A Full Pardon For Greg Hall (stuff it)

[Greegor]

On Apr 1, 4:24 pm, the messenjah <theguyontheb...@veryfast.biz> wrote:
Chuck > You folks need to get out more.

Let nobody accuse AUK'ers of being young, healthy
sporty competitors. Mostly fat old sociopaths.

[Greegor]

LOL

[Greegor]

http://www.lexisone.com/lx1/caselaw/freecaselaw?action=OCLGetCaseDetail&format=FULL&sourceID=beeheh&searchTerm=eHdU.Zbaa.aadj.eabQ&searchFlag=y&l1loc=FCLOW


http://caselaw.findlaw.com/ia-supreme-court/1360099.html

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF IOWA
No. 31 / 04-0202
Filed May 6, 2005

STATE OF IOWA,
Appellee,
vs.
KENT BRADLEY WILLS,
Appellant.
----------------------------------------

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.alien.visitors/msg/7bb21a6718c8504c

Sun, 15 Jun 2003 03:46:12 [...]
KBW 2003 > I was born in Krakow, Poland on
KBW 2003 > Jan. 8, 1969. I grew up there, and
KBW 2003 > in the mid 80's I came to the US.

-----------------------------------------

http://www.doc.state.ia.us/InmateInfo.asp?OffenderCd=1155768


http://www.iowacourts.state.ia.us/

Iowa Courts
Online Search
< Start A Case Search Here! > click

Iowa Courts Online Search
Search Selection

Under Trial Court < click on Case Search >

Wills Kent B
02401 ESPR015146 INA J WILLS ESTATE
05771 FECR145250 STATE VS KENT 01/08/1969
05771 FECR176876 STATE VS KENT 01/08/1969
05771 SCSC310505 SWEENEY RENTALS VS KENT ******
05771 SCSC335210 CITI FINANCIAL VS KENT
05771 SCSC374163 SFI F SCHERLE PRES VS KENT
05771 SCSC374164 SFI F SCHERLE III PRES VS KENT
05771 STAN201670 IOWA vs [ KENT ] 01/08/1969
05771 STAN210929 IOWA vs [ KENT ] 01/08/1969
05771 SWCR177169 STATE VS KENT 01/08/1969

A list of case numbers will be presented.
Click on the SECOND Felony ending with 876.

Under the "Charges" tab:

Charges, Dispositions, Sentences
Title: STATE VS KENT BRADLEY WILLS
Case: 05771 FECR176876 (POLK)
Citation Number:

[ Text compressed for presentation on usenet ]

Charges, Dispositions, Sentences
Title: STATE VS KENT BRADLEY WILLS
Case: 05771 FECR176876 (POLK)
Citation Number:

Count 01
08/12/2003 Offense Date BURGLARY 2ND DEGREE - 1983 (FELC)
12/17/2003 Adj.Date: GUILTY
01/16/2004 Sentence 10 Year(s) SUSPENDED PRISON
01/16/2004 Sentence: PROBATION 2 Year(s)
01/16/2004 Sentence: RESIDENTIAL FACILITY FT DSM FACILITY-MAX
BENEFITS
01/16/2004 Sentence: COMMUNITY SERVICE 150 Hour(s)
12/17/2003 Sentence: JO-PROBATION EXTENDED UNTIL 1/16/09
01/25/2006 Sentence: IMPOSED PROBATION EXTENDED UNTIL 01/16/09
Count 02
08/12/2003 Offense BURGLARY 3RD DEGREE - UNOCCUPIED MOTOR VEHICLE
(AGMS)
12/17/2003 GUILTY
01/16/2004 Sentence: PRISON Duration: 2 Year(s) SUSPENDED PRISON
01/16/2004 Sentence: PROBATION Duration: 2 Year(s)
01/16/2004 Sentence: RESIDENTIAL FACILITY FT DSM FACILITY-MAX
BENEFITS
01/16/2004 Sentence: COMMUNITY SERVICE Duration: 150 Hour(s)
12/17/2003 Sentence: JO-PROBATION EXTENDED UNTIL 1/16/09
01/25/2006 Sentence: IMPOSED PROBATION EXTENDED UNTIL 01/06/09
Count 03
08/12/2003 USING JUVENILE TO COMMIT AN INDICTABLE OFFENSE(FELC)709A.
6(2)
12/17/2003 GUILTY
01/16/2004 Sentence: PRISON Duration: 10 Year(s)
01/16/2004 Sentence: SUSPENDED PRISON 10 Year(s)
01/16/2004 Sentence: PROBATION 2 Year(s)
01/16/2004 Sentence: RESIDENTIAL FACILITY FT DSM FACILITY-MAX
BENEFITS
01/16/2004 Sentence: COMMUNITY SERVICE 150 Hour(s)
12/17/2003 Sentence: JO-PROBATION EXTENDED UNTIL 1/16/09
01/25/2006 Sentence: IMPOSED PROBATION EXTENDED UNTIL 01/16/09

http://fifthdcs.com/addresses.cfm?location=fort

Fifth Judicial District Department of Correctional Services

Fort Des Moines Community Corrections Complex
Main Phone Number: (515) 242-6900

[Greegor]

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.alien.visitors/msg/7bb21a6718c8504c

Sun, 15 Jun 2003 03:46:12 [...]
KBW 2003 > I was born in Krakow, Poland on
KBW 2003 > Jan. 8, 1969. I grew up there, and
KBW 2003 > in the mid 80's I came to the US.

http://5magazine.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/img_0271.jpg

Kalderashi Kent the Krakow Kowboy!

[Greegor]

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.alien.visitors/msg/7bb21a6718c8504c

Sun, 15 Jun 2003 03:46:12  [...]
KBW 2003 > I was born in Krakow, Poland on
KBW 2003 > Jan. 8, 1969.  I grew up there, and
KBW 2003 > in the mid 80's I came to the US.

http://5magazine.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/img_0271.jpg

G > Kalderashi Kent the Krakow Kowboy!

China Blue > I was born on 14 February 2417.

How very auspicious!

Will your birthday end up on a department
of corrections web site?

http://www.doc.state.ia.us/InmateInfo.asp?OffenderCd=1155768

Name Kent Bradley Wills
Offender Number 1155768
Sex M
Birth Date 01/08/1969
Age 43
Location
Offense
County Of Commitment
Commitment Date
Duration
TDD/SDD *

* TDD = Tentative Discharge Date
* SDD = Supervision Discharge Date

Supervision Status Offense Class County of Commitment End Date
Probation Aggravated Misdemeanor Polk 12/16/2008
Probation C Felony Polk 12/16/2008

Supervision Status Offense Class County of Commitment End Date
Probation Aggravated Misdemeanor Polk 11/25/2003

[ These notes are still ONLINE and verifiable under CHARGES ]

http://www.lexisone.com/lx1/caselaw/freecaselaw?action=OCLGetCaseDetail&format=FULL&sourceID=beeheh&searchTerm=eHdU.Zbaa.aadj.eabQ&searchFlag=y&l1loc=FCLOW


http://caselaw.findlaw.com/ia-supreme-court/1360099.html

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF IOWA
No. 31 / 04-0202
Filed May 6, 2005

STATE OF IOWA,
Appellee,
vs.
KENT BRADLEY WILLS,
Appellant.

Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk
County, Michael D. Huppert, Judge.

Defendant appeals claiming ineffective
assistance of counsel. AFFIRMED.

Linda Del Gallo, State Appellate Defender,
and Tricia Johnston, Assistant State
Appellate Defender, for appellant.

Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Kevin
Cmelik, Assistant Attorney General, John P.
Sarcone, County Attorney, and John Judisch,
Assistant County Attorney, for appellee.

WIGGINS, Justice.

