Re: John M. Graham v. John N. Graham
-
In reply to:
Re: John M. Graham v. John N. Graham
Thomas Beall 4/04/13
Thomas
My analysis stands.Johm M's wife was Jessie, that's very clear.I did not omit John N. because he was not in the document.I put in one comma period, to emphasise the point which is very clear in the document.
The land deed only mentions John M. over and over.It is not a mistake repeaded.There is no way John N. was the person in the deed.
Talk about twisting facts, Thomas, you are an expert.I spent hours upon hours studying these documents and could come to no other conclusion.
Even if both documents were 1893, the dates on the documentsdon't make sense.The second document was dated before the first.You can't force something to be true.And once again, I deeply resent you harsh, mean spirited attacks against me and others.If you disagee then use what little brain power you have to present your case.
Your response was muddled and incorrect as you invented charges.
More Replies:
-
Re: John M. Graham v. John N. Graham
Thomas Beall 4/04/13