The New Talk Back w/ Bob Larson: Greatest Hits CD is dope as fuck.
yumhuyk
with domons, Satanists, witches, faggits, Democrats, Subgenii,
vegetarians and the rest of the scum on the Earth. This brings back
great memories, but also sadness that the MSM refuses to air Talk Back
anymore. Best $40 I ever spent. Get it while supplies last.
http://blmonlinestore.stores.yahoo.net/boblamiat.html
yours in Christ,
isamu
Desertphile
<wost...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Bob went back into the archives and dug up the best of his battles
> with domons, Satanists, witches, faggits, Democrats, Subgenii,
> vegetarians and the rest of the scum on the Earth. This brings back
> great memories, but also sadness that the MSM refuses to air Talk Back
> anymore.
The Christian magazine _Cornerstone_ exposed Larson as a crook and
a liar.
--
http://desertphile.org
Desertphile's Desert Soliloquy. WARNING: view with plenty of water
"Why aren't resurrections from the dead noteworthy?" -- Jim Rutz
Greegor
> a liar.
Squabbles between denominations and even factions
of the same denomination are not anything new.
To some degree they are competitors.
Ideology is often second to that.
I still think yumhuyk is Kent Wills in drag,
Kent apparently hates BL a lot after Kent
tried to infiltrate BL's flock.
Kent Wills
convictions for BEATING his ex-wife), child abuser and self confessed
user and abuser of illegal drugs, Gregory Scott "Piggly Wiggly" Hanson
<gree...@gmail.com> wrote:
KEYWORDS: Gregory Scott Hanson, Lisa Rene Watkins, Kristen Watkins,
Tom Watkins, child abuse, OWI, child molestation, drugs, Greg Hanson,
felony, sexual assault, Donna Joann Hanson, Sandra Lyn Freese, Sandy
Freese, spousal abuse, greegor47, wife beater, sexual assault, James E
Hanson, Jim Hanson, Jimmy Hanson, Kris Watkins
>> The Christian magazine _Cornerstone_ exposed Larson as a crook and
>> a liar.
>
>Squabbles between denominations and even factions
>of the same denomination are not anything new.
>
>To some degree they are competitors.
>Ideology is often second to that.
>
>I still think yumhuyk is Kent Wills in drag,
You also think I live in several different places on the North
American continent, all at the same time.
And it was you who posted with the name Lisa Watkins. Since you
hold that the name by which one posts with MUST BE their name in real
life, well... How long have you dressed as a woman, Greg?
>Kent apparently hates BL a lot after Kent
Hate is far too strong a word.
>tried to infiltrate BL's flock.
First I did, now I only tried.
Pick a lane, stupid.
A select number of items that really are about Gregory Scott "Piggly
Wiggly" Hanson (either directly or through the same standards he
DEMANDS be held to others):
Title: ST VS GREGORY HANSON
(DOB 05/22/1959)
CRIMINAL COMPLAINT 04/10/1996
Comments: CT 1 OWI 1ST
OTHER CITATION 04/10/1996
Comments: CT 2 SPEED
Disposition Status
GUILTY PLEA/DEFAULT
"That's the chick, but not the pic, zipperhead!"
Greg "Piggly Wiggly" Hanson proving his bigotry towards Asians, by
attacking my first wife (deceased).
http://www.rsdb.org/search?q=zipperhead
Me: "I suspect your stalking is due to the use and abuse of illegal
drugs, Greg. Is the reason for your stalking the members of
alt.friends due to the use and abuse of illegal drugs?
Gregory Scott "Piggly Wiggly" Hanson, wife beater and child abuser:
"Of course."
"My family's case is for Neglect, but we are treated
in virtually every regard as child abusers, marked on
the Child Abuse registry, for example."
-- Gregory Scott "Piggly Wiggly" Hanson, wife beater and child
abuser
As of Saturday, March 27, 2010:
SMALL CLAIMS ORIGINAL NOTICE
Comments: OPA $2805.04
COPIES TO PA
VERIFICATION OF ACCOUNT
JUDGEMENT DEFAULT
Comments: JUDGMENT AGAINST GREGORY HANSON FOR $2805.04
+ INTEREST AT 7.271% FROM 8/6/98 & $45.00 COSTS.
Comments: NOTE OF GARN/NOTE TO DEFT SERV 9/24/98 BY WCSD
TO SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT (ED POLKERS) FOR GREG HANSON
FEES $35.60
Gregory Scott "Piggly Wiggly" Hanson has a Garnishment order against
him from Ed Polkers. There is nothing to even suggest any of the
money legally owed has been paid. The SoL on the order has likely
expired, but Greg still can't risk getting a job due to it.
As of Saturday, March 27, 2010:
Financials
Title: STATE OF IOWA VS HANSON, GREG SCOTT
Case: 06571 AGCR015216 (LINN)
Citation Number:
Summary Orig Paid Due
COSTS 9200.00 850.00 8350.00
FINE 500.00 500.00 0.00
SURCHARGE 150.00 150.00 0.00
RESTITUTION 0.00 0.00 0.00
OTHER 0.00 0.00 0.00
$9850.00 $1500.00 $8350.00
Yes, Gregory Scott "Piggly Wiggly" Hanson still owes over
$8000.00 related to his convictions for BEATING his ex-wife.
Me: Hey, he used your standards.
Gregory Scott "Piggly Wiggly" Hanson: It's textbook psychopathic
reasoning.
Greg admitting his standards are psychopathic.
Desertphile
<gree...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > The Christian magazine _Cornerstone_ exposed Larson as a crook and
> > a liar.
> Squabbles between denominations and even factions of the same
> denomination are not anything new.
That's nice.
Bob Larson is an evil bastard who went out of his way to hurt
Christians. He lied about his childhood, lied about his past, and
he swindeled Christians out of their money.
Greegor
wrote:
> [...] Bob Larson is an evil bastard who went
> out of his way to hurt Christians. He lied
> about his childhood, lied about his past, and
> he swindeled Christians out of their money. [...]
If true, Bob Larson would fit right in on usenet!
But you sound like you have a more
PERSONAL kind of grudge.
What did BL do TO YOU?
Come on, with all of the televangelists and
frauds selling religion, why would you
focus on just this one?
With all of the rabid atheists and
obsessive misfits on usenet, posting
through datamas or through a proxy,
do you really think this is NEW??
Kent supposedly was once a paying
member of Bob Larson's flock.
I'd like to know how Kent and BL
had their "falling out".
Was Kent just pretending to be a
believer to inveigle information?
Or was Kent a true believer who was
cast out of BL's ministry because he
continued to deceive people and
conceal his true criminal record?
If BL is the fraud and crook you present, then
why don't you PROVE it to the real world
instead of wasting your time in the usenet
world where lies, smears and deception
are a way of life for Felons and misfits like Kent?
http://www.doc.state.ia.us/InmateInfo.asp?OffenderCd=1155768
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=ia&vol=sc%5C20050506%5C04-0202&invol=1
IN PRINTED LAW BOOKS
West's North Western Reporter
Second Series
A Unit of the National Reporter System
Volume 696 N.W.2d 20,22 (Iowa 2005)
cited BY 06-1812 State v. CARROLL (Iowa 2007)
cited BY 08-0460 State v. Berry (Iowa 2009)
A Home’s Attached Garage Can Be an Occupied Structure
State v. Wills, _____ N.W.2d _____ (Iowa 2005)(No. 31/04-0202)
Kent Bradley Wills argued that his trial attorney was ineffective
because of a failure to move for acquittal and to object to a jury
instruction. Wills argued an attached garage of a residence is a
separate occupied structure from the living quarters of the residence,
and the state failed to prove an element of a burglary charge against
him.
The Supreme Court, Wiggins, J., rejects Wills’ argument. The Court
notes the garage at the home involved in the incident was separated
from the living quarters by a door. The garage is a functional part of
the residence. The garage and living quarters are a single structure.
Under Iowa law (section 702.12, Iowa Code) the residence including the
garage is a single “occupied structure”. The Court writes, “Wills’
claim is without merit. . . . [T]he residence is the one and only
‘occupied structure’ under the facts of this case. Had Wills’ trial
counsel made this objection . . . , it would have been overruled.
Therefore, Wills’ trial counsel is not ineffective for failing to move
for a judgment of acquittal or object to the instruction because there
was no legal basis for the motion or objection.” The district court
decision denying Wills’ ineffective counsel motion is affirmed.
1. State v. Wills, No. 31 / 04-0202 , SUPREME COURT OF IOWA, May 6,
2005, Filed
OVERVIEW: Defendant's conviction for burglary under Iowa Code §
713.5(2) (2003) was affirmed as where defendant entered a garage that
was only separated from the living quarters by a door, the living
quarters including the garage were a single "occupied structure" under
Iowa Code § 702.12.
marston shores
> On Tue, 29 Jun 2010 05:43:59 -0700 (PDT), Greegor
> <gree...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> The Christian magazine _Cornerstone_ exposed Larson as a crook and
>>> a liar.
>
>> Squabbles between denominations and even factions of the same
>> denomination are not anything new.
>
> That's nice.
>
> Bob Larson is an evil bastard who went out of his way to hurt
> Christians. He lied about his childhood, lied about his past, and
> he swindeled Christians out of their money.
>
you and your brother frederic are boyh nutso:
Barbara Schwarz
Mar 23 2005, 11:57 am
Newsgroups: alt.atheism.holysmoke, alt.atheism, alt.religion.christian,
sci.skeptic, alt.true-crime
From: "Barbara Schwarz" <barbara.schw...@gmail.com>
Date: 23 Mar 2005 08:57:58 -0800
Local: Wed, Mar 23 2005 11:57 am
Subject: Re: And more on that Frederic Rice kook
Fredric L. Rice wrote:
Dave Rice posted recently with ID Rev. Desertphile that terrorism isn't
the enemy. That is probably what Al Queda is saying too.
In May, 2004, his twin brother Frederic Rice posted a drawing of the
floor plan to the not-so-secret-any-more
Rice deprogramming center located in the Mojave Desert, and his twin
David cheered that I should be not told where the "documents" are being
hidden. Note that "deprogramming" is depersonalization and a violation
of international human rights.
Here some details what kind of crimes the Rice brothers, who both stole
the name de Rothschild, plan to commit against religious people in
their hideouts: 1) Handsome porch to lure unsuspecting victims into a
false sense of comfort and security.
2) Bedroom, used to have forced sex with the deprogrammee. Video taping
equipment is in here; proceeds of the sale of the video go to fight
Scientology Inc.
3) Brainwashing Center, large TV with lecture tapes on why religion is
evil, hosted by James Randi, Karl Marx, Joseph Lennin, Charles Darwin,
and Frederic Rice. (They forgot to mention Hitler and a battery of
psychs.)
4) Long hallway to sex/video room.
5) Dark windowless closet to lock up uncooperating deprogramees (They
forgot to mention that it will be a torture chamber).
6) Guarded room, manned 24 hours a day.
7) Staff kitchen, deprogrammees are not allowed to eat.
8) Bare room with hard cement flooring. This is where deprogrammees get
only one hour sleep each day, laying in a dirt sheet. Note the tiny
window to prevent escape. (This sort of confirms that the Rice bro's
were something like concentration camp wardens in their past life)
9) Deprogrammer house. Used to hide our victims from family, friends,
and churches until our victims no longer believe in their religion.
Walls are 12 inch brick, to hide screaming of deprogrammees from
neighbors.
Dave Rice informed me: "If you must know, I drew the plans up myself
and sent it to him. (Frederic Rice). Ain't I a clever boy?!"
http://www.skeptictank.org/depro.jpg
They want to build that crime center and concentration camp in the
Mojave Desert, and I assume they will also bury the beheaded or starved
to death or raped to death victims in their backyard.
Below is copied from a PDF file of the www.religiousfreedomwatch.org,
the extemist page 10 of David Touretzy, the bomb and porn instruction
guy:
Robert Clark was arrested in 1990 for hacking into Los Alamos National
Laboratory and has posted bomb threats on the internet.
Zenon Panoussis is hosting websites containing bomb-making instructions
and was a member of the Anti-Olympic Committee which supported bombings
to sabotage the 2004 Olympics. He was arrested in 1999 for verbally
assaulting a police officer.
David Rice suggested in a posting to kill members of the FBI.
Frederic Rice has threatened governmental officials over the Internet.
He also hosts a site where he gives tips on how to kill bikers.
Andreas Heldal-Lund hosts a website with a message board that contains
death threats.
Arnie Lerma is a supporter of the Neo Nazis movement founded by Willis
Carto and is on the Board of Policy of Liberty Lobby, an anti-semitic
organization founded by Carto. He is also associated with the Utopian
Anarchist Party, that promotes the overthrowing of the U.S. government,
the killing of police officers and their website teaches how to build
bombs. Lerma is close to William White, spokesperson of UAP who was
arrested and convicted of battery and carrying a concealed weapons.
also copied from the www.religiousfreedomwatch.org
DAVID RICE
David Rice has done more than talk about harming the Church of
Scientology and its parishioners. He has actively sought the means to
conduct terrorism.
GPS Readings Taken by David Rice & Keith Henson
On July 5, 2000, David Rice was at one of the Church facilities with
Keith Henson and Barbara Graham. It was on that day that Rice took the
GPS (Global Positioning System) readings of various buildings. Rice
later posted this information on the Internet along with a photo and
the coordinates of one of the buildings. He called it "target data".
In his November 2000 Affidavit, Rice gives his false version of the
story on what "happened" on that day when he, Barbara Graham and Keith
Henson were harassing the Church. Rice claims that he used the GPS
device to simulate that it was a tape recorder.
If that was his real intention, then why did he take the actual
readings? In any event, Rice's story is contradicted by a debrief
written by Barbara Graham (a.k.a. Barb Warr) who clearly states that
Rice was taking GPS coordinates and that Keith Henson had them go out
again to repeat this action after a lunch break.
With his false affidavit David Rice was apparently attempting to
protect Keith Henson who had also made threats against the Church. It
is not the first time that Rice attempted to cover up threats against
the Church while blaming the Church for having fabricated the threat.
In July 1999, Rice blamed the Church of Scientology for a bomb threat
that had been made against it several years earlier. Robert Clark,
another avid attacker of the Church, and the person who had actually
made the threat, posted to the Internet the following day that he (Rob
Clark) had been the one who made the bomb threat. Of course Clark was
dishonest enough to only admit his terrorist threat after the statute
of limitations ran out.
David Rice claims to be a computer network systems specialist who used
to live on his "own" boat, Myste, at Dana Point, California. On October
23, 2000 he posted on the Internet that he had sold the boat and was
now in Hana Bay, Maui - one of the Hawaiian islands.
In a November 2000 affidavit, which was posted on the Internet, Rice
confirmed that he has been out of the country and that he was at that
time planning to move on to French Polynesia.
His desire to remain outside United States' legal jurisdiction is
understandable.
Barbara Schwarz
marston shores
> On Mon, 28 Jun 2010 20:56:21 -0700 (PDT), yumhuyk
> <wost...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Bob went back into the archives and dug up the best of his battles
>> with domons, Satanists, witches, faggits, Democrats, Subgenii,
>> vegetarians and the rest of the scum on the Earth. This brings back
>> great memories, but also sadness that the MSM refuses to air Talk Back
>> anymore.
>
> The Christian magazine _Cornerstone_ exposed Larson as a crook and
> a liar.
>
>
you and your bro frederic are certifiable liberal nutters
forevernitefan
> On Jun 29, 12:45 pm, Desertphile <desertph...@invalid-address.net>
> wrote:
>
> > [...] Bob Larson is an evil bastard who went
> > out of his way to hurt Christians. He lied
> > about his childhood, lied about his past, and
> > he swindeled Christians out of their money. [...]
>
> If true, Bob Larson would fit right in on usenet!
Usenet is pretty much passe now.
>
> But you sound like you have a more
> PERSONAL kind of grudge.
> What did BL do TO YOU?
Whomever Desertphile is, he or she can dislike a scuzz like Larson
without having a personal involvement. The stuff on Larson is online
and that's only the obvious stuff.'
>
> Come on, with all of the televangelists and
> frauds selling religion, why would you
> focus on just this one?
Because of his hair plugs?
>
> With all of the rabid atheists and
> obsessive misfits on usenet, posting
> through datamas or through a proxy,
> do you really think this is NEW??
(( Rolls eyes)) The criticism of Larson has been online since at least
1996 or so. The BL usenet group was formed when a group of CAnadain
students who objected to Larson's homophobia decided to band together
and spread the word so when Larson showed his lying face in Canada one
day in his little greed and ego appearances, he got quite a shock when
protesters interrupted and prevented him squeezing money out of the
crowd.
>
> Kent supposedly was once a paying
> member of Bob Larson's flock.
