info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
?Dr. Sara Payne?
339 views
Skip to first unread message
totallyconfused
Jun 7, 2012, 10:05:52 AM6/7/12
to
Apparently she is getting an 'honorary' Doctorate from the Open
University on Saturday. This is for her work in 'victim support and
advocacy and work in child protection.'
Heard it all now.
TC
University on Saturday. This is for her work in 'victim support and
advocacy and work in child protection.'
Heard it all now.
TC
Ophelia
Jun 7, 2012, 10:11:28 AM6/7/12
to
"totallyconfused" <lisab...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:a8efe0ad-a478-4805...@m10g2000vbn.googlegroups.com...
--
--
http://www.shop.helpforheroes.org.uk/
totallyconfused
Jun 7, 2012, 10:18:06 AM6/7/12
to
On Jun 7, 3:11 pm, "Ophelia" <Ophe...@elsinore.me.uk> wrote:
> "totallyconfused" <lisabar...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
That's what I want to know. How getting legless with your violent
husband in the pub while leaving a 10 year old in charge of a 7 year
old who then wander over a mile away in an unfamiliar area earns you a
Doctorate is beyond me.
TC
> "totallyconfused" <lisabar...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
husband in the pub while leaving a 10 year old in charge of a 7 year
old who then wander over a mile away in an unfamiliar area earns you a
Doctorate is beyond me.
TC
Janitor of Lunacy
Jun 7, 2012, 11:37:34 AM6/7/12
to
news:28b63249-a3fa-4c2a...@q2g2000vbv.googlegroups.com...
"Physician, heal thyself" springs to mind (Luke 4:23); but of course, she's
not the sharpest knife in the box and quite possibly open to manipulation as
a stooge of those with an agenda. But I agree that merely being a mouthpiece
should not qualify one for a doctorate, regardless of her past.
not the sharpest knife in the box and quite possibly open to manipulation as
a stooge of those with an agenda. But I agree that merely being a mouthpiece
should not qualify one for a doctorate, regardless of her past.
Zapp Brannigan
Jun 7, 2012, 11:51:03 AM6/7/12
to
news:28b63249-a3fa-4c2a...@q2g2000vbv.googlegroups.com...
> That's what I want to know. How getting legless with your violent
> husband in the pub while leaving a 10 year old in charge of a 7 year
> old who then wander over a mile away in an unfamiliar area earns you a
> Doctorate is beyond me.
This is a strikingly spiteful accusation to make, TC. Even if it were true
that she was in the pub when her child was abducted and murdered by Roy
Whiting, that hardly makes her a bad person.
Looking back at your own family life and the decisions that you made, do you
sometimes feel that with hindsight you failed to protect your children
sufficiently? You've often written here about the distress they have
suffered, and it would be hard to not reflect on how you might've acted
differently at this or that key moment.
Sara Payne struggles on with considerable dignity, coping with a tragedy she
didn't ask for and trying to make something positive come from it. She
makes mistakes, she sometimes behave emotively, but she has been
surprisingly effective as an advocate & campaigner. I would have thought
you might've identified with that, and seen her as an inspiration and role
model for your own struggle?
> That's what I want to know. How getting legless with your violent
> husband in the pub while leaving a 10 year old in charge of a 7 year
> old who then wander over a mile away in an unfamiliar area earns you a
> Doctorate is beyond me.
that she was in the pub when her child was abducted and murdered by Roy
Whiting, that hardly makes her a bad person.
Looking back at your own family life and the decisions that you made, do you
sometimes feel that with hindsight you failed to protect your children
sufficiently? You've often written here about the distress they have
suffered, and it would be hard to not reflect on how you might've acted
differently at this or that key moment.
Sara Payne struggles on with considerable dignity, coping with a tragedy she
didn't ask for and trying to make something positive come from it. She
makes mistakes, she sometimes behave emotively, but she has been
surprisingly effective as an advocate & campaigner. I would have thought
you might've identified with that, and seen her as an inspiration and role
model for your own struggle?
Nigel Oldfield
Jun 7, 2012, 12:25:42 PM6/7/12
to
On 07/06/2012 16:37, Janitor of Lunacy wrote:
> That's what I want to know. How getting legless with your violent
> husband in the pub while leaving a 10 year old in charge of a 7 year
> old who then wander over a mile away in an unfamiliar area earns you a
> Doctorate is beyond me.
> TC
>
> "Physician, heal thyself" springs to mind (Luke 4:23); but of course, she's
> not the sharpest knife in the box and quite possibly open to manipulation as
> a stooge of those with an agenda. But I agree that merely being a mouthpiece
> should not qualify one for a doctorate, regardless of her past.
Not Dr Sara Payne MBE
> That's what I want to know. How getting legless with your violent
> husband in the pub while leaving a 10 year old in charge of a 7 year
> old who then wander over a mile away in an unfamiliar area earns you a
> Doctorate is beyond me.
> TC
>
> "Physician, heal thyself" springs to mind (Luke 4:23); but of course, she's
> not the sharpest knife in the box and quite possibly open to manipulation as
> a stooge of those with an agenda. But I agree that merely being a mouthpiece
> should not qualify one for a doctorate, regardless of her past.
Use the Title 'Dr', in any way fraudulently, or to mislead (or allow
others to do so), and Ms Payne et al will be challenged, appropriately.
More services-rendered; now, we wonder if we can find out who submitted
the nomination?
http://therealosc.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/not-dr-sara-payne-mbe.html
WM
Rampant Member
Nigel Oldfield
Jun 7, 2012, 12:32:18 PM6/7/12
to
On 07/06/2012 16:51, Zapp Brannigan wrote:
>
> "totallyconfused" <lisab...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:28b63249-a3fa-4c2a...@q2g2000vbv.googlegroups.com...
>
>> That's what I want to know. How getting legless with your violent
>> husband in the pub while leaving a 10 year old in charge of a 7 year
>> old who then wander over a mile away in an unfamiliar area earns you a
>> Doctorate is beyond me.
>
> This is a strikingly spiteful accusation to make, TC. Even if it were
> true that she was in the pub when her child was abducted and murdered by
> Roy Whiting, that hardly makes her a bad person.
> Looking back at your own family life and the decisions that you made, do
> you sometimes feel that with hindsight you failed to protect your
> children sufficiently? You've often written here about the distress they
> have suffered, and it would be hard to not reflect on how you might've
> acted differently at this or that key moment.
Well, it was, of course, incredibly bad luck (if it actually happened as
>
> "totallyconfused" <lisab...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:28b63249-a3fa-4c2a...@q2g2000vbv.googlegroups.com...
>
>> That's what I want to know. How getting legless with your violent
>> husband in the pub while leaving a 10 year old in charge of a 7 year
>> old who then wander over a mile away in an unfamiliar area earns you a
>> Doctorate is beyond me.
>
> This is a strikingly spiteful accusation to make, TC. Even if it were
> true that she was in the pub when her child was abducted and murdered by
> Roy Whiting, that hardly makes her a bad person.
> Looking back at your own family life and the decisions that you made, do
> you sometimes feel that with hindsight you failed to protect your
> children sufficiently? You've often written here about the distress they
> have suffered, and it would be hard to not reflect on how you might've
> acted differently at this or that key moment.
we are led to believe) ... but, the contributory factors, to the
foundations of the abduction, are often sugar-coated, for effect; as
they always are, with TPP and its partners.
> Sara Payne struggles on with considerable dignity, coping with a tragedy
> she didn't ask for and trying to make something positive come from it.
> She makes mistakes, she sometimes behave emotively, but she has been
> surprisingly effective as an advocate & campaigner.
WM
Message has been deleted
totallyconfused
Jun 7, 2012, 12:48:28 PM6/7/12
to
On Jun 7, 4:51 pm, "Zapp Brannigan" <ZBr...@DOOP.com> wrote:
> "totallyconfused" <lisabar...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
I never left my children unattended. The only things I failed to
protect my children from were a) an illegal search warrant in
Operation Ore in 2003 (which had nothing to do with me- so what
action
of mine would have anticipated that situation?) and then b) naively
allowing myself to believe that SOME who claimed to be equally
stitched up were actually people who had nothing to do with this
miscarriage of justice and were genuine risks to children and
believed
their false stories and FALSE NAMES. (Such as one poster here who
claims to be no risk to children when his PPO tells me quite a
different story.)
Sorry but Ms Payne (for that is her 'official name'- she is remarried
with other children) blames Whiting. It was her own actions that led
to her situation. I can find nothing in my conscious or sub
conscious
actions/thoughts or behaviours that could have prevented 'our'
situation. But I do blame Gamble, Carr, Payne, Kennan, et al for
starting this situation through their lies and mistruths. And yes, I
do blame my ex alot for the situation because of the way he dealt
with
it- or more specifically, how he failed to deal with it. (Please
remember that the Ore accusations made against him were from supposed
activity more that 3 years before I met him)
Remember, the worst accusation ever leveled at ME was that I 'could
have possibly put a child at potential future risk of maybe suffering
harm.' (due to again a poster here who introduced me to someone
needing 'help' and that person gave me a false name and story.)
Hope that explains my position.
TC
> "totallyconfused" <lisabar...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
protect my children from were a) an illegal search warrant in
Operation Ore in 2003 (which had nothing to do with me- so what
action
of mine would have anticipated that situation?) and then b) naively
allowing myself to believe that SOME who claimed to be equally
stitched up were actually people who had nothing to do with this
miscarriage of justice and were genuine risks to children and
believed
their false stories and FALSE NAMES. (Such as one poster here who
claims to be no risk to children when his PPO tells me quite a
different story.)
Sorry but Ms Payne (for that is her 'official name'- she is remarried
with other children) blames Whiting. It was her own actions that led
to her situation. I can find nothing in my conscious or sub
conscious
actions/thoughts or behaviours that could have prevented 'our'
situation. But I do blame Gamble, Carr, Payne, Kennan, et al for
starting this situation through their lies and mistruths. And yes, I
do blame my ex alot for the situation because of the way he dealt
with
it- or more specifically, how he failed to deal with it. (Please
remember that the Ore accusations made against him were from supposed
activity more that 3 years before I met him)
Remember, the worst accusation ever leveled at ME was that I 'could
have possibly put a child at potential future risk of maybe suffering
harm.' (due to again a poster here who introduced me to someone
needing 'help' and that person gave me a false name and story.)
Hope that explains my position.
TC
Paul Cummins
Jun 7, 2012, 1:07:00 PM6/7/12
to
We were about to embark at Dover, when lisab...@hotmail.com
(totallyconfused) came up to me and whispered:
> (Such as one poster here who
> claims to be no risk to children when his PPO tells me quite a
> different story.)
His PPO cannot tell you that. Again you are likely to be lying.
If you are not, please give the name, collar number and police station of
the PPO in question. I will contact him independently and ask if he has
given you this information.
