GottaLaff posted the story. The story said that the house address was 424 Terrace, and that the property record had "vanished". Both of those assertions are false. The address is 408 Terrace, and it has a property record.

For some reason, GottaLaff (and you) will not state that the address given in the post is wrong, even though it is easily proven by viewing the Leon Appraiser's map, and that therefore there is no mysteriosly erased property record.

Why won't GottaLaff (and you) simply acknowledge that the story that GottaLaff posted is materially wrong?

GottaLaff posted the report upon which we are all commenting. The report is in black and white above. The report she posted gives the address as 424 Terrace and goes on to say that there is no property record for that address -- that it has "vanished". All of this information is false, though for some reason GottaLaff refuses to admit that it is false even though the proof is easily found. Do you believe that the address of the house shown is 408, and do you admit that there is a property record for it, and therefore that the information in the report posted above is false?

The report also states that Ms. Stoner "claims ownership of the home", but the only evidence presented for that is a comment by Ms. Stoner saying "I am the FUTURE owner of this adorable place...[emph. added]."

I will also note that the house was listed for sale at least through February of this year.

By the way, I have no idea who you are, or why you have entered this sub-thread; I have never mentioned you nor did I state that you "brought up the address." Why are you defending yourself to me when I've never said anything about you?

Gottalaff was not the one to comment or bring up the address. Neither were we the one. the 408 address is listed under someone else and shows last date sold was 9/2006 this woman has tweeted several times she owns the house, she spent at Lowes and Home depot, commented on how expensive to maintain a house is. So either she is a liar, or you sir have ulterior motives. if you read all the posting you would clearly see that Gottalaff was not the one to comment on the address. You claimed she posted it, it was another reader. How quick to go after her when you yourself made a grave error.

I thought I couldn't be more disappointed in your evasions, but I was mistaken.

You have posted information that is provably false, and you have not even denied that it is false. That information includes the extremely serious insinuation that official government records were altered as part of a cover-up.

When faced with the truth of the matter, you refuse to take a position on the facts, but rather distance yourself from the report you posted. Rather than step up and defend the report, or refute it in the face of the clear facts, you waffle and say you "may or may not agree with everything I report."

You pass the buck to your source -- but you refuse to allow contact with him. So you shut down the very line of inquiry that might result in the truth being exposed to you. You are not only disinterested in the truth, you seem fearful of it.

You then claim a newspaper is "giving it a lot of credibility," but when asked for the name of the paper -- surely not a secret, like your source's identity -- you won't back up your claim with facts.

This sort of disgraceful "reporting" on the left -- and I'm on the left -- only gives fodder to the dishonest folks on the right. They can point to this report and mock it for its obvious falseness, but worse, they can point out how you refuse to acknowledge the truth of the matter once it is made clear to you, and how you evade and attempt to shut down the discussion when it becomes clear that you would otherwise be forced to issue a retraction. And, worst of all, they'll be absolutely correct.

It's terribly dismaying to see the left engaging in the sorts of practices we rightly excoriate the right for practicing.

The right thing to do here would have been for you to simply say, "upon further investigation, my source had the wrong address for the house; the appraiser's map clearly shows the property to be at 408, not 424, and there is a property record for 408 Terrace st., so the property record did not disappear as my post stated. And Ms. Stoner did not actually say she was the owner of that property, but rather that she expected to be the future owner, so it is not irregular that the property is not in her name in the appraiser's database. I apologize for the errors." But I can see there is no hope of such an honest approach to this situation. Sad.

You may or not agree with everything you report; that makes sense, in terms of opinions. But when it comes to facts, why would you report (or allow to stand) something that you believe to be factually false? That, indeed, is a newsflash.

Your source would want to talk to me because your source is interested in truth. Now, if your source is not interested in truth, I certainly understand why he wouldn't want to talk to me.

Why would you reveal your source? Simple: because you wrote, "I didn't claim it. My source did. Ask him." First, you disclaim any responsibility for false information you post, then you tell me to ask your source about it, not you; finally, you refuse to reveal the source you told me to ask. That's terribly irresponsible and evasive "reporting". You won't take responsibility for information that you repeat -- because it come from someone else -- and you won't allow others to ask your source about it after telling them to do so. So you can repeat provable falsehoods, and you wash your hands of it while blocking attempts to check the information. That's really disappointing and deeply undermines your credibility.

Which newspaper in Florida is "giving it a lot of credibility"?

Right you are. But you posted it, and now you know it is wrong. Why don't you correct it?

I would be happy to ask your source. Who is he?

I'm not sure what you mean "I saw both addresses." The address of the property is 408 Terrace, NOT 424 Terrace as you claimed, right? And, therefore, there is no mysteriously erased property record, right? If you agree with that, you should correct your post. If you don't, and you still claim the address is 424 Terrace, please state why you believe that so we can engage in a discussion to resolve that point.

I'm not sure what the relevance is that her comment was in April. No matter when it was, she didn't write that she owned the house, which you claim she did. You wrote, "she claims ownership of home." Where does she do that?

The address is 408 Terrace, not 424, as a simple check of the Leon County Appraiser's property map would have revealed, so this business about the records of 424 Terrace having been erased are nonsense (there is no such address on Terrace; Google Maps interpolates and does its best to locate the address). If you read Ms. Stoner's Plixi page with care, she wrote, "I am the FUTURE owner of this adorable place...[emph. added]," not that she already owned it.

So there IS a property record, and she is not YET the owner. As far as the appraiser's records go, there is no smoke, let alone fire, so I suggest toning down the conspiracy talk on this specific matter.

That picture looks like 408 Terrace Street, last sold in 2006
http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/408-Terrace-St-Tallahassee-FL-32308/45579746_zpid/
http://www.leonpa.org/ACCT.cfm?ACCOUNT=1131860060080

Call information, and ask the neighbor some questions.

Get the information to Alan Grayson, and Rachael

That's why I posted this. We need to get it around to get these questions

answered.

I did some poking around after reading this story and what is oddis that Stoner claims t have purchased two different homes. One is a photo of 424 Terrace from her Plixi pics but the other is at Terrace and Shell on her foursquare. But what is odd is that I can find NO RECORD in the Leon County Property Appraiser's records for either of those homes under her name. In fact, there is NO 424 Terrace in the records at all. And why is it ONLY the two homes this woman claims to have bought that can't seem to be found anywhere in the records (either at all as a record, or even in her name)?

Interestingly too, if you read some of her tweets and foursquare entries, she makes a comment about "sitting on her porch swing studying for the LSAT" and if you use Google Street View to look at the 2 properties, only the house at 424 Terrace has a front porch with a porch swing but that address does not exist in Leon County Prop Appraiser database. Something smells "off" here somewhere.

It's the only parcel on the street to have sold at all this year. There should be a record, because even if you go to the Leon County courthouse, you'll be searching the same system on their computers. People like me, in the land surveying business, need to have access to deed and plat records at any given time. Barring a clerical error or something like that, it's illegal to tamper with those records.

First I'll say...I want this to simply IMPLODE all over The Rube's face!

Then...I wonder if the county is just as slow and stupid about dividing lots and getting the records updated as Los Angeles County.

Years ago...we bought a condo unit in a new building...25 units. It took the freak'n county TWO (or was it three?) years to get the property divided into units from the original single lot.

Of course then...they sent everyone tax bills for the past 3 years...all at once.