As Kent said, and something you deliberately ignored, when Kent gave
Larson money Larson DID NOT HAVE A CHURCH, so Kent obviously was not a
member of his " flock". One of the many things you obviously either do
not know or choose to ignore is that "Bob Larson Ministries" was
legally a tax exempt religious group but it was NOT a church. As you
have a hard-on about anything connected to Kent Wills, you
spasmodically do posts like the one I am responding to. And in doing
so your ignorance and deliberate lies show more than I or Kent could
say about what type of person you actually are.
>
> I'd like to know how Kent and BL
> had their "falling out".
Its been posted in the alt.fan.bob-larson usenet group Greg. Kent
made no secret of how he was convinced Larson was a liar and a greedy
con man.
>
> Was Kent just pretending to be a
> believer to inveigle information?
Had you actually been combing past posts Kent made in your
cyberstalking him, you would know the answer to that one.
>
> Or was Kent a true believer who was
> cast out of BL's ministry because he
> continued to deceive people and
> conceal his true criminal record?
Lots of distortion in that sentence, but usual for you Greg.
In fact the actual deceiver was and is Bob Larson.
>
> If BL is the fraud and crook you present, then
> why don't you PROVE it to the real world
> instead of wasting your time in the usenet
> world where lies, smears and deception
> are a way of life for Felons and misfits like Kent?
>
Kent is not a felon.
Secondly the evidence of Larson as a fraud and a crook was online
some years ago when Ken Smith had the Bob Larson Fan Club web site.
There is further proof online on various web sites and a number of
other sources I am sure you as the cybertstalker you try to be can
find for yourself.
Wait, you suck at cyberstalking. You often post erroneous info you
think you have found on your online victims. Heck, you couldn't even
operate a Google news search query even with explicit directions
handed to you.
BTW you were charged by your ex-wife with abuse and you have a
number of court cases against you where you have not paid the court
fees. Not to mention how you abused a seven year old girl badly enough
to have your name on a state abuse registry.
Dontcha think that before you call other people criminals that you
might want to clean up your own legal and other violations first?
Moe
yumhuyk
>
> The thing about " Coast to Coast" is that it airs pretty much
> anything,no matter how pathetically dumb it actually is. I remember
This, from a "pagan" who thinks that lighting magick candles will make
teenage bois fall in love with her.
> that after the last Indiana Jones movie came out that the C2C callers
> actually thought the frigging crystal skulls were real and that if you
> gathered twelve of them together, awesome stuff was supposed to
> happen. I sat there listening to that garbage and shook my head in
> wonder at how people can fall for that crap.
>
> moe
Crystal skulls are real, Moe. The Azteks carved them and used them as
vessels for the domon Huitzilopochtli. Staring into the skull will
allow Huitzilopochtli to enter the sorcerer's body and give him powers
of foresight. Multiple examples have been found in excavations of
Aztek temples.
yours in Christ,
isamu
Desertphile
<gree...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 29, 12:45 pm, Desertphile <desertph...@invalid-address.net>
> wrote:
>
> > [...] Bob Larson is an evil bastard who went
> > out of his way to hurt Christians. He lied
> > about his childhood, lied about his past, and
> > he swindeled Christians out of their money. [...]
> If true, Bob Larson would fit right in on usenet!
It's true. _Cornerstone_ documented the crimes and abuses Larson
engaged in, with witnesses, high school records, newspaper
articles, affidavits, photographs.... they proved Larson is a
lying sack of shit. Larson even fakes at least one imaginary
"assasination attempt." The asshole belongs in prison for his
crimes.
Desertphile
<fvr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jun 30, 5:38 pm, Greegor <greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Jun 29, 12:45 pm, Desertphile <desertph...@invalid-address.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > [...] Bob Larson is an evil bastard who went
> > > out of his way to hurt Christians. He lied
> > > about his childhood, lied about his past, and
> > > he swindeled Christians out of their money. [...]
> >
> > If true, Bob Larson would fit right in on usenet!
>
> Usenet is pretty much passe now.
>
> >
> > But you sound like you have a more
> > PERSONAL kind of grudge.
> > What did BL do TO YOU?
>
> Whomever Desertphile is, he or she can dislike a scuzz like Larson
> without having a personal involvement. The stuff on Larson is online
> and that's only the obvious stuff.'
I object to people swindling and robbing other people for the
exact same reason I object to people being abused due to the color
of their skin even if it is different than mine: I am not a
sociopath, therefore I do not have to be a victim of a crime
before I object to the crime.
\
marston shores
> On Wed, 30 Jun 2010 18:11:34 -0700 (PDT), forevernitefan
> <fvr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> On Jun 30, 5:38 pm, Greegor <greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Jun 29, 12:45 pm, Desertphile <desertph...@invalid-address.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> [...] Bob Larson is an evil bastard who went
>>>> out of his way to hurt Christians. He lied
>>>> about his childhood, lied about his past, and
>>>> he swindeled Christians out of their money. [...]
>>> If true, Bob Larson would fit right in on usenet!
>> Usenet is pretty much passe now.
>>
>>> But you sound like you have a more
>>> PERSONAL kind of grudge.
>>> What did BL do TO YOU?
>> Whomever Desertphile is, he or she can dislike a scuzz like Larson
>> without having a personal involvement. The stuff on Larson is online
>> and that's only the obvious stuff.'
>
> I object to people swindling and robbing other people for the
> exact same reason I object to people being abused due to the color
> of their skin even if it is different than mine: I am not a
> sociopath, therefore I do not have to be a victim of a crime
> before I object to the crime.
> \
>
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/anti-religious-extremists/david-rice/
David Rice
in Hana Bay, Maui – one of the Hawaiian islands.
Greegor
> [...] Bob Larson is an evil bastard who went
> out of his way to hurt Christians. He lied
> about his childhood, lied about his past, and
> he swindeled Christians out of their money. [...]
G > If true, Bob Larson would fit right in on usenet!
Moe > Usenet is pretty much passe now.
G > But you sound like you have a more
G > PERSONAL kind of grudge.
G > What did BL do TO YOU?
Moe > Whomever Desertphile is, he or she can
Moe > dislike a scuzz like Larson without
Moe > having a personal involvement.
Moe > The stuff on Larson is online
Moe > and that's only the obvious stuff.
I think it's more likely that much like
the Canadian GAY group you described,
there is some other motivation like
rabid atheism or your own personal
pagan witchcraft, Moe.
G > Come on, with all of the televangelists and
G > frauds selling religion, why would you
G > focus on just this one?
Moe > Because of his hair plugs?
Even though it's apparent, you just can't
acknowledge how OBSESSED you are.
G > With all of the rabid atheists and
G > obsessive misfits on usenet, posting
G > through datamas or through a proxy,
G > do you really think this is NEW??
Moe > (( Rolls eyes)) The criticism of Larson
Moe > has been online since at least 1996
Moe > or so. The BL usenet group was
Moe > formed when a group of CAnadain
Moe > students who objected to Larson's
Moe > homophobia decided to band together
Moe > and spread the word so when Larson
Moe > showed his lying face in Canada one
Moe > day in his little greed and ego
Moe > appearances, he got quite a shock
Moe > when protesters interrupted and
Moe > prevented him squeezing money
Moe > out of the crowd.
Suddenly I am starting to understand Kent's
MOTIVATION for hating BL so much and
infiltrating BL's flock.
Kent are you a fudge packer?
G > Kent supposedly was once a paying
G > member of Bob Larson's flock.
Moe > As Kent said, and something you
Moe > deliberately ignored, when Kent gave
Moe > Larson money Larson DID NOT HAVE
Moe > A CHURCH, so Kent obviously was
Moe > not a member of his " flock". One
Moe > of the many things you obviously either do
Moe > not know or choose to ignore is that "Bob
Moe > Larson Ministries" was legally a tax
Moe > exempt religious group but it was NOT a church.
A ministry, a flock and even a church are not
strictly dependant on having a BUILDING.
Think of home vs. house.
Moe > As you have a hard-on about anything
Moe > connected to Kent Wills, you spasmodically
Moe > do posts like the one I am responding to.
Moe > And in doing so your ignorance and
Moe > deliberate lies show more than I or Kent
Moe > could say about what type of person you
Moe > actually are.
Frank needs another roll and your
help in the bathroom, Maureen.
G > I'd like to know how Kent and BL
G > had their "falling out".
Moe > Its been posted in the alt.fan.bob-larson
Moe > usenet group Greg. Kent made no
Moe > secret of how he was convinced
Moe > Larson was a liar and a greedy con man.
Yeah, as if I want to take Kent's ""word"" for it! LOL
What does BL ministries say about the falling
out between Kent and BL?
Was Kent actually a "plant" with the
intent of disrupting from the inside,
as you described?
G > Was Kent just pretending to be a
G > believer to inveigle information?
Moe > Had you actually been combing
Moe > past posts Kent made in your
Moe > cyberstalking him, you would know
Moe > the answer to that one.
I know that Kent is an unrepentent and
devious liar.
He apparently THINKS he is smart
but he paints himself into a corner
with his lies.
G > Or was Kent a true believer who was
G > cast out of BL's ministry because he
G > continued to deceive people and
G > conceal his true criminal record?
Moe > Lots of distortion in that sentence,
Moe > but usual for you Greg. In fact the
Moe > actual deceiver was and is Bob Larson.
I'm sure it never occurred to you that your
comment resembles an attempt to justify
Kent's deception/infiltration.
G > If BL is the fraud and crook you present, then
G > why don't you PROVE it to the real world
G > instead of wasting your time in the usenet
G > world where lies, smears and deception
G > are a way of life for Felons and misfits like Kent?
Moe > Kent is not a felon.
You are a rediculous stooge for Kent Wills.
Moe > Secondly the evidence of Larson as a
Moe > fraud and a crook was online some years
Moe > ago when Ken Smith had the Bob
Moe > Larson Fan Club web site.
The PROOF must have been VERY convincing!
Moe > There is further proof online on various
Moe > web sites and a number of other sources
Moe > I am sure you as the cybertstalker you
Moe > try to be can find for yourself.
Moe > Wait, you suck at cyberstalking. You often
Moe > post erroneous info you think you have
Moe > found on your online victims. Heck, you
Moe > couldn't even operate a Google news
Moe > search query even with explicit directions
Moe > handed to you.
Moe >
Moe > BTW you were charged by your ex-wife
Incorrect. State vs.
Show me where the records for my 15 year
old misdemeanor convictions name the victim.
Moe > with abuse and you have a number of
Moe > court cases against you where you
Moe > have not paid the court fees.
Incorrect.
Moe > Not to mention how you abused a seven
Moe > year old girl badly enough to have your
Moe > name on a state abuse registry.
Got an official LINK to that registry for confirmation?
You are a sad bored OBSESSED misfit reading
TRUE CRIME stories to bring excitement to your
life because you can't get a date with either gender.
Moe > Dontcha think that before you call other
Moe > people criminals that you might want to
Moe > clean up your own legal and other violations first?
I think I called Kent a FELON, not a mere criminal.
In fact, Kent has at least TWO Felonies and
a misdemeanor for using a teen to help
commit his Garage Burglary Felony.
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=ia&vol=sc%5C20050506%5C04-0202&invol=1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF IOWA
No. 31 / 04-0202
Filed May 6, 2005
STATE OF IOWA,
Appellee,
vs.
KENT BRADLEY WILLS,
Appellant.
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk
County, Michael D. Huppert, Judge.
Defendant appeals claiming ineffective
assistance of counsel. AFFIRMED.
Linda Del Gallo, State Appellate Defender,
and Tricia Johnston, Assistant State
Appellate Defender, for appellant.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Kevin
Cmelik, Assistant Attorney General, John P.
Sarcone, County Attorney, and John Judisch,
Assistant County Attorney, for appellee.
WIGGINS, Justice.
Kent Wills appeals his conviction for
second-degree burglary contending that
an attached garage is a separate occupied
structure from that of the living quarters
of the residence. In this appeal, we must
determine whether trial counsel was
ineffective for (1) failing to move for
judgment of acquittal on the basis there
was insufficient evidence to convict Wills
of second-degree burglary when he entered
an attached garage of a residence when no
persons were present in the garage, but
when persons were present in the living
quarters; and (2) failing to object to a
jury instruction based on this same
argument. Because we find there was no
legal basis for the motion for judgment
of acquittal or the objection to the jury
instruction, Wills' trial counsel was not
ineffective. Accordingly, we affirm the
judgment of the district court.
I. Background Facts and Proceedings.
Around 1 a.m., an Ankeny resident called
the local police to report that a car
alarm sounded in the resident's
neighborhood. The city dispatched a police
officer to the location. Observing nothing
unusual, the officer left the area, only
to be stopped a couple of blocks later
by a person who informed the officer he
had witnessed someone running from the
area of the car alarm. As the officer
started driving back to the area of the
car alarm, he noticed a person walking
on the sidewalk. The officer asked the
person, a minor, if he had noticed anybody
running from the area. The minor answered
that he had not. While the officer and
another officer were speaking to the minor,
another resident of the neighborhood
arrived in her car and informed the
officers that she had observed two people,
one of whom was heavy set with a blinking
light on his back pocket, walking in the
area of her neighbor's residence. She
observed the heavier-set individual, later
identified as Wills, enter her neighbor's
attached garage through an unlocked service
door. She further observed a smaller
individual standing by a van parked in
the neighbor's driveway.
The officers eventually let the minor leave
even though they found a large amount of
coins, a flashlight, and an electronic
pocket organizer in his pockets. After
releasing the minor, the police officers
drove to the residence where the neighbor
observed the two suspicious people and
woke the owner. The owner, his wife,
and two daughters were in the residence
sleeping at the time. After a search
of his vehicles, the owner discovered
change and an electronic pocket organizer
were missing from the vehicles. The
owner's daughter reported a diamond ring
and some change were missing from her
vehicle. The officers then contacted
the minor's parents, who informed the
officers the minor was with Wills. After
the officers questioned the minor again,
he admitted his involvement in the theft
and implicated Wills in the burglary.
Although Wills denied involvement in the
burglary, the officers arrested him.
The State filed a trial information
charging Wills with second-degree
burglary. The State later amended the
information to include two additional
charges of burglary in the third degree
and using a juvenile to commit an
indictable offense.
The jury returned a verdict finding Wills
guilty of the crimes of burglary in the
second degree, burglary in the third
degree, and using a juvenile to commit
an indictable offense. Wills appeals his
conviction for second-degree burglary
claiming ineffective assistance of
counsel.
II. Scope of Review.
Claims of ineffective assistance of counsel
are derived from the Sixth Amendment of the
United States Constitution. Strickland v.
Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 684-86, 104 S.
Ct. 2052, 2063-64, 80 L. Ed. 2d 674, 691-93
(1984). Our review for a claim involving
violations of the Constitution is de novo.
State v. Fintel, 689 N.W.2d 95, 100
(Iowa 2004). We normally preserve
ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims
for postconviction relief actions. State
v. Carter, 602 N.W. 2d 818, 820 (Iowa 1999).
However, we will address such claims on
direct appeal when the record is sufficient
to permit a ruling. State v. Artzer,
609 N.W.2d 526, 531 (Iowa 2000). The
appellate record in the present case is
sufficient to allow us to address Wills'
ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims
on direct appeal.
In order for a defendant to succeed on a
claim of ineffective assistance of counsel,
the defendant must prove: (1) counsel
failed to perform an essential duty and
(2) prejudice resulted. Id. Prejudice
results when "there is a reasonable
probability that, but for the counsel's
unprofessional errors, the result of the
proceeding would have been different."
State v. Hopkins, 576 N.W.2d 374, 378
(Iowa 1998) (quoting Strickland, 466
U.S. at 694, 104 S. Ct. at 2068,
80 L. Ed. 2d at 698). Wills' arguments
also raise issues of statutory
interpretation, which we review for
correction of errors at law. State v.
Wolford Corp., 689 N.W.2d 471, 473 (Iowa 2004).
III. Analysis.
To find Wills guilty of burglary in the
second degree, the State had to prove
Wills perpetrated a burglary "in or
upon an occupied structure in which one
or more persons are present . . . ." Iowa
Code § 713.5(2) (2003) (emphasis added).
In this appeal, Wills first contends his
trial counsel was ineffective for failing
to move for a judgment of acquittal on
the basis there was insufficient evidence
to support a finding that at the time Wills
entered the garage, there were persons
present in or upon the occupied structure.
Wills concedes the garage was an occupied
structure, but argues the living quarters
and the attached garage are separate and
independent occupied structures; therefore,
the jury could not have found there were
people present in the attached garage
at the time of the burglary.