--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
IF you think this http://bit.ly/u5EP3p is cruel
please sign this http://bit.ly/sKkzEx
---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----
(totallyconfused) came up to me and whispered:
> (Such as one poster here who
> claims to be no risk to children when his PPO tells me quite a
> different story.)
If you are not, please give the name, collar number and police station of
the PPO in question. I will contact him independently and ask if he has
given you this information.
--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
IF you think this http://bit.ly/u5EP3p is cruel
please sign this http://bit.ly/sKkzEx
---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----
Nigel Oldfield
Jun 7, 2012, 1:18:41 PM6/7/12
to
On 07/06/2012 18:07, Paul Cummins wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when lisab...@hotmail.com
> (totallyconfused) came up to me and whispered:
>
>> (Such as one poster here who
>> claims to be no risk to children when his PPO tells me quite a
>> different story.)
>
> His PPO cannot tell you that. Again you are likely to be lying.
>
> If you are not, please give the name, collar number and police station of
> the PPO in question. I will contact him independently and ask if he has
> given you this information.
Go ahead.
> We were about to embark at Dover, when lisab...@hotmail.com
> (totallyconfused) came up to me and whispered:
>
>> (Such as one poster here who
>> claims to be no risk to children when his PPO tells me quite a
>> different story.)
>
> His PPO cannot tell you that. Again you are likely to be lying.
>
> If you are not, please give the name, collar number and police station of
> the PPO in question. I will contact him independently and ask if he has
> given you this information.
I have.
WM
totallyconfused
Jun 7, 2012, 1:31:20 PM6/7/12
to
On Jun 7, 6:07 pm, useth...@stedtelephone.invalid (Paul Cummins)
wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when lisabar...@hotmail.com
correspondence regarding my discussions with this woman to 3 people on
this site who I trust and know will not divulge any information; only
to confirm both telephone and email discussions have occurred. So I
am not lying; also, remember she can share information with me as he
was involved/implicated/considered assisting someone to pose a risk to
a child.
You can call me a liar to your heart's content. I don't care because
I know the facts.
You might not like what I say or how I say it; so what? It is not
going to impact on my life or beliefs.
TC
wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when lisabar...@hotmail.com
> (totallyconfused) came up to me and whispered:
>
> > (Such as one poster here who
> > claims to be no risk to children when his PPO tells me quite a
> > different story.)
>
> His PPO cannot tell you that. Again you are likely to be lying.
>
> If you are not, please give the name, collar number and police station of
> the PPO in question. I will contact him independently and ask if he has
> given you this information.
>
> --
> Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
> Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
> IF you think thishttp://bit.ly/u5EP3pis cruel
> please sign thishttp://bit.ly/sKkzEx
>
> > (Such as one poster here who
> > claims to be no risk to children when his PPO tells me quite a
> > different story.)
>
> His PPO cannot tell you that. Again you are likely to be lying.
>
> If you are not, please give the name, collar number and police station of
> the PPO in question. I will contact him independently and ask if he has
> given you this information.
>
> --
> Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
> Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
> IF you think thishttp://bit.ly/u5EP3pis cruel
>
> ---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----
Well until recently He was a SHE. I have passed the email
> ---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----
correspondence regarding my discussions with this woman to 3 people on
this site who I trust and know will not divulge any information; only
to confirm both telephone and email discussions have occurred. So I
am not lying; also, remember she can share information with me as he
was involved/implicated/considered assisting someone to pose a risk to
a child.
You can call me a liar to your heart's content. I don't care because
I know the facts.
You might not like what I say or how I say it; so what? It is not
going to impact on my life or beliefs.
TC
Cynic
Jun 7, 2012, 3:11:06 PM6/7/12
to
On Thu, 7 Jun 2012 18:07 +0100 (BST), uset...@stedtelephone.invalid
(Paul Cummins) wrote:
>We were about to embark at Dover, when lisab...@hotmail.com
>(totallyconfused) came up to me and whispered:
>> (Such as one poster here who
>> claims to be no risk to children when his PPO tells me quite a
>> different story.)
>His PPO cannot tell you that. Again you are likely to be lying.
Whilst the police are not permitted to make a public disclosure of a
(Paul Cummins) wrote:
>We were about to embark at Dover, when lisab...@hotmail.com
>(totallyconfused) came up to me and whispered:
>> (Such as one poster here who
>> claims to be no risk to children when his PPO tells me quite a
>> different story.)
>His PPO cannot tell you that. Again you are likely to be lying.
person's PNC record, a police officer may disclose details held on the
PNC about another person to any specific individuals if they believe
it to be necessary in order to protect any member of the public or to
prevent a crime. Indeed they have a *duty* to do so.
People on the SOR are told that the police *will* disclose all their
history to anyone the offender has frequent contact with, if there is
a risk of the offender gaining access to a child via that contact.
--
Cynic
Nigel Oldfield
Jun 7, 2012, 3:22:31 PM6/7/12
to
WM
Paul Cummins
Jun 7, 2012, 3:50:00 PM6/7/12
to
We were about to embark at Dover, when cyni...@yahoo.co.uk (Cynic) came
So again I challenge Ms Bartal to prove her position. For it is easy to
make claims like hers, but hard to test their accuracy, and inaccurate
claims of this type do need to be challenged to halt the paedostyria.
--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
up to me and whispered:
> People on the SOR are told that the police *will* disclose all
> their history to anyone the offender has frequent contact with, if
> there is a risk of the offender gaining access to a child via that
> contact.
And that is clearly not the situation in this case.
> their history to anyone the offender has frequent contact with, if
> there is a risk of the offender gaining access to a child via that
> contact.
So again I challenge Ms Bartal to prove her position. For it is easy to
make claims like hers, but hard to test their accuracy, and inaccurate
claims of this type do need to be challenged to halt the paedostyria.
--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
IF you think this http://bit.ly/u5EP3p is cruel
please sign this http://bit.ly/sKkzEx
Zapp Brannigan
Jun 7, 2012, 4:16:06 PM6/7/12
to
news:b45dbd27-6123-413a...@j9g2000vbk.googlegroups.com...
Thank you for that fascinating demonstration of the human mind's capacity
for self-deception. "Sara Payne is a bad person and wholly responsible for
the harm to her child, whilst I am a good person and all my misfortunes have
been inflicted upon me by others."
It is not my place to call you a bad person, any more than I am a bad
person. Most of us have our proud moments and our secret shames, and I am
no exception. But I think you have not yet reflected upon your own part in
the constant drama of risk, confrontation and hyperbole which your children
have undergone during their childhood.
for self-deception. "Sara Payne is a bad person and wholly responsible for
the harm to her child, whilst I am a good person and all my misfortunes have
been inflicted upon me by others."
It is not my place to call you a bad person, any more than I am a bad
person. Most of us have our proud moments and our secret shames, and I am
no exception. But I think you have not yet reflected upon your own part in
the constant drama of risk, confrontation and hyperbole which your children
have undergone during their childhood.
Alex Heney
Jun 7, 2012, 4:58:07 PM6/7/12
to
You are NOT stupid enough to believe for one millisecond that doing
the above has contributed in any way to her getting this.
It is what she has done as response to the results of that.
Not that I agree for one moment that she should have it. Anybody who
has a law "named" after them should be severely punished rather than
being rewarded IMO, because such laws are almost invariably bad,
knee-jerk laws.
--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
Have cursor, will curse.
To reply by email, my address is alexDOTheneyATgmailDOTcom
totallyconfused
Jun 7, 2012, 5:09:36 PM6/7/12
to
On Jun 7, 8:50 pm, useth...@stedtelephone.invalid (Paul Cummins)
wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when cynic_...@yahoo.co.uk (Cynic) came
claim is 100% true.
TC
wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when cynic_...@yahoo.co.uk (Cynic) came
> up to me and whispered:
>
> > People on the SOR are told that the police *will* disclose all
> > their history to anyone the offender has frequent contact with, if
> > there is a risk of the offender gaining access to a child via that
> > contact.
>
> And that is clearly not the situation in this case.
>
> So again I challenge Ms Bartal to prove her position. For it is easy to
> make claims like hers, but hard to test their accuracy, and inaccurate
> claims of this type do need to be challenged to halt the paedostyria.
>
> --
> Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
> Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
>
> > People on the SOR are told that the police *will* disclose all
> > their history to anyone the offender has frequent contact with, if
> > there is a risk of the offender gaining access to a child via that
> > contact.
>
> And that is clearly not the situation in this case.
>
> So again I challenge Ms Bartal to prove her position. For it is easy to
> make claims like hers, but hard to test their accuracy, and inaccurate
> claims of this type do need to be challenged to halt the paedostyria.
>
> --
> Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
> Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
> IF you think thishttp://bit.ly/u5EP3pis cruel
> please sign thishttp://bit.ly/sKkzEx
>
> ---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----
I am all against the hype and paedogeddon, but in this instance, my
> ---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----
claim is 100% true.
TC
totallyconfused
Jun 7, 2012, 5:25:44 PM6/7/12
to
On Jun 7, 9:16 pm, "Zapp Brannigan" <ZBr...@DOOP.com> wrote:
> "totallyconfused" <lisabar...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> have undergone during their childhood.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Please tell me what my 'own part in this' was? I did everything
correct- Before I allowed my ex to move in had him go see a respected
psychologist for an assessment as I wanted to know the impact of a new
'parental figure' in the home. (Indeed, I am open to admit it was
Stelios Keiosis)
I have never said 'Sara Payne is a bad person'; I have said she did
not think through the consequences; I planned for months being very
careful. I took every precaution conceivable; no one (including him)
could have foreseen Operation Ore and all that followed. But her
attitude of 'yeah, let's go to the pub and tell the boy to look after
her while we get lathered' and then a few hours later realise your
children are missing is not really thinking it through. It has
nothing to do with education or intellect- I am specifically thinking
of the McFrauds.
Finally if the poster I am referring to believes my claims to be false
or misrepresentative- then tell him to do what his 'mate' did; get his
solicitor to write me a letter demanding I stop making such posts on
the internet and to the press. Amazingly, once my solicitor responded
and stated I was only stating fact with evidence.......suddenly all
went quiet and I have not had another 'threatening' letter again.
So I suggest that you that you turn it around and ask the regular
poster to prove I am wrong.
TC
> "totallyconfused" <lisabar...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> - Show quoted text -
Please tell me what my 'own part in this' was? I did everything
correct- Before I allowed my ex to move in had him go see a respected
psychologist for an assessment as I wanted to know the impact of a new
'parental figure' in the home. (Indeed, I am open to admit it was
Stelios Keiosis)
I have never said 'Sara Payne is a bad person'; I have said she did
not think through the consequences; I planned for months being very
careful. I took every precaution conceivable; no one (including him)
could have foreseen Operation Ore and all that followed. But her
attitude of 'yeah, let's go to the pub and tell the boy to look after
her while we get lathered' and then a few hours later realise your
children are missing is not really thinking it through. It has
nothing to do with education or intellect- I am specifically thinking
of the McFrauds.
