Welcome back Dan!
Greegor
when you come back you don't offer any explanation?
Kent Wills
wife beater (two conviction -- one resulting in incarceration) user
and abuser of illegal drugs (self admitted and one conviction for OWI)
and child abuser (self admitted and on Iowa's Child Abuse Registry)
wrote:
>Dan, What, You abruptly leave for THREE MONTHS and
>when you come back you don't offer any explanation?
What causes you to believe Dan owes you, or anyone else, an
explanation, Greg?
A select number of items that really are about Gregory Scott "Piggly
Wiggly" Hanson (either directly or through the same standards he
DEMANDS be held to others):
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
As of Saturday, March 27, 2010:
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 from Ed Polkers. 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.
As of Saturday, March 27, 2010:
Financials
Title: STATE OF IOWA VS HANSON, GREG SCOTT
Case: 06571 AGCR015216 (LINN)
Citation Number:
Summary Orig Paid Due
COSTS 9200.00 850.00 8350.00
FINE 500.00 500.00 0.00
SURCHARGE 150.00 150.00 0.00
RESTITUTION 0.00 0.00 0.00
OTHER 0.00 0.00 0.00
$9850.00 $1500.00 $8350.00
Yes, Gregory Scott "Piggly Wiggly" Hanson still owes over
$8000.00 related to his convictions for BEATING his ex-wife.
Me: Hey, he used your standards.
Gregory Scott "Piggly Wiggly" Hanson: It's textbook psychopathic
reasoning.
Greg admitting his standards are psychopathic.
Greegor
Dan, What, You abruptly leave for FOUR MONTHS and
Kent Wills
wife beater (two conviction -- one resulting in incarceration) user
and abuser of illegal drugs (self admitted and one conviction for OWI)
and child abuser (self admitted and on Iowa's Child Abuse Registry)
wrote:
>Correction:
>Dan, What, You abruptly leave for FOUR MONTHS and
>when you come back you don't offer any explanation?
I'm not Dan, stupid. You replied to my post, referring to me as
Dan.
Once again you offer PROOF that you have Fregoli, or that you are
psychologically UNABLE to be honest except by accident or force.
That aside, I'll ask again, and you'll likely HIDE from the
question, what causes you to believe Dan owes you, or anyone else, an
explanation?
Greegor
Kent Wills
>Tell me you don't want to explain, Dan!
I'm not Dan. No matter how many times you reply to my posts
claiming I am Dan, I won't be Dan. Accept this truth and move on with
your life.
Why do you hold to the delusion that Dan owes you, or anyone
else, any explanation?
Greegor
G > Dan, What, You abruptly leave for FOUR MONTHS and
G > when you come back you don't offer any explanation?
DJS3 > Is January 4 to April 1 "FOUR MONTHS," grag?
Your PROFILE shows a FOUR month gap.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
15 hours ago
4 days ago
Nov 30 2009
Nov 9 2009
Sep 29 2009
----------------------------------------------------
Whether it's FOUR or THREE months
absent, What's your story, Dan?
How was Bay Shore?
Damn shame about your selling price!
I assume you moved to an apartment in Patchogue,
is it one that converts to being a care facility?
http://web.adblade.com/banners/images/100x75/4b96ddd9cc521.gif
http://www.zillow.com/homes/6-S-Pinelake-Dr-Patchogue,-NY-11772_rb/
6 S Pinelake Dr # S, Patchogue, NY
Recently Sold: $320,000 Zestimate: $447,500 Beds: --
Baths: --Sqft: --
Lot: 16,552Sold On: 09/17/2009
Built: --Details Save Alerts Similar
http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/6-S-Pinelake-Dr-S-Patchogue-NY-11772/59443713_zpid/
http://www.redfin.com/NY/Patchogue/6-S-Pinelake-Dr-11772/home/21226238
Dan Sullivan
> G > Correction:
> G > Dan, What, You abruptly leave for FOUR MONTHS and
> G > when you come back you don't offer any explanation?
>
> DJS3 > Is January 4 to April 1 "FOUR MONTHS," grag?
>
> Your PROFILE shows a FOUR month gap.
You're nuts.
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> http://groups.google.com/groups/profile?hl=en&enc_user=aOWhVhYAAADACR...
>
> 15 hours ago
> 4 days ago
> Nov 30 2009
> Nov 9 2009
> Sep 29 2009
> ----------------------------------------------------
>
> Whether it's FOUR or THREE months
> absent, What's your story, Dan?
About what?
> How was Bay Shore?
Compared to what?
> Damn shame about your selling price!
Why?
Have you ever owned your own home, grag?
> I assume you moved to an apartment in Patchogue,
> is it one that converts to being a care facility?
For what?
Greegor
G > Dan, What, You abruptly leave for FOUR MONTHS and
G > when you come back you don't offer any explanation?
DJS3 > Is January 4 to April 1 "FOUR MONTHS," grag?
G > Your PROFILE shows a FOUR month gap.
DJS3 > You're nuts.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
15 hours ago
4 days ago
Nov 30 2009
Nov 9 2009
Sep 29 2009
----------------------------------------------------
G > Whether it's FOUR or THREE months
G > absent, What's your story, Dan?
DJS3 > About what?
G > How was Bay Shore?
DJS3 > Compared to what?
G > Damn shame about your selling price!
DJS3 > Why?
DJS3 > Have you ever owned your own home, grag?
Why ask, when you didn't OWN yours?
Surely you didn't have it all paid off
or you would not have sold it at such
an outrageously bad time!
G > I assume you moved to an apartment in Patchogue,
G > is it one that converts to being a care facility?
DJS3 > For what?
Putting yourself out to pasture?
Damn shame about your selling price!
I assume you moved to an apartment in Patchogue,
is it one that converts to being a care facility?
http://web.adblade.com/banners/images/100x75/4b96ddd9cc521.gif
http://www.zillow.com/homes/6-S-Pinelake-Dr-Patchogue,-NY-11772_rb/
Kent Wills
wife beater (two conviction -- one resulting in incarceration) user
and abuser of illegal drugs (self admitted and one conviction for OWI)
and child abuser (self admitted and on Iowa's Child Abuse Registry)
wrote:
>G > Correction:
>G > Dan, What, You abruptly leave for FOUR MONTHS and
>G > when you come back you don't offer any explanation?
>
>DJS3 > Is January 4 to April 1 "FOUR MONTHS," grag?
>
>Your PROFILE shows a FOUR month gap.
>
And Google is never wrong, in your mind, right?
That you once again show that you believe this to be the case
will, in time, prove to be a metaphorical thorn in your side.
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>http://groups.google.com/groups/profile?hl=en&enc_user=aOWhVhYAAADACRq_k2TW26kFNTEF1l0tzwPcMnixvA1U01ExQS2_8A
>
>15 hours ago
>4 days ago
>Nov 30 2009
>Nov 9 2009
>Sep 29 2009
>----------------------------------------------------
>
>Whether it's FOUR or THREE months
>absent, What's your story, Dan?
>
Why do you believe Dan owes anyone an explanation? If he feels
the need, or desire, to tell anyone, he will likely have already done
so.
>How was Bay Shore?
Was Dan on vacation? That could explain his absence.
If, as you seem to be implying, you know he was on vacation, why
are you asking him why he wasn't posting?
>
>Damn shame about your selling price!
Just because you have claimed he sold a property at a loss
doesn't mean he did. In fact, that you make the claim is grounds to
believe he did not.
Add that I was able to show how our Dan is not the Dan you claim,
and there is less reason to accept your claim.
>
>I assume you moved to an apartment in Patchogue,
>is it one that converts to being a care facility?
>
>http://web.adblade.com/banners/images/100x75/4b96ddd9cc521.gif
>
>http://www.zillow.com/homes/6-S-Pinelake-Dr-Patchogue,-NY-11772_rb/
>6 S Pinelake Dr # S, Patchogue, NY
> Recently Sold: $320,000 Zestimate: $447,500 Beds: --
Those are some expensive beds! :-)
Please keep in mind my jokes are free, and typically worth less
than the price paid. Note the lack of a smiley. My jokes really are
that lame (most of the time).