The Code defines an "occupied structure" as:
[A]ny building, structure, appurtenances
to buildings and structures, land, water
or air vehicle, or similar place adapted
for overnight accommodation of persons,
or occupied by persons for the purpose of
carrying on business or other activity
therein, or for the storage or safekeeping
of anything of value. Such a structure
is an "occupied structure" whether or not
a person is actually present.
Id. § 702.12.
Wills relies on State v. Smothers, 590
N.W.2d 721 (Iowa 1999), to argue the
garage and the living quarters are separate
and independent occupied structures. In
Smothers, two separate and distinct
businesses connected by interior fire doors
were operated in the same structure.
590 N.W.2d at 723. We held the defendant
committed two burglaries by entering each
business because "[t]he facility's
construction history and physical make-up
demonstrate that the portions are
independent working units which constitute
'[a] combination of materials to form a
construction for occupancy [or] use.'" Id.
Smothers is not at odds with the present
case because the living quarters and the
garage are not separate or independent
units of the residence.
Our review of the record reveals the garage
in question was a three-car attached garage
separated from the living quarters by a
door. The same roof covered the garage as
the rest of the residence. The living
quarters surrounded the garage on two sides.
It was structurally no different from any
other room in the residence.
The garage was a functional part of the
residence. On the night of the incident,
the door was unlocked. The owner of the
residence used two stalls in the garage to
park the family vehicles. The owner used
the third stall for his motorcycle. As
such, the garage and the living quarters
are a single "structure" or "building"
functioning as an integral part of the
family residence. Thus, the residence
including the garage is a single
"occupied structure" under section 702.12.
See, e.g., People v. Ingram, 48 Cal. Rptr.
2d 256 (Ct. App.1995) (holding defendant's
entry into an attached garage constituted
first-degree burglary because the garage
was attached to the house; therefore,
burglary of the garage was burglary of
an inhabited dwelling house); People v.
Cunningham, 637 N.E.2d 1247, 1252 (Ill.
App. Ct. 1994) (holding "ordinarily an
attached garage is a 'dwelling' because
it is part of the structure in which
the owner or occupant lives");
State v. Lara, 587 P.2d 52, 53
(N.M. Ct. App. 1978) (holding "burglary
of the [attached] garage was burglary of
the dwelling house because the garage was
a part of the structure used as living
quarters"); People v. Green, 141 A.D.2d
760, 761 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988) (holding
"[s]ince the garage in the present case
was structurally part of a building
which was used for overnight lodging of
various persons, it must be considered
as part of a dwelling"); White v. State,
630 S.W. 2d 340, 342 (Tex. Ct. App. 1982)
(holding an attached garage under the
same roof as the home would be considered
a habitation within the purview of the
penal code because the garage is a
structure appurtenant to and connected
to the house); State v. Murbach, 843 P.
2d 551, 553 (Wash. Ct. App 1993)
(holding the definition of a dwelling
under Washington's burglary statute
included an attached garage).
Had Wills' trial counsel moved for a
judgment of acquittal on the basis there
was insufficient evidence to support
a finding that at the time Wills
entered the garage there were no persons
present in or upon the occupied
structure, it would have been overruled
by the court because the owner and his
family were present in the residence at
the time of the burglary.
Wills also claims his counsel was
ineffective for failing to object to
the jury instruction used by the district
court on the same ground; that the
living quarters were a separate and
independent occupied structure from the
attached garage. The instruction as
given stated:
The State must prove all of the following
elements of Burglary in the Second
Degree as to Count I:
1. On or about the 12th day of August,
2003, the defendant or someone he aided
and abetted broke into or entered the
residence at . . . .
2. The residence at . . . was an occupied
structure as defined in Instruction No. 29.
3. The defendant or the person he aided
and abetted did not have permission or
authority to break into the residence at ...
4. The defendant or the person he aided
and abetted did so with the specific
intent to commit a theft therein.
5. During the incident persons were present
in or upon the occupied structure.
If the State has proved all of the elements,
the defendant is guilty of Burglary in the
Second Degree. If the State has failed to prove
any of the elements, the defendant is not
guilty of Burglary in the Second Degree and
you will then consider the charge of
Attempted Burglary in the Second Degree
explained in Instruction No. 21.
(Emphasis added.)
Wills' claim is without merit. As we have
discussed, the residence is the one and
only "occupied structure" under the facts
of this case. Had Wills' trial counsel
made this objection to the instruction,
it would have been overruled.
Therefore, Wills' trial counsel is not
ineffective for failing to move
for a judgment of acquittal or objecting
to the instruction because there was no
legal basis for the motion or objection.
See State v. Hochmuth, 585 N.W.2d 234,
238 (Iowa 1998) (holding trial counsel was
not ineffective for failing to raise an
issue that has no merit).
IV. Disposition.
We affirm the judgment of the district
court because Wills' trial counsel was
not ineffective for failing to raise
meritless issues.
AFFIRMED.
forevernitefan
> At one time, not so long ago, yumhuyk <wostyn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> >On Jun 30, 7:37 pm, forevernitefan <fvrn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >> The thing about " Coast to Coast" is that it airs pretty much
> >> anything,no matter how pathetically dumb it actually is. I remember
>
> >This, from a "pagan" who thinks that lighting magick candles will make
> >teenage bois fall in love with her.
>
> >> that after the last Indiana Jones movie came out that the C2C callers
> >> actually thought the frigging crystal skulls were real and that if you
> >> gathered twelve of them together, awesome stuff was supposed to
> >> happen. I sat there listening to that garbage and shook my head in
> >> wonder at how people can fall for that crap.
>
> >> moe
>
> >Crystal skulls are real, Moe.
>
>
> > The Azteks carved them and used them as
>
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crystal_skull
>
> http://www.mendhak.com/80-the-13-crystal-skulls.aspx
>
> http://en.epochtimes.com/news/5-8-21/31477.html
>
> http://www.crystalinks.com/crystalskulls.html
>
> If you would spend a few seconds checking, you wouldn't make
> yourself look the fool you are.
> Crystal skulls are Mayan.
>
> >vessels for the domon Huitzilopochtli.
>
>
> http://fc02.deviantart.net/fs25/f/2008/156/0/c/G_GUNDAM_DOMON_and_RAI...
>
> >Staring into the skull will
> >allow Huitzilopochtli to enter the sorcerer's body and give him powers
> >of foresight. Multiple examples have been found in excavations of
> >Aztek temples.
>
> that they are Mayan. Some of the Maya still carve them.
> Anywhere one finds a population of Mayan people, like Belize,
> Southern Mexico (Cozumel is a good example), Northern Honduras (Copa
> is the best bet for meeting some) or Guatemala, one will find crystal
> skulls of various sizes. Some are well carved, some others, not so
> much.
>
>
You expect a racist like Yukkie to know the difference between "
aztek" and Mayan? Good luck with that one.
I also forgot to mention that in Mexico they have their Day of the
Dead celebration which,if memory serves me correctly, includes a lot
of depictions of human skulls as sugar candies and so forth. Its been
awhile since I even looked at anything Aztec, Mayan or Inca as I am no
archeologist so my memory of this might be in error
Moe
>
> >yours in Christ,
>
> If only he was the Christ found within the Bible rather than the
> demon using the name that you worship.
>
> --
>
> I did an unbelievable amount of work in the yard. It's amazing what I
> can do when my wife puts my mind to it. :)
forevernitefan
wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Jun 2010 18:11:34 -0700 (PDT), forevernitefan
>
>
>
> <fvrn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On Jun 30, 5:38 pm, Greegor <greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Jun 29, 12:45 pm, Desertphile <desertph...@invalid-address.net>
> > > wrote:
>
> > > > [...] Bob Larson is an evil bastard who went
> > > > out of his way to hurt Christians. He lied
> > > > about his childhood, lied about his past, and
> > > > he swindeled Christians out of their money. [...]
>
> > > If true, Bob Larson would fit right in on usenet!
>
> > Usenet is pretty much passe now.
>
> > > But you sound like you have a more
> > > PERSONAL kind of grudge.
> > > What did BL do TO YOU?
>
> > Whomever Desertphile is, he or she can dislike a scuzz like Larson
> > without having a personal involvement. The stuff on Larson is online
> > and that's only the obvious stuff.'
>
> I object to people swindling and robbing other people for the
> exact same reason I object to people being abused due to the color
> of their skin even if it is different than mine: I am not a
> sociopath, therefore I do not have to be a victim of a crime
> before I object to the crime.
> \
Agreed. Same here.
Moe
>
> --http://desertphile.org
forevernitefan
And yet you LIVE for his posts Greg. You repeat post the same old
shit like a retarded person yet you expect people to think you are
sane or credible?
>
> What does BL ministries say about the falling
> out between Kent and BL?
Get real here. Kent was one of thousands of people BLM scammed.
>
> Was Kent actually a "plant" with the
> intent of disrupting from the inside,
> as you described?
I never said that, Show the MID where I said that or be proven once
again you are a liar.
>
> G > Was Kent just pretending to be a
> G > believer to inveigle information?
>
> Moe > Had you actually been combing
> Moe > past posts Kent made in your
> Moe > cyberstalking him, you would know
> Moe > the answer to that one.
>
> I know that Kent is an unrepentent and
> devious liar.
Projection noted.
>
> He apparently THINKS he is smart
> but he paints himself into a corner
> with his lies.
Projection AND Irony noted.
>
> G > Or was Kent a true believer who was
> G > cast out of BL's ministry because he
> G > continued to deceive people and
> G > conceal his true criminal record?
>
> Moe > Lots of distortion in that sentence,
> Moe > but usual for you Greg. In fact the
> Moe > actual deceiver was and is Bob Larson.
>
> I'm sure it never occurred to you that your
> comment resembles an attempt to justify
> Kent's deception/infiltration.
Your own deception to make me post something you want me to post
noted. Kent never did the" deception/infiltration". What he did do
regarding BLM is shown on old newsgroup posts, regardless of your
attempts to claim otherwise.
>
> G > If BL is the fraud and crook you present, then
> G > why don't you PROVE it to the real world
> G > instead of wasting your time in the usenet
> G > world where lies, smears and deception
> G > are a way of life for Felons and misfits like Kent?
>
> Moe > Kent is not a felon.
>
> You are a rediculous stooge for Kent Wills.
And you were the mouth patsy for Kennie Pangborn until KennieBoy got
his little legal papers getting his obese abusive ass off usenet.
>
> Moe > Secondly the evidence of Larson as a
> Moe > fraud and a crook was online some years
> Moe > ago when Ken Smith had the Bob
> Moe > Larson Fan Club web site.
>
> The PROOF must have been VERY convincing!
It was for a number of people Greg. You might want to do some actual
research before continuing this avenue because you are showing what an
idiot and imbecile you are-- again.
>
> Moe > There is further proof online on various
> Moe > web sites and a number of other sources
> Moe > I am sure you as the cybertstalker you
> Moe > try to be can find for yourself.
>
> Moe > Wait, you suck at cyberstalking. You often
> Moe > post erroneous info you think you have
> Moe > found on your online victims. Heck, you
> Moe > couldn't even operate a Google news
> Moe > search query even with explicit directions
> Moe > handed to you.
> Moe >
> Moe > BTW you were charged by your ex-wife
>
> Incorrect. State vs.
>
> Show me where the records for my 15 year
> old misdemeanor convictions name the victim.
The child was a minor, Greg as you damn well know. Laws prohibit the
names of minors who were victims from being recorded in public
records.
Do explain how Lisa Watkins' daughter was taken away from her while
you lived in her home,greg.
>
> Moe > with abuse and you have a number of
> Moe > court cases against you where you
> Moe > have not paid the court fees.
>
> Incorrect.
You have a number of court cases against you and you haven't paid all
the fees yet. Deny and lie all you want Greg. You're scum, after all.
>
> Moe > Not to mention how you abused a seven
> Moe > year old girl badly enough to have your
> Moe > name on a state abuse registry.
>
> Got an official LINK to that registry for confirmation?
As soon as you show proof of your claims Greg.
>
> You are a sad bored OBSESSED misfit reading
> TRUE CRIME stories to bring excitement to your
> life because you can't get a date with either gender.
Is being a misfit bad?
Greg, why should I "get a date" when I HAVE a BF?
>
> Moe > Dontcha think that before you call other
> Moe > people criminals that you might want to
> Moe > clean up your own legal and other violations first?
>
> I think I called Kent a FELON, not a mere criminal.
And yet you admit what you posted about " Kent Wills" is not the same
"Kent Wills' that posts here.
Trying to have it both ways?
>
> In fact, Kent has at least TWO Felonies and
> a misdemeanor for using a teen to help
> commit his Garage Burglary Felony.
And yet you don't have scans of the actual court documents, do you?
Moe
>
forevernitefan
> At one time, not so long ago, forevernitefan <fvrn...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> KEYWORDS: Gregory Scott Hanson, Lisa Rene Watkins, Kristen Watkins,
> Tom Watkins, child abuse, OWI, child molestation, drugs, Greg Hanson,
> felony, sexual assault, Donna Joann Hanson, Sandra Lyn Freese, Sandy
> Freese, spousal abuse, greegor47, wife beater, sexual assault, James E
> Hanson, Jim Hanson, Jimmy Hanson, Kris Watkins
>
>
>
>
> >> Kent supposedly was once a paying
> >> member of Bob Larson's flock.
>
> > As Kent said, and something you deliberately ignored, when Kent gave
> >Larson money Larson DID NOT HAVE A CHURCH, so Kent obviously was not a
> >member of his " flock".
>
> illegal drugs he's admitted, he is psychologically UNABLE to be honest
> with intent, unless he believes it will promote a lie he's presented.
> What is most sad, IMO, is that Greg honestly believes his
> behavior is what society would see as normal.
>
> >One of the many things you obviously either do
> >not know or choose to ignore is that "Bob Larson Ministries" was
> >legally a tax exempt religious group but it was NOT a church. As you
> >have a hard-on about anything connected to Kent Wills, you
>
> This is proved by his NEED to follow me all over Usenet when he
> realized I had left the CPS group. He also gets very upset if I don't
> mention him and/or acknowledge his posts for more than a few days.
> I don't think I'm worthy of such devotion, but Greg clearly does.
>
> >spasmodically do posts like the one I am responding to. And in doing
> >so your ignorance and deliberate lies show more than I or Kent could
> >say about what type of person you actually are.
>
>
>
>
> >> I'd like to know how Kent and BL
> >> had their "falling out".
>
> > Its been posted in the alt.fan.bob-larson usenet group Greg. Kent
> >made no secret of how he was convinced Larson was a liar and a greedy
> >con man.
>
> interesting how much of what I've stated on Usenet seems to be unknown
> to Greg.
> It's almost as if he LIED when he made the claim.
> Odds are he has read them, but because he is psychologically
> UNABLE to be honest with intent, save for when he thinks doing so will
> advance a lie, he can't post what he's read. He may well WANT to post
> what he knows, but since doing so would not promote any of his lies,
> he's unable.
>
>
>
> >> Was Kent just pretending to be a
> >> believer to inveigle information?
>
> > Had you actually been combing past posts Kent made in your
> >cyberstalking him, you would know the answer to that one.
>
>
>
>
> >> Or was Kent a true believer who was
> >> cast out of BL's ministry because he
> >> continued to deceive people and
> >> conceal his true criminal record?
>
> >Lots of distortion in that sentence, but usual for you Greg.
> >In fact the actual deceiver was and is Bob Larson.
>
> archive.
> Anyone ,ay use their favorite search engine to find the truth
> about Lar$on.
>
>
>
> >> If BL is the fraud and crook you present, then
> >> why don't you PROVE it to the real world
> >> instead of wasting your time in the usenet
> >> world where lies, smears and deception
> >> are a way of life for Felons and misfits like Kent?
>
> >Kent is not a felon.
>
> He still posts that which he admitted isn't about me as if it was
> and is about me. An odd thing to do, but Greg's not quite right.
>
>
>
> > Secondly the evidence of Larson as a fraud and a crook was online
> >some years ago when Ken Smith had the Bob Larson Fan Club web site.
> >There is further proof online on various web sites and a number of
> >other sources I am sure you as the cybertstalker you try to be can
> >find for yourself.
>
I was being sarcastic. Greg's cyberstaling " results" time and time
again show how incompetent he actually is.
>
> > Wait, you suck at cyberstalking. You often post erroneous info you
> >think you have found on your online victims. Heck, you couldn't even
> >operate a Google news search query even with explicit directions
> >handed to you.
>
> Greg's mind really does operate at about a fourth grade level.
> All available evidence shows he's not acting for the benefit of
> Usenet.
I would pity him except for his well known abuses of women and what he
did to Lisa's daughter. Some things are unforgivable.
>
>
>
> > BTW you were charged by your ex-wife with abuse and you have a
> >number of court cases against you where you have not paid the court
> >fees. Not to mention how you abused a seven year old girl badly enough
> >to have your name on a state abuse registry.