Finally if the poster I am referring to believes my claims to be false
or misrepresentative- then tell him to do what his 'mate' did; get his
solicitor to write me a letter demanding I stop making such posts on
the internet and to the press. Amazingly, once my solicitor responded
and stated I was only stating fact with evidence.......suddenly all
went quiet and I have not had another 'threatening' letter again.
So I suggest that you that you turn it around and ask the regular
poster to prove I am wrong.
TC
totallyconfused
Jun 7, 2012, 5:41:43 PM6/7/12
to
>
> - Show quoted text -
I completely agree- hence the ?'s either side of name.
> - Show quoted text -
I believe her 'campaign' is much like the McFrauds; diverting
attention. I have been open about all my experiences over the last 9
years. My 'campaigning' is about how resources are stupidly wasted
and diverted from children and families truely in need. (As I have
said, I had to waste precious time with morons who summed up 'They own
too many books'; 'The house is too clean for a single mother with 3
children'; 'It is of concern that a 4/5 yr old has never had a chicken
McNugget'.)
This may assist you:
http://justiceforfamilies.freeforums.org/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=4723
(I am used to being unpopular with the masses considering for 4 years
my job was to 'weed out' the 'incompetent' and restructure companies
which resulted in those not up to it were not there at the end of the
exercise.) But as you will see, there are some who share my
experience and POV.
TC
totallyconfused
Jun 7, 2012, 5:08:36 PM6/7/12
to
On Jun 7, 8:11 pm, cynic_...@yahoo.co.uk (Cynic) wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Jun 2012 18:07 +0100 (BST), useth...@stedtelephone.invalid
>
> (Paul Cummins) wrote:
> >We were about to embark at Dover, when lisabar...@hotmail.com
TC
> On Thu, 7 Jun 2012 18:07 +0100 (BST), useth...@stedtelephone.invalid
>
> (Paul Cummins) wrote:
> >We were about to embark at Dover, when lisabar...@hotmail.com
> >(totallyconfused) came up to me and whispered:
> >> (Such as one poster here who
> >> claims to be no risk to children when his PPO tells me quite a
> >> different story.)
> >His PPO cannot tell you that. Again you are likely to be lying.
>
> Whilst the police are not permitted to make a public disclosure of a
> person's PNC record, a police officer may disclose details held on the
> PNC about another person to any specific individuals if they believe
> it to be necessary in order to protect any member of the public or to
> prevent a crime. Indeed they have a *duty* to do so.
>
> People on the SOR are told that the police *will* disclose all their
> history to anyone the offender has frequent contact with, if there is
> a risk of the offender gaining access to a child via that contact.
>
> --
> Cynic
EXACTLY. That is why THEY contacted ME in this instance.
> >> (Such as one poster here who
> >> claims to be no risk to children when his PPO tells me quite a
> >> different story.)
> >His PPO cannot tell you that. Again you are likely to be lying.
>
> Whilst the police are not permitted to make a public disclosure of a
> person's PNC record, a police officer may disclose details held on the
> PNC about another person to any specific individuals if they believe
> it to be necessary in order to protect any member of the public or to
> prevent a crime. Indeed they have a *duty* to do so.
>
> People on the SOR are told that the police *will* disclose all their
> history to anyone the offender has frequent contact with, if there is
> a risk of the offender gaining access to a child via that contact.
>
> --
> Cynic
TC
Mel Rowing
Jun 7, 2012, 6:12:18 PM6/7/12
to
On Jun 7, 10:25 pm, totallyconfused <lisabar...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 7, 9:16 pm, "Zapp Brannigan" <ZBr...@DOOP.com> wrote:
> But her attitude of 'yeah, let's go to the pub and tell the boy to look after
> her while we get lathered' and then a few hours later realise your
> children are missing is not really thinking it through. It has
> nothing to do with education or intellect- I am specifically thinking
> of the McFrauds.
What have the McCanns to do with it ? The cases are in no way related.
> On Jun 7, 9:16 pm, "Zapp Brannigan" <ZBr...@DOOP.com> wrote:
> But her attitude of 'yeah, let's go to the pub and tell the boy to look after
> her while we get lathered' and then a few hours later realise your
> children are missing is not really thinking it through. It has
> nothing to do with education or intellect- I am specifically thinking
> of the McFrauds.
They are a complete red herring. You do have the habit of throwing
sand in people's eyes.
I must admit that I find this allegation regarding the Paynes
extraordinary. In fact so extraordinary that I took the trouble to
look up as many independent reports of the trial of Whiting I could
find. The case for the prosecution, a case that had had the benefit of
a thorough investigation behind it, was that on that fateful day
(July 1st 2000) the Paynes took the children to visit their
grandparents. The parents together with the children's grandfather,
took a walk with the children. The children were left playing together
a five minute walk from the grandparents' home. Hardly a case of
wanton neglect! It was during this play that Sarah having received a
bang on the head left the others to walk back to the gandparents home
when she was abducted.
Nowhere is there any mention of drunkeness visits to pubs etc. though
Mr Payne some considerable time later was convicted of wounding his
brother.
Some substantiation would therefore appear appropriate.
Nigel Oldfield
Jun 7, 2012, 6:41:19 PM6/7/12
to
On 07/06/2012 23:12, Mel Rowing wrote:
> On Jun 7, 10:25 pm, totallyconfused<lisabar...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On Jun 7, 9:16 pm, "Zapp Brannigan"<ZBr...@DOOP.com> wrote:
>
>> But her attitude of 'yeah, let's go to the pub and tell the boy to look after
>> her while we get lathered' and then a few hours later realise your
>> children are missing is not really thinking it through. It has
>> nothing to do with education or intellect- I am specifically thinking
>> of the McFrauds.
>
> What have the McCanns to do with it ? The cases are in no way related.
> They are a complete red herring. You do have the habit of throwing
> sand in people's eyes.
Partially correct, but there are parallels.
> On Jun 7, 10:25 pm, totallyconfused<lisabar...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On Jun 7, 9:16 pm, "Zapp Brannigan"<ZBr...@DOOP.com> wrote:
>
>> But her attitude of 'yeah, let's go to the pub and tell the boy to look after
>> her while we get lathered' and then a few hours later realise your
>> children are missing is not really thinking it through. It has
>> nothing to do with education or intellect- I am specifically thinking
>> of the McFrauds.
>
> What have the McCanns to do with it ? The cases are in no way related.
> They are a complete red herring. You do have the habit of throwing
> sand in people's eyes.
> I must admit that I find this allegation regarding the Paynes
> extraordinary. In fact so extraordinary that I took the trouble to
> look up as many independent reports of the trial of Whiting I could
> find.
> The case for the prosecution, a case that had had the benefit of
> a thorough investigation behind it,
>was that on that fateful day
> (July 1st 2000) the Paynes took the children to visit their
> grandparents.
>The parents together with the children's grandfather,
> took a walk with the children.
>The children were left playing together
> a five minute walk from the grandparents' home.
>Hardly a case of
> wanton neglect!
>It was during this play that Sarah having received a
> bang on the head left the others to walk back to the gandparents home
> when she was abducted.
>
> Nowhere is there any mention of drunkeness visits to pubs etc. though
> Mr Payne some considerable time later was convicted of wounding his
> brother.
adults etc could visit a public house.
> Some substantiation would therefore appear appropriate.
WM
totallyconfused
Jun 7, 2012, 6:48:33 PM6/7/12
to
were at home the entire time so never went on a family walk. Mr.
Payne also has convictions for assaulting his then wife.
Apparently even within her own book she states her husband was a manic
depressive, an alcoholic and that on the day in question she left the
children unattended with the oldest boy (Lee) saying they were going
to try and find the beach. She also admits to not paying attention to
basic household chores, cooking and shopping. She also describes
their home as 'unhappy and miserable with both of us drinking
excessively, hostile and daily arguments.' She also admits that she
is racked with guilt for being so inattentive with a 'far too relaxed
attitude to parenting'.
TC.
Paul Cummins
Jun 7, 2012, 8:47:00 PM6/7/12
to
We were about to embark at Dover, when lisab...@hotmail.com
(totallyconfused) came up to me and whispered:
>
> I am all against the hype and paedogeddon, but in this
> instance, my claim is 100% true.
So evidence it. Give me the details of the officer in question. Name,
collar number and station - not exactly Official Secrets now.
--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
(totallyconfused) came up to me and whispered:
>
> I am all against the hype and paedogeddon, but in this
> instance, my claim is 100% true.
collar number and station - not exactly Official Secrets now.
--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
IF you think this http://bit.ly/u5EP3p is cruel
please sign this http://bit.ly/sKkzEx
Paul Cummins
Jun 7, 2012, 8:47:00 PM6/7/12
to
We were about to embark at Dover, when lisab...@hotmail.com
Your lies aren't adding up, Ms Bartal.
(totallyconfused) came up to me and whispered:
>
>
> EXACTLY. That is why THEY contacted ME in this instance.
But they wouldn't, unless you were associating with Mr Oldfield...
Your lies aren't adding up, Ms Bartal.
totallyconfused
Jun 8, 2012, 1:49:15 AM6/8/12
to
On Jun 8, 1:47 am, useth...@stedtelephone.invalid (Paul Cummins)
wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when lisabar...@hotmail.com
TC
wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when lisabar...@hotmail.com
> (totallyconfused) came up to me and whispered:
>
>
>
> > EXACTLY. That is why THEY contacted ME in this instance.
>
> But they wouldn't, unless you were associating with Mr Oldfield...
>
> Your lies aren't adding up, Ms Bartal.
>
> --
> Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
> Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
>
>
>
> > EXACTLY. That is why THEY contacted ME in this instance.
>
> But they wouldn't, unless you were associating with Mr Oldfield...
>
> Your lies aren't adding up, Ms Bartal.
>
> --
> Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
> Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
> IF you think thishttp://bit.ly/u5EP3pis cruel
> please sign thishttp://bit.ly/sKkzEx
>
> ---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----
Or if his name was meantioned as part of 'the plan' of a third party.
> ---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----
TC
Mel Rowing
Jun 8, 2012, 4:19:57 AM6/8/12
to
On Jun 7, 11:48 pm, totallyconfused <lisabar...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 7, 11:12 pm, Mel Rowing <mel.row...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> > Nowhere is there any mention of drunkeness visits to pubs etc. though
> > Mr Payne some considerable time later was convicted of wounding his
> > brother.
>
> > Some substantiation would therefore appear appropriate.
>
> Not to sound mean, but that story is not accurate: the grandparents
> were at home the entire time so never went on a family walk.
There was not any indication that the grandmother did - more sand!
