first piece of evidence in support of kangana's claims DTNpg28&32

First Previous

Page

Next Last

Frequent Posters

humanity

@F.I.T.B

Sparkler

Posted: 8 years ago

#301

Originally posted by: LiveEatLove

Oh I give up...absolutely! You can celebrate man 😆😆😆 I will not further waste my time answering the same questions again and again and again and again worded in a different manner every time which have been answered several times in this thread.

😆 please don't waste it ...Time is precious 😳

i GUJAARISH you and i know you are KAABIL member as you know

ZINDAGI NA MILEGI DUBAARA hence kitne bhi KABHI KHUSHI KABHI GHUM aaye you keep smiling 😳

Quote

LiveEatLove

@LiveEatLove

Sparkler

+ 4

Posted: 8 years ago

#302

Originally posted by: Heisenberg17.
Who is the no.1 criminal lawyer of India, and is there any official word that the case is closed?

Ram Jethmalani is the no 1 criminal lawyer in India ...he did not fight HR's case.😆

Quote

Looks like you are new here. Register for free, learn and contribute.

LiveEatLove

@LiveEatLove

Sparkler

+ 4

Posted: 8 years ago

#303

Originally posted by: Nova19

I know. I mostly answer for anyone lurking who may have genuinely not been following the detail. I do recognize the names of posters asking questions who I am sure already know the answers they don't want to hear😉. And I have stopped responding to 3 posters entirely😆

I tell myself I should respond sincerely for any unbiased third person who might be reading so they can understand what they need to. I know I should just switch to twitter but I've been here a long long time (I myself lurked for ages) and it is habit now.

Many people genuinely do not understand the case if they din't follow since last year and their queries should be answered.

Before HR slammed the case on her and it all began , I was 100 % sure HR is at fault and this must be another affair...but oh boy this turned out to be something else. 🤔 I am glad he took the legal route . Although right now I want him to keep quiet.

Quote

IPSO_FACTO

@IPSO_FACTO

Sparkler

+ 4

Posted: 8 years ago

#304

Originally posted by: LiveEatLove

Ram Jethmalani is the no 1 criminal lawyer in India ...he did not fight HR's case.😆

Ram Jethmalani is an ass and a MCp. Please dont take his name, my blood boils 😡

Edited by Xx..Anjali..xX - 8 years ago

Quote

LiveEatLove

@LiveEatLove

Sparkler

+ 4

Posted: 8 years ago

#305

Originally posted by: Xx..Anjali..xX

Ram Jethmalani is an ass and a MCp. Please dont take his name, my blood boils 😡

I agree. He is.

Quote

ponymo

@ponymo

Sparkler

+ 4

Posted: 8 years ago

#306

Originally posted by: Nova19
@Ponymo Sorry, I left to eat and was not intentionally ignoring your response. Kangana was under no legal obligation to surrender her "gadgets" so she definitely could refuse as she refused to go to the police station when summoned. I do not think much of her lawyer but even he would have advised her as much. We will have to agree to disagree on what u think vs what I think she said to Masand. I heard why would I give them my gadgets, which to me means I didn't. Your interpretation is clearly different. In most police departments, officers are not authorized to speak officially which is why you get leaks. The nil report did not mean what Kangana claims. Again we may have to agree to disagree on whether she is intentionally misleading people with her interpretation of what the nil report meant.

She did not mention the word "them" which you added. Adding them would imply she's talking about the cops.

But she clearly talks about HR's statement which says "Take her laptop", to which she says "Why would I give my laptop" as a mark of protest against him. But immediately after that she says "how can I refuse cops?"

You see. If she did not want to co-operate, she wouldn't let cops into her house in the first place. Like you said, she was under no obligation to do so. But she still let them in and co-operated with whatever they wanted.

And honestly, why would she say she did not hand over her laptop in one interview and the very next day say she gave her laptop? I am not saying what she is saying is the gospel truth. However, if you see at it without bias you can tell that she's saying she co-operated with the police.

The nil report means that they could not find any imposter on which Hrithik's case rested. Simple as that.

Of course we can agree to disagree, but I refuse to agree with you that Kangana is lying. I am yet to see the evidence that she has lied. Don't attribute it to quotes from paid PR articles. If you can prove that she has contradicted herself when she is speaking on video, you can let us know.

And it's very easy to be on Hrithik's side right now because he hasn't spoken a word on this so far. He has relied on PR articles and his daddy and ex-wife to speak for him. Until and unless Hrithik comes clean with this I will give Kangana the benefit of doubt, but you might as well do otherwise - I'm fine with that. Peace.

Edited by ponymo - 8 years ago

Quote

Illyrion

@Illyrion

Dazzler

+ 2

Posted: 8 years ago

#307

Originally posted by: ponymo

She did not mention the word "them" which you added. Adding them would imply she's talking about the cops.

But she clearly talks about HR's statement which says "Take her laptop", to which she says "Why would I give my laptop" as a mark of protest against him. But immediately after that she says "how can I refuse cops?"

You see. If she did not want to co-operate, she wouldn't let cops into her house in the first place. Like you said, she was under no obligation to do so. But she still let them in and co-operated with whatever they wanted.