>
> He was not only charged, but convicted, twice, for BEATING her.
Yup and the guy's such a coward he got his glass jaw busted by an old
man.
>
>
>
> >Dontcha think that before you call other people criminals that you
> >might want to clean up your own legal and other violations first?
>
> Greg has a LONG history as a defendant in numerous criminal and
> civil cases. It's so long that there is NOTHING to be gained by
> adding a false conviction to it, as Greg tries to claim I've done.
>
> A select number of items that really are about Gregory Scott "Piggly
> Wiggly" Hanson (either directly or through the same standards he
> DEMANDS be held to others):
>
> Title: ST VS GREGORY HANSON
> (DOB 05/22/1959)
> CRIMINAL COMPLAINT 04/10/1996
> Comments: CT 1 OWI 1ST
> OTHER CITATION 04/10/1996
> Comments: CT 2 SPEED
> Disposition Status
> GUILTY PLEA/DEFAULT
>
> "That's the chick, but not the pic, zipperhead!"
> Greg "Piggly Wiggly" Hanson proving his bigotry towards Asians, by
> attacking my first wife (deceased).http://www.rsdb.org/search?q=zipperhead
forevernitefan
>
>
>
> <desertph...@invalid-address.net> wrote:
> >On Wed, 30 Jun 2010 15:38:16 -0700 (PDT), Greegor
> ><greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> On Jun 29, 12:45 pm, Desertphile <desertph...@invalid-address.net>
> >> wrote:
>
> >> > [...] Bob Larson is an evil bastard who went
> >> > out of his way to hurt Christians. He lied
> >> > about his childhood, lied about his past, and
> >> > he swindeled Christians out of their money. [...]
>
> >> If true, Bob Larson would fit right in on usenet!
>
> >It's true. _Cornerstone_ documented the crimes and abuses Larson
> >engaged in, with witnesses, high school records, newspaper
> >articles, affidavits, photographs.... they proved Larson is a
> >lying sack of shit. Larson even fakes at least one imaginary
> >"assasination attempt." The asshole belongs in prison for his
> >crimes.
>
Supposedly it was the guy with the big knife that showed up at one of
his rallies. Bob lies to overdramatize crap like that to make it
appear what he does is dangerous to him.
It wouldn't surprise me that the so-called knife wielder was another
of his plants.
> I do know that Lar$on has to actually pay someone in order to get
> a death thread. I think the guy he hired is named Chad, though it's
> been so long I couldn't say so under oath.
>
> --
> "Now I want to ask you one more thing. Is this planet protected? Who
> got rid of all of them? Me. My Advice? Run"
> -- The Doctor, "The 11th Hour"
Dan Sullivan
grag doesn't think he needs to be forgiven because he claims he had
the mother's permission to maltreat her seven year old daughter.
he also claims the little girl was removed by the authorities in Iowa
under false pretenses.
But he allowed them to remove her anyway.
Removed from her mother's physical and legal custody for YEARS
supposedly for no good reason.
And almost from the start grag wanted to sue and be financially
rewarded for their "mistake."
Desertphile
<comp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> At one time, not so long ago, Desertphile
> <deser...@invalid-address.net> wrote:
>
> >On Wed, 30 Jun 2010 15:38:16 -0700 (PDT), Greegor
> ><gree...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Jun 29, 12:45 pm, Desertphile <desertph...@invalid-address.net>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > [...] Bob Larson is an evil bastard who went
> >> > out of his way to hurt Christians. He lied
> >> > about his childhood, lied about his past, and
> >> > he swindeled Christians out of their money. [...]
> >
> >> If true, Bob Larson would fit right in on usenet!
> >
> >It's true. _Cornerstone_ documented the crimes and abuses Larson
> >engaged in, with witnesses, high school records, newspaper
> >articles, affidavits, photographs.... they proved Larson is a
> >lying sack of shit. Larson even fakes at least one imaginary
> >"assasination attempt." The asshole belongs in prison for his
> >crimes.
> I missed the assassination attempt.
> I do know that Lar$on has to actually pay someone in order to get
> a death thread. I think the guy he hired is named Chad, though it's
> been so long I couldn't say so under oath.
The article is still on my holysmoke.org web site, with permission
from _Cornerstone._
Desertphile
<fvr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jul 1, 2:46 am, Kent Wills <compu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > At one time, not so long ago, Desertphile
> >
> >
> >
> > <desertph...@invalid-address.net> wrote:
> > >On Wed, 30 Jun 2010 15:38:16 -0700 (PDT), Greegor
> > ><greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > >> On Jun 29, 12:45 pm, Desertphile <desertph...@invalid-address.net>
> > >> wrote:
> >
> > >> > [...] Bob Larson is an evil bastard who went
> > >> > out of his way to hurt Christians. He lied
> > >> > about his childhood, lied about his past, and
> > >> > he swindeled Christians out of their money. [...]
> >
> > >> If true, Bob Larson would fit right in on usenet!
> >
> > >It's true. _Cornerstone_ documented the crimes and abuses Larson
> > >engaged in, with witnesses, high school records, newspaper
> > >articles, affidavits, photographs.... they proved Larson is a
> > >lying sack of shit. Larson even fakes at least one imaginary
> > >"assasination attempt." The asshole belongs in prison for his
> > >crimes.
> >
> > I missed the assassination attempt.
> Supposedly it was the guy with the big knife that showed up at one of
> his rallies. Bob lies to overdramatize crap like that to make it
> appear what he does is dangerous to him.
I haven't heard about that claim. The one I referred to was a fake
gun shot where Larson claimed the bullet almost struck him as he
was getting into his car. Larson did not bother telling law
enforcement about the murder attemt. LOL!
> It wouldn't surprise me that the so-called knife wielder was another
> of his plants.
>
> > I do know that Lar$on has to actually pay someone in order to get
> > a death thread. I think the guy he hired is named Chad, though it's
> > been so long I couldn't say so under oath.
> >
> > --
> > "Now I want to ask you one more thing. Is this planet protected? Who
> > got rid of all of them? Me. My Advice? Run"
> > -- The Doctor, "The 11th Hour"
marston shores
> At one time, not so long ago, Desertphile
>
>> On Wed, 30 Jun 2010 15:38:16 -0700 (PDT), Greegor
>> <gree...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Jun 29, 12:45 pm, Desertphile <desertph...@invalid-address.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> [...] Bob Larson is an evil bastard who went
>>>> out of his way to hurt Christians. He lied
>>>> about his childhood, lied about his past, and
>>>> he swindeled Christians out of their money. [...]
>>> If true, Bob Larson would fit right in on usenet!
>> It's true. _Cornerstone_ documented the crimes and abuses Larson
>> engaged in, with witnesses, high school records, newspaper
>> articles, affidavits, photographs.... they proved Larson is a
>> lying sack of shit. Larson even fakes at least one imaginary
>> "assasination attempt." The asshole belongs in prison for his
>> crimes.
>
> a death thread. I think the guy he hired is named Chad, though it's
> been so long I couldn't say so under oath.
>
>
You "under oath"?
Amusing.
marston shores
>> I missed the assassination attempt.
>> I do know that Lar$on has to actually pay someone in order to get
>> a death thread. I think the guy he hired is named Chad, though it's
>> been so long I couldn't say so under oath.
>
> The article is still on my holysmoke.org web site, with permission
> from _Cornerstone._
>
>
Are you still defacing desert rock to make your own fraudulent petroglyphs?
I wonder what the feds would have to say about that.
forevernitefan
wrote:
The fake gun shot claim. I haven't heard that one. Presumably if he
was entering one of his high priced cars and if someone took a shot at
him, the bullet would hit the car. If that was a real event, which I
doubt because Larson is a drama queen, then there would have been a
police report somewhere.
If he didn't bother telling law enforcement about this alleged murder
attempt, it really puts into question about his credibility. He has a
wife and kids now and if he supposedly was the target of someone
firing a gun, seems to me if he cared he would have notified
authorities and did what he could to protect his family.
Sounds like some BS story he would spout off as proof about " enemies
of his ministry". Considering his hair plugs and the bare back of his
head now, I'd find it hard to believe if someone was aiming a gun or
rifle at him that they could miss his swollen head. :-D Not only that
but a better shot would be at the torso, not the head.
>
> > It wouldn't surprise me that the so-called knife wielder was another
> > of his plants.
>
> > > I do know that Lar$on has to actually pay someone in order to get
> > > a death thread. I think the guy he hired is named Chad, though it's
> > > been so long I couldn't say so under oath.
Chad Kelley was the guy he paid $10 via signed check ( Ken Smith
posted once on his web site the photos of the back and the front) for
the "kill bob larson" song and T-shirt thing Deicide and Glen Benton
had in their act.
Here is the URL for the BLFC page:
"http://home.earthlink.net/~19ranger57/blies.htm
And here is one pic of two of the check:
http://home.earthlink.net/~19ranger57/KBLofficialCheck_040899lev.jpg
Here is the link to the " Kill Bob Larson" scam:
http://home.earthlink.net/~19ranger57/killbob.htm
That also has some details of Chad Kelley and the transaction between
him and Larson.
Try this URL as well:
http://home.earthlink.net/~19ranger57/kblcheck.html
Moe
>
> > > --
> > > "Now I want to ask you one more thing. Is this planet protected? Who
> > > got rid of all of them? Me. My Advice? Run"
> > > -- The Doctor, "The 11th Hour"
>
Greegor
> On Jun 30, 11:52 pm, Greegor <greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Desertphile wrote:
> > > [...] Bob Larson is an evil bastard who went
> > > out of his way to hurt Christians. He lied
> > > about his childhood, lied about his past, and
> > > he swindeled Christians out of their money. [...]
>
> > G > If true, Bob Larson would fit right in on usenet!
>
> > Moe > Usenet is pretty much passe now.
>
> > G > But you sound like you have a more
> > G > PERSONAL kind of grudge.
> > G > What did BL do TO YOU?
>
> > Moe > Whomever Desertphile is, he or she can
> > Moe > dislike a scuzz like Larson without
> > Moe > having a personal involvement.
> > Moe > The stuff on Larson is online
> > Moe > and that's only the obvious stuff.
>
> > I think it's more likely that much like
> > the Canadian GAY group you described,
> > there is some other motivation like
> > rabid atheism or your own personal
> > pagan witchcraft, Moe.
Ulterior motives are usually more important than stated motives.
G > What does BL ministries say about the falling
G > out between Kent and BL?
Moe > Get real here. Kent was one of thousands of people BLM scammed.
I'd still like to hear what BL Ministries says
about the falling out with Kent Wills.
G > Was Kent actually a "plant" with the
G > intent of disrupting from the inside,
G > as you described?
Moe > I never said that, Show the MID where
Moe > I said that or be proven once
Moe > again you are a liar.
You explained how the BL newsgroup was
formed by a bunch of Canadian gays who
were pissed about BL's anti-gay stance.
You described how their intent was to
infiltrate into a BL gathering and disrupt.
Kent also claims to have been a paying
member of BL's ministry, but later turned
on BL. So much so that for periods of
many months Kent was the only BL hater
"holding down the fort" in the BL fan club
usenet group.
> > G > Was Kent just pretending to be a
> > G > believer to inveigle information?
>
> > Moe > Had you actually been combing
> > Moe > past posts Kent made in your
> > Moe > cyberstalking him, you would know
> > Moe > the answer to that one.
>
> > I know that Kent is an unrepentent and
> > devious liar.
>
> Projection noted.
>
>
>
> > He apparently THINKS he is smart
> > but he paints himself into a corner
> > with his lies.
>
> Projection AND Irony noted.
>
>
G > Or was Kent a true believer who was
G > cast out of BL's ministry because he
G > continued to deceive people and
G > conceal his true criminal record?
Moe > Lots of distortion in that sentence,
Moe > but usual for you Greg. In fact the
Moe > actual deceiver was and is Bob Larson.
G > I'm sure it never occurred to you that your
G > comment resembles an attempt to justify
G > Kent's deception/infiltration.
Moe > Your own deception to make me post
Moe > something you want me to post noted.
Moe > Kent never did the" deception/infiltration".
Why would I believe you?
But thanks for explaining the roots of the
Bob Larson Fan Club.
Moe > What he did do regarding BLM is shown
Moe > on old newsgroup posts, regardless of
Moe > your attempts to claim otherwise.
Post a quote and a LINK.
> > G > If BL is the fraud and crook you present, then
> > G > why don't you PROVE it to the real world
> > G > instead of wasting your time in the usenet
> > G > world where lies, smears and deception
> > G > are a way of life for Felons and misfits like Kent?
>
Moe > Kent is not a felon.
>
G > You are a rediculous stooge for Kent Wills.
>
Moe > And you were the mouth patsy for Kennie
Moe > Pangborn until KennieBoy got his little
Moe > legal papers getting his obese abusive
Moe > ass off usenet.
Irrelevent and fictional.
ISP's have been dropping off usenet like flies.
Moe > Secondly the evidence of Larson as a
Moe > fraud and a crook was online some years
Moe > ago when Ken Smith had the Bob
Moe > Larson Fan Club web site.
G > The PROOF must have been VERY convincing!
Moe > It was for a number of people Greg. You
Moe > might want to do some actual research
Moe > before continuing this avenue because
Moe > you are showing what an idiot and
Moe > imbecile you are-- again.
Has he been arrested?
Has he been sued successfully?
A usenet hunting pack full of atheists
and people raging against scientologists
is not a substitute for law enforcement.
> > Moe > There is further proof online on various
> > Moe > web sites and a number of other sources
> > Moe > I am sure you as the cybertstalker you
> > Moe > try to be can find for yourself.
>
> > Moe > Wait, you suck at cyberstalking. You often
> > Moe > post erroneous info you think you have
> > Moe > found on your online victims. Heck, you
> > Moe > couldn't even operate a Google news
> > Moe > search query even with explicit directions
> > Moe > handed to you.
Moe > BTW you were charged by your ex-wife
G > Incorrect. State vs.
G > Show me where the records for my 15 year
G > old misdemeanor convictions name the victim.
Moe > The child was a minor,
My ex-wife was not a child.
Moe > Greg as you damn well know. Laws
Moe > prohibit the names of minors who
Moe > were victims from being recorded
Moe > in public records.
My ex-wife was not a child.
My misdemeanors are very OLD and involved no child.
Where are the victims names in Domestic Abuse records?
Moe > Do explain how [...]' daughter was
Moe > taken away from her while you lived
Moe > in her home,greg.
Desperate to change the subject, Moe?
Moe > with abuse and you have a number of
Moe > court cases against you where you
Moe > have not paid the court fees.
G > Incorrect.
Moe > You have a number of court cases
Moe > against you
Now?
Moe > and you haven't paid all the fees yet.
Moe > Deny and lie all you want Greg.
Moe > You're scum, after all.
Moe > Not to mention how you abused a seven
Moe > year old girl badly enough to have your
Moe > name on a state abuse registry.
G > Got an official LINK to that registry for confirmation?
Moe > As soon as you show proof of your claims Greg.
H 4 on Kent's stock fallacies chart.
Proof held hostage awaiting opponents proof on something else
> > You are a sad bored OBSESSED misfit reading
> > TRUE CRIME stories to bring excitement to your
> > life because you can't get a date with either gender.
Moe > Is being a misfit bad?
Moe > Greg, why should I "get a date" when I HAVE a BF?
Inflateable.
Moe > Dontcha think that before you call other
Moe > people criminals that you might want to
Moe > clean up your own legal and other violations first?
G > I think I called Kent a FELON, not a mere criminal.
Moe > And yet you admit what you posted about
Moe > " Kent Wills" is not the same "Kent Wills'
Moe > that posts here.
Moe >
Moe > Trying to have it both ways?
On the Kent Wills stock fallacy/deception chart that is G 1.
Res Judicata - Already conceded to Kent's argument
G > In fact, Kent has at least TWO Felonies and
G > a misdemeanor for using a teen to help
G > commit his Garage Burglary Felony.
Moe > And yet you don't have scans of the actual court documents, do
you?
Public links to official web sites can't be photoshopped.
Kent's stock deceptions/logical fallacies
F. Ad Hominem calling opponents
1. Drunks or drunk drivers
2. Druggies or on drugs
3. Mentally Ill often as result of drug use
G. Res Judicata
1. Already conceded to Kent's argument
2. Question already asked and answered.
H. Fallacy of Suppressed Evidence
1a. Missing Middle, False Dilemma, False Dichotomy, bifurcation
1b. Fallacy of Complex Question - loaded question with presupposition
2. Withholding proof saying it's already on the table
3. ""Check is in the mail"" as proof of something.
4. Proof held hostage awaiting opponents proof on something else
J. Lie claimed to be based on opponents standards - a type of strawman
Claim that a lack of proof disproves something.