>Baths: --Sqft: --
>Lot: 16,552Sold On: 09/17/2009
>Built: --Details Save Alerts Similar
>
>http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/6-S-Pinelake-Dr-S-Patchogue-NY-11772/59443713_zpid/
>
>http://www.redfin.com/NY/Patchogue/6-S-Pinelake-Dr-11772/home/21226238
Given that I proved, and by your own standards you gave the tacit
admission that I was correct, that our Dan is not the Dan you claim,
the above information, while of mild interest to some, has no bearing
on anything.
Why do you constantly post information you KNOW isn't about the
person you're trying to present it is about? What is your core
motivation?
Greegor
Could you explain your claims about the
fair hearing and the registry in light of
this news story?
Also, some MORE states have declared their
Child Abuser "registry" to be unconstitutional
because of the lack of due process.
http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2010/03/ny_denied_thousands_accused_of.html
Dan Sullivan
"Greegor" <gree...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1fd28cfd-6bdd-4bcd...@e7g2000yqf.googlegroups.com...
>
> Could you explain your claims about the
> fair hearing and the registry in light of
> this news story?
Which claims specifically?
Greegor
G > fair hearing and the registry in light of
G > this news story?
DJS3 > Which claims specifically?
Your claims that you got a fair hearing each time, Dan?
The news article says different.
How much equity did you have in that house, Dan?
You sold it to get out from under a huge MORTGAGE, right?
Your EGO said that you just had to overcommit, right?
Feb 2002
Dan Sullivan wrote "I was founded for SA of my daughter back in '93."
[...]
'The "credible evidence" was my (3 yo) daughter's statement that "My
daddy touches me with the puppet bear in the toilet." '
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.child-protective-services/msg/52b49e5611d619ea
April 2004 Dan Sullivan wrote
"My daddy touched me with the puppet bear in the toilet."
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.child-protective-services/msg/d15f8e338226b780
July 2007 Dan Sullivan wrote
"My daddy touches me with the puppet bear in the toilet."
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.foster-parents/msg/2d04c26b08f9f2b9
http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2010/03/ny_denied_thousands_accused_of.html
NY denied thousands accused of child abuse the chance to clear their
name
By John O'Brien / The Post-Standard March 22, 2010, 6:00AM
Syracuse, NY - The state Office of Children and Family Services in
2004 had a backlog of requests for hearings from people accused of
mistreating children.
Three women had recently sued the agency over the delays that were
costing them jobs working with kids because they couldn't get their
names cleared.
The agency had a solution to the thousands of pending written
requests
that would come under scrutiny by the lawsuit, according to sworn
testimony from state workers: Shred.
For a month in 2004, the workers were under orders to take carts of
the requests for name-clearing hearings and shred them after hours in
their Albany offices, according to the testimony. They shredded about
a thousand a day for a month, one OCFS worker testified.
The revelation came in a proposed settlement of a class-action
lawsuit
last month that could affect 25,000 people across the state who are
listed in a statewide database as reported child abusers. Under the
settlement, anyone who requested a hearing on child abuse or
maltreatment charges but never got it regained the right to the
hearing.
Employers such as day care centers check the database to see if a job
applicant was ever accused of child abuse. Those accused could
request
a hearing with OCFS to clear their names. More than half of those
challenges result in the accused person being cleared, according to
Thomas Hoffman, a lawyer for the three women who sued the state over
the lengthy delays.
Those women claimed they lost opportunities for jobs working with
children because the state took up to two years to give them a name-
clearing hearing. By then, the potential employer had filled the job
opening.
Four years after the suit was filed, a whistleblower who works for
OCFS called Hoffman, he said. She told him how the agency was getting
rid of the written requests for hearings, then marking the case
"waived" or "withdrawn" on the database, court papers said. The state
never told the accused. To the inquiring employer, it would appear
that the person had given up on their request for a hearing, and the
child abuse accusation stood.
The backlog of hearing requests was much longer than two years — some
requests had been sitting around for seven years, court papers said.
The whistleblower came forward in February 2009. Hoffman then took
testimony of 18 or 19 OCFS workers about the handling of the requests
for hearings, he said.
In some cases, workers called the prospective employers with whom the
accused person had applied for a job, according to the workers’
testimony. If the employer was no longer interested, the state
workers
were told to mark the file "waived," according to the testimony of
six
OCFS workers. The accused person was never notified in those cases.
The written requests were shredded or thrown in the garbage, at least
three of the workers testified.
If the whistleblower hadn't come forward about the shredded cases,
Hoffman would never have known the extent of the backlog, he said.
Cathy Dufty, a clerical worker in the office, testified that
supervisor David Peters ordered her to gather a bunch of temp workers
and start shredding.
"I would go down to his office about 3:30 and I would take the cart
back, and it would be, 'These are to be shredded, and these over here
are to be refiled,'" Dufty testified last year.
Peters was then the director of the statewide Central Register of
Child Abuse and Maltreatment. He has since retired. In his deposition
for the lawsuit, Peters denied that his agency did anything improper,
Hoffman said. Peters could not be reached for comment.
The assistant state attorney general who represented the state in the
lawsuit, Robert Kraft, refused to comment. A spokeswoman for OCFS,
Pat
Cantiello, said no one from the agency could comment because the
settlement has not yet been approved by a federal judge.
The whistleblower, who still works for OCFS, also would not comment.
Under the proposed settlement, the state would have to send notices
to
the 25,000 people on the central register whose requests for hearings
were ignored between 2003 and 2007. U.S. District Judge Shira
Scheindlin will hold a hearing in April in Manhattan, then decide
whether to approve the settlement.
As part of the settlement, the state agreed to stop the practice of
calling potential employers to see if they still wanted to hire the
person accused of child abuse. The state agreed that the accused
person has a right to a hearing whether the employer is interested or
not, Hoffman said.
The settlement only applies to people who requested a hearing and
never got one. It doesn't affect anyone who never requested a hearing
or who withdrew his or her hearing request.
Once the settlement is approved, Hoffman will submit a bill for legal
services to the court. The state will pay those costs, but will not
pay damages under the proposed settlement. Anyone who might be
affected should check Hoffman’s Web site on the case:
http://WWW.registryclassaction.com
The state gets about 350,000 inquiries a year from prospective
employers, including child care centers, foster care agencies,
juvenile detention centers and other employers who work with
children.
The register is accessible only to employers who are required to
check
a job applicant's background.
"The employer doesn't know why you’re on the list," Hoffman said.
"You
could be a pedophile or it could be something benign."
Dan Sullivan
> G > Could you explain your claims about the
> G > fair hearing and the registry in light of
> G > this news story?
>
> DJS3 > Which claims specifically?
>
> Your claims that you got a fair hearing each time, Dan?
I didn't say that.
> The news article says different.
I didn't see my name mentioned in the news article, grag.
Greegor
G > fair hearing and the registry in light of
G > this news story?
DJS3 > Which claims specifically?
G > Your claims that you got a fair hearing each time, Dan?
DJS3 > I didn't say that.
G > The news article says different.
DJS3 > I didn't see my name mentioned in the news article, grag.
So?
How could you get behind on your mortgage, Dan?
Don't you make the big bucks?
Feb 2002
Dan Sullivan wrote "I was founded for SA of my daughter back in '93."
[...]
'The "credible evidence" was my (3 yo) daughter's statement that "My
daddy touches me with the puppet bear in the toilet." '
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.child-protective-services/msg/52b49e5611d619ea
April 2004 Dan Sullivan wrote
"My daddy touched me with the puppet bear in the toilet."
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.child-protective-services/msg/d15f8e338226b780
July 2007 Dan Sullivan wrote
"My daddy touches me with the puppet bear in the toilet."
