Re: NOMINATION: Frank McCoy for the Bobo award

[Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler]

On Thu, 4 Oct 2012 19:12:56 -0700 (PDT), "Usenet Legends bobandcarole
<========///~~" <usenetleg...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Statutory rape charges

Has McCoy's case gone to trial yet? If not, I am unable to accept
your nomination.
--

October 2012 nominations:
http://blackhelicopternews.blogspot.com/2012/10/october-2012-nominations.html

http://blackhelicopternews.blogspot.com/p/award-winners-1994-2012.html

http://fnvw.databasix.com (awards descriptions and more)

http://blackhelicopternews.blogspot.com/p/afa-b-awards-in-exile.html

[Frank McCoy]

Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler <fn...@databasix.com> wrote:

>On Thu, 4 Oct 2012 19:12:56 -0700 (PDT), "Usenet Legends bobandcarole
><========///~~" <usenetleg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Statutory rape charges
>
>Has McCoy's case gone to trial yet? If not, I am unable to accept
>your nomination.

The trial was over about 2 1/2 years ago.
Actually, closer to 2 3/4 years now.
Judge-only; no jury.

The judge hasn't made a ruling yet.
The indication begins to look like he never will.

By LAW, and all rulings of the Supreme-Court, he can't find me guilty.
By HOW HE FEELS, I suspect he can't find me innocent.

So, by NOT ruling on the case, he keeps me forever in Limbo; subject
to "pretrial release" rules; which are almost identical to Parole
rules. And, if I even accidentally *break* any of those rules, I can
be treated as if I were a convicted criminal; and held in jail until a
verdict *is* rendered.

Giving a REAL verdict, guilty OR innocent would be a lose-lose
situation for the judge; as no matter *which* way he ruled, he would
be attacked by one side or the other. AND, if he ruled "guilty", then
likely the verdict would be overturned on any of about 20 legal
precedences or previous rulings by higher courts.

On the other hand: NOT ruling is a win-win situation for the judge.
Nobody can say he goofed an obvious case; he keeps me under
restrictive rules (specifically *forbidding* me from posting
sex-stories) just as if he'd ruled "guilty" without actually doing-so.

As my lawyer(s) pointed-out: There are rules guaranteeing a speedy
TRIAL. There are *NO* rules guaranteeing a speedy VERDICT; especially
so on things involving legal issues instead of, "Did-he or did-he-not
do said action?"

Actually, the SCOTUS itself often takes several years after hearing a
particular case to make a final ruling and judgement. So there's
argument for this particular judge to be extra-careful in his ruling
and how he justifies it ... and to take half-of-forever to do so, if
necessary.

There's NO argument about whether-or-not I posted said sex-stories.
Both sides have agreed to THAT. The argument is *purely* on whether
posting stories like mine is LEGAL or not.

WE say such posting is legal under the First Amendment; and also by at
least three legs of the four-legged-stool the Supreme Court set as
standard for judging "obscene material" under said amendment.

They're Literature, Art, Social Commentary, and Political Propaganda;
ALL things protected under "The Miller Test" as set forth by the
Supreme Court. WE presented expert testimony to most of the above.
The prosecution presented NO evidence to the contrary, other than that
THEY personally (and therefore the citizens of Georgia) felt the
material was "obscene", obviously-so, and should thus be prohibited
from being posted throughout the USA; and me convicted.

The Supreme Court however, has ruled multiple times that such
objections are NOT reason enough to keep even "filthy pictures" from
being disseminated and sold; let alone pure TEXT like my stories are;
which they've said several times get far greater protection as both
freedom of SPEECH and freedom of the PRESS. IOW: Saying VERY
unpopular things is *protected* speech and writing.

"Child Pornography", on the other hand, consisting of very REAL
pictures of very REAL "innocent children" CAN be suppressed and
banned; because of the *possible* damage to those same children. Even
*some* damage to *some* children is enough for the court to rule
against such dissemination. There, the damage is considered to be
REAL, and not speculative because the children being photographed are
real. That argument just doesn't work, even against
computer-generated pictures of non-real children; though the Justice
Department and lawmakers on Capitol-Hill keep trying to change that.