Kent Wills appeals his conviction for
second-degree burglary contending that
an attached garage is a separate occupied
structure from that of the living quarters
of the residence. In this appeal, we must
determine whether trial counsel was
ineffective for (1) failing to move for
judgment of acquittal on the basis there
was insufficient evidence to convict Wills
of second-degree burglary when he entered
an attached garage of a residence when no
persons were present in the garage, but
when persons were present in the living
quarters; and (2) failing to object to a
jury instruction based on this same
argument. Because we find there was no
legal basis for the motion for judgment
of acquittal or the objection to the jury
instruction, Wills' trial counsel was not
ineffective. Accordingly, we affirm the
judgment of the district court.

I. Background Facts and Proceedings.

Around 1 a.m., an Ankeny resident called
the local police to report that a car
alarm sounded in the resident's
neighborhood. The city dispatched a police
officer to the location. Observing nothing
unusual, the officer left the area, only
to be stopped a couple of blocks later
by a person who informed the officer he
had witnessed someone running from the
area of the car alarm. As the officer
started driving back to the area of the
car alarm, he noticed a person walking
on the sidewalk. The officer asked the
person, a minor, if he had noticed anybody
running from the area. The minor answered
that he had not. While the officer and
another officer were speaking to the minor,
another resident of the neighborhood
arrived in her car and informed the
officers that she had observed two people,
one of whom was heavy set with a blinking
light on his back pocket, walking in the
area of her neighbor's residence. She
observed the heavier-set individual, later
identified as Wills, enter her neighbor's
attached garage through an unlocked service
door. She further observed a smaller
individual standing by a van parked in
the neighbor's driveway.

The officers eventually let the minor leave
even though they found a large amount of
coins, a flashlight, and an electronic
pocket organizer in his pockets. After
releasing the minor, the police officers
drove to the residence where the neighbor
observed the two suspicious people and
woke the owner. The owner, his wife,
and two daughters were in the residence
sleeping at the time. After a search
of his vehicles, the owner discovered
change and an electronic pocket organizer
were missing from the vehicles. The
owner's daughter reported a diamond ring
and some change were missing from her
vehicle. The officers then contacted
the minor's parents, who informed the
officers the minor was with Wills. After
the officers questioned the minor again,
he admitted his involvement in the theft
and implicated Wills in the burglary.
Although Wills denied involvement in the
burglary, the officers arrested him.

The State filed a trial information
charging Wills with second-degree
burglary. The State later amended the
information to include two additional
charges of burglary in the third degree
and using a juvenile to commit an
indictable offense.

The jury returned a verdict finding Wills
guilty of the crimes of burglary in the
second degree, burglary in the third
degree, and using a juvenile to commit
an indictable offense. Wills appeals his
conviction for second-degree burglary
claiming ineffective assistance of
counsel.

II. Scope of Review.

Claims of ineffective assistance of counsel
are derived from the Sixth Amendment of the
United States Constitution. Strickland v.
Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 684-86, 104 S.
Ct. 2052, 2063-64, 80 L. Ed. 2d 674, 691-93
(1984). Our review for a claim involving
violations of the Constitution is de novo.
State v. Fintel, 689 N.W.2d 95, 100
(Iowa 2004). We normally preserve
ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims
for postconviction relief actions. State
v. Carter, 602 N.W. 2d 818, 820 (Iowa 1999).
However, we will address such claims on
direct appeal when the record is sufficient
to permit a ruling. State v. Artzer,
609 N.W.2d 526, 531 (Iowa 2000). The
appellate record in the present case is
sufficient to allow us to address Wills'
ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims
on direct appeal.

In order for a defendant to succeed on a
claim of ineffective assistance of counsel,
the defendant must prove: (1) counsel
failed to perform an essential duty and
(2) prejudice resulted. Id. Prejudice
results when "there is a reasonable
probability that, but for the counsel's
unprofessional errors, the result of the
proceeding would have been different."
State v. Hopkins, 576 N.W.2d 374, 378
(Iowa 1998) (quoting Strickland, 466
U.S. at 694, 104 S. Ct. at 2068,
80 L. Ed. 2d at 698). Wills' arguments
also raise issues of statutory
interpretation, which we review for
correction of errors at law. State v.
Wolford Corp., 689 N.W.2d 471, 473 (Iowa 2004).

III. Analysis.

To find Wills guilty of burglary in the
second degree, the State had to prove
Wills perpetrated a burglary "in or
upon an occupied structure in which one
or more persons are present . . . ." Iowa
Code § 713.5(2) (2003) (emphasis added).

In this appeal, Wills first contends his
trial counsel was ineffective for failing
to move for a judgment of acquittal on
the basis there was insufficient evidence
to support a finding that at the time Wills
entered the garage, there were persons
present in or upon the occupied structure.
Wills concedes the garage was an occupied
structure, but argues the living quarters
and the attached garage are separate and
independent occupied structures; therefore,
the jury could not have found there were
people present in the attached garage
at the time of the burglary.

The Code defines an "occupied structure" as:

[A]ny building, structure, appurtenances
to buildings and structures, land, water
or air vehicle, or similar place adapted
for overnight accommodation of persons,
or occupied by persons for the purpose of
carrying on business or other activity
therein, or for the storage or safekeeping
of anything of value. Such a structure
is an "occupied structure" whether or not
a person is actually present.

Id. § 702.12.

Wills relies on State v. Smothers, 590
N.W.2d 721 (Iowa 1999), to argue the
garage and the living quarters are separate
and independent occupied structures. In
Smothers, two separate and distinct
businesses connected by interior fire doors
were operated in the same structure.
590 N.W.2d at 723. We held the defendant
committed two burglaries by entering each
business because "[t]he facility's
construction history and physical make-up
demonstrate that the portions are
independent working units which constitute
'[a] combination of materials to form a
construction for occupancy [or] use.'" Id.
Smothers is not at odds with the present
case because the living quarters and the
garage are not separate or independent
units of the residence.

Our review of the record reveals the garage
in question was a three-car attached garage
separated from the living quarters by a
door. The same roof covered the garage as
the rest of the residence. The living
quarters surrounded the garage on two sides.
It was structurally no different from any
other room in the residence.

The garage was a functional part of the
residence. On the night of the incident,
the door was unlocked. The owner of the
residence used two stalls in the garage to
park the family vehicles. The owner used
the third stall for his motorcycle. As
such, the garage and the living quarters
are a single "structure" or "building"
functioning as an integral part of the
family residence. Thus, the residence
including the garage is a single
"occupied structure" under section 702.12.
See, e.g., People v. Ingram, 48 Cal. Rptr.
2d 256 (Ct. App.1995) (holding defendant's
entry into an attached garage constituted
first-degree burglary because the garage
was attached to the house; therefore,
burglary of the garage was burglary of
an inhabited dwelling house); People v.
Cunningham, 637 N.E.2d 1247, 1252 (Ill.
App. Ct. 1994) (holding "ordinarily an
attached garage is a 'dwelling' because
it is part of the structure in which
the owner or occupant lives");
State v. Lara, 587 P.2d 52, 53
(N.M. Ct. App. 1978) (holding "burglary
of the [attached] garage was burglary of
the dwelling house because the garage was
a part of the structure used as living
quarters"); People v. Green, 141 A.D.2d
760, 761 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988) (holding
"[s]ince the garage in the present case
was structurally part of a building
which was used for overnight lodging of
various persons, it must be considered
as part of a dwelling"); White v. State,
630 S.W. 2d 340, 342 (Tex. Ct. App. 1982)
(holding an attached garage under the
same roof as the home would be considered
a habitation within the purview of the
penal code because the garage is a
structure appurtenant to and connected
to the house); State v. Murbach, 843 P.
2d 551, 553 (Wash. Ct. App 1993)
(holding the definition of a dwelling
under Washington's burglary statute
included an attached garage).

Had Wills' trial counsel moved for a
judgment of acquittal on the basis there
was insufficient evidence to support
a finding that at the time Wills
entered the garage there were no persons
present in or upon the occupied
structure, it would have been overruled
by the court because the owner and his
family were present in the residence at
the time of the burglary.