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.foster-parents/msg/2d04c26b08f9f2b9
http://www.zillow.com/homes/6-S-Pinelake-Dr-Patchogue,-NY-11772_rb/
Recently Sold: $320,000 Zestimate: $447,500 Beds: --
Dan Sullivan
> G > Could you explain your claims about the
> G > fair hearing and the registry in light of
> G > this news story?
>
> DJS3 > Which claims specifically?
>
> G > Your claims that you got a fair hearing each time, Dan?
>
> DJS3 > I didn't say that.
>
> G > The news article says different.
>
> DJS3 > I didn't see my name mentioned in the news article, grag.
>
> So?
First you lied and said the news article had a claim from me that I
"got a fair hearing each time."
Now when I point out your lie you respond with "so."
How many times a week do you see your psychologist, grag?
Greegor
G > fair hearing and the registry in light of
G > this news story?
DJS3 > Which claims specifically?
G > Your claims that you got a fair hearing each time, Dan?
DJS3 > I didn't say that.
G > The news article says different.
DJS3 > I didn't see my name mentioned in the news article, grag.
G > So?
DJS3 > First you lied and said the news article had
DJS3 > a claim from me that I "got a fair hearing each time."
DJS3 >
DJS3 > Now when I point out your lie you respond with "so."
DJS3 >
DJS3 > How many times a week do you see your psychologist, grag?
That you claim you had a "fair hearing" at all
contradicts the news article doesn't it?
http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2010/03/ny_denied_thousands_accused_of.html
name-clearing hearing. By then, the
Kent Wills
wife beater (two conviction -- one resulting in incarceration) user
and abuser of illegal drugs (self admitted and one conviction for OWI)
and child abuser (self admitted and on Iowa's Child Abuse Registry)
wrote:
>How much equity did you have in it, Dan?
Outside of your drug induced stupor, I'm not Dan.
Again you reply to one of my posts and call me Dan. Is your
Fregoli so serious, or are you offering more PROOF that you are
psychologically UNABLE to be honest, except by mistake or force?
>
>Could you explain your claims about the
>fair hearing and the registry in light of
>this news story?
Since I've never made such a claim, no.
>
>Also, some MORE states have declared their
>Child Abuser "registry" to be unconstitutional
>because of the lack of due process.
And this relates to my post, the one to which you replied, in
what way, exactly? Not being a pathetic druggie as you not only
admitted you are, but consistently PROVE you are, I can't follow your
stream of thought.
>
>http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2010/03/ny_denied_thousands_accused_of.html
Kent Wills
wife beater (two conviction -- one resulting in incarceration) user
and abuser of illegal drugs (self admitted and one conviction for OWI)
and child abuser (self admitted and on Iowa's Child Abuse Registry)
>G > Could you explain your claims about the
>G > fair hearing and the registry in light of
>G > this news story?
>
>DJS3 > Which claims specifically?
>
>G > Your claims that you got a fair hearing each time, Dan?
>
>DJS3 > I didn't say that.
>
>G > The news article says different.
>
>DJS3 > I didn't see my name mentioned in the news article, grag.
>
>G > So?
>
>DJS3 > First you lied and said the news article had
>DJS3 > a claim from me that I "got a fair hearing each time."
>DJS3 >
>DJS3 > Now when I point out your lie you respond with "so."
>DJS3 >
>DJS3 > How many times a week do you see your psychologist, grag?
>
>That you claim you had a "fair hearing" at all
>contradicts the news article doesn't it?
I've not seen a post from Dan making such a claim. Please post
the MID and/or Google link to one post from him making the claim you
present.
If you would rather make the tacit, by YOUR standards, admission
that another of your MANY drug induced lies has been exposed, this is
acceptable to me.
Dan Sullivan
> G > Could you explain your claims about the
> G > fair hearing and the registry in light of
> G > this news story?
>
> DJS3 > Which claims specifically?
>
> G > Your claims that you got a fair hearing each time, Dan?
>
> DJS3 > I didn't say that.
>
> G > The news article says different.
>
> DJS3 > I didn't see my name mentioned in the news article, grag.
>
> G > So?
>
> DJS3 > First you lied and said the news article had
> DJS3 > a claim from me that I "got a fair hearing each time."
> DJS3 >
> DJS3 > Now when I point out your lie you respond with "so."
> DJS3 >
> DJS3 > How many times a week do you see your psychologist, grag?
>
> That you claim you had a "fair hearing" at all
> contradicts the news article doesn't it?
No, but if you believe differently, please explain in detail.
Greegor
G > fair hearing and the registry in light of
G > this news story?
DJS3 > Which claims specifically?
G > Your claims that you got a fair hearing each time, Dan?
DJS3 > I didn't say that.
G > The news article says different.
DJS3 > I didn't see my name mentioned in the news article, grag.
G > So?
DJS3 > First you lied and said the news article had
DJS3 > a claim from me that I "got a fair hearing each time."
DJS3 >
DJS3 > Now when I point out your lie you respond with "so."
DJS3 >
DJS3 > How many times a week do you see your psychologist, grag?
G > That you claim you had a "fair hearing" at all
G > contradicts the news article doesn't it?
DJS3 > No, but if you believe differently, please explain in detail.
That you deny the conflict between your claims
and the news article is particularly interesting, Dan.
I am in no hurry.
Dan Sullivan
> G > Could you explain your claims about the
> G > fair hearing and the registry in light of
> G > this news story?
>
> DJS3 > Which claims specifically?
>
> G > Your claims that you got a fair hearing each time, Dan?
>
> DJS3 > I didn't say that.
>
> G > The news article says different.
>
> DJS3 > I didn't see my name mentioned in the news article, grag.
>
> G > So?
>
> DJS3 > First you lied and said the news article had
> DJS3 > a claim from me that I "got a fair hearing each time."
> DJS3 >
> DJS3 > Now when I point out your lie you respond with "so."
> DJS3 >
> DJS3 > How many times a week do you see your psychologist, grag?
>
> G > That you claim you had a "fair hearing" at all
> G > contradicts the news article doesn't it?
>
> DJS3 > No, but if you believe differently, please explain in detail.
>
> That you deny the conflict between your claims
> and the news article is particularly interesting, Dan.
There is no conflict.
Greegor
G > fair hearing and the registry in light of
G > this news story?
DJS3 > Which claims specifically?
G > Your claims that you got a fair hearing each time, Dan?
DJS3 > I didn't say that.
G > The news article says different.
DJS3 > I didn't see my name mentioned in the news article, grag.
G > So?
DJS3 > First you lied and said the news article had
DJS3 > a claim from me that I "got a fair hearing each time."
DJS3 >
DJS3 > Now when I point out your lie you respond with "so."
DJS3 >
DJS3 > How many times a week do you see your psychologist, grag?
G > That you claim you had a "fair hearing" at all
G > contradicts the news article doesn't it?
DJS3 > No, but if you believe differently, please explain in detail.
G > That you deny the conflict between your claims
G > and the news article is particularly interesting, Dan.
DJS3 > There is no conflict.
The AGENCY shredded appeals by the THOUSANDS,
at the level of a CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY, but
miraculously all FIVE of your appeals supposedly
made it and went your way?
You really ARE ""special"" aren't you, Dan?
Dan Sullivan
The shredding by CPS was done in a single month in 2004, which didn't
coincide with any of of my appeals.
Greegor
G > fair hearing and the registry in light of
G > this news story?
DJS3 > Which claims specifically?
G > Your claims that you got a fair hearing each time, Dan?
DJS3 > I didn't say that.
G > The news article says different.
DJS3 > I didn't see my name mentioned in the news article, grag.
G > So?
DJS3 > First you lied and said the news article had
DJS3 > a claim from me that I "got a fair hearing each time."
DJS3 >
DJS3 > Now when I point out your lie you respond with "so."
DJS3 >
DJS3 > How many times a week do you see your psychologist, grag?