How much MORE so would it not work against fictional "children" whose
only existence is in a mere STORY or someone's mind?

Next we would be punishing mere un-appropriate thinking.
(Yeah, I know: the word is "inappropriate". Didn't quite fit.)
But then ... THAT has been tried before too!

But by NOT giving a verdict, the judge it seems can punish me just
about as severely as he would if/when finding me guilty ... and yet
*without* ever having to worry about the verdict being overturned by a
higher court!

Oh yes: Both we AND the prosecution DO have a possible way around this
stalemate: We COULD petition a higher-court to pressure the judge into
"doing his job" of producing a verdict.

OTOH, if we or they DID, wouldn't the judge's most likely response be,
"You WANT a verdict? HERE is a verdict!!! and rule AGAINST whichever
side forced his hand.

Well, that's how *I* think it would go; and so does my lawyer.
;-{

Maybe though ... I'm beginning to think I *should* "shake the legal
tree" and get the judge to rule; even if it forces him to say
"guilty". THEN, we could go immediately to appeal; where it's almost
certain such a verdict would be overturned ... from previous rulings
by the same judiciary.

Maybe ... But maybe not, too.

Geesh ... Do I ramble on when my chain is pulled ... or what?

The soapbox is empty.
NEXT!

--
_____
/ ' / ™
,-/-, __ __. ____ /_
(_/ / (_(_/|_/ / <_/ <_

[Fred Hall]

On Thu, 04 Oct 2012 22:15:08 -0500, Frank McCoy <mcc...@millcomm.com>
wrote:

I don't like what you write, Frank, but until a court rules one way or
the other, you will not appear on the ballot. Innocent until proven
guilty, right?

And yes, you do ramble when your chain is yanked.

[-̮̮̃-̃ ̾●̮̮̃̾•̃̾ ™Usenet Legends ªºªandɔa®ole]

mccoy wasn't nominated because of guilt or innocence. He was nominated
because he writes the child-porn filth he proudly admits he polluted
usenet with until a wise judge found a unique way to bridle him. It
seems obvious that a man who gets his jollies writing this type of
material must have a vein of ko0kyness in him.

--

''Thanking Obama for killing Bin Laden is like thanking Ronald
McDonald for the Big Mac. You thank the one who made the
burger, not the clown''

"Well he's a friend of those long haired, hippy type, pinko fags
I'll betcha he's even got a Commie flag tacked up on the wall
inside of his garage"~~The Charlie Daniels Band.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^|^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^|^^^^^^^ |P
| ♥~♥ Usenet Legends bobandcarole ♥~♥ ||”"”;..\___.
| ……_______________| l______________l _||__|…, ]P
“(@)’(@)”""""""*l'(@)l'(@)l """"""""""""""(@)'(@)""""'(@)

̾●̮̮̃̾•̃̾ ™bobaлdcaяole -̮̮̃-̃
Copyright © 2012
all rights reserved
News*Justice*Social Commentary
"Bringing you the ultimate uncensored truth since 1997"
___

"I think we'll be seeing less of bobandcarole...at least while I'm
around" ~Scott Allen Salberg, Resident Fool & Court Jester of APH
...............................................................................................
#1 pedophile hunters: The Urban Dictionary & Evil-Unveiled.com

