Kent Wills' claim to be a school teacher?
Greegor
Iowa or Arkansas?
Why would a guy with two FELONIES for thieving,
and a misdemeanor for using a teen as an accomplice
on the second FELONY (Garage Burglary) want to
present himself on internet as a SCHOOL TEACHER?
Kent Wills
Is that enough attention for you, or do you require more?
A select number of items that really are about Gregory Scott "Piggly
Wiggly" Hanson (either directly or through the same standards he
DEMANDS be held to others):
Title: ST VS GREGORY HANSON
(DOB 05/22/1959)
CRIMINAL COMPLAINT 04/10/1996
Comments: CT 1 OWI 1ST
OTHER CITATION 04/10/1996
Comments: CT 2 SPEED
Disposition Status
GUILTY PLEA/DEFAULT
"That's the chick, but not the pic, zipperhead!"
Greg "Piggly Wiggly" Hanson proving his bigotry towards Asians, by
attacking my first wife (deceased).
http://www.rsdb.org/search?q=zipperhead
Me: "I suspect your stalking is due to the use and abuse of illegal
drugs, Greg. Is the reason for your stalking the members of
alt.friends due to the use and abuse of illegal drugs?
Gregory Scott "Piggly Wiggly" Hanson, wife beater and child abuser:
"Of course."
"My family's case is for Neglect, but we are treated
in virtually every regard as child abusers, marked on
the Child Abuse registry, for example."
-- Gregory Scott "Piggly Wiggly" Hanson, wife beater and child
abuser
As of Saturday, March 27, 2010:
SMALL CLAIMS ORIGINAL NOTICE
Comments: OPA $2805.04
COPIES TO PA
VERIFICATION OF ACCOUNT
JUDGEMENT DEFAULT
Comments: JUDGMENT AGAINST GREGORY HANSON FOR $2805.04
+ INTEREST AT 7.271% FROM 8/6/98 & $45.00 COSTS.
Comments: NOTE OF GARN/NOTE TO DEFT SERV 9/24/98 BY WCSD
TO SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT (ED POLKERS) FOR GREG HANSON
FEES $35.60
Gregory Scott "Piggly Wiggly" Hanson has a Garnishment order against
him from Ed Polkers. There is nothing to even suggest any of the
money legally owed has been paid. The SoL on the order has likely
expired, but Greg still can't risk getting a job due to it.
As of Saturday, March 27, 2010:
Financials
Title: STATE OF IOWA VS HANSON, GREG SCOTT
Case: 06571 AGCR015216 (LINN)
Citation Number:
Summary Orig Paid Due
COSTS 9200.00 850.00 8350.00
FINE 500.00 500.00 0.00
SURCHARGE 150.00 150.00 0.00
RESTITUTION 0.00 0.00 0.00
OTHER 0.00 0.00 0.00
$9850.00 $1500.00 $8350.00
Yes, Gregory Scott "Piggly Wiggly" Hanson still owes over
$8000.00 related to his convictions for BEATING his ex-wife.
Me: Hey, he used your standards.
Gregory Scott "Piggly Wiggly" Hanson: It's textbook psychopathic
reasoning.
Greg admitting his standards are psychopathic.
Greegor
Arkansas or Iowa?
Dan Sullivan
"Greegor" <gree...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:12c0604a-8885-444a...@q15g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
> Which state do you claim you are a school teacher in, Kent?
> Arkansas or Iowa?
Looking to get your third grade diploma, grag?
Greegor
G > school teacher in, Kent? Arkansas or Iowa?
DJS3 > Looking to get your third grade diploma, grag?
Kent Wills claims to be a school teacher.
What state? Iowa or Arkansas?
Dan Sullivan
You need to know for your geography class, grag?
Kent Wills
Is this enough attention for you, or do you require more?
Kent Wills
wrote:
Greg simply NEEDS my attention. You likely seen how desperate he
gets when I don't give him attention every day.
Since Greg claimed to have PROVED I live in Iowa via the phone
book, it's clear he's just DESPERATE. In Greg's mind, there is
absolutely no one more important than me.
Kind of sad, really, as I'm not worthy of such devotion.
Greegor
G > school teacher in, Kent? Arkansas or Iowa?
DJS3 > Looking to get your third grade diploma, grag?
G > Kent Wills claims to be a school teacher.
G > What state? Iowa or Arkansas?
DJS3 > You need to know for your geography class, grag?
Why would it be so difficult for Kent to restate
what he has stated so many times before?
Are you now retreating from your own claims
that you are a school teacher, Kent?
I LOVE that you are siding with Kent Wills,
the infamous GARAGE BURGLAR, Dan!
Why would Kent Wills, a two time FELON
with a misdemeanor for using a TEEN on
a GARAGE BURGLARY, represent himself
on the internet as a SCHOOL TEACHER?
Please offer your Socratic hypotheticals, Dan!
Is Kent attempting to recruit new talent?
Kent Wills
wife beater (two conviction -- one resulting in incarceration) user
and abuser of illegal drugs (self admitted and one conviction for OWI)
and child abuser (self admitted and on Iowa's Child Abuse Registry)
salivated like Pavlov's dogs at the mere thought my replying when he
wrote:
>G > Which state do you claim you are a
>G > school teacher in, Kent? Arkansas or Iowa?
>
>DJS3 > Looking to get your third grade diploma, grag?
>
>G > Kent Wills claims to be a school teacher.
>G > What state? Iowa or Arkansas?
>
>DJS3 > You need to know for your geography class, grag?
>
[...]
>
>Are you now retreating from your own claims
>that you are a school teacher, Kent?
Dan and I are not the same person.
Either your Fregoli is acting up, or you've offered more PROOF
that you are psychologically UNABLE to be honest, except by accident
or force.
I believe it's psychological and a result of the use and abuse of
illegal drugs you've admitted. However, I must acknowledge this isn't
the SOLE possible cause.
If it's due to your continued use and abuse of illegal drugs, you
may make the tacit admission, by YOUR standards, of it by refusing to
state the real reason you constantly claim I am so many different
people.
Dan Sullivan
> G > Which state do you claim you are a
> G > school teacher in, Kent? Arkansas or Iowa?
>
> DJS3 > Looking to get your third grade diploma, grag?
>
> G > Kent Wills claims to be a school teacher.
> G > What state? Iowa or Arkansas?
>
> DJS3 > You need to know for your geography class, grag?
>
> Why would it be so difficult for Kent to restate
> what he has stated so many times before?
Why does Kent need to repeat himself if he's stated it "so many times
before," grag?
Kent Wills
wrote:
Greg's admitted use and abuse of illegal dugs seems to have
impaired his memory. He claimed to have read all of my past posts,
yet often shows he can't recall them.
Greegor
G > school teacher in, Kent? Arkansas or Iowa?
DJS3 > Looking to get your third grade diploma, grag?
G > Kent Wills claims to be a school teacher.
G > What state? Iowa or Arkansas?
DJS3 > You need to know for your geography class, grag?
G > Why would it be so difficult for Kent to restate
G > what he has stated so many times before?
DJS3 > Why does Kent need to repeat himself if he's
DJS3 > stated it "so many times before," grag?
Good point, Dan, but isn't it MORE amusing
that Kent has ceased making the claim?
But then you claimed you were put on the NY
child abuse registry 5 times and had easy access
to the same appeal process that was documented
for being criminally denied to thousands of other
people. It must have been MIRACULOUS!
Or else you lied.
Now you've taken to posting anti-parent news articles.
Shilling for the ""Child Protection"" INDUSTRY, Dan?
Way to go, Dan!
Post your testimonials for Kent Wills, Dan!
Dan Sullivan
> G > Which state do you claim you are a
> G > school teacher in, Kent? Arkansas or Iowa?
>
> DJS3 > Looking to get your third grade diploma, grag?
>
> G > Kent Wills claims to be a school teacher.
> G > What state? Iowa or Arkansas?
>
> DJS3 > You need to know for your geography class, grag?
>
> G > Why would it be so difficult for Kent to restate
> G > what he has stated so many times before?
>
> DJS3 > Why does Kent need to repeat himself if he's
> DJS3 > stated it "so many times before," grag?
>
> Good point, Dan, but isn't it MORE amusing
> that Kent has ceased making the claim?
Post the proof that Kent made the claim before, grag.
> But then you claimed you were put on the NY
> child abuse registry 5 times and had easy access
> to the same appeal process that was documented
> for being criminally denied to thousands of other
> people. It must have been MIRACULOUS!
If you say so, grag.
Kent Wills
wrote:
>On Apr 17, 8:17 pm, Greegor <greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> G > Which state do you claim you are a
>> G > school teacher in, Kent? Arkansas or Iowa?
>>
>> DJS3 > Looking to get your third grade diploma, grag?
>>
>> G > Kent Wills claims to be a school teacher.
>> G > What state? Iowa or Arkansas?
>>
>> DJS3 > You need to know for your geography class, grag?
>>
>> G > Why would it be so difficult for Kent to restate
>> G > what he has stated so many times before?
>>
>> DJS3 > Why does Kent need to repeat himself if he's
>> DJS3 > stated it "so many times before," grag?
>>
>> Good point, Dan, but isn't it MORE amusing
>> that Kent has ceased making the claim?
>
>Post the proof that Kent made the claim before, grag.
>
Good catch. Greg is presenting that I ceased when anyone reading
KNOWS I haven't.
Your exposing the TRUTH that Greg is psychologically UNABLE to be
honest, unless he makes a mistake or is forced, is noted.
>> But then you claimed you were put on the NY
>> child abuse registry 5 times and had easy access
>> to the same appeal process that was documented
>> for being criminally denied to thousands of other
>> people. It must have been MIRACULOUS!
>
>If you say so, grag.
>
Greg says and writes a lot that simply isn't true. While your
beating the CPS agency Greg LOVES probably wasn't easy, to call it
miraculous is being far less than honest. Not that this would stop
Greg.
Greegor
How is this for proof that Kent has
claimed to be a SCHOOL TEACHER?
THREAD FROM 2003 WHERE A GROUP OF OTHERS
DECIDED THAT KENT WILLS IS NOT A SCHOOL TEACHER.
INDIVIDUAL POST BY KENT IN 2003
Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!
headwall.stanford.edu!pookiehead.databasix.com!not-for-mail
From: "Compuelf" <compu...@yahoo.comX>
Newsgroups: alt.consumers.free-stuff
Subject: Re: Iowa Database of Teachers
Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2003 18:47:44 -0500
Organization: DataBasix - News Done Right.
Lines: 20
Sender: n...@databasix.com
Message-ID: <bfv3vk$ne1$1...@blackhelicopter.databasix.com>
References: <bfgq4r$fnh$1...@blackhelicopter.databasix.com>
<20030726194229...@mb-m13.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: blackhelicopter.databasix.com
X-Trace: blackhelicopter.databasix.com 1059263285 24001 (26 Jul 2003
23:48:05 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: ab...@databasix.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2003 23:48:05 +0000 (UTC)
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
"Y6g11" <y6...@aol.comnospammm> wrote in message
news:20030726194229...@mb-m13.aol.com...
> >
> > And you have yet to offer any evidence that I'm not a teacher.
>
> How long have you been a teacher as you aren't listed in the Ankeny
database?
I've already stated how long I've been teaching. It's archived in
Google (I don't have x-no-archive: yes). Go find it, moron.
Kent
--
>I post, therefore I am
a spammer.
-- Scott Dentice (posting as Y6...@aol.com)
Message ID: 20030606202038.07705.00000...@mb-m18.aol.com
SEPTEMBER 2009 KENT'S OWN CLAIM TO BE A SCHOOL TEACHER
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.veterans/msg/c9811fcf6cf0ea9e?dmode=source
Newsgroups: soc.veterans, alt.support.child-protective-services,
soc.men, misc.legal, alt.usenet.kooks
From: Kent Wills <compu...@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 2009 04:04:04 -0500
Subject: Re: Kent as school teacher? LOL
On Sat, 12 Sep 2009 23:24:13 -0700 (PDT), Greegor
<greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
G >Kent, WHY did you once claim you were a school teacher?
KBW > Your question dishonestly implies that
KBW > I am no longer one.
KBW > Why are you being so deceptive in your presentation?
APRIL 4, 2010 KENT WILLS CLAIM TO BE A SCHOOL TEACHER
Path: g2news2.google.com!news4.google.com!feeder.news-service.com!
188.40.43.213.MISMATCH!feeder.eternal-september.org!eternal-
september.org!news.tornevall.net!not-for-mail
From: Kent Wills <compu...@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: alt.support.child-protective-
services,misc.legal,alt.adoption,alt.thebird.copwatch
Subject: Gregory Scott "Piggly Wiggly" Hanson, wife beater (two
conviction -- one resulting in incarceration) user and abuser of
illegal drugs (self admitted and one conviction for OWI) and child
abuser (self admitted and on Iowa's Child Abuse Registry)
Date: Sun, 04 Apr 2010 14:51:35 -0500
Organization: TornevallNET - http://news.tornevall.net
Lines: 117
Sender: compu...@gmail.com
Message-ID: <nbrhr5166vaanfojl...@4ax.com>
References: <2kdop555lhnqbmm7a...@4ax.com>
<a66cbc24-2924-4cd2...@r1g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>
<1h4j7msfw3714.1...@40tude.net>
<6sjqp5hkpf9mttjdb...@4ax.com> <9e2eff71-6d8b-45cb-
a270-909...@m37g2000yqf.googlegroups.com>
<8pqrp5l0jbra176mg...@4ax.com> <5f778272-828c-4202-9127-
d7c7d2...@g28g2000yqh.googlegroups.com> <f0611b70-f6d8-45fe-
bd3a-424...@n34g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>
Reply-To: compu...@gmail.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: MjFhZjk5NjEyZDIxM2ZkMGI3NTJiOTBlNThkMjMxNjE=
X-Complaints-To: ab...@tornevall.net
Summary: Gregory Scott "Piggly Wiggly" Hanson, wife beater (two
conviction -- one resulting in incarceration) user and abuser of
illegal drugs (self admitted and one conviction for OWI) and child
abuser (self admitted and on Iowa's Child Abuse Registry)
Keywords: Gregory Scott "Piggly Wiggly" Hanson, wife beater (two
conviction -- one resulting in incarceration) user and abuser of
illegal drugs (self admitted and one conviction for OWI) and child
abuser (self admitted and on Iowa's Child Abuse Registry)
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
X-Validate-Post: http://news.tornevall.net/validate.php?trace=MjFhZjk5NjEyZDIxM2ZkMGI3NTJiOTBlNThkMjMxNjE=
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 100404-0, 04/04/2010), Outbound message
X-Posting-User: 7827656fc33ce5be0925bb9e8b679c63
X-Complaints-Language: Spoken language is english or swedish - NOT
ITALIAN, FRENCH, GERMAN OR ANY OTHER LANGUAGE!
X-SpeedUI: 440
X-Complaints-Italiano: Non abbiamo padronanza della lingua italiana -
se mandate una email scrivete solo in Inglese, grazie
[...]
I made the truthful claim of being a teacher since at least 1998.
I may have mentioned it in 1997, though I would need to check Google
to be 100% certain.
[...]
Pj
> Dan:
> How is this for proof that Kent has
> claimed to be a SCHOOL TEACHER?
>
> THREAD FROM 2003 WHERE A GROUP OF OTHERS
> DECIDED THAT KENT WILLS IS NOT A SCHOOL TEACHER.
>
>
> INDIVIDUAL POST BY KENT IN 2003
>
>
> Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!
> headwall.stanford.edu!pookiehead.databasix.com!not-for-mail
> From: "Compuelf" <compu...@yahoo.comX>
> Newsgroups: alt.consumers.free-stuff
> Subject: Re: Iowa Database of Teachers
> Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2003 18:47:44 -0500
> Organization: DataBasix - News Done Right.
> Lines: 20
> Sender: n...@databasix.com
> Message-ID: <bfv3vk$ne1$1...@blackhelicopter.databasix.com>
> References: <bfgq4r$fnh$1...@blackhelicopter.databasix.com>
> NNTP-Posting-Host: blackhelicopter.databasix.com
> X-Trace: blackhelicopter.databasix.com 1059263285 24001 (26 Jul 2003
> 23:48:05 GMT)
> X-Complaints-To: ab...@databasix.com
> NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2003 23:48:05 +0000 (UTC)
> X-Priority: 3
> X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
> X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
>
> "Y6g11" <y6...@aol.comnospammm> wrote in message
>
> news:20030726194229...@mb-m13.aol.com...