G > That you claim you had a "fair hearing" at all
G > contradicts the news article doesn't it?
DJS3 > No, but if you believe differently, please explain in detail.
G > That you deny the conflict between your claims
G > and the news article is particularly interesting, Dan.
DJS3 > There is no conflict.
G > The AGENCY shredded appeals by the THOUSANDS,
G > at the level of a CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY, but
G > miraculously all FIVE of your appeals supposedly
G > made it and went your way?
DJS3 > The shredding by CPS was done in a single
DJS3 > month in 2004, which didn't coincide with
DJS3 > any of of my appeals.
Are you arguing that this behavior was
an ISOLATED INCIDENT and not a
"pattern and practice" approved by
agency supervision?
I got a letter from the agency director himself,
denying process with improper/illegal basis.
WHO is ultimately responaible for this
appeal SHREDDING operation, Dan?
Did you think this registry appeal process is somehow
isolated from the top management of the agency?
How does this not reveal a "pattern and practice"
of corruption at a criminal level?
Do you think somebody at your NY CPS agency
INVENTED this solution after YOUR cases?
And ( Come to think of it! ) how is it that YOU
didn't know that New York was dead ending
these registry appeals?
Remember anybody telling you that the
agencies were dead ending regisstry appeals?
WHO WAS THAT, Dan?
Remember Res Judicata?
WHO brought that up, Danny Boy, me bucko?
WHAT YEAR???
Didn't somebody once ask you if your experience
might have been a bit STALE considering the
current corrupt behavior of the agency??
WHO? WHEN?
LOL
Dan Sullivan
You never asked that before, grag.
> I got a letter from the agency director himself,
> denying process with improper/illegal basis.
You got a letter from the New York State agency director?
> WHO is ultimately responaible for this
> appeal SHREDDING operation, Dan?
I don't know.
> Did you think this registry appeal process is somehow
> isolated from the top management of the agency?
I don't know.
> How does this not reveal a "pattern and practice"
> of corruption at a criminal level?
Tell me.
> Do you think somebody at your NY CPS agency
> INVENTED this solution after YOUR cases?
Apparently.
> And ( Come to think of it! ) how is it that YOU
> didn't know that New York was dead ending
> these registry appeals?
My first appeal, written in 1988, wasn't resolved until 1993.
> Remember anybody telling you that the
> agencies were dead ending regisstry appeals?
I learned it myself 22 years ago.
> WHO WAS THAT, Dan?
>
> Remember Res Judicata?
Yes.
> WHO brought that up, Danny Boy, me bucko?
Me.
> WHAT YEAR???
I don't remember.
> Didn't somebody once ask you if your experience
> might have been a bit STALE considering the
> current corrupt behavior of the agency??
No.
> WHO? WHEN?
>
> LOL
>
> http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2010/03/ny_denied_thousands_ac...
Kent Wills
wife beater (two conviction -- one resulting in incarceration) user
and abuser of illegal drugs (self admitted and one conviction for OWI)
and child abuser (self admitted and on Iowa's Child Abuse Registry)
wrote:
>DJS3 > No, but if you believe differently, please explain in detail.
>
>That you deny the conflict between your claims
>and the news article is particularly interesting, Dan.
>
>I am in no hurry.
But you are so obsessed you HAD to post a 197 line reply to Dan's
29 line post.
How does it feel to be so completely OWNED, at least by YOUR
standards?
I thought I owned you, but clearly Dan has the greater claim.
Unless, of course, you are still psychologically UNABLE to allow
yourself to be held to the same standards you DEMAND to be held to
others.
Kent Wills
wife beater (two conviction -- one resulting in incarceration) user
and abuser of illegal drugs (self admitted and one conviction for OWI)
and child abuser (self admitted and on Iowa's Child Abuse Registry)
wrote:
>G > That you deny the conflict between your claims
>G > and the news article is particularly interesting, Dan.
>
>DJS3 > There is no conflict.
>
>The AGENCY shredded appeals by the THOUSANDS,
>at the level of a CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY, but
>miraculously all FIVE of your appeals supposedly
>made it and went your way?
>
>You really ARE ""special"" aren't you, Dan?
It really does piss you off that Dan beat CPS.
Why are you so against the concept of families, Greg? Why do you
support CPS so much that anyone who wins against CPS MUST, in your
mind, be attacked to the degree you attack Dan, et al.?
Kent Wills
wife beater (two conviction -- one resulting in incarceration) user
and abuser of illegal drugs (self admitted and one conviction for OWI)
and child abuser (self admitted and on Iowa's Child Abuse Registry)
wrote:
>G > The AGENCY shredded appeals by the THOUSANDS,
>G > at the level of a CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY, but
>G > miraculously all FIVE of your appeals supposedly
>G > made it and went your way?
>
>DJS3 > The shredding by CPS was done in a single
>DJS3 > month in 2004, which didn't coincide with
>DJS3 > any of of my appeals.
>
>Are you arguing that this behavior was
>an ISOLATED INCIDENT and not a
>"pattern and practice" approved by
>agency supervision?
>
The article you use to PROVE yourself a lowly thief only mentions
the one month.
If you have evidence that supports a claim for more, offer it for
review. If you have none, all you're doing is guessing.
>I got a letter from the agency director himself,
>denying process with improper/illegal basis.
The director of the New York agency wrote to you?
Well, being the loyal CPS shill you are, it is within the realm
of possibility. Still, I would like to see some proof that the
director of the New York CPS agency wrote to you.
If you would rather make the tacit admission, by YOUR standards,
that another of your MANY pathological lies has been exposed, that is
acceptable to me.
>
>WHO is ultimately responaible for this
>appeal SHREDDING operation, Dan?
You already asked and Dan answered.
Dan stated he doesn't know.
>
>Did you think this registry appeal process is somehow
>isolated from the top management of the agency?
It might be, though you, being a good CPS shill, will already
KNOW the answer.
>
>How does this not reveal a "pattern and practice"
>of corruption at a criminal level?
The available evidence only supports of a claim of the one month.
If you have additional evidence supporting a claim of it occurring at
other times, present it.
>
>Do you think somebody at your NY CPS agency
>INVENTED this solution after YOUR cases?
Given the time of Dan's appeals and the shredding, it would have
to have been after.
Of course, your question was intended to imply that the shredding
was in reaction to Dan's successful appeals. Such a position has
never been presented.
>
>And ( Come to think of it! ) how is it that YOU
>didn't know that New York was dead ending
>these registry appeals?
You presume Dan devotes his life to CPS. Unlike you have been
PROVED to be, Dan is not a shill for CPS.
>
>Remember anybody telling you that the
>agencies were dead ending regisstry appeals?
If anyone did, I didn't see the post.
>
>WHO WAS THAT, Dan?
>
>Remember Res Judicata?
>
>WHO brought that up, Danny Boy, me bucko?
>
>WHAT YEAR???
>
>Didn't somebody once ask you if your experience
>might have been a bit STALE considering the
>current corrupt behavior of the agency??
Yet Dan's suggestions to parents appear, by all available
evidence, to be working.
How many families have you been able to sacrifice at the alter of
CPS since you were outted as a CPS shill, Greg?
Greegor
DJS3 > Which claims specifically?
G > So?
G > Are you arguing that this behavior was
G > an ISOLATED INCIDENT and not a
G > "pattern and practice" approved by
G > agency supervision?
DJS3 > You never asked that before, grag.
So?
You didn't answer it either.
G > I got a letter from the agency director himself,
G > denying process with improper/illegal basis.
DJS3 > You got a letter from the New York State agency director?
I've never been in IN New York, dolt.
G > WHO is ultimately responaible for this
G > appeal SHREDDING operation, Dan?
DJS3 > I don't know.
Suddenly you have NO IDEA
about the chain of command?
G > Did you think this registry appeal process is somehow
G > isolated from the top management of the agency?
DJS3 > I don't know.