Wills also claims his counsel was
ineffective for failing to object to
the jury instruction used by the district
court on the same ground; that the
living quarters were a separate and
independent occupied structure from the
attached garage. The instruction as
given stated:

The State must prove all of the following
elements of Burglary in the Second
Degree as to Count I:

1. On or about the 12th day of August,
2003, the defendant or someone he aided
and abetted broke into or entered the
residence at . . . .

2. The residence at . . . was an occupied
structure as defined in Instruction No. 29.

3. The defendant or the person he aided
and abetted did not have permission or
authority to break into the residence at ...

4. The defendant or the person he aided
and abetted did so with the specific
intent to commit a theft therein.

5. During the incident persons were present
in or upon the occupied structure.

If the State has proved all of the elements,
the defendant is guilty of Burglary in the
Second Degree. If the State has failed to prove
any of the elements, the defendant is not
guilty of Burglary in the Second Degree and
you will then consider the charge of
Attempted Burglary in the Second Degree
explained in Instruction No. 21.

(Emphasis added.)

Wills' claim is without merit. As we have
discussed, the residence is the one and
only "occupied structure" under the facts
of this case. Had Wills' trial counsel
made this objection to the instruction,
it would have been overruled.

Therefore, Wills' trial counsel is not
ineffective for failing to move
for a judgment of acquittal or objecting
to the instruction because there was no
legal basis for the motion or objection.
See State v. Hochmuth, 585 N.W.2d 234,
238 (Iowa 1998) (holding trial counsel was
not ineffective for failing to raise an
issue that has no merit).

IV. Disposition.

We affirm the judgment of the district
court because Wills' trial counsel was
not ineffective for failing to raise
meritless issues.

AFFIRMED.

[Kent Wills]

On Fri, 27 Apr 2012 20:20:06 -0700 (PDT), Greegor
<gree...@gmail.com> wrote:

>G > Kalderashi Kent the Krakow Kowboy!
>
>China Blue > I was born on 14 February 2417.
>
>How very auspicious!
>
>Will your birthday end up on a department
>of corrections web site?

Your birthday appears on many, but not all, of the listings in
you LONG history as a defendant in criminal and civil actions, Greg.

Which of these women is Lisa Rene Watkins:

http://i212.photobucket.com/albums/cc127/kwills_photo/8b1234bd.jpg

"I am Bob Larson."
Gregory Scott "Piggly Wiggly" Hanson offering more proof that he is
as mentally ill as he presents.
Message-ID:
<df610804-da3b-4aa8...@cu4g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>

A select number of items that really are about Gregory Scott "Piggly
Wiggly" Hanson (They are so accurate, Greg compared them the comment
that water is wet):

Title: ST VS GREGORY HANSON
(DOB 05/22/1959)
CRIMINAL COMPLAINT 04/10/1996
Comments: CT 1 OWI 1ST
OTHER CITATION 04/10/1996
Comments: CT 2 SPEED
Disposition Status
GUILTY PLEA/DEFAULT

"That's the chick, but not the pic, zipperhead!"
Greg "Piggly Wiggly" Hanson proving his bigotry towards Asians, by
attacking my first wife (deceased).
http://www.rsdb.org/search?q=zipperhead

Me: "I suspect your stalking is due to the use and abuse of illegal
drugs, Greg. Is the reason for your stalking the members of
alt.friends due to the use and abuse of illegal drugs?

Gregory Scott "Piggly Wiggly" Hanson, wife beater and child abuser:
"Of course."

"My family's case is for Neglect, but we are treated
in virtually every regard as child abusers, marked on
the Child Abuse registry, for example."
-- Gregory Scott "Piggly Wiggly" Hanson, wife beater and child
abuser

" ... But there ought to be conferences and studies on how to curb
minority overpopulation, repatriate minorities abroad, imprison more
minorities, increase use of the death penalty and divest minorities of
the power they have usurped over us in recent years. That would
address the most pressing problems of our day. ... "
April 2000, Gregory Hanson
http://www.nationalist.org/ATW/2000/040101.html#Hanson

Path:
news.datemas.de!newsfeed.datemas.de!goblin1!goblin.stu.neva.ru!postnews.google.com!y21g2000yqn.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: Greegor <gree...@gmail.com>
Newsgroups:
misc.kids,alt.support.foster-parents,uk.people.parents,alt.support.child-protective-services

With the Christmas season upon us again, my stepdaughter was launching
into her usual tirade of "I need this" (Nintendo 64 games, Pokemon,
videos, Rhianna CD, etc.) After enduring a trip through Kmart, I
was at my wits end. I took the kid home and filled the bathtub with
water. Then I dunked the brat's head under the water and counted out
a full minute, with her flailing her arms. I brought her up and she
gasped for air. When she'd caught her breath, I asked her, "When you
were under that water, did you 'need' Nintendo? Pokemon? Rhianna?"
She shook her head. "What were you thinking about?" I
prodded. She told me "I was thinking that I needed air."

"Now you know the difference between 'need' and 'want'" I exclaimed
triumphantly.

--a true story

As of Wednesday, August 31, 2011:

SMALL CLAIMS ORIGINAL NOTICE
Comments: OPA $2805.04
COPIES TO PA
VERIFICATION OF ACCOUNT

JUDGEMENT DEFAULT
Comments: JUDGMENT AGAINST GREGORY HANSON FOR $2805.04
+ INTEREST AT 7.271% FROM 8/6/98 & $45.00 COSTS.

Comments: NOTE OF GARN/NOTE TO DEFT SERV 9/24/98 BY WCSD
TO SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT (ED POLKERS) FOR GREG HANSON
FEES $35.60

Gregory Scott "Piggly Wiggly" Hanson has a Garnishment order against
him. There is nothing to even suggest any of the money legally owed
has been paid. The SoL on the order has likely expired, but Greg still
can't risk getting a job due to it.

[Greegor]

G > Kalderashi Kent the Krakow Kowboy!

China Blue > I was born on 14 February 2417.

G > How very auspicious!
G >
G > Will your birthday end up on a department
G > of corrections web site?

KBW > Your birthday appears on many, but not
KBW > all, of the listings in you LONG history
KBW > as a defendant in criminal and civil actions, Greg.

Wills Kent B
02401 ESPR015146 INA J WILLS ESTATE
05771 FECR145250 STATE VS KENT 01/08/1969
05771 FECR176876 STATE VS KENT 01/08/1969
05771 SCSC310505 SWEENEY RENTALS VS KENT ******
05771 SCSC335210 CITI FINANCIAL VS KENT
05771 SCSC374163 SFI F SCHERLE PRES VS KENT
05771 SCSC374164 SFI F SCHERLE III PRES VS KENT
05771 STAN201670 IOWA vs [ KENT ] 01/08/1969
05771 STAN210929 IOWA vs [ KENT ] 01/08/1969
05771 SWCR177169 STATE VS KENT 01/08/1969

[Greegor]

KBW > Greg has claimed Ina, Janet and Carole
KBW > are all my mom.  And he
KBW > thinks he's mentally stable.  LOL

Please post a dated quote where I made
such claims.

Your Mom is Janet Rae Wills, DOB 02/16/1947

I've been quite "fixated" on that
information for a number of years, Kent.

You connected yourself to Janet when you
announced your sister's wedding on
usenet, by name.

You also connected yourself to Janet and
Fred when you made exaggerated claims of
selling the apartment building in Ankeny
even though property records are public
and listed them.

That the Iowa COURTS connect you to
the estate of Ina Wills is not of
much concern to me. Should it be?

Your Mom is Janet Rae Wills, DOB 02/16/1947
Iowa traffic ticket 09/30/1996 02641 NTWG734877
for "DNU - DISOBEYING TRAFFIC SIGNAL"

[Greegor]

KBW > Re: Gregory Scott Hanson can't chose a single woman
KBW > to be the one who gave birth to me.
KBW > He keeps jumping around.

G > Kent, your Mom is Janet Rae Wills, DOB 02/16/1947
G > 09/30/1996 Iowa traffic ticket 02641 NTWG734877
G > for "DNU - DISOBEYING TRAFFIC SIGNAL"
G >
G > She gave birth to you on Jan 8, 1969, Kent.

