Runaway bride noteAaron Harris writes:
Dave, the husband of the runaway bride did take a polygraph shortly after she went missing and passed it.As soon as I heard that, I concluded, correctly, that the bride had run away.There's no such thing as coincidence in criminal matters, and for a woman to get kidnapped by a stranger on the weekend before her wedding strains credulity.
This point is duly noted. I have to admit to regular readers that I was unaware that her fiancee had taken a polygraph examination. As hard as I try to keep facts accurate on this weblog, I will occasionally make an error in fact, and I certainly don't mind readers pointing out errors in fact. In this case, as I recall, NBC originally reported that the man failed to take a polygraph examination and I based my report here on that initial report. By the time I made the post to which Aaron was responding, the story was actually several days old. I was quite unaware of the reality of the polygraph of which Aaron speaks.
Now, some of you will use my encouragement to report to me errors of fact as an excuse to treat opinion as fact and try to tell me that some opinion that I hold is wrong because you don't happen to agree with it. That would be error of opinion, not error of fact, and is a matter of opinion itself! You are certainly welcome to post disagreements with my opinions in the comments section. In fact, I welcome many comments postings and I regularly respond to them. However, keep in mind that if you are questioning an error of opinion in your comment, I can just as easily believe, as a matter of opinion, that your opinion is in error! This is most often true for liberals and others whose heads have not yet come out of the clouds.