Claim that a lack of proof proves something.
Flat out outright lies.
It's as if Kent is an automation that is WAY too simple.
yumhuyk
>
> As for the well known crystal skull, look at the shape of the eye
> sockets. Mayans, being of the Native American branch which is an
> offshoot of the Oriental branch, have a specific shape in both the eye
> sockets and in their front teeth.
Bull-honkey. Forensic cranial anthropology was used by the Hitler to
"prove" that the "Aryan" race was superior and that negroes,
orientals, etc were inferior. No one believes that crap anymore about
differences in skull shapes between races, in fact, no educated person
even believes in "races" anymore.
> But you knew that right?
Yes, we knew you're a neo-nazi peice of shit.
yours in Christ,
isamu
Kent Wills
convictions for BEATING his ex-wife), child abuser and self confessed
user and abuser of illegal drugs, Gregory Scott "Piggly Wiggly" Hanson
<gree...@gmail.com> wrote:
KEYWORDS: Gregory Scott Hanson, Lisa Rene Watkins, Kristen Watkins,
Tom Watkins, child abuse, OWI, child molestation, drugs, Greg Hanson,
felony, sexual assault, Donna Joann Hanson, Sandra Lyn Freese, Sandy
Freese, spousal abuse, greegor47, wife beater, sexual assault, James E
Hanson, Jim Hanson, Jimmy Hanson, Kris Watkins
>G > What does BL ministries say about the falling
>G > out between Kent and BL?
>
>Moe > Get real here. Kent was one of thousands of people BLM scammed.
>
>I'd still like to hear what BL Ministries says
>about the falling out with Kent Wills.
Call and ask.
I doubt they cared. There were enough dupes out there.
Add that it's been 16 years + and it's unlikely anyone will
recall my having been a supporter.
>
>G > Was Kent actually a "plant" with the
>G > intent of disrupting from the inside,
>G > as you described?
>
>Moe > I never said that, Show the MID where
>Moe > I said that or be proven once
>Moe > again you are a liar.
>
>You explained how the BL newsgroup was
>formed by a bunch of Canadian gays who
>were pissed about BL's anti-gay stance.
Actually, Moe did not claim they were gay.
If your admitted use and abuse of illegal drugs had not removed
your ability to understand context, you would have noticed that Moe
stated Canadian students made the group to protest Lar$on's homophobic
position.
While it is possible these students were gay, there is nothing in
Moe's comment that supports a claim that they must have been.
>
>You described how their intent was to
>infiltrate into a BL gathering and disrupt.
When, outside of your drug induced delusions, did Moe make such a
claim?
>
>Kent also claims to have been a paying
>member of BL's ministry, but later turned
>on BL. So much so that for periods of
>many months Kent was the only BL hater
>"holding down the fort" in the BL fan club
>usenet group.
Why do you lie, Greg?
[...]
>
>G > I'm sure it never occurred to you that your
>G > comment resembles an attempt to justify
>G > Kent's deception/infiltration.
>
>Moe > Your own deception to make me post
>Moe > something you want me to post noted.
>Moe > Kent never did the" deception/infiltration".
>
>Why would I believe you?
You have PROVED you don't want to believe that which is true.
>But thanks for explaining the roots of the
>Bob Larson Fan Club.
If, as you've claimed, you read all of my past posts, you would
have already known.
>
>Moe > What he did do regarding BLM is shown
>Moe > on old newsgroup posts, regardless of
>Moe > your attempts to claim otherwise.
>
>Post a quote and a LINK.
But you claimed you read all of my past posts.
Were you lying?
>
>> > G > If BL is the fraud and crook you present, then
>> > G > why don't you PROVE it to the real world
>> > G > instead of wasting your time in the usenet
>> > G > world where lies, smears and deception
>> > G > are a way of life for Felons and misfits like Kent?
>>
>Moe > Kent is not a felon.
>>
>G > You are a rediculous stooge for Kent Wills.
>>
>Moe > And you were the mouth patsy for Kennie
>Moe > Pangborn until KennieBoy got his little
>Moe > legal papers getting his obese abusive
>Moe > ass off usenet.
>
>Irrelevent and fictional.
>ISP's have been dropping off usenet like flies.
Kenneth Robert Pangborn, of KRP CONsulting and The A-Team,
believes there was and is such a court order. He accused me of
posting parts of it to Usenet.
He claimed he was sending the E-mail to you. Did he lie to me
about it?
In order for me to post parts of a court order, a court order
must exist. That I had already told him I had never seen a copy
didn't prevent Ken Pangborn from claiming I had posted parts of it.
It is possible Ken lied, of course. But I can't think of any
rational reason for him to lie and claim I posted parts of a court
order that never existed.
>
>Moe > Secondly the evidence of Larson as a
>Moe > fraud and a crook was online some years
>Moe > ago when Ken Smith had the Bob
>Moe > Larson Fan Club web site.
>
>G > The PROOF must have been VERY convincing!
>
>Moe > It was for a number of people Greg. You
>Moe > might want to do some actual research
>Moe > before continuing this avenue because
>Moe > you are showing what an idiot and
>Moe > imbecile you are-- again.
>
>Has he been arrested?
Nope.
While he's LEGALLY innocent, in reality he's very guilty. The
lack of an arrest doesn't equate to a lack of a crime.
>Has he been sued successfully?
Nope.
>
>A usenet hunting pack full of atheists
>and people raging against scientologists
>is not a substitute for law enforcement.
What does Scientology have to do with anything, Greg?
Your attempt to distract is very transparent.
>
>> > Moe > There is further proof online on various
>> > Moe > web sites and a number of other sources
>> > Moe > I am sure you as the cybertstalker you
>> > Moe > try to be can find for yourself.
>>
>> > Moe > Wait, you suck at cyberstalking. You often
>> > Moe > post erroneous info you think you have
>> > Moe > found on your online victims. Heck, you
>> > Moe > couldn't even operate a Google news
>> > Moe > search query even with explicit directions
>> > Moe > handed to you.
>
>Moe > BTW you were charged by your ex-wife
>
>G > Incorrect. State vs.
>
>G > Show me where the records for my 15 year
>G > old misdemeanor convictions name the victim.
>
>Moe > The child was a minor,
>
>My ex-wife was not a child.
>
But she was the victim of your BEATINGS, Greg.
And Lisa Watkins' daughter was a child when you abused her in
various ways.
>Moe > Greg as you damn well know. Laws
>Moe > prohibit the names of minors who
>Moe > were victims from being recorded
>Moe > in public records.
>
>My ex-wife was not a child.
>My misdemeanors are very OLD and involved no child.
>Where are the victims names in Domestic Abuse records?
In the case file.
You are stupid.
>
>Moe > Do explain how Lisa Watkins' daughter was
>Moe > taken away from her while you lived
>Moe > in her home,greg.
>
>Desperate to change the subject, Moe?
Why is it acceptable for you to divert to another item but so
very wrong for anyone else?
>
>Moe > with abuse and you have a number of
>Moe > court cases against you where you
>Moe > have not paid the court fees.
>
>G > Incorrect.
>
>Moe > You have a number of court cases
>Moe > against you
>
>Now?
It is possible, though I've not seen any evidence of it.
>
>Moe > and you haven't paid all the fees yet.
>Moe > Deny and lie all you want Greg.
>Moe > You're scum, after all.
>
>
>
>Moe > Not to mention how you abused a seven
>Moe > year old girl badly enough to have your
>Moe > name on a state abuse registry.
>
>G > Got an official LINK to that registry for confirmation?
>
>Moe > As soon as you show proof of your claims Greg.
>
>H 4 on Kent's stock fallacies chart.
>Proof held hostage awaiting opponents proof on something else
>
Is this how you admit you've been lying all along about the
existence of the pictures, Greg? A simple yes or no will do.
>
>> > You are a sad bored OBSESSED misfit reading
>> > TRUE CRIME stories to bring excitement to your
>> > life because you can't get a date with either gender.
>
>Moe > Is being a misfit bad?
>
>Moe > Greg, why should I "get a date" when I HAVE a BF?
>
>Inflateable.
Projection noted.
How long ago did Lisa Watkins wise up and give you the
metaphorical boot?
>
>Moe > Dontcha think that before you call other
>Moe > people criminals that you might want to
>Moe > clean up your own legal and other violations first?
>
>G > I think I called Kent a FELON, not a mere criminal.
>
>Moe > And yet you admit what you posted about
>Moe > " Kent Wills" is not the same "Kent Wills'
>Moe > that posts here.
>Moe >
>Moe > Trying to have it both ways?
>
>On the Kent Wills stock fallacy/deception chart that is G 1.
> Res Judicata - Already conceded to Kent's argument
>
Are you so stoned you see asking a question as claiming that you
conceded to anything?
Really?
>G > In fact, Kent has at least TWO Felonies and
>G > a misdemeanor for using a teen to help
>G > commit his Garage Burglary Felony.
>
>Moe > And yet you don't have scans of the actual court documents, do
>you?
>
>Public links to official web sites can't be photoshopped.
But, as you have admitted is the case with regards to the
information you post as if it was and is about me, it doesn't always
link to the person you claim.
With you, it rarely does.
forevernitefan
> At one time, not so long ago, forevernitefan <fvrn...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>
>
> >> > > I do know that Lar$on has to actually pay someone in order to get
> >> > > a death thread. I think the guy he hired is named Chad, though it's
> >> > > been so long I couldn't say so under oath.
>
> > Chad Kelley was the guy he paid $10 via signed check ( Ken Smith
> >posted once on his web site the photos of the back and the front) for
> >the "kill bob larson" song and T-shirt thing Deicide and Glen Benton
> >had in their act.
>
> >Here is the URL for the BLFC page:
>
> >"http://home.earthlink.net/~19ranger57/blies.htm
>
> > And here is one pic of two of the check:
>
> >http://home.earthlink.net/~19ranger57/KBLofficialCheck_040899lev.jpg
>
> >Here is the link to the " Kill Bob Larson" scam:
>
> >http://home.earthlink.net/~19ranger57/killbob.htm
>
> >That also has some details of Chad Kelley and the transaction between
> >him and Larson.
>
> >Try this URL as well:
>
> >http://home.earthlink.net/~19ranger57/kblcheck.html
>
> I suspected KSIC was Lar$on, but the possibility that he was
> nothing more than a duped loyalist was still there. I was able to
> start exposing him by getting him to post a scan of the check.
> What's most sad is that even after I, and another poster,
> explained exactly what I did, Lar$on couldn't grasp it.
>
> --
> Nessun maggior dolore
> Che ricordarsi del tempo felice
> Nella miseria.
Larson's self centeredness doesn't allow him the insight to realize
when he makes mistakes. His self-glorification of claiming to be "the
foremost authority", yada yada, doesn't ground him to the truth about
himself.
Larson, in essence, is blind to his actual nature.
Moe
marston shores
>> A death "thread"?
>
> Sorry. That should have been death threat.
>
>> You "under oath"?
>
> Not at the moment.
>
>> Amusing.
>
> You see typos as amusing? You really are easily amused.
>
>
I find your ongoing denial of your garage burglary conviction amusing,
your obsession with Bob I just find weird.
marston shores
> Larson's self centeredness doesn't allow him the insight to realize
> when he makes mistakes. His self-glorification of claiming to be "the
> foremost authority", yada yada, doesn't ground him to the truth about
> himself.
>
> Larson, in essence, is blind to his actual nature.
>
> Moe
And what about you?
Are you willing to admit you're obsessed with the man, to the point of
stalking him for years, in fact even a decade?
What you and Mr. Wills do here is very unnatural behavior.
Frankly if I had a talk program I'd be tempted to book you both and let
the audience get a real look at the far side.
Greegor
1. Who would do DIDDLY for $10 in 1999?
2. Who would author a song for $10?
3. Could be Photoshopped. Kent has a history of that.
Dan Sullivan
"Greegor" <gree...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:9ea5ccb0-e4aa-4693...@8g2000vbg.googlegroups.com...
> http://home.earthlink.net/~19ranger57/KBLofficialCheck_040899lev.jpg
>
> 1. Who would do DIDDLY for $10 in 1999?
About that time, grag, you were driving Lisa Watkins' daughter around Cedar
Rapids so she could retrieve bottles and cans out of the neighbor's garbage
for the 5 cent deposit money.
Kent Wills
convictions for BEATING his ex-wife), child abuser and self confessed
user and abuser of illegal drugs, Gregory Scott "Piggly Wiggly" Hanson
<gree...@gmail.com> wrote:
KEYWORDS: Gregory Scott Hanson, Lisa Rene Watkins, Kristen Watkins,
Tom Watkins, child abuse, OWI, child molestation, drugs, Greg Hanson,
felony, sexual assault, Donna Joann Hanson, Sandra Lyn Freese, Sandy
Freese, spousal abuse, greegor47, wife beater, sexual assault, James E
Hanson, Jim Hanson, Jimmy Hanson, Kris Watkins
>http://home.earthlink.net/~19ranger57/KBLofficialCheck_040899lev.jpg
>
>1. Who would do DIDDLY for $10 in 1999?
You mean like how you FORCED Kristen Watkins to crawl into
dangerous dumpster to retrieve cans and bottles for the deposit? How
much more did her work earn, Greg?
Chad didn't care about the money, which is why he sent the check
to Ken.
>
>2. Who would author a song for $10?
Seems Chad would.
Of course, Chad was very open about the fact that he really did
it to promote himself and his band. The publicity may have been worth
far more than the $10.00 check.
>
>3. Could be Photoshopped. Kent has a history of that.
Even if your LIE were true, I had nothing to do with it.
Until Ken posted a link to the page where he exposed that Lar$on
had to PAY Chad in order to get a death threat, I knew nothing of it.
Regarding your latest PROOF that you are psychologically UNABLE
to be honest, unless you make a mistake, are forced, or believe doing
so will advance one or more of your lies, I can't make use of
photoshop to save my life. I can barely open an image with it. And
that's saying something, given how easy simply opening an image is.
Maybe you should try a lie that is at least plausible. You keep
getting caught in your implausible lies. So much so it's as if you
make the conscious choice to post that which you know will get
exposed.
marston shores
>> I find your ongoing denial of your garage burglary conviction amusing,
>
> Be careful. Greg has stated I have no such conviction. He may
> get upset that you are, in essence, calling him a liar.
I opened the various state web links, they are valid.
>> your obsession with Bob I just find weird.
>
> What obsession? Save for still participating in the news group, I
> pay not attention to the man. He's a non-event.
Yet you have been in this group, if the google archive is accurate, for
about a decade discussing him, that's very strange for a small time
tele-celebrity such as he.
Frankly when Larson's Christian talk radio network began imploding he
went all the way off the national radar, and that's been years.
Weird.
forevernitefan
Gee Greg, did you figure out by now that you exposed your little nym
here? The " photoshopped" claim is something you repeat numerous times
along with your usual copy and paste crapola.
What an idiot!!!
Moe
Greegor
G > 1. Who would do DIDDLY for $10 in 1999?
DJS3 > About that time, grag, you were driving
DJS3 > [...]'s daughter around Cedar Rapids so
DJS3 > she could retrieve bottles and cans out
DJS3 > of the neighbor's garbage for the
DJS3 > 5 cent deposit money.
Not quite.
Country road and a quadruple softball field.
Your usual twisting of course.
Do YOU think some guy wrote a song or orchestrated
some fake assasination plot for only $10, Dan?
Maybe you should have taken your wife and
teen out doing can/bottle redemption instead
of letting your house get foreclosed, Dan!
G > 2. Who would author a song for $10?
G > 3. Could be Photoshopped. Kent has a history of that.
http://home.earthlink.net/~19ranger57/KBLofficialCheck_040899lev.jpg
1. Who would do DIDDLY for $10 in 1999?
2. Who would author a song for $10?
3. Could be Photoshopped. Kent has a history of that.
Moe > Gee Greg, did you figure out by now that
Moe > you exposed your little nym here?
You make up the craziest crap.
I don't use sock nyms, Maureen.
Moe > The " photoshopped" claim is something
Moe > you repeat numerous times along with
Moe > your usual copy and paste crapola.
Welcome to the internet!
Photographs and scans are not
proof because Photoshop exists.
That's why a LINK to court/prison
records is better for proof.
Moe > What an idiot!!!
How long did you last as a chicken plucker?
Why doesn't your brother take care of Frank?
Greegor
amusing,
KBW > Be careful. Greg has stated I have no such
KBW > conviction. He may get upset that you are,
KBW > in essence, calling him a liar.
ms > I opened the various state web links, they are valid.
I post verifiable facts about Kent.
Kent responds by posting text of
somebody else's on line OWI conviction
information where Kent edited out the
CASE NUMBER and edited in my name
and birth date.