G > Deny your own mother, Kent.

http://immaculatecongestion.blogspot.com/

KBW > First, you are not me.

G > I never claimed to be you, Kent Bradley Wills!

KBW > You've not claimed to be Kent Bradley Wills,
KBW > but you've claimed to be me MANY times.

You ARE Kent Bradley Wills, DOB Jan 8, 1969.

KBW > You post edits don't alter this TRUTH.
KBW > And as you KNOW, but are psychologically
KBW > UNABLE to admit, I am not the person
KBW > you currently claim I am.

You are Kent Bradley Wills, Garage Burglary felon.

KBW > Your continuously replying to your own
KBW > posts claiming you are me will never
KBW > get you out of the uneducated,
KBW > unemployed LOSER life you've got.

Photo of Kent's shack at 1110 South F Street, Rogers, Arkansas
72756-5520
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&biw=1020&bih=602&q=1110+South+F+Street,+Rogers,+Arkansas+72756-5520
In the PHOTO (left side) look for the RED CHAIR on the front
"stoop"! LOL

KBW > Your OBSESSION with Rebecca's house is NOT
KBW > the behavior of the mentally sound, Greg.

There is no Rebecca currently at that address, Kent.

http://gis.co.benton.ar.us/website/basemap/viewer.htm

Type in a parcel ID like 02-00444-000 in the blank
marked parcel ID and then hit enter.

Kent Bradley Wills, 1110 South F Street, Rogers, Arkansas 72756-5520
County parcel # 02-00444-000 (Owned by Kent's folks Fred and Janet.)

KBW > Let your shrink know that your
KBW > losing ground in your treatment.

http://cbk2.google.com/cbk?output=thumbnail&thumb=1&ll=36.322943,-94.107730&cbll=36.322971,-94.107481

[...]
KBW > Maybe I'm the man who has parents you KNOW I don't have?

That would be special indeed!
Even better than immaculate conception!

http://media.kickstatic.com/kickapps/images/63269/photos/PHOTO_14204311_63269_25461334_ap.jpg

[Kent Wills]

On Thu, 17 May 2012 09:01:18 -0700 (PDT), Greegor
<gree...@gmail.com> wrote:

>KBW > Re: Gregory Scott Hanson can't chose a single woman
>KBW > to be the one who gave birth to me.
>KBW > He keeps jumping around.
>
>G > Kent, your Mom is Janet Rae Wills, DOB 02/16/1947
>G > 09/30/1996 Iowa traffic ticket 02641 NTWG734877
>G > for "DNU - DISOBEYING TRAFFIC SIGNAL"
>G >
>G > She gave birth to you on Jan 8, 1969, Kent.
>
>G > Deny your own mother, Kent.
>
>http://immaculatecongestion.blogspot.com/
>

Your bogus web site only proves that you really are as mentally
ill as you present.
Contrary to your claims, I don't have a twin sister.
People who travel in the same time zone do not experience jet
lag. Since you can't afford to travel more than a few miles, you may
not have known this.
A woman who happens to have the same last name as me going to
Aruba, if she did and you didn't fake the claim, in February has no
bearing on my going in March.
This is not the first time I've exposed your LIES about this,
Greg. Given this truth, please explain why you are so COMPELLED to
repeat the same lies, KNOWING I will simply exposed them again.

>KBW > First, you are not me.
>
>G > I never claimed to be you, Kent Bradley Wills!
>
>KBW > You've not claimed to be Kent Bradley Wills,
>KBW > but you've claimed to be me MANY times.
>
>You ARE Kent Bradley Wills, DOB Jan 8, 1969.
>

Only in your drug addled mind.

>KBW > You post edits don't alter this TRUTH.
>KBW > And as you KNOW, but are psychologically
>KBW > UNABLE to admit, I am not the person
>KBW > you currently claim I am.
>
>You are Kent Bradley Wills, Garage Burglary felon.
>

But you claimed I am not.
Where you lying then, or are you lying now?

>KBW > Your continuously replying to your own
>KBW > posts claiming you are me will never
>KBW > get you out of the uneducated,
>KBW > unemployed LOSER life you've got.
>
>Photo of Kent's shack at 1110 South F Street, Rogers, Arkansas
>72756-5520
>http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&biw=1020&bih=602&q=1110+South+F+Street,+Rogers,+Arkansas+72756-5520
>In the PHOTO (left side) look for the RED CHAIR on the front
>"stoop"! LOL
>

I'm still not Rebecca, Greg. Accept that your Fregoli, or
psychological NEED to lie, will not make your claims the truth.

>KBW > Your OBSESSION with Rebecca's house is NOT
>KBW > the behavior of the mentally sound, Greg.
>
>There is no Rebecca currently at that address, Kent.

If my claim is a lie, prove it.
That it may be owned by someone else and she rents it can't, to
the mentally sound, mean she doesn't live there.
And to destroy your attempt to distract from the TRUTH that
another of your MANY lies has been exposed:

She did refer to it as her house. She may have meant it in the
same way someone refers to their apartment as their apartment. They
probably don't own it (it would be a condo if they did), but they
still call it theirs.

What LIE will you come up with to avoid the TRUTH I've presented
about you, Greg?

>
>http://gis.co.benton.ar.us/website/basemap/viewer.htm
>
>Type in a parcel ID like 02-00444-000 in the blank
>marked parcel ID and then hit enter.
>
>Kent Bradley Wills, 1110 South F Street, Rogers, Arkansas 72756-5520
>County parcel # 02-00444-000 (Owned by Kent's folks Fred and Janet.)
>
>KBW > Let your shrink know that your
>KBW > losing ground in your treatment.
>
>http://cbk2.google.com/cbk?output=thumbnail&thumb=1&ll=36.322943,-94.107730&cbll=36.322971,-94.107481
>

Post edit restored to the original context.

How sad that you think if you remove the TRUTH, it will vanish. I
hope you've finally learned that it will not.


>> Which of the several IDs you've claimed for me is me today?
>> Am I the man who inherited a large sum of money from his mom,
>>Ina?
>> Am I the man who you claimed to have PROVED, via the phone book,
>>to live in Indianola, Suburban Denver, CO, Little Rock, AR, or
>>someplace in New Mexico?

>> Maybe I'm the man who has parents you KNOW I don't have?

>> Which of the MANY people you've claimed I am are you claiming
>>today?

>
>That would be special indeed!

Not really.

>Even better than immaculate conception!

That would imply I have no earthy dad. Is this the claim you're
making?
Your claim that someone who is not my dad is my dad can't, to the
mentally sound, equate to immaculate conception.

>
>http://media.kickstatic.com/kickapps/images/63269/photos/PHOTO_14204311_63269_25461334_ap.jpg

Let your shrink know that your OBSESSION with the man in the
picture is getting worse, Greg.

[Greegor]

KBW > Re: Gregory Scott Hanson can't chose a single woman
KBW > to be the one who gave birth to me.
KBW > He keeps jumping around.

G > Kent, your Mom is Janet Rae Wills, DOB 02/16/1947
G > 09/30/1996 Iowa traffic ticket 02641 NTWG734877
G > for "DNU - DISOBEYING TRAFFIC SIGNAL"
G >
G > She gave birth to you on Jan 8, 1969, Kent.

G > Deny your own mother, Kent.

http://immaculatecongestion.blogspot.com/

KBW > Your bogus web site

Not mine.
Are you STILL of the delusion that I am
your one and ONLY detractor, Kent?

> only proves that you really are as mentally
> ill as you present.

Like the way Moe was ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN
that "bit some rot" was me?

And then later conceded that it's not me?

> Contrary to your claims, I don't have a twin sister.

I never made any such claim.
Was this one of your psychopathic "inferences"
that you said I "claimed" or "admitted to"?

