Received: by 10.224.186.20 with SMTP id cq20mr19035552qab.8.1351695972062;
        Wed, 31 Oct 2012 08:06:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.236.180.134 with SMTP id j6mr3588081yhm.15.1351695972010; Wed,
 31 Oct 2012 08:06:12 -0700 (PDT)
Path: gf5ni7628829qab.0!nntp.google.com!c7no823757qap.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: alt.mountain-bike
Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 08:06:11 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <f862fa27-2a74-4c5c-8b99-d70f209bdd22@googlegroups.com>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=152.14.245.50;
 posting-account=cqiQcAkAAABgCMnbVk0CH-gK7I5yHbI0
NNTP-Posting-Host: 152.14.245.50
References: <6645721e-0c0b-4a74-8767-52cc60d80866@googlegroups.com>
 <46c0d1c5-8ff2-4593-a953-d3e33d333d57@googlegroups.com> <c64e56b6-ee45-4818-94e1-26384e1b6d47@googlegroups.com>
 <59a1000f-88db-401b-aeda-57e64530034f@googlegroups.com> <ee570038-2360-4477-bc06-8f7b818682fb@googlegroups.com>
 <4d9cc51e-f0d9-4386-8c02-bfff75bf0d07@googlegroups.com> <f862fa27-2a74-4c5c-8b99-d70f209bdd22@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <d5cf653f-a755-4d21-a4f8-49d80225395e@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: A Cure for Violence?
From: shragap...@hotmail.com
Injection-Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 15:06:12 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wednesday, October 31, 2012 1:08:46 AM UTC-4, Mike Vandeman wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 30, 2012 6:46:55 PM UTC-7, shrag...@hotmail.com wrote=
:
>=20
> > On Tuesday, October 30, 2012 3:30:07 PM UTC-4, Mike Vandeman wrote: > O=
n Monday, October 29, 2012 6:32:28 AM UTC-7, Blackblade wrote: > > > On Sat=
urday, October 27, 2012 4:20:32 PM UTC+1, Mike Vandeman wrote: > On Friday,=
 October 26, 2012 1:20:48 AM UTC-7, Blackblade wrote: > > > On Wednesday, O=
ctober 10, 2012 5:52:48 AM UTC+1, Mike Vandeman wrote: > > > > > > > > > > =
> > > > > > > > > > Mike Vandeman > > > > > > > > > > > > I suspect that a =
criminal with convictions for violent offences, who continues to deny that =
fact, is not likely to get much of a hearing when lecturing others on how t=
o live their lives ! > > > > Liar. No one listens to mountain bikers, knowi=
ng that they are all incorrigible liars. What, precisely, do you contend is=
 a lie Mr Vandeman ? You do have convictions for violent offences (battery =
and exhibiting a deadly weapon) and you do, despite that, keep claiming to =
be innocent without supporting that position with any objective evidence. S=
o, I have public-record proof of my assertions. What do you have ? > > > > =
There was no violence whatsoever. "Battery" just means "touching". Brandish=
ing in self-defense is not a crime. You are extraordinarily ignorant! Or ly=
ing. Take your pick. No, moron. "Battery" does not "just mean" "touching." =
You'd think you'd have taken the time to understand that after being convic=
ted of it. The difference is in the intent. "The following elements must be=
 proven to establish a case for battery: (1) an act by a defendant; (2) an =
intent to cause harmful or offensive contact on the part of the defendant; =
and (3) harmful or offensive contact to the plaintiff." Why are you so afra=
id to tell the truth?
>=20
>=20
>=20
> I'm not. In this case it was just touching. No "violence". Of course, sin=
ce you weren't there, you are DISHONEST to pretend to know what happened --=
 the same dishonesty that causes you to STILL not give your real name. Noth=
ing new for mountain bikers -- they NEVER tell the truth.

Show me where I wrote "violence," liar.

Clearly, the courts believe you possessed "intent to cause harmful or offen=
sive contact." I don't care if you believe it was "just touching," because =
that's not what battery is, no matter how many times you write it.=20

I don't pretend to know what happened. You are LYING about that, as usual. =
I am merely repeating the court's decision. I've asked you several times to=
 present the details of your side of the story here in this forum, but you =
are obviously too big of a coward to comply.=20

Whether or not you agree with the court's decision is your problem, not min=
e.=20

You were arrested. You were convicted. Those are FACTS, and only a LIAR wou=
ld refute them.