Recently when confronted, Kent has
tried claiming he "wrote it down"
at some mysterious place he calls the
"records office" right after he tried
claiming the records were expunged.
Kent says all kinds of crazy stuff and then
like a true psychopath he says that it's
true based on his opponent's standards.
ms > your obsession with Bob I just find weird.
KBW > What obsession? Save for still participating
KBW > in the news group, I pay not attention to
KBW > the man. He's a non-event.
ms > Yet you have been in this group, if the
ms > google archive is accurate, for about
ms > a decade discussing him, that's very
ms > strange for a small time tele-celebrity
ms > such as he.
ms >
ms > Frankly when Larson's Christian talk
ms > radio network began imploding he
ms > went all the way off the national
ms > radar, and that's been years.
ms >
ms > Weird.
Kent and Moe urgently NEED villains, even
if they have to fabricate the villainy or pick
on somebody who has ignored them or LEFT.
Kent was recognized as a liar on usenet
before I ever heard of him, by a bunch of
people who figured out that his claim
of being a school teacher was bogus.
Kent still* claims to be a school teacher.
Don't you kinda wonder why a guy
with two felonies and a misdemeanor for
using a teenager in his Garage Burglary
would go around usenet for YEARS
claiming to be a school teacher?
I wonder if Arkansas has laws against LURING minors?
Dan Sullivan
> http://home.earthlink.net/~19ranger57/KBLofficialCheck_040899lev.jpg
>
> G > 1. Who would do DIDDLY for $10 in 1999?
>
> DJS3 > About that time, grag, you were driving
> DJS3 > she could retrieve bottles and cans out
> DJS3 > of the neighbor's garbage for the
> DJS3 > 5 cent deposit money.
>
> Not quite.
> Country road and a quadruple softball field.
Nine years and that's the best BS you've got, grag?
> Your usual twisting of course.
You've never claimed "country road" and "softball field" before.
Greegor
DJS3 > About that time, grag, you were driving
DJS3 > Lisa Watkins' daughter around Cedar Rapids so
DJS3 > she could retrieve bottles and cans out
DJS3 > of the neighbor's garbage for the
DJS3 > 5 cent deposit money.
G > Not quite.
G > Country road and a quadruple softball field.
DJS3 > Nine years and that's the best BS you've got, grag?
G > Your usual twisting of course.
DJS3 > You've never claimed "country road" and "softball field"
before.
Never? Not even when you quoted me in 2007?
But you never told me why you MADE
BABIES with a bipolar woman.
When asked about why you got 20+
Child Abuse reports you never suggested
that fact as a cause or possible factor.
Hitters changed it's name to Third Base sports complex.
Fish around a bit to the left and you can see four softball
diamonds. They look a bit like a clover or cloverleaf.
Notice that Google's map tag for it still says Hitters Park.
http://www.easterniowasports.com/Diamond%20pics/Third%20Base%20ComplexIMG_1271.JPG
http://www.easterniowasports.com/Diamond%20pics/Third%20base%20back%20diamondsIMG_1273.JPG
The complex is located at 7251 Mt. Vernon Rd. S.E. Cedar
Rapids, Iowa 52403 The park is located at the corner of Hwy
13 and Mt. Vernon Road. Traveling I-380 exit Hwy. 30 East
travel east exit Hwy. 13 north, travel Hwy 13 Approx 4 miles
first four ways stop is Mt. Vernon Rd. turn left. Hitters will
be on your left. Traveling Hwy. 30 west, exit Hwy. 13 north,
travel Hwy 13 Approx 4 miles first four ways stop is Mt.
Vernon Rd. turn left. Hitters will be on your left.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.adoption/msg/60be66b7d806ea81
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.child-protective-services/msg/ad37f4e22a9fed56?hl=en
Newsgroups: alt.support.child-protective-services, alt.support.foster-
parents, alt.dads-rights.unmoderated, alt.support.divorce
From: Dan Sullivan <dsull...@optonline.net>
Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2007 16:48:02 -0700
Subject: Re: evaluating foster parents
FM > have the little girl climbing into
FM > dumpsters to retrieve cans for you,
G > Never. But we did collect cans for pin money.
G > Particularly at a company that runs 4 softball fields
G > I had long plywood tongs to reach into dumpsters.
DJS3 > And we have your word for that.
Kent Wills
wrote:
Especially in light of the fact that I am very open about my lack
of ability to use photoshop.
I'm being very honest when I state I can barely open an image
with photoshop. Given how easy that should be, this will indicate how
UNABLE I am to use the software.
Greg is well aware that I can't make use of it, but his NEED to
lie is so strong, he is UNABLE to be honest.
>What an idiot!!!
>
What did idiots do to you that you would degrade them by forcing
an association between them and Greg? :)
Dan Sullivan
> G > 1. Who would do DIDDLY for $10 in 1999?
>
> DJS3 > About that time, grag, you were driving
> DJS3 > Lisa Watkins' daughter around Cedar Rapids so
> DJS3 > she could retrieve bottles and cans out
> DJS3 > of the neighbor's garbage for the
> DJS3 > 5 cent deposit money.
>
> G > Not quite.
> G > Country road and a quadruple softball field.
>
> DJS3 > Nine years and that's the best BS you've got, grag?
>
> G > Your usual twisting of course.
>
> DJS3 > You've never claimed "country road" and "softball field"
> before.
>
> Never? Not even when you quoted me in 2007?
Liar.
I never quoted your claim of "country road" or "softball field," grag,
because you never said "country road" or "softball field."
> Newsgroups: alt.support.child-protective-services, alt.support.foster-
> parents, alt.dads-rights.unmoderated, alt.support.divorce
> From: Dan Sullivan <dsull...@optonline.net>
> Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2007 16:48:02 -0700
> Subject: Re: evaluating foster parents
>
> FM > have the little girl climbing into
> FM > dumpsters to retrieve cans for you,
>
> G > Never. But we did collect cans for pin money.
> G > Particularly at a company that runs 4 softball fields
> G > I had long plywood tongs to reach into dumpsters.
>
> DJS3 > And we have your word for that.
See!
No "country road."
And "a company that runs 4 softball fields."
marston shores
> At one time, not so long ago, marston shores <ma...@addy.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> Kent Wills wrote:
>>
>>>> I find your ongoing denial of your garage burglary conviction amusing,
>>> Be careful. Greg has stated I have no such conviction. He may
>>> get upset that you are, in essence, calling him a liar.
>> I opened the various state web links, they are valid.
>
> You're calling him a liar, which tends to upset him.
I've done no such thing, a lie is of course a premeditated mis-truth,
it's possible he is merely in error or holds a different opinion than you.
In any case, a convicted garage burglar you remain.
>> Yet you have been in this group, if the google archive is accurate, for
>> about a decade discussing him, that's very strange for a small time
>> tele-celebrity such as he.
>
> I first found the group in 1994. That means I've been here for
> more than "about" a decade.
> Is simple math too difficult for you?
I should have googled farther back, sorry, OK you're a decade and a half
plus stalker, happy now?
>> Frankly when Larson's Christian talk radio network began imploding he
>> went all the way off the national radar, and that's been years.
>>
>
> Which is why Lar$on isn't often the topic of discussion. Not
> until someone feels the need to bring up his name.
And then you show up as if on call.
Obsession is difficult to cure, isn't it?
forevernitefan
Coming from one who spews out crazy assed insinuations and
allegations he can't prove, I consider your comment to be a good
indication I was right on target. You do often see the truth as a lie.
>
> I don't use sock nyms, Maureen.
I didn't say sock nyms greg. but you and " marston" seem a bit, quick
to respond to each others posts. This is a trick your buddy Kennie
Pangborn used often to make it appear that he wasn't the only one.
You in your usual stupidity and eagerness to get some more stabs at
Kent resorted to your old hackneyed standbys-- and in doing so you
revealed Marston sounds a little too much exactly like you to be an
actual separate person.
Face it Greg, You prematurely ejected your disguise.
>
> Moe > The " photoshopped" claim is something
> Moe > you repeat numerous times along with
> Moe > your usual copy and paste crapola.
>
> Welcome to the internet!
More like your boring crap over and over and over.....
Seriously Greg, you could save everyone some time by posting an URL
to your Kent rant and posting an URL to your David Sullivan rant. That
way if someone was bored enough to read your old crap they could do so
so the rest of us sane people can just see the two links and go on to
the next post. Its a great time saver. Its not like you actually have
said anything new in over a year....
>
> Photographs and scans are not
> proof because Photoshop exists.
Scans and photos can lead to proof depending upon the content. Since
your buddy Kennnie ( now thankfully banned from usenet) showed a photo
of his discharge certificate, then the same you claim about something
not being proof should apply to Kennie's
case, right Greg?
Oh wait, that would mean you would have to admit Kennie was being
deceptive.....
>
> That's why a LINK to court/prison
> records is better for proof.
>
> Moe > What an idiot!!!
>
> How long did you last as a chicken plucker?
I never was one greg.
But if you need a job as one I can help you fill out the employment
form for you. :-)
>
> Why doesn't your brother take care of Frank?
Who's frank? And which brother are you referring to?
Moe
forevernitefan
Hoping to move to Arkansas Greg? Lisa's daughter, whom you abused was
a minor.
Moe
forevernitefan
> At one time, not so long ago, forevernitefan <fvrn...@yahoo.com>
My sincere and humble apology to all the idiots out there who are OC
still smarter than greg.
Moe
Greegor
amusing,
KBW > Be careful. Greg has stated I have no such conviction.
A blatant and plainly visible outright LIE by Kent.
Simply claiming that his opponent has taken
the exact opposite position from what they really did.
KBW > He may get upset that you are,
KBW > in essence, calling him a liar.
Kent poses as incredibly concerned for
the well being of his opponent ms.
Kent is attempting to further extend the
LIE that Kent is misidentified.
ms > I opened the various state web links, they are valid.
KBW > But Greg has admitted none are about me.
A blatant and outright LIE from Kent, plainly visible.
KBW > You're calling him a liar, which tends to upset him.
When Kent coaches his opponent you know something's wrong.
ms > I've done no such thing, a lie is of course a
ms > premeditated mis-truth, it's possible he is
ms > merely in error or holds a different opinion than you.
I'm starting to see a pattern.
""marston shores"" set themself up as antagonistic to Kent.
""ms"" acknowledge the official links
on Kent which are irrefutable anyway.
Then ms tried to steer toward some way for
Kent to weasel out of the ID.
""ms"" suggests "it's possible he is merely in error
or holds a different opinion than you.".
This statement is presented as if it is
antagonistic to Kent, but it's not really.
It's a ""softball"" attack, a pretense
that he is antagonistic to Kent.
ms > In any case, a convicted garage burglar you remain.
Asserting an undeniable truth is a small
sacrifice to try to sell the "hedge".
ms > Yet you have been in this group, if the google
ms > archive is accurate, for about a decade
ms > discussing him, that's very strange for a
ms > small time tele-celebrity such as he.
Another undeniable truth. When Kent posts truth
it is usually to sell some lie.
KBW > I first found the group in 1994. That means
KBW > I've been here for more than "about" a decade.
KBW > Is simple math too difficult for you?
Kent sells himself as KING RAT.
Usenet is so perverse On usenet that passes for an EGO TRIP!
The math dig may have been simply to distract.
ms > I should have googled farther back, sorry, OK
ms > you're a decade and a half plus stalker, happy now?
Not really anything new.
ms > Frankly when Larson's Christian talk
ms > radio network began imploding he
ms > went all the way off the national radar,
ms > and that's been years.
KBW > Which is why Lar$on isn't often the
KBW > topic of discussion. Not until
KBW > someone feels the need to bring up his name.
ms > And then you show up as if on call.
ms > Obsession is difficult to cure, isn't it?
Undeniable truth, nothing novel or profound in that.
The alt.fan.bob-larson usenet group was basically
dead. ""Yumhuyk"" and ""marston shores"" came
along and posted these ""softball"" or weak
""attacks"" which gave Kent and Moe an excuse
to RAGE about what is really a dead issue.
""marston shores"" has also repeatedly
played games with the "follow up"
designation in his post headers.
-----------------------------------
Kent Wills
wrote:
[...]
KEYWORDS: Gregory Scott Hanson, Lisa Rene Watkins, Kristen Watkins,
Tom Watkins, child abuse, OWI, child molestation, drugs, Greg Hanson,
felony, sexual assault, Donna Joann Hanson, Sandra Lyn Freese, Sandy
Freese, spousal abuse, greegor47, wife beater, sexual assault, James E
Hanson, Jim Hanson, Jimmy Hanson, Kris Watkins
>> I wonder if Arkansas has laws against LURING minors?
>
>Hoping to move to Arkansas Greg? Lisa's daughter, whom you abused was
>a minor.
If that is Greg's motivation, I expect he'll find the laws
regarding the sexual molestation of children are just as strict. And
he may not be lucky enough to avoid prosecution in Arkansas.
Kent Wills
convictions for BEATING his ex-wife), child abuser and self confessed
<gree...@gmail.com> wrote:
KEYWORDS: Gregory Scott Hanson, Lisa Rene Watkins, Kristen Watkins,
Tom Watkins, child abuse, OWI, child molestation, drugs, Greg Hanson,
felony, sexual assault, Donna Joann Hanson, Sandra Lyn Freese, Sandy
Freese, spousal abuse, greegor47, wife beater, sexual assault, James E
Hanson, Jim Hanson, Jimmy Hanson, Kris Watkins
>ms > I find your ongoing denial of your garage burglary conviction
>amusing,
>
>KBW > Be careful. Greg has stated I have no such conviction.
>
>A blatant and plainly visible outright LIE by Kent.
Not at all. You openly admitted the information isn't about me,
but some other Kent Wills.
The truth is you have information about three people who, in real
life, are named Kent Wills. You post their information as if it was
and is about me. You do this AFTER you admitted it's not.
What possess you to be so dishonest, Greg?
Serious question.
>Simply claiming that his opponent has taken
>the exact opposite position from what they really did.
You claimed the information is about the other Kent Wills. You
posted this a few times.
>
>KBW > He may get upset that you are,
>KBW > in essence, calling him a liar.
>
>Kent poses as incredibly concerned for
>the well being of his opponent ms.
You get upset when you are PROVED a liar, so it's certainly
possible you'll get upset at the accusation.
If marston's calling you a liar doesn't bother you, so be it.
>Kent is attempting to further extend the
>LIE that Kent is misidentified.
Since there is no lie, I can't be further extending it.
How is it that such simple logic is beyond you, Greg?
>
>ms > I opened the various state web links, they are valid.
>
>KBW > But Greg has admitted none are about me.
>
>A blatant and outright LIE from Kent, plainly visible.
You may lie about it all you want. The truth will remain the
truth, Greg.
>
>KBW > You're calling him a liar, which tends to upset him.
>
>When Kent coaches his opponent you know something's wrong.
It tends to mean I'm trying to keep the opponent from looking too
much the fool.
>
>ms > I've done no such thing, a lie is of course a
>ms > premeditated mis-truth, it's possible he is
>ms > merely in error or holds a different opinion than you.
>
>I'm starting to see a pattern.
>""marston shores"" set themself up as antagonistic to Kent.
>""ms"" acknowledge the official links
>on Kent which are irrefutable anyway.
Except that you admitted they aren't about me.
Where you lying then, or are you lying now? You've never answered
this question. In fact, you've only acknowledged it once, and you
LIED when you did that.
>Then ms tried to steer toward some way for
>Kent to weasel out of the ID.
Why should I wish to weasel out of it? The more you insist I am
who you claim I am not, the more foolish you look.
>
>""ms"" suggests "it's possible he is merely in error
>or holds a different opinion than you.".
>
>This statement is presented as if it is
>antagonistic to Kent, but it's not really.
>It's a ""softball"" attack, a pretense
>that he is antagonistic to Kent.
Are you setting up a scenario in which you can present the drug
induced claim that I am everyone on Usenet? Everyone except for you,
of course.
I realize you truly believe I am everyone, but the truth is, I am
not. No amount of your drug induced (unless you lied) mental defects
will alter this truth, Greg. Seriously.
>
>ms > In any case, a convicted garage burglar you remain.
>
>Asserting an undeniable truth is a small
>sacrifice to try to sell the "hedge".
Except that you claimed it's not about me. Where you lying then,
or now?
>
>ms > Yet you have been in this group, if the google
>ms > archive is accurate, for about a decade
>ms > discussing him, that's very strange for a
>ms > small time tele-celebrity such as he.
>
>Another undeniable truth. When Kent posts truth
>it is usually to sell some lie.
Projection noted.
>
>KBW > I first found the group in 1994. That means
>KBW > I've been here for more than "about" a decade.
>KBW > Is simple math too difficult for you?
>
>Kent sells himself as KING RAT.