> On Jun 7, 11:12 pm, Mel Rowing <mel.row...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> > Nowhere is there any mention of drunkeness visits to pubs etc. though
> > Mr Payne some considerable time later was convicted of wounding his
> > brother.
>
> > Some substantiation would therefore appear appropriate.
>
> Not to sound mean, but that story is not accurate: the grandparents
> were at home the entire time so never went on a family walk.
However, statements to the police later to be tested in court, that
the two parents and the Grandfather did. So what you are saying is
that all three perjured themselves over a detail that would make no
difference whatsoever on the verdict of the court as to Whiting's
innocence or guilt.
And still no corroboration!
>Mr. Payne also has convictions for assaulting his then wife.
> Apparently even within her own book she states her husband was a manic
> children unattended with the oldest boy (Lee) saying they were going
> to try and find the beach. She also admits to not paying attention to
> basic household chores, cooking and shopping. She also describes
> their home as 'unhappy and miserable with both of us drinking
> excessively, hostile and daily arguments.' She also admits that she
> is racked with guilt for being so inattentive with a 'far too relaxed
> attitude to parenting'.
Equally "apparently" you have not even read the book. Neither have I!
> to try and find the beach. She also admits to not paying attention to
> basic household chores, cooking and shopping. She also describes
> their home as 'unhappy and miserable with both of us drinking
> excessively, hostile and daily arguments.' She also admits that she
> is racked with guilt for being so inattentive with a 'far too relaxed
> attitude to parenting'.
However, what few reviews I can find of it offer nothing but sympathy
for the Paynes. You should be aware that this book would have been
read by professional reviewers working for newspapers. The News of the
World, yes that scandal sheet, was particularly interested in the
Paynes. Still not a dicky bird - apparently!
totallyconfused
Jun 8, 2012, 5:04:57 AM6/8/12
to
has a section by chapter describing 'the main content' of each section/
chapter. I also have met people who know the family and seem to be
reliable.
Sorry that her halo has dropped.
I do have sympathy for the woman. However, I am uncomfortable with
how she has manipulated the public (by allowing herself to be
manipulated by the press) and created this hysteria over child
protection and paedogeddon to be such an influence on the law and and
how people treat their children.
In my own case, my family was just 'unlucky'; we just encountered a
rare situation.
TC
The Todal
Jun 8, 2012, 5:25:53 AM6/8/12
to
to turn a dreadful bereavement into something positive by campaigning
for changes in the law, and I regret that the newspapers keep treating
her as some sort of expert, running to her for quotes when she actually
isn't an expert at all and there is no reason why laws should be passed
just to please her.
I have equal sympathy for the McCanns and I think it is a pity that you
keep referring to them as the McFrauds. A pity, because it just seems
rather spiteful. Sorry, because I have no wish to fall out with you.
totallyconfused
Jun 8, 2012, 5:40:28 AM6/8/12
to
>
> - Show quoted text -
Nor I wish to fall out with you. I just think there is something 'not
> - Show quoted text -
right' about the McCann situation.
If it helps I follow these two sites which highlight why people are
sceptical about them:
http://textusa.blogspot.co.uk/
http://textusa.blogspot.co.uk/
Both are run by Portugese citizens.
My only strong opinions about Gerry and Kate are a) why were they at
least not investigated for neglect b) how they set up a 'company' so
fast and how they spent the money c) how suddenly they were deemed
'child protection experts/spokespeople'. Other than that my only view
is that the child (regardless of her current status) deserves the
truth.
Take Care
TC
The Todal
Jun 8, 2012, 6:11:00 AM6/8/12
to
>
> Both are run by Portugese citizens.
less.
>
> My only strong opinions about Gerry and Kate are a) why were they at
> least not investigated for neglect
b) how they set up a 'company' so
> fast
and how they spent the money
it took me only a few seconds to find
http://www.findmadeleine.com/about_the_campaign/index.html
What is the money being spent on ?
The majority of the fund money has been and continues to be spent on
investigative work to help find Madeleine. Additionally money continues
to be spent on the wider 'Awareness Campaign' – reminding people that
Madeleine is still missing and to remain vigilant. None of the directors
have taken any money from the fund as remuneration.
Anyone who wishes further information with regards to the financial
details of Madeleine's Fund and its professional advisors, please refer
to the accounts filed at Companies House. Crown Way Maindy Cardiff CF14 3UZ
c) how suddenly they were deemed
> 'child protection experts/spokespeople'.
They are however well qualified to comment on such issues as: what
support a parent can expect from governments or police forces when their
child goes missing in a foreign country. Most people would probably
assume that the authorities would try very hard to find the child, to
discover the child's fate and to ensure that those responsible are
brought to justice.
Other than that my only view
> is that the child (regardless of her current status) deserves the
> truth.
care of children and should not rest until a missing child is found, or
proved to be dead.
Paul Cummins
Jun 8, 2012, 6:07:00 AM6/8/12
to
We were about to embark at Dover, when lisab...@hotmail.com
Not only are you not demonstrating you meet it, but you are also
demonstrating a breach of the conditions by telling us what you claim was
disclosed.
"Sarah’s Law" permits parents to ask the police if someone with regular,
unsupervised access to their children has a record for child sex offences.
If a person is given the information, she will be asked to keep it
confidential – and could face civil or criminal action if she does not.
So, again, are you going to tell me who the MAPPA/PPO officer was, or am
I going to contact Mr Oldfield and offer to be a NPOV witness against you
for his harassment claim?
--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
(totallyconfused) came up to me and whispered:
> Or if his name was meantioned as part of 'the plan' of a third
> party.
No. The basis of disclosure is clear.
> party.
Not only are you not demonstrating you meet it, but you are also
demonstrating a breach of the conditions by telling us what you claim was
disclosed.
"Sarah’s Law" permits parents to ask the police if someone with regular,
unsupervised access to their children has a record for child sex offences.
If a person is given the information, she will be asked to keep it
confidential – and could face civil or criminal action if she does not.
So, again, are you going to tell me who the MAPPA/PPO officer was, or am
I going to contact Mr Oldfield and offer to be a NPOV witness against you
for his harassment claim?
--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
IF you think this http://bit.ly/u5EP3p is cruel
please sign this http://bit.ly/sKkzEx
totallyconfused
Jun 8, 2012, 6:14:12 AM6/8/12
to
>
> Not quite the way I'd put it. Any civilised society should take good
> care of children and should not rest until a missing child is found, or
> proved to be dead.- Hide quoted text -
> Not quite the way I'd put it. Any civilised society should take good
> care of children and should not rest until a missing child is found, or
>
> - Show quoted text -
There we go- back to agreeing again:)
> - Show quoted text -
TC
totallyconfused
Jun 8, 2012, 6:23:38 AM6/8/12
to
On Jun 8, 11:07 am, useth...@stedtelephone.invalid (Paul Cummins)
wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when lisabar...@hotmail.com
TC
wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when lisabar...@hotmail.com
> (totallyconfused) came up to me and whispered:
>
> > Or if his name was meantioned as part of 'the plan' of a third
> > party.
>
> No. The basis of disclosure is clear.
>
> Not only are you not demonstrating you meet it, but you are also
> demonstrating a breach of the conditions by telling us what you claim was
> disclosed.
>
> "Sarah s Law" permits parents to ask the police if someone with regular,
> unsupervised access to their children has a record for child sex offences.
> If a person is given the information, she will be asked to keep it
> confidential and could face civil or criminal action if she does not.
>
> So, again, are you going to tell me who the MAPPA/PPO officer was, or am
> I going to contact Mr Oldfield and offer to be a NPOV witness against you
> for his harassment claim?
>
> --
> Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
> Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
>
> > Or if his name was meantioned as part of 'the plan' of a third
> > party.
>
> No. The basis of disclosure is clear.
>
> Not only are you not demonstrating you meet it, but you are also
> demonstrating a breach of the conditions by telling us what you claim was
> disclosed.
>
> "Sarah s Law" permits parents to ask the police if someone with regular,
> unsupervised access to their children has a record for child sex offences.
> If a person is given the information, she will be asked to keep it
> confidential and could face civil or criminal action if she does not.
>
> So, again, are you going to tell me who the MAPPA/PPO officer was, or am
> I going to contact Mr Oldfield and offer to be a NPOV witness against you
> for his harassment claim?
>
> --
> Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
> Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
> IF you think thishttp://bit.ly/u5EP3pis cruel
> please sign thishttp://bit.ly/sKkzEx
>
> ---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----
Go ahead
> ---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----
TC
The Todal
Jun 8, 2012, 6:27:21 AM6/8/12
to
extremely unimpressed. I see lots of words, a veritable cesspit of
verbal diarrhoea, and I have the impression that lots of people with
nothing to do just exchange lame poems and silly ideas. I couldn't find
any clear statement of what the authors believe actually happened, let
alone any proof that they have any original ideas or new evidence.
I can very well believe that if you happen to be Portuguese you will
resent any criticism of your police or government when it comes from
foreigners, particularly those who once regarded your country as a colony.
I can also believe that any parents who were initially upset and shocked
by the abduction would like to console themselves by thinking that the
world really isn't that bad, that their children are probably safe, and
that those who lose their children generally do so by carelessness or
because they have secretly murderered them.
And most people love a whodunnit and like to guess what the answer is.
Mel Rowing
Jun 8, 2012, 6:53:28 AM6/8/12
to
On Jun 8, 10:25 am, The Todal <deadmail...@beeb.net> wrote:
You can't beat a good barney on usenet!
Sets you up for the day!
Mel Rowing
Jun 8, 2012, 6:35:50 AM6/8/12
to
On Jun 8, 10:04 am, totallyconfused <lisabar...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 8, 9:19 am, Mel Rowing <mel.row...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> The source of what I posted is a site called associatepublisher. It
> has a section by chapter describing 'the main content' of each section/
> chapter. I also have met people who know the family and seem to be
> reliable.
"Sorry, the website associatepublisher. cannot be found"
> On Jun 8, 9:19 am, Mel Rowing <mel.row...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> The source of what I posted is a site called associatepublisher. It
> has a section by chapter describing 'the main content' of each section/
> chapter. I also have met people who know the family and seem to be
> reliable.
> Sorry that her halo has dropped.
presented so far that suggest this story to be anything other than
baloney. If you are going to indulge in character assisination like
this then you must be prepared to offer more. Raw belief is
insufficient.
> I do have sympathy for the woman. However, I am uncomfortable with
> how she has manipulated the public (by allowing herself to be
> manipulated by the press) and created this hysteria over child
> protection and paedogeddon to be such an influence on the law and and
> how people treat their children.
mainipulated ? I haven't! This lady has pursued a campaign somewhat
sucessfully for which she in being granted token recognition. So
what ?
