Jump to content
JimmyJames

Yogurt shop murders

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, CDAK said:

Ok, do it now before the window closes.  Or do it two years ago or whenever these enhanced DNA techniques became available.  

Too late, will post more later, but the big one that many cops/forensics genealogists were using just automatically set everybody to opt-out for law enforcement purposes, and you have to opt-in if you want your DNA used for law enforcement purposes.  

I got the email this morning.  Knew it was going to happen, just not when.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

Too late, will post more later, but the big one that many cops/forensics genealogists were using just automatically set everybody to opt-out for law enforcement purposes, and you have to opt-in if you want your DNA used for law enforcement purposes.  

I got the email this morning.  Knew it was going to happen, just not when.  

Welp, looks like APD just got themselves handed a new excuse not to solve it. The old “opt out of the DNA testing” trick.

Rats! Foiled again! 

Edited by JimmyJames

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/5/2019 at 11:30 PM, mulletpelini said:

I turned mine in under my old lady's name, just in case I blacked out and did something like this.  Shit goes down, she's busted and I'm outta here!

Well I did see you blacked out drunk playing broomball on the ice rink at northcross mall that night. 

Err...I mean somebody else told me they saw that. I personally was at a Christmas party way down in far south Austin by west gate mall. I’ve got at least twenty witnesses too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice job of framing those kids, APD. 

Quote

As we sit outside a coffee shop on a sunny Austin day, Lowry paraphrases a portion of the Scott confession.

Police: “Well, what did you use [to tie up the girls]?

Scott: “Venetian blind cords.”

Police: “Not Venetian blind cords.”

Scott: “Um, napkins.”

Police: “You can’t tie somebody up with napkins.”

It went on and on until, through the process of elimination, he correctly guessed that the girls had been bound with their own clothes. “It was just heart-breaking to hear that poor, stupid guy saying, ‘Well, if you guys say so, I guess I was there, but I don’t think I was,'” says Lowry.

https://www.aetv.com/real-crime/the-austin-yogurt-shop-murders-cold-case-revisiting-the-scene-of-the-crime-more-than-25-years-later

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, JimmyJames said:

In this particular case, I don’t think the problem is they’re worried about time running out on finding something, I think what they are terrified of is what they might actually find. I think that’s always been the case here. 

The earlier posted movie “hunt for red October “ gif “you arrogant ass you killed us” is fitting here. Some people would probably just wish this went away forever. Austin has definitely prospered in the interim. 

Care to elaborate?  Why wouldn't they want to solve it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If one of my DNA relatives committed a horrible crime I would hope my DNA would be used to catch him.  I suppose I'll take my chances on defending myself if my DNA is somehow found at the scene of a crime I didn't commit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Reagan1k said:

Care to elaborate?  Why wouldn't they want to solve it?

I’ll say this. Most people do want it solved, including the original detectives who were very good cops given a shit sandwich assignment. 

But I do believe that some people possibly don’t want it solved, perhaps because they’re afraid of what the truth might actually be or possibly they know something we don’t. 

Irregardless of that, the apparent fact that all possible leads with respect to the DNA, possibilities that didn’t exist in 1991, including first CODIS and now ancestral DNA, have not been vigorously pursued is unconscionable, and invites heavy suspicion as to, why not? 

That’s the issue here. Follow all leads and if you truly have, let the public know that. I personally don’t believe they have. Public statements indicate that’s a no. I could be wrong. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was 12 and remember that like yesterday because my mom and brother went out shopping and passed by the shop with the fire truck, Ems and crime scene vans. I remember mom mom saying “oh my, I hope everyone’s alright”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Doc Reeves said:

I was 12 and remember that like yesterday because my mom and brother went out shopping and passed by the shop with the fire truck, Ems and crime scene vans. I remember mom mom saying “oh my, I hope everyone’s alright”

Narrator: Everyone was not alright. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

Too late, will post more later, but the big one that many cops/forensics genealogists were using just automatically set everybody to opt-out for law enforcement purposes, and you have to opt-in if you want your DNA used for law enforcement purposes.  