G > How does this not reveal a "pattern and practice"
G > of corruption at a criminal level?
DJS3 > Tell me.
G > Do you think somebody at your NY CPS agency
G > INVENTED this solution after YOUR cases?
DJS3 > Apparently.
G > And ( Come to think of it! ) how is it that YOU
G > didn't know that New York was dead ending
G > these registry appeals?
DJS3 > My first appeal, written in 1988, wasn't resolved until 1993.
Have you ever mentioned this detail BEFORE?
Was this about the PUPPET BEAR case?
If it took from 1988 to 1993 to reverse it, then you
were ON THE REGISTRY between those years.
G > Remember anybody telling you that the
G > agencies were dead ending regisstry appeals?
DJS3 > I learned it myself 22 years ago.
Please cite where your old comments
indicated this obstructionism by the agency.
G > WHO WAS THAT, Dan?
G > Remember Res Judicata?
DJS3 > Yes.
G > WHO brought that up, Danny Boy, me bucko?
DJS3 > Me.
Liar!
G > WHAT YEAR???
DJS3 > I don't remember.
I bet.
G > Didn't somebody once ask you if your experience
G > might have been a bit STALE considering the
G > current corrupt behavior of the agency??
DJS3 > No.
Liar.
G > WHO? WHEN?
G > LOL
Dan Sullivan
So how could I be arguing about something when it wasn't an issue?
> You didn't answer it either.
>
> G > I got a letter from the agency director himself,
> G > denying process with improper/illegal basis.
>
> DJS3 > You got a letter from the New York State agency director?
>
> I've never been in IN New York, dolt.
The article you posted was about New York.
How is anyone supposed to know you're talking about another state if
you don't clarify what you're talking about, grag?
> G > WHO is ultimately responaible for this
> G > appeal SHREDDING operation, Dan?
>
> DJS3 > I don't know.
>
> Suddenly you have NO IDEA
> about the chain of command?
You didn't ask about the chain of command.
> G > Did you think this registry appeal process is somehow
> G > isolated from the top management of the agency?
>
> DJS3 > I don't know.
>
> G > How does this not reveal a "pattern and practice"
> G > of corruption at a criminal level?
>
> DJS3 > Tell me.
>
> G > Do you think somebody at your NY CPS agency
> G > INVENTED this solution after YOUR cases?
>
> DJS3 > Apparently.
>
> G > And ( Come to think of it! ) how is it that YOU
> G > didn't know that New York was dead ending
> G > these registry appeals?
>
> DJS3 > My first appeal, written in 1988, wasn't resolved until 1993.
>
> Have you ever mentioned this detail BEFORE?
Sure.
> Was this about the PUPPET BEAR case?
Of course not.
> If it took from 1988 to 1993 to reverse it, then you
> were ON THE REGISTRY between those years.
Not that I'm aware of.
> G > Remember anybody telling you that the
>
> G > agencies were dead ending regisstry appeals?
>
> DJS3 > I learned it myself 22 years ago.
>
> Please cite where your old comments
> indicated this obstructionism by the agency.
> G > WHO WAS THAT, Dan?
>
> G > Remember Res Judicata?
>
> DJS3 > Yes.
>
> G > WHO brought that up, Danny Boy, me bucko?
>
> DJS3 > Me.
>
> Liar!
Prove otherwise.
> G > WHAT YEAR???
>
> DJS3 > I don't remember.
>
> I bet.
>
> G > Didn't somebody once ask you if your experience
> G > might have been a bit STALE considering the
> G > current corrupt behavior of the agency??
>
> DJS3 > No.
>
> Liar.
Prove it.
Kent Wills
wife beater (two conviction -- one resulting in incarceration) user
and abuser of illegal drugs (self admitted and one conviction for OWI)
and child abuser (self admitted and on Iowa's Child Abuse Registry)
wrote:
>G > I got a letter from the agency director himself,
>G > denying process with improper/illegal basis.
>
>DJS3 > You got a letter from the New York State agency director?
>
>I've never been in IN New York, dolt.
>
Nice avoidance, Greg. Note that Dan didn't ask about your
travels.
Why don't you answer the question Dan asked?
>
>G > WHO is ultimately responaible for this
>G > appeal SHREDDING operation, Dan?
>
>DJS3 > I don't know.
>
>Suddenly you have NO IDEA
>about the chain of command?
You're the CPS shill, Greg. You will know far better than Dan
about the chain of command for CPS.
[...]
>
>G > And ( Come to think of it! ) how is it that YOU
>G > didn't know that New York was dead ending
>G > these registry appeals?
>
>DJS3 > My first appeal, written in 1988, wasn't resolved until 1993.
>
>Have you ever mentioned this detail BEFORE?
You don't know?
Within the past 48 hours, you have PROVED Dan OWNS you more than
anyone else, yet you don't know what he's posted?
>
>Was this about the PUPPET BEAR case?
>
>If it took from 1988 to 1993 to reverse it, then you
>were ON THE REGISTRY between those years.
Was he?
That one is automatically placed on the registry in Iowa, as you
have claimed, but never proved, you were and are, doesn't mean every
state MUST do the same. While it is plausible Dan was, it doesn't
instantly mean he was.
>
>G > Remember anybody telling you that the
>
>G > agencies were dead ending regisstry appeals?
>
>DJS3 > I learned it myself 22 years ago.
>
>Please cite where your old comments
>indicated this obstructionism by the agency.
Dan didn't claim his old comments presented such a thing.
You do love to present claims never made.
>
>G > WHO WAS THAT, Dan?
>
>G > Remember Res Judicata?
>
>DJS3 > Yes.
>
>G > WHO brought that up, Danny Boy, me bucko?
>
>DJS3 > Me.
>
>Liar!
I can think of three posts where Dan brought it up.
>
>G > WHAT YEAR???
>
>DJS3 > I don't remember.
>
>I bet.
>
Can you recall every aspect, including the year, of every post
you've made, Greg?
>G > Didn't somebody once ask you if your experience
>G > might have been a bit STALE considering the
>G > current corrupt behavior of the agency??
>
>DJS3 > No.
>
>Liar.
If he's lying, you'll be able to prove it. If you're lying,
you'll offer nothing in the way of proof.
Greegor
DJS3 > Which claims specifically?
G > So?
G > So?
DJS3 > So how could I be arguing about
DJS3 > something when it wasn't an issue?
G > You didn't answer it either.
G > I got a letter from the agency director himself,
G > denying process with improper/illegal basis.
DJS3 > You got a letter from the New York State agency director?
G > I've never been in IN New York, dolt.
DJS3 > The article you posted was about New York.
Do you want to argue about how UNIQUE and
different New York is frojm other states when it
comes to the way their CPS agency works??
DJS3 > How is anyone supposed to know you're
DJS3 > talking about another state if you don't
DJS3 > clarify what you're talking about, grag?
Which "anyone" are you talking about?
G > WHO is ultimately responaible for this
G > appeal SHREDDING operation, Dan?
DJS3 > I don't know.
G > Suddenly you have NO IDEA
G > about the chain of command?
DJS3 > You didn't ask about the chain of command.
G > Did you think this registry appeal process is somehow
G > isolated from the top management of the agency?
DJS3 > I don't know.
G > How does this not reveal a "pattern and practice"
G > of corruption at a criminal level?
DJS3 > Tell me.
G > Do you think somebody at your NY CPS agency
G > INVENTED this solution after YOUR cases?
DJS3 > Apparently.
G > And ( Come to think of it! ) how is it that YOU
G > didn't know that New York was dead ending
G > these registry appeals?
DJS3 > My first appeal, written in 1988, wasn't resolved until 1993.
G > Have you ever mentioned this detail BEFORE?
DJS3 > Sure.
G > Was this about the PUPPET BEAR case?
DJS3 > Of course not.
G > If it took from 1988 to 1993 to reverse it, then you
G > were ON THE REGISTRY between those years.