Paul Cummins
Jun 8, 2012, 6:56:00 AM6/8/12
to
We were about to embark at Dover, when lisab...@hotmail.com
In other words, you are not prepared to substantiate your comments
because you KNOW they are lies, you KNOW the information you claim has
not been passed to you and you KNOW ythat you have been caught with your
knickers down on this occasion, so to speak.
Nigel, you have my contact details if you wish to progres this via the
usual channels.
--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
(totallyconfused) came up to me and whispered:
> Go ahead
In other words, you are not prepared to substantiate your comments
because you KNOW they are lies, you KNOW the information you claim has
not been passed to you and you KNOW ythat you have been caught with your
knickers down on this occasion, so to speak.
Nigel, you have my contact details if you wish to progres this via the
usual channels.
--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
IF you think this http://bit.ly/u5EP3p is cruel
please sign this http://bit.ly/sKkzEx
totallyconfused
Jun 8, 2012, 7:08:38 AM6/8/12
to
On Jun 8, 11:56 am, useth...@stedtelephone.invalid (Paul Cummins)
wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when lisabar...@hotmail.com
substantiate them in front of a court..not on some anonymous usenet
group.
TC
wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when lisabar...@hotmail.com
> (totallyconfused) came up to me and whispered:
>
> > Go ahead
>
> In other words, you are not prepared to substantiate your comments
> because you KNOW they are lies, you KNOW the information you claim has
> not been passed to you and you KNOW ythat you have been caught with your
> knickers down on this occasion, so to speak.
>
> Nigel, you have my contact details if you wish to progres this via the
> usual channels.
>
> --
> Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
> Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
>
> > Go ahead
>
> In other words, you are not prepared to substantiate your comments
> because you KNOW they are lies, you KNOW the information you claim has
> not been passed to you and you KNOW ythat you have been caught with your
> knickers down on this occasion, so to speak.
>
> Nigel, you have my contact details if you wish to progres this via the
> usual channels.
>
> --
> Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
> Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
> IF you think thishttp://bit.ly/u5EP3pis cruel
> please sign thishttp://bit.ly/sKkzEx
>
> ---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----
No....I have fact on my side. As I said, go ahead. I am prepared to
> ---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----
substantiate them in front of a court..not on some anonymous usenet
group.
TC
Fredxx
Jun 8, 2012, 7:33:45 AM6/8/12
to
Perhaps it's because you'd rather hide behind immunity, of being a
witness in court, to avoid any case of libel against you.
It is a shame that you won't answer a simple question, or retract your
claim.
Fredxx
Jun 8, 2012, 7:40:09 AM6/8/12
to
On 08/06/2012 11:35, Mel Rowing wrote:
> On Jun 8, 10:04 am, totallyconfused<lisabar...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On Jun 8, 9:19 am, Mel Rowing<mel.row...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>> The source of what I posted is a site called associatepublisher. It
>> has a section by chapter describing 'the main content' of each section/
>> chapter. I also have met people who know the family and seem to be
>> reliable.
>
> "Sorry, the website associatepublisher. cannot be found"
I was hoping to find some evidence but like you can't find any. It is
> On Jun 8, 10:04 am, totallyconfused<lisabar...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On Jun 8, 9:19 am, Mel Rowing<mel.row...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>> The source of what I posted is a site called associatepublisher. It
>> has a section by chapter describing 'the main content' of each section/
>> chapter. I also have met people who know the family and seem to be
>> reliable.
>
> "Sorry, the website associatepublisher. cannot be found"
possible the articles did exist but have been since pulled for being
libellous.
Perhaps TC can point us to a current website.
totallyconfused
Jun 8, 2012, 7:51:04 AM6/8/12
to
>
> - Show quoted text -
Why would I foot the fees? As I said, if he choses not to believe me
> - Show quoted text -
and make accusations calling me a liar, then let him pursue action. I
am not afraid of being accused of libel as I have not libeled anyone.
However, Mr. Cummins has called me many names which can be deemed
sexist, racist and personal abuse. So I am sure if he wishes to
proceed, he will make an excellent defence counsel and witness for the
prosecution.
TC
Paul Cummins
Jun 8, 2012, 7:47:00 AM6/8/12
to
We were about to embark at Dover, when lisab...@hotmail.com
publish it here.
If you do not do so, but continue to post, I will ask your ISP (sky.com)
to provide it under section 35 of the Data Protection Act.
Alternatively I will expend effort on discovering it by other lawful
means, and bill you for the cost of doing so in proceedings. Given that
you appear to live in Bridgend/Cardiff area, I wonder why you would
*still* be claiming to have knowledge of a guy entirely unrelated to you
who lives in Yorkshire, more than 200 miles away.
> not on some anonymous usenet group.
Ah, you see, that's where you are wrong. Usenet is not anonymous. And I
am certainly not - my posting history is available, unhidden for all to
see. My contact details are vaild, and if you goggle hard enough you'll
find phone numbers and addresses (admittedly not my curent address
though)
So the only anonymous one here is you, Ms Bartal. And even then, not that
anonymous...
--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
(totallyconfused) came up to me and whispered:
> I am prepared to
> substantiate them in front of a court
The please provide an address for service. You can either email me or
> substantiate them in front of a court
publish it here.
If you do not do so, but continue to post, I will ask your ISP (sky.com)
to provide it under section 35 of the Data Protection Act.
Alternatively I will expend effort on discovering it by other lawful
means, and bill you for the cost of doing so in proceedings. Given that
you appear to live in Bridgend/Cardiff area, I wonder why you would
*still* be claiming to have knowledge of a guy entirely unrelated to you
who lives in Yorkshire, more than 200 miles away.
> not on some anonymous usenet group.
am certainly not - my posting history is available, unhidden for all to
see. My contact details are vaild, and if you goggle hard enough you'll
find phone numbers and addresses (admittedly not my curent address
though)
So the only anonymous one here is you, Ms Bartal. And even then, not that
anonymous...
--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
IF you think this http://bit.ly/u5EP3p is cruel
please sign this http://bit.ly/sKkzEx
Paul Cummins
Jun 8, 2012, 7:51:00 AM6/8/12
to
We were about to embark at Dover, when fre...@nospam.com (Fredxx) came up
to me and whispered:
> Perhaps TC can point us to a current website.
I think it's unlikely - she's a dumb, shit-stirring yank who can't even
lie convincingly.
to me and whispered:
> Perhaps TC can point us to a current website.
lie convincingly.
Cynic
Jun 8, 2012, 8:05:45 AM6/8/12
to
On Thu, 07 Jun 2012 20:22:31 +0100, Nigel Oldfield
<WMCritica...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> People on the SOR are told that the police *will* disclose all their
>> history to anyone the offender has frequent contact with, if there is
>> a risk of the offender gaining access to a child via that contact.
>None of that is the case here.
<WMCritica...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> People on the SOR are told that the police *will* disclose all their
>> history to anyone the offender has frequent contact with, if there is
>> a risk of the offender gaining access to a child via that contact.
It most certainly is.
Start a relationship with a woman who has a young daughter, Nige, and
your PPO is perfectly entitled to disclose as much of your PNC record
and risk-assessment results as the PPO considers necessary in order to
protect the child (the PPO may have to justify why they considered it
to be necessary).
I'm surprised you think it is not permitted.
--
Cynic
Paul Cummins
Jun 8, 2012, 8:09:00 AM6/8/12
to
We were about to embark at Dover, when lisab...@hotmail.com
> racist
But unless stirrring up racial hatred, also not a crime known to British
Law.
> personal abuse.
Again, not a crime known to British Law.
Wheras deliberate and malicious communication is a crime known to British
Law, and every time you publish any lies about Oldfield, you are
committing it.
Address for Service please?
--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
(totallyconfused) came up to me and whispered:
> However, Mr. Cummins has called me many names which can be
> deemed sexist,
Not a crime known to British Law
> deemed sexist,
> racist
But unless stirrring up racial hatred, also not a crime known to British
Law.
> personal abuse.
Again, not a crime known to British Law.
Wheras deliberate and malicious communication is a crime known to British
Law, and every time you publish any lies about Oldfield, you are
committing it.
Address for Service please?
--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
IF you think this http://bit.ly/u5EP3p is cruel
please sign this http://bit.ly/sKkzEx
Cynic
Jun 8, 2012, 8:17:47 AM6/8/12
to
On Fri, 8 Jun 2012 01:47 +0100 (BST), uset...@stedtelephone.invalid
(Paul Cummins) wrote:
>We were about to embark at Dover, when lisab...@hotmail.com
>(totallyconfused) came up to me and whispered:
>> EXACTLY. That is why THEY contacted ME in this instance.
>But they wouldn't, unless you were associating with Mr Oldfield...
"Association" does not need to involve having any physical contact.
(Paul Cummins) wrote:
>We were about to embark at Dover, when lisab...@hotmail.com
>(totallyconfused) came up to me and whispered:
>> EXACTLY. That is why THEY contacted ME in this instance.
>But they wouldn't, unless you were associating with Mr Oldfield...
--
Cynic
Fredxx
Jun 8, 2012, 8:26:51 AM6/8/12
to
you make unsubstantiated claims forgive us for not believing you.
With your sky-high IQ, I'm genuinely surprised that you aren't aware of
the consequences of making a claim saying the evidence is on a defunct
or imaginary website, and still expect to receive respect from writers
and stalkers of this newsgroup.
I'm fast becoming of the opinion that IQ is no substitute for judgement
and foresight.
The Todal
Jun 8, 2012, 8:42:38 AM6/8/12
to
On 8/6/12 12:47, Paul Cummins wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when lisab...@hotmail.com
> (totallyconfused) came up to me and whispered:
>
>> I am prepared to
>> substantiate them in front of a court
>
> The please provide an address for service. You can either email me or
> publish it here.
>
> If you do not do so, but continue to post, I will ask your ISP (sky.com)
> to provide it under section 35 of the Data Protection Act.
>
> Alternatively I will expend effort on discovering it by other lawful
> means, and bill you for the cost of doing so in proceedings. Given that
> you appear to live in Bridgend/Cardiff area, I wonder why you would
> *still* be claiming to have knowledge of a guy entirely unrelated to you
> who lives in Yorkshire, more than 200 miles away.
>
I've lost track of what this argument is about. Are you saying that she
> We were about to embark at Dover, when lisab...@hotmail.com
> (totallyconfused) came up to me and whispered:
>
>> I am prepared to
>> substantiate them in front of a court
>
> The please provide an address for service. You can either email me or
> publish it here.
>
> If you do not do so, but continue to post, I will ask your ISP (sky.com)
> to provide it under section 35 of the Data Protection Act.
>
> Alternatively I will expend effort on discovering it by other lawful
> means, and bill you for the cost of doing so in proceedings. Given that
> you appear to live in Bridgend/Cardiff area, I wonder why you would
> *still* be claiming to have knowledge of a guy entirely unrelated to you
> who lives in Yorkshire, more than 200 miles away.
