Kent gets a surprise
Greegor
KW > agencies that remove children from child abusers like Greg.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.FRIENDS/msg/9f45e7e78a565ed7?hl=en
PH > And remove children from parents when the
PH > children have made up lies about them. And
PH > before you start, I know someone in this line
PH > of work. It's a piece of nonsense.
Worse. Kent knows, but honesty doesn't suit him.
Kent Wills
wrote:
You can't be honest for any reason, huh? Not unless you screw up
or are somehow forced to do so.
I've spoken against CPS many times. That I realize that they
were 100% correct in regards to you doesn't mean I'm pro-CPS. It only
means they did nothing wrong regarding the various forms of abuse you
inflicted on Lisa's little girl.
What is the specific reason for this latest lie from you? What,
specifically, has caused you to be compelled to present this lie? Are
you having flash backs? Are you once again abusing illegal drugs?
Why are you stalking members of alt.friends?
These are all serious questions.
--
"If you call the police, I'll knock out all of your teeth, I'll
cripple you. I may go to prison for it, but when I get out,
I'll be able to walk,but you will still be a cripple."
--Greg Hanson, in a verbal threat to his girlfriend
Greegor
Re: Gregory Scott Hanson, inmate 1104135, wife and child abuser,
and illegal drug abuser (possibly recovering) is caught lying.
KW > Child Protective Services. It's the "catch all" term for
KW > agencies that remove children from child abusers like Greg.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.FRIENDS/msg/9f45e7e78a565ed7?hl=en
PH > And remove children from parents when the
PH > children have made up lies about them. And
PH > before you start, I know someone in this line
PH > of work. It's a piece of nonsense.
G > Worse. Kent knows, but honesty doesn't suit him.
KW > You can't be honest for any reason, huh?
KW > Not unless you screw up or are somehow
KW > forced to do so. I've spoken against CPS
KW > many times. That I realize that they were
KW > 100% correct in regards to you doesn't
KW > mean I'm pro-CPS. It only means they
KW > did nothing wrong regarding the various
KW > forms of abuse you inflicted on Lisa's little
KW > girl. What is the specific reason for this
KW > latest lie from you? What, specifically,
KW > has caused you to be compelled to
KW > present this lie? Are you having flash
KW > backs? Are you once again abusing
KW > illegal drugs? Why are you stalking
KW > members of alt.friends?
KW > These are all serious questions.
The usual Kent Wills BS.
BTW, Kent, you now ASKED about drug use when
just days ago you ASSERTED that I was court
ordered into drug rehab. As you know such
information would be online and public, so
what's the case number, Kent??
KW > "If you call the police, I'll knock out all of your teeth, I'll
KW > cripple you. I may go to prison for it, but when I get out,
KW > I'll be able to walk,but you will still be a cripple."
KW > --Greg Hanson, in a verbal threat to his girlfriend
Kent quoted this from an online Pennsylvania Appeals court
ruling for a Gregory CHRISTIAN Hanson, easily confirmed
through PA's docket site.
Wrong person, wrong birthdate (yes, mine is online),
wrong age, wrong middle initial, etc.
Kent also routinely quotes a Greg Hanson that is
a White Supremacist.
Kent does this on purpose.
He'd like to pretend that he was not identified by
his birthday and middle name.
My birthday and middle name are well known online.
So is Kent's, but he claims that is a ""Fake ID"".
If it were his ""Fake ID"" then why would he want to counter it?
_ Prof. Jonez _
Do his neighbors in Arkansas know he's a convicted child abuser?
Greegor
I wouldn't do that, but the area neighborhood watch
should know he's a twice convicted thief.
2000 Felony Theft BEFORE his 2004 Felony Burglary.
Would you want a two time SNEAK THIEF living nearby?
Kent Wills
<the...@jonez.net> wrote:
[...]
>>
>> My birthday and middle name are well known online.
>> So is Kent's, but he claims that is a ""Fake ID"".
>> If it were his ""Fake ID"" then why would he want to counter it?
>
>Do his neighbors in Arkansas know he's a convicted child abuser?
You freely admitted that your racial fate for my family has forced
you to lie about me. Because of this, there's no reason for anyone to
accept your lies that
1) I live in Arkansas
2) That I have a conviction for child abuse
But feel free to offer your proof, unless you're simply offering
more proof that your racial hate for my family is compelling you to
lie. Still.
And you can forget about your lie that I don't have a family.
You wouldn't have called for their murder unless they exist.
Me:
It's nice that you finally agree that Rule Number One: "Prof.
Jonez is a bigot who will lie at every opportunity" is valid.
Prof. Jonez/Reality Check/assorted other nyms:
It's immutable.
Kent Wills
<Gree...@gmail.com> wrote:
[...]
>> > My birthday and middle name are well known online.
>> > So is Kent's, but he claims that is a ""Fake ID"".
>> > If it were his ""Fake ID"" then why would he want to counter it?
>>
>> Do his neighbors in Arkansas know he's a convicted child abuser?
>
>I wouldn't do that, but the area neighborhood watch
>should know he's a twice convicted thief.
But which neighborhood?
You have claimed I'm living in at least two different parts of
Arkansas at the same time.
Earlier today you claimed I'm posting from Indianola, Iowa (Your
lie that I'm Melody).
You need to pick a location for me and stick with it. Kind of
like you need to pick a person for me to be. You've claimed I'm at
least four different people named Kent Wills.
>2000 Felony Theft BEFORE his 2004 Felony Burglary.
It's been proved that never actually existed. You'll never
acknowledge this, since doing so would require you to be honest.
>
>Would you want a two time SNEAK THIEF living nearby?
You couldn't afford this neighborhood, Greg.
"If you call the police, I'll knock out all of your teeth, I'll
cripple you. I may go to prison for it, but when I get out,
I'll be able to walk,but you will still be a cripple."
_ Prof. Jonez _
He abused a child in the commission of his 2004 Burglary,
so sayeth the Iowa Court Records.
>
> Would you want a two time SNEAK THIEF living nearby?
Who'd want Kent "the lying cunt" Wills living nearby even
without a criminal record?
_ Prof. Jonez _
> On Thu, 11 Dec 2008 10:46:33 -0700, "_ Prof. Jonez _"
> <the...@jonez.net> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>>>
>>> My birthday and middle name are well known online.
>>> So is Kent's, but he claims that is a ""Fake ID"".
>>> If it were his ""Fake ID"" then why would he want to counter it?
>>
>> Do his neighbors in Arkansas know he's a convicted child abuser?
>
> You freely admitted that
"You are in the Kill File. Have been for a while.
Note that I can only reply if I read someone else's
reply to you."
-- Kent B Wills vainly trying to curtail his OCD
"At this point Madeleine is equally alive and dead. "
-- Kent ignoramus Wills giving the Iowa version of Kwantum Mahkaniks
" Currently, we, citizens of the U.S., aren't allowed to go to
Venezuela or Cuba. My hope is that Venezuela's restriction will
be lifted after the next election."
- Kent Wills 2007, lying jackass
"Let's pretend breathing is outlawed and everyone the world
over ceases inhaling and exhaling.
There will be NO change in CO2 levels since we exhale carbon
monoxide, not carbon dioxide, stupid."
- Kent Wills si-untist from Iowa
Kent Wills
<the...@jonez.net> wrote:
[...]
>>> Do his neighbors in Arkansas know he's a convicted child abuser?
>>
>> I wouldn't do that, but the area neighborhood watch
>> should know he's a twice convicted thief.
>> 2000 Felony Theft BEFORE his 2004 Felony Burglary.
>
>He abused a child in the commission of his 2004 Burglary,
>so sayeth the Iowa Court Records.
Is there no lie your racial hate for my family won't compel you
to tell?
>
>>
>> Would you want a two time SNEAK THIEF living nearby?
>
>Who'd want Kent "the lying cunt" Wills living nearby even
>without a criminal record?
Odd that you can't prove even one lie from you. By way of
contrast, I've proved several of yours. You've even admitted your
claims about me are lies.
Kent Wills
<the...@jonez.net> wrote:
Whenever you've lost, you use the dishonestly snipped out and out
of context quotes.
Wouldn't it be better to just admit the one you call a race
traitor has proved, again, that he is your better?
Greegor
TNKev > wrong...and I am sure there are lurkers.
PHucker > You find that endless twaddle of interest?
KW > Kevin and I are troll busters. We enjoy
KW > making trolls look foolish. Greg manages
KW > to make it real easy with him. For
KW > example, according to Greg, I am at least
KW > four different people named Kent Wills.
KW > That each of them has a different middle
KW > name, different dates of birth, and live in
KW > different locations never factors into it.
KW > Pointing this out was very easy of course,
KW > and lead to Greg slipping up and
KW > admitting he'd been lying the whole time.
LMAO!
A "Confidence Man" to the bitter end, aren't you Kent?
You WISH you were confused among other Kent Wills.
That doesn't make it so. Kent Bradley Wills DOB Jan 8 1969
http://www.doc.state.ia.us/InmateInfo.asp?OffenderCd=1155768
http://www.iowacourts.state.ia.us/
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=ia&vol=sc%5C20050506%5C04-0202&invol=1
Daam van den Billiefretter
evangelised:
<to Kent Wills>
> KW > Kevin and I are troll busters. We enjoy
> KW > making trolls look foolish.
I'm a troll. Come and make me look foolish, you blithering cuntbubble.
--
alt.usenet.kooks
"We are arrant knaves all, believe none of us."
Hamlet, Act 3, Scene 1 [129]
Hammer of Thor: February 2007.
Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook, Line & Sinker:
September 2005, April 2006, January 2007, August 2008.
Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog Whistle, Official owner
and trainer of Bucky Breeder, August 2008.
Official Member: Cabal Obsidian Order COOSN-124-07-06660
Official Overseer of Kooks & Trolls in 24hoursupport.helpdesk
Member of:
Usenet Ruiner List
Top Assholes on the Net List
Most hated usenetizens of all time List
Cog in the AUK Hate Machine List
Find me on Google Maps: 24°39'47.13"S, 134°4'20.18"E
Join me for dinner. I'm cooking awful platypus duodenum with anus
topping on top of microwaved hobo's nose hairs and mosquito foot sauce
con loathsome syphilis scabs, cooked in a randomly twitching cup
containing tepid sundry bits of corn, olive and avocado in melted
cheese, a side of Norway rat prostate and a can of pap smear scrapings.
krp
"Greegor" <Gree...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:9ae611dd-2390-4d20...@r37g2000prr.googlegroups.com...
> But we can't be bothered reading it. Only you and him are reading the
> posts.
TNKev > wrong...and I am sure there are lurkers.
PHucker > You find that endless twaddle of interest?
KW > Kevin and I are troll busters. We enjoy
KW > making trolls look foolish. Greg manages
KW > to make it real easy with him. For
KW > example, according to Greg, I am at least
KW > four different people named Kent Wills.
KW > That each of them has a different middle
KW > name, different dates of birth, and live in
KW > different locations never factors into it.
KW > Pointing this out was very easy of course,
KW > and lead to Greg slipping up and
KW > admitting he'd been lying the whole time.
< LMAO!
Kent, the consummate "Polack" has NO idea not even a glimmering of
understanding what he just admitted to. While Wills believes he is a GREAT
USENET "TROLL BUSTER" he IS, in point of FACT, admitting the HE is a troll!
You could pound his skull with a baseball bat for the next 2 millennia and
he still would never get it.
krp
news:9ae611dd-2390-4d20...@r37g2000prr.googlegroups.com...
> posts.
TNKev > wrong...and I am sure there are lurkers.
PHucker > You find that endless twaddle of interest?
KW > Kevin and I are troll busters. We enjoy
KW > making trolls look foolish. Greg manages
KW > to make it real easy with him. For
KW > example, according to Greg, I am at least
KW > four different people named Kent Wills.
KW > That each of them has a different middle
KW > name, different dates of birth, and live in
KW > different locations never factors into it.
KW > Pointing this out was very easy of course,
KW > and lead to Greg slipping up and
KW > admitting he'd been lying the whole time.
< LMAO!