DJS3 > Not that I'm aware of.
G > Remember anybody telling you that the
G > agencies were dead ending regisstry appeals?
DJS3 > I learned it myself 22 years ago.
G > Please cite where your old comments
G > indicated this obstructionism by the agency.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.child-protective-services/msg/f5ebb9619a2571ef
G > WHO WAS THAT, Dan?
G > Remember Res Judicata?
DJS3 > Yes.
G > WHO brought that up, Danny Boy, me bucko?
DJS3 > Me.
G > Liar!
DJS3 > Prove otherwise.
G > WHAT YEAR???
DJS3 > I don't remember.
G > I bet.
G > Didn't somebody once ask you if your experience
G > might have been a bit STALE considering the
G > current corrupt behavior of the agency??
DJS3 > No.
G > Liar.
DJS3 > Prove it.
I found this VERY interesting, indeed!
A very interesting background for somebody
who later revised their number of investigations
up to 20+ and said about somebody else
"where there's smoke there's fire".
I am even MORE amused that somebody else
realized you were FULL OF IT way back in 2001.
This is your best example showing how the agency
treated you in an obstructionist way?
You declared that they would have to have an
EXPERT to assert emotional abuse.
WHERE is that required in the NY Juvenile code?
CPS uses bogus ""evidence"" constantly.
Even IN court.
In this old post you present the situation as
one where the JUDGE is impartial or would
in any way place a burden of proof on the agency.
You DID however, describe where a Judge
ordered the agency to investigate the REPORTER.
That is about as absurd and unlikely as the notion
that a Judge would direct the prosecutor to begin
PERJURY charges against their friends at CPS.
It SHOULD happen a lot, but you're lucky
if that takes place even after a kid is DEAD
as a result of caseworker perjury.
Do you think Judges in THIS court would seek
to punish caseworkers who up the NUMBERS
through corrupt behavior?
Logan County Family Court signs Title IV-E funds agreement
Written by THE BELLEFONTAINE EXAMINER STAFF
Saturday, 03 April 2010
The Logan County Family Court, in conjunction with the Logan County
Commissioners, recently signed a two-year title IV-E agreement with
the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services, according to a
release.
The court plans to use the federal financial participation funds to
improve children and youth services in the county, with special
emphasis on developing community-based resources and coordination
service improvements. The amount of reimbursement funds the court
receives throughout the two-year period is based upon the number of
children in its care who meet qualification guidelines, said LuAnna
McArthur, chief probation officer.
Last year, the court received $365,631.08 in title IV-E reimbursement
funds last year, which represents 10 quarters of billings. Also for
calendar year 2009, LCFC maintained a beginning balance for the title
IV-E fund of $89,428.58, and an ending balance of $264,053.41.
Path: archiver1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail
From: dsull...@att.net (dan)
Newsgroups: alt.support.child-protective-services
Subject: Social workers call it BULL SHIT! Imagine that.
Date: 2 Sep 2001 07:27:07 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com/
Lines: 126
Message-ID: <d1a57d9b.01090...@posting.google.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.79.128.158
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 999440828 16572 127.0.0.1 (2 Sep 2001
14:27:08 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups...@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: 2 Sep 2001 14:27:08 GMT
Hello People,
My first post on the SW Forum was to April Johnson because she posted
the following,
I tend to believe all charges. They generally are not made up and no
one usually has it out for one family. I do work for Child Protective
Services and if your husband didn't do it the truth will come out, if
he did than you should choose your child over your husband.
Dan writes,
She works for CPS and "tends" to believe "ALL charges."
"They generally are not made up and no one usually has it in for one
family."
Isn't that special?
Here is my reply,
Hello April Johnson,
Only 20-30% of all screened in reports are "founded", so we can figure
you'd be wrong (if you tend to believe all charges) 70-80% of the time
not counting the reports that are immediately screened out. I truly
hope you're not a caseworker, or supervisor, or anyone with any power
whatsoever. I have been investigated by our local CPS about fifteen
times, and five times I have been "founded" (multiple counts each
time). EVERY time CPS "founded" me I took them either to a fair
hearing or an administrative review so they could produce the credible
evidence that they based their decision on, and every time they
produced NOTHING-ZERO, and had ALL their decisions reversed!
1988-I was "founded" for broken bones, which weren't broken, because I
"confessed" to someone who supposedly reported the confession to CPS.
The caseworker who documented the "confession" in the case record
never recorded the name of the person who reported the confession and
I never knew the persons name until the caseworker revealed it in
court in 1992. Fortunately this person (a SW) was able to testify,
before she died of cancer, that she had never spoken with the
caseworker and never reported I "confessed" anything to anyone. The
decision might have stood had she not been able to testify. (REVERSED
1992)
1992-I was "founded" for domestic violence and a few other things with
no evidence. (REVERSED 1994)
1993-I was "founded" for sexual abuse, CPS' own expert reported to the
judge that there was no evidence that I had done anything to my
daughter and recommended to the judge that CPS investigate the person
who made the report for creating a false allegation, because the
evidence she discovered pointed to them. The judge threw the charges
against me out of court and "court ordered" CPS to investigate the
accuser. CPS declined to investigate my accuser, citing "no credible
evidence" and "founded" me anyway. (REVERSED 1994)
1996-I was "founded" for slapping my son in the face on a weekend I
was denied visitation and had a police report to prove it! The case
record actually documented the fact that CPS mailed out the letter
informing me that I was under investigation three days AFTER they
decided to "found" me. They never even contacted me to tell me what
the accusation was because the investigation was over before it
started. (REVERSED 1998)
1998-I was "founded" for hitting my son and causing a "red mark" that
no one saw, and my son when interviewed never told the caseworker that
I hit him (I didn't). (REVERSED 2000)
Interspersed in these decisions are "founded" decisions for inadequate
guardianship and emotional neglect. Emotional neglect is supposed to
be proven by a qualified professional doing an evaluation. Never were
my children seen by anyone and they "founded" me for it anyway, even
after a previous decision was reversed because they never had an
evaluation done then! In other words, I caught them doing it wrong
(1988) and let them know I knew they were doing it wrong again in a
subsequent investigation and they went ahead and did it wrong again
knowing I was just going to have to go back to court and get the
decision reversed like the first time.
Five times I've been "founded" and five times I've had their decisions
reversed. You know how hard it is getting one decision reversed, let
alone five. The first time I used an attorney, after I learned how
incompetent CPS was I did all the rest myself. Needless to say I've
got more experience than the caseworkers and the supervisors that I
come in contact with. My record is spotless, I can't say the same for
CPS.
Reply to my post from SW Stephanie,
(put a towel on your chair before you read this)
Dear Dan,
Your record may be clean. I daresay your soul is not.
I can believe that a person could be falsely accused of child abuse-
ONCE. Twice is farfetched, but possible. Five times....Bullshit.
The pride in your tone as you describe beating the system sickens me.
I truly hope for the sake of your children that I am wrong. If not...
I'm sure they are holding your place in hell- I'd be happy to send you
there myself.
My reply to that,
Hello Stephanie,
Why would "they" be holding a place in hell for me if I was able to
overturn five wrong "founded" decisions of CPS? Two of the reversal
decisions were made by their judges and three were made by a their
people at a CPS Central Register review at my state capital. I simply
asked that CPS provide the credible evidence that they based their
decisions on, and they weren't able to produce anything! I actually
have been falsely reported about 15 times since 1987, only 5 were
"founded."
If I have pride in my tone it is because I proved that a CPS decision
is not etched in stone and can be reversed. It is extremely difficult
to even find the proper procedures to start the process of getting a
"decision" reviewed. There is hope for the falsely accused!
I know you don't work for CPS or have anything to do with them,
otherwise you would know my situation is not unusual. All you need is
a relative who is bi-polar and who was molested as a child AND
everybody at CPS pissed off at you because you know how to reverse
their decisions and are teaching others how to do it too!