I got the email this morning.  Knew it was going to happen, just not when.  

Hurry. We are solving too many decades old cold cases. We have to do something about this!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/use-of-online-dna-databases-by-law-enforcement-leads-to-backlash-and-website-changes

Quote

GEDmatch soon updated its policy to establish that law enforcement only gets matches from the DNA profiles of users who have given permission. That closed off more than a million profiles. More than 50,000 users agreed to share their information — a figure that the company says is growing.

The 95% reduction in GEDmatch profiles available to police will dramatically reduce the number of hits detectives get and make it more difficult to solve crimes, said David Foran, a forensics biology professor at Michigan State University.

“Law enforcement needs these big databases for the chance that someone might be in there,” Foran said. “Now that they are requiring people to opt in, my guess is that database is going to become very small.”

Site co-founder Curtis Rogers said the change was being discussed before the Utah case. He said users received emails about the May decision, encouraging them to opt-in to police searches.

“We strongly support law enforcement,” Rogers wrote in an email. “The use of genetic genealogy for providing leads in violent crimes has been called the biggest crime-fighting breakthrough in decades. Its incredible success to date has been due almost entirely to the GEDmatch database.”

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, HouTex said:

If one of my DNA relatives committed a horrible crime I would hope my DNA would be used to catch him.  I suppose I'll take my chances on defending myself if my DNA is somehow found at the scene of a crime I didn't commit.

I gotta say, if we collectively have the power to solve cold cases and provide some justice for the murdered and their loved ones and choose not to, that’s some pretty repugnant shit.  For what?   We think people are going to be wrongly convicted on DNA?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, po elvis said:

Hurry. We are solving too many decades old cold cases. We have to do something about this!

This is almost worth its own thread, but this has been building up for a long time (the debate was kicked off after the Golden State Killer).  It was a situation where the laws, civil liberties, best practices, etc. had not been fully thought out - basically things moved way faster than anybody expected.

It's not quite a case of:

DsVUreqXcAAVZD9.jpg

The cops will need warrants - the days of trolling through GEDMATCH are basically over.

The discussion now is that law enforcement will lose their shit over this, and will most likely try to force access to all of the major DNA databases (Ancestory, 23AndMe, etc.), if that means going all the way up to the Supreme Court.

Edited by atomheartbevo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, atomheartbevo said:

This is almost worth its own thread, but this has been building up for a long time (the debate was kicked off after the Golden State Killer).  It was a situation where the laws, civil liberties, best practices, etc. had not been fully thought out - basically things moved way faster than anybody expected.

It's not quite a case of:

DsVUreqXcAAVZD9.jpg

The cops will need warrants - the days of trolling through GEDMATCH are basically over.

The discussion now is that law enforcement will lose their shit over this, and will most likely try to force access to all of the major DNA databases (Ancestory, 23AndMe, etc.), if that means going all the way up to the Supreme Court.

I personally don’t see the need for warrant to be a bad thing at all. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Lhorn said:

I gotta say, if we collectively have the power to solve cold cases and provide some justice for the murdered and their loved ones and choose not to, that’s some pretty repugnant shit.  For what?   We think people are going to be wrongly convicted on DNA?

There is nothing stopping you and millions of others who feel this way from doing a DNA test at Ancestry.com, etc., and then uploading the results to GEDMATCH and ticking the box that says "yes, grant law enforcement access to my DNA".

Nothing at all.  As a matter of fact, I think Ancestry is running a sale right now.

5-10 million Americans uploading their DNA info and their family tree information to GEDMATCH would solve a lot of cold cases, given that those 5-10 million Americans are easily related to 50-100 million Americans (if not more).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, JimmyJames said:

I personally don’t see the need for warrant to be a bad thing at all. 