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=bobandcarole

http://evil-unveiled.com/Alt.support.boy-lovers
........................................................................................
#5 ruiner of usenet.
.......................................................................................
Owner and trainer of Tom Evans aka "mad as a box of frogs"
Tom Evans actual picture:http://bayimg.com/faJBbaAcd
.........................................................................................
"Publicity is publicity, good or bad it's STILL publicity"~ Alice
Cooper
.........................................................................................
"Did you plug the hole yet Daddy?"~~Malia Obama
.........................................................................................
Now I know why they call him tiger, "ELDRICK TONT Woods"?? LMAO!! .
..............................................................................................
"There are 1000 or more reasons for a person INNOCENT of child
molesting to kill themselves"~ Arrested filth-monger frank mccoy
.............................................................................................
"A victory for one pornographer is a victory for all of the human
race"--pedophile "XXX"
...........................................................................................
Image snap of Court and Conviction Record, Scott Salberg.
http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u20/ninety7gt/Intelius.jpg
..........................................................................................
"I am so superior to you that you can't even see it"~ScottyFLL
aka "Enos Penvy" aka scott salberg-- <enospenvy @null.net>
violent criminal Broward County Fla.
............................................................................................
"You are not decent citizens, you are sick, degenerate filth. The
fact that you attend church regularly proves it"~W.T.S.--
<m14m @earthlink.net>
.............................................................................................
"Only becasue they [bestiality and necrophilia] both ARE,
[harmless] for those who get off on that sort of thing. And what
*they* do is absolutely NONE of my busines NOR any of my concern NOR
that of anyone else!!"~~Craig Chilton <r @z.com> showcases why he's
designated a ko0k even by those he claims to defend and shows his
ignorance in using a spell checker..
.............................................................................................
"I understand, you guys{The UTB} i assume you belong? have been
around forever, and are clearly a force to be reckoned with"~~Carl
<carrrrrrl @gmail.com> makes a correct statement for the first time in
his life
..............................................................................................

Why should I have to press one for English??? This is AMERICA
<This space for rent>

[Frank McCoy]

-???-? ??????•?? ™Usenet Legends ªºªand?a®ole

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

>mccoy wasn't nominated because of guilt or innocence. He was nominated
>because he writes the child-porn filth he proudly admits he polluted
>usenet with until a wise judge found a unique way to bridle him. It
>seems obvious that a man who gets his jollies writing this type of
>material must have a vein of ko0kyness in him.

There's something almost flattering about somebody like B&C accusing
ME of being a kook.

If "being a kook" is not fitting the usual definition of "normal";
then I'll proudly claim the title ... along with Ben Franklin, Will
Shakespear, Thomas Edison, or (more appropriately) Rosa Parks.

Find me even ONE "normal person" and I'll show you somebody so far
outside statistical averages they don't have a number that huge.

I wrote my stories and POSTED them as a challenge to the existing laws
that were shutting down entire publishing companies without once ever
leveling a real charge; just *threatening* to do so. Nobody in the
industry wanted to stand up and be counted; so I wrote a story
deliberately designed to do so ... and SAYING so in both the
introduction and in the appendix explaining things. Nothing happened;
so I wrote a bunch MORE stories even more intended to annoy people ...
especially people like B&C.

It took them SIXTEEN BLOODY YEARS to try to get a warrant from a judge
to see my computer ... a warrant that was three times denied. So,
they went to a Grand-Jury in Georgia, the most hidebound and
religiously anti-sex place they could find, with excerpts and *EDITED*
ones *with mistakes not in the original stories* at that, picked to
make the worst possible impression, and got an indictment ... on ME.

They couldn't GET a warrant on the stories themselves; what they
REALLY wanted, so they could go snooping around in my computer.

Which is REALLY silly.
*IF* they'd come around anytime in the years BEFORE they started this
silliness and just ASKED to look over my computer or even make a copy
of the hard-drive, I'd have INVITED them to do so!

In fact, I previously had issued such invitations several times in the
years immediately following the posting of that original story in 114
horrible parts.

Sometime though, look at the actual indictment. It's nuts.
I'm was charged with "transporting obscene material" because I sent an
agent in Georgia the URL of the website in California where my stories
are archived. I never sent him ANY stories. I just told him where to
find them; rather like telling him he could find copies of Nabukov's
"Lolita" in almost any library.

The prosecution though, claims that by sending the agent the URL of
where my stories could be found by going through about three levels of
warnings and pages-loaded, that I was aiding and abetting his doing
something illegal; to wit: HIS downloading my stories from a website
based in California. And yes, the judge DID dismiss our objections to
that idiocy.