>
> > > And you have yet to offer any evidence that I'm not a teacher.
>
> > How long have you been a teacher as you aren't listed in the Ankeny
>
> database?
>
> I've already stated how long I've been teaching. It's archived in
> Google (I don't have x-no-archive: yes). Go find it, moron.
>
> Kent
> -->I post, therefore I am
>
> a spammer.
> -- Scott Dentice (posting as Y6...@aol.com)
> Message ID: 20030606202038.07705.00000...@mb-m18.aol.com
>
> SEPTEMBER 2009 KENT'S OWN CLAIM TO BE A SCHOOL TEACHER
>
>
> Newsgroups: soc.veterans, alt.support.child-protective-services,
> soc.men, misc.legal, alt.usenet.kooks
> From: Kent Wills <compu...@gmail.com>
> Date: Sun, 13 Sep 2009 04:04:04 -0500
> Subject: Re: Kent as school teacher? LOL
> On Sat, 12 Sep 2009 23:24:13 -0700 (PDT), Greegor
>
> <greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> G >Kent, WHY did you once claim you were a school teacher?
>
> KBW > Your question dishonestly implies that
> KBW > I am no longer one.
> KBW > Why are you being so deceptive in your presentation?
>
> APRIL 4, 2010 KENT WILLS CLAIM TO BE A SCHOOL TEACHER
>
>
> Path: g2news2.google.com!news4.google.com!feeder.news-service.com!
> 188.40.43.213.MISMATCH!feeder.eternal-september.org!eternal-
> september.org!news.tornevall.net!not-for-mail
> From: Kent Wills <compu...@gmail.com>
> Newsgroups: alt.support.child-protective-
> services,misc.legal,alt.adoption,alt.thebird.copwatch
> Subject: Gregory Scott "Piggly Wiggly" Hanson, wife beater (two
> conviction -- one resulting in incarceration) user and abuser of
> illegal drugs (self admitted and one conviction for OWI) and child
> abuser (self admitted and on Iowa's Child Abuse Registry)
> Date: Sun, 04 Apr 2010 14:51:35 -0500
> Lines: 117
> Sender: compu...@gmail.com
> Message-ID: <nbrhr5166vaanfojlv436f0pnob4134...@4ax.com>
> References: <2kdop555lhnqbmm7aaive3u057c5aho...@4ax.com>
> <a66cbc24-2924-4cd2-8ec7-2ff7a74eb...@r1g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>
> <1h4j7msfw3714.10dr6hc0bs29h....@40tude.net>
> <6sjqp5hkpf9mttjdb067au2fd0f5pb9...@4ax.com> <9e2eff71-6d8b-45cb-
> a270-9096b8ec8...@m37g2000yqf.googlegroups.com>
> <8pqrp5l0jbra176mgcsac9l3e8pross...@4ax.com> <5f778272-828c-4202-9127-
> d7c7d2e40...@g28g2000yqh.googlegroups.com> <f0611b70-f6d8-45fe-
> bd3a-42429b157...@n34g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>
> Reply-To: compu...@gmail.com
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> X-Trace: MjFhZjk5NjEyZDIxM2ZkMGI3NTJiOTBlNThkMjMxNjE=
> X-Complaints-To: ab...@tornevall.net
> Summary: Gregory Scott "Piggly Wiggly" Hanson, wife beater (two
> conviction -- one resulting in incarceration) user and abuser of
> illegal drugs (self admitted and one conviction for OWI) and child
> abuser (self admitted and on Iowa's Child Abuse Registry)
> Keywords: Gregory Scott "Piggly Wiggly" Hanson, wife beater (two
> conviction -- one resulting in incarceration) user and abuser of
> illegal drugs (self admitted and one conviction for OWI) and child
> abuser (self admitted and on Iowa's Child Abuse Registry)
> X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
> X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 100404-0, 04/04/2010), Outbound message
> X-Posting-User: 7827656fc33ce5be0925bb9e8b679c63
> X-Complaints-Language: Spoken language is english or swedish - NOT
> ITALIAN, FRENCH, GERMAN OR ANY OTHER LANGUAGE!
> X-SpeedUI: 440
> X-Complaints-Italiano: Non abbiamo padronanza della lingua italiana -
> se mandate una email scrivete solo in Inglese, grazie
>
> [...]
>
> I made the truthful claim of being a teacher since at least 1998.
> I may have mentioned it in 1997, though I would need to check Google
> to be 100% certain.
>
> [...]
Take your stupid argument off this site you bunch of dickheads no one
is interested...you are worse than the idiot spammer.... and should be
ashamed of yourselves....
Kent Wills
wife beater (two conviction -- one resulting in incarceration) user
and abuser of illegal drugs (self admitted and one conviction for OWI)
and child abuser (self admitted and on Iowa's Child Abuse Registry)
>Dan:
>How is this for proof that Kent has
>claimed to be a SCHOOL TEACHER?
>
Claimed? Past tense?
Why do you LIE and present that I don't continue to state the
truth?
Where is your evidence that counters that which I, and others,
have presented over the years? Or are you admitting, via YOUR
standards, that you've been caught in another lie?
>
>
>THREAD FROM 2003 WHERE A GROUP OF OTHERS
>DECIDED THAT KENT WILLS IS NOT A SCHOOL TEACHER.
>
>http://groups.google.com/group/alt.consumers.free-stuff/browse_frm/thread/b5bebeddfe44c364/72d36335e91bfcb4
>
If you're going to lie, and you are, DO NOT link to the PROOF
that you're lying.
GregR never questioned my being a teacher. Suzn also accepted
the truth. The same with Dani (RipCurl). As did Gregie "for ronnie the
capon who is afraid of todays date" Gibson.
JZ, who appears in the thread, provided evidence that I was
posting from the school before posting became prohibited.
Bill (my real life brother-in-law) also posted, though he used
X-No-Archive: Yes. You can see many of his posts via the replies of
others. He certainly didn't decide that I wasn't a teacher.
So much for your LIE about a GROUP OF OTHERS. In fact, in the
link you provide, only one person, Scott Dentice, questioned it. He
is, last I knew, in a Nevada prison for child molestation.
Among Dentice's claims are:
"But Kent lives in Des Moines."
I've never lived in Des Moines, nor have I ever claimed to live in
Des Moines. Still, Scott claimed I lived there.
Sort of like how you claim I live in so many different places,
Greg. If I didn't know better, I might be tempted to think you are
Scott.
"Kent said he teachers in Des Moines."
I've never claimed to teach in Des Moines. I've not even implied
it.
Like you, Greg, Scott Dentice would lie, then use his own lies to
try and support his other lies. Like you, he failed EVERY TIME.
You really know how to pick your sources, Greg.
[...]
What's most interesting is how you NEED me to state it again.
Even though I've been stating it since I became a fully licence
teacher in the State of Iowa. If you only knew my name in real life,
you might be able to exact the revenge you seek for my outing you as a
CPS shill.
Poor widdle Gweggie. You just can't win while I continue to win
what I want: the chance to make certain the TRUTH that you want to
DESTROY families is know.
How many families have you been able to sacrifice at the alter of
your beloved CPS since I outted you, Greg? If you can't count to
zero, I'll understand.
Oh, you're more than welcome. It was and is my pleasure to
expose you for the pro-CPS shill you were and are.
Kent Wills
[...]
>> I made the truthful claim of being a teacher since at least 1998.
>> I may have mentioned it in 1997, though I would need to check Google
>> to be 100% certain.
>>
>> [...]
>
>Take your stupid argument off this site you bunch of dickheads no one
>is interested...you are worse than the idiot spammer.... and should be
>ashamed of yourselves....
We aren't on a site. This is Usenet.
The Web and Usenet are two different aspects of the Internet.
--
Always follow your dream!
Unless it's the one where you're at work in your underwear during a
fire drill.
Dan Sullivan
> Dan:
> How is this for proof that Kent has
> claimed to be a SCHOOL TEACHER?
And your point, in regards to asCPS or any of the other cross posted
groups, is?
Greegor
G > How is this for proof that Kent has
G > claimed to be a SCHOOL TEACHER?
DJS3 > And your point, in regards to asCPS
DJS3 > or any of the other cross posted groups, is?
Why would a TWO time Felon who got nailed
for using a teenager on a garage burglary present
himself on the internet as a SCHOOL TEACHER?
Is he trying to recruit new talent?
alt.support.child-protective-services,
alt.usenet.kooks,
misc.legal,
alt.true-crime,
alt.law-enforcement
Notice further down, the offer mentioning e-mails connected.
WILLS, KENT ROGERS, AR compue**@___.com
WILLS, KENT ROGERS, AR compue**@___.com
G > D. apt building at 202 NW College Ave Ankeny IA
Sat, Sep 19 2009 4:52 pm
KBW > One of the buildings I've owned in my life.
KBW > Very old news.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.true-crime/msg/9181902a00641f9a?hl=en&dmode=source
G > D. apt building at 202 NW College Ave Ankeny IA
KBW > It's gone through at least three owners since I sold it. Deal
with it.
http://groups.google.com/groups/profile?hl=en&enc_user=sxgvsgwAAADuSAbpL3GdLyNqs29-agZS
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.bob-larson/msg/96c7554459ad7f73?hl=en
Newsgroups: alt.fan.bob-larson, alt.religion.christian.calvary-chapel,
alt.feminism, soc.men, misc.legal
From: skylexicon <s...@lars.org>
Date: Sat, 6 May 2006 21:46:48 -0600
Local: Sat, May 6 2006 9:46 pm
Subject: Re: I agree with you entirely, Jude (was Re: Hey, Ken Rape is
forced sex either way
Well...
My name is Kent Wills. Despite my clearly Welsh name, I was
born
in Krakow, Poland.
I came to the US in 1984 and quickly made my way to Chicago,
Illinois where there are more Polish natives than anywhere else in
the
world, save for Warsaw. Honest.
I started learning English, and did well financially in real
estate. I bought REO's (foreclosed homes) from banks and sold them
on
the open market for quite a bit more than I spent. Now everyone
knows
how I am *really* able to afford the BMW <g>.
In 1987 I got my GED, since no college was willing to accept
my
Polish diploma. Allow me a bit of bragging here when I mention I
joined Mensa the same year.
I attended Worsham College of Mortuary Science and even
managed
to get licensed to direct funerals and do embalming. I didn't last
long though. After doing it, I understand why alcoholism is so high
in the industry.
In 1992 I moved to Iowa to attend Grinnel College (often
called
the Harvard of the Midwest, though I can't figure out why <g>). In
1993 I transferred to Drake University in Des Moines, Iowa.
I now teach American History to middle school children and
own
rental properties.
I'm *slowly* working on my Master's degree.
You'll see me mention Lindsay a lot. She's a psychologist
working for the Fifth Judicial District in Des Moines, Iowa. We met
at a Mensa meeting in 1993.
If anyone wants to know more, just ask.
Kent
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.bob-larson/msg/39e03dd0511b5cbd?hl=en
Newsgroups: alt.fan.bob-larson, alt.religion.christian.calvary-chapel,
alt.feminism, soc.men, misc.legal
From: skylexicon <s...@lars.org>
Date: Sat, 6 May 2006 21:43:17 -0600
Local: Sat, May 6 2006 9:43 pm
Subject: Re: I agree with you entirely, Jude (was Re: Hey, Ken Rape is
forced sex either way
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
Path: g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!proxad.net!
212.101.4.254.MISMATCH!solnet.ch!solnet.ch!newsfeed01.sul.t-
online.de!
newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!
border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!
local01.nntp.dca.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 14:12:23 -0600
Newsgroups:
alt.binaries.chatter,alt.usenet.kooks,soc.culture.jewish,uk.legal,uk.loc
al.london,uk.local.peterborough
Subject: Re: This is crossposted, but worth reading
From: Doc Savage <D...@themanor.xxx>
References: <Xns974E2AF7A3...@195.8.68.206>
<43ccb0d6$2$36707
$892e0...@auth.newsreader.octanews.com> <Xns974F4B870DF50xxrabbisxx@
195.8.68.222>
<43ce6108$0$36743$892e0...@auth.newsreader.octanews.com>
<Xns975099EFDED4Fxxrabbi...@217.158.240.11>
<op.s3m2hwnawab...@blue.mshome.net>
Organization: I eat liars for breakfast
Message-ID: <Xns9754CD...@216.196.109.144>
Followup-To: alt.binaries.chatter,alt.usenet.kooks
User-Agent: Xnews/5.04.25
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 14:12:23 -0600
Lines: 114
X-Trace: sv3-
qZUm1oW3OVwrxcnncdLSK9j9FDT1NPpceY9SwqFC1bDNGcuolthN4DSeFVtW/893ADngcH/
4
7Rfsidi!uGsRHMbMXRAKu
+ftknBjr7Eg2EFdewPVBUzEt74XhFKXWZxioABraZaLLsLEkg==
X-Complaints-To: ab...@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL
headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your
complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.32
"Peter Hucker" <n...@spam.com> wrote in
news:op.s3m2h...@blue.mshome.net:
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
>>>> That will be after
>>>> he's posted the pics and answered a few of my questions, like why
>>>> did he lie 18 times in one post, why can't he tell us which College
>>>> he got his Masters degree from without naming the wrong college?
>>>> First he claimed it was the Uni of Northern Iowa who deny he ever
>>>> attended, then he claimed he's mde an error and meant Drake, who
>>>> also say they have no record of him attending, and then I see he
>>>> added Grinnel to the list.
>>>> Why did he claim to have bought a building at 202 NW College Ave in
>>>> Ankeny from Eric Sheldahl in 1993 $150,000.00 when the County
>>>> records show that Eric had sold it to Fred and Janet Wills in
>>>> January 1990 for $130,500.00? Why does he claim to have sold that
>>>> building to The Sweeney Revocable Grantor Trust for $172,000.00
>>>> when the Country records show it was sold to the Sweeney Trust for
>>>> a mere $135,000.00?
Let's add a little more:
This is from a post made by Kent B Wills in June 2005 I'm still
waiting
for him to respond to the proof I showed that he lied several times in
a
couple of paragraphs.
>Then there's still the fact that Fred A Wills and Janet R Wills used to
>own 202 NW College. They bought it from Eric Sheldahl on January 2
>1990 and paid $130,500 for it.
You have partial information and, I presume, made up the
rest.
I did buy the building from Eric, but in January 1993. I paid
$150,000.00 for it.
>It was Fred and Janet who sold the property to
>Sweeney Rentals; full trading name "Sweeney Revocable[sic] Grantor
>Trust"
I sold it, but you do have the full name of Sweeny correct.
>for oh let me see....$135,000
Odd. The check I got stated I was paid $172,000.00. And
that's what I paid taxes on. I wish you had been available at the
time, since I would have gotten one heck of a tax break using your
figures.
>This is from the Polk County Assessors
>Office public records in Des Moines. Perhaps you should have listened
>when I told you that I have copies of the Assessors records for that
>property. They are also available on the WWW.
>Now don't you think it just a teensy bit curious that you should have
>lived at 202, which was owned by a couple whose son is also called Kent
>B Wills, and yet you never knew them?
Never met Fred nor Janet. Deal with it.
I'll make life a *little* easier for you. My dad's first
name
is Don. Now, go figure out where he and my mom live.
-------------------------------------------------------
Since Wills has already admitted in alt.binaries.chatter that he lied
about his parents names in some childish attempt to 'put me off' when
I
showed that they were also his sisters parents, we can ignore his
claims
that he 'never met them'.
The truth about the building ownership can be found here:
http://www.assess.co.polk.ia.us/web/inven/query/queryHome.html
and a tiny link to the same place
http://tinyurl.com/bekw3
Simply type in 202 NW College Ave and click the "Perform Search"
button,
then scroll down the results page to see that his claim to have
bought
the building from Eric Sheldahl and Associates in January 1993 and
sold
it to the Sweeney Revocable Grantor Trust in 1998 for $172,000.00 is
a
total fabrication, as is 99% of what he says.
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
>>>> Why does he claim to have a 2 metres *ONLY* FCC Ham radio Licence
>>>> when the FCC have never issued such a licence in their history, why
>>>> does he claim to have a PhD Psychologist wife who can diagnose
>>>> everybody he argues with on the 'net to have exactly the same
>>>> illness (OCD) yet she can't spot Wills' pathological urge to lie
>>>> about everybody and everything. Why did he claim, for example, to
>>>> have had an arrest warrant sworn out against me with the Iowa
>>>> Attorney General, and yet there's still no listing in my name on
>>>> the Iowa AG and Sheriffs website lists and I have still been able
>>>> to pass the Homeland Security checks, US Immigration checks and an
>>>> FBI check to be issued with a Biometric ID and a visiting Lecturers
>>>> Licence, not to mention being approved in Missouri and Iowa to
>>>> adopt a son from the US?