>      People who travel in the same time zone do not experience jet
> lag. Since you can't afford to travel more than a few miles, you may
> not have known this.
>      A woman who happens to have the same last name as me going to
> Aruba, if she did and you didn't fake the claim, in February has no
> bearing on my going in March.
>      This is not the first time I've exposed your LIES about this,
> Greg.  Given this truth, please explain why you are so COMPELLED to
> repeat the same lies, KNOWING I will simply exposed them again.

Are you trying to explain how you obtained
the original materials you photoshopped
your name onto?

> >KBW > First, you are not me.
>
> >G > I never claimed to be you, Kent Bradley Wills!
>
> >KBW > You've not claimed to be Kent Bradley Wills,
> >KBW > but you've claimed to be me MANY times.
>
> >You ARE Kent Bradley Wills, DOB Jan 8, 1969.
>
>      Only in your drug addled mind.

You ID'd yourself, Kent!

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.alien.visitors/msg/7bb21a6718c8504c

Sun, 15 Jun 2003 03:46:12 [...]
KBW 2003 > I was born in Krakow, Poland on
KBW 2003 > Jan. 8, 1969. I grew up there, and
KBW 2003 > in the mid 80's I came to the US.

> >KBW > You post edits don't alter this TRUTH.
> >KBW > And as you KNOW, but are psychologically
> >KBW > UNABLE to admit, I am not the person
> >KBW > you currently claim I am.
>
> >You are Kent Bradley Wills, Garage Burglary felon.
>
>      But you claimed I am not.
>      Where you lying then, or are you lying now?

YOU are lying when you make this claim.

> >KBW > Your continuously replying to your own
> >KBW > posts claiming you are me will never
> >KBW > get you out of the uneducated,
> >KBW > unemployed LOSER life you've got.

Photo of Kent's shack at 1110 South F Street, Rogers, Arkansas
72756-5520
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&biw=1020&bih=602&q=1110+South+F+Street,+Rogers,+Arkansas+72756-5520
In the PHOTO (left side) look for the RED CHAIR on the front
"stoop"! LOL

> I'm still not Rebecca, Greg.

How nice for you.

> Accept that your Fregoli, or
> psychological NEED to lie, will not make your claims the truth.
>
> >KBW > Your OBSESSION with Rebecca's house is NOT
> >KBW > the behavior of the mentally sound, Greg.
>

G > There is no Rebecca currently at that address, Kent.

KBW > If my claim is a lie, prove it.
KBW > That it may be owned by someone else

Public tax recordss show your PARENTS own it, Kent.

> and she rents it can't, to
> the mentally sound, mean she doesn't live there.
> And to destroy your attempt to distract from the TRUTH that
> another of your MANY lies has been exposed:
>
> She did refer to it as her house.  She may have meant it in the
> same way someone refers to their apartment as their apartment.  They
> probably don't own it
> (it would be a condo if they did)

Putting such a shack of a house under CONDO
law would be unusual, and wouoldn't it be
listed as under CONDO law on the county
tax assessor database?

KBW > , but they still call it theirs.

Sure they do, Kent, sure they do....

Reverse listings show no Rebecca
currently at that address.

> What LIE will you come up with to avoid
> the TRUTH I've presented
> about you, Greg?

empty rhetoric

http://gis.co.benton.ar.us/website/basemap/viewer.htm

Type in a parcel ID like 02-00444-000 in the blank
marked  parcel ID and then hit enter.

Kent Bradley Wills, 1110 South F Street, Rogers, Arkansas 72756-5520
County parcel # 02-00444-000 (Owned by Kent's folks Fred and Janet.)

KBW > Let your shrink know that your
KBW > losing ground in your treatment.

empty rhetoric

http://cbk2.google.com/cbk?output=thumbnail&thumb=1&ll=36.322943,-94.107730&cbll=36.322971,-94.107481

> Post edit restored to the original context.

--------------------

>      How sad that you think if you remove the TRUTH, it will vanish. I
> hope you've finally learned that it will not.
>
> >>     Which of the several  IDs you've claimed for me is me today?
> >>     Am I the man who inherited a large sum of money from his mom,
> >>Ina?
> >>     Am I the man who you claimed to have PROVED, via the phone book,
> >>to live in Indianola, Suburban Denver, CO, Little Rock, AR, or
> >>someplace in New Mexico?
> >>     Maybe I'm the man who has parents you KNOW I don't have?
> >>     Which of the MANY people you've claimed I am are you claiming
> >>today?

-----------------


Kent offers various red herrings after it's WAY too late!

KBW > Maybe I'm the man who has
KBW > parents you KNOW I don't have?

G > That would be special indeed!
G > Even better than immaculate conception!

KBW > Not really.
KBW > That would imply I have no earthy dad.
KBW > Is this the claim you're making?
KBW > Your claim that someone who is not my
KBW > dad is my dad can't, to the mentally
KBW > sound, equate to immaculate conception.

You were the one who made the statement:

KBW > Maybe I'm the man who has
KBW > parents you KNOW I don't have?

Perhaps English as a Second Language
got the best of you on that one, Kent?

[Kent Wills]

On Sat, 19 May 2012 18:12:18 -0700 (PDT), Greegor
<gree...@gmail.com> wrote:

>KBW > Re: Gregory Scott Hanson can't chose a single woman
>KBW > to be the one who gave birth to me.
>KBW > He keeps jumping around.
>
>G > Kent, your Mom is Janet Rae Wills, DOB 02/16/1947
>G > 09/30/1996 Iowa traffic ticket 02641 NTWG734877
>G > for "DNU - DISOBEYING TRAFFIC SIGNAL"
>G >
>G > She gave birth to you on Jan 8, 1969, Kent.
>
>G > Deny your own mother, Kent.
>
>>http://immaculatecongestion.blogspot.com/
>
>KBW > Your bogus web site
>
>Not mine.

You claimed it is. Openly.
Are you claiming you LIED?

>Are you STILL of the delusion that I am
>your one and ONLY detractor, Kent?
>

I hold no delusions. It's a matter of time until you out
yourself or provide enough evidence to allow another to out you. It
happens nearly every time you use one of your socks.
You may opt to cease using your latest sock before the PROOF is
made known. This has happened before, though not as often as you end
up outted.

>> only proves that you really are as mentally
>> ill as you present.
>
>Like the way Moe was ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN
>that "bit some rot" was me?
>
>And then later conceded that it's not me?

You still don't see what she did, eh?
How does someone as stone cold STUPID as you consistently PROVE
yourself to be survive in the world?

>
>> Contrary to your claims, I don't have a twin sister.
>
>I never made any such claim.

Unless you are stating your LIED when you claimed the site is
yours, you did.
If you'd like, I'll post the MID where your open admission can be
read. Of course, your ability to make use of such will suddenly
vanish again. It happens each and every time someone posts the MIDs
that PROVE you the drug addled LIAR you are.

>Was this one of your psychopathic "inferences"
>that you said I "claimed" or "admitted to"?

You openly admitted to the site being yours. Either it is, in
which case you LIED on the site, or it is not and you LIED when you
claimed it is.
Which is the one that further PROVES you are psychologically
UNABLE to be honest in most cases?

Let's pretend for the moment that you didn't openly admit to
being the one who made the site. That it's so inaccurate about my
having a twin sister and it claims someone who travels in the same
time zone will have jet lag, it's clear the site is not credible.
But then, you don't really care. So long as you can feed your
NEED to lie, you're happy.

>
>>      People who travel in the same time zone do not experience jet
>> lag. Since you can't afford to travel more than a few miles, you may
>> not have known this.
>>      A woman who happens to have the same last name as me going to
>> Aruba, if she did and you didn't fake the claim, in February has no
>> bearing on my going in March.
>>      This is not the first time I've exposed your LIES about this,
>> Greg.  Given this truth, please explain why you are so COMPELLED to
>> repeat the same lies, KNOWING I will simply exposed them again.
>
>Are you trying to explain how you obtained
>the original materials you photoshopped
>your name onto?
>

I've never photoshopped my name onto anything.
As you already KNOW, but are psychologically UNABLE to admit, I
don't use photoshop. I can barely open an image in it. Given how
easy that is, it should be clear to even one as intellectually limited
as you that I can't do anything else with photoshop.
But please, prove your claim that I photoshopped something.
Anything.
If your claim is a LIE, which it is, you'll never be able to
prove your claim to be true.
Quick, present your claim that Ted Kaldis and I are the same
person. That means of deception has FAILED each time you've used it
to distract from the TRUTH, but maybe it will work this time. Maybe.