Your shock at my TRUE story demonstrates the attitude of the great
majority of the American population.
Until CPS knocks at your door you have NO IDEA how corrupt these
people are, believe me I know and YOU read about it right here.
Moral to the story,
Never debate with a Social Worker, they have ALL the "facts."
Greegor
very same thread, somebody else in NY described
a problem with appeal process being OBSTRUCTED??
Hmm...?
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.child-protective-services/msg/c621dd47dd832863
From: lnay...@hotmail.com (Lynne)
Date: 2 Sep 2001 14:55:22 -0700
[...]
"Not unusual in New York State, where requests for
fair hearings requested within statutory periods are routinely
ignored."
Dan Sullivan
Do you?
> DJS3 > How is anyone supposed to know you're
> DJS3 > talking about another state if you don't
> DJS3 > clarify what you're talking about, grag?
>
> Which "anyone" are you talking about?
Anyone who read your messages in this thread.
Greegor
G > Which "anyone" are you talking about?
DJS3 > Anyone who read your messages in this thread.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/media/ALeqM5ixhjvHwZMda31NDoT6IDmDKfBE1Q
Isn't it intertesting that in 2001 another poster
claimed that NY was dead ending their appeals?
Just like in the article!
How do you explain that, Dan?
I'll ask again, WHEN do you think this
behavior of shredding or tossing appeals
began and when do you think it ended in NY?
Dan Sullivan
>
> Isn't it intertesting that in 2001 another poster
> claimed that NY was dead ending their appeals?
Not to me.
> Just like in the article!
>
> How do you explain that, Dan?
>
> I'll ask again, WHEN do you think this
> behavior of shredding or tossing appeals
> began and when do you think it ended in NY?
Asked and answered.
Greegor
G > claimed that NY was dead ending their appeals?
DJS3 > Not to me.
I bet not! LOL
G > Just like in the article!
G > How do you explain that, Dan?
G > I'll ask again, WHEN do you think this
G > behavior of shredding or tossing appeals
G > began and when do you think it ended in NY?
DJS3 > Asked and answered.
How is it you supposedly HELPED people
when you are so strongly disinterested
in how the agency behaved at that time?
Did you just espouse how it USED TO BE, Dan?
The ""Good Ol' Days" (to you) or something?
The news article makes it clear some really
horrific criminal conspiracy level activitiies
took place in 2004, but here we have RETROACTIVE
TESTIMONY that the very same NY agency
had been behaving this way in 1999 if not further back!
But you have NO INTEREST, right Dan? LOL
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.child-protective-services/msg/c621dd47dd832863
Newsgroups: alt.support.child-protective-services
From: lnay...@hotmail.com (Lynne)
Date: 2 Sep 2001 14:55:22 -0700
Local: Sun, Sep 2 2001 4:55 pm
Subject: Re: Social workers call it BULL SHIT! Imagine that.
This is my first message to the group. Fern recommended me.
I think Stephanie's living a sheltered life. I'm the mother of 3
children, two of whom had emotional and developmental problems, and
the third who was developmentally normal but went through a period of
truancy and running away in her teens (she's now 26, and doing well).
In all, we were investigated 8 or 9 times by CPS between 1988 and
1999. I lost count of the number of times; didn't keep most of their
letters. Every middle-class parent with kids like mine that I knew
had also been targeted repeatedly by CPS. I knew CPS came with the
territory, along with the social workers, the shrinks, the special ed
teachers, ad nauseum, that fill the lives of families like ours.
I've
also come to learn that about 1 out of 4 households in my small
unprosperous town have had CPS involvement. Maybe Stephanie lives in
an upper-class area, where CPS doesn't prey on people quite so much
(they aren't immune, I know). I wrote for a fair hearing back in
1988;
when going through my files last year, I realized I was still waiting
for a response. Not unusual in New York State, where requests for
fair hearings requested within statutory periods are routinely
ignored. I didn't appeal any of the others. When you have demanding
children and umpteen professionals in your lives, you just don't have
energy to pursue these things. And I knew it didn't make a
difference, anyway, because CPS is part of the landscape when you
have
kids like mine.
And, Stephanie, what do you think the charges were in response to?
You take a child out of the hospital AMA, they call CPS; you refuse
to
hospitalize a child, they call CPS; when I didn't call the police
immediately when my daughter didn't come home (they never looked for
her anyway), they called CPS; when my older son, when 17 and 6' tall
beat up my husband, and his caseworker called CPS. On and on and on
it goes. Each case more ridiculous than the first. I hear about
lots
of local cases re disturbed children. Nothing in my situation is
unusual, nor are the number of reports! ALL reports were from
mandated reporters - the hospital; the teacher; the principal; the
caseworker.
The last report, in 1999, I did appeal because it was the most
outrageous one of all. It took the intervention of my state
legislator
to get my statutorily permitted fair hearing, because, of course,
Albany ignored it, but I got it, and the case WAS expunged.
BYW, my 18-year-old, diagnosed psychotic, son was charged with
neglect
of his 17-year-old brother. DSS dragged him, as well as us, through
Family Court. All along I asked them to quote the section of social
service law under which my son, Paul, was being charged with neglect,
they would evade the question. Paul's case was expunged because,
under New York State Social Services law, he could not be charged
with
neglect or abuse. Fancy that! I'd been telling them that all along!
Some how it escaped the notice of Judge Ingrid Braslaw; Westchester
County Attorney Lauren Morrisey; court-appointed attorney Steven
Hansen; caseworkers Joann Bohannan and Susan Italia; and Joann and
Susan's vindictive manager, Virginia Meehan.
Regards,
Lynne
Dan Sullivan
> G > Isn't it intertesting that in 2001 another poster
> G > claimed that NY was dead ending their appeals?
>
> DJS3 > Not to me.
>
> I bet not! LOL
What are you going to bet?
A trunk full of empty cans and bottles?
> G > Just like in the article!
>
> G > How do you explain that, Dan?
>
> G > I'll ask again, WHEN do you think this
> G > behavior of shredding or tossing appeals
> G > began and when do you think it ended in NY?
>
> DJS3 > Asked and answered.
>
> How is it you supposedly HELPED people
> when you are so strongly disinterested
> in how the agency behaved at that time?
I'm still helping people, grag.
And I'm interested in current situations and alleged evidence.
> Did you just espouse how it USED TO BE, Dan?
You're attempting to do that, grag.
Kent Wills
wrote:
[...]
>> > > DJS3 > How is anyone supposed to know you're
>> > > DJS3 > talking about another state if you don't
>> > > DJS3 > clarify what you're talking about, grag?
>>
>> G > Which "anyone" are you talking about?
>>
>> DJS3 > Anyone who read your messages in this thread.
>>
>> http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/media/ALeqM5ixhjvHwZMda31NDoT6IDm...
>>
>> Isn't it intertesting that in 2001 another poster
>> claimed that NY was dead ending their appeals?
>
>Not to me.
>
>> Just like in the article!
>>
>> How do you explain that, Dan?
>>
>> I'll ask again, WHEN do you think this
>> behavior of shredding or tossing appeals
>> began and when do you think it ended in NY?
>
>Asked and answered.
Greg likes to ask questions after they've been answered. He
probably hopes no one will recall the answer having been presented.
Greegor
G > claimed that NY was dead ending their appeals?
DJS3 > Not to me.
G > I bet not! LOL
DJS3 > What are you going to bet?
DJS3 > A trunk full of empty cans and bottles?
Reduce, reuse, recycle.
Even Republicans get that!
Your EGO didn't pay your mortgage, did it?
Does your EGO get you a fatter disability check?
G > Just like in the article!
G > How do you explain that, Dan?
G > I'll ask again, WHEN do you think this
G > behavior of shredding or tossing appeals
G > began and when do you think it ended in NY?
DJS3 > Asked and answered.
G > How is it you supposedly HELPED people
G > when you are so strongly disinterested
G > in how the agency behaved at that time?