>>>> Why doesn't he post the pics of me he claimed one of my UK friends
>>>> sent him. He's supposedly had them since July last year, and I've
>>>> asked him many times to post them, yet his silence is almost
>>>> deafening. Is it possible that he can't back up his claim because
>>>> he's lying yet again?
>>>> They aren't difficult questions, but they do need to be answered in
>>>> the same media where his claims were made. You've set the 'rules'
>>>> so if he doesn't answer, then he must be a liar.
>> Still no response from Wills. Now why am I not surprised?
> Cause he killfiled you.
He's claimed to have me killfiled dozens of times, yet he inevitably
responds to my posts through the replies of others. He's also
claimed
many times that his reply would be the last response he would make,
so
that he can wriggle out of answering to the truth. He does that
every
time I post a couple of links which show him for the liar he is.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.bob-larson/msg/61866eda85dd85b1?hl=en
Newsgroups: alt.fan.bob-larson, alt.religion.christian.calvary-chapel,
alt.feminism, soc.men, misc.legal
From: skylexicon <s...@lars.org>
Date: Sat, 6 May 2006 21:51:29 -0600
Local: Sat, May 6 2006 9:51 pm
Subject: Re: I agree with you entirely, Jude (was Re: Hey, Ken Rape is
forced sex either way
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
Name: Kent T. Wills
Email: kentwi...@yahoo.com
Level: College
City: North America or Europe
Subjects: ESL classes (reading, writing, listening and speaking
classes), ESP (Business), EIP, Language Acquisition
Qualifications: BA in Journalism and Mass Communications - The
University Of Iowa
MA TESOL & Applied Linguistics - Northern
Iowa
University
Experienced, cultured, well travelled, people
oriented, speak English, Spanish, French and Czech.
I am a problem solver, take charge person,
easy
to get along with
Interests: Teaching foreign students, reading, writing, sports, and
travelling
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.friends/msg/1a933a4f8595cafe?hl=en
---------------------------------------------------------------------
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.bob-larson/msg/d25345d1ca9b5dd9?hl=en
KS > For someone who claims to be a former
KS > supporter of this Ministry (and I find no
KS > record of that) and who purportedly
KS > set out to get the "facts"
KBW > Why would you have access to
KBW > Lar$on's donation records?
KBW > Interesting slip.
KBW > Anyway, look for Kent Wills.
KBW > My address at the time was 202
KBW > NW COLLEGE AVE ANKENY,
KBW > IA 50021. It would have been in
KBW > '93 and possibly early '94.
KS > about this Ministry, it is quite telling
KS > that I can always find "at least" one
KS > serious inaccuracy/falsehood in
KS > your line of thinking relating to BLM
KS > -- and you are as adamant to be a
KS > Larson loather as ever!
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Kent!
On Mar 7, 2:58 pm, Greegor <greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
G > Hi Kent!
KBW > Hello.
G > There you go!
G > Was that really so painful, Kent?
G > You're showing real growth!
G > Just so you know, I don't believe ALL
G > of those things they say about you.
G > But thanks for helping me win the bet.
Are you saying that this CURRENT phone number is not yours, Kent?
Check out the map, and it even does an AERIAL view!
http://dexknows.whitepages.com/search/FindPerson?firstname=kent&name=wills&city_zip=rogers%2C+ar
Why is it that when other people posted that phone
number in usenet, you didn't deny it was you?
Kent, Why do they think you ( compuelf ) live in Rogers?
Notice the middle initial and the relatives.
How many of ""those other"" compuelf's
have the name Kent Wills and are related
to Fred, Janet and Tiffany?
Kent B Wills (Age 41)
Rogers, AR [ latest listing ]
Ankeny, IA
Marshalltown, IA
Bartlett, IL
Villa Park, IL
Tiffany Jeanne [Wills] Hartwig (Age 36)
Frederick A Wills
Frederick Alfred Wills (Age 66)
Janet Rae Wills (Age 63)
Michael A Wills (Age 41)
WILLS, KENT ROGERS, AR compue**@___.com
WILLS, KENT ROGERS, AR compue**@___.com
http://www.slashlegal.com/showthread.php?t=158861&page=17
http://www.slashlegal.com/showthread.php?t=158861&page=19
http://www.google.com/url?
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.adoption/msg/650b09611f404cef?hl=en
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.bob-larson/msg/d25345d1ca9b5dd9?hl=en
Why would you have access to Lar$on's donation records?
Interesting slip.
Anyway, look for Kent Wills. My address at the time was 202
NW COLLEGE AVE ANKENY, IA 50021. It would have been in '93 and
possibly early '94.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.adoption/msg/a6431d314a32e866?hl=en
PROFILE: Kent 2003 one month
comp...@yah0o.c0m
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.consumers.free-stuff/msg/30a10c7cac8035df?hl=en
Newsgroups: alt.consumers.free-stuff
From: y6...@aol.comnospammm (Y6g11)
Date: 27 Jul 2003 02:05:22 GMT
Local: Sat, Jul 26 2003 8:05 pm
Subject: Re: Iowa Database of Teachers
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
> Can you post my CURRENT address? To date all anyone's been able to find
>is the one I had when I lived on SW Southlawn Dr. It's roughly four years
>out of date now. Perhaps you can figure out my address today.
Since you are asking
Kent B. Wills
202 Nw College Ave #5
Ankeny Ia 50021-2136
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.consumers.free-stuff/msg/72d36335e91bfcb4?hl=en
Newsgroups: alt.consumers.free-stuff
From: y6...@aol.comnospammm (Y6g11)
Date: 27 Jul 2003 10:24:58 GMT
Local: Sun, Jul 27 2003 4:24 am
Subject: Re: Iowa Database of Teachers
> Kent B. Wills
>> 202 Nw College Ave #5
>> Ankeny Ia 50021-2136
KBW > That was from 1993 to 1998. I want my CURRENT address.
Oh that's right. You moved in when your dad Fred and your mom Janet
owned it.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.child-protective-services/msg/693d06cc1084d129
alt.support.child-protective-services, misc.legal, alt.adoption,
alt.thebird.copwatch, alt.law-enforcement
Kent denied his OWN usenet posts BRAGGING about SELLING 202 NW College
Ave Kent can delete his usenet posts but other people quoted Kent
G > But Kent posted comments about his
G > personal involvement in the sale
G > of his parents apartment building at
G > 202 NW College in Ankeny Iowa.
KBW > Again, not located on the site at all.
G > I said posted, referring to usenet.
> We were discussing the web site, stupid.
> That I so completely exposed your lie that you had to try and
> distract from it only means I completely exposed your lie, Greg.
G > You can delete your old posts but
G > not other people's messages that
G > reflect your comments about 202 NW College.
KBW > And I asked you to link to any such
KBW > post, or any replies. I note you've
KBW > not done so. I know how you
KBW > HATE it when I "call you out" on your lies.
In due course!
KBW > How are you so UNABLE to remain focused?
G > I AM focused on your IDENTITY, Kent!
KBW > My Usenet nym, yes. But not who
KBW > I am in real life. You admitted my
KBW > name in real life isn't Kent.
Liar.
KBW > You also admitted the information
KBW > you post as if it is about me, isn't about me.
Then why bitch about it and argue so much?
Especially after you are nailed "dead to rights".
G > Are you trying to distract from your ID?
> No. Since you have PROVED my not
> using my real life name has made it
> IMPOSSIBLE to find any information
> about me, I'm quite happy with it.
Everybody can see that!
> Why are you so DESPERATE to distract from the TRUTH that I have,
> once again, exposed your LIE about the Friends' web site?
>
> [Snip of lies already exposed numerous times]
Goes to MOTIVATION.
Kent's Appeal
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=ia&vol=sc%5C20050506%5C04-0202&invol=1
HTML
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.
Dan Sullivan
> G > Dan:
> G > How is this for proof that Kent has
> G > claimed to be a SCHOOL TEACHER?
>
> DJS3 > And your point, in regards to asCPS
> DJS3 > or any of the other cross posted groups, is?
>
> Why would a TWO time Felon who got nailed
> for using a teenager on a garage burglary present
> himself on the internet as a SCHOOL TEACHER?
>
> Is he trying to recruit new talent?
Can you post any evidence to prove he is?
Kent Wills
wrote:
>On Apr 18, 2:46 am, Greegor <greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
There are two points. One is to get the attention he desperately
NEEDS from me. The second is to try and bury the TRUTH that Greg is a
pro-CPS shill.
He is getting the attention he needs from me, but his desire to
bury the truth about himself is failing.
At least he can feel good about realizing his goal of getting
attention from me.
Kent Wills
wife beater (two conviction -- one resulting in incarceration) user
and abuser of illegal drugs (self admitted and one conviction for OWI)
and child abuser (self admitted and on Iowa's Child Abuse Registry)
>G > Dan:
>G > How is this for proof that Kent has
>G > claimed to be a SCHOOL TEACHER?
>
>DJS3 > And your point, in regards to asCPS
>DJS3 > or any of the other cross posted groups, is?
>
>Why would a TWO time Felon who got nailed
>for using a teenager on a garage burglary present
>himself on the internet as a SCHOOL TEACHER?
>
Why do you ask questions so many times after they've been
answered?
Oh yeah, you made the tacit admission, by YOUR standards, that
it's due to your continued use and abuse of illegal drugs. Sorry
'bout that.
>Is he trying to recruit new talent?
For what? You refuse to state what your drug induced delusions
force you to believe I'm recruiting for.
>
>alt.support.child-protective-services,
>alt.usenet.kooks,
>misc.legal,
>alt.true-crime,
>alt.law-enforcement
Yes, these are the groups you spam in your never ending question
to get attention from me. What's both funny and sad is that I read
only one of those groups. Of course, over the years, I have
cross-posted to the others, and that's all you need to justify seeking
the attention you desperately NEED from me in each one.
FWIW, your NEED is being filled. Take joy in the knowledge that
your very shallow goal has, and is being, met.
Of course, I'm still going to make certain the truth that you are
a CPS shill is known. You're very welcome.
Kent Wills
>>alt.support.child-protective-services,
>>alt.usenet.kooks,
>>misc.legal,
>>alt.true-crime,
>>alt.law-enforcement
>
> Yes, these are the groups you spam in your never ending question
>to get attention from me.
That should be "...your never ending quest to get..."
I apologize for any confusion my inability to proof read properly
may have caused.
--
2,000 mockingbirds: two kilomockingbirds
Greegor
G > How is this for proof that Kent has
G > claimed to be a SCHOOL TEACHER?
DJS3 > And your point, in regards to asCPS
DJS3 > or any of the other cross posted groups, is?
G > Why would a TWO time Felon who got nailed
G > for using a teenager on a garage burglary present
G > himself on the internet as a SCHOOL TEACHER?
G >
G > Is he trying to recruit new talent?
DJS3 > Can you post any evidence to prove he is?
You didn't acknowledge the proof I posted yesterday.
You never concede anything, even when you're
caught dead to rights.
When you deny or ignore blatant proof you asked for,
your requests for proof appear shallow, Dan.
But I DID prove that Kent continues to claim that
he is a SCHOOL TEACHER.
For a two time thieving FELON who also
got a misdemeanor for USING a kid in
his latest GARAGE BURGLARY, this
certainly should raise some red flags.
Do you think for somebody with that record
claiming to be a schoolteacher is:
A. SMART
B. LEGAL (FRAUD with INTENT, LURING, ?)
C. TACTICALLY WISE
D. ENDEARING
E. WORTHY OF TRUST
F. THE KIND OF GUY YOU WANT AROUND YOUR GRANDCHILDREN
G. TYPICAL OF DAN SULLIVAN'S CIRCLE OF FRIENDS
Dan Sullivan
> G > Dan:
> G > How is this for proof that Kent has
> G > claimed to be a SCHOOL TEACHER?
>
> DJS3 > And your point, in regards to asCPS
> DJS3 > or any of the other cross posted groups, is?
>
> G > Why would a TWO time Felon who got nailed
> G > for using a teenager on a garage burglary present
> G > himself on the internet as a SCHOOL TEACHER?
> G >
> G > Is he trying to recruit new talent?
>
> DJS3 > Can you post any evidence to prove he is?
>
> You didn't acknowledge the proof I posted yesterday.
You didn't post proof that Kent is recruiting new talent, did you,
grag?
Kent Wills
wrote:
>On Apr 18, 3:48 pm, Greegor <greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
The dullard refuses to state what he thinks I need talent for.
Seems his drug induced delusions have yet to inform him of that.
Kent Wills
wife beater (two conviction -- one resulting in incarceration) user
and abuser of illegal drugs (self admitted and one conviction for OWI)
and child abuser (self admitted and on Iowa's Child Abuse Registry)
>G > Dan:
>G > How is this for proof that Kent has
>G > claimed to be a SCHOOL TEACHER?
>
>DJS3 > And your point, in regards to asCPS
>DJS3 > or any of the other cross posted groups, is?
>
>G > Why would a TWO time Felon who got nailed
>G > for using a teenager on a garage burglary present
>G > himself on the internet as a SCHOOL TEACHER?
>G >
>G > Is he trying to recruit new talent?
>
>DJS3 > Can you post any evidence to prove he is?
>
>You didn't acknowledge the proof I posted yesterday.
Yes he did. You offer the proof above.
He may not have acknowledged it in a manner your drug addled mind
would prefer, but those are the breaks.
BTW, thanks for making the tacit admission, by YOUR standards,
that you can't prove the implication present in your question.
>
>You never concede anything, even when you're
>caught dead to rights.
Yet he does so. Odd that.
What is the SPECIFIC reason you are forced to LIE, Greg?
>
>When you deny or ignore blatant proof you asked for,
>your requests for proof appear shallow, Dan.
He acknowledged it. Anyone with an interest can see this, since
you foolishly quote his reply to your post.
Why do you so frequently offer the PROOF that you're lying, Greg?
You make it far too easy to PROVE you are psychologically UNABLE to be
honest with any intent.
>
>But I DID prove that Kent continues to claim that
>he is a SCHOOL TEACHER.
You proved that which I have never denied and continue to state.
That's, um, impressive? No. Exciting?
That's not it either.
I know. Completely POINTLESS. Much as is the case with
everything else you attempt.
Next you might try to prove that I claim to drive a red Mazda
B2600 more often than any other vehicle. I've never denied claiming
this truth. As such your drug addled (unless you lied) mind MUST force
you to prove I've made the claim.
Then you can set about proving really important things like that
on a clear day, the sky appears blue. And that they moon orbits the
earth.
>
>For a two time thieving FELON who also
>got a misdemeanor for USING a kid in
>his latest GARAGE BURGLARY, this
>certainly should raise some red flags.
>
You already admitted I have no such record.
Where you lying then, or are you lying now? You've always chosen
to HIDE from this question. Your cowardly behavior gives the
impression that you know you've been caught lying and hope that by
ignoring the truth, the truth will go away.
It's not going away, Greg. I'll continue to bring up the truth,
much to your dismay.
>Do you think for somebody with that record
>claiming to be a schoolteacher is:
>
You should ask someone who is involved in such activities. Since
you slipped and admitted I have no such record, your LIE that I do
have one is failing.
Unless you are admitting that you LIED when you claimed it's not
me, but some other Kent Wills.
>A. SMART
If someone was to do as you are claiming, no.
>B. LEGAL (FRAUD with INTENT, LURING, ?)
If someone was to do as you are claiming, probably not.
>C. TACTICALLY WISE
If someone was doing as you claim, not very.
>D. ENDEARING
If someone was doing as you are claiming, not really.
>E. WORTHY OF TRUST
If someone was doing as you are claiming, not really.
>F. THE KIND OF GUY YOU WANT AROUND YOUR GRANDCHILDREN
If someone was doing as you are claiming, they would be preferable
to having you around.
You claim you are on Iowa's Child Abuse Registry as a result of
the various forms of abuse you inflicted on Lisa's little girl. Of
course, when asked for proof of your clime, you ALWAYS choose to HIDE.
You obsessed about my friend's pre-pubescent daughter for a
little over a week. For months you were fixated on a former student
of mine who was around age 11 at the time.
