Do you even bother to find answers on your own?  I read 3 articles about him repaying the cost of the investigation before this thread was updated.  "Restitution" means exactly that.   Who else would he need to repay $120K to?  Kamala Harris for the favors she burned on his behalf?

Stop being a child.  Learn how to find things on your own.

Stop being an a-hole. I never asked you to find anything for me.

Read what I wrote again and stop trying to pick fights where none are needed.
I said "I hope the fines cover the cost of the taxpayer funded investigation." I didn't ask if it does. Focus.

Stop being an a-hole. I never asked you to find anything for me.

Read what I wrote again and stop trying to pick fights where none are needed.
I said "I hope the fines cover the cost of the taxpayer funded investigation." I didn't ask if it does. Focus.

You said you hoped something that already was reported would happen.

That's dumb, Snowflake.

You said you hoped something that already was reported would happen.

That's dumb, Snowflake.

Hahhahaha once again, he fails to read.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

You said you hoped something that already was reported would happen.

That's dumb, Snowflake.

And that somehow justifies you being an a-hole? All you had to do was say it does cover the full cost of the investigation if you had to say anything at all.

If someone said they hope their big mac comes with cheese do you make a big deal that all big macs have cheese? Not a big friend maker are you?

BTW, I saw reports of the cost of the investigation between $130,000 and $150,000. The CNN article you posted said he was ordered to pay a restitution of $120,000. If you can follow basic math that leaves between $10,000 and $30,000. The answer you claim is there is not a full answer to my question genius.

 So again, I hope the restitution covers the full cost of the investigation

$130, 106.15 is what Chicago Police sued him for in 2019 for the cost of their resources investigating the hoax.

He was ordered to pay $120,106 + $25,000 fine in 2022 when he was sentenced.  Total = $145,106.

The fine + restitution covers more than what the police sought leaving $15K for court costs.

The only thing that's difficult is getting you to think for yourself.

$130, 106.15 is what Chicago Police sued him for in 2019 for the cost of their resources investigating the hoax.

He was ordered to pay $120,106 + $25,000 fine in 2022 when he was sentenced.  Total = $145,106.

The fine + restitution covers more than what the police sought leaving $15K for court costs.

The only thing that's difficult is getting you to think for yourself.

I am happy if that is all true and all costs are recovered. My point to you still stands.

I am happy if that is all true and all costs are recovered. My point to you still stands.

Can't accept the truth when it hits you in the face.

#Snowflake

Can't accept the truth when it hits you in the face.

#Snowflake

Strawman.
I never denied any truth.

Are you an a-hole in real life or just on the internet?

Stop being an a-hole. I never asked you to find anything for me.

Read what I wrote again and stop trying to pick fights where none are needed.
I said "I hope the fines cover the cost of the taxpayer funded investigation." I didn't ask if it does. Focus.

Wow, that escalated. Since you claim you look stuff up, a simple google would have answered your question.  Here's how you could have responded instead:

"Flapp, thanks for the info, I never bothered to look it up on my own". But no, you chose another path like usual.  I'm sure goal post moving will begin soon.

Tism awareness month.

And that somehow justifies you being an a-hole? All you had to do was say it does cover the full cost of the investigation if you had to say anything at all.

If someone said they hope their big mac comes with cheese do you make a big deal that all big macs have cheese? Not a big friend maker are you?

BTW, I saw reports of the cost of the investigation between $130,000 and $150,000. The CNN article you posted said he was ordered to pay a restitution of $120,000. If you can follow basic math that leaves between $10,000 and $30,000. The answer you claim is there is not a full answer to my question genius.

 So again, I hope the restitution covers the full cost of the investigation

All you had to say is "Thanks Flapp". See my prior post.

All you had to say is "Thanks Flapp". See my prior post.

He went from:

Stop being an a-hole. I never asked you to find anything for me.

to:

BTW, I saw reports of the cost of the investigation between $130,000 and $150,000. The CNN article you posted said he was ordered to pay a restitution of $120,000. If you can follow basic math that leaves between $10,000 and $30,000. The answer you claim is there is not a full answer to my question genius.

Seems like I was right from the beginning -- he did ask a question indirectly, and I was nice enough to explain the answer to him, admittedly in less than tender terms.

Hard to be nice to someone who keeps calling me vulgar names.

 

He went from:
to:

Seems like I was right from the beginning -- he did ask a question indirectly, and I was nice enough to explain the answer to him, admittedly in less than tender terms.

Hard to be nice to someone who keeps calling me vulgar names.

 

Since the money you posted didn't add up to the penny, he will say you were wrong.  He wants you to contact the state, Jussie,  and lawyers to get receipts.  This way he can try to make like he's right.

Since the money you posted didn't add up to the penny, he will say you were wrong.  He wants you to contact the state, Jussie,  and lawyers to get receipts.  This way he can try to make like he's right.

I've got $20 that says the original amount the Chicago Police Dept sued Juicy for was just an estimate (i.e. not an exact amount), and was inflated (i.e. included every possible tangential cost not directly and exclusively used for the hoax investigation).

How often have we tried to give an accurate accounting of time we spent on a project or task, only to include several hours of browsing FB, IG, Twitter, YT, etc, personal phone calls, texts or emails, breaks to grab coffee or a meal, and so on?

It's one thing to get paid for an hour for lunch, but it's another to put that hour down as time for which Juicy owes the city.

As much as EEF wants to "ensure" Chicago is covering the amount of the nvestigation, he can rest assured they are still getting more than they expended.

Wow, that escalated. Since you claim you look stuff up, a simple google would have answered your question. 

If I wanted the answer I would have looked it up. I wasn't asking a question though, I was stating a desire. It really isn't that complicated.

He went from:
to:

Seems like I was right from the beginning -- he did ask a question indirectly, and I was nice enough to explain the answer to him, admittedly in less than tender terms.

Hard to be nice to someone who keeps calling me vulgar names.

 

You are ALWAYS the one to draw first blood, now you are whining when someone hits back. Everyone on this forum knows this.

If I wanted the answer I would have looked it up. I wasn't asking a question though, I was stating a desire. It really isn't that complicated.

Really?  Not asking a question?

"The answer you claim is there is not a full answer to my question genius."

Please tell me how it's possible I didn't answer YOUR QUESTION when you WEREN'T ASKING A QUESTION.

I'm just a genius-in-training.  Please show me how those two comments you posted can both be true at the same time.

Really?  Not asking a question?

"The answer you claim is there is not a full answer to my question genius."

Please tell me how it's possible I didn't answer YOUR QUESTION when you WEREN'T ASKING A QUESTION.

I'm just a genius-in-training.  Please show me how those two comments you posted can both be true at the same time.

You kept referring to it as an answer and in replying I used matching terminology. It was a typo.

I know full well you will seize on any chance to start an argument so I wouldn't even bother you ask you a question because you will predictably respond with some sort of google-fu type response.

You kept referring to it as an answer and in replying I used matching terminology. It was a typo.

I know full well you will seize on any chance to start an argument so I wouldn't even bother you ask you a question because you will predictably respond with some sort of google-fu type response.

Bull crap.

You kept referring to it as an answer and in replying I used matching terminology. It was a typo.

I know full well you will seize on any chance to start an argument so I wouldn't even bother you ask you a question because you will predictably respond with some sort of google-fu type response.

Good post Newsom.

Bull crap.

Believe what you want, I really don't care.