Kent, the consummate "Polack" has NO idea not even a glimmering of
Dan Sullivan
krp
"Dan Sullivan" <dsul...@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:4943b550$0$14279$607e...@cv.net...
Sex life THAT BAD eh Danny? Am I keeping you up?
Dan Sullivan
Greegor
> On Dec 13, 8:22 am, " krp" <kr...@verizon.net> wrote:
> zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
How's Susan?
Dan Sullivan
Susan who?
Kent Wills
>
>"Greegor" <Gree...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:9ae611dd-2390-4d20...@r37g2000prr.googlegroups.com...
>> But we can't be bothered reading it. Only you and him are reading the
>> posts.
>
>TNKev > wrong...and I am sure there are lurkers.
>
>PHucker > You find that endless twaddle of interest?
>
>KW > Kevin and I are troll busters. We enjoy
>KW > making trolls look foolish. Greg manages
>KW > to make it real easy with him. For
>KW > example, according to Greg, I am at least
>KW > four different people named Kent Wills.
>KW > That each of them has a different middle
>KW > name, different dates of birth, and live in
>KW > different locations never factors into it.
>KW > Pointing this out was very easy of course,
>KW > and lead to Greg slipping up and
>KW > admitting he'd been lying the whole time.
>
>< LMAO!
>
> Kent, the consummate "Polack"
You've already proved yourself a bigot a few times. You don't
need to keep proving it.
>has NO idea not even a glimmering of
>understanding what he just admitted to.
That your past and possibly current illegal drug abuse makes it
easy to "trick" you into telling the truth?
>While Wills believes he is a GREAT
>USENET "TROLL BUSTER"
When, outside of your latest proof that your past, and possibly
current, illegal drug abuse, have I claimed to be a GREAT USENET
"TROLL BUSTER?" Where have I even implied it?
>he IS, in point of FACT, admitting the HE is a troll!
Only within the confines of your continued proof of your past,
and possibly current, drug abuse.
>You could pound his skull with a baseball bat for the next 2 millennia and
>he still would never get it.
>
I would need to abuse the various illegal drugs you have, and
possibly still are, for a while before I could ever hope to get the
various mental defects you display with most every post.
Why are you stalking the members of alt.friends? Is it because
of your past, and possibly current, illegal drug abuse?
--
"If you call the police, I'll knock out all of your teeth, I'll
cripple you. I may go to prison for it, but when I get out,
I'll be able to walk,but you will still be a cripple."
Kent Wills
My apologies. For some reason, I thought I was replying to Greg.
As far as I know, Pangborn has never partook of any illegal drug.
Kenneth Robert Pangborn has freely admitted to being an alcoholic
on at least two occasions, but I've not seen anything to indicate he's
ever used an illegal drug.
Again, I apologize.
On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 09:50:28 -0600, Kent Wills <comp...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Kent Wills
Greg, why did you fondle a six-year-old girl's genital area with
your bare hand?
"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 Hanson, inmate 1104135, wife and child abuser.
Message-ID: <35120b16.04011...@posting.google.com>
Dan Sullivan
"Kent Wills" <comp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:6jm7k45haio587ups...@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 06:27:33 -0800 (PST), Greegor
> <Gree...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Dec 13, 7:39 am, Dan Sullivan <dsull...@optonline.net> wrote:
>>> On Dec 13, 8:22 am, " krp" <kr...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>> zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
>>
>>How's Susan?
>
> Greg, why did you fondle a six-year-old girl's genital area with
> your bare hand?
What you need to know is grag has claimed I live in Hollis, Queens.
When I don't think I have ever been there.
He's claimed I live in Middle Island.
When I haven't ever been there.
He's claimed he knew who my father was when the man he found was born years
after I was.
He's claimed I was married to this Susan person.
When I never even dated a woman named Susan.
Nor do I know anyone right now named Susan.
Kent Wills
<Gree...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> But we can't be bothered reading it. Only you and him are reading the posts.
>
>TNKev > wrong...and I am sure there are lurkers.
>
>PHucker > You find that endless twaddle of interest?
>
>KW > Kevin and I are troll busters. We enjoy
>KW > making trolls look foolish. Greg manages
>KW > to make it real easy with him. For
>KW > example, according to Greg, I am at least
>KW > four different people named Kent Wills.
>KW > That each of them has a different middle
>KW > name, different dates of birth, and live in
>KW > different locations never factors into it.
>KW > Pointing this out was very easy of course,
>KW > and lead to Greg slipping up and
>KW > admitting he'd been lying the whole time.
>
>LMAO!
>
>A "Confidence Man" to the bitter end, aren't you Kent?
I'm confident you can't be honest, unless you make a mistake or
are forced to.
>
>You WISH you were confused among other Kent Wills.
>That doesn't make it so. Kent Bradley Wills DOB Jan 8 1969
You claim I am at least four different people named Kent Wills.
That each one has a different middle name, date of birth, and live
in different areas, doesn't matter.
For example, Kent T. Wills was born in 1963. Kent D. Wills was
born in 1972. Kent E. Wills was born in 1978. Kent B. Wills didn't
exist until 1993, as your stalking (by the very definition you posted
to accuse others of stalking you) proved.
You continue to prove your past, and possibly current, illegal
drug abuse prohibits you from understanding that your behavior is not
normal. One person can't be so many others. No matter how much your
drug addled mind forces you to believe it's possible, it's simply not.
>
>http://www.doc.state.ia.us/InmateInfo.asp?OffenderCd=1155768
>
>http://www.iowacourts.state.ia.us/
>
>http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=ia&vol=sc%5C20050506%5C04-0202&invol=1
Which of the Kent Wills that you claim I am will those links
apply to?
Why did you author the following?
" ... But there ought to be conferences and studies on how to curb
minority overpopulation, repatriate minorities abroad, imprison more
minorities, increase use of the death penalty and divest minorities of
the power they have usurped over us in recent years. That would
address the most pressing problems of our day. ... "
April 2000, Gregory Hanson
http://www.nationalist.org/ATW/2000/040101.html#Hanson
Kent Wills
<inv...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>Greegor, ye drunk soul, thou art as loathsome as a fat toad, ye
>evangelised:
>
><to Kent Wills>
>
>> KW > Kevin and I are troll busters. We enjoy
>> KW > making trolls look foolish.
>
>I'm a troll. Come and make me look foolish, you blithering cuntbubble.
Just did.
--
When cryptography is outlawed,
bayl bhgynjf jvyy unir cevinpl.
TNKev
> Greegor, ye drunk soul, thou art as loathsome as a fat toad, ye
> evangelised:
>
> <to Kent Wills>
>
>> KW > Kevin and I are troll busters. We enjoy
>> KW > making trolls look foolish.
>
> I'm a troll. Come and make me look foolish, you blithering cuntbubble.
>
you don't need any help with that.
Konstanz van de Ballenstamper
chamber lye breeds fleas like a loach, ye cringed:
ObLame.
--
alt.usenet.kooks
"We are arrant knaves all, believe none of us."
Hamlet, Act 3, Scene 1 [129]
Hammer of Thor: February 2007.
Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook, Line & Sinker:
September 2005, April 2006, January 2007, August 2008.
Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog Whistle, Official owner
and trainer of Bucky Breeder, August 2008.
Official Member: Cabal Obsidian Order COOSN-124-07-06660
Official Overseer of Kooks & Trolls in 24hoursupport.helpdesk
Member of:
Usenet Ruiner List
Top Assholes on the Net List
Most hated usenetizens of all time List
Cog in the AUK Hate Machine List
Find me on Google Maps: 24°39'47.13"S, 134°4'20.18"E
Join me for dinner. I'm cooking malignant live rat embryos and bullhead
genitalia seasoning with vulgar chicken entrails and wood rat intestines
conserve accompanied with gone off poodle pussing boil and frog lesion
topping, cooked in a turbid cup stuffed with dog-eared bits of asparagus
and acorn in artichoke juice, a side of turtle salivary gland and a
litre of caterpillar slobber.
Kent Wills
<dsul...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>"Kent Wills" <comp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:6jm7k45haio587ups...@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 06:27:33 -0800 (PST), Greegor
>> <Gree...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Dec 13, 7:39 am, Dan Sullivan <dsull...@optonline.net> wrote:
>>>> On Dec 13, 8:22 am, " krp" <kr...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>> zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
>>>
>>>How's Susan?
>>
>> Greg, why did you fondle a six-year-old girl's genital area with
>> your bare hand?
>
>What you need to know is grag has claimed I live in Hollis, Queens.
>
According to Greg, I'm an actor and ESL teacher from Webster City
(Kent T. Wills).
>When I don't think I have ever been there.
>
>He's claimed I live in Middle Island.
Greg claims I live in Sailorville Township, Ia (Kent D. Wills).
He also claims I live in Rogers AND Little Rock, Ar. at the same
time, in addition to a few places in Iowa.
There are no listings for any Kent Wills in either location,
contrary to his lie about the phone book.
Don't take my word for it. Check the following and see:
http://switchboard.intelius.com/results.php?ReportType=34&qc=Rogers&qf=Wills&qn=Kent&qs=AR
We did not find any directory results for Wills Kent in ROGERS,
ARKANSAS
http://switchboard.intelius.com/results.php?ReportType=34&qc=Little+Rock&qf=Wills&qn=Kent&qs=AR
We did not find any directory results for Wills Kent in LITTLE ROCK,
ARKANSAS
Pooooooor Greg. He keeps getting caught in his lies.
>
>When I haven't ever been there.
>
>He's claimed he knew who my father was when the man he found was born years
>after I was.
To the best of my knowledge, Greg's not commented about my
parents.
He probably saw how Doc was made to look the fool when he tried.
Greg's no where near Doc's level of mental illness.
>
>He's claimed I was married to this Susan person.
>
>When I never even dated a woman named Susan.
>
>Nor do I know anyone right now named Susan.
>
But someone named Dan Sullivan probably is/was married to Susan.
In Greg's mind EVERONE with the same first and last name are all the
same person.
In Greg's mind, I am three or four, maybe more, different people
named Kent Wills. Just like everyone with the name David Moore are
all the David Moore we know from Usenet.
Greg thinks you are every Dan Sullivan.
Kent Wills
<inv...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>TNKev, ye feeble-minded rascally knave, I leak in your chimney and your
>chamber lye breeds fleas like a loach, ye cringed:
>
>> Daam van den Billiefretter wrote:
>>> Greegor, ye drunk soul, thou art as loathsome as a fat toad, ye
>>> evangelised:
>>>
>>> <to Kent Wills>
>>>
>>>> KW > Kevin and I are troll busters. We enjoy
>>>> KW > making trolls look foolish.
>>>
>>> I'm a troll. Come and make me look foolish, you blithering
>>> cuntbubble.
>>
>>
>> you don't need any help with that.
>
>ObLame.
But true.
--
-... .- -.. .-- --- .-.. ..-.
krp
krp
Poor Danny Sullivan still suffering the DELUSION that he RUNS several
newsgroups.
krp
>>>>> zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
>>>
>>>How's Susan?
>>
>> Greg, why did you fondle a six-year-old girl's genital area with
>> your bare hand?
>
> What you need to know is grag has claimed I live in Hollis, Queens.
Danny tell us ALL ABOUT the PUPPET BEAR and how you USED that with little
kids.....................
melody4u
> "Dan Sullivan" <dsull...@optonline.net> wrote in message
you really want to lie about other mens daughters when the truth about
your own is so hidious?
Dan Sullivan
> "Dan Sullivan" <dsull...@optonline.net> wrote in message
There's nothing to talk about.
Greegor
15+ Chi;d Abuse investigations and 5 foundeds
supposedly reversed, but you're squeaky clean?
Got proof?
Dan Sullivan
> Dan, I'd like to see proof you'r not FOUNDED.
More than you like to see naked seven year old girls?
> 15+ Chi;d Abuse investigations and 5 foundeds
> supposedly reversed, but you're squeaky clean?
Yes.
> Got proof?
Yes.
Greegor
> On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 22:29:17 -0000, Kent Wills <compu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 19:51:09 -0000, "Peter Hucker" <n...@spam.com>
> > wrote:
>
> >>>> You find that endless twaddle of interest?