It's not.  A lot of people don't realize that no warrants were involved until the very end when a genealogist had a match for a family group - at that point, the cops had to do the legwork on what family members were eligible (i.e. alive and in the area, etc.).   This is (most likely) going to force them to get a warrant at the very start, but it's also going to be fairly useless now if most opt out.

I think it's reasonable that people should be able to opt out of this.  This is ultimately a private transaction between them and a private company.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

There is nothing stopping you and millions of others who feel this way from doing a DNA test at Ancestry.com, etc., and then uploading the results to GEDMATCH and ticking the box that says "yes, grant law enforcement access to my DNA".

Nothing at all.  As a matter of fact, I think Ancestry is running a sale right now.

5-10 million Americans uploading their DNA info and their family tree information to GEDMATCH would solve a lot of cold cases, given that those 5-10 million Americans are easily related to 50-100 million Americans (if not more).

This is a serious question I have. No joking, because I’m not an expert on criminal matters and DNA.

Who currently has access to the DNA that APD and the Travis County prosecutors have that didn’t match their primary suspects? Is it just them or do others have access to it? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where do you think I said “if only there was a way to opt in, but alas no such option exists?”   I’m saying I don’t think it’s a good thing that people be allowed to opt out.  I think of the decades of grief suffered by families of victims of the Golden State Killer and such and what a tremendous gift DNA registries have given them of some in the form of answers. Also the justice of a 70 some year old man finally having to pay for his heinous crimes. 

If 95% of people chose to opt out that speaks to the ignorance or just plain shittiness of humans in general. I assume those 95% aren’t all murderers. They’re probably dumbasses who think their DNA is going to match Jean Benet’s murderer. 

As said above, if I thought a relative of mine was possibly a murderer I’d want them captured. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

This is a serious question I have. No joking, because I’m not an expert on criminal matters and DNA.

Who currently has access to the DNA that APD and the Travis County prosecutors have that didn’t match their primary suspects? Is it just them or do others have access to it? 

Depends on if they uploaded it to this:

https://www.fbi.gov/services/laboratory/biometric-analysis/codis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If law enforcement obtains a warrant, could they conduct the search against profiles that have opted out (or not opted in)?  That is, deliver a warrant to ancestry/23andme requiring them to conduct the search against their entire database regardless of user consent?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Lhorn said:

Where do you think I said “if only there was a way to opt in, but alas no such option exists?”   I’m saying I don’t think it’s a good thing that people be allowed to opt out.  I think of the decades of grief suffered by families of victims of the Golden State Killer and such and what a tremendous gift DNA registries have given them of some in the form of answers. Also the justice of a 70 some year old man finally having to pay for his heinous crimes. 

If 95% of people chose to opt out that speaks to the ignorance or just plain shittiness of humans in general. I assume those 95% aren’t all murderers. They’re probably dumbasses who think their DNA is going to match Jean Benet’s murderer. 

As said above, if I thought a relative of mine was possibly a murderer I’d want them captured. 

It's ultimately a private transaction of information between private individuals and private companies.  The cops were shoe-horning themselves into this transaction, without a warrant.  

I've been following this debate about GEDMatch since the first round of crimes were solved a few years ago, and I correctly predicted that the free-wheeling access by law enforcement would come to an end, but I've been following the larger debate about the issue of who has a right to your DNA information since Ancestry.com started taking DNA tests mainstream around mid-2012.

This is more for another thread, but you are focusing on just the crime-solving aspect, when that is just of a catalyst for this debate - there is a genuine concern that if law enforcement can easily trawl these databases for cold cases, then the government at large will make their case (for whatever tinfoil reason you want), and at that point if you have government agencies, whether at the city, county, state, or federal level, easily forcing their way into these private databases at these private companies, then the insurance companies, etc. will be able to force their way in.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, CDAK said:

If law enforcement obtains a warrant, could they conduct the search against profiles that have opted out (or not opted in)?  That is, deliver a warrant to ancestry/23andme requiring them to conduct the search against their entire database regardless of user consent?