I would much rather have a burglar watch my daughter than you. I
won't need a "Nanny Cam" in every room of the house to see if you've
fondled her genital area, as you did with Lisa's daughter when she was
six or seven years of age (unless you've been less than honest).
>G. TYPICAL OF DAN SULLIVAN'S CIRCLE OF FRIENDS
Since there appears to be no such person as you describe posting,
there is no way they could be included in or excluded from Dan's
circle of friends.
Greegor
G > How is this for proof that Kent has
G > claimed to be a SCHOOL TEACHER?
DJS3 > And your point, in regards to asCPS
DJS3 > or any of the other cross posted groups, is?
G > Why would a TWO time Felon who got nailed
G > for using a teenager on a garage burglary present
G > himself on the internet as a SCHOOL TEACHER?
G >
G > Is he trying to recruit new talent?
DJS3 > Can you post any evidence to prove he is?
G > You didn't acknowledge the proof I posted yesterday.
DJS3 > You didn't post proof that Kent is
DJS3 > recruiting new talent, did you, grag?
Kent has not denied recruiting new talent.
G > You never concede anything, even
G > when you're caught dead to rights.
G >
G > When you deny or ignore blatant proof you asked
G > for, your requests for proof appear shallow, Dan.
G >
G > But I DID prove that Kent continues to
G > claim that he is a SCHOOL TEACHER.
G >
G > For a two time thieving FELON who also
G > got a misdemeanor for USING a kid in
G > his latest GARAGE BURGLARY, this
G certainly should raise some red flags.
G >
G > Do you think for somebody with that record
G > claiming to be a schoolteacher is:
G >
G > A. SMART
G > B. LEGAL (FRAUD with INTENT, LURING, ?)
G > C. TACTICALLY WISE
G > D. ENDEARING
G > E. WORTHY OF TRUST
G > F. THE KIND OF GUY YOU WANT AROUND YOUR GRANDCHILDREN
G > G. TYPICAL OF DAN SULLIVAN'S CIRCLE OF FRIENDS
Dan Sullivan
> G > Dan:
> G > How is this for proof that Kent has
> G > claimed to be a SCHOOL TEACHER?
>
> DJS3 > And your point, in regards to asCPS
> DJS3 > or any of the other cross posted groups, is?
>
> G > Why would a TWO time Felon who got nailed
> G > for using a teenager on a garage burglary present
> G > himself on the internet as a SCHOOL TEACHER?
> G >
> G > Is he trying to recruit new talent?
>
> DJS3 > Can you post any evidence to prove he is?
>
> G > You didn't acknowledge the proof I posted yesterday.
>
> DJS3 > You didn't post proof that Kent is
> DJS3 > recruiting new talent, did you, grag?
>
> Kent has not denied recruiting new talent.
Again, have you posted proof that Kent is recruiting new talent or
not, grag?
Kent Wills
>G > Is he trying to recruit new talent?
>
>DJS3 > Can you post any evidence to prove he is?
>
>G > You didn't acknowledge the proof I posted yesterday.
>
>DJS3 > You didn't post proof that Kent is
>DJS3 > recruiting new talent, did you, grag?
>
>Kent has not denied recruiting new talent.
I haven't denied being on the grassy knoll in December of 1963.
Does your drug induced delusions force you to believe I was there?
Dan Sullivan
> At one time, not so long ago, Greegor <greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >G > Is he trying to recruit new talent?
>
> >DJS3 > Can you post any evidence to prove he is?
>
> >G > You didn't acknowledge the proof I posted yesterday.
>
> >DJS3 > You didn't post proof that Kent is
> >DJS3 > recruiting new talent, did you, grag?
>
> >Kent has not denied recruiting new talent.
>
> I haven't denied being on the grassy knoll in December of 1963.
> Does your drug induced delusions force you to believe I was there?
November.
Greegor
G > How is this for proof that Kent has
G > claimed to be a SCHOOL TEACHER?
DJS3 > And your point, in regards to asCPS
DJS3 > or any of the other cross posted groups, is?
G > Why would a TWO time Felon who got nailed
G > for using a teenager on a garage burglary present
G > himself on the internet as a SCHOOL TEACHER?
G >
G > Is he trying to recruit new talent?
DJS3 > Can you post any evidence to prove he is?
G > You didn't acknowledge the proof I posted yesterday.
DJS3 > You didn't post proof that Kent is
DJS3 > recruiting new talent, did you, grag?
G > Kent has not denied recruiting new talent.
DJS3 > Again, have you posted proof that
DJS3 > Kent is recruiting new talent or not, grag?
KBW > I haven't denied being on the grassy knoll in December of 1963.
DJS3 > November.
Kent has not denied recruiting new talent.
Why has Kent lied about being a school teacher?
Dan Sullivan
> G > Dan:
> G > How is this for proof that Kent has
> G > claimed to be a SCHOOL TEACHER?
>
> DJS3 > And your point, in regards to asCPS
> DJS3 > or any of the other cross posted groups, is?
>
> G > Why would a TWO time Felon who got nailed
> G > for using a teenager on a garage burglary present
> G > himself on the internet as a SCHOOL TEACHER?
> G >
> G > Is he trying to recruit new talent?
>
> DJS3 > Can you post any evidence to prove he is?
>
> G > You didn't acknowledge the proof I posted yesterday.
>
> DJS3 > You didn't post proof that Kent is
> DJS3 > recruiting new talent, did you, grag?
>
> G > Kent has not denied recruiting new talent.
>
> DJS3 > Kent is recruiting new talent or not, grag?
>
> KBW > I haven't denied being on the grassy knoll in December of 1963.
>
> DJS3 > November.
>
> Kent has not denied recruiting new talent.
When are you going to stop J-O in public, grag?
Kent Wills
wrote:
Then either :)
I must admit I'm a bit embarrassed at my use of the wrong month.
If anyone should have gotten it right, it should have been me.
--
'Life is pain. Anybody that says different is selling something.'
-- Fezzik's mother
Kent Wills
[...]
>DJS3 > Again, have you posted proof that
>DJS3 > Kent is recruiting new talent or not, grag?
>
>KBW > I haven't denied being on the grassy knoll in December of 1963.
>KBW > Does your drug induced delusions force you to believe I was there?
>
>DJS3 > November.
>
>Kent has not denied recruiting new talent.
You've never denied that you have inappropriate images of
children stored on your computer. People have asked you about it, yet
you didn't deny you have them.
By YOUR standards, you must have said images.
Don't you just HATE it when your own standards are applied to
you?
BTW, you still haven't stated what talent your drug induced
delusions compel you to believe I am recruiting for. Please do so
now.
>
>Why has Kent lied about being a school teacher?
I haven't. But by all means, prove the claim you present in your
question. Unless, of course, you would rather admit, directly or
tacitly, you have been lying about the matter the whole time.
Let's see the proof, Greg.
Kent Wills
wrote:
[...]
>> Kent has not denied recruiting new talent.
>
>When are you going to stop J-O in public, grag?
More than 12 hours later, and Greg hasn't answered.
By Greg's standards, he must be admitting that he's going to
continue masturbating in public.
Greegor
29 Dan Sullivan Apr 19
30 Kent Wills Apr 20
31 Kent Wills Apr 20
32 Kent Wills Apr 20
Ding!
Dan Sullivan
You're still J-O in public, grag!
What does all your J-O prove, grag?
Greegor
G > 29 Dan Sullivan Apr 19
G > 30 Kent Wills Apr 20
G > 31 Kent Wills Apr 20
G > 32 Kent Wills Apr 20
G > Ding!
DJS3 > You're still J-O in public, grag!
DJS3 > What does all your J-O prove, grag?
Kent Wills' claims to be a school teacher
Post your glowing testimonial for Kent, Don.
Kent Wills
wife beater (two conviction -- one resulting in incarceration) user
and abuser of illegal drugs (self admitted and one conviction for OWI)
and child abuser (self admitted and on Iowa's Child Abuse Registry)
wrote:
One reply to you and two replies to Dan. Are you claiming that I
await Dan's posts the respond like Pavlov's dogs when he does? If, as
appears to be the case, you are making such a claim, upon what do you
base it?
If my conclusion is in error, please explain why replying to one
of your posts and two of Dan's warrants a "Ding" from you.
If you are simply offering more PROOF that you are
psychologically impaired due to the continued use and abuse of illegal
drugs, feel free to admit such by any of the means you frequently
DEMAND be applied to others.
Kent Wills
wife beater (two conviction -- one resulting in incarceration) user
and abuser of illegal drugs (self admitted and one conviction for OWI)
and child abuser (self admitted and on Iowa's Child Abuse Registry)
wrote:
Who is Don? It can't be a typo, since the A and O keys aren't
close to each other.
Greegor
G > 29 Dan Sullivan Apr 19
G > 30 Kent Wills Apr 20
G > 31 Kent Wills Apr 20
G > 32 Kent Wills Apr 20
G > Ding!
DJS3 > You're still J-O in public, grag!
DJS3 > What does all your J-O prove, grag?
G > Kent Wills' claims to be a school teacher
G > Post your glowing testimonial for Kent, Dan.
https://www.iowaonline.state.ia.us/boee/
wil
ken
Dan Sullivan
You're still J-O in public, grag.
Greegor
> On Apr 17, 8:17 pm, Greegor <greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > G > Which state do you claim you are a
> > G > school teacher in, Kent? Arkansas or Iowa?
>
> > DJS3 > Looking to get your third grade diploma, grag?
>
> > G > Kent Wills claims to be a school teacher.
> > G > What state? Iowa or Arkansas?
>
> > DJS3 > You need to know for your geography class, grag?
>
> > G > Why would it be so difficult for Kent to restate
> > G > what he has stated so many times before?
>
> > DJS3 > Why does Kent need to repeat himself if he's
> > DJS3 > stated it "so many times before," grag?
>
> > Good point, Dan, but isn't it MORE amusing
> > that Kent has ceased making the claim?
>
> Post the proof that Kent made the claim before, grag.
>
> > But then you claimed you were put on the NY
> > child abuse registry 5 times and had easy access
> > to the same appeal process that was documented
> > for being criminally denied to thousands of other
> > people. It must have been MIRACULOUS!
DJS3 > If you say so, grag.
They shredded THOUSANDS of other people's
registry appeals but not yours, right, Dan?
You think there's nothing suspicious about
a person with Kent's history posing as a school teacher?
Dan Sullivan
Correct.
Greegor
G > school teacher in, Kent? Arkansas or Iowa?
DJS3 > Looking to get your third grade diploma, grag?
G > Kent Wills claims to be a school teacher.
G > What state? Iowa or Arkansas?
DJS3 > You need to know for your geography class, grag?
G > Why would it be so difficult for Kent to restate
G > what he has stated so many times before?
DJS3 > Why does Kent need to repeat himself if he's
DJS3 > stated it "so many times before," grag?
G > Good point, Dan, but isn't it MORE amusing
G > that Kent has ceased making the claim?
DJS3 > Post the proof that Kent made the claim before, grag.
[ I think that was done, but snipped. Why? ]
G > But then you claimed you were put on the NY
G > child abuse registry 5 times and had easy access
G > to the same appeal process that was documented
G > for being criminally denied to thousands of other
G > people. It must have been MIRACULOUS!
DJS3 > If you say so, grag.
G > They shredded THOUSANDS of other people's
G > registry appeals but not yours, right, Dan?
DJS3 > Correct.
I get that you think you're SPECIAL, Dan, but
why did you snip the following question rather
than answering it?
G > You think there's nothing suspicious
G > about a person with Kent's history
G > posing as a school teacher?
Kent Wills
[...]
>> > But then you claimed you were put on the NY
>> > child abuse registry 5 times and had easy access
>> > to the same appeal process that was documented
>> > for being criminally denied to thousands of other
>> > people. It must have been MIRACULOUS!
>
>DJS3 > If you say so, grag.
>
>They shredded THOUSANDS of other people's
>registry appeals but not yours, right, Dan?
Not only Dan's, presumably.
>
>You think there's nothing suspicious about
>a person with Kent's history posing as a school teacher?
Which history? My TRUE history, or the one you post even after
you admitted it's not mine?
Kent Wills
You're still off. But do continue to try and find my name in
real life. Your obsession DEMANDS you do so.
Will your obsession with me last as long as you claimed your
obsession with Glen did? More than 10 years, right?
Kent Wills
>G > They shredded THOUSANDS of other people's
>G > registry appeals but not yours, right, Dan?
>
>DJS3 > Correct.
>
>I get that you think you're SPECIAL, Dan, but
>why did you snip the following question rather
>than answering it?
>
>G > You think there's nothing suspicious
>G > about a person with Kent's history
>G > posing as a school teacher?
My guess is that Dan doesn't share your obsession over me.
Kent Wills
wrote:
>On Apr 21, 12:06�pm, Greegor <greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
He risks being placed on Iowa's Sex Offender Registry by doing
so. Do keep in mind that Greg has never denied that he masturbates in
public, which, according to Greg, is the same as admitting the claim
is true.
--
Intaxication: Euphoria at getting a tax refund, which lasts until you
realize that it was your money to start with.
Greegor
G > school teacher in, Kent? Arkansas or Iowa?
DJS3 > Looking to get your third grade diploma, grag?
G > Kent Wills claims to be a school teacher.
G > What state? Iowa or Arkansas?
DJS3 > You need to know for your geography class, grag?
G > Why would it be so difficult for Kent to restate
G > what he has stated so many times before?
DJS3 > Why does Kent need to repeat himself if he's
DJS3 > stated it "so many times before," grag?
G > Good point, Dan, but isn't it MORE amusing
G > that Kent has ceased making the claim?
DJS3 > Post the proof that Kent made the claim before, grag.
[ I think that was done, but snipped. Why? ]
G > But then you claimed you were put on the NY
G > child abuse registry 5 times and had easy access
G > to the same appeal process that was documented
G > for being criminally denied to thousands of other
G > people. It must have been MIRACULOUS!
DJS3 > If you say so, grag.
G > They shredded THOUSANDS of other people's
G > registry appeals but not yours, right, Dan?
KBW > Not only Dan's, presumably.
Dan, Do you think that the NY Child Protection
agency shredded any of your 5 registry appeals?
48 Greegor Apr 21
49 Kent Wills Apr 22
50 Kent Wills Apr 22
Ding!
Dan Sullivan
>
> Dan, Do you think that the NY Child Protection
> agency shredded any of your 5 registry appeals?
Obviously not, because I didn't have any appeals during the month in
2004 that NY CPS did the shredding.
Greegor
G > agency shredded any of your 5 registry appeals?
DJS3 > Obviously not, because I didn't have any
DJS3 > appeals during the month in
DJS3 > 2004 that NY CPS did the shredding.
And yet somebody named Lynn posted in 2001
that NY was obstructing/ not giving people
the appeals process several years before that.
Several other states have been caught obstructing
registry appeals as well, by the way.
Why are you back to pretending that it only
took place over one month?
I already pointed out that bureaucrats are
very much creatures of habit.
But yours is a SPECIAL case, Dan.
You got accused of child abuse 20+ times
and founded 5 of those, but miraculously
you're so SPECIAL that not only did you
GET access to the appeals process, but
the CPS agency decided they LIKE you!
Now, WHY would that BE, in the middle
of the same people denying process and
criminally obstructing appeals for YEARS?
You're SPECIAL.
No wonder you give out such sunshiny
simple minded advice!
You think EVERYBODY else will get your
level of SPECIAL treatment, just because
they mention your name!
Dan Sullivan
> G > Dan, Do you think that the NY Child Protection
> G > agency shredded any of your 5 registry appeals?
>
> DJS3 > Obviously not, because I didn't have any
> DJS3 > appeals during the month in
> DJS3 > 2004 that NY CPS did the shredding.
>
> And yet somebody named Lynn posted in 2001
> that NY was obstructing/ not giving people
> the appeals process several years before that.
My first appeal, which was mailed in 1988, was ignored by NY CPS until
1992.
> Several other states have been caught obstructing
> registry appeals as well, by the way.
I'm not surprised.
I'll bet every state "loses" huge number of appeals.
> Why are you back to pretending that it only
> took place over one month?
That's what was claimed in the news story you posted... the shredding
took place over a single month in 2004.
> I already pointed out that bureaucrats are
> very much creatures of habit.
>
> But yours is a SPECIAL case, Dan.
>
> You got accused of child abuse 20+ times
> and founded 5 of those, but miraculously
> you're so SPECIAL that not only did you
> GET access to the appeals process, but
> the CPS agency decided they LIKE you!