>
> >>> stalk Kent....why? I think he has a drug problem and he wants attention
> >>> so he lashes out and argues with who ever says anything contradictory to
> >>> his opinions about CPS. he bombs that group with crap about how
> >>> crooked CPS is to the point that the group can't be a group.....a troll.
>
> >>Maybe he fancies him?
>
> > I'm too far past puberty, and the wrong gender, for Greg.
> > We (tinw) recently learned that Greg's first wife had a little
> > girl from a previous relationship. The girl was removed from Greg's
> > presence.
> > Seems Greg was trying to mold her, as he was Lisa's daughter, to
> > be a sex partner.
> > I'm not kidding in any way.
> > What's most frightening is that Greg thinks his actions are
> > normal.
>
> How old was the girl?
>
> --http://www.petersparrots.com http://www.insanevideoclips.com http://www.petersphotos.com
>
> One day, a mom was cleaning her son's room and in the closet she found a bondage S&M magazine.
> This was highly upsetting for her.
> She hid the magazine until his father got home and showed it to him.
> He looked at it and handed it back to her without a word.
> She finally asked him, " Well what should we do about this?"
> The dad looked at her and said, "Well I don't think you should spank him."- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Kent's explanation is barely 25% true, with 75% BS.
The hyena pack throws around mostly lies hoping for
corrections which provide more information to base
more lies upon.
The approach is a variation on the old
"Have you stopped beating your wife?" game.
Another recent game is to ask for a denial of a double negative.
The intent, of course, is not to obtain truth at all,
but to concoct more and more garbage.
The "recent discovery" Kent claims was about
removal of a girl who never lived in my home.
There was no investigation about her because there couldn't be.
Here is the reason Kent lies:
05771 FECR176876 (POLK) [Filings]
Event Filed By Filed Create Date Last Updated Action Date
ORDER FOR PROBATION REVOCATION HEARING MOISAN CYNTHIA M 12/05/2008
12/05/2008 12/05/2008
Comments: ON 1/7/09 AT 9:30AM RM204
PROBATION REVOCATION 12/05/2008 12/05/2008 12/05/2008
Comments: REPORT OF VIOLATIONS FILED BY JAN HORNOCKER
FORMAL PROBATION HUTCHISON ROBERT A 01/25/2006 01/26/2006
01/26/2006
Comments: EXTENDED TO 01/16/09 OR UNTIL CONDITIONS ARE MET
http://www.doc.state.ia.us/InmateInfo.asp?OffenderCd=1155768
Name Kent Bradley Wills
Offender Number 1155768
Sex M
Birth Date 01/08/1969
Age 39
Location Interstate Compact
Offense BURGLARY 2ND DEGREE
County Of Commitment Polk
Commitment Date 01/16/2004
Duration
TDD/SDD * 01/16/2009
* TDD = Tentative Discharge Date
* SDD = Supervision Discharge Date
CLICK HERE TO REGISTER FOR NOTIFICATION ON ANY CHANGES TO THIS
OFFENDER’S CUSTODY STATUS
Supervision Status Offense Class County of Commitment End Date
Probation Aggravated Misdemeanor Polk
Probation C Felony Polk
Supervision Status Offense Class County of Commitment End Date
Probation Aggravated Misdemeanor Polk 11/25/2003
http://www.iowacourts.state.ia.us/
Iowa Courts
Online Search
< Start A Case Search Here! > click
Iowa Courts Online Search
Search Selection
Under Trial Court < click on Case Search >
Wills Kent B
02401 ESPR015146 INA J WILLS ESTATE
05771 FECR145250 STATE VS KENT 01/08/1969
05771 FECR176876 STATE VS KENT 01/08/1969
05771 SCSC310505 SWEENEY RENTALS VS KENT
05771 SCSC335210 CITI FINANCIAL VS KENT
05771 SCSC374163 SFI F SCHERLE PRES VS KENT
05771 SCSC374164 SFI F SCHERLE III PRES VS KENT
05771 STAN201670 IOWA vs [ KENT ] 01/08/1969
05771 STAN210929 IOWA vs [ KENT ] 01/08/1969
05771 SWCR177169 STATE VS KENT 01/08/1969
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.
Charges, Dispositions, Sentences
Title: STATE VS KENT BRADLEY WILLS
Case: 05771 FECR176876 (POLK)
Citation Number:
Defendant: WILLS, KENT BRADLEY
---------------------------------------------------
Count 01 Charge
Charge:
713.5 Description: BURGLARY 2ND DEGREE - 1983 (FELC)
Offense Date: 08/12/2003 Arrest Date: Against Type:
DPS Number:
0668408-01
Adjudication
Charge:
713.5 Description: BURGLARY 2ND DEGREE - 1983 (FELC)
Adj.:
DNU-GUILTY Adj.Date: 12/17/2003
Adj.Judge:
HUPPERT, MICHAEL D
Comments: GUILTY
Sentence
Charge:
713.5 Description: BURGLARY 2ND DEGREE - 1983 (FELC)
Sentence Date:
01/16/2004 Sentence: PRISON
Appeal:
AFFR Sen.Judge: HUPPERT, MICHAEL D
Facility Type:
Attorney: Y
Restitution:
Y Drug: N Extradition: N
Lic.Revoked:
N DDS: N Batterer: N
Fine Amount:
Duration: 10 Year(s)
Comment:
Sentence
Charge:
713.5 Description: BURGLARY 2ND DEGREE - 1983 (FELC)
Sentence Date:
01/16/2004 Sentence: SUSPENDED PRISON
Appeal:
AFFR Sen.Judge: HUPPERT, MICHAEL D
Facility Type:
Attorney: Y
Restitution:
Y Drug: N Extradition: N
Lic.Revoked:
N DDS: N Batterer: N
Fine Amount:
Duration: 10 Year(s)
Comment:
Sentence
Charge:
713.5 Description: BURGLARY 2ND DEGREE - 1983 (FELC)
Sentence Date:
01/16/2004 Sentence: PROBATION
Appeal:
AFFR Sen.Judge: HUPPERT, MICHAEL D
Facility Type:
Attorney: Y
Restitution:
Y Drug: N Extradition: N
Lic.Revoked:
N DDS: N Batterer: N
Fine Amount:
Duration: 2 Year(s)
Comment:
FORMAL
Sentence
Charge:
713.5 Description: BURGLARY 2ND DEGREE - 1983 (FELC)
Sentence Date:
01/16/2004 Sentence: RESIDENTIAL FACILITY
Appeal:
AFFR Sen.Judge: HUPPERT, MICHAEL D
Facility Type:
R Attorney: Y
Restitution:
Y Drug: N Extradition: N
Lic.Revoked:
N DDS: N Batterer: N
Fine Amount:
Duration:
Comment:
FT DSM FACILITY-MAX BENEFITS
Sentence
Charge:
713.5 Description: BURGLARY 2ND DEGREE - 1983 (FELC)
Sentence Date:
01/16/2004 Sentence: COMMUNITY SERVICE
Appeal:
AFFR Sen.Judge: HUPPERT, MICHAEL D
Facility Type:
R Attorney: Y
Restitution:
Y Drug: N Extradition: N
Lic.Revoked:
N DDS: N Batterer: N
Fine Amount:
Duration: 150 Hour(s)
Comment:
Sentence
Charge:
713.5 Description: BURGLARY 2ND DEGREE - 1983 (FELC)
Sentence Date:
12/17/2003 Sentence: PROBATION EXTENDED
Appeal:
Sen.Judge: HUTCHISON, ROBERT A
Facility Type:
Attorney: Y
Restitution:
N Drug: N Extradition: N
Lic.Revoked:
N DDS: N Batterer:
Fine Amount:
Duration:
Comment:
JO-PROBATION EXTENDED UNTIL 1/16/09
Sentence
Charge:
713.5 Description: BURGLARY 2ND DEGREE - 1983 (FELC)
Sentence Date:
01/25/2006 Sentence: IMPOSED
Appeal:
Sen.Judge: HUTCHISON, ROBERT A
Facility Type:
Attorney: N
Restitution:
N Drug: N Extradition: N
Lic.Revoked:
N DDS: N Batterer:
Fine Amount:
Duration:
Comment:
PROBATION EXTENDED UNTIL 01/16/09
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Count 02 Charge
Charge:
713.6A(2)-A Description: BURGLARY 3RD DEGREE - UNOCCUPIED MOTOR
VEHICLE (AGMS)
Offense Date: 08/12/2003 Arrest Date: Against Type:
DPS Number:
0668408-02
Adjudication
Charge:
713.6A(2)-A Description: BURGLARY 3RD DEGREE - UNOCCUPIED MOTOR
VEHICLE (AGMS)
Adj.:
DNU-GUILTY Adj.Date: 12/17/2003
Adj.Judge:
HUPPERT, MICHAEL D
Comments: GUILTY
Sentence
Charge:
713.6A(2)-A Description: BURGLARY 3RD DEGREE - UNOCCUPIED MOTOR
VEHICLE (AGMS)
Sentence Date:
01/16/2004 Sentence: PRISON
Appeal:
AFFR Sen.Judge: OVROM, ELIZA
Facility Type:
Attorney: Y
Restitution:
Y Drug: N Extradition: N
Lic.Revoked:
N DDS: N Batterer: N
Fine Amount:
Duration: 2 Year(s)
Comment:
Sentence
Charge:
713.6A(2)-A Description: BURGLARY 3RD DEGREE - UNOCCUPIED MOTOR
VEHICLE (AGMS)
Sentence Date:
01/16/2004 Sentence: SUSPENDED PRISON
Appeal:
AFFR Sen.Judge: OVROM, ELIZA
Facility Type:
Attorney: Y
Restitution:
Y Drug: N Extradition: N
Lic.Revoked:
N DDS: N Batterer: N
Fine Amount:
Duration: 2 Year(s)
Comment:
Sentence
Charge:
713.6A(2)-A Description: BURGLARY 3RD DEGREE - UNOCCUPIED MOTOR
VEHICLE (AGMS)
Sentence Date:
01/16/2004 Sentence: PROBATION
Appeal:
AFFR Sen.Judge: OVROM, ELIZA
Facility Type:
Attorney: Y
Restitution:
Y Drug: N Extradition: N
Lic.Revoked:
N DDS: N Batterer: N
Fine Amount:
Duration: 2 Year(s)
Comment:
FORMAL
Sentence
Charge:
713.6A(2)-A Description: BURGLARY 3RD DEGREE - UNOCCUPIED MOTOR
VEHICLE (AGMS)
Sentence Date:
01/16/2004 Sentence: RESIDENTIAL FACILITY
Appeal:
AFFR Sen.Judge: OVROM, ELIZA
Facility Type:
R Attorney: Y
Restitution:
Y Drug: N Extradition: N
Lic.Revoked:
N DDS: N Batterer: N
Fine Amount:
Duration:
Comment:
FT DSM FACILITY-MAX BENEFITS
Sentence
Charge:
713.6A(2)-A Description: BURGLARY 3RD DEGREE - UNOCCUPIED MOTOR
VEHICLE (AGMS)
Sentence Date:
01/16/2004 Sentence: COMMUNITY SERVICE
Appeal:
AFFR Sen.Judge: OVROM, ELIZA
Facility Type:
Attorney: Y
Restitution:
Y Drug: N Extradition: N
Lic.Revoked:
N DDS: N Batterer: N
Fine Amount:
Duration: 150 Hour(s)
Comment:
Sentence
Charge:
713.6A(2)-A Description: BURGLARY 3RD DEGREE - UNOCCUPIED MOTOR
VEHICLE (AGMS)
Sentence Date:
12/17/2003 Sentence: PROBATION EXTENDED
Appeal:
Sen.Judge: HUTCHISON, ROBERT A
Facility Type:
Attorney: Y
Restitution:
N Drug: N Extradition: N
Lic.Revoked:
N DDS: N Batterer:
Fine Amount:
Duration:
Comment:
JO-PROBATION EXTENDED UNTIL 1/16/09
Sentence
Charge:
713.6A(2)-A Description: BURGLARY 3RD DEGREE - UNOCCUPIED MOTOR
VEHICLE (AGMS)
Sentence Date:
01/25/2006 Sentence: IMPOSED
Appeal:
Sen.Judge: HUTCHISON, ROBERT A
Facility Type:
Attorney: N
Restitution:
N Drug: N Extradition: N
Lic.Revoked:
N DDS: N Batterer:
Fine Amount:
Duration:
Comment:
PROBATION EXTENDED UNTIL 01/06/09
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Count 03 Charge
Charge:
709A.6(2) Description: USING A JUVENILE TO COMMIT AN INDICTABLE
OFFENSE (FELC)
Offense Date: 08/12/2003 Arrest Date: Against Type:
DPS Number:
0668408-03
Adjudication
Charge:
709A.6(2) Description: USING A JUVENILE TO COMMIT AN INDICTABLE
OFFENSE (FELC)
Adj.:
DNU-GUILTY Adj.Date: 12/17/2003
Adj.Judge:
HUPPERT, MICHAEL D
Comments: GUILTY
Sentence
Charge:
709A.6(2) Description: USING A JUVENILE TO COMMIT AN INDICTABLE
OFFENSE (FELC)
Sentence Date:
01/16/2004 Sentence: PRISON
Appeal:
AFFR Sen.Judge: OVROM, ELIZA
Facility Type:
Attorney: Y
Restitution:
Y Drug: N Extradition: N
Lic.Revoked:
N DDS: N Batterer: N
Fine Amount:
Duration: 10 Year(s)
Comment:
Sentence
Charge:
709A.6(2) Description: USING A JUVENILE TO COMMIT AN INDICTABLE
OFFENSE (FELC)
Sentence Date:
01/16/2004 Sentence: SUSPENDED PRISON
Appeal:
AFFR Sen.Judge: OVROM, ELIZA
Facility Type:
Attorney: Y
Restitution:
Y Drug: N Extradition: N
Lic.Revoked:
N DDS: N Batterer: N
Fine Amount:
Duration: 10 Year(s)
Comment:
Sentence
Charge:
709A.6(2) Description: USING A JUVENILE TO COMMIT AN INDICTABLE
OFFENSE (FELC)
Sentence Date:
01/16/2004 Sentence: PROBATION
Appeal:
AFFR Sen.Judge: OVROM, ELIZA
Facility Type:
Attorney: Y
Restitution:
Y Drug: N Extradition: N
Lic.Revoked:
N DDS: N Batterer: N
Fine Amount:
Duration: 2 Year(s)
Comment:
FORMAL
Sentence
Charge:
709A.6(2) Description: USING A JUVENILE TO COMMIT AN INDICTABLE
OFFENSE (FELC)
Sentence Date:
01/16/2004 Sentence: RESIDENTIAL FACILITY
Appeal:
AFFR Sen.Judge: OVROM, ELIZA
Facility Type:
R Attorney: Y
Restitution:
Y Drug: N Extradition: N
Lic.Revoked:
N DDS: N Batterer: N
Fine Amount:
Duration:
Comment:
FT DSM FACILITY-MAX BENEFITS
Sentence
Charge:
709A.6(2) Description: USING A JUVENILE TO COMMIT AN INDICTABLE
OFFENSE (FELC)
Sentence Date:
01/16/2004 Sentence: COMMUNITY SERVICE
Appeal:
AFFR Sen.Judge: OVROM, ELIZA
Facility Type:
Attorney: Y
Restitution:
Y Drug: N Extradition: N
Lic.Revoked:
N DDS: N Batterer: N
Fine Amount:
Duration: 150 Hour(s)
Comment:
Sentence
Charge:
709A.6(2) Description: USING A JUVENILE TO COMMIT AN INDICTABLE
OFFENSE (FELC)
Sentence Date:
12/17/2003 Sentence: PROBATION EXTENDED
Appeal:
Sen.Judge: HUTCHISON, ROBERT A
Facility Type:
Attorney: Y
Restitution:
N Drug: N Extradition: N
Lic.Revoked:
N DDS: N Batterer:
Fine Amount:
Duration:
Comment:
JO-PROBATION EXTENDED UNTIL 1/16/09
Sentence
Charge:
709A.6(2) Description: USING A JUVENILE TO COMMIT AN INDICTABLE
OFFENSE (FELC)
Sentence Date:
01/25/2006 Sentence: IMPOSED
Appeal:
Sen.Judge: HUTCHISON, ROBERT A
Facility Type:
Attorney: N
Restitution:
N Drug: N Extradition: N
Lic.Revoked:
N DDS: N Batterer:
Fine Amount:
Duration:
Comment:
PROBATION EXTENDED UNTIL 01/16/09
Dan Sullivan
> Here is the reason Kent lies:
>
> 05771 FECR176876 (POLK) [Filings]
Wrong Kent Wills, moron.
Unless you can post positive proof otherwise.
But you haven't posted it in all the months you've been JO with this
claim of yours.
So I'm not expecting any.
_ Prof. Jonez _
> On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 11:01:04 -0700, "_ Prof. Jonez _"
> <the...@jonez.net> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>>>> Do his neighbors in Arkansas know he's a convicted child abuser?
>>>
>>> I wouldn't do that, but the area neighborhood watch
>>> should know he's a twice convicted thief.
>>> 2000 Felony Theft BEFORE his 2004 Felony Burglary.
>>
>> He abused a child in the commission of his 2004 Burglary,
>> so sayeth the Iowa Court Records.
>
> Is there no lie
Rule#1 = Kent Wills ALWAYS Lies!
_ Prof. Jonez _
> On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 11:02:22 -0700, "_ Prof. Jonez _"
> <the...@jonez.net> wrote:
>
>> Kent Wills wrote:
>>> On Thu, 11 Dec 2008 10:46:33 -0700, "_ Prof. Jonez _"
>>> <the...@jonez.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> My birthday and middle name are well known online.
>>>>> So is Kent's, but he claims that is a ""Fake ID"".
>>>>> If it were his ""Fake ID"" then why would he want to counter it?
>>>>
>>>> Do his neighbors in Arkansas know he's a convicted child abuser?
>>>
>>
>> "You are in the Kill File. Have been for a while.
>> Note that I can only reply if I read someone else's
>> reply to you."
>> -- Kent B Wills vainly trying to curtail his OCD
>>
>> "At this point Madeleine is equally alive and dead. "
>> -- Kent ignoramus Wills giving the Iowa version of Kwantum
>> Mahkaniks
>>
>> " Currently, we, citizens of the U.S., aren't allowed to go to
>> Venezuela or Cuba. My hope is that Venezuela's restriction will
>> be lifted after the next election."
>> - Kent Wills 2007, lying jackass
>>
>> "Let's pretend breathing is outlawed and everyone the world
>> over ceases inhaling and exhaling.
>> There will be NO change in CO2 levels since we exhale carbon
>> monoxide, not carbon dioxide, stupid."
>> - Kent Wills si-untist from Iowa
>>
>
> Whenever you've lost,
Rule #1 = Kent Wills ALWAYS Lies
Kent Wills
It's certainly possible you lied in your post about what
occurred. If you did, you should explain why you lied.
Then explain to the readers why you are so desperately trying to
avoid the truth that there is no revocation hearing?
>
>The hyena pack throws around mostly lies hoping for
>corrections which provide more information to base
>more lies upon.
>
>The approach is a variation on the old
>"Have you stopped beating your wife?" game.
You stopped when Donna wisely divorced you because of your
beatings.
>
>Another recent game is to ask for a denial of a double negative.
How, outside of your latest proof that your past, and possibly
current, illegal drug abuse is asking you to prove your claims, or
admit you've been lying, asking for a denial of anything?
>
>The intent, of course, is not to obtain truth at all,
>but to concoct more and more garbage.
That's your party trick.
You frequently accuse others of that which you've been proved to
have done. You've offered another example of it.
>
>The "recent discovery" Kent claims was about
>removal of a girl who never lived in my home.
So you lied?
Why would Grandma remove the girl from the home, as you claimed,
if she wasn't in the home?
Do you think about the lies you're going to post before you post
them?
>
>There was no investigation about her because there couldn't be.
>
There could have been. No amount of your lying will alter this
simple truth.
It's possible your attempt to condition the little girl to be your
sex partner lacked the evidence to warrant any action beyond what
happened. This doesn't mean an investigation couldn't have happened.
>
>Here is the reason Kent lies:
[snip of items Greg KNOWS, but lacks the ability to directly admit,
have nothing to do with me.]
Greg, what lie(s) will you present to try and avoid the truth
that there is no revocation hearing, and that you've been lying about
my being on probation the whole time?
Why are you stalking the members of alt.friends?
Do you still think insomnia and claustrophobia are the same
thing?
Why did you author the following (by YOUR standards):
Kent Wills
<dsul...@optonline.net> wrote:
>On Dec 14, 2:04 pm, Greegor <Greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Here is the reason Kent lies:
>>
>> 05771 FECR176876 (POLK) [Filings]
>
>Wrong Kent Wills, moron.
>
Greg knows I've never been arrested for, let alone convicted of,
any felony. However, he is UNABLE to be honest, unless he makes a
mistake or is forced.
>Unless you can post positive proof otherwise.
>
He's never been able to date.
>But you haven't posted it in all the months you've been JO with this
>claim of yours.
>
>So I'm not expecting any.
If Greg is half the stalker he presents, he found Kent B. Wills
didn't exist in Iowa, if anywhere, before 1993. He is unable to admit
this, of course, since it would require that he be honest.
Kent Wills
<dsul...@optonline.net> wrote:
>On Dec 14, 12:36 pm, Greegor <Greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Dan, I'd like to see proof you'r not FOUNDED.
>
>More than you like to see naked seven year old girls?
>
Greg wants nothing more than to see naked pre-pubescent girls,
other than to actually have sex with them.
>> 15+ Chi;d Abuse investigations and 5 foundeds
>> supposedly reversed, but you're squeaky clean?
>
>Yes.
>
>> Got proof?
>
>Yes.
I like how Greg DEMANDS proof, but refuses to ever offer any for
his claims. Of course, his claims have been shown to be lies, so he
can't offer any.
krp
"melody4u" <rgc2...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:81761c2e-e491-4568...@w1g2000prk.googlegroups.com...
> >>>How's Susan?
>
> >> Greg, why did you fondle a six-year-old girl's genital area with
> >> your bare hand?
>
> > What you need to know is grag has claimed I live in Hollis, Queens.
>
> Danny tell us ALL ABOUT the PUPPET BEAR and how you USED that with little
> kids.....................
< you really want to lie about other mens daughters when the truth about
your own is so hidious?
I have GREAT kids and grandchildren. What's YOUR problem sweetie?
krp
I guess not, I understand you are embarrassed about using dolls to help
you molest kids. I feel sorry for you Danny boy.
krp
< Yes.
> Got proof?
< Yes.
Okay, give us a LINK!!!!
krp
"_ Prof. Jonez _" <the...@jonez.net> wrote in message
news:6ql6scF...@mid.individual.net...
Understatement!
Kent Wills
Jonezie has already admitted his claims about me are lies. When
I asked him, "Where's the lie?" he posted the list.
Further, he has stated that his being a bigot who lies at every
opportunity is immutable. Some truths are so powerful, not even
Jonezie can deny them.
Me:
It's nice that you finally agree that Rule Number One: "Prof.
Jonez is a bigot who will lie at every opportunity" is valid.
Prof. Jonez/Reality Check/assorted other nyms:
It's immutable.
Kent Wills
So great that NONE will have anything to do with you.
"And you RULE OUT that it could be MOORE my biggest
fan and GAY lover."
Kenneth Robert Pangborn, of KRP Consulting and The A-Team, LYING
and claiming David Moore is his gay lover. Message-ID:
<_MlOj.598$pH4.7@trnddc06>
Greegor
before he had it scrubbed?
I posted the entire page once in the newsgroups.
Later I posted just his line entry and the webmaster line.
You might also remember that kent claimed that
the detailed identity was a ""Fake ID"" that he
set up to mislead his stalkers.
So if KENT set up the ""Fake ID"" why would
he be anything less than enthusiastic that
I EMBRACE his ""Fake ID"" ?