The courts will have to decide that, because that's a situation where law enforcement is wanting open access to a huge amount of private information on a huge amount of private (and innocent) individuals that is held by a private company. 

Law enforcement had that open access thanks to some loopholes and shortsightedness on the part of GEDMatch.  If GEDMatch had their shit together from the very beginning, law enforcement would not have had such open access.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

See that’s the thing. I don’t think they ever had. At least their last public statements indicated they hadn’t. 

They claim its some partial male DNA or some other such doublespeak so they didn’t think it would do any good. Well ok. How about you send it to CODIS and let them tell you that instead of just assuming it won’t work?  It makes no sense. We’re talking about the most heinous murder ever committed here. Don’t just throw up your hands and say we don’t think it’s gonna work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

The courts will have to decide that, because that's a situation where law enforcement is wanting open access to a huge amount of private information on a huge amount of private (and innocent) individuals that is held by a private company. 

Law enforcement had that open access thanks to some loopholes and shortsightedness on the part of GEDMatch.  If GEDMatch had their shit together from the very beginning, law enforcement would not have had such open access.

 

Thanks, I think that will be an interesting line of cases to follow in the future.  On one hand, law enforcement will have a very strong interest (e.g., solving a murder or rape) and they're testing the DNA of the likely perp. But, on the other hand, the search is insanely broad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

See that’s the thing. I don’t think they ever had. At least their last public statements indicated they hadn’t. 

They claim its some partial male DNA or some other such doublespeak so they didn’t think it would do any good. Well ok. How about you send it to CODIS and let them tell you that instead of just assuming it won’t work?  It makes no sense. We’re talking about the most heinous murder ever committed here. Don’t just throw up your hands and say we don’t think it’s gonna work.

This is what makes for a good conspiracy theory - simple procedures not being followed.  If anything, you'd think they want to say "hey guys, we uploaded it to CODIS, it's out of our hands!"

I'm not an expert on the criminal mind, but somebody who would murder 4 young girls, rape the 13 year old (and maybe others), burn their bodies and the shop to cover it up, I'm just imagining that it's somebody who has already come into contact with the criminal justice system.  This isn't somebody shoplifting something and getting scared straight and never doing it again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, CDAK said:

Thanks, I think that will be an interesting line of cases to follow in the future.  On one hand, law enforcement will have a very strong interest (e.g., solving a murder or rape) and they're testing the DNA of the likely perp. But, on the other hand, the search is insanely broad.

It's so broad...one online discussion group I'm in, I saw somebody who writes about legal issues and DNA say that it's the equivalent of cops knowing there's a drug dealer in a neighborhood, and searching the phones of everybody in that neighborhood without a warrant, simply hoping to find a text saying "Hey, I think the guy two doors down is dealing drugs", except in the case of DNA, they are looking for a 3rd cousin of a suspect to upload their DNA profile, etc.

She made a comment that the high-profile cases were really played up by law enforcement in order to justify their use of these services, to get the public on their side.  She had some examples of the language they were using in their press releases.  

Right now, the DNA stuff falls into two categories - genealogy and health-testing (looking for markers for certain diseases, or a family history of certain diseases).   There is some overlap between some of the companies, but the legal/DNA expert I mentioned above said that the health-related tests are really going to tighten up on what information they retain and present to customers, so that they can't be used for identification (you take your test, you're sent a list of health markers, that's it).

 On the genealogy front, there is a lot of revising the legal disclaimers, procedures, etc., but they are taking a wait-and-see approach, to see how GEDMatch weathers the storm.  DNA has revolutionized a lot of genealogy research, and I've used it in my own, as well as with clients, and I'm pretty concerned that we will see some of the companies simply shut it down and ditch the info, rather than risk expensive legal fights and potential lawsuits.