I do no such thing.
>Usenet is so perverse On usenet that passes for an EGO TRIP!
>The math dig may have been simply to distract.
Actually, it was a minor insult. It's very telling that you
didn't catch it.
>
>ms > I should have googled farther back, sorry, OK
>ms > you're a decade and a half plus stalker, happy now?
>
>Not really anything new.
>
>ms > Frankly when Larson's Christian talk
>ms > radio network began imploding he
>ms > went all the way off the national radar,
>ms > and that's been years.
>
>KBW > Which is why Lar$on isn't often the
>KBW > topic of discussion. Not until
>KBW > someone feels the need to bring up his name.
>
>ms > And then you show up as if on call.
>ms > Obsession is difficult to cure, isn't it?
>
>Undeniable truth, nothing novel or profound in that.
>
So you are obsessed with me, Greg?
When I left ASCPS, you followed me all over Usenet. You even
went to groups I hadn't been to for over a year.
>The alt.fan.bob-larson usenet group was basically
>dead. ""Yumhuyk"" and ""marston shores"" came
>along and posted these ""softball"" or weak
>""attacks"" which gave Kent and Moe an excuse
>to RAGE about what is really a dead issue.
What would that be, Greg?
>
>""marston shores"" has also repeatedly
>played games with the "follow up"
>designation in his post headers.
>
He has? You're the one who obsessively adds various groups to
the list, Greg.
Do you really think your behavior is normal?
[Snip of items already addressed]
Do you really believe that by posting the same thing over and
over it will become the truth?
marston shores
>> I've done no such thing,
>
> In fact, you have. You haven't used the word liar, but you are
> calling him one.
Your sort of mental, aren't you?
>> a lie is of course a premeditated mis-truth,
>> it's possible he is merely in error or holds a different opinion than you.
>
> Except that he's openly admitted the information isn't about me.
> If it were an error, he would have stated such. I make mistakes
> and own up to them. Greg never does, so they can't be seen as errors.
> Our opinions do differ, but that's isn't what motivates either of
> us.
Totally mental.
>> In any case, a convicted garage burglar you remain.
>
> Greg claimed I'm not. Why are you calling him, in effect, a
> liar? I'm curious as to why you would call him such.
I don't know him and have no opinion on him.
But your conviction is available online.
>> I should have googled farther back, sorry, OK you're a decade and a half
>> plus stalker, happy now?
>
> Happy that you are finally able to be partially honest.
> Posting to a newsgroup does not make one a stalker. Not to the
> rational mind.
Staying here for 16 years sure does.
>> And then you show up as if on call.
>>
>
> I check the group on Sundays, and occasionally on Wednesdays. If,
> like now, I become involved in a discussion, I check more often.
But you always DO show up, that we know.
>> Obsession is difficult to cure, isn't it?
>
> You would need to tell me. You're posting to the Lar$on group,
> which by your account equates to an obsession with Bob Lar$on.
Your going mental again.
marston shores
>
> Kent and Moe urgently NEED villains, even
> if they have to fabricate the villainy or pick
> on somebody who has ignored them or LEFT.
>
> Kent was recognized as a liar on usenet
> before I ever heard of him, by a bunch of
> people who figured out that his claim
> of being a school teacher was bogus.
>
> Kent still* claims to be a school teacher.
>
> Don't you kinda wonder why a guy
> with two felonies and a misdemeanor for
> using a teenager in his Garage Burglary
> would go around usenet for YEARS
> claiming to be a school teacher?
>
> I wonder if Arkansas has laws against LURING minors?
I think the two of them are flat crazy, mental, etc.
And I think they prove it more and more each time they post.
marston shores
>> Your sort of mental, aren't you?
>
> There's nothing to suggest I am mental, in the context in which
> you preset the term.
Oh yes there is!
>> Totally mental.
>
> Going Valley on us?
Just a turn of the phrase.
>> I don't know him and have no opinion on him.
>>
>> But your conviction is available online.
>
> Except that I have no such conviction.
I read it on an official Iowa courts website.
> Greg's already slipped
> and admitted the information isn't about me.
> That one or more people named Kent Wills do does not mean *I* do.
The doppleganger defense?
Lame.
>> Staying here for 16 years sure does.
>
> Not to the rational mind.
Especiallt to a rational mind.
> YMMV.
Not this time.
>> But you always DO show up, that we know.
>>
>
> Eventually.
Swiftly.
> If someone posts to misc.legal, I eventually read it. By your
> standards, I must be obsessed with the law.
Every law, or some laws?
>> Your going mental again.
>
> I'm using YOUR standards to make the claim.
You can't be, I never shared them with you.
Greegor
ms > You can't be, I never shared them with you.
J. Lie claimed to be based on opponents standards - a type of strawman
Kent's stock deceptions/logical fallacies
F. Ad Hominem calling opponents
1. Drunks or drunk drivers
2. Druggies or on drugs
3. Mentally Ill often as result of drug use
G. Res Judicata
1. Already conceded to Kent's argument
2. Question already asked and answered.
H. Fallacy of Suppressed Evidence
1a. Missing Middle, False Dilemma, False Dichotomy, bifurcation
1b. Fallacy of Complex Question - loaded question with presupposition
2. Withholding proof saying it's already on the table
3. ""Check is in the mail"" as proof of something.
4. Proof held hostage awaiting opponents proof on something else
J. Lie claimed to be based on opponents standards - a type of strawman
Claim that a lack of proof disproves something.
Claim that a lack of proof proves something.
Flat out outright lies.
Claim that asking for a LINK PROVES insult XYZ
It's as if Kent is an automation that is WAY too simple.
Kent Wills
Is this enough attention from me, or does your drug addled mind
require more?
KEYWORDS: Gregory Scott Hanson, Lisa Rene Watkins, Kristen Watkins,
Tom Watkins, child abuse, OWI, child molestation, drugs, Greg Hanson,
felony, sexual assault, Donna Joann Hanson, Sandra Lyn Freese, Sandy
Freese, spousal abuse, greegor47, wife beater, sexual assault, James E
Hanson, Jim Hanson, Jimmy Hanson, Kris Watkins
Kent Wills
convictions for BEATING his ex-wife), child abuser and self confessed
<gree...@gmail.com> wrote:
KEYWORDS: Gregory Scott Hanson, Lisa Rene Watkins, Kristen Watkins,
Tom Watkins, child abuse, OWI, child molestation, drugs, Greg Hanson,
felony, sexual assault, Donna Joann Hanson, Sandra Lyn Freese, Sandy
Freese, spousal abuse, greegor47, wife beater, sexual assault, James E
Hanson, Jim Hanson, Jimmy Hanson, Kris Watkins
I wasn't going to address the List O' Lies, as I call it, yet
another time, but since there may be new readers, it wouldn't hurt to
expose your lies and projection again.
You're more than welcome Greg.
>KBW > I'm using YOUR standards to make the claim.
>
>ms > You can't be, I never shared them with you.
>
>J. Lie claimed to be based on opponents standards - a type of strawman
>
>
>
>Kent's stock deceptions/logical fallacies
>
>F. Ad Hominem calling opponents
You of course are innocent as an angel and haven't done the least
bit of ad hom, right Greg? Please deny that I have adopted YOUR
standards, Greg. I would enjoy posting the MIDs that will PROVE you
the liar you are.
> 1. Drunks or drunk drivers
I only call people drunks if they claimed they are.
I've never called anyone a drunk driver. Post the MID and/or
Google link to just one post where I have accused anyone of being a
drunk driver. Unless, of course, you're lying.
> 2. Druggies or on drugs
Only if they've admitted they are.
> 3. Mentally Ill often as result of drug use
Grandmother, Greg?
>G. Res Judicata
> 1. Already conceded to Kent's argument
If it fits your own style of posting and your own claims that by
not answering your opponent has conceded, you might want to salute it
as it sails by YOU.
Please deny you have done this, Greg. I'm requesting you do so.
This will allow me to quote you, with MIDs so that anyone with an
interest may verify the quote and context.
You will, of course, run and HIDE from the TRUTH I've presented.
> 2. Question already asked and answered.
That's on your list why, Greg? Well, because it's the truth, but
you want to deceptively present it is not. You want to dishonestly
present that it's evasion and that your opponent MUST answer the same
question over and over, with your express intent of any reader
unfamiliar with your lies, and your sick little mind games, to
actually believe the lie in your rhetorical question.
Why do you ask the same questions so many times AFTER they've
been answered, Greg? You've never answered this.
>H. Fallacy of Suppressed Evidence
> 1a. Missing Middle, False Dilemma, False Dichotomy, bifurcation
You don't even know what those mean, Greg. You are doing a cut
and paste from a web page on fallacious argumentation.
You are far more guilty of such things than anyone else I've ever
met on or off-line. Would you like me to post the MIDs for the
multitude of posts from you where you commit each? I'm willing to
find and post them.
> 1b. Fallacy of Complex Question - loaded question with presupposition
Oh come now Greg. Stop with the confessions. I, and probably
everyone reading, already know that you use this and have used it
since you first began posting to ASCPS and tried to sabotage families
so they would lose to your precious CPS.
Would you like me to post MIDs of the post that PROVE my claim?
I'm willing. You are, of course, free to make the tacit admission
that my claim is true and accurate by running from the truth I
present.
The choice is yours to make.
> 2. Withholding proof saying it's already on the table
Liar.
If it's already on the table, it can't be withheld.
You are stupid.
> 3. ""Check is in the mail"" as proof of something.
You have, once again, confused me with Kenneth Robert Pangborn.
Is this because of your Fregoli, or your psychological INABILITY
to be honest with intent? I'll accept either answer.
If you see an option I do not, present it. But keep in mind I
will expose any and all lies you present.
> 4. Proof held hostage awaiting opponents proof on something else
Borrowed from the standards of one Gregory Scott "Piggly Wiggly"
Hanson.
If you believe this standard is unfair, please explain why you
used it so many times.
>J. Lie claimed to be based on opponents standards - a type of strawman
And spot on truth in your case. You do everything you've listed
here, and then complain when it's sent back to you in the same manner.
Do you understand what a joke that makes you? Any new poster
reading your tripe should leave laughing.
It's your mean and bitter campaign in FAVOR of CPS removing and
keeping children that disgusts them, but at least they can leave
laughing at your pathetic attempts to use these fallacies and your
crying when others use them against you.
>
>Claim that a lack of proof disproves something.
That's you, not me. I've never presented such.
Post the MID and/or Google link to just one post from me where I
present such. Just one is all I ask.
You'll offer nothing, since I've never presented it. I have
stated that without proof it's difficult to KNOW something to be true
or not. This is not, however, what you dishonestly present.
>Claim that a lack of proof proves something.
Again, that's you. Feel free to prove I've done so.
Oh wait, I've asked you to do that before and you chose to run
and HIDE from the request. Maybe you'll be a man and offer something
to prove your claim this time.
You'll understand if I don't expect you to do so.
>Flat out outright lies.
Greg, meet Gregory Scott "Piggly Wiggly" Hanson, liar supreme.
>Claim that asking for a LINK PROVES insult XYZ
That's about as obtuse a comment and accusation as you've ever
come up with, I think. Want to explain, clarify, and see if you can
make any sense?
You won't, of course. You will use one of the projected dodges
you list.
>
>It's as if Kent is an automation that is WAY too simple.
Since you are guilty of using all of these dodges Greg, who is
being simple and transparent?
Why, Gregory Scott "Piggly Wiggly" Hanson, of course. For over
ten years on ASCPS. A simpleton and fool, ready to belly up with scum
suck as Kenneth Robert Pangborn because you admire his ability to
screw up his clients' cases and ensure another CPS win.
You are a fool, Greg, and stupid to boot.
What is most sad is that you honestly believe your behavior is
that of one who is mentally sound.
Greegor
> another time, but since there may be new readers, it wouldn't hurt to
> expose your lies and projection again.
> You're more than welcome Greg.
>
> >KBW > I'm using YOUR standards to make the claim.
>
> >ms > You can't be, I never shared them with you.
>
> >J. Lie claimed to be based on opponents standards - a type of strawman
>
> >Kent's stock deceptions/logical fallacies
>
> >F. Ad Hominem calling opponents
>
> You of course are innocent as an angel and haven't done the least
> bit of ad hom, right Greg? Please deny that I have adopted YOUR
> standards, Greg. I would enjoy posting the MIDs that will PROVE you
> the liar you are.
>
> > 1. Drunks or drunk drivers
KBW > I only call people drunks if they claimed they are.
KBW > I've never called anyone a drunk driver.
KBW > Post the MID and/or Google link to just
KBW > one post where I have accused anyone
KBW > of being a drunk driver.
KBW > Unless, of course, you're lying.
--------------------------------------------------
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.legal/msg/408201910de1bc05
Newsgroups: misc.legal, alt.fan.bob-larson, alt.support.foster-
parents, alt.support.child-protective-services
From: Kent Wills <compu...@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 23:28:35 -0600
Subject: Gregory Scott "G'Tard the Dancing Chimp" Hanson, drunk
driver, child molester (by his standards of proof) wife and child
abuser.
---------------------------------------------------
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.child-protective-services/msg/4f31fe27f9163c42
Newsgroups: alt.support.child-protective-services, alt.support.foster-
parents, misc.legal, alt.fan.bob-larson
From: Kent Wills <compu...@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2009 10:55:51 -0600
Subject: The mind of the OWI convict, child molester (by his own
standards of proof), wife and child abuser named Gregory Scott Hanson
---------------------------------------------------
Plus THOUSANDS of postings of this:
CRIMINAL COMPLAINT 04/10/1996
Comments: CT 1 OWI 1ST
OTHER CITATION 04/10/1996
Comments: CT 2 SPEED
Disposition Status
GUILTY PLEA/DEFAULT
-----------------------------------------------
> > 2. Druggies or on drugs
>
> Only if they've admitted they are.
>
> > 3. Mentally Ill often as result of drug use
>
> Grandmother, Greg?
Her vascular dementia was not due to drug use.
And it was DIAGNOSED and documented.
YOU throw it around at most of your opponents.
> >G. Res Judicata
> > 1. Already conceded to Kent's argument
>
> If it fits your own style of posting and your own claims that by
> not answering your opponent has conceded, you might want to salute it
> as it sails by YOU.
> Please deny you have done this, Greg. I'm requesting you do so.
> This will allow me to quote you, with MIDs so that anyone with an
> interest may verify the quote and context.
> You will, of course, run and HIDE from the TRUTH I've presented.
>
> > 2. Question already asked and answered.
>
> That's on your list why, Greg? Well, because it's the truth, but
> you want to deceptively present it is not. You want to dishonestly
> present that it's evasion and that your opponent MUST answer the same
> question over and over, with your express intent of any reader
> unfamiliar with your lies, and your sick little mind games, to
> actually believe the lie in your rhetorical question.
> Why do you ask the same questions so many times AFTER they've
> been answered, Greg? You've never answered this.
>
> >H. Fallacy of Suppressed Evidence
> > 1a. Missing Middle, False Dilemma, False Dichotomy, bifurcation
>
> You don't even know what those mean,
KBW > Greg. You are doing a cut and paste
KBW > from a web page on fallacious argumentation.
Yet you pretend it's my fault.
> You are far more guilty of such things than anyone else I've ever
> met on or off-line. Would you like me to post the MIDs for the
> multitude of posts from you where you commit each? I'm willing to
> find and post them.
>
> > 1b. Fallacy of Complex Question - loaded question with presupposition
>
> Oh come now Greg. Stop with the confessions. I, and probably
> everyone reading, already know that you use this and have used it
> since you first began posting to ASCPS and tried to sabotage families
> so they would lose to your precious CPS.
Short attention span, Kent? Or hoping for distraction?
> Would you like me to post MIDs of the post that PROVE my claim?
> I'm willing. You are, of course, free to make the tacit admission
> that my claim is true and accurate by running from the truth I
> present.
> The choice is yours to make.
G > 2. Withholding proof saying it's already on the table
KBW > Liar. If it's already on the table, it can't
KBW > be withheld. You are stupid.
The key word is IF.
As in you falsely claim some proof is on the table.
> > 3. ""Check is in the mail"" as proof of something.
>
> You have, once again, confused me with Kenneth Robert Pangborn.
> Is this because of your Fregoli, or your psychological INABILITY
> to be honest with intent? I'll accept either answer.
> If you see an option I do not, present it. But keep in mind I
> will expose any and all lies you present.
>
> > 4. Proof held hostage awaiting opponents proof on something else
>
KBW > Borrowed from the standards of one Gregory
KBW > Scott "Piggly Wiggly" Hanson. If you believe
KBW > this standard is unfair, please explain why
KBW > you used it so many times.
Kent, You argued on appeal that burglarizing
an attached garage should not be considered
residential burglary for the purposes of
sentencing.