Did you like the part where Kent recently claimed he
was "assigned" the identity?
That sounds eerily like a GROUP activity
involving a false identity, and it included a birthday.
Who "assigns" identities like this and who
feels obligated enough to adopt an identity
""assigned"" to them?
I don't believe the absurd story, of course.
But the fact that KENT asserted it blatantly
shifts the burden of proof such that KENT
would have to prove he is NOT
Kent Bradlye Wills DOB Jan 8, 1969.
Since Kent supposedly adopted or was
""assigned"" the ""Fake ID"" then it should
be really easy for him to prove that claim.
You see, Dan, while the burden of proof might
once have been to prove that he IS Kent Wills,
once he announced that it was a ""Fake ID""
suddenly it became clear that he would
have no reason, no motivation whatsoever
to counter the ""Fake ID"" unless it's not fake.
Dan Sullivan
> Dan, Did you see Kent's birthday page
> before he had it scrubbed?
No.
> I posted the entire page once in the newsgroups.
I don't care.
> Later I posted just his line entry and the webmaster line.
I don't care.
> You might also remember that kent claimed that
> the detailed identity was a ""Fake ID"" that he
> set up to mislead his stalkers.
>
> So if KENT set up the ""Fake ID"" why would
> he be anything less than enthusiastic that
> I EMBRACE his ""Fake ID"" ?
>
> Did you like the part where Kent recently claimed he
> was "assigned" the identity?
Kent was a nickname.
> That sounds eerily like a GROUP activity
> involving a false identity, and it included a birthday.
I don't care what you think it sounds like.
> Who "assigns" identities like this and who
> feels obligated enough to adopt an identity
> ""assigned"" to them?
>
> I don't believe the absurd story, of course.
Yeah, you believe naked little girl should be forced into cold
showers, too.
> But the fact that KENT asserted it blatantly
> shifts the burden of proof such that KENT
> would have to prove he is NOT
> Kent Bradlye Wills DOB Jan 8, 1969.
>
> Since Kent supposedly adopted or was
> ""assigned"" the ""Fake ID"" then it should
> be really easy for him to prove that claim.
How?
> You see, Dan, while the burden of proof might
> once have been to prove that he IS Kent Wills,
> once he announced that it was a ""Fake ID""
> suddenly it became clear that he would
> have no reason, no motivation whatsoever
> to counter the ""Fake ID"" unless it's not fake.
Obviously...
:- ))))))))
Kent Wills
<Gree...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Dan, Did you see Kent's birthday page
>before he had it scrubbed?
>
Prove it's been "scrubbed." Unless you're lying, of course.
Oh wait. You are UNABLE to prove any lie you post to be true.
Still, you post the same lies over and over. Even after everyone
reading has seen the proof that you were lying.
>I posted the entire page once in the newsgroups.
With some alteration.
>
>Later I posted just his line entry and the webmaster line.
>
No, you posted the entry you made up. This has already been
proved.
>You might also remember that kent claimed that
>the detailed identity was a ""Fake ID"" that he
>set up to mislead his stalkers.
Outside of your continued proof that you are unable to be honest
because of your past, and probably current, illegal drug abuse, I
didn't set up the Kent Wills nym.
>
>So if KENT set up the ""Fake ID"" why would
As you know, but continue to PROVE you lack the psychologically
ability to be honest and admit, I didn't set it up/
>he be anything less than enthusiastic that
>I EMBRACE his ""Fake ID"" ?
I'm not embracing it.
Why are you so determined to prove that your past, and probably
current, illegal drug abuse prohibits you from being honest?
Serious question.
>
>Did you like the part where Kent recently claimed he
>was "assigned" the identity?
I was given the nym, as you know.
>
>That sounds eerily like a GROUP activity
I suppose in your drug addled mind, one person giving a nym would
be seen as a group.
>involving a false identity, and it included a birthday.
Which birthday?
>
>Who "assigns" identities like this and who
>feels obligated enough to adopt an identity
>""assigned"" to them?
Again you prove your past, and probably current, illegal drug
abuse makes being honest impossible for you.
I've not adopted anything.
>
>I don't believe the absurd story, of course.
You've proved many times that you are unable to accept that which
is true. Why would this be any different?
>
>But the fact that KENT asserted it blatantly
>shifts the burden of proof such that KENT
>would have to prove he is NOT
>Kent Bradlye Wills DOB Jan 8, 1969.
You claim I am someone who does not exist. Outside of your proof
that you are ANTI-American, the burden of proof befalls you.
>
>Since Kent supposedly adopted or was
>""assigned"" the ""Fake ID"" then it should
>be really easy for him to prove that claim.
You're the one claiming it's my name in real life. It's your job
to prove your claim. It is not my job to disprove it.
>
>You see, Dan, while the burden of proof might
>once have been to prove that he IS Kent Wills,
It still it.
>once he announced that it was a ""Fake ID""
>suddenly it became clear that he would
>have no reason, no motivation whatsoever
>to counter the ""Fake ID"" unless it's not fake.
Only within the confines of your additional proof that your past,
and probably current, illegal drug abuse makes it impossible for you
to be honest. Unless you slip up or are somehow forced.
Why are you stalking the members of alt.friends?
http://www.stalkingbehavior.com/definiti.htm
Stalking is defined as "the willful, malicious and repeated
following and harassing of another person" (Meloy, 1998).
-- Gregory Scott Hanson, inmate 1104135, wife and child abuser,
posting a definition of stalking so that he could accuse others of
stalking him.
Message-ID: <1150922197.4...@b68g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
_ Prof. Jonez _
melody4u
Kent Wills
<the...@jonez.net> wrote:
>Subject: Re: Kent's motivation to DIE !!
Once again you call for my death. Everyone knows why. I married
a non-white woman. We have two children.
What lies will you present now?
Kent Wills
<rgc2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Dec 15, 2:10 pm, "_ Prof. Jonez _" <thep...@jonez.net> wrote:
>>
[...]
You need to keep in mind that Jonezie called for my family to be
murdered because my wife and children don't fit into the "white"
demographic. Jonezie is extremely racist. He no longer even tries to
pretend he is not, since the proof is undeniable (he state's it's
immutable).
He made it clear his calling for my children to be murdered
earned him a visit from law enforcement. He was aware they took notes
during the visit. This was something no one else knew until he
mentioned it.
When another poster stated that at the time she did not have a
copy of the report made by law enforcement, he said she was lying.
If she was lying, she must have had a copy. In order for her to
have had a copy, there must be an original.
The bulk of his posts over the past six months have been to attack
me. All because he thinks whites are somehow superior just because of
the amount of melanin they have.
TNKev
clearly the ramblings of a drug addled, paranoid idiot.
Greegor
Nice try!
You know, when Kent and you stooges tried
to claim that the 3 official state court web sites
were somehow FAKED, you came closer to
resembling an imbalanced person than my
mere logical presentation above.
Kent himself said that his Kent B Wills ""Fake ID""
was "assigned" to him. I have seen no explanation
of why he would have felt somehow obligated to
adopt the use of the ""Fake ID"" complete with
a matching birthdate.
A. Group activity
B. ""Fake ID""
C. Birthdate matching the ""Fake ID""
All of the above were asserted by Kent himself!
Could you please at least TRY to explain why Kent
would try to refute his own ""Fake ID""?
If it's a ""Fake ID"" then what's the point?
melody4u
>
> - Show quoted text -
he has stated they both were obsessed, LOL and if you believed
that .....
Greegor
It's fairly obvious that you are an old poster
or an existing poster under a new name.
It must have been hard on you to be so
embarassed before that you have to hide
behind an anonymous identity this time around.
Was it me that forced you to "go underground" ?
Dragon's Girl
Wow. You think you got a lot of power.
LOL
Tell me, can you buy that with food stamps, or is it just inbred?
melody4u
Dragon's Girl
I'd say the thinking in itself probably doesn't hurt too bad.
Couple it, though, with his ongoing case of cranial rectosis, and that
could be a very painful act.
My bet is that he could have that sugically corrected for just over
eight grand.
Peter Hucker
> On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 13:10:33 -0700, "_ Prof. Jonez _"
> <the...@jonez.net> wrote:
>
>>Subject: Re: Kent's motivation to DIE !!
>
> Once again you call for my death. Everyone knows why. I married
> a non-white woman.
Only slightly.
> We have two children.
> What lies will you present now?
>
>
> Me:
> It's nice that you finally agree that Rule Number One: "Prof.
> Jonez is a bigot who will lie at every opportunity" is valid.
>
> Prof. Jonez/Reality Check/assorted other nyms:
> It's immutable.
>
--
If you are going to try cross-country skiing, start with a small country.
Kent Wills
<betty...@yahoo.com> wrote:
[...]
>> > Was it me that forced you to "go underground" ?
>>
>> LOL, does it hurt when you think so hard?
>
>I'd say the thinking in itself probably doesn't hurt too bad.
>Couple it, though, with his ongoing case of cranial rectosis, and that
>could be a very painful act.
>My bet is that he could have that sugically corrected for just over
>eight grand.
If he can't afford $80.00 for a storage unit (he thinks Iowa's
tax payers should foot his bills), he certainly can't afford $8000.00.
Kent Wills
Only you would be so mentally defective as to think one's real
life being more important the Usenet equates to going underground.
Kent Wills
>> You see, Dan, while the burden of proof might
>> once have been to prove that he IS Kent Wills,
>> once he announced that it was a ""Fake ID""
>> suddenly it became clear that he would
>> have no reason, no motivation whatsoever
>> to counter the ""Fake ID"" unless it's not fake.
>
>clearly the ramblings of a drug addled, paranoid idiot.
I don't know if Greg is still abusing illegal drugs. His doing
so would explain a great deal, but it's possible he's clean.
It's clear he's not following the steps. According to every 12
step web site I've read, part of recovery requires the person to admit
s/he has an addiction. That they have mastered does not mean they are
actually free of it.
Greg has consistently refused to admit his past illegal drug
abuse. As such, he's not really in recovery.
"If you call the police, I'll knock out all of your teeth, I'll
cripple you. I may go to prison for it, but when I get out,
I'll be able to walk,but you will still be a cripple."
--Greg Hanson, in a verbal threat to his girlfriend
" ... But there ought to be conferences and studies on how to curb
minority overpopulation, repatriate minorities abroad, imprison more
minorities, increase use of the death penalty and divest minorities of
the power they have usurped over us in recent years. That would
address the most pressing problems of our day. ... "
April 2000, Gregory Hanson
http://www.nationalist.org/ATW/2000/040101.html#Hanson
Kent Wills
<Gree...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > You see, Dan, while the burden of proof might
>> > once have been to prove that he IS Kent Wills,
>> > once he announced that it was a ""Fake ID""
>> > suddenly it became clear that he would
>> > have no reason, no motivation whatsoever
>> > to counter the ""Fake ID"" unless it's not fake.
>>
>> clearly the ramblings of a drug addled, paranoid idiot.
>
>Nice try!
>
Most find truth nice. That you don't is a given.
>You know, when Kent and you stooges tried
>to claim that the 3 official state court web sites
>were somehow FAKED, you came closer to
>resembling an imbalanced person than my
>mere logical presentation above.
There is nothing logical in your presentation. The damage your
past, and probably current, illegal drug abuse has damaged your brain
so much that logic isn't possible for you.
You claim I am Kent B. Wills in real life. Since you can't prove
your claim, you lie and say it's my burden to disprove it.
The best you've ever been able to do is show that on Usenet I
make use of the nym Kent Wills. Of course, my use of the nym isn't in
dispute.
>
>Kent himself said that his Kent B Wills ""Fake ID""
>was "assigned" to him.
I've made no such claim.
> I have seen no explanation
>of why he would have felt somehow obligated to
>adopt the use of the ""Fake ID"" complete with
>a matching birthdate.
I've adopted nothing.
Are you abusing illegal drugs again? It would explain a lot.
>
>A. Group activity
>B. ""Fake ID""
>C. Birthdate matching the ""Fake ID""
As far as I know, my real birthday isn't listen on any web site.