That's not true.
I was told by a NY CPS investigator that my local CPS "hates" me.
> Now, WHY would that BE, in the middle
> of the same people denying process and
> criminally obstructing appeals for YEARS?
Are you claiming that NY CPS denied every appeal since 1987?
> You're SPECIAL.
I think so.
> No wonder you give out such sunshiny
> simple minded advice!
My advice is extremely successful in beating CPS.
> You think EVERYBODY else will get your
> level of SPECIAL treatment, just because
> they mention your name!
Did I say that?
Greegor
G > agency shredded any of your 5 registry appeals?
DJS3 > Obviously not, because I didn't have any
DJS3 > appeals during the month in
DJS3 > 2004 that NY CPS did the shredding.
G > And yet somebody named Lynn posted in 2001
G > that NY was obstructing/ not giving people
G > the appeals process several years before that.
DJS3 > My first appeal, which was mailed in 1988,
DJS3 > was ignored by NY CPS until 1992.
So you were ON the child abuse registry for
FOUR YEARS for that one alone?
G > Several other states have been caught obstructing
G > registry appeals as well, by the way.
DJS3 > I'm not surprised.
DJS3 > I'll bet every state "loses" huge number of appeals.
G > Why are you back to pretending that it only
G > took place over one month?
DJS3 > That's what was claimed in the news
DJS3 > story you posted... the shredding
DJS3 > took place over a single month in 2004.
G > I already pointed out that bureaucrats are
G > very much creatures of habit.
Wouldn't you agree, Dan?
G > But yours is a SPECIAL case, Dan.
G >
G > You got accused of child abuse 20+ times
G > and founded 5 of those, but miraculously
G > you're so SPECIAL that not only did you
G > GET access to the appeals process, but
G > the CPS agency decided they LIKE you!
DJS3 > That's not true.
DJS3 > I was told by a NY CPS investigator
DJS3 > that my local CPS "hates" me.
Does your local CPS office handle appeals, Dan?
Who delayed your 1988 appeal for FOUR YEARS??
Was it the local CPS office?
G > Now, WHY would that BE, in the middle
G > of the same people denying process and
G > criminally obstructing appeals for YEARS?
DJS3 > Are you claiming that NY CPS denied every appeal since 1987?
Why not?
You're talking about the people who got CAUGHT
and documented in a court of LAW for shredding
THOUSANDS of appeals on one occasion.
After that, establishing "patern and practice" is
relatively easy.
Bureaucracies and bureaucrats are creatures of habit.
G > You're SPECIAL.
DJS# > I think so.
It's apparent.
G > No wonder you give out such sunshiny
G > simple minded advice!
DJS3 > My advice is extremely successful in beating CPS.
What is so successful about being on the registry
for FOUR FREAKIN YEARS while they denied
you access to the appeal process?
On ONE case alone!
And what IS so ""special"" about you that the
agency would get 20+ child abuse reports from
various people and FOUNDED you for 5 of them??
Apparently, SOMETHING about you screams
"child abuser" a LOT!
Something about your lifestyle, dress or
appearance draws in abuse reports like
a magnet. WHAT is it, Dan?
G > You think EVERYBODY else will get your
G > level of SPECIAL treatment, just because
G > they mention your name!
DJS3 > Did I say that?
Your "easy answers" have been somewhat transparent, Dan.
Greegor
http://home.comcast.net/~kaldis/KBW.htm
Kent's claim to be a licensed school teacher in Iowa
http://www.boee.iowa.gov/search_warn.html
News story related to teachers license being yanked in Iowa
Dan Sullivan
You tell me.
> Who delayed your 1988 appeal for FOUR YEARS??
I don't know.
> Was it the local CPS office?
I don't know.
> G > Now, WHY would that BE, in the middle
> G > of the same people denying process and
> G > criminally obstructing appeals for YEARS?
>
> DJS3 > Are you claiming that NY CPS denied every appeal since 1987?
>
> Why not?
Because my five appeals, all since 1988, went thru the system.
> You're talking about the people who got CAUGHT
> and documented in a court of LAW for shredding
> THOUSANDS of appeals on one occasion.
> After that, establishing "patern and practice" is
> relatively easy.
>
> Bureaucracies and bureaucrats are creatures of habit.
>
> G > You're SPECIAL.
>
> DJS# > I think so.
>
> It's apparent.
>
> G > No wonder you give out such sunshiny
> G > simple minded advice!
>
> DJS3 > My advice is extremely successful in beating CPS.
>
> What is so successful about being on the registry
> for FOUR FREAKIN YEARS while they denied
> you access to the appeal process?
If I was on the registry for four years that's still less than half
the time you've been on the Iowa State Child Abuse Registry... and
you'll be listed for what? Another fourteen years, grag?
Dan Sullivan
> Boarding Pass forgery
Not proof.
> http://home.comcast.net/~kaldis/KBW.htm
>
> Kent's claim to be a licensed school teacher in Iowa
>
> http://www.boee.iowa.gov/search_warn.html
???
> News story related to teachers license being yanked in Iowa
>
> http://www.kcrg.com/news/local/90742239.html
No mention of Kent.
Greegor
Greegor
G > agency shredded any of your 5 registry appeals?
DJS3 > Obviously not, because I didn't have any
DJS3 > appeals during the month in
DJS3 > 2004 that NY CPS did the shredding.
G > And yet somebody named Lynn posted in 2001
G > that NY was obstructing/ not giving people
G > the appeals process several years before that.
DJS3 > My first appeal, which was mailed in 1988,
DJS3 > was ignored by NY CPS until 1992.
G > So you were ON the child abuse registry for
G > > FOUR YEARS for that one alone?
G > Several other states have been caught obstructing
G > registry appeals as well, by the way.
DJS3 > I'm not surprised.
DJS3 > I'll bet every state "loses" huge number of appeals.
G > Why are you back to pretending that it only
G > took place over one month?
DJS3 > That's what was claimed in the news
DJS3 > story you posted... the shredding
DJS3 > took place over a single month in 2004.
G > I already pointed out that bureaucrats are
G > very much creatures of habit.
G > Wouldn't you agree, Dan?
G > But yours is a SPECIAL case, Dan.
G >
G > You got accused of child abuse 20+ times
G > and founded 5 of those, but miraculously
G > you're so SPECIAL that not only did you
G > GET access to the appeals process, but
G > the CPS agency decided they LIKE you!
DJS3 > That's not true.
DJS3 > I was told by a NY CPS investigator
DJS3 > that my local CPS "hates" me.
G > Does your local CPS office handle appeals, Dan?
DJS3 > You tell me.
G > Who delayed your 1988 appeal for FOUR YEARS??
DJS3 > I don't know.
G > Was it the local CPS office?
DJS3 > I don't know.
G > Now, WHY would that BE, in the middle
G > of the same people denying process and
G > criminally obstructing appeals for YEARS?
DJS3 > Are you claiming that NY CPS denied every appeal since 1987?
G > Why not?
DJS3 > Because my five appeals, all since 1988, went thru the system.
How nice for you.
G > You're talking about the people who got CAUGHT
G > and documented in a court of LAW for shredding
G > THOUSANDS of appeals on one occasion.
G > After that, establishing "pattern and practice" is
G > relatively easy.
G >
G > Bureaucracies and bureaucrats are creatures of habit.
G > You're SPECIAL.
DJS# > I think so.
G > It's apparent.
G > No wonder you give out such sunshiny
G > simple minded advice!
DJS3 > My advice is extremely successful in beating CPS.
G > What is so successful about being on the registry
G > for FOUR FREAKIN YEARS while they denied
G > you access to the appeal process?
G > On ONE case alone!
DJS3 > If I was on the registry for four years
Based on your own recent statements, your
use of the word "if" here is completely absurd
and reveals your deceptive intent.
DJS3 > that's still less than half the time
DJS3 > you've been on the Iowa State
DJS3 > Child Abuse Registry... and you'll
DJS3 > be listed for what?
DJS3 > Another fourteen years, grag?
Got PROOF?
Did you think that equivocation would help
considering your 20+ child abuse investigations
and FIVE foundeds?
How long were you marked for the OTHER four FOUNDEDS?
YOU claimed this one as if it was a success! LOL
If THAT was a success, then you must have
been listed on the registry a LONG time on
the other four FOUNDEDS!
G > And what IS so ""special"" about you that the
G > agency would get 20+ child abuse reports from
G > various people and FOUNDED you for 5 of them??
G >
G > Apparently, SOMETHING about you
G > screams "child abuser" a LOT!
G >
G > Something about your lifestyle, dress or
G > appearance draws in abuse reports like
G > a magnet. WHAT is it, Dan?
G > You think EVERYBODY else will get your
G > level of SPECIAL treatment, just because
G > they mention your name!
DJS3 > Did I say that?
G > Your "easy answers" have been somewhat transparent, Dan.
Greegor
First three letters for lastname and firstname so...
(click here to continue button) wil ken (search button)
No Kent Wills listed as a licensed school teacher in Iowa.
Kent Wills
wife beater (two conviction -- one resulting in incarceration) user
and abuser of illegal drugs (self admitted and one conviction for OWI)
and child abuser (self admitted and on Iowa's Child Abuse Registry)
wrote:
>Boarding Pass forgery
>
>http://home.comcast.net/~kaldis/KBW.htm
>
Outside of your Fregoli, or deeply rooted psychological NEED to
lie, Ted Kaldis and I are not the same person. That's TED'S site, not
mine.
So, are you offering more PROOF that you have Fregoli, or are you
offering more PROOF that you are psychologically UNABLE to be honest,
except by accident or force?
>Kent's claim to be a licensed school teacher in Iowa
I, and others, have presented evidence to support, if not prove,
the claim. What have you offered to counter the evidence? All you've
managed to do is further PROVE that you don't know my name in real
life.
>
>http://www.boee.iowa.gov/search_warn.html
>
>News story related to teachers license being yanked in Iowa
>
>http://www.kcrg.com/news/local/90742239.html
Your attempt to present that my license has been "yanked" fails.
Just like EVERYTHING else you've ever tried in life.
Your desire to punish me for outing you as a CPS shill remains
unfulfilled. All indications are that it will remain such for the
remainder of your life.
Poor widdle Gweggie. You just can't win no matter what you do.
Why do you collect child pornography and store the images on your
computer, Greg? You've never denied you do such, which means it's
true, according to YOUR standards.
Dan Sullivan
>
> YOU claimed this one as if it was a success! LOL
The authorities ruled in my favor and against my local CPS, as they
have done in all of my appeals.
How many times have you prevailed in your CPS appeals, grag?
Is Lisa Watkins' family court case still ongoing?
Kent Wills
wrote:
>On Apr 23, 12:40 am, Greegor <greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> YOU claimed this one as if it was a success! LOL
>
>The authorities ruled in my favor and against my local CPS, as they
>have done in all of my appeals.
>
>How many times have you prevailed in your CPS appeals, grag?
>
Clearly Greg LIED about that as a means to con families into
trusting him. This allowed him to do what he could to ensure CPS
would win.
Keep in mind that Greg has never denied this, which according to
Greg is the same as admitting the accusation is true.
>Is Lisa Watkins' family court case still ongoing?
The SoL expired on it a LONG time ago. I cited applicable law
regarding the SoL. Of course, Greg claimed that since no one who was
involved has admitted they did wrong, the SoL was and is tolled. Yes,
he actually made that claim.
Greegor
How many did you make with Susan?
Did she bring any kids from a previous marriage?
Did you tell her about your 20 Child Abuse investigations
and your 5 FOUNDEDS long before you married her?
How long did you know Susan before you married her?
How did she take it when your home mortgage collapsed, Dan?
Dan Sullivan
On Apr 24, 5:44 am, Greegor <greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dan, How many kids did you make with the mental case ex?
Are you trying to change the subject because you've never prevailed
over CPS in an appeal even once, grag?
Greegor
Dan Sullivan and his magical registry appeals
DJS3 > because you've never prevailed over
DJS3 > CPS in an appeal even once, grag?
Are you allergic to questions about your family?
How many babies did you make with the
mental case ex-wife?
How many babies did you make with Susan?
How many kids did she bring to the marriage
from a previous relationship?
Did you WARN her that you are a magnet
for CPS cases??
Did you tell her that you had been investigated
for Child Abuse 20+ times and FOUNDED for
FIVE of those, one for SEXUAL ABUSE??
How did Susan take it when you got behind
on the home mortgage and had to sell at
a huge loss?
How does she feel about your previous choice
of a marriage partner?
Did she ever ask you why you made
multiple BABIES with a freakin' mental case?
Do you honestly want to pretend that you didn't
KNOW she was a freakin BIPOLAR when you
made the first baby with her, much less the second?
You have NEVER claimed that your BIPOLAR
ex-wife ever deceived you about her illness.
Are you going to start claiming she deceived you?
Just what IS it about you that makes
you such a magnet for so MANY child
abuse complaints from various people?
What IS it about you that just screams child abuser?
20+ child abuse reports is a lot to come from a variety of people.
Dan Sullivan
> DJS3 > Are you trying to change the subject
>
> Dan Sullivan and his magical registry appeals
>
> DJS3 > because you've never prevailed over
> DJS3 > CPS in an appeal even once, grag?
>
> Are you allergic to questions about your family?
You commented on my first win against CPS as if it wasn't a win and I
asked you about your "wins" in appealing CPS decisions.
Are you allergic to questions about your record of successful appeals
against CPS, grag?
Greegor
Subject: Dan Sullivan and his magical registry appeals
DJS3 > because you've never prevailed over
DJS3 > CPS in an appeal even once, grag?
G > Are you allergic to questions about your family?
DJS3 > You commented on my first win against
DJS3 > CPS as if it wasn't a win
As if?
DJS3 > and I asked you about your "wins" in
DJS3 > appealing CPS decisions.
Do you usually call a FOUR YEAR
delay on one case alone a "victory"??
DJS3 > Are you allergic to questions about your
DJS3 > record of successful appeals against CPS, grag?
I don't claim I had 20 + investigations with 5 of them founded.
You never imagined a downside
to CLAIMING so much experience
with CPS investigations, did you, Dan?
How many babies did you make with the nut case?
How many kids did you make with Susan?
How many kids did Susan bring with her from a previous relationship?
Did you tell Susan about your glorious ""record"" of successful
appeals, Dan?
Don't you think your 20 child abuse investigations and
5 foundeds would have given Susan a lot of concern?
Dan Sullivan
> DJS3 > Are you trying to change the subject
>
> Subject: Dan Sullivan and his magical registry appeals
>
> DJS3 > because you've never prevailed over
> DJS3 > CPS in an appeal even once, grag?
>
> G > Are you allergic to questions about your family?
>
> DJS3 > You commented on my first win against
> DJS3 > CPS as if it wasn't a win
>
> As if?
>
> DJS3 > and I asked you about your "wins" in
> DJS3 > appealing CPS decisions.
>
> Do you usually call a FOUR YEAR
> delay on one case alone a "victory"??
I won, CPS lost.
> DJS3 > Are you allergic to questions about your
> DJS3 > record of successful appeals against CPS, grag?
>
> I don't claim I had 20 + investigations with 5 of them founded.
Neither did I.
> You never imagined a downside
> to CLAIMING so much experience
> with CPS investigations, did you, Dan?
What's the downside when I prevailed over CPS in every case?
Kent Wills
wife beater (two conviction -- one resulting in incarceration) user
and abuser of illegal drugs (self admitted and one conviction for OWI)
and child abuser (self admitted and on Iowa's Child Abuse Registry)
>DJS3 > You commented on my first win against
>DJS3 > CPS as if it wasn't a win
>
>As if?
>
>DJS3 > and I asked you about your "wins" in
>DJS3 > appealing CPS decisions.
>
>Do you usually call a FOUR YEAR
>delay on one case alone a "victory"??
Was Dan's founded reversed? If so, it was a victory, stupid.
No amount of your desire/need to distract from this truth will
alter the truth.
>
>DJS3 > Are you allergic to questions about your
>DJS3 > record of successful appeals against CPS, grag?
>
>I don't claim I had 20 + investigations with 5 of them founded.
>
Dan doesn't either.
Your LIE about 20+ investigations has been exposed more times
than I am willing to count. As such, that you continue to claim they
occurred simply stands as more PROOF that you are psychologically
UNABLE to be honest unless you make a mistake or are forced.
>You never imagined a downside
>to CLAIMING so much experience
>with CPS investigations, did you, Dan?