DJS3 > I'm still helping people, grag.
DJS3 > And I'm interested in current situations and alleged evidence.
Wherever you can wheel your napper crapper?
G > Did you just espouse how it USED TO BE, Dan?
DJS3 > You're attempting to do that, grag.
How so, Dan?
If you didn't hate Family Rights groups so much
and if you'd quit trying to sabotage them from
the inside, you would be aware of the CPS stuff
that is unfolding/evolving.
Been kicked out of any more Family Rights groups lately?
You don't seem to have paid much attention to that
other poster, Lynn's comments about how appeals
were being dead ended in 1998/1999.
Why would you be so disinterested in that comment?
If you've been tracking things as they've changed,
then you should be able to explain how the agency
behavior in regard to OBSTRUCTING appeals has
changed over the years, at least in NY.
Care to give it a try?
Do you think the CRIMINAL level OBSTRUCTION
of appeals began in 1998 or ended abruptly in 2004?
Do you think it extends back to when you
had kids and had your fights with NY CPS?
Do you think you have ideas that could overcome
this OBSTRUCTION OF APPEALS behavior in NY?\
Dan Sullivan
In my personal experience it's been going on since 1988.
> Been kicked out of any more Family Rights groups lately?
>
> You don't seem to have paid much attention to that
> other poster, Lynn's comments about how appeals
> were being dead ended in 1998/1999.
>
> Why would you be so disinterested in that comment?
Nothing new to me.
> If you've been tracking things as they've changed,
> then you should be able to explain how the agency
> behavior in regard to OBSTRUCTING appeals has
> changed over the years, at least in NY.
>
> Care to give it a try?
No.
> Do you think the CRIMINAL level OBSTRUCTION
> of appeals began in 1998 or ended abruptly in 2004?
No.
> Do you think it extends back to when you
> had kids and had your fights with NY CPS?
At least.
Greegor
DJS3 > In my personal experience it's been going on since 1988.
Why didn't you just say so about 37 messages ago?
Now could you explain how you overcame this
particular behavior on the part of the NY agency?
How is it that they SHREDDED appeals and dead ended
them for SO VERY LONG and yet you supposedly got FIVE?
How did you supposedly get the process that the agency was
so determined to NOT GIVE ANYBODY?
Did you pull a rabbit out of a hat or do other magic tricks?
> > Been kicked out of any more Family Rights groups lately?
>
> > You don't seem to have paid much attention to that
> > other poster, Lynn's comments about how appeals
> > were being dead ended in 1998/1999.
> > Why would you be so disinterested in that comment?
> Nothing new to me.
> > If you've been tracking things as they've changed,
> > then you should be able to explain how the agency
> > behavior in regard to OBSTRUCTING appeals has
> > changed over the years, at least in NY.
>
> > Care to give it a try?
> No.
> > Do you think the CRIMINAL level OBSTRUCTION
> > of appeals began in 1998 or ended abruptly in 2004?
>
> No.
>
> > Do you think it extends back to when you
> > had kids and had your fights with NY CPS?
DJS3 > At least.
So this would make your supposedly getting
appeals hearings FIVE TIMES somewhat of
a freakin miracle wouldn't it?
What magic trick did you use to force them
to A. Give you the process FIVE TIMES and
B. Swing the process favorably to yourself?
C. Overcome their bogus pretense that a
caseworker opinion is an ""expert testimony""?
G > Do you think you have ideas that could overcome
G > this OBSTRUCTION OF APPEALS behavior in NY?
Dan Sullivan
You said you weren't in a hurry.
> Now could you explain how you overcame this
> particular behavior on the part of the NY agency?
>
> How is it that they SHREDDED appeals and dead ended
> them for SO VERY LONG and yet you supposedly got FIVE?
The news article you posted claimed NYS CPS shredded requests for a
single month in 2004.
I don't think that's "SO VERY LONG" at all.
Greegor
G > claimed that NY was dead ending their appeals?
DJS3 > Not to me.
G > I bet not! LOL
DJS3 > What are you going to bet?
DJS3 > A trunk full of empty cans and bottles?
G > Reduce, reuse, recycle.
G > Even Republicans get that!
G > Your EGO didn't pay your mortgage, did it?
G > Does your EGO get you a fatter disability check?
G > Just like in the article!
G > How do you explain that, Dan?
G > I'll ask again, WHEN do you think this
G > behavior of shredding or tossing appeals
G > began and when do you think it ended in NY?
DJS3 > Asked and answered.
G > How is it you supposedly HELPED people
G > when you are so strongly disinterested
G > in how the agency behaved at that time?
DJS3 > I'm still helping people, grag.
DJS3 > And I'm interested in current situations and alleged evidence.
G > Wherever you can wheel your napper crapper?
G > Did you just espouse how it USED TO BE, Dan?
DJS3 > You're attempting to do that, grag.
G > How so, Dan?
G > If you didn't hate Family Rights groups so much
G > and if you'd quit trying to sabotage them from
G > the inside, you would be aware of the CPS stuff
G > that is unfolding/evolving.
DJS3 > In my personal experience it's been going on since 1988.
G > Why didn't you just say so about 37 messages ago?
DJS3 > You said you weren't in a hurry.
G > Now could you explain how you overcame this
G > particular behavior on the part of the NY agency?
G > How is it that they SHREDDED appeals and dead ended
G > them for SO VERY LONG and yet you supposedly got FIVE?
DJS3 > The news article you posted claimed
DJS3 > NYS CPS shredded requests for a
DJS3 > single month in 2004.
DJS3 > I don't think that's "SO VERY LONG" at all.
Yet you just got done saying you think that
behavior went on for MANY years.
Contradicting yourself again?
Kent Wills
wife beater (two conviction -- one resulting in incarceration) user
and abuser of illegal drugs (self admitted and one conviction for OWI)
and child abuser (self admitted and on Iowa's Child Abuse Registry)
wrote:
>G > How is it that they SHREDDED appeals and dead ended
>G > them for SO VERY LONG and yet you supposedly got FIVE?
>
>DJS3 > The news article you posted claimed
>DJS3 > NYS CPS shredded requests for a
>DJS3 > single month in 2004.
>
>DJS3 > I don't think that's "SO VERY LONG" at all.
>
>Yet you just got done saying you think that
>behavior went on for MANY years.
>
>Contradicting yourself again?
You really need to get off the illegal drugs, Greg.
Greegor
> Dan, What, You abruptly leave for THREE MONTHS and
> when you come back you don't offer any explanation?
How are you doing after the foreclosure on
the SUB PRIME mortgage on the big house?
When Dan let his EGO get the best of him
and took out a mortgage he could not pay off,
didn't you do the math?
Didn't you know Dan was overcommitting?
Wouldn't the bank take Dan's huge inflated EGO
as payment on the mortgage?
http://www.zillow.com/homes/6-S-Pinelake-Dr-Patchogue,-NY-11772_rb/
Recently Sold: $320,000 Zestimate: $447,500 Beds: --
Baths: --Sqft: --
Lot: 16,552Sold On: 09/17/2009
Built: --Details Save Alerts Similar
http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/6-S-Pinelake-Dr-S-Patchogue-NY-11772/59443713_zpid/
http://www.redfin.com/NY/Patchogue/6-S-Pinelake-Dr-11772/home/21226238
Kent Wills
convictions for BEATING his ex-wife), child abuser (listed on Iowa's
Child Abuse Registry) and self admitted user and abuse of illegal
drugs, Gregory Scott "Piggly Wiggly" Hanson <gree...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>
>How are you doing after the foreclosure on
>the SUB PRIME mortgage on the big house?
I wasn't aware you had a foreclosure, Greg. You replied to your
own post asking the question, so barring you offering more PROOF that
you are psychologically UNABLE to be honest, except by accident or
force, you must have a foreclosure.
When did this happen?
Admittedly, it's none of my business, but I am curious.