If you know of a webs site that lists my real birthday, please
offer a link to it.
>
>All of the above were asserted by Kent himself!
When? Outside of your continued proof that your past, and
probably current, illegal drug abuse has serious screwed up your mind,
I've asserted no group activity, fake ID or birthday.
>
>Could you please at least TRY to explain why Kent
>would try to refute his own ""Fake ID""?
It's not my fake ID. It's a Usenet nym, dullard.
>
>If it's a ""Fake ID"" then what's the point?
It further proves you to be psychologically UNABLE to be honest,
due to your past, and probably current, illegal drug use. You already
know my name in real life isn't Kent Bradley Wills. However, your
need to lie is so great that you are unable to admit it.
This has been proved a few times. Kind of like how it was proved
you were lying about the birthday page.
Kent Wills
wrote:
>On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 22:55:02 -0000, Kent Wills <comp...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 13:10:33 -0700, "_ Prof. Jonez _"
>> <the...@jonez.net> wrote:
>>
>>>Subject: Re: Kent's motivation to DIE !!
>>
>> Once again you call for my death. Everyone knows why. I married
>> a non-white woman.
>
>Only slightly.
How does one only slightly marry someone?
--
"Hail imp," shouted Vlad, the Imp Hailer.
Greegor
DO actually have a wife or kids?
Jonez recent post didn't mention them anyway.
It just cited your crimhist as a motivation for you to DIE.
While I don't take such a strong position, it
is NOT a racial threat just because you SAY so, Whitey!
You play the race card in vain, Kent.
Doesn't that set the cause of equality back a few decades?
While I don't think that Kent's criminal history
is a reason for him to DIE, I would not feel one
bit of remorse if his FELONIES depressed him
to the point of suicide.
Certainly Kent has had the chance to cease
his massive dishonesty, so if being "found out"
is something Kent can't live with, so be it.
Anybody whose sense of self identity depends
on calling multiple court and government
web sites fraudulent is not very balanced.
Kent Wills
<Gree...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Kent, What proof do you have that you
>DO actually have a wife or kids?
The pictures I once made available.
If you missed them, bummer. With mentally defective people such
as you out there, I'm not going to hand out stalking fodder.
>
>Jonez recent post didn't mention them anyway.
He has called for my murder for marrying a Hispanic woman many
times. You can deny the truth of this as many times as you want. The
truth will remain the truth.
>
>It just cited your crimhist as a motivation for you to DIE.
>While I don't take such a strong position, it
>is NOT a racial threat just because you SAY so, Whitey!
You can defend his racism as much as your own proved bigotry
demands of you. It's your right to do so.
I'll defend his and your right to be a bigot. However, when he
called for the murder of my children, he went too far.
That you would defend such action speaks volumes.
>
>You play the race card in vain, Kent.
>Doesn't that set the cause of equality back a few decades?
Exposing bigots is always a good thing. That's why I point out
your bigotry when you display it.
>
>While I don't think that Kent's criminal history
>is a reason for him to DIE, I would not feel one
>bit of remorse if his FELONIES depressed him
>to the point of suicide.
You are incapable of remorse, as proved by your seeing your
constant lying as acceptable.
Add your seeing your lust for pre-pubescent girls as normal, and
it's further proved.
>
>Certainly Kent has had the chance to cease
>his massive dishonesty,
What dishonesty? You've been unable to cite even one lie from
me.
You're the one claiming I have a revocation hearing when you know
I don't. Since, as you know, I'm not on probation or parole (you've
claimed I'm on both at the same time), there can't be one.
What lies will you tell when I'm still posting after the
fictional revocation hearing?
>so if being "found out"
>is something Kent can't live with, so be it.
>
>Anybody whose sense of self identity depends
>on calling multiple court and government
>web sites fraudulent is not very balanced.
When have you made such a claim? I must have missed those posts.
Why are you stalking the members of alt.friends?
Why do you think your fondling of Lisa's daughter's genital area
was/is a normal action for an adult male who is not related?
Dragon's Girl
> On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 10:53:37 -0800 (PST), "Dragon's Girl"
>
>
> [...]
>
> >> > Was it me that forced you to "go underground" ?
>
> >> LOL, does it hurt when you think so hard?
>
> >I'd say the thinking in itself probably doesn't hurt too bad.
> >Couple it, though, with his ongoing case of cranial rectosis, and that
> >could be a very painful act.
> >My bet is that he could have that sugically corrected for just over
> >eight grand.
>
> If he can't afford $80.00 for a storage unit (he thinks Iowa's
> tax payers should foot his bills), he certainly can't afford $8000.00.
I know he can't.
Dragon's Girl
The tried and true all time favorite posting cry of Greegor the
Greasy..
"what proof do you have?'
Kent, you owe him some proof damnit, now chop chop, get on it.
_ Prof. Jonez _
> On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 12:18:48 -0800 (PST), melody4u
> <rgc2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> On Dec 15, 2:10 pm, "_ Prof. Jonez _" <thep...@jonez.net> wrote:
>>>
>
> [...]
>
> You need to keep in mind that
Rule #1 is - Kent Wills ALWAYS Lies !
_ Prof. Jonez _
> On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 13:10:33 -0700, "_ Prof. Jonez _"
> <the...@jonez.net> wrote:
>
>> Subject: Re: Kent's motivation to DIE !!
>
> Once again you call for my death.
Once again Rule #1 is proven = Kent Wills ALWAYS Lies!!
http://www.doc.state.ia.us/InmateInfo.asp?OffenderCd=1155768
Name Kent Bradley Wills
Offender Number 1155768
Sex M
Birth Date 01/08/1969
Age 38
Location Interstate Compact (Arkansas)
Greegor
not exactly the same as calling for your death.
YOU added the racial component, and you
have repeatedly mentioned an old post
where he supposedly made racial death threats.
But when asked to pony up the old message
you have failed to provide a link to it intact and
in place.
To claim racial death threats over and over without
linking to the exact original is flat out dishonest.
This recent interaction proves exactly
why I have my doubts about your assertions.
You claim it's a racial death threat even
though actually it is neither racial nor a death threat.
Stating that your two time thieving FELONY record
might motivate you to commit suicide is
not the same as calling for your death.
Dragon's Girl
I'd think someone in your position would do well to be cleaning up
their own house, both literally and figuratively, before they're all
worried about someone else's.
But then, that's been your problem all along, eh?
Greegor
melody4u > WHY hasn't grag commented on how the mothers
melody4u > of his two separate wives felt the urgent need to
melody4u > get their very young grandaughters as far away
melody4u > from him as possible?
melody4u > he has stated they both were obsessed,
melody4u > LOL and if you believed that .....
G > melody4u: Who were you known as in here previously?
G >
G > It's fairly obvious that you are an old poster
G > or an existing poster under a new name.
G >
G > It must have been hard on you to be so
G > embarassed before that you have to hide
G > behind an anonymous identity this time around.
G >
G > Was it me that forced you to "go underground" ?
melody4u > LOL, does it hurt when you think so hard?
Why did you think this anonymous BS was smart?
Greegor
G > not exactly the same as calling for your death.
G >
G > YOU added the racial component, and you
G > have repeatedly mentioned an old post
G > where he supposedly made racial death threats.
G >
G > But when asked to pony up the old message
G > you have failed to provide a link to it intact and
G > in place.
G >
G > To claim racial death threats over and over without
G > linking to the exact original is flat out dishonest.
G >
G > This recent interaction proves exactly
G > why I have my doubts about your assertions.
G >
G > You claim it's a racial death threat even
G > though actually it is neither racial nor a death threat.
G >
G > Stating that your two time thieving FELONY record
G > might motivate you to commit suicide is
G > not the same as calling for your death.
BW > I'd think someone in your position would do
BW > well to be cleaning up their own house,
BW > both literally and figuratively, before they're
BW > all worried about someone else's.
BW > But then, that's been your problem all along, eh?
I've been in ascps for 8 years now, sometimes
totally alone against your pack of hyenas.
Whenever one of you gets your proverbial
tit in a ringer, the others in your hyena pack
have been there to distract and counter attack.
I would just like to point out that your distraction
at this point is just that, and not very rational
since it has not a damn thing to do with Kent's
BS about ""racial death threats"".
Did you feel that Kent really couldn't stand
up and answer questions HE prompted, himself?
Or was it just pack loyalty which made you
post this complete and utter distraction from
the subject at hand?
In any event, you really count on readers
to have a very short attention span.
Kent, please answer the questions.
melody4u
grag,when I want you to know who I am or what I think I will tell you,
otherwise you keep trying to figure it out , go on now, you are
edrudite, it shouldnt be that hard.
melody4u
You showed yourself to be a wife beating, child abusing stalker grag,
the way you have attacked people here what else on earyth did you
expect?
And you want us to cry a river for you?
You get what you give, then whine like a baby.
Go be a victim somewhere else.
> Whenever one of you gets your proverbial
> tit in a ringer, the others in your hyena pack
> have been there to distract and counter attack.
>
> I would just like to point out that your distraction
> at this point is just that, and not very rational
> since it has not a damn thing to do with Kent's
> BS about ""racial death threats"".
>
> Did you feel that Kent really couldn't stand
> up and answer questions HE prompted, himself?
>
> Or was it just pack loyalty which made you
> post this complete and utter distraction from
> the subject at hand?
It must suck when your only cyber pal is ken pangborn, huh?
> In any event, you really count on readers
> to have a very short attention span.
>
> Kent, please answer the questions.
You reap what you sow asshole.
Dan Sullivan
"Greegor" <Gree...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:b3897436-fab7-46f4...@b38g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
You're a pervert/child abuser and the other members aren't.
Greegor
G > I've been in ascps for 8 years now, sometimes
G > totally alone against your pack of hyenas.
melody4u > You showed yourself to be a wife beating, child abusing
stalker grag,
melody4u > the way you have attacked people here what else on earyth
did you
melody4u > expect?
Yeah, a whole pack of hyenas nipping away at me
and I'm JUST SO MEAN to you? LOL
Next you'll be saying I have you surrounded!
melody4u > And you want us to cry a river for you?
melody4u > You get what you give, then whine like a baby.
melody4u > Go be a victim somewhere else.
Declaring ownership of a newsgroup?
Dan is that you in DRAG?
G > Whenever one of you gets your proverbial
G > tit in a ringer, the others in your hyena pack
G > have been there to distract and counter attack.
G >
G > I would just like to point out that your distraction
G > at this point is just that, and not very rational
G > since it has not a damn thing to do with Kent's
G > BS about ""racial death threats"".
G >
G > Did you feel that Kent really couldn't stand
G > up and answer questions HE prompted, himself?
G >
G > Or was it just pack loyalty which made you
G > post this complete and utter distraction from
G > the subject at hand?
melody4u > It must suck when your only cyber pal is ken pangborn, huh?
Everybody who disagrees with you is a conspiracy?
So truth doesn't matter right?
Just popularity and pack loyalty?
Did you think that makes you seem smart?
G > In any event, you really count on readers
G > to have a very short attention span.
G > Kent, please answer the questions.
melody4u > You reap what you sow asshole.
Anonymous BS ? Nope.
Kent Wills
<the...@jonez.net> wrote:
>Kent Wills wrote:
>> On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 12:18:48 -0800 (PST), melody4u
>> <rgc2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Dec 15, 2:10 pm, "_ Prof. Jonez _" <thep...@jonez.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> You need to keep in mind that
>
>Rule #1 is - Prof. Jonez is a bigot who will lie at every opportunity.
>
I adopted your posting style. I'm sure you'll be happy with my
doing so.
Kent Wills
If you were half as erudite as you dishonestly claim to be, you
would already know who she is. She's not hiding herself.
Oh wait. You have claimed she's me. If I am, it means you LIED
about my living in Arkansas.
Have you offered proof that you're too stupid to see from where
someone is posting, or are you admitting you lied about where I live?
I'll accept either answer, though you'll run away like the cowardly
child predator you are.
"If you call the police, I'll knock out all of your teeth, I'll
cripple you. I may go to prison for it, but when I get out,
I'll be able to walk,but you will still be a cripple."