>
has defamed *you* or Mr Oldfield? If the latter, how can you expect to
act on Mr Oldfield's behalf?
Paul Cummins
Jun 8, 2012, 9:23:00 AM6/8/12
to
We were about to embark at Dover, when deadm...@beeb.net (The Todal)
that alone.
--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
came up to me and whispered:
> Are you saying that she
> has defamed *you* or Mr Oldfield? If the latter, how can you
> expect to act on Mr Oldfield's behalf?
I say she's breaking the law by Malicious Communication. I can act on
> has defamed *you* or Mr Oldfield? If the latter, how can you
> expect to act on Mr Oldfield's behalf?
that alone.
--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
IF you think this http://bit.ly/u5EP3p is cruel
please sign this http://bit.ly/sKkzEx
Nigel Oldfield
Jun 8, 2012, 10:14:18 AM6/8/12
to
On 08/06/2012 11:56, Paul Cummins wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when lisab...@hotmail.com
> (totallyconfused) came up to me and whispered:
>
>> Go ahead
>
> In other words, you are not prepared to substantiate your comments
> because you KNOW they are lies, you KNOW the information you claim has
> not been passed to you and you KNOW ythat you have been caught with your
> knickers down on this occasion, so to speak.
>
> Nigel, you have my contact details if you wish to progres this via the
> usual channels.
Thank you for your offer of assistance.
> We were about to embark at Dover, when lisab...@hotmail.com
> (totallyconfused) came up to me and whispered:
>
>> Go ahead
>
> In other words, you are not prepared to substantiate your comments
> because you KNOW they are lies, you KNOW the information you claim has
> not been passed to you and you KNOW ythat you have been caught with your
> knickers down on this occasion, so to speak.
>
> Nigel, you have my contact details if you wish to progres this via the
> usual channels.
Preliminary communications have taken place, regarding obtaining a copy
of the relevant parts of 'the transcript' - or if it even exists, and
are now being pursued, formally.
WM
Nigel Oldfield
Jun 8, 2012, 10:30:20 AM6/8/12
to
The first thing is this, I did not start any such 'relationship', Ms B
contacted me, knowing, very well, my history (and present, at the time),
but let us say I did.
Ms B's children are no longer in her 'possession' and have not been for
some time.
The PPO need not disclose anything to Ms B, I have done so many times,
to Ms B, and every PPO is aware of it; legal action is still available,
against the police, for disproportionate (i.e. illegal) disclosure; they
are very careful on such matters, for many obvious reasons.
If they have 'transcripts' of what named individuals have 'said'
(clearly not illegal, by any measure), they, certainly, they have them
from Ms B - as do we.
I am almost certain, that in her 'confusions', that Ms B is confusing me
with another person, of which I am aware; 'the transcript' will clarify
this.
This is all moot, as I work with the authorities on these matters, not
against them; as they are well aware.
At this time, this is not about Ms B or me, this is about 'the transcript'.
WM
Nigel Oldfield
Jun 8, 2012, 10:31:57 AM6/8/12
to
On 08/06/2012 09:19, Mel Rowing wrote:
>
> Equally "apparently" you have not even read the book. Neither have I!
> However, what few reviews I can find of it offer nothing but sympathy
I have the book - and others.
>
> Equally "apparently" you have not even read the book. Neither have I!
> However, what few reviews I can find of it offer nothing but sympathy
WM
Paul Cummins
Jun 8, 2012, 3:48:00 PM6/8/12
to
We were about to embark at Dover, when uset...@stedtelephone.invalid
(Paul Cummins) came up to me and whispered:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when lisab...@hotmail.com
> (totallyconfused) came up to me and whispered:
>
> > I am prepared to
> > substantiate them in front of a court
>
> The please provide an address for service. You can either email
> me or
> publish it here.
What a surprise. Since I asked for the Address, and demonstrated how easy
it would be to find, she's gone all quiet.
Maybe not so dumb after all...
(Paul Cummins) came up to me and whispered:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when lisab...@hotmail.com
> (totallyconfused) came up to me and whispered:
>
> > I am prepared to
> > substantiate them in front of a court
>
> The please provide an address for service. You can either email
> me or
> publish it here.
it would be to find, she's gone all quiet.
Maybe not so dumb after all...
totallyconfused
Jun 8, 2012, 4:10:40 PM6/8/12
to
On Jun 8, 8:48 pm, useth...@stedtelephone.invalid (Paul Cummins)
wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when useth...@stedtelephone.invalid
TC
wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when useth...@stedtelephone.invalid
> (Paul Cummins) came up to me and whispered:
>
> > We were about to embark at Dover, when lisabar...@hotmail.com
>
> > (totallyconfused) came up to me and whispered:
>
> > > I am prepared to
> > > substantiate them in front of a court
>
> > The please provide an address for service. You can either email
> > me or
> > publish it here.
>
> What a surprise. Since I asked for the Address, and demonstrated how easy
> it would be to find, she's gone all quiet.
>
> Maybe not so dumb after all...
>
> --
> Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
> Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
>
> > > I am prepared to
> > > substantiate them in front of a court
>
> > The please provide an address for service. You can either email
> > me or
> > publish it here.
>
> What a surprise. Since I asked for the Address, and demonstrated how easy
> it would be to find, she's gone all quiet.
>
> Maybe not so dumb after all...
>
> --
> Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
> Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
> IF you think thishttp://bit.ly/u5EP3pis cruel
> please sign thishttp://bit.ly/sKkzEx
>
> ---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----
Nope...you just bore me.
> ---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----
TC
Paul Cummins
Jun 8, 2012, 6:18:00 PM6/8/12
to
We were about to embark at Dover, when lisab...@hotmail.com
Ah well... People who want to remain anonymous shouldn't be on Twitter
and Linked-In.
Why did you dissolve company number 6506448.
Do you still live at that registered address - your "Directors Report"
says you do, and number 33 hasn't been on the market since 1996 according
to the Land Registry. What a pity that it looks like Tract Houses at your
end of the street.
How easy is it to get out of the driveway when you are on the roundabout
like that?
Apparently your house is worth about £230,000. That's a nice value to get
a Charging Order on.
I believe I now have an address for sevice, from publicly available
sources. I fancy another drive to Porthcawl once I've typed a formal
Letter of Claim.
By the way, it's not nice to be on the receiving end, is it?
--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
(totallyconfused) came up to me and whispered:
>
> Nope...you just bore me.
>
Ah well... People who want to remain anonymous shouldn't be on Twitter
and Linked-In.
Why did you dissolve company number 6506448.
Do you still live at that registered address - your "Directors Report"
says you do, and number 33 hasn't been on the market since 1996 according
to the Land Registry. What a pity that it looks like Tract Houses at your
end of the street.
How easy is it to get out of the driveway when you are on the roundabout
like that?
Apparently your house is worth about £230,000. That's a nice value to get
a Charging Order on.
I believe I now have an address for sevice, from publicly available
sources. I fancy another drive to Porthcawl once I've typed a formal
Letter of Claim.
By the way, it's not nice to be on the receiving end, is it?
--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
IF you think this http://bit.ly/u5EP3p is cruel
please sign this http://bit.ly/sKkzEx
totallyconfused
Jun 8, 2012, 7:39:27 PM6/8/12
to
On Jun 8, 11:18 pm, useth...@stedtelephone.invalid (Paul Cummins)
wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when lisabar...@hotmail.com
there.
TC
wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when lisabar...@hotmail.com
> (totallyconfused) came up to me and whispered:
>
>
>
> > Nope...you just bore me.
>
> Ah well... People who want to remain anonymous shouldn't be on Twitter
> and Linked-In.
>
> Why did you dissolve company number 6506448.
>
> Do you still live at that registered address - your "Directors Report"
> says you do, and number 33 hasn't been on the market since 1996 according
> to the Land Registry. What a pity that it looks like Tract Houses at your
> end of the street.
>
> How easy is it to get out of the driveway when you are on the roundabout
> like that?
>
> Apparently your house is worth about £230,000. That's a nice value to get
> a Charging Order on.
>
> I believe I now have an address for sevice, from publicly available
> sources. I fancy another drive to Porthcawl once I've typed a formal
> Letter of Claim.
>
> By the way, it's not nice to be on the receiving end, is it?
>
> --
> Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
> Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
>
>
>
> > Nope...you just bore me.
>
> Ah well... People who want to remain anonymous shouldn't be on Twitter
> and Linked-In.
>
> Why did you dissolve company number 6506448.
>
> Do you still live at that registered address - your "Directors Report"
> says you do, and number 33 hasn't been on the market since 1996 according
> to the Land Registry. What a pity that it looks like Tract Houses at your
> end of the street.
>
> How easy is it to get out of the driveway when you are on the roundabout
> like that?
>
> Apparently your house is worth about £230,000. That's a nice value to get
> a Charging Order on.
>
> I believe I now have an address for sevice, from publicly available
> sources. I fancy another drive to Porthcawl once I've typed a formal
> Letter of Claim.
>
> By the way, it's not nice to be on the receiving end, is it?
>
> --
> Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
> Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
> IF you think thishttp://bit.ly/u5EP3pis cruel
> please sign thishttp://bit.ly/sKkzEx
>
> ---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----
Go for it...you will be making a fool of yourself-so nothing new
> ---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----
there.
TC
totallyconfused
Jun 11, 2012, 9:24:52 AM6/11/12
to
On Jun 8, 11:18 pm, useth...@stedtelephone.invalid (Paul Cummins)
wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when lisabar...@hotmail.com
I will just make a few comments: my teenage son told me there are Men
who pretend to be American on the internet to impress young girls;
discussing their love of surfing, swimming....you know like water
sport.
So where is your service letter of claim?
I am here and in great British tradition have the kettle on. So 72
hours later, since you got so insensed about the issue......where are
you.
TC
wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when lisabar...@hotmail.com
> (totallyconfused) came up to me and whispered:
>
>
>
> > Nope...you just bore me.
>
> Ah well... People who want to remain anonymous shouldn't be on Twitter
> and Linked-In.
>
> Why did you dissolve company number 6506448.
>
> Do you still live at that registered address - your "Directors Report"
> says you do, and number 33 hasn't been on the market since 1996 according
> to the Land Registry. What a pity that it looks like Tract Houses at your
> end of the street.
>
> How easy is it to get out of the driveway when you are on the roundabout
> like that?
>
> Apparently your house is worth about £230,000. That's a nice value to get
> a Charging Order on.
>
> I believe I now have an address for sevice, from publicly available
> sources. I fancy another drive to Porthcawl once I've typed a formal
> Letter of Claim.
>
> By the way, it's not nice to be on the receiving end, is it?
>
> --
> Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
> Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
>
>
>
> > Nope...you just bore me.
>
> Ah well... People who want to remain anonymous shouldn't be on Twitter
> and Linked-In.
>
> Why did you dissolve company number 6506448.