Ancestry.com has got to be shitting bricks, they were planning an IPO later this year, and the DNA industry is supposed to hit $250 million a year within a few years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I’m saying I don’t think it’s a good thing that people be allowed to opt out.


Even if the services do not allow people to opt out, people can still opt out by not submitting their DNA in the first place. The lack of an opt out feature would then damage these private companies which were created for purposes entirely different from solving crimes. Law enforcement can’t simply hijack them.

I personally do not trust the future of DNA information and would not willingly put my DNA info out in the world until the long-term implications of this industry are better known. The risk-benefit just isn’t there for me, even if there’s a 0.002% chance of helping solve a crime. I think of it like having your gmail hacked and made public, except that you can change your gmail but you are forever stuck with your DNA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

This is what makes for a good conspiracy theory - simple procedures not being followed.  If anything, you'd think they want to say "hey guys, we uploaded it to CODIS, it's out of our hands!"

I'm not an expert on the criminal mind, but somebody who would murder 4 young girls, rape the 13 year old (and maybe others), burn their bodies and the shop to cover it up, I'm just imagining that it's somebody who has already come into contact with the criminal justice system.  This isn't somebody shoplifting something and getting scared straight and never doing it again.

That’s why the case against Springsteen, Scott, et all never made any sense at all. Those two never committed another crime before or after to my knowledge, Forrest never did shit at all, and the other dude was a low level minor criminal who, interestingly enough, wound up eventually being killed by the APD. 

Those four never could have pulled off what APD and Travis County claimed they did. Rape, murder, cover up by fire. 17 year olds. It just never made sense.

Scott’s incomprehensible confession with a gun to his head never made sense. Springsteen’s confession was more compelling, given that he supposedly knew what nobody else but the cops and killers knew, but the DNA findings blew all that apart. Makes one wonder how he knew those details...

The worst thing about this is that the parent’s of these poor girls wound up getting victimized twice. First with the horrific murders of their daughters. Then getting to watch the people who the APD and Travis County DA’s office convinced them was the murderers eventually walk free.

Total Bullshit and partially explains why the APD and Travis County aren’t all that interested in finding out what actually happened so they would then have to explain to the parents how bad they fucked up. Whoops. So Sorry bout that. We thought we had the right guys but, well, we fucked up. 

An interesting thing to me was the case was completely cold until DNA evidence started to become a thing in the late 90s. Then new detectives came aboard and they obtained new confessions just in the nick of time. Turned out to be false ones though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DNA evidence could solve this case. It just takes someone who has access to it who is interested in solving it. Hope that eventually happens. 

The eventual death of 13 year old Amy Ayers, which was totally different than the other three, is the key. Two somewhat separate but related crimes were committed that night. I would be willing to bet if the original detectives, armed with the DNA technology we have access to today,  were still on the case it would have finally been solved by now. 

A reckoning needs to happen. I hope. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's with all the cloak and dagger bullshit around the statement "the police are scared of what they might find"?  Are you suggesting a cop?  A local politician?  If so, why can't any of you just say that?  If not, what the fuck does the sentence mean, and is there any credibility to it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, PilotsError said:

What's with all the cloak and dagger bullshit around the statement "the police are scared of what they might find"?  Are you suggesting a cop?  A local politician?  If so, why can't any of you just say that?  If not, what the fuck does the sentence mean, and is there any credibility to it?

I think the links were posted earlier in the thread, but it’s one helluva rabbit hole to go down - lots of conspiracy theories about who did the murders, complete with all kinds of links to politicians, cops, etc.  Cops acting weird at the scene, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This was such a terrible tragedy that 4 young girls were murdered.  What is even worse to me that (as often happens unfortunately) the police do shoddy work to solve a murder because it's in the news.  