Since Dan has never offered the claim you DISHONESTLY present,
your question is pointless.
You can't use your past LIES to support a present claim, Greg.
Although you try to do so often.
I see you're still using and abusing illegal drugs, Greg. You
slipped and openly admitted that your use and abuse of illegal drugs
compels you to stalk, by the very definition you posted to accuse
others of stalking you, the members of alt.friends. Since you're
still stalking, you must still be using and abusing illegal drugs.
Kent Wills
in incarceration) user and abuser of illegal drugs (self admitted and
one conviction for OWI) and child abuser (self admitted and on Iowa's
>DJS3 > Are you trying to change the subject
>
>Dan Sullivan and his magical registry appeals
So you are trying to change the subject.
While I expect everyone reading was and is aware that you were
and are trying to change the subject regarding what Dan asked you,
it's nice that you offer the PROOF that you are doing so.
>
>DJS3 > because you've never prevailed over
>DJS3 > CPS in an appeal even once, grag?
>
>Are you allergic to questions about your family?
Why don't you answer the question Dan asked, Greg? Why do you
FEAR his questions to the degree you PROVE you do?
Serious questions, Greg.
>
>How many babies did you make with the
>mental case ex-wife?
You presume she was/is a mental case.
Bipolar disorder is treatable, stupid.
Or are you expressing your jealousy? Donna REFUSED to permit
your genetic code to be passed on, showing that while she was stupid
enough to endure your frequent BEATINGS [1], she was far more
intelligent than was previously thought, and it has you upset.
>
>How many babies did you make with Susan?
Who is Susan?
Oh yeah, she's the wife of the other Dan Sullivan. The one you
helped to PROVE is not the one we know from Usenet.
Odd that you still present they are the same person, given the
evidence YOU offered that they are not. Unless you wish to claim you
LIED when you claimed the pictures of the house you linked to where of
Dan's home.
>
>How many kids did she bring to the marriage
>from a previous relationship?
>
>Did you WARN her that you are a magnet
>for CPS cases??
According to your claims, Dan's youngest child is too old to be a
factor in any CPS matter.
The "C" in CPS stands for Child. While it can be accurately
argued that any child of Dan's will always be his child, CPS deals
with matters of children who have not reached the age of majority.
Since you are now KNOWN to be a shill for CPS, you should have known
this.
>
>Did you tell her that you had been investigated
>for Child Abuse 20+ times and FOUNDED for
>FIVE of those, one for SEXUAL ABUSE??
Where do you get that Dan has been investigated 20+ times? Oh
yeah, your own LIES and the LIES of your banned puppet master.
You do LOVE to try and use your own lies, and those of your only
on-line friend, who is no longer allowed to post, to support
subsequent lies.
Since you consistently get exposed for this deceptive act, in
addition to others, I need to ask why you keep using it? I know I've
asked this many times before, but you've always chosen to HIDE from it
rather than offer any sort of answer.
Your opting to HIDE means something to you, does it not?
>
>How did Susan take it when you got behind
>on the home mortgage and had to sell at
>a huge loss?
>
It has been PROVED (you replied to the posts and helped to prove
it, so don't waste time LYING about it) the Dan Sullivan we know isn't
the one you claimed.
>How does she feel about your previous choice
>of a marriage partner?
Presuming Dan is currently married (I lack your obsessive nature,
so I've don't have the deeply rooted psychological NEED to find out),
why would she care?
>
>Did she ever ask you why you made
>multiple BABIES with a freakin' mental case?
You still can't comprehend the concept of love, huh? It's truly
sad that such a wonderful emotion is beyond your abilities.
Yes, love can lead one to pain, but most find the occasional
negatives a small price to pay for the massive positives.
Fortunately for you, the fact that you've never been able to
experience it means you've never known what you have missed.
>
>Do you honestly want to pretend that you didn't
>KNOW she was a freakin BIPOLAR when you
>made the first baby with her, much less the second?
When has Dan claimed, directly or through implication, that he
didn't know?
One would have to be stupid to a level few could comprehend not
to see the signs before the desire for marriage came into play.
It's far more plausible that Dan did know, and didn't care. He
was in love and wanted to be married to the woman he loved.
How is it that this concept is so far beyond your ability to
understand, Greg? I understand you aren't able to experience the
emotion of love, but you should be able to understand it on an
intellectual level. Unless your drug induced mental retardation is
greater than you've shown.
>
>You have NEVER claimed that your BIPOLAR
>ex-wife ever deceived you about her illness.
Presumably because it's impossible to do when a relationship last
long enough for marriage to be a consideration.
Over a course of a few dates, I can see it being hidden. When one
is thinking of marriage, enough time will have passed that the other
person couldn't avoid knowing. Unless that other person is so screwed
up they simply aren't capable of understanding much of anything.
>
>Are you going to start claiming she deceived you?
Your question presumes she tried. Care to offer evidence that
would support such a presumption?
>
>Just what IS it about you that makes
>you such a magnet for so MANY child
>abuse complaints from various people?
Is anyone currently complaining? If so, why would they bother?
According to your claims, there are no children young enough to
warrant CPS attention.
Another of your deceptive innuendos has been exposed.
You're welcome, Greg.
>
>What IS it about you that just screams child abuser?
>
Maybe his voluntary association on Usenet with one Gregory Scott
Hanson? It's as good a guess as any at this point.
Of course, your deception is clear. You wish to present that Dan
is currently abusing children via your use of present tense words.
Did you honestly think your deception would go unexposed? You
might want to have a word with the author of your posts and explain
how those who aren't as stupid (unable to learn) as you consistently
PROVE yourself to be won't be fooled by such tactics.
>20+ child abuse reports is a lot to come from a variety of people.
Given that he has NO founded reports on his record, your LIE that
he ever had 20+ reports still doesn't matter.
How's that law suit you've been claiming your going to file for,
what, 10 years?, going?
[1] You have two convictions for BEATING her, so we can only KNOW
about the two. However, it would be foolish to presume those where
the only times you BEAT her. It's far more plausible that you BEAT
your ex-wife frequently, but were only convicted for two of them.
Greegor
Subject: Dan Sullivan and his magical registry appeals
DJS3 > because you've never prevailed over
DJS3 > CPS in an appeal even once, grag?
G > Are you allergic to questions about your family?
DJS3 > You commented on my first win against
DJS3 > CPS as if it wasn't a win
G > As if?
DJS3 > and I asked you about your "wins" in
DJS3 > appealing CPS decisions.
G > Do you usually call a FOUR YEAR
G > delay on one case alone a "victory"??
DJS3 > I won, CPS lost.
DJS3 > Are you allergic to questions about your
DJS3 > record of successful appeals against CPS, grag?
G > I don't claim I had 20 + investigations with 5 of them founded.
DJS3 > Neither did I.
Yes you did!
You started out claiming 15+ investigations
and later you used the number 20 investigations.
G > You never imagined a downside
G > to CLAIMING so much experience
G > with CPS investigations, did you, Dan?
DJS3 > What's the downside when I prevailed
DJS3 > over CPS in every case?
How many babies did you make with the freakin nut case?
How many kids did you make with Susan?
How many kids did Susan bring with her from a previous relationship?
Did you tell Susan about your glorious ""record"" of successful
appeals, Dan?
Don't you think your 20 child abuse investigations and
5 foundeds would have given Susan a lot of concern?
How many CPS investigations did Susan have to undergo
in conjunction with your 20+ investigations, Dan?
Dan Sullivan
> DJS3 > Are you trying to change the subject
>
> Subject: Dan Sullivan and his magical registry appeals
>
> DJS3 > because you've never prevailed over
> DJS3 > CPS in an appeal even once, grag?
>
> G > Are you allergic to questions about your family?
>
> DJS3 > You commented on my first win against
> DJS3 > CPS as if it wasn't a win
>
> G > As if?
>
> DJS3 > and I asked you about your "wins" in
> DJS3 > appealing CPS decisions.
>
> G > Do you usually call a FOUR YEAR
> G > delay on one case alone a "victory"??
>
> DJS3 > I won, CPS lost.
>
> DJS3 > Are you allergic to questions about your
> DJS3 > record of successful appeals against CPS, grag?
>
> G > I don't claim I had 20 + investigations with 5 of them founded.
>
> DJS3 > Neither did I.
>
> Yes you did!
>
> You started out claiming 15+ investigations
> and later you used the number 20 investigations.
I said "15+" and I also said "about 20."
I never said "20+" as you've claimed, grag.
But this has been discussed, and you've been corrected and shown to be
a liar more times than I can remember.
> G > You never imagined a downside
> G > to CLAIMING so much experience
> G > with CPS investigations, did you, Dan?
>
> DJS3 > What's the downside when I prevailed
> DJS3 > over CPS in every case?
>
> How many babies did you make with the freakin nut case?
Still trying to change the subject.
What's the downside to beating CPS, grag?
Of course I know you don't know what it's like to prevail over CPS in
an appeal... so in your usual delusional state you probably think
there's an upside to losing. Like you claimed there was an upside to
getting TPR'd because the court would need to use a higher standard of
evidence... completely forgetting, of course, the parents would no
longer have custody of their children.
LOL!
Greegor
Subject: Dan Sullivan and his magical registry appeals
DJS3 > because you've never prevailed over
DJS3 > CPS in an appeal even once, grag?
G > Are you allergic to questions about your family?
DJS3 > You commented on my first win against
DJS3 > CPS as if it wasn't a win
G > As if?
DJS3 > and I asked you about your "wins" in
DJS3 > appealing CPS decisions.
G > Do you usually call a FOUR YEAR
G > delay on one case alone a "victory"??
DJS3 > I won, CPS lost.
DJS3 > Are you allergic to questions about your
DJS3 > record of successful appeals against CPS, grag?
G > I don't claim I had 20 + investigations with 5 of them founded.
DJS3 > Neither did I.
G > Yes you did!
G > You started out claiming 15+ investigations
G > and later you used the number 20 investigations.
DJS3 > I said "15+" and I also said "about 20."
DJS3 > I never said "20+" as you've claimed, grag.
Dan, Aside from the apparent meaning of your
sliding number, "20+" and "about 20" are not
mutually exclusive.
I strongly suspect the number is higher and
you're just another internet BS artist.
You thought I'd interpret your "about 20"
in a way most favorable to you??
Who is naive', Dan?
You for expecting favorable interpretation
after your number slid?
Or me, if I had accepted your second sliding
number and interpreted it favorably to you?
Perhaps you should provide some PROOF!
DJS3 > But this has been discussed, and you've
DJS3 > been corrected and shown to be
DJS3 > a liar more times than I can remember.
G > You never imagined a downside
G > to CLAIMING so much experience
G > with CPS investigations, did you, Dan?
DJS3 > What's the downside when I
DJS3 > prevailed over CPS in every case?
G > How many babies did you make with the freakin nut case?
DJS3 > Still trying to change the subject.
DJS3 > What's the downside to beating CPS, grag?
On 20+ cases and 5 founded ones?
Or on the ONE case where according to
your own statements you were ON THE
REGISTRY for FOUR WHOLE YEARS?
How long were you on the registry for the
other FOUR foundeds you claimed?
Let's not forget that YOU brought up the
"Where there's smoke there's fire" axiom
in regard to child abuse investigations, Dan!
What does that say about your 20+ investigations
and 5 foundeds?
DJS3 > Of course I know you don't know what it's
DJS3 > like to prevail over CPS in an appeal... so
DJS3 > in your usual delusional state you probably
DJS3 > think there's an upside to losing. Like you
DJS3 > claimed there was an upside to getting
DJS3 > TPR'd because the court would need to
DJS3 > use a higher standard of evidence...
DJS3 > completely forgetting, of course, the
DJS3 > parents would no longer have custody
DJS3 > of their children.
Quote me, with a LINK. It bit you on the ass last time.
DJS3 > LOL!
How many babies did you make with the freakin nut case?
Kent Wills
wife beater (two conviction -- one resulting in incarceration) user
and abuser of illegal drugs (self admitted and one conviction for OWI)
and child abuser (self admitted and on Iowa's Child Abuse Registry)
wrote:
[...]
>
>DJS3 > Are you allergic to questions about your
>DJS3 > record of successful appeals against CPS, grag?
>
>G > I don't claim I had 20 + investigations with 5 of them founded.
>
>DJS3 > Neither did I.
>
>G > Yes you did!
>
>G > You started out claiming 15+ investigations
>G > and later you used the number 20 investigations.
>
>DJS3 > I said "15+" and I also said "about 20."
>
>DJS3 > I never said "20+" as you've claimed, grag.
>
>Dan, Aside from the apparent meaning of your
>sliding number, "20+" and "about 20" are not
>mutually exclusive.
To the rational mind, they are.
>
>I strongly suspect the number is higher and
>you're just another internet BS artist.
You consistently PROVE you are mentally unstable.
>
>You thought I'd interpret your "about 20"
>in a way most favorable to you??
>
You flat out LIED about what Dan claimed, offering the PROOF
yourself. Now you're trying to LIE your way out of your lie.
As with EVERYTHING you try, you have failed.
>Who is naive', Dan?
I don't know about naive, but you are very stupid, Greg, if you
think anyone is buying your lies.
>You for expecting favorable interpretation
>after your number slid?
>Or me, if I had accepted your second sliding
>number and interpreted it favorably to you?
Why don't you try being honest?
You made the FACT CLAIM that Dan stated he had 20+
investigations. You KNEW he never presented such. However, you are
UNABLE to be honest with any intent.
>
>Perhaps you should provide some PROOF!
Says the guy who NEVER offers proof, except for when he proves
himself the liar he is (that's YOU Greg).
>
>DJS3 > But this has been discussed, and you've
>DJS3 > been corrected and shown to be
>DJS3 > a liar more times than I can remember.
>
>G > You never imagined a downside
>G > to CLAIMING so much experience
>G > with CPS investigations, did you, Dan?
>
>DJS3 > What's the downside when I
>DJS3 > prevailed over CPS in every case?
>
>G > How many babies did you make with the freakin nut case?
>
>DJS3 > Still trying to change the subject.
>DJS3 > What's the downside to beating CPS, grag?
>
>On 20+ cases and 5 founded ones?
Again you LIE.
If you hadn't PROVED your claim to be the lie it is, this might
be funny.
>Or on the ONE case where according to
>your own statements you were ON THE
>REGISTRY for FOUR WHOLE YEARS?
You've been on Iowa's Child Abuse Registry for how many years,
Greg? Has it hit 10 yet?
>
>How long were you on the registry for the
>other FOUR foundeds you claimed?
If he was placed on it, it was for far less time than you've been
on Iowa's. Of course, you've ALWAYS opted to HIDE from requests that
you offer proof.
You've never denied that you made the claim as a means to con
parents into trusting you so that you could sabotage their cases
against CPS.
>
>Let's not forget that YOU brought up the
>"Where there's smoke there's fire" axiom
>in regard to child abuse investigations, Dan!
>
So you admit, AGAIN, that you did abuse Lisa's six or seven year
old daughter physically, emotionally and sexually?
>What does that say about your 20+ investigations
>and 5 foundeds?
Since you offered the PROOF that you LIED about 20+
investigations, why do you keep claiming there were 20+?
>
>DJS3 > Of course I know you don't know what it's
>DJS3 > like to prevail over CPS in an appeal... so
>DJS3 > in your usual delusional state you probably
>DJS3 > think there's an upside to losing. Like you
>DJS3 > claimed there was an upside to getting
>DJS3 > TPR'd because the court would need to
>DJS3 > use a higher standard of evidence...
>DJS3 > completely forgetting, of course, the
>DJS3 > parents would no longer have custody
>DJS3 > of their children.
>
>Quote me, with a LINK. It bit you on the ass last time.
He's already done so in the past. Are you really so stupid that
you think the PROOF will change now?
[Snip of Greg's continued attempt to distract from the question, What
is so bad about beating CPS?]
Are you going to answer Dan's question, or will you continue to
offer tacit proof, by YOUR standards, that you're a CPS shill who
wants to see families destroyed?
Dan Sullivan
As has been clarified, even by you, grag, I never used the term "20+."
> I strongly suspect the number is higher and
> you're just another internet BS artist.
>
> You thought I'd interpret your "about 20"
> in a way most favorable to you??
>
> Who is naive', Dan?
> You for expecting favorable interpretation
> after your number slid?
> Or me, if I had accepted your second sliding
> number and interpreted it favorably to you?
>
> Perhaps you should provide some PROOF!