And honestly, why would she say she did not hand over her laptop in one interview and the very next day say she gave her laptop? I am not saying what she is saying is the gospel truth. However, if you see at it without bias you can tell that she's saying she co-operated with the police.

The nil report means that they could not find any imposter on which Hrithik's case rested. Simple as that.

Of course we can agree to disagree, but I refuse to agree with you that Kangana is lying. I am yet to see the evidence that she has lied. Don't attribute it to quotes from paid PR articles. If you can prove that she has contradicted herself when she is speaking on video, you can let us know.

And it's very easy to be on Hrithik's side right now because he hasn't spoken a word on this so far. He has relied on PR articles and his daddy and ex-wife to speak for him. Until and unless Hrithik comes clean with this I will give Kangana the benefit of doubt, but you might as well do otherwise - I'm fine with that. Peace.

First it is Kangana misinformation that Hrithiks case rested on there being an imposter. His case rests on there being no affair. Whether or not she was communicating with an imposter or lied about that too isn't important though Kanganas PR is trying to make it the only thing. Either way it has no bearing on whether they had a physically intimate relationship.

Back to the imposter...She claimed he was sending her emails. He said any emails she received were from an imposter. The nil report did NOT say there was no imposter. It said they lacked evidence to trace the imposter. There is a very big difference. Nowhere does the report conclude who was using the email. Without identifying who was sending the emails, how is it possible to say it was not an imposter?

From Mumbai Mirror: The Cyber police in Bandra Kurla Complex is likely to close the case as the only 'bone of contention' was the emails sent from the account 'hroshan@email.com'. Sanjay Saxena, joint commissioner of police, Crime Branch told Mirror, 'We have been unable to find anything on the mail ID as the server is located in the US. Now it is very difficult to ascertain who was using the account. Still, we will try to conclude [the case] from the available evidence.'

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/hindi/bollywood/news/Hrithik-Kangana-case-to-be-closed-Cyber-police-file-NIL-Report/articleshow/55469230.cms

When you are presented with her statements which are clearly trying to make people believe things which are not true or even which contradict each other you choose to not see it as evidence of her lying (or at minimum misleading). Even Kangana has said she lies - if you will not believe her why would you ever believe me 😆?

As for the question you asked bolded above, why would her story change day to day...because she lies. Her story has been changing with every telling since the first time she told it.

I know I will not change your mind. I reply for others who may be interested and I thank you for the civility with which you disagree.

Edited by Nova19 - 8 years ago

Quote

ponymo

@ponymo

Sparkler

+ 4

Posted: 8 years ago

#308

^So as it stands, you have not given me any evidence that she lies. Where she has openly contradicted herself on camera. Good enough for me to keep believing whatever I stand by until now (and for good reason).

Of course when they say there was no imposter, it obviously means they failed to find any. Because certainly someone would have written those mails? And that someone could very well be Hrithik himself? Hrithik started this imposter theory to prove that it was no him but a different person that Kangana was dealing with - and he failed to prove it, full stop.

And likewise, thanks for being civil. I am not trying to convince you either. I am only trying to get a good understanding myself. So when you said in the Masand interview she said she did not hand out her gadgets to the police - had it been true, I wouldn't be in denial of it. I would accept it and take it as a contradiction of what Kangana stated in other interviews. But as it turns out, she nowhere mentioned she did not co-operate, hence I have no reason to believe she is lying. And this shall continue until Hrithik himself opens his mouth and comes clean, and of course his narrative has to be at least as convincing as Kangana's for me to be neutral on this issue again. Until then, my benefit of doubt will rest with Kangana.

Quote

Kara

@Kara_R

Voyager

Posted: 8 years ago

#309

Originally posted by: Nova19

I know I will not change your mind. I reply for others who may be interested and I thank you for the civility with which you disagree.

You classy girl you 👏 🤗 Hope it's well received.

Quote

Justwatching

@Justwatching

Dazzler

+ 3

Posted: 8 years ago

#310

Originally posted by: ponymo

She did not mention the word "them" which you added. Adding them would imply she's talking about the cops.

But she clearly talks about HR's statement which says "Take her laptop", to which she says "Why would I give my laptop" as a mark of protest against him. But immediately after that she says "how can I refuse cops?"

You see. If she did not want to co-operate, she wouldn't let cops into her house in the first place. Like you said, she was under no obligation to do so. But she still let them in and co-operated with whatever they wanted.

And honestly, why would she say she did not hand over her laptop in one interview and the very next day say she gave her laptop? I am not saying what she is saying is the gospel truth. However, if you see at it without bias you can tell that she's saying she co-operated with the police.

The nil report means that they could not find any imposter on which Hrithik's case rested. Simple as that.

Of course we can agree to disagree, but I refuse to agree with you that Kangana is lying. I am yet to see the evidence that she has lied. Don't attribute it to quotes from paid PR articles. If you can prove that she has contradicted herself when she is speaking on video, you can let us know.

And it's very easy to be on Hrithik's side right now because he hasn't spoken a word on this so far. He has relied on PR articles and his daddy and ex-wife to speak for him. Until and unless Hrithik comes clean with this I will give Kangana the benefit of doubt, but you might as well do otherwise - I'm fine with that. Peace.