--Greg Hanson, in a verbal threat to his girlfriend
" ... But there ought to be conferences and studies on how to curb
Kent Wills
I've noticed that Greg always demands proof, but thinks he should
be believed, even after his claims have been proved to be lies.
As of my writing this, Greg has NEVER been able to support, let
alone prove, any claim he's ever made. When asked for cites he runs
away from the requests.
--
Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons...
for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup.
Kent Wills
<Gree...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Kent, Saying that you have motivation to die is
>not exactly the same as calling for your death.
Lie all your mental defects require. You're going to anyway (you
can't stop yourself), so I may as well make it look like I grant you
permission.
>
>YOU added the racial component, and you
>have repeatedly mentioned an old post
>where he supposedly made racial death threats.
Since Jonezie has made it clear he wants my family murdered
because we're not pure white, it's clear what he meant. No amount of
your rationalization or desire to defend a bigot will ever alter this
simple truth.
>
>But when asked to pony up the old message
>you have failed to provide a link to it intact and
>in place.
Since Moe posted them, there was no need for me to do so.
Or does your drug damaged mind make you think my posting the same
links would have greater meaning?
>
>To claim racial death threats over and over without
>linking to the exact original is flat out dishonest.
>
Moe already did. You replied to her posts with the links, so you
can't claim you haven't had the opportunity to read them. Not unless
you lie.
>This recent interaction proves exactly
>why I have my doubts about your assertions.
You consistently prove you doubt anything that contains truth.
If you wish to doubt the truth, that's fine. Your opinion isn't
important outside of Usenet fodder.
By way of contrast, my opinion of you is of such great importance
that upon realizing I'd left ascps, you sought me out in other groups.
Including at least two I hadn't been to in over a year.
>
>You claim it's a racial death threat even
>though actually it is neither racial nor a death threat.
Rationalize his racist hate any way you need.
>
>Stating that your two time thieving FELONY record
>might motivate you to commit suicide is
>not the same as calling for your death.
As you know, I've not been arrested for, let alone convicted of,
a single, let alone two, felony.
Is it your past illegal drug abuse that forces you to post that
which you KNOW is not true, or is it due to current illegal drug
abuse?
Why are you stalking the members of alt.friends?
--
Kent Wills
<Gree...@gmail.com> wrote:
[...]
>BW > I'd think someone in your position would do
>BW > well to be cleaning up their own house,
>BW > both literally and figuratively, before they're
>BW > all worried about someone else's.
>BW > But then, that's been your problem all along, eh?
>
>I've been in ascps for 8 years now, sometimes
>totally alone against your pack of hyenas.
>
>Whenever one of you gets your proverbial
>tit in a ringer, the others in your hyena pack
>have been there to distract and counter attack.
When it's the truth, it's not an attack. You seem to have a real
problem accepting this simple truth.
>
>I would just like to point out that your distraction
>at this point is just that, and not very rational
>since it has not a damn thing to do with Kent's
>BS about ""racial death threats"".
>
Is your drug induced brain damage so great that you think a
conversation doesn't change on Usenet?
>Did you feel that Kent really couldn't stand
>up and answer questions HE prompted, himself?
I've answered each of the three, maybe four, times you've asked
them.
>
>Or was it just pack loyalty which made you
>post this complete and utter distraction from
>the subject at hand?
Friends do tend to defend each other. Since your past, and
probably current, illegal drug abuse has you so paranoid you can't
make friends, you can't understand.
>
>In any event, you really count on readers
>to have a very short attention span.
You ask the same questions of me multiple times in a futile hope
that no one will recall my having answered them, and claim Betty is
counting on short attention span?
>
>Kent, please answer the questions.
Already done. About a minute ago I answered them again.
You'll note the context has never changed in the answers I've
given any of the times I've answered them.
Why are you stalking the members of alt.friends? You've never
answered this question. On the rare occasions when your mental
defects permit you to acknowledge it, you either lie (claiming you are
a member when the truth is you have been banned from membership) or
play the avoidance game.
Greegor
KW > It's immutable.
Kent, What's your proof that these various adversaries
of yours are the same person?
Fregoli much?
Kent Wills
<rgc2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
[...]
>> I've been in ascps for 8 years now, sometimes
>> totally alone against your pack of hyenas.
>
>You showed yourself to be a wife beating, child abusing stalker grag,
> the way you have attacked people here what else on earyth did you
>expect?
>And you want us to cry a river for you?
>You get what you give, then whine like a baby.
>Go be a victim somewhere else.
But everyone is supposed to support Greg.
>
>> Whenever one of you gets your proverbial
>> tit in a ringer, the others in your hyena pack
>> have been there to distract and counter attack.
>>
>> I would just like to point out that your distraction
>> at this point is just that, and not very rational
>> since it has not a damn thing to do with Kent's
>> BS about ""racial death threats"".
>>
>> Did you feel that Kent really couldn't stand
>> up and answer questions HE prompted, himself?
>>
>> Or was it just pack loyalty which made you
>> post this complete and utter distraction from
>> the subject at hand?
>
>It must suck when your only cyber pal is ken pangborn, huh?
>
The only reason Pangborn is all buddy-buddy is because Greg helps
to feed his lies.
To be fair, Pangborn does the same for Greg.
>> In any event, you really count on readers
>> to have a very short attention span.
>>
>> Kent, please answer the questions.
>
>You reap what you sow asshole.
I've answered the questions each time he's presented them.
Either he's counting on the readers having memory problems, or he
thinks the answers will magically change.
Kent Wills
<Gree...@gmail.com> wrote:
[...]
>melody4u > You showed yourself to be a wife beating, child abusing
>stalker grag,
>melody4u > the way you have attacked people here what else on earyth
>did you
>melody4u > expect?
>
>Yeah, a whole pack of hyenas nipping away at me
>and I'm JUST SO MEAN to you? LOL
>
>Next you'll be saying I have you surrounded!
More proof of your mental defects noted.
>
>melody4u > And you want us to cry a river for you?
>melody4u > You get what you give, then whine like a baby.
>melody4u > Go be a victim somewhere else.
>
>Declaring ownership of a newsgroup?
>Dan is that you in DRAG?
When, outside of your illegal drug induced delusions, has Dan
claimed, even via implication, ownership of any newsgroup?
>
>G > Whenever one of you gets your proverbial
>G > tit in a ringer, the others in your hyena pack
>G > have been there to distract and counter attack.
>G >
>G > I would just like to point out that your distraction
>G > at this point is just that, and not very rational
>G > since it has not a damn thing to do with Kent's
>G > BS about ""racial death threats"".
>G >
>G > Did you feel that Kent really couldn't stand
>G > up and answer questions HE prompted, himself?
>G >
>G > Or was it just pack loyalty which made you
>G > post this complete and utter distraction from
>G > the subject at hand?
>
>melody4u > It must suck when your only cyber pal is ken pangborn, huh?
>
>Everybody who disagrees with you is a conspiracy?
That's YOUR claim, though you prefer to use the term witch hunt.
>So truth doesn't matter right?
To you, truth to be avoided at all costs!
>Just popularity and pack loyalty?
>Did you think that makes you seem smart?
>
Compared to you, most everyone on earth is smart.
>G > In any event, you really count on readers
>G > to have a very short attention span.
>
>G > Kent, please answer the questions.
>
>melody4u > You reap what you sow asshole.
>
>Anonymous BS ? Nope.
If you were half as erudite as you dishonestly claim, you would
know who Mel really is. Sadly, you're just too stupid to figure it
out.
Sadly, I'm not joking in any way.
Why are you stalking the members of alt.friends?
Kent Wills
<Gree...@gmail.com> wrote:
>KW > Prof. Jonez/Reality Check/assorted other nyms:
>KW > It's immutable.
>
Jonezie wrote "It's immutable."
Contrary to your latest proof that you have Fregoli, or lack the
ability to be honest, we're not the same person. Really.
You frequently attribute the writings of others to me, and my
writings to others. Given how often you do this, it can't be a
mistake.
Are you proving you have Fregoli, or are you proving you can't be
honest? I'll accept either answer, though you'll probably run away
from the question, since an honest answer is impossible for you.
>Kent, What's your proof that these various adversaries
>of yours are the same person?
>
His own claims.
Do you think he lied about each of the nyms being his? While it
is possible he lied, I've seen nothing to support such a claim. If
you have something that would support a claim that he lied, present
it.
If your question is just another of your typical deception via
innuendo, then forget it.
>Fregoli much?
Since Jonezie claims the various nyms as his own, probably not.
Dragon's Girl
Awwwww.
>
> Whenever one of you gets your proverbial
> tit in a ringer, the others in your hyena pack
> have been there to distract and counter attack.
Who's in a ringer?
>
> I would just like to point out that your distraction
> at this point is just that, and not very rational
> since it has not a damn thing to do with Kent's
> BS about ""racial death threats"".
Heh. I have taken no part in any discussion on death threats.
I'm just here while I'm recovering from my surgery to get a giggle out
of you and Ken doing the stroke and pony show.
>
> Did you feel that Kent really couldn't stand
> up and answer questions HE prompted, himself?
Sure he can. That's why I haven't said anything FOR him.
Duh.
>
> Or was it just pack loyalty which made you
> post this complete and utter distraction from
> the subject at hand?
No. My pack loyalty has nothing to do with my dislike for you, poster
child for CPS, and your slacker mommy.
My loyalties lie on a completely different plane doofus.
>
> In any event, you really count on readers
> to have a very short attention span.
Yeah? That's why I tell people read the archives huh?
Suuuuuuure.
Now go pat yourself on the back, you think you did a good job so you
think you deserve it.
Greegor
G > not exactly the same as calling for your death.
KW > Lie all your mental defects require. You're
KW > going to anyway (you can't stop yourself),
KW > so I may as well make it look like I grant
KW > you permission.
G > YOU added the racial component, and you
G > have repeatedly mentioned an old post
G > where he supposedly made racial death threats.
KW > Since Jonezie has made it clear he wants
KW > my family murdered because we're not
KW > pure white, it's clear what he meant. No
KW > amount of your rationalization or desire
KW > to defend a bigot will ever alter this
KW > simple truth.
It's not simple truth until you post a link to this
newsgroup post you claim as proof.
You usually refuse to provide the link.
The reason is because it does NOT
say what you claim it does.
G > But when asked to pony up the old message
G > you have failed to provide a link to it intact and
G > in place.
KW > Since Moe posted them, there was no need for me to do so.
Why didn't you post "them" yourself?
KW > Or does your drug damaged mind make
KW > you think my posting the same
KW > links would have greater meaning?
You ARE the one admitting you never posted the links!
Are you going to admit that you made the
assertion of racist death threats over and over?
Or do I have to rub your nose in the fact that
you asserted it so MANY times yet never
posted the link to the newsgroup post/s in
which the racist death threats were made?
G > To claim racial death threats over and over without
G > linking to the exact original is flat out dishonest.
KW > Moe already did. You replied to her posts
KW > with the links, so you can't claim you
KW > haven't had the opportunity to read them.
KW > Not unless you lie.
G > This recent interaction proves exactly
G > why I have my doubts about your assertions.
KW > You consistently prove you doubt anything
KW > that contains truth. If you wish to doubt the
KW > truth, that's fine. Your opinion isn't
KW > important outside of Usenet fodder.
Which is afterall, your WHOLE LIFE!
KW > By way of contrast, my opinion of you
KW > is of such great importance that upon
KW > realizing I'd left ascps, you sought me
KW > out in other groups.
KW > Including at least two I hadn't been to in over a year.
Back when you were fighting your over
the top net addiction, you mean? LOL
G > You claim it's a racial death threat even
G > though actually it is neither racial nor a death threat.
KW > Rationalize his racist hate any way you need.
Why would I need to, since you LIED?
You have never proved "racial death threats"
and you've claimed them too many times to count.
Your LIES cause more harm to the cause of
equality than any racist!
G > Stating that your two time thieving FELONY record
G > might motivate you to commit suicide is
G > not the same as calling for your death.
KW > As you know, I've not been arrested for, let
KW > alone convicted of, a single, let alone two, felony.
It's based on your birthday that YOU posted
on a web page that YOU webmastered.