>
> DJS3 > But this has been discussed, and you've
> DJS3 > been corrected and shown to be
> DJS3 > a liar more times than I can remember.
>
> G > You never imagined a downside
> G > to CLAIMING so much experience
> G > with CPS investigations, did you, Dan?
>
> DJS3 > What's the downside when I
> DJS3 > prevailed over CPS in every case?
>
> G > How many babies did you make with the freakin nut case?
>
> DJS3 > Still trying to change the subject.
> DJS3 > What's the downside to beating CPS, grag?
>
> On 20+ cases and 5 founded ones?
See above. I never said "20+."
All cases unfounded.
> Or on the ONE case where according to
> your own statements you were ON THE
> REGISTRY for FOUR WHOLE YEARS?
I never made a statement that I was "on the registry for four whole
years."
> How long were you on the registry for the
> other FOUR foundeds you claimed?
>
> Let's not forget that YOU brought up the
> "Where there's smoke there's fire" axiom
> in regard to child abuse investigations, Dan!
Actually that statement was made in regard to YOUR admissions of your
inappropriate behavior with Lisa Watkins' child, an unrelated seven
year old girl.
YOU admitted spanking her.
YOU admitted forcing her to take cold showers as punishment.
YOU admitted driving her around the neighborhood so she could collect
bottles and cans for the deposit money, which YOU claimed was YOUR
contribution to the household expenses.
And in February of 2001 you reportedly locked the little girl outside
her own home with no shoes, socks or coat, which caused the
authorities in Iowa to remove her from her mother's custody.
Greegor
> On Apr 26, 3:38 am, Greegor <greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > DJS3 > Are you trying to change the subject
>
> > Subject: Dan Sullivan and his magical registry appeals
>
> > DJS3 > because you've never prevailed over
> > DJS3 > CPS in an appeal even once, grag?
>
> > G > Are you allergic to questions about your family?
>
> > DJS3 > You commented on my first win against
> > DJS3 > CPS as if it wasn't a win
>
> > G > As if?
>
> > DJS3 > and I asked you about your "wins" in
> > DJS3 > appealing CPS decisions.
>
> > G > Do you usually call a FOUR YEAR
> > G > delay on one case alone a "victory"??
>
> > DJS3 > I won, CPS lost.
>
> > DJS3 > Are you allergic to questions about your
> > DJS3 > record of successful appeals against CPS, grag?
>
> > G > I don't claim I had 20 + investigations with 5 of them founded.
>
> > DJS3 > Neither did I.
>
> > G > Yes you did!
>
> > G > You started out claiming 15+ investigations
> > G > and later you used the number 20 investigations.
>
> > DJS3 > I said "15+" and I also said "about 20."
>
> > DJS3 > I never said "20+" as you've claimed, grag.
>
G > sliding number, "20+" and "about 20" are not
G > mutually exclusive.
> As has been clarified, even by you, grag, I never used the term "20+."
Your denial that you used a term is NOT
denying that it's true. Fully in keeping
with your smartass games of semantics
and technicality.
G > I strongly suspect the number is higher and
G > you're just another internet BS artist.
G >
G > You thought I'd interpret your "about 20"
G > in a way most favorable to you??
G >
G > Who is naive', Dan?
G > You for expecting favorable interpretation
G > after your number slid?
G > Or me, if I had accepted your second sliding
G > number and interpreted it favorably to you?
G > Perhaps you should provide some PROOF!
> > DJS3 > But this has been discussed, and you've
> > DJS3 > been corrected and shown to be
> > DJS3 > a liar more times than I can remember.
> > G > You never imagined a downside
> > G > to CLAIMING so much experience
> > G > with CPS investigations, did you, Dan?
>
> > DJS3 > What's the downside when I
> > DJS3 > prevailed over CPS in every case?
>
> > G > How many babies did you make with the freakin nut case?
DJS3 > Still trying to change the subject.
DJS3 > What's the downside to beating CPS, grag?
G > On 20+ cases and 5 founded ones?
DJS3 > See above. I never said "20+."
DJS3 > All cases unfounded.
By YOUR OWN admission you were on the
child abuser registry for FOUR YEARS
on one case alone, and also by your
own admission you were FOUNDED on
FOUR other investigations.
How long did it take you to supposedly
get them to reverse all of those?
Announcing that all 20+ cases were unfounded
is not exactly true, and qualifies as
a half truth considering your OWN assertions
that you reversed 5 FOUNDEDS.
Just one case alone, by your own assertion,
took FOUR FREAKIN YEARS to supposedly
get reversed.
You keep trying to stress the HALF TRUTH
that you were unfounded in all cases.
More precisely, you were FOUNDED for
child abuse in 5 cases and one of those
was for child sexual abuse.
That you supposedly got those 5 foundeds
reversed later (if true at all) would make
your statement that all cases were unfounded
a despicable half truth on your part.
Please post some PROOF, Dan!
G > Or on the ONE case where according to
G > your own statements you were ON THE
G > REGISTRY for FOUR WHOLE YEARS?
DJS3 > I never made a statement that I was
DJS3 > "on the registry for four whole years."
Again, denying that you SAID IT is not the
same as denying that it's TRUE by your
own statement.
And where I paraphrased you in a way that
was true by your own statement, you
added quotes and denied exact wording.
Cute deception, but very dishonest.
G > How long were you on the registry for the
G > other FOUR foundeds you claimed?
G >
G > Let's not forget that YOU brought up the
G > "Where there's smoke there's fire" axiom
G > in regard to child abuse investigations, Dan!
DJS3 > Actually that statement was made in
DJS3 > regard to YOUR admissions of your
allegedly
DJS3 > inappropriate behavior with [...] child,
DJS3 > an unrelated seven year old girl.
DJS3 > YOU admitted spanking her.
Which is 100% legal!
DJS3 > YOU admitted forcing her to take
DJS3 > cold showers as punishment.
The CRIME of the century!
Directing a kid to wash pee off themself
with cold water as an AVERSIVE...
DJS3 > YOU admitted driving her around the
DJS3 > neighborhood so she could collect
DJS3 > bottles and cans for the deposit money,
DJS3 > which YOU claimed was YOUR
DJS3 > contribution to the household expenses.
Is this your CRIME of the century?
DJS3 > And in February of 2001 you reportedly
DJS3 > locked the little girl outside her own
DJS3 > home with no shoes, socks or coat,
DJS3 > which caused the authorities in Iowa
DJS3 > to remove her from her mother's custody.
Wrong.
What's this "reportedly" game you're playing?
By that standard you committed child sexual abuse, Dan!
After all, it was REPORTED!
You were even FOUNDED for it by the state!
Can you PROVE you ever got it reversed?
Dan Sullivan
I never made that admission.
> and also by your
> own admission you were FOUNDED on
> FOUR other investigations.
>
> How long did it take you to supposedly
> get them to reverse all of those?
And they were all reversed on appeal.
> Announcing that all 20+ cases were unfounded
> is not exactly true,
It is exactly true.
> and qualifies as
> a half truth considering your OWN assertions
> that you reversed 5 FOUNDEDS.
I didn't reverse anything, grag.
For a parent.
> DJS3 > YOU admitted forcing her to take
> DJS3 > cold showers as punishment.
>
> The CRIME of the century!
> Directing a kid to wash pee off themself
> with cold water as an AVERSIVE...
>
> DJS3 > YOU admitted driving her around the
> DJS3 > neighborhood so she could collect
> DJS3 > bottles and cans for the deposit money,
> DJS3 > which YOU claimed was YOUR
> DJS3 > contribution to the household expenses.
>
> Is this your CRIME of the century?
>
> DJS3 > And in February of 2001 you reportedly
> DJS3 > locked the little girl outside her own
> DJS3 > home with no shoes, socks or coat,
> DJS3 > which caused the authorities in Iowa
> DJS3 > to remove her from her mother's custody.
>
> Wrong.
>
> What's this "reportedly" game you're playing?
>
> By that standard you committed child sexual abuse, Dan!
>
> After all, it was REPORTED!
Actually there was never a report of SA.
> You were even FOUNDED for it by the state!
Wrong.
Kent Wills
wife beater (two conviction -- one resulting in incarceration) user
and abuser of illegal drugs (self admitted and one conviction for OWI)
and child abuser (self admitted and on Iowa's Child Abuse Registry)
>> > G > I don't claim I had 20 + investigations with 5 of them founded.
>>
>> > DJS3 > Neither did I.
>>
>> > G > Yes you did!
>>
>> > G > You started out claiming 15+ investigations
>> > G > and later you used the number 20 investigations.
>>
>> > DJS3 > I said "15+" and I also said "about 20."
>>
>> > DJS3 > I never said "20+" as you've claimed, grag.
>>
>G > Dan, Aside from the apparent meaning of your
>G > sliding number, "20+" and "about 20" are not
>G > mutually exclusive.
>
>> As has been clarified, even by you, grag, I never used the term "20+."
>
>Your denial that you used a term is NOT
>denying that it's true.
If he didn't use it, then the claim he did is being denied,
stupid.
>Fully in keeping
>with your smartass games of semantics
>and technicality.
Projection noted.
Greg, why are you so afraid to answer Dan's question? What about
the question, "What is so bad about beating CPS?", fills you with so
much fear?
Dan has never made such a claim. At least not since I became
aware of him.
If you have anything that shows he did make the claim you
attribute to him, present it. If, as will surely be the case, you are
lying, you'll offer nothing.
>on one case alone, and also by your
>own admission you were FOUNDED on
>FOUR other investigations.
All founded were reversed, Greg. The proof of this is not very
difficult to find. If you are half the computer guru you try to
present, you will have already found it.
>
>How long did it take you to supposedly
>get them to reverse all of those?
As long as it took.
You want to make the length of time a focus. Why?
>
>Announcing that all 20+ cases were unfounded
Whereas there weren't and aren't 20+ cases, outside of your well
documented LIES, Dan could not make such an announcement.
>is not exactly true, and qualifies as
>a half truth considering your OWN assertions
>that you reversed 5 FOUNDEDS.
The reverse of founded is UNfounded, stupid.
BTW, Dan didn't reverse them, since he lacks the legal authority
to do so.
>
>Just one case alone, by your own assertion,
>took FOUR FREAKIN YEARS to supposedly
>get reversed.
How long have you been on Iowa's Child Abuse Registry, Greg?
>
>You keep trying to stress the HALF TRUTH
>that you were unfounded in all cases.
I've never seen a post from Dan asserting such. Unless you've
been caught in another lie, you'll be kind enough to post the MID(s)
and/or Google link(s) to the post(s) where he's done such.
>
>More precisely, you were FOUNDED for
>child abuse in 5 cases and one of those
>was for child sexual abuse.
Can you offer anything in the way of evidence to support that any
were for sexual abuse? All I've ever seen is you and Ken claiming one
was, but that's all.
Is this ANOTHER case of your using past lies to support present
lies?
>
>That you supposedly got those 5 foundeds
>reversed later (if true at all) would make
>your statement that all cases were unfounded
>a despicable half truth on your part.
>
I've never seen Dan offer anything less than pure truth. If you
have evidence, REAL evidence and not your word games, that he's been
less than honest, present it.
If I have exposed another of your MANY drug induced pathological
lies, you'll offer nothing.
>Please post some PROOF, Dan!
That's almost funny, Greg. You DEMAND proof, yet aside from
proving yourself a liar, you NEVER offer any.
>
>G > Or on the ONE case where according to
>G > your own statements you were ON THE
>G > REGISTRY for FOUR WHOLE YEARS?
>
>DJS3 > I never made a statement that I was
>DJS3 > "on the registry for four whole years."
>
>Again, denying that you SAID IT is not the
>same as denying that it's TRUE by your
>own statement.
>
The matter is whether he presented the claim or not. You assert
that he did, even after you offered the PROOF that he did not.
That you are compelled to make a claim YOU proved to be a lie
speaks volumes about you, Greg. None of it good.
>And where I paraphrased you in a way that
>was true by your own statement, you
>added quotes and denied exact wording.
Given the number of times he's offered the denial of your
deceptive claim of 20+ cases, your deception fails.
But you're used to failure, seeing as how you work very hard to
ensure you'll fail.
>
>Cute deception, but very dishonest.
>
That's your SOP, Greg. Projecting it onto others only serves to
further prove how dysfunctional you truly are.
>G > How long were you on the registry for the
>G > other FOUR foundeds you claimed?
>G >
>G > Let's not forget that YOU brought up the
>G > "Where there's smoke there's fire" axiom
>G > in regard to child abuse investigations, Dan!
>
>DJS3 > Actually that statement was made in
>DJS3 > regard to YOUR admissions of your
>
>allegedly
You've never denied it. According to YOUR standards, this is
equal to admitting it's true.
>
>DJS3 > inappropriate behavior with Lisa Watkins' child,
Why did you remove Lisa's name? I replaced it at no additional
cost.
You were once so proud of her name, you posted with it. Now
you're embarrassed?
Did she dump you and hook up with a real man who doesn't think
Socialism is the way things should be, as you've PROVED you do?
>DJS3 > an unrelated seven year old girl.
>
>DJS3 > YOU admitted spanking her.
>
>Which is 100% legal!
For a parent, yes. For mom's boyfriend, not so much.
>
>DJS3 > YOU admitted forcing her to take
>DJS3 > cold showers as punishment.
>
>The CRIME of the century!
>Directing a kid to wash pee off themself
>with cold water as an AVERSIVE...
It was abuse. Physical AND sexual. You've never denied either.
>
>DJS3 > YOU admitted driving her around the
>DJS3 > neighborhood so she could collect
>DJS3 > bottles and cans for the deposit money,
>DJS3 > which YOU claimed was YOUR
>DJS3 > contribution to the household expenses.
>
>Is this your CRIME of the century?
When, outside of your drug induced delusions, has Dan even
implied that it is?
>
>DJS3 > And in February of 2001 you reportedly
>DJS3 > locked the little girl outside her own
>DJS3 > home with no shoes, socks or coat,
>DJS3 > which caused the authorities in Iowa
>DJS3 > to remove her from her mother's custody.
>
>Wrong.
Are you claiming you LIED, Greg? You're the one who claimed it.
>
>What's this "reportedly" game you're playing?
>
Dan is aware that you are psychologically UNABLE to be honest
intentionally, so it's very possible the incident you reported never
actually occurred.
>By that standard you committed child sexual abuse, Dan!
>
When has Dan claimed he did such a thing?
>After all, it was REPORTED!
Not by Dan.
You see, YOU claimed you forced the child outside in February in
Iowa without proper attire to protect from the cold. If you lied, you
lied, but YOU reported it.
>
>You were even FOUNDED for it by the state!
>
>Can you PROVE you ever got it reversed?
The proof is out there, Greg. When I looked, it took me about 30
minutes to find it. Admittedly, I knew very little of Dan, so I
wasn't sure what to look for.
If real life has you being the computer expert you play on
Usenet, you should have found it long ago. Of course, to admit that
you've seen it will mean admitting the Dan Sullivan we know from
Usenet is not the same one you claim.
You've painted yourself into anther metaphorical corner. You
must admit you lack the knowledge and skills to find the proof, or
admit you've been lying about who Dan is. Which will you choose,
Greg?
Or will you, by YOUR standards, make the tacit admission that
BOTH are true by refusing to pick one?
Kent Wills
wrote:
>> By YOUR OWN admission you were on the
>> child abuser registry for FOUR YEARS
>> on one case alone,
>
>I never made that admission.
>
Greg likes to LIE and claim people made admissions they never
did. Then he WHINES when someone does the same to him.
In Greg's mind, he may do as he pleases to anyone, but if anyone
dares to give him the same, he gets very upset.
This is common with very young children. Generally, by age five
or six, they grow out of it. Greg has yet to do so.
>> and also by your
>> own admission you were FOUNDED on
>> FOUR other investigations.
>>
>> How long did it take you to supposedly
>> get them to reverse all of those?
>
>And they were all reversed on appeal.
They were, which really upsets Greg and his pro-CPS stance. Keep
in mind that Greg offered the evidence that he's a CPS shill.
>
>> Announcing that all 20+ cases were unfounded
>> is not exactly true,
>
>It is exactly true.
Not so, since there were never 20+ cases.
>
>> and qualifies as
>> a half truth considering your OWN assertions
>> that you reversed 5 FOUNDEDS.
>
>I didn't reverse anything, grag.
Again Greg is playing word games. That you got them reversed is
not the same as you reversing them.
Expect Greg to LIE in the future and state you claimed that YOU
reversed them.