>> >KBW > First, you are not me.
>>
>> >G > I never claimed to be you, Kent Bradley Wills!
>>
>> >KBW > You've not claimed to be Kent Bradley Wills,
>> >KBW > but you've claimed to be me MANY times.
>>
>> >You ARE Kent Bradley Wills, DOB Jan 8, 1969.
>>
>>      Only in your drug addled mind.
>
>You ID'd yourself, Kent!

Not to the mentally sound. As with all things, YM will V.
Let your shrink know about this at your next session.

>
>http://groups.google.com/group/alt.alien.visitors/msg/7bb21a6718c8504c
>
>Sun, 15 Jun 2003 03:46:12 [...]
>KBW 2003 > I was born in Krakow, Poland on
>KBW 2003 > Jan. 8, 1969. I grew up there, and
>KBW 2003 > in the mid 80's I came to the US
>

>> >KBW > Your post edits don't alter this TRUTH.

>> >KBW > And as you KNOW, but are psychologically
>> >KBW > UNABLE to admit, I am not the person
>> >KBW > you currently claim I am.
>>
>> >You are Kent Bradley Wills, Garage Burglary felon.
>>
>>      But you claimed I am not.
>>      Where you lying then, or are you lying now?
>
>YOU are lying when you make this claim.
>

I've posted the MID for a few of your open, though accidental,
admissions. I recall one posting caused you to admit you've always
known double quotation marks mean nothing and are the same as using
nothing at all.
Keep lying, Greg. It works to my benefit when your deeply rooted
psychological NEED to lie is exposed.

>> >KBW > Your continuously replying to your own
>> >KBW > posts claiming you are me will never
>> >KBW > get you out of the uneducated,
>> >KBW > unemployed LOSER life you've got.
>
>>>Photo of Kent's shack at 1110 South F Street, Rogers, Arkansas
>>>72756-5520
>>>http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&biw=1020&bih=602&q=1110+South+F+Street,+Rogers,+Arkansas+72756-5520
>>>In the PHOTO (left side) look for the RED CHAIR on the front
>>>"stoop"! LOL

I encourage everyone reading to look at the house pictured. It
will become important later.

>
>> I'm still not Rebecca, Greg.
>
>How nice for you.
>

You certainly seem to have a hard time coming to terms with this
TRUTH. You've once again PROVED you have Fregoli, or you've PROVED
you are psychologically UNABLE to be honest in most cases.
Or is it your position that Lindsay's real name is Rebecca? It's
not, but it would be as good a guess as any.

>> Accept that your Fregoli, or
>> psychological NEED to lie, will not make your claims the truth.
>>
>> >KBW > Your OBSESSION with Rebecca's house is NOT
>> >KBW > the behavior of the mentally sound, Greg.
>>
>G > There is no Rebecca currently at that address, Kent.
>
>KBW > If my claim is a lie, prove it.
>KBW > That it may be owned by someone else
>
>Public tax recordss show your PARENTS own it, Kent.
>

My parents do not own it.
Again, the people you LIE and claim are my parents can't be. Fred
was, and maybe is, a professor at the University of Arkansas. My dad
was an administrator at a middle school in Iowa.
To the mentally sound, these are not the same jobs. Add the
distance between Iowa and Arkansas, and any mentally sound person
would accept that he can't be my dad.
This means, of course, that his wife can't be my mom.
I can't dumb this down any more than I have, Greg. If you are
still too intellectually challenged to understand, you'll continue to
claim people you KNOW aren't my parents are my parents.

>> and she rents it can't, to
>> the mentally sound, mean she doesn't live there.
>> And to destroy your attempt to distract from the TRUTH that
>> another of your MANY lies has been exposed:
>>
>> She did refer to it as her house.  She may have meant it in the
>> same way someone refers to their apartment as their apartment.  They
>> probably don't own it (it would be a condo if they did)
>
>Putting such a shack of a house under CONDO
>law would be unusual, and wouoldn't it be
>listed as under CONDO law on the county
>tax assessor database?
>

I failed to take into account your very limited fourth grade
intellect.
Apartments that are owned, not rented, are typically called
condominiums, or condos for short.
People who rent an apartment, like the slum apartment you have,
will often refer to it as their apartment, when they don't actually
own it.
I do hope I was able to dumb it down to your level. If not,
there's nothing more I can do. I am unable to make it any more simple
than I have.

>KBW > , but they still call it theirs.
>
>Sure they do, Kent, sure they do....
>

When you want someone to visit, do you tell them, "Come to the
slum apartment I'm renting." or do you say something like, "Come over
to my place."?
You don't actually own the apartment, but you'll call it yours.
Have I managed to dumb it down to your intellectual level?

>Reverse listings show no Rebecca
>currently at that address.

Maybe (lacking your NEED to stalk people unknown to either of us
means I've never felt compelled to check), but the scan of the bill
you saw on Photobucket PROVES that she was there several months ago.
If you'd like, I can post the IP record that PROVES you visited
and viewed the scan in question.
Since it was before Lisa Rene Watkins kicked you out of her life,
it is possible she was the one to visit. I can't KNOW which of you it
was, though it's far more plausible that it was you.

>
>> What LIE will you come up with to avoid
>> the TRUTH I've presented
>> about you, Greg?
>
>empty rhetoric
>

A rather weak lie from you, but you don't have many options.

>http://gis.co.benton.ar.us/website/basemap/viewer.htm
>
>Type in a parcel ID like 02-00444-000 in the blank
>marked  parcel ID and then hit enter.
>
>Kent Bradley Wills, 1110 South F Street, Rogers, Arkansas 72756-5520
>County parcel # 02-00444-000 (Owned by Kent's folks Fred and Janet.)
>

There is no mention of a Kent Wills.
I don't know, but I expect others have checked and already saw
that your deeply rooted psychological NEED to lie was hard at work.
Did you notice the picture of the house? If you click on the
"report" link, there's a picture of the property owned by Fred and
Jan. It looks nothing like the picture you claim for me.
Click "report" and scroll down and see the house.
It's unlikely the web site is lying. The person who put it
together would have no reason to lie about the house.
You, however, have been PROVED a liar so many times, it's clear
that this is yet another of your MANY pathological lies.
Or are you going to claim "Witch Hunt" did it?
Poor widdle Gweggie. If you would just be honest, you wouldn't
have your lies exposed. Sadly, you are psychologically UNABLE to be
honest intentionally, unless you think honesty will promote one or
more of your MANY lies.
Of course, your LIE was exposed back when you posted the overhead
view of the property. You claimed I live next to a school. I didn't
and don't, but you made the claim. The aerial view PROVED that claim
a lie.
The MID for your LIE about the school is available upon request,
though you'll lose the ability to make use of it since it PROVED you a
liar.

>KBW > Let your shrink know that your
>KBW > losing ground in your treatment.
>
>empty rhetoric
>

The TRUTH found within my suggestion can't, to the mentally sound
mind, be empty rhetoric.
To a well PROVED liar such as you, it may be.

>http://cbk2.google.com/cbk?output=thumbnail&thumb=1&ll=36.322943,-94.107730&cbll=36.322971,-94.107481
>
>> Post edit restored to the original context.
>

>>      How sad that you think if you remove the TRUTH, it will vanish. I
>> hope you've finally learned that it will not.
>>
>> >>     Which of the several  IDs you've claimed for me is me today?
>> >>     Am I the man who inherited a large sum of money from his mom,
>> >>Ina?
>> >>     Am I the man who you claimed to have PROVED, via the phone book,
>> >>to live in Indianola, Suburban Denver, CO, Little Rock, AR, or
>> >>someplace in New Mexico?
>> >>     Maybe I'm the man who has parents you KNOW I don't have?
>> >>     Which of the MANY people you've claimed I am are you claiming
>> >>today?
>

>Kent offers various red herrings after it's WAY too late!
>

The TRUTH is not a red herring, Greg. At least not to those who
aren't PROVED a liar with nearly every posts as is the case with you.