But I'll agree that MANY people, even those who agree with my stance
or even those who LIKE my stories (and yes, my wife too) think I AM
rather a "kook" or idiot for not only putting my REAL name on such
stories, with a REAL address, but most-especially for VOLUNTEERING to
be the test-case on whether-or-not such postings of sex-stories are
really illegal under the Constitution and the First Amendment.

"Geesh, idiot! Why couldn't you have let somebody ELSE be the goat?!"
That being the commonest reaction I get from most people.

Only ... Nobody else was standing up; in-particular none of the
*publishers* of erotic stories previously selling books were willing
to fight. So, like Rosa Parks sitting in her bus, I figured that if
nobody ELSE would stand up for what I felt was right, then it was left
to ME to do so.

In fact, I felt that it became my Civic Duty to do so.

So ... I wrote a NOVEL that had just about any kink I could think
would offend the anti-sex crowd in it; but made it funny, readable,
and a real STORY, not just sex. I made it a LOVE STORY though,
without the kinks of pain or bondage or force. (I don't LIKE such
things; especially not in sex.) I also included in the forward and
afterwords explanations of WHY I wrote the thing. Then I posted HFD
to the Net in 114 horrible parts though a "gateway" in a local BBS to
the ass newsgroup ... and then jittered for about two months WAITING
for the Gestapo to come with a battering-ram and break down my door.

Well, they DID come; and yes, WITH that battering-ram; though they
didn't break down the door. They just forced me to come to the door,
stark staring naked, to keep them FROM breaking it down. This SIXTEEN
bloody YEARS later!

The rest is documented history.
You can look almost all of it up on Google.
All except the actual trial and references to my stories, that the
persecution (deliberate) wants to keep hidden from the Public.

So ... Call me a "kook" if you wish.
By most people's standards, by posting under my own name and
*challenging* the blue-noses to arrest me, I am.
Well, THEY wouldn't do it!

[Andrew Wilson]

On Oct 5, 2:12 am, "Usenet Legends bobandcarole <========///~~"
<usenetlegends00...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Oct 5, 12:04 am, Frank McCoy <mcc...@millcomm.com> wrote:
>
>  > Don't write rape stories.  Despise force of any kind.
>
> Statutory rape charges don't require force, frank. You know that.
>
> > Calling somebody older being seduced by somebody younger >"rape",
>
> When that "person" is a preteen child, yes, it IS legally considered
> rape frank. Children are not old enough to give consent and a grown
> man should know better. 12 WILL get you 20, frank, consent or no
> consent.
>
> > demeans the real thing ... As I said; and you ignored.
>
> > "Statutory Rape" is not rape.
> > Don't conflate the two.
>
> > I don't write rape stories.
>
> From franks own site:http://www.incesttaboo.com/incestgrrl/authors/frank/files.htm
>
> ''Frank McCoy is a man who started writing sex stories for his own
> enjoyment, and later started publishing them on the internet (in
> alt.sex.stories) when he found out that other people were interested
> in reading them''
>
> ''His stories mostly involve incest, (family members having sex)
> pedophilia, (young children having sex) pregnancy (yes, having babies)
> and quite often several other quirks as well''.
>
> "young children having babies"????  Don't you think that's a bit
> demented, frank?
>
> ''These stories (with a few notable exceptions) are usually completely
> consensual (That means that all parties involved want to do whatever
> they are doing.) and are basically love-stories. Even though most
> people might consider this "abuse," nobody (with the above noted
> exceptions) gets abused in his stories''
>
> So you DO write "exceptions" ... liar
>
> ''If a little girl has sex, (gets fucked) it's because she wants to
> get fucked, and asks for it''
>
> Ohhhh, according to phreeky frank if a preteen girl "asks" for it it's
> perfectly ok.
>
> http://www.incesttaboo.com/incestgrrl/authors/frank/files.htm

Pretty creepy, but I don't think this meets the bar for a Bobo. Unless
you can point to a conviction or death resulting from the kook's
actions.