There is Iowa black letter law DECLARING exactly that.
And it was not a constitutional challenge
of the law! The appeal implies that your
appeal attorney did not even KNOW of
the black letter law!
Is that YOUR idea of some fabulous
legal moves, Kent?
Who was the TRIAL CONSULTANT on
your case, Kent?
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=ia&vol=sc%5C20050506%5C04-0202&invol=1
Kent Wills
convictions for BEATING his ex-wife), child abuser and self confessed
user and abuser of illegal drugs, Gregory Scott "Piggly Wiggly" Hanson
<gree...@gmail.com> wrote:
KEYWORDS: Gregory Scott Hanson, Lisa Rene Watkins, Kristen Watkins,
Tom Watkins, child abuse, OWI, child molestation, drugs, Greg Hanson,
felony, sexual assault, Donna Joann Hanson, Sandra Lyn Freese, Sandy
Freese, spousal abuse, greegor47, wife beater, sexual assault, James E
Hanson, Jim Hanson, Jimmy Hanson, Kris Watkins
>> I wasn't going to address the List O' Lies, as I call it, yet
I stand corrected. I failed to consider how under Iowa law, OWI
doesn't have to mean alcohol was involved.
>---------------------------------------------------
>http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.child-protective-services/msg/4f31fe27f9163c42
>
>Newsgroups: alt.support.child-protective-services, alt.support.foster-
>parents, misc.legal, alt.fan.bob-larson
>From: Kent Wills <compu...@gmail.com>
>Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2009 10:55:51 -0600
>
>Subject: The mind of the OWI convict, child molester (by his own
>standards of proof), wife and child abuser named Gregory Scott Hanson
>
You have a conviction for OWI. The evidence is so strong, you
remove your name and date of birth in a futile attempt to make it go
away.
I asked you if it was supposed to be expunged and you started
claiming I said it was to have been.
>---------------------------------------------------
>
>Plus THOUSANDS of postings of this:
>
>CRIMINAL COMPLAINT 04/10/1996
> Comments: CT 1 OWI 1ST
>OTHER CITATION 04/10/1996
> Comments: CT 2 SPEED
>Disposition Status
> GUILTY PLEA/DEFAULT
>
>-----------------------------------------------
>
>> > 2. Druggies or on drugs
>>
>> Only if they've admitted they are.
>>
>> > 3. Mentally Ill often as result of drug use
>>
>> Grandmother, Greg?
>
>Her vascular dementia was not due to drug use.
But you often berated her for supposedly being mentally ill.
Text book self loather.
>And it was DIAGNOSED and documented.
So you claim.
>YOU throw it around at most of your opponents.
>
Only when they offer the evidence.
>> >G. Res Judicata
>> > 1. Already conceded to Kent's argument
>>
>> If it fits your own style of posting and your own claims that by
>> not answering your opponent has conceded, you might want to salute it
>> as it sails by YOU.
>> Please deny you have done this, Greg. I'm requesting you do so.
>> This will allow me to quote you, with MIDs so that anyone with an
>> interest may verify the quote and context.
>> You will, of course, run and HIDE from the TRUTH I've presented.
>>
>> > 2. Question already asked and answered.
>>
>> That's on your list why, Greg? Well, because it's the truth, but
>> you want to deceptively present it is not. You want to dishonestly
>> present that it's evasion and that your opponent MUST answer the same
>> question over and over, with your express intent of any reader
>> unfamiliar with your lies, and your sick little mind games, to
>> actually believe the lie in your rhetorical question.
>> Why do you ask the same questions so many times AFTER they've
>> been answered, Greg? You've never answered this.
>>
>> >H. Fallacy of Suppressed Evidence
>> > 1a. Missing Middle, False Dilemma, False Dichotomy, bifurcation
>>
>> You don't even know what those mean,
>
>KBW > Greg. You are doing a cut and paste
>KBW > from a web page on fallacious argumentation.
>
>Yet you pretend it's my fault.
>
Unless you can prove you are doing the C&P under duress, one
could argue your posting it is your fault.
I've never assigned you blame for doing it, contrary to the LIE
you present, but I can see where the argument could be made.
>> You are far more guilty of such things than anyone else I've ever
>> met on or off-line. Would you like me to post the MIDs for the
>> multitude of posts from you where you commit each? I'm willing to
>> find and post them.
>>
>> > 1b. Fallacy of Complex Question - loaded question with presupposition
>>
>> Oh come now Greg. Stop with the confessions. I, and probably
>> everyone reading, already know that you use this and have used it
>> since you first began posting to ASCPS and tried to sabotage families
>> so they would lose to your precious CPS.
>
>Short attention span, Kent? Or hoping for distraction?
I'm trying to keep you focused, Greg.
>
>> Would you like me to post MIDs of the post that PROVE my claim?
>> I'm willing. You are, of course, free to make the tacit admission
>> that my claim is true and accurate by running from the truth I
>> present.
>> The choice is yours to make.
>
>G > 2. Withholding proof saying it's already on the table
>
>KBW > Liar. If it's already on the table, it can't
>KBW > be withheld. You are stupid.
>
>The key word is IF.
>As in you falsely claim some proof is on the table.
Adding to your lies won't make them suddenly become truth, Greg.
[...]
Greg, if there is a large portion of text for which you have no
comment, you can snip it. Just point out that you've done so, and
preserve the context.
>>
>> >Flat out outright lies.
>>
>> Greg, meet Gregory Scott "Piggly Wiggly" Hanson, liar supreme.
>>
>> >Claim that asking for a LINK PROVES insult XYZ
>>
>> That's about as obtuse a comment and accusation as you've ever
>> come up with, I think. Want to explain, clarify, and see if you can
>> make any sense?
>> You won't, of course. You will use one of the projected dodges
>> you list.
>>
>>
>>
>> >It's as if Kent is an automation that is WAY too simple.
>>
>> Since you are guilty of using all of these dodges Greg, who is
>> being simple and transparent?
>> Why, Gregory Scott "Piggly Wiggly" Hanson, of course. For over
>> ten years on ASCPS. A simpleton and fool, ready to belly up with scum
>> suck as Kenneth Robert Pangborn because you admire his ability to
>> screw up his clients' cases and ensure another CPS win.
>> You are a fool, Greg, and stupid to boot.
>> What is most sad is that you honestly believe your behavior is
>> that of one who is mentally sound.
>
>Kent, You argued on appeal that burglarizing
>an attached garage should not be considered
>residential burglary for the purposes of
>sentencing.
I've argued no such appeal.
Why do you present this same lie after it's been exposed so many
times?
>
>There is Iowa black letter law DECLARING exactly that.
>
I was the one who cited it when you were claiming an attached
garage is not a part of the residence.
>And it was not a constitutional challenge
>of the law! The appeal implies that your
>appeal attorney did not even KNOW of
>the black letter law!
Now it was an attorney who argued the appeal. You can't maintain
your lie for one post.
>
>Is that YOUR idea of some fabulous
>legal moves, Kent?
Since you admitted, a few times, the conviction isn't mine, what
I would or would not consider fabulous has no bearing.
>
>Who was the TRIAL CONSULTANT on
>your case, Kent?
I've not had a case, as you slipped and admitted a few times.
Where you lying then, or are you lying now? You've never
answered this question.
>
>
>http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=ia&vol=sc%5C20050506%5C04-0202&invol=1
>
>http://www.iowabar.org/IowaSupremeCourt.nsf/9a275c73f72409f4862564bb00563305/d2cfdda54a0050a086256ffc0049693c!OpenDocument&Highlight=0,04-0202
A select number of items that really are about Gregory Scott "Piggly
Wiggly" Hanson (either directly or through the same standards he
DEMANDS be held to others):
Title: ST VS GREGORY HANSON
(DOB 05/22/1959)
CRIMINAL COMPLAINT 04/10/1996
Comments: CT 1 OWI 1ST
OTHER CITATION 04/10/1996
Comments: CT 2 SPEED
Disposition Status
GUILTY PLEA/DEFAULT
"That's the chick, but not the pic, zipperhead!"
marston shores
>> That's rude of you.
>
> You'd need to see the picture. Long greasy hair that hadn't seen
> a cleansing agent in a LONG time.
> Envision the stereotypical heavy metal stoner and you'll have some
> idea.
And you are so handsome as to be prideful enough to cast aspersions
against him too?
>> Has anyone seen your photo here?
>
> I linked to one once.
What is the url please?
>> Are you attractive?
>
> Some will find her attractive. Some will not.
Let me judge for myself please.
>> You're acting mental again.
>>
>
> You do seem to equate truth with mental defects.
I correlate very little truth with you.
Greegor
Kent wants to relive the days when he was
in the middle of a strong hyena pack on
the attack, beating up the nasty televangelist.
Did Ken Smith the attorney ever proof read
Kent's insane appeal before it was turned in?
Did Ken Smith read how Kent's insane appeal
went down with the Iowa Supreme Court?
Why does Kent, a guy with two thieving
Felonies and a MIsdemeanor for using
a teen on his GARAGE BURGLARY go
around internet claiming to be a school teacher?
Is Kent trying to recruit new ""talent""?
marston shores
>> I correlate very little truth with you.
>
> Kent wants to relive the days when he was
> in the middle of a strong hyena pack on
> the attack, beating up the nasty televangelist.
>
> Did Ken Smith the attorney ever proof read
> Kent's insane appeal before it was turned in?
>
> Did Ken Smith read how Kent's insane appeal
> went down with the Iowa Supreme Court?
>
> Why does Kent, a guy with two thieving
> Felonies and a MIsdemeanor for using
> a teen on his GARAGE BURGLARY go
> around internet claiming to be a school teacher?
>
> Is Kent trying to recruit new ""talent""?
>
My goodness! Those are some very compelling questions. I wonder what
became of Mr. Smith anyway?
Greegor
G > Kent wants to relive the days when he was
G > in the middle of a strong hyena pack on
G > the attack, beating up the nasty televangelist.
G >
G > Did Ken Smith the attorney ever proof read
G > Kent's insane appeal before it was turned in?
G > Did Ken Smith read how Kent's insane appeal
G > went down with the Iowa Supreme Court?
G >
G > Why does Kent, a guy with two thieving
G > Felonies and a MIsdemeanor for using
G > a teen on his GARAGE BURGLARY go
G > around internet claiming to be a school teacher?
G >
G > Is Kent trying to recruit new ""talent""?
ms > My goodness! Those are some very compelling
ms > questions. I wonder what became of Mr. Smith anyway?
I bet Kent knows! Maybe he doesn't want to say!
marston shores
I think, given their associations over the years, you are correct.
marston shores
> At one time, not so long ago, ex-con
Are you comparing convictions here Kent?
I guess burglarizing garages with a minor isn't the worst rap sheet a
person can have.
If that's your angle...
Greegor
G > Kent wants to relive the days when he was
G > in the middle of a strong hyena pack on
G > the attack, beating up the nasty televangelist.
G >
G > Did Ken Smith the attorney ever proof read
G > Kent's insane appeal before it was turned in?
G > Did Ken Smith read how Kent's insane appeal
G > went down with the Iowa Supreme Court?
G >
G > Why does Kent, a guy with two thieving
G > Felonies and a MIsdemeanor for using
G > a teen on his GARAGE BURGLARY go
G > around internet claiming to be a school teacher?
G >
G > Is Kent trying to recruit new ""talent""?
ms > My goodness! Those are some very compelling
ms > questions. I wonder what became of Mr. Smith anyway?
G > I bet Kent knows! Maybe he doesn't want to say!
KBW > Last I knew he was still an accountant.
ms > I think, given their associations over the years, you are
correct.
---------------------------
KBW > At one time, not so long ago, ex-con
ms > Are you comparing convictions here Kent?
ms >
ms > I guess burglarizing garages with a minor isn't
ms > the worst rap sheet a person can have.
ms >
ms > If that's your angle...
I have owed up to my two 15 year old misdemeanors.
Kent's two felonies and misdemeanor are from
the year 2000 and the year 2003 but dragged
out to 2005. Making them 10 and 5 years old.
But Kent stupidly DENIES his ID and record!
Kent decided that my two misdemeanors
are not bad enough, so he lifted TEXT of
somebody else's Iowa OWI docket text
and merely edited in my name and birth date.
The catch is that Kent's faked text can't
show a CASE NUMBER or else it could
be easily verified that it's not mine.
Then he tried to imply that it was expunged,
which covers the fact it's not on the
public court web site. But he also claimed
that he went to the ""records office"" and
wrote it down (complete with leading spaces
which are an artifact of cut and paste from
online docket records.).
Kent is so dumb that he painted himself
into a corner on that one.
The same kind of idiotic logic that was
visible in his absurd APPEAL is evident
in Kent's every day posting.
Even the KOOKS group gave Kent the boot.
Kent's own parents had to confront the fact he's a moron.
They set up his family inheritance through a protective
trust to keep the moron from blowing it on magic beans.
yumhuyk
http://img196.imageshack.us/img196/5227/moebn.jpg
Try not too vomit.
yours in Christ,
isamu
Greegor
It's odd that you would bring up THAT photo, Moe!
Tell us more about it!
Kabuki Bob
Actually I DIDN'T " bring up THAT photo" greg.
Greg, seriously, do you actually think I am dumb enough to post a
photo of me anywhere online? Particularly after I know about your
little pathetic cyberstalking attempts on me?
Sheesh, you haven't even fund my PhotoBucket account where I gave you
a clue tha tit has a lot of Tom Welling pics.
I know you aren't very bright, but gee,you fall for anything,
dontcha?
Moe
Greegor
Doesn't she look like she's allergic to celery?
Greegor
so
Moe > chicken^%$# that you won;t reveal your name or the full name of
the
Moe > Premier guy you claimed you talked to whee I was supposedly
mentioned,
Moe > yet you want to see a photo of ME?
Moe >
Moe > Why would a photo of me be germane to the discussion at hand?
BTW if
Moe > you want the photo that was mentioned you might want to contact
Greg
Moe > for it. Also funny that you claimed you looked over the BL
newsgroup
Moe > posts yet you haven't come across where the photo URL was
listed--
Moe > while you came across other photo references relating to Kent.
G > Are you talking about the photo where you
G > were macking on a teeenager, Moe ?
G >
G > Ya misfiit 50 year old cradle robber....
Y > This is the photo of Moe and her "boifriend":
http://img196.imageshack.us/img196/5227/moebn.jpg
Y > Try not too vomit.
Y >
Y > yours in Christ,
Y > isamu
G > It's odd that you would bring up THAT photo, Moe!
G > Tell us more about it!
Moe > Actually I DIDN'T " bring up THAT photo" greg.
> Greg, seriously, do you actually think I am dumb enough to post a
> photo of me anywhere online? Particularly after I know about your
> little pathetic cyberstalking attempts on me?
>
> Sheesh, you haven't even fund my PhotoBucket account where I gave you
> a clue tha tit has a lot of Tom Welling pics.
>
> I know you aren't very bright, but gee,you fall for anything,
> dontcha?
>
> Moe
KBW > Greg either believes you and marston
KBW > are the same person, or he lied. Only
KBW > he can KNOW which is the case.
KBW > I don't expect him to ever build up
KBW > enough honesty to state which it is.
Moe posted, directing marston shores to obtain
her photo from me, referring to the one that
Yumhuyk found or provided.
marston shores
>> Actually I DIDN'T " bring up THAT photo" greg.
>
> Greg either believes you and marston are the same person, or he
> lied.
Those are the only two scenarios in your mind?
> Only he can KNOW which is the case. I don't expect him to ever
> build up enough honesty to state which it is.
Honesty and you are not compatible.
>> Greg, seriously, do you actually think I am dumb enough to post a
>> photo of me anywhere online? Particularly after I know about your
>> little pathetic cyberstalking attempts on me?
>>
>
> The closest he can get is the picture I made available, and the
> face was censored.
Why would you do that anyway Kent?
I mean isn't that the type of thing that would feed the level of
stalking here?
But you knew that when you did it, didn't you, bob-stalker?
Kabuki Bob
A photo you claimed was of me, a photo I never posted claiming was
me.
And you know yukkie is hardly a source for accurate info. The guy's
stupider than you are.
Moe
Greegor
G > Moe posted, directing marston shores to obtain
G > her photo from me, referring to the one that
G > Yumhuyk found or provided.
Moe > A photo you claimed was of me, a
Moe > photo I never posted claiming was me.
Moe >
Moe > And you know yukkie is hardly a source
Moe > for accurate info. The guy's stupider
Moe > than you are.
Sure, Moe, I BELIEVE you, after all,
why would you lie?
Kabuki Bob
Here's a clue dimwit. Who posted that url first? I didn't. What I DID
do is let you believe that is a photo of me and my son.
And you are stupid enough to fall for it.
Moe