>KBW > Maybe I'm the man who has
>KBW > parents you KNOW I don't have?
>
>G > That would be special indeed!
>G > Even better than immaculate conception!
>
>KBW > Not really.
>KBW > That would imply I have no earthy dad.
>KBW > Is this the claim you're making?
>KBW > Your claim that someone who is not my
>KBW > dad is my dad can't, to the mentally
>KBW > sound, equate to immaculate conception.
>
>You were the one who made the statement:
>
>KBW > Maybe I'm the man who has
>KBW > parents you KNOW I don't have?
>

Since you KNOW the people you claim are my parents are not my
parents, I can't have them as my parents.
Again, I failed to take into account your very limited intellect.

>Perhaps English as a Second Language
>got the best of you on that one, Kent?

It's my being used to dealing with adults who do not have your
extreme intellectual limitations. It's rare that I deal with those
who are as mentally retarded as you PROVE yourself to be in real life.
As such, I have the habit of communicating, verbally and via text, in
what would be viewed as "normal" intellectual level dialog.
I've have difficultly in dummying down my replies to you to a
level you'll easily understand. Not for lack of trying, but given how
stupid you honestly are, it's not easy for me.

[Greegor]

Hi

[Kent Wills]

On Sun, 20 May 2012 10:23:07 -0700 (PDT), Greegor
<gree...@gmail.com> wrote:


Context restored at no additional cost.
Again I'll ask, and again you'll run away to HIDE from the
question (questions cause you soil yourself in fear), has this means
of deception ever worked for you?

>>>G > There is no Rebecca currently at that address, Kent.
>>>
>>>KBW > If my claim is a lie, prove it.
>>>KBW > That it may be owned by someone else
>>>
>>>Public tax recordss show your PARENTS own it, Kent.
>>>
>>
>> My parents do not own it.
>> Again, the people you LIE and claim are my parents can't be. Fred
>>was, and maybe is, a professor at the University of Arkansas. My dad
>>was an administrator at a middle school in Iowa.
>> To the mentally sound, these are not the same jobs. Add the
>>distance between Iowa and Arkansas, and any mentally sound person
>>would accept that he can't be my dad.
>> This means, of course, that his wife can't be my mom.
>> I can't dumb this down any more than I have, Greg. If you are
>>still too intellectually challenged to understand, you'll continue to
>>claim people you KNOW aren't my parents are my parents.
>

>Hi

Your admission that you LIED and are no longer able to lie your
way out of it is accepted.

[Greegor]

Hi

[Kent Wills]

On Mon, 21 May 2012 07:48:57 -0700 (PDT), Greegor
<gree...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Hi

Your admission that you lied and can no longer lie your way out

[Greegor]

G > Hi

KBW > Your admission that you lied and
KBW > can no longer lie your way out
KBW > of it is accepted.

You got all of that from "Hi" ??

LOL

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-iVzKgeg1a2Y/T6LKDy5UPUI/AAAAAAAAEmk/txARX2iwIH8/s1600/581129_10151605616245054_636865053_24281275_298397335_n.jpg

[Kent Wills]

On Mon, 21 May 2012 16:00:04 -0700 (PDT), Greegor
<gree...@gmail.com> wrote:

>G > Hi
>
>KBW > Your admission that you lied and
>KBW > can no longer lie your way out
>KBW > of it is accepted.
>
>You got all of that from "Hi" ??
>
>LOL

Since I've been stating so for at least three years, and you've
never denied that your replying with "Hi" or "Hi, Kent" means what I
claim, you have, by YOUR standards, given the tacit admission that my
claim is correct.
Quick, claim your standards are actually means of deception. It's
the only way out for you that I can see.

[Greegor]

G > Hi

KBW > Your admission that you lied and
KBW > can no longer lie your way out
KBW > of it is accepted.

G > You got all of that from "Hi" ??
G > LOL

KBW > Since I've been stating so for at least
KBW > three years, and you've never denied
KBW > that your replying with "Hi" or
KBW > "Hi, Kent" means what I claim, you have,
KBW > by YOUR standards, given the tacit
KBW > admission that my claim is correct.
KBW > Quick, claim your standards are actually
KBW > means of deception. It's the only
KBW > way out for you that I can see.

You're silly.

[Kent Wills]

Maybe, but I post the TRUTH about you.

[Greegor]

G > Hi

KBW > Your admission that you lied and
KBW > can no longer lie your way out
KBW > of it is accepted.

G > You got all of that from "Hi" ??
G > LOL

KBW > Since I've been stating so for at least
KBW > three years, and you've never denied
KBW > that your replying with "Hi" or
KBW > "Hi, Kent" means what I claim, you have,
KBW > by YOUR standards, given the tacit
KBW > admission that my claim is correct.
KBW > Quick, claim your standards are actually
KBW > means of deception. It's the only
KBW > way out for you that I can see.

G > You're silly.

KBW > Maybe, but I post the TRUTH about you.

Equating "Hi" to mean whatever
suits your psychotic mind, Kenty?

[Kent Wills]

You don't deny my claim, which means, according to you, that my
claim is true and accurate.
Of course, you also hold that the denial of a claim is only
offered because the claim is true. Reference your stating the only
reason I, and others, would deny your claim that I am Albatross was
because your claim that I am was true.

[Greegor]

Kent has rotated through various types of denials,
some of which are not compatible with the others.
Kent used a few stooges and socks to help him
try to sell his false denials. The funniest part is
that Kent's APPEAL reflects the same kind of
idiocy that Kent tries on usenet.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-rfAl19rbEbk/TiImA61TYoI/AAAAAAAAAAk/2TCqaQv0ED0/s640/ma.jpg

http://5magazine.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/img_0271.jpg

http://z.hubpages.com/u/1051348_f520.jpg

http://media.kickstatic.com/kickapps/images/63269/photos/PHOTO_14204311_63269_25461334_ap.jpg

http://profile.ak.fbcdn.net/hprofile-ak-snc4/275503_100001671186315_604162677_n.jpg

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-rfAl19rbEbk/TiImA61TYoI/AAAAAAAAAAk/2TCqaQv0ED0/s640/ma.jpg

http://www.doc.state.ia.us/InmateInfo.asp?OffenderCd=1155768

Screen Captures further proving the ID on Kent is correct.
http://immaculatecongestion.blogspot.com/

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.alien.visitors/msg/7bb21a6718c8504c

Sun, 15 Jun 2003 03:46:12 [...]
KBW 2003 > I was born in Krakow, Poland on
KBW 2003 > Jan. 8, 1969. I grew up there, and

KBW 2003 > in the mid 80's I came to the US.

http://www.lexisone.com/lx1/caselaw/freecaselaw?action=OCLGetCaseDetail&format=FULL&sourceID=beeheh&searchTerm=eHdU.Zbaa.aadj.eabQ&searchFlag=y&l1loc=FCLOW

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/ia-supreme-court/1360099.html