>
> Do you still live at that registered address - your "Directors Report"
> says you do, and number 33 hasn't been on the market since 1996 according
> to the Land Registry. What a pity that it looks like Tract Houses at your
> end of the street.
>
> How easy is it to get out of the driveway when you are on the roundabout
> like that?
>
> Apparently your house is worth about £230,000. That's a nice value to get
> a Charging Order on.
>
> I believe I now have an address for sevice, from publicly available
> sources. I fancy another drive to Porthcawl once I've typed a formal
> Letter of Claim.
>
> By the way, it's not nice to be on the receiving end, is it?
>
> --
> Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
> Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
> IF you think thishttp://bit.ly/u5EP3pis cruel
> please sign thishttp://bit.ly/sKkzEx
>
> ---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----
So where are you? I have been calm and ready for your arrival.
> ---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----
I will just make a few comments: my teenage son told me there are Men
who pretend to be American on the internet to impress young girls;
discussing their love of surfing, swimming....you know like water
sport.
So where is your service letter of claim?
I am here and in great British tradition have the kettle on. So 72
hours later, since you got so insensed about the issue......where are
you.
TC
totallyconfused
Jun 11, 2012, 9:27:16 AM6/11/12
to
>
> - Show quoted text -
sorry should have said 'incensed'.TC
> - Show quoted text -
Paul Cummins
Jun 11, 2012, 11:31:00 AM6/11/12
to
We were about to embark at Dover, when lisab...@hotmail.com
across such men...
Personally, I can't stand surfing, or many water sports, either in the
natural or sexual meaning.
And why anyone would pretend do be American is beyond me. Hell some
americans don't even want to be, like Boris, and, apparently, yourself.
If you are concerned about your Teenage son meeting such men, I suggest
you stop him from using the internet.
--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
(totallyconfused) came up to me and whispered:
> my teenage son told me there are Men who pretend to be American on
> the internet to impress young girls; discussing their love of
> surfing, swimming....you know like water sport.
Really - how fascinating. I shall ask my partner if she has ever come
> the internet to impress young girls; discussing their love of
> surfing, swimming....you know like water sport.
across such men...
Personally, I can't stand surfing, or many water sports, either in the
natural or sexual meaning.
And why anyone would pretend do be American is beyond me. Hell some
americans don't even want to be, like Boris, and, apparently, yourself.
If you are concerned about your Teenage son meeting such men, I suggest
you stop him from using the internet.
--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
IF you think this http://bit.ly/u5EP3p is cruel
please sign this http://bit.ly/sKkzEx
totallyconfused
Jun 11, 2012, 11:59:00 AM6/11/12
to
On Jun 11, 4:31 pm, useth...@stedtelephone.invalid (Paul Cummins)
wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when lisabar...@hotmail.com
TC
wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when lisabar...@hotmail.com
> (totallyconfused) came up to me and whispered:
>
> > my teenage son told me there are Men who pretend to be American on
> > the internet to impress young girls; discussing their love of
> > surfing, swimming....you know like water sport.
>
> Really - how fascinating. I shall ask my partner if she has ever come
> across such men...
>
> Personally, I can't stand surfing, or many water sports, either in the
> natural or sexual meaning.
>
> And why anyone would pretend do be American is beyond me. Hell some
> americans don't even want to be, like Boris, and, apparently, yourself.
>
> If you are concerned about your Teenage son meeting such men, I suggest
> you stop him from using the internet.
>
> --
> Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
> Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
>
> > my teenage son told me there are Men who pretend to be American on
> > the internet to impress young girls; discussing their love of
> > surfing, swimming....you know like water sport.
>
> Really - how fascinating. I shall ask my partner if she has ever come
> across such men...
>
> Personally, I can't stand surfing, or many water sports, either in the
> natural or sexual meaning.
>
> And why anyone would pretend do be American is beyond me. Hell some
> americans don't even want to be, like Boris, and, apparently, yourself.
>
> If you are concerned about your Teenage son meeting such men, I suggest
> you stop him from using the internet.
>
> --
> Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
> Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
> IF you think thishttp://bit.ly/u5EP3pis cruel
> please sign thishttp://bit.ly/sKkzEx
>
> ---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----
not according to your press release Paul....try again.
> ---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----
TC
totallyconfused
Jun 11, 2012, 12:02:38 PM6/11/12
to
On Jun 11, 4:31 pm, useth...@stedtelephone.invalid (Paul Cummins)
wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when lisabar...@hotmail.com
TC
wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when lisabar...@hotmail.com
> (totallyconfused) came up to me and whispered:
>
> > my teenage son told me there are Men who pretend to be American on
> > the internet to impress young girls; discussing their love of
> > surfing, swimming....you know like water sport.
>
> Really - how fascinating. I shall ask my partner if she has ever come
> across such men...
>
> Personally, I can't stand surfing, or many water sports, either in the
> natural or sexual meaning.
>
> And why anyone would pretend do be American is beyond me. Hell some
> americans don't even want to be, like Boris, and, apparently, yourself.
>
> If you are concerned about your Teenage son meeting such men, I suggest
> you stop him from using the internet.
>
> --
> Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
> Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
>
> > my teenage son told me there are Men who pretend to be American on
> > the internet to impress young girls; discussing their love of
> > surfing, swimming....you know like water sport.
>
> Really - how fascinating. I shall ask my partner if she has ever come
> across such men...
>
> Personally, I can't stand surfing, or many water sports, either in the
> natural or sexual meaning.
>
> And why anyone would pretend do be American is beyond me. Hell some
> americans don't even want to be, like Boris, and, apparently, yourself.
>
> If you are concerned about your Teenage son meeting such men, I suggest
> you stop him from using the internet.
>
> --
> Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
> Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
> IF you think thishttp://bit.ly/u5EP3pis cruel
> please sign thishttp://bit.ly/sKkzEx
>
> ---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----
So where are you with this 'letter of claim'?
> ---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----
TC
Paul Cummins
Jun 11, 2012, 12:13:00 PM6/11/12
to
We were about to embark at Dover, when lisab...@hotmail.com
Are you really trying to assume that the people knocking on your door are
wearing nice uniforms? Because that's the very dangerous path you are
going down if you are trying to imply anything about my past that you
cannot categorically prove is me.
Your intention is clearly malicious, and your conduct is tending to
incitement...
--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
(totallyconfused) came up to me and whispered:
>
>
> not according to your press release Paul....try again.
I don't have a "press release".
Are you really trying to assume that the people knocking on your door are
wearing nice uniforms? Because that's the very dangerous path you are
going down if you are trying to imply anything about my past that you
cannot categorically prove is me.
Your intention is clearly malicious, and your conduct is tending to
incitement...
--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
IF you think this http://bit.ly/u5EP3p is cruel
please sign this http://bit.ly/sKkzEx
totallyconfused
Jun 11, 2012, 12:16:24 PM6/11/12
to
On Jun 11, 4:31 pm, useth...@stedtelephone.invalid (Paul Cummins)
wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when lisabar...@hotmail.com
Mr Cummins you win the Queen of D-Nile award
You try anything with me and all I have to say is
*Paul Cummins
*Basingstoke
*42 months
* No access unless supervised to your little girl.....
* Judge David Griffiths
Would you wish me to continue?
TC
wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when lisabar...@hotmail.com
> (totallyconfused) came up to me and whispered:
>
> > my teenage son told me there are Men who pretend to be American on
> > the internet to impress young girls; discussing their love of
> > surfing, swimming....you know like water sport.
>
> Really - how fascinating. I shall ask my partner if she has ever come
> across such men...
>
> Personally, I can't stand surfing, or many water sports, either in the
> natural or sexual meaning.
>
> And why anyone would pretend do be American is beyond me. Hell some
> americans don't even want to be, like Boris, and, apparently, yourself.
>
> If you are concerned about your Teenage son meeting such men, I suggest
> you stop him from using the internet.
>
> --
> Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
> Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
>
> > my teenage son told me there are Men who pretend to be American on
> > the internet to impress young girls; discussing their love of
> > surfing, swimming....you know like water sport.
>
> Really - how fascinating. I shall ask my partner if she has ever come
> across such men...
>
> Personally, I can't stand surfing, or many water sports, either in the
> natural or sexual meaning.
>
> And why anyone would pretend do be American is beyond me. Hell some
> americans don't even want to be, like Boris, and, apparently, yourself.
>
> If you are concerned about your Teenage son meeting such men, I suggest
> you stop him from using the internet.
>
> --
> Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
> Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
> IF you think thishttp://bit.ly/u5EP3pis cruel
> please sign thishttp://bit.ly/sKkzEx
>
> ---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----
obviously you can't read or won't
> ---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----
Mr Cummins you win the Queen of D-Nile award
You try anything with me and all I have to say is
*Paul Cummins
*Basingstoke
*42 months
* No access unless supervised to your little girl.....
* Judge David Griffiths
Would you wish me to continue?
TC
Paul Cummins
Jun 11, 2012, 1:00:00 PM6/11/12
to
We were about to embark at Dover, when lisab...@hotmail.com
that spurious report to me, and they have turned up with nothing for
their trouble.
The report apparently comes from the Basingstoke Gazette, yet it is not
available on their website. The photograph is not of me, and I do not
have such an order against me restricting me from using chat rooms or
anything of the sort, either from Winchester Crown Court or anywhere
else.
Many people have tried to scare me off Usenet with that bullshit story,
and have tried, and failed, to link me to it. Many people have tried to
intimidate me by publishing it again and again. I am still here, they
keep losing their ISP and internet Access.
Now, given you seem to be developing a history of harassing those you
believe (rightly or wrongly) to be Sex Offenders in a public forum like
this where one of your "targets" already has sufficient information to
turn up on, or ask Police to turn up on your doorstep, are you sure YOU
want to continue your petty little attempt to intimidate me, Lisa Denise
Bartal?
For the avoidance of doubt, if you continue with your smutty little
allegations, I *will* bring the police into this matter. And then we
shall, once and for all, see whether you have spoken a single word of
truth since starting your vindictive conduct towards NLO and others.
--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
(totallyconfused) came up to me and whispered:
> Would you wish me to continue?
You can continue all you like. Far better men than you have tried to link
that spurious report to me, and they have turned up with nothing for
their trouble.
The report apparently comes from the Basingstoke Gazette, yet it is not
available on their website. The photograph is not of me, and I do not
have such an order against me restricting me from using chat rooms or
anything of the sort, either from Winchester Crown Court or anywhere
else.
Many people have tried to scare me off Usenet with that bullshit story,
and have tried, and failed, to link me to it. Many people have tried to
intimidate me by publishing it again and again. I am still here, they
keep losing their ISP and internet Access.
Now, given you seem to be developing a history of harassing those you
believe (rightly or wrongly) to be Sex Offenders in a public forum like
this where one of your "targets" already has sufficient information to
turn up on, or ask Police to turn up on your doorstep, are you sure YOU
want to continue your petty little attempt to intimidate me, Lisa Denise
Bartal?