I Hope and pray that the actual murderer is caught and convicted one day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What's with all the cloak and dagger bullshit around the statement "the police are scared of what they might find"?  Are you suggesting a cop?  A local politician?  If so, why can't any of you just say that?  If not, what the fuck does the sentence mean, and is there any credibility to it?

I think it’s due to recent cases where partial dna matches have cast suspicion over innocent people and caused them reputational damage. Some of these partial matches just aren’t very good. Here’s a recent case: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nola.com/article_d58a3d17-c89b-543f-8365-a2619719f6f0.amp.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I knew Eliza.  I was a few years ahead of her @ Mccallum.  Had a crush on her somewhat.  I remember years later I was out and Boy 2 Men, so hard to say goodbye came on the radio and I started balling.  Just balling like a baby.  I'd held it in for so long, and it just came out.  To this day I can't really hear that song.  God speed to the poor families.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, BabaYaga said:

I knew Eliza.  I was a few years ahead of her @ Mccallum.  Had a crush on her somewhat.  I remember years later I was out and Boy 2 Men, so hard to say goodbye came on the radio and I started balling.  Just balling like a baby.  I'd held it in for so long, and it just came out.  To this day I can't really hear that song.  God speed to the poor families.  

This guy did it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These murders occurred several years before I arrived on the 40 acres, and I vaguely remember it being in the news when Springsteen was arrested, but I never really paid much attention to it.  That being said, I picked up "Who Killed These Girls?" by Beverly Lowry last summer.  Great read.  The book does a solid job of conveying the thought processes and influences of all involved parties including the suspects, the family members, the police, the DA.  So many different factors that went into the decisions, but the takeaways I got were how shoddy the police work was, how much forensics and crime scene investigations are now compared to then, and how influential the media and the desire to find ANYONE guilty was on the investigation and subsequent trial.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/7/2019 at 8:33 PM, JimmyJames said:

I personally don’t see the need for warrant to be a bad thing at all. 

A warrant for a DNA database wouldn't be issued.

The 4th Amendment requires that the place to be searched or the thing to be seized in particular is or contains evidence of a crime......not speculation that searching hundreds of thousands of things (DNA profiles) might reveal evidence of a crime. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Years ago I was in court, before the cases against the boys had been shown to be false, and I was sitting in the gallery talking to a client. The judge called the docket and lo and behold on the other side of me I was sitting next to Forrest Welborn. 

It took everything I had to not ask him if they did it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, 4th and 5 said:

Years ago I was in court, before the cases against the boys had been shown to be false, and I was sitting in the gallery talking to a client. The judge called the docket and lo and behold on the other side of me I was sitting next to Forrest Welborn. 

It took everything I had to not ask him if they did it.

Let me spare you the suspense. Forrest and his dipshit crew of misfits didn’t do it. The partial DNA evidence they did get eventually proved that.  It should have been obvious without that long ago.

Apparently the FBI has evidence regarding the known partial DNA samples that may eventually help solve the crime, which they inexplicably refuse to share with Travis County prosecutors for “privacy” reasons and because they claim it “probably” won’t help. This begs the question as to how they know it “probably” wont help. Maybe it will, maybe it won’t. Maybe we should test that out chief. 

This case has stunk from the beginning and the smell of it gets worse every single day.

I am somewhat slightly personally torn because for the families sake and for justice sake I want it solved, but am also afraid what it may ultimately lead to and the damage it may do to my own town’s reputation for not having solved it much earlier and for what really might have happened. But ultimately I say fuck that and the latter is immaterial, solve it and let the chips fall where they may. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I spoke with someone recently who is extremely knowledgeable about crime scenes and crime labs. One of the issues with this case as I understand it is that the first information received by authorities was that there was a fire. Firemen entered the burning building and unwittingly destroyed a lot of evidence in the process. So not only did the fire itself ruin a lot of evidence, the control of the fire also caused problems for investigators.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


mpu


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Recruiting ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Help ... For Sale ... Politics ... Board Discussion
×
×
  • Create New...