Photo of Kent's shack at 1110 South F Street, Rogers, Arkansas
72756-5520
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&biw=1020&bih=602&q=1110+South+F+Street,+Rogers,+Arkansas+72756-5520
In the PHOTO (left side) look for the RED CHAIR on the front
"stoop"! LOL

http://cbk2.google.com/cbk?output=thumbnail&cb_client=maps_sv&thumb=2&thumbfov=30&ll=36.322943,-94.107730&cbll=36.322971,-94.107481

http://cbk2.google.com/cbk?output=thumbnail&cb_client=maps_sv&thumb=2&thumbfov=100&ll=36.322943,-94.107730&cbll=36.322971,-94.107481

http://cbk2.google.com/cbk?output=thumbnail&thumb=1&ll=36.322943,-94.107730&cbll=36.322971,-94.107481

http://www.iowacourts.state.ia.us/

Iowa Courts
Online Search
< Start A Case Search Here! > click

Iowa Courts Online Search
Search Selection

Under Trial Court < click on Case Search >

Wills Kent B
02401 ESPR015146 INA J WILLS ESTATE
05771 FECR145250 STATE VS KENT 01/08/1969
05771 FECR176876 STATE VS KENT 01/08/1969
05771 SCSC310505 SWEENEY RENTALS VS KENT ******
05771 SCSC335210 CITI FINANCIAL VS KENT
05771 SCSC374163 SFI F SCHERLE PRES VS KENT
05771 SCSC374164 SFI F SCHERLE III PRES VS KENT
05771 STAN201670 IOWA vs [ KENT ] 01/08/1969
05771 STAN210929 IOWA vs [ KENT ] 01/08/1969
05771 SWCR177169 STATE VS KENT 01/08/1969

Kent and the BOAT registration
1. Kent posted links to photos of his boat.
2. Kent made public claims about his boat registration.
3. Kent lied about boat registration some more.
4. Kent posted link to a youtube video of his boat.
5. posted Oct 6 2007 purchase weeks before (Sep purchase)
6. The boat registration was plainly visible. IA 6312 WW
(1989 Bluefin)
7. Iowa boat registration revealed it was registered
to Dale and Judy Caquelin 105 Southfield Webster City, Iowa

[Kent Wills]

On Fri, 25 May 2012 12:07:55 -0700 (PDT), Greegor
<gree...@gmail.com> wrote:

Context restored at no additional cost.

Why you are so COMPELLED make use of a means of deception you
KNOW I'll expose remains a mystery.
Are you able to put the cause of your NEED to be dishonest into
words? Serious question.

>Kent has rotated through various types of denials,

I offer no denial in the post to which you replied. In fact, I
affirm that your standards mean you've offered the tacit admission
that my claims are 100% true and accurate.
Once again your deeply rooted psychological NEED to lie is
PROVED. Not that it hasn't been proved enough already. Your sock
puppets are the only "people" who believe your claims.

[snip of your C&P of items PROVED to be nothing more than your drug
induced lies and of items you've openly admitted are not about me]

Again I'll ask, and again you'll not answer, why do you post that
which you've openly admitted isn't about me as if it is about me?
Additional: Why do you post that which has been PROVED a lie as
if it's accurate in any way?

By way of contrast, here is information that is, according to
you, as believable as the claim that water is wet:

[Greegor]

Gary Lee Burnore DOB 10/13/1957 mugshot 1997

http://www.uffnet.com/mirrors/archives.mfn.org/images/defectgb.jpg


GLB Probation Officer Report (3 pages)Oct 1997

http://www.uffnet.com/mirrors/archives.mfn.org/images/batch_2/Doc1_Page1.JPG
http://www.uffnet.com/mirrors/archives.mfn.org/images/batch_2/Doc1_Page2.JPG
http://www.uffnet.com/mirrors/archives.mfn.org/images/batch_2/Doc1_Page3.JPG

"Appearing before the Court for Violation of Probation
is 40-year-old Gary Burnore. The defendant was
convicted of violation of Sec. 647.6(a) PC (Annoying/
Molesting a Child Under the Age of 18). He is allegedly
in violation for failure to register, failure to make
payments, failure to participate in counseling, and
leaving the state of California without permission.
The defendant takes little responsibility for the
occurring offense, minimizing the part he played,
blaming others, and justifying his behavior as being
appropriate. Likewise, the defendant appears to
view himself as the victim, vocalizing his distress
that he has done everything 'right' and that the
Probation Department is preventing him from moving.
It is his belief that the probation officer is
'harassing' him.

Although the defendant verbalizes his compliance
with the terms and conditions of probation, it
seems clear that his actions speak louder than
his words, especially in the light of his recent
absconding from Santa Clara County. In secret,
the defendant moved to another state, fully
realizing he could not move from California
until Interstate Compact had finished their
investigation and the new state accepted his
case. The defendant's behavior can only be
characterized as manipulative and self-serving.
It appears the defendant does not believe he
needs to follow the rules, but rather that he
is a victim of the system and can, therefore,
do as he pleases.

The defendant's attitude, failure to comply,
and the point that he takes only minimal
responsibility for the occurring offense,
suggests that risk for potential victims
may be high."

J. Puccinelli, Probation Officer, Unit IV
Municipal Court of the State of California,
Santa Clara County, People of the State
of California v. Gary Burnore
Probation Office No. DMU044
Court No. C9618225 DA No. 961131078
Santa Clara Police Department Case No. 9615185

http://webapps6.doc.state.nc.us/opi/viewoffender.do?method=view&offenderID=0594483


SEVEN PAGE POLICE NARRATIVE

http://www.uffnet.com/mirrors/archives.mfn.org/images/batch_2/Doc2_Page1.JPG
http://www.uffnet.com/mirrors/archives.mfn.org/images/batch_2/Doc2_Page2.JPG
http://www.uffnet.com/mirrors/archives.mfn.org/images/batch_2/Doc2_Page3.JPG
http://www.uffnet.com/mirrors/archives.mfn.org/images/batch_2/Doc2_Page4.JPG
http://www.uffnet.com/mirrors/archives.mfn.org/images/batch_2/Doc2_Page5.JPG
http://www.uffnet.com/mirrors/archives.mfn.org/images/batch_2/Doc2_Page6.JPG
http://www.uffnet.com/mirrors/archives.mfn.org/images/batch_2/Doc2_Page7.JPG

Police Narrative Pages 1-7
http://bayimg.com/haNigAaBd
http://bayimg.com/hanIIaaBd
http://bayimg.com/HaNIlAabd
http://bayimg.com/hAnimaaBD
http://bayimg.com/IANIaaAbD
http://bayimg.com/iaNicaabd
http://bayimg.com/iAnidaabd

[Kent Wills]

On Sat, 26 May 2012 17:18:43 -0700 (PDT), Greegor

<gree...@gmail.com> wrote:


Context restored at no additional cost.

Why do you make use of this means of deception when I exposed it
every time you use it?

>>>> You don't deny my claim, which means, according to you, that my
>>>>claim is true and accurate.
>>>> Of course, you also hold that the denial of a claim is only
>>>>offered because the claim is true. Reference your stating the only
>>>>reason I, and others, would deny your claim that I am Albatross was
>>>>because your claim that I am was true.
>>>
>>>Kent has rotated through various types of denials,
>>
>> I offer no denial in the post to which you replied. In fact, I
>>affirm that your standards mean you've offered the tacit admission
>>that my claims are 100% true and accurate.
>> Once again your deeply rooted psychological NEED to lie is
>>PROVED. Not that it hasn't been proved enough already. Your sock
>>puppets are the only "people" who believe your claims.
>

>Gary Lee Burnore DOB 10/13/1957 mugshot 1997
>

I'm still not Gary, stupid. And your DESPERATE attempt to hide
the TRUTH I posted about you has failed. But then, it fails each and
every time you use it.
I'm sure your being COMPELLED to use it over and over is due to
your Asperger's. You MUST follow the pattern.

[Snip of items that have nothing to do with me.]

At least the other items are about someone with my last name. The
forgeries don't even allow you that delusion.

[Kent Wills]

On Sun, 27 May 2012 00:38:16 +0000 (UTC), This account has been banned
because it violated the Google Groups Terms Of Use <laug...@u.kook>
wrote:

>Greegor 'Rock Hard Stupid' Hanson <gree...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>....
>
>Vg jba'g or ybat abj orsber gur xbbx uvgf n OV bs 20 jvgu uvf fcnzzvat.
>

Gur ceboyrz vf gur Tbbtyr qbrfa'g pner. Ur pna cbfg nf zhpu fcnz
nf ur jnagf naq fb ybat nf ur'f cbfgvat sebz Tbbtyr, ur'yy or fnsr.