For the avoidance of doubt, if you continue with your smutty little
allegations, I *will* bring the police into this matter. And then we
shall, once and for all, see whether you have spoken a single word of
truth since starting your vindictive conduct towards NLO and others.
--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
IF you think this http://bit.ly/u5EP3p is cruel
please sign this http://bit.ly/sKkzEx
totallyconfused
Jun 11, 2012, 1:04:43 PM6/11/12
to
On Jun 11, 5:13 pm, useth...@stedtelephone.invalid (Paul Cummins)
wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when lisabar...@hotmail.com
me papers for 'a letter of claim' et all. Why don't I have them? Why
have I been not been served as per your quote?
I do spot one scared man....much like his friends.
Enjoy
TC
wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when lisabar...@hotmail.com
> (totallyconfused) came up to me and whispered:
>
>
>
> > not according to your press release Paul....try again.
>
> I don't have a "press release".
>
> Are you really trying to assume that the people knocking on your door are
> wearing nice uniforms? Because that's the very dangerous path you are
> going down if you are trying to imply anything about my past that you
> cannot categorically prove is me.
>
> Your intention is clearly malicious, and your conduct is tending to
> incitement...
>
> --
> Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
> Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
>
>
>
> > not according to your press release Paul....try again.
>
> I don't have a "press release".
>
> Are you really trying to assume that the people knocking on your door are
> wearing nice uniforms? Because that's the very dangerous path you are
> going down if you are trying to imply anything about my past that you
> cannot categorically prove is me.
>
> Your intention is clearly malicious, and your conduct is tending to
> incitement...
>
> --
> Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
> Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
> IF you think thishttp://bit.ly/u5EP3pis cruel
> please sign thishttp://bit.ly/sKkzEx
>
> ---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----
You said above over 72 hours ago you were coming to my house to serve
> ---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----
me papers for 'a letter of claim' et all. Why don't I have them? Why
have I been not been served as per your quote?
I do spot one scared man....much like his friends.
Enjoy
TC
totallyconfused
Jun 11, 2012, 12:55:20 PM6/11/12
to
On Jun 11, 5:13 pm, useth...@stedtelephone.invalid (Paul Cummins)
wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when lisabar...@hotmail.com
Knock my door down again with nothing to do with me and will find
nothing,....
Good Luck
TC
wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when lisabar...@hotmail.com
> (totallyconfused) came up to me and whispered:
>
>
>
> > not according to your press release Paul....try again.
>
> I don't have a "press release".
>
> Are you really trying to assume that the people knocking on your door are
> wearing nice uniforms? Because that's the very dangerous path you are
> going down if you are trying to imply anything about my past that you
> cannot categorically prove is me.
>
> Your intention is clearly malicious, and your conduct is tending to
> incitement...
>
> --
> Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
> Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
>
>
>
> > not according to your press release Paul....try again.
>
> I don't have a "press release".
>
> Are you really trying to assume that the people knocking on your door are
> wearing nice uniforms? Because that's the very dangerous path you are
> going down if you are trying to imply anything about my past that you
> cannot categorically prove is me.
>
> Your intention is clearly malicious, and your conduct is tending to
> incitement...
>
> --
> Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
> Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
> IF you think thishttp://bit.ly/u5EP3pis cruel
> please sign thishttp://bit.ly/sKkzEx
>
> ---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----
Incitement to what...so do explain.....where have I been 'malicious?'
> ---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----
Knock my door down again with nothing to do with me and will find
nothing,....
Good Luck
TC
totallyconfused
Jun 11, 2012, 12:55:35 PM6/11/12
to
totallyconfused
Jun 11, 2012, 3:31:08 PM6/11/12
to
On Jun 11, 6:00 pm, useth...@stedtelephone.invalid (Paul Cummins)
wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when lisabar...@hotmail.com
wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when lisabar...@hotmail.com
> IF you think thishttp://bit.ly/u5EP3pis cruel
> please sign thishttp://bit.ly/sKkzEx
>
> ---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----
Bring it on....try.....you will fail.TC
> ---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----
totallyconfused
Jun 11, 2012, 5:02:16 PM6/11/12
to
Paul Cummins
Jun 11, 2012, 5:33:00 PM6/11/12
to
We were about to embark at Dover, when lisab...@hotmail.com
--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
(totallyconfused) came up to me and whispered:
> I do spot one scared man....much like his friends.
Which friends?
--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
IF you think this http://bit.ly/u5EP3p is cruel
please sign this http://bit.ly/sKkzEx
totallyconfused
Jun 11, 2012, 6:16:00 PM6/11/12
to
On Jun 11, 10:33 pm, useth...@stedtelephone.invalid (Paul Cummins)
wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when lisabar...@hotmail.com
wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when lisabar...@hotmail.com
> (totallyconfused) came up to me and whispered:
>
> > I do spot one scared man....much like his friends.
>
> Which friends?
>
> --
> Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
> Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
>
> > I do spot one scared man....much like his friends.
>
> Which friends?
>
> --
> Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
> Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
> IF you think thishttp://bit.ly/u5EP3pis cruel
> please sign thishttp://bit.ly/sKkzEx
>
> ---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----
> ---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----
totallyconfused
Jun 11, 2012, 6:20:23 PM6/11/12
to
On Jun 11, 6:00 pm, useth...@stedtelephone.invalid (Paul Cummins)
wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when lisabar...@hotmail.com
Good Luck
TC
wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when lisabar...@hotmail.com
> IF you think thishttp://bit.ly/u5EP3pis cruel
> please sign thishttp://bit.ly/sKkzEx
>
> ---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----
Phone the police and serve me...i have informed them- in preparation.
> ---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----
Good Luck
TC
totallyconfused
Jun 11, 2012, 6:04:39 PM6/11/12
to
On Jun 11, 10:33 pm, useth...@stedtelephone.invalid (Paul Cummins)
wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when lisabar...@hotmail.com
wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when lisabar...@hotmail.com
> (totallyconfused) came up to me and whispered:
>
> > I do spot one scared man....much like his friends.
>
> Which friends?
>
> --
> Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
> Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
>
> > I do spot one scared man....much like his friends.
>
> Which friends?
>
> --
> Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
> Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
> IF you think thishttp://bit.ly/u5EP3pis cruel
> please sign thishttp://bit.ly/sKkzEx
>
> ---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----
That would be you Bitch
> ---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----
Paul Cummins
Jun 11, 2012, 9:06:00 PM6/11/12
to
We were about to embark at Dover, when lisab...@hotmail.com
bortaS bIr jablu'DI' reH QaQqu' nay'
--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
(totallyconfused) came up to me and whispered:
>
>
> You said above over 72 hours ago you were coming to my house to
> serve me papers for 'a letter of claim' et all. Why don't I have
> them?
Because I have six years. Wonder when they will arrive...
> serve me papers for 'a letter of claim' et all. Why don't I have
> them?
bortaS bIr jablu'DI' reH QaQqu' nay'
--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
IF you think this http://bit.ly/u5EP3p is cruel
please sign this http://bit.ly/sKkzEx
Paul Cummins
Jun 11, 2012, 9:06:00 PM6/11/12
to
We were about to embark at Dover, when lisab...@hotmail.com
Oh, no, you won;t produce that either, because, just as with your claim
to have sopent to NLO's PPO, it's a lie.
--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
(totallyconfused) came up to me and whispered:
> Phone the police and serve me...i have informed them- in
> preparation.
I see - CAD number please? just so I can speak to the right team.
> preparation.
Oh, no, you won;t produce that either, because, just as with your claim
to have sopent to NLO's PPO, it's a lie.
--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
IF you think this http://bit.ly/u5EP3p is cruel
please sign this http://bit.ly/sKkzEx
totallyconfused
Jun 12, 2012, 5:49:52 AM6/12/12
to
On Jun 12, 2:06 am, useth...@stedtelephone.invalid (Paul Cummins)
wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when lisabar...@hotmail.com
TC
wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when lisabar...@hotmail.com
> (totallyconfused) came up to me and whispered:
>
> > Phone the police and serve me...i have informed them- in
> > preparation.
>
> I see - CAD number please? just so I can speak to the right team.
>
> Oh, no, you won;t produce that either, because, just as with your claim
> to have sopent to NLO's PPO, it's a lie.
>
> --
> Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
> Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
>
> > Phone the police and serve me...i have informed them- in
> > preparation.
>
> I see - CAD number please? just so I can speak to the right team.
>
> Oh, no, you won;t produce that either, because, just as with your claim
> to have sopent to NLO's PPO, it's a lie.
>
> --
> Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
> Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
> IF you think thishttp://bit.ly/u5EP3pis cruel
> please sign thishttp://bit.ly/sKkzEx
>
> ---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----
The burden of proof is yours- not mine. Did you not realise this?
> ---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----
TC
Paul Cummins
Jun 12, 2012, 6:46:00 AM6/12/12
to
We were about to embark at Dover, when lisab...@hotmail.com
<plonk>
--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
(totallyconfused) came up to me and whispered:
> The burden of proof is yours- not mine. Did you not realise
> this?
Bored now
> this?
<plonk>
--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
IF you think this http://bit.ly/u5EP3p is cruel
please sign this http://bit.ly/sKkzEx
Martin
Jun 12, 2012, 7:03:19 AM6/12/12
to
On 12/06/2012 10:49, totallyconfused wrote:
> On Jun 12, 2:06 am, useth...@stedtelephone.invalid (Paul Cummins)
> wrote:
>> We were about to embark at Dover, when lisabar...@hotmail.com
>> (totallyconfused) came up to me and whispered:
>>
>>> Phone the police and serve me...i have informed them- in
>>> preparation.
>>
>> I see - CAD number please? just so I can speak to the right team.
>>
>> Oh, no, you won;t produce that either, because, just as with your claim
>> to have sopent to NLO's PPO, it's a lie.
> On Jun 12, 2:06 am, useth...@stedtelephone.invalid (Paul Cummins)
> wrote:
>> We were about to embark at Dover, when lisabar...@hotmail.com
>> (totallyconfused) came up to me and whispered:
>>
>>> Phone the police and serve me...i have informed them- in
>>> preparation.
>>
>> I see - CAD number please? just so I can speak to the right team.
>>
>> Oh, no, you won;t produce that either, because, just as with your claim
>> to have sopent to NLO's PPO, it's a lie.
> The burden of proof is yours- not mine. Did you not realise this?
Actually it isn't, anymore than I can claim there is an invisible pink
unicorn living in my garage. If someone claims I'm lying it is up to me
to provide some evidence.
"What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without
evidence."
You can claim anything you like, but unless you're willing to put up
some evidence for the claim you'll just be dismissed as a nutter. A bit
like the guy who enjoys shouting at everyone at our Saturday market.
0 new messages