You have never proved to me that you
are not Kent Bradley Wills, DOB Jan 8, 1969.
You can't blame me for believing the birthday
that you posted to your own birthday web page.
How many YEARS was that on there, anyway?
A.
KW > Is it your past illegal drug abuse that
KW > forces you to post that which you KNOW
KW > is not true, or is it due to current illegal drug
KW > abuse?
B.
KW > Why are you stalking the members of alt.friends?
C.
KW > "If you call the police, I'll knock out all of your teeth, I'll
KW > cripple you. I may go to prison for it, but when I get out,
KW > I'll be able to walk,but you will still be a cripple."
KW > --Greg Hanson, in a verbal threat to his girlfriend
What's the point of making any argument at all
when you regularly attach what you and I both
know are outright blatant LIES?
You lie so much that a person would have
to be a cult like moron to take your word for
anything.
Because you LIE so knowingly and so profusely,
YOU create a situation where your word means
nothing except to your sycophants.
You put out your BIRTHDAY and celebrated
your BIRTHDAY, but now you want to
convince me that it's NOT your birthday?
Too bad!
Greegor
Got a link to that post?
Give me a break for not taking YOUR WORD FOR IT.
Dan Sullivan
>G > Kent, Saying that you have motivation to die is
> G > not exactly the same as calling for your death.
>
> KW > Lie all your mental defects require. You're
> KW > going to anyway (you can't stop yourself),
> KW > so I may as well make it look like I grant
> KW > you permission.
>
> G > YOU added the racial component, and you
> G > have repeatedly mentioned an old post
> G > where he supposedly made racial death threats.
>
> KW > Since Jonezie has made it clear he wants
> KW > my family murdered because we're not
> KW > pure white, it's clear what he meant. No
> KW > amount of your rationalization or desire
> KW > to defend a bigot will ever alter this
> KW > simple truth.
>
> It's not simple truth until you post a link to this
> newsgroup post you claim as proof.
> You usually refuse to provide the link.
> The reason is because it does NOT
> say what you claim it does.
Post the message Kent is referring to, grag.
We'll see who's telling the truth.
Greegor
G > I've been in ascps for 8 years now, sometimes
G > totally alone against your pack of hyenas.
BW > Awwwww.
BW > Whenever one of you gets your proverbial
BW > tit in a ringer, the others in your hyena pack
BW > have been there to distract and counter attack.
BW > Who's in a ringer?
[...]
BW > Heh. I have taken no part in any discussion on death threats.
BW > I'm just here while I'm recovering from my surgery to get a
giggle out
BW > of you and Ken doing the stroke and pony show.
Getting a mastectomy?
You were just asking who got a tit in a ringer!
G > Did you feel that Kent really couldn't stand
G > up and answer questions HE prompted, himself?
BW > Sure he can. That's why I haven't said anything FOR him.
BW > Duh.
Just 'strokin Kent eh?
G > Or was it just pack loyalty which made you
G > post this complete and utter distraction from
G > the subject at hand?
BW > No. My pack loyalty has nothing to do with
BW > my dislike for you, poster child for CPS, and
BW > your slacker mommy. My loyalties lie on
BW > a completely different plane doofus.
Please explain! Were you on Morphine when you posted?
G > In any event, you really count on readers
G > to have a very short attention span.
BW > Yeah? That's why I tell people read the archives huh?
BW > Suuuuuuure.
BW > Now go pat yourself on the back, you think you
BW > did a good job so you think you deserve it.
G > Kent, please answer the questions.
Kent Wills
<Gree...@gmail.com> wrote:
>KW > Since Jonezie has made it clear he wants
>KW > my family murdered because we're not
>KW > pure white, it's clear what he meant. No
>KW > amount of your rationalization or desire
>KW > to defend a bigot will ever alter this
>KW > simple truth.
>
>It's not simple truth until you post a link to this
>newsgroup post you claim as proof.
Do you think the links will be any different from the ones Moe
posted?
>You usually refuse to provide the link.
Since Moe posted them, and you replied to her posts, you've
already seen them.
Is there a specific reason your dishonestly presenting that you
didn't?
>The reason is because it does NOT
>say what you claim it does.
You used to make that same claim until Moe posted the links.
After that, you commented about how Jonezie used a different nym for
most, then ran away from the thread.
>
>G > But when asked to pony up the old message
>G > you have failed to provide a link to it intact and
>G > in place.
>
>KW > Since Moe posted them, there was no need for me to do so.
>
>Why didn't you post "them" yourself?
>
Because Moe beat me to it. Duh.
>KW > Or does your drug damaged mind make
>KW > you think my posting the same
>KW > links would have greater meaning?
>
>You ARE the one admitting you never posted the links!
>
Yes. Since Moe already posted them, and you replied, there was no
need for me to post them. You already read the posts.
Is there a reason for the deceptive implication in your post?
>Are you going to admit that you made the
>assertion of racist death threats over and over?
The posts were racially based.
>
>Or do I have to rub your nose in the fact that
>you asserted it so MANY times yet never
>posted the link to the newsgroup post/s in
>which the racist death threats were made?
Again, Moe beat me to it.
What makes you think my posting the same links as Moe would have
made any difference?
>
>G > To claim racial death threats over and over without
>G > linking to the exact original is flat out dishonest.
>
>KW > Moe already did. You replied to her posts
>KW > with the links, so you can't claim you
>KW > haven't had the opportunity to read them.
>KW > Not unless you lie.
>
>G > This recent interaction proves exactly
>G > why I have my doubts about your assertions.
>
>KW > You consistently prove you doubt anything
>KW > that contains truth. If you wish to doubt the
>KW > truth, that's fine. Your opinion isn't
>KW > important outside of Usenet fodder.
>
>Which is afterall, your WHOLE LIFE!
You're the one who was compelled to follow me to various groups
when you realized I had left ascps.
Wow. Proof that I post to Usenet.
Once again you prove that which is not in contention. You do this
frequently. Does your drug addled mind make you think pointing out
something no one disputes means anything?
>KW > By way of contrast, my opinion of you
>KW > is of such great importance that upon
>KW > realizing I'd left ascps, you sought me
>KW > out in other groups.
>KW > Including at least two I hadn't been to in over a year.
>
>Back when you were fighting your over
>the top net addiction, you mean? LOL
Such an addition exists solely within the confines of your most
recent proof that your past, and probably current, illegal drug abuse
makes honesty impossible for you.
>
>G > You claim it's a racial death threat even
>G > though actually it is neither racial nor a death threat.
>
>KW > Rationalize his racist hate any way you need.
>
>Why would I need to, since you LIED?
Where is the lie?
>
>You have never proved "racial death threats"
>and you've claimed them too many times to count.
>
Moe posted the links. While you're correct that it wasn't *me*
who posted the proof, the truth remains that the proof was posted.
Your replies to Moe's post prove you saw the posts.
If your fear of truth was and is so great you couldn't read the
posts Moe linked, that's you issue to address.
>Your LIES cause more harm to the cause of
>equality than any racist!
Where is the lie?
Since I have never claimed that *I* posted the proof, in fact,
I've often pointed out it was Moe, there can be no lie. Outside of
your continued proof that your past, and probably current, illegal
drug abuse forces you to lie, that is.
>
>G > Stating that your two time thieving FELONY record
>G > might motivate you to commit suicide is
>G > not the same as calling for your death.
>
>KW > As you know, I've not been arrested for, let
>KW > alone convicted of, a single, let alone two, felony.
>
>It's based on your birthday that YOU posted
>on a web page that YOU webmastered.
You mean July 29, 1972? It's not my real birthday either.
http://www.pcpages.com/altfriends/bday.html
That's the page you LIED and said was scrubbed.
Why did you lie about that, knowing anyone with an interest could
prove you were lying?
>
>You have never proved to me that you
>are not Kent Bradley Wills, DOB Jan 8, 1969.
It befalls you to prove your claim that I am. It does not befall
me to prove you've been lying.
>
>You can't blame me for believing the birthday
>that you posted to your own birthday web page.
>How many YEARS was that on there, anyway?
It went up in 2004, as the JPG about our thoughts going out to the
victims of the 2004 tsunami indicates.
http://www.pcpages.com/altfriends/dec04.jpg
Adding the JPG was the last thing I did with the site. I had the
password written down, and lost it. If you can guess it, let me know
what it is.
>
>A.
>KW > Is it your past illegal drug abuse that
>KW > forces you to post that which you KNOW
>KW > is not true, or is it due to current illegal drug
>KW > abuse?
>
>B.
>KW > Why are you stalking the members of alt.friends?
>
>C.
>KW > "If you call the police, I'll knock out all of your teeth, I'll
>KW > cripple you. I may go to prison for it, but when I get out,
>KW > I'll be able to walk,but you will still be a cripple."
>KW > --Greg Hanson, in a verbal threat to his girlfriend
>
>What's the point of making any argument at all
>when you regularly attach what you and I both
>know are outright blatant LIES?
You often post that which you KNOW is not true. The date listed
on the birthday page is an example. I can't KNOW the reason, which is
why I asked if it's due to past or current illegal drug abuse.
I suspect it's current, but suspicion isn't proof.
By the very definition you posted to accuses others of stalking
you, you are stalking the members of alt.friends. You refuse to
answer the question of why. It's rare that you're even able to
acknowledge the question.
When you can acknowledge it, you either lie or play the avoidance
game.
By your own standards, everyone with the same first and last name
are all the same person, you did issue the threat.
If you think holding you to the same standards you hold to others
is wrong, perhaps you should cease holding such standards to others.
>
>You lie so much that a person would have
>to be a cult like moron to take your word for
>anything.
Odd that you can't cite even one lie from me. You've tried, but
ended up having each lie exposed.
You should be used to it by now.
>
>Because you LIE so knowingly and so profusely,
>YOU create a situation where your word means
>nothing except to your sycophants.
You're not mine, Greg.
>
>You put out your BIRTHDAY
I've put out several. It makes stalkers like you, by your own
standards, really upset.
>and celebrated
>your BIRTHDAY,
I celebrate my birthday. Most people celebrate their birthdays.
You act as if this is unusual.
>but now you want to
>convince me that it's NOT your birthday?
I want you to prove your claim that my real birthday is the date
you claim. I also want you to prove your claim that my name in real
life is Kent Bradley Wills.
As of my writing this, you've been unable. Since you know I'm
not Kent Bradley Wills, and that my date of birth isn't even in
January, you can't.
Someday you'll learn that you can't prove a lie to be true. No
matter how much your brain damage forces you to believe your own lies.
>
>Too bad!
Expecting you to follow the same standards you demand be applied
to others is a bit much. You've proved that such is not possible for
you.
Why are you stalking the members of alt.friends?
--
"If you call the police, I'll knock out all of your teeth, I'll
cripple you. I may go to prison for it, but when I get out,
I'll be able to walk,but you will still be a cripple."
Kent Wills
<Gree...@gmail.com> wrote:
>BW > Heh. I have taken no part in any discussion on death threats.
>BW > I'm just here while I'm recovering from my surgery to get a
>giggle out
>BW > of you and Ken doing the stroke and pony show.
>
>Getting a mastectomy?
>You were just asking who got a tit in a ringer!
You're the one who mentioned tit in a ringer.
>
>G > Did you feel that Kent really couldn't stand
>G > up and answer questions HE prompted, himself?
>
>BW > Sure he can. That's why I haven't said anything FOR him.
>BW > Duh.
>
>Just 'strokin Kent eh?
Exposing you for the lying child predator you are isn't stroking
anyone. Not in reality. YMMV, due to your past, and probably
current, illegal drug abuse.
>
>G > Or was it just pack loyalty which made you
>G > post this complete and utter distraction from
>G > the subject at hand?
>
>BW > No. My pack loyalty has nothing to do with
>BW > my dislike for you, poster child for CPS, and
>BW > your slacker mommy. My loyalties lie on
>BW > a completely different plane doofus.
>
>Please explain! Were you on Morphine when you posted?
Not everyone does illegal drugs, Greg. That you did, and
probably are doing, illegal drugs doesn't mean everyone else is.
Why are you stalking the members of alt.friends?