[...]
>>
>> G > How long were you on the registry for the
>> G > other FOUR foundeds you claimed?
>> G >
>> G > Let's not forget that YOU brought up the
>> G > "Where there's smoke there's fire" axiom
>> G > in regard to child abuse investigations, Dan!
>>
>> DJS3 > Actually that statement was made in
>> DJS3 > regard to YOUR admissions of your
>>
>> allegedly
>>
>> DJS3 > inappropriate behavior with [...] child,
>> DJS3 > an unrelated seven year old girl.
>>
>> DJS3 > YOU admitted spanking her.
>>
>> Which is 100% legal!
>
>For a parent.
>
And, under certain circumstances, others. However, the boyfriend
of the child's mom wouldn't fit any circumstances.
[...]
>>
>> Wrong.
>>
>> What's this "reportedly" game you're playing?
>>
>> By that standard you committed child sexual abuse, Dan!
>>
>> After all, it was REPORTED!
>
>Actually there was never a report of SA.
>
Greg is using his past lies to make current, dishonest, claims.
>> You were even FOUNDED for it by the state!
>
>Wrong.
Greg is rarely correct about anything. Kind of sad, really.
--
Always follow your dream!
Unless it's the one where you're at work in your underwear during a
fire drill.
Greegor
G > By YOUR OWN admission you were on the
G > child abuser registry for FOUR YEARS
G > on one case alone,
DJS3 > I never made that admission.
You claimed that it took FOUR YEARS
to get just ONE reversed.
Therefore you were ON the NY child abuse
registry for those FOUR YEARS.
> > and also by your
> > own admission you were FOUNDED on
> > FOUR other investigations.
>
> > How long did it take you to supposedly
> > get them to reverse all of those?
>
> And they were all reversed on appeal.
>
> > Announcing that all 20+ cases were unfounded
> > is not exactly true,
>
> It is exactly true.
>
> > and qualifies as
> > a half truth considering your OWN assertions
> > that you reversed 5 FOUNDEDS.
DJS3 > I didn't reverse anything, grag.
THAT I believe!
G > allegedly
DJS3 > inappropriate behavior with [...] child,
DJS3 > an unrelated seven year old girl.
DJS3 >
DJS3 > YOU admitted spanking her.
G > Which is 100% legal!
DJS3 > For a parent.
In Loco Parentis with permission of parent, nimrod.
Post where the law makes spanking with parent
permission a crime in Iowa, Dan.
Iowa DHS didn't even try this puke you're slinging, Dan.
> > DJS3 > YOU admitted forcing her to take
> > DJS3 > cold showers as punishment.
>
> > The CRIME of the century!
> > Directing a kid to wash pee off themself
> > with cold water as an AVERSIVE...
>
> > DJS3 > YOU admitted driving her around the
> > DJS3 > neighborhood so she could collect
> > DJS3 > bottles and cans for the deposit money,
> > DJS3 > which YOU claimed was YOUR
> > DJS3 > contribution to the household expenses.
>
> > Is this your CRIME of the century?
>
> > DJS3 > And in February of 2001 you reportedly
> > DJS3 > locked the little girl outside her own
> > DJS3 > home with no shoes, socks or coat,
> > DJS3 > which caused the authorities in Iowa
> > DJS3 > to remove her from her mother's custody.
>
> > Wrong.
>
> > What's this "reportedly" game you're playing?
>
> > By that standard you committed child sexual abuse, Dan!
>
> > After all, it was REPORTED!
DJS3 > Actually there was never a report of SA.
G > You were even FOUNDED for it by the state!
DJS3 > Wrong.
Feb 2002
Dan Sullivan wrote "I was founded for SA of my daughter back in '93."
[...]
'The "credible evidence" was my (3 yo) daughter's statement that "My
daddy touches me with the puppet bear in the toilet." '
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.child-protective-services/msg/52b49e5611d619ea
April 2004 Dan Sullivan wrote
"My daddy touched me with the puppet bear in the toilet."
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.child-protective-services/msg/d15f8e338226b780
July 2007 Dan Sullivan wrote
"My daddy touches me with the puppet bear in the toilet."
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.foster-parents/msg/2d04c26b08f9f2b9
Greegor
G > You were even FOUNDED for it by the state!
DJS3 > Wrong.
Feb 2002
Dan Sullivan wrote "I was founded for SA of my daughter back in '93."
[...]
'The "credible evidence" was my (3 yo) daughter's statement that "My
daddy touches me with the puppet bear in the toilet." '
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.child-protective-services/msg/52b49e5611d619ea
April 2004 Dan Sullivan wrote
"My daddy touched me with the puppet bear in the toilet."
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.child-protective-services/msg/d15f8e338226b780
July 2007 Dan Sullivan wrote
"My daddy touches me with the puppet bear in the toilet."
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.foster-parents/msg/2d04c26b08f9f2b9
Cat got your tongue, Daniel?
Kent Wills
wife beater (two conviction -- one resulting in incarceration) user
and abuser of illegal drugs (self admitted and one conviction for OWI)
and child abuser (self admitted and on Iowa's Child Abuse Registry)
>> > DJS3 > Still trying to change the subject.
>> > DJS3 > What's the downside to beating CPS, grag?
>>
>> > G > On 20+ cases and 5 founded ones?
>>
>> > DJS3 > See above. I never said "20+."
>>
>> > DJS3 > All cases unfounded.
>
>G > By YOUR OWN admission you were on the
>G > child abuser registry for FOUR YEARS
>G > on one case alone,
>
>DJS3 > I never made that admission.
>
>You claimed that it took FOUR YEARS
>to get just ONE reversed.
>
>Therefore you were ON the NY child abuse
>registry for those FOUR YEARS.
Prove he was on the registry, Greg, unless you want to make the
tacit admission, by YOUR standards, that you've lied.
Just because Iowa does it a certain way, this doesn't mean every
other state MUST do it that way.
BTW, Greg, what's the downside to beating CPS? You've yet to
answer this question. Since you HIDE when Dan asks it, I thought I'd
see if you would be man enough to answer when I ask.
Dan Sullivan
True.
> Therefore you were ON the NY child abuse
> registry for those FOUR YEARS.
I don't know that for a fact, and neither do you, grag.
> > > and also by your
> > > own admission you were FOUNDED on
> > > FOUR other investigations.
>
> > > How long did it take you to supposedly
> > > get them to reverse all of those?
>
> > And they were all reversed on appeal.
>
> > > Announcing that all 20+ cases were unfounded
> > > is not exactly true,
>
> > It is exactly true.
>
> > > and qualifies as
> > > a half truth considering your OWN assertions
> > > that you reversed 5 FOUNDEDS.
>
> DJS3 > I didn't reverse anything, grag.
>
> THAT I believe!
New York state reversed the decisions.
No, they took the easy road, remove the victim from the perp.
What kind of mother gives permission to anyone to spank their litte
girl... OR boy???
> daddy touches me with the puppet bear in the toilet." 'http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.child-protective-services/...
>
> April 2004 Dan Sullivan wrote
> "My daddy touched me with the puppet bear in the toilet."http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.child-protective-services/...
>
> July 2007 Dan Sullivan wrote
> "My daddy touches me with the puppet bear in the toilet."http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.foster-parents/msg/2d04c26...
Right, but there never was a report of SA made to the NY State
hotline.
LOL!!!
Greegor
G > As if?
DJS3 > Neither did I.
G > Yes you did!
DJS3 > As has been clarified, even by you,
DJS3 > grag, I never used the term "20+."
G > Your denial that you used a term is NOT
G > denying that it's true. Fully in keeping
G > with your smartass games of semantics
G > and technicality.
DJS3 > All cases unfounded.
G > You claimed that it took FOUR YEARS
G > to get just ONE reversed.
DJS3 > True.
G > Therefore you were ON the NY child abuse
G > registry for those FOUR YEARS.
DJS3 > I don't know that for a fact, and neither do you, grag.
Yes I do.
That is how child abuse registries
work and you know it is.
G > and also by your
G > own admission you were FOUNDED on
G > FOUR other investigations.
G > How long did it take you to supposedly
G > get them to reverse all of those?
DJS3 > And they were all reversed on appeal.
G > Announcing that all 20+ cases were unfounded
G > is not exactly true,
DJS3 > It is exactly true.
That is a LIE, of the half-truth variety.
5 of the cases were FOUNDED by caseworkers,
one of them for SEXUAL ABUSE, and you CLAIM
that you got them reversed through registry
appeal processes.
G > and qualifies as
G > a half truth considering your OWN assertions
G > that you reversed 5 FOUNDEDS.
DJS3 > I didn't reverse anything, grag.
G > THAT I believe!
DJS3 > New York state reversed the decisions.
G > Just one case alone, by your own assertion,
G > took FOUR FREAKIN YEARS to supposedly
G > get reversed.
G >
G > You keep trying to stress the HALF TRUTH
G > that you were unfounded in all cases.
G >
G > More precisely, you were FOUNDED for
G > child abuse in 5 cases and one of those
G > was for child sexual abuse.
G >
G > That you supposedly got those 5 foundeds
G > reversed later (if true at all) would make
G > your statement that all cases were unfounded
G > a despicable half truth on your part.
G >
G > Please post some PROOF, Dan!
G > Or on the ONE case where according to
G > your own statements you were ON THE
G > REGISTRY for FOUR WHOLE YEARS?
DJS3 > I never made a statement that I was
DJS3 > "on the registry for four whole years."
G > Again, denying that you SAID IT is not the
G > same as denying that it's TRUE by your
G > own statement.
G > And where I paraphrased you in a way that
G > was true by your own statement, you
G > added quotes and denied exact wording.
G > Cute deception, but very dishonest.
G > How long were you on the registry for the
G > other FOUR foundeds you claimed?
G >
G > Let's not forget that YOU brought up the
G > "Where there's smoke there's fire" axiom
G > in regard to child abuse investigations, Dan!
DJS3 > Actually that statement was made in
DJS3 > regard to YOUR admissions of your
G > allegedly
DJS3 > inappropriate behavior with [...] child,
DJS3 > an unrelated seven year old girl.
DJS3 >
DJS3 > YOU admitted spanking her.
G > Which is 100% legal!
DJS3 > For a parent.
G > In Loco Parentis with permission of parent, nimrod.
G >
G > Post where the law makes spanking with parent
G > permission a crime in Iowa, Dan.
G >
G > Iowa DHS didn't even try this puke you're slinging, Dan.
DJS3 > No, they took the easy road, remove the victim from the perp.
DJS3 > What kind of mother gives permission to anyone
DJS3 > to spank their litte girl... OR boy???
Do you pretend that is YOUR call?
CPS never even wrote up a complaint about this.
YOU have an obsession about it.
Could this be reminding you of some anxiety
you had when you were a non-custodial parent?
DJS3 > YOU admitted forcing her to take
DJS3 > cold showers as punishment.
G > The CRIME of the century!
G > Directing a kid to wash pee off themself
G > with cold water as an AVERSIVE...
DJS3 > YOU admitted driving her around the
DJS3 > neighborhood so she could collect
DJS3 > bottles and cans for the deposit money,
DJS3 > which YOU claimed was YOUR
DJS3 > contribution to the household expenses.
G > Is this your CRIME of the century?
DJS3 > And in February of 2001 you reportedly
DJS3 > locked the little girl outside her own
DJS3 > home with no shoes, socks or coat,
DJS3 > which caused the authorities in Iowa
DJS3 > to remove her from her mother's custody.
DJS3 > Wrong.
G > What's this "reportedly" game you're playing?
G > By that standard you committed child sexual abuse, Dan!
G > After all, it was REPORTED!
DJS3 > Actually there was never a report of SA.
G > You were even FOUNDED for it by the state!
DJS3 > Wrong.
Feb 2002
Dan Sullivan wrote "I was founded for SA of my daughter back in '93."
[...]
'The "credible evidence" was my (3 yo) daughter's statement that "My
daddy touches me with the puppet bear in the toilet." '
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.child-protective-services/msg/52b49e5611d619ea
April 2004 Dan Sullivan wrote
"My daddy touched me with the puppet bear in the toilet."
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.child-protective-services/msg/d15f8e338226b780
July 2007 Dan Sullivan wrote
"My daddy touches me with the puppet bear in the toilet."
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.foster-parents/msg/2d04c26b08f9f2b9
DJS3 > Right, but there never was a report of
DJS3 > SA made to the NY State hotline.
DJS3 >
DJS3 > LOL!!!
How is your little BS semantics game funny?
You are a sicko, Dan.
Did you know your bipolar ex-wife was bipolar
BEFORE you made the first baby with her, Dan?
How long had she been diagnosed to be bipolar before that?
Was she bipolar before you met her?
Did you meet her in a psychiatric facility, Dan?
What is the nature of your OWN psych disability, Dan?
How many healthy men would choose to make
babies with a woman they KNOW to be a freakin'
mental case?
How many men who are THEMSELVES
freakin' mental cases would choose
to make babies with a woman they
KNOW to be a freakin' mental case?
How many babies did you make with her, total?
One died young you claimed.
How many babies did you make with Susan?
How does she like the current place?
The mortgage was eating you alive wasn't it?
Why ELSE would you take such a BEATING
on the house price, Dan?
LOL!
Dan Sullivan
Post the proof.
> That is how child abuse registries
> work and you know it is.
I don't know that all the child abuse registries work the same.
If you have credible evidence that they do work the same, post the
proof, grag.
> G > and also by your
> G > own admission you were FOUNDED on
> G > FOUR other investigations.
>
> G > How long did it take you to supposedly
> G > get them to reverse all of those?
>
> DJS3 > And they were all reversed on appeal.
>
> G > Announcing that all 20+ cases were unfounded
> G > is not exactly true,
>
> DJS3 > It is exactly true.
>
> That is a LIE, of the half-truth variety.
>
> 5 of the cases were FOUNDED by caseworkers,
With no credible evidence to support the decisions, which is why NY
state reversed the decisions.
> one of them for SEXUAL ABUSE,
See above.
> and you CLAIM
> that you got them reversed through registry
> appeal processes.
True.
> G > and qualifies as
> G > a half truth considering your OWN assertions
> G > that you reversed 5 FOUNDEDS.
NY state reversed five CPS decisions that were erroneously made with a
total lack of credible evidence.
The authorities in Iowa removed the little girl from the mother.
I don't have an obsession, grag, the fact is you don't even care about
the removal.
Greegor
G > Yes I do.
DJS3 > Post the proof.
Until you got the FOUNDEDS reversed,
if you really did get them reversed, you
were placed on the registry until then.
G > That is how child abuse registries
G > work and you know it is.
DJS3 > I don't know that all the child abuse registries work the same.
DJS3 > If you have credible evidence that they
DJS3 > do work the same, post the proof, grag.
What remarkeable reason would there be
why they would supposedly NOT have
placed you on the registry when you were FOUNDED?
Such exceptional behavior would carry great
risk for the agency, and possibly result in
more failure to protect by the agency!
Please make your assertion regarding this
and of course PROVE IT!
> > G > and also by your
> > G > own admission you were FOUNDED on
> > G > FOUR other investigations.
>
> > G > How long did it take you to supposedly
> > G > get them to reverse all of those?
>
> > DJS3 > And they were all reversed on appeal.
>
> > G > Announcing that all 20+ cases were unfounded
> > G > is not exactly true,
>
> > DJS3 > It is exactly true.
>
> > That is a LIE, of the half-truth variety.
G > 5 of the cases were FOUNDED by caseworkers,
DJS3 > With no credible evidence to support the
DJS3 > decisions, which is why NY state
DJS3 > reversed the decisions.
G > one of them for SEXUAL ABUSE,
How long did the NY CPS agency delay
on your other 4 registry hearings?
I've asked this several times.
Are you avoiding this question, Dan?
> See above.
>
> > and you CLAIM
> > that you got them reversed through registry
> > appeal processes.
>
> True.
>
> > G > and qualifies as
> > G > a half truth considering your OWN assertions
> > G > that you reversed 5 FOUNDEDS.
DJS3 > NY state reversed five CPS decisions that
DJS3 > were erroneously made with a total lack
DJS3 > of credible evidence.
HOW LONG did they delay on the other 4
FOUNDEDS you supposedly reversed?
DJS3 > I didn't reverse anything, grag.
G > THAT I believe!
DJS3 > New York state reversed the decisions.
One was delayed FOUR years, so
how long were the other four cases
supposedly delayed?
G > Do you pretend that is YOUR call?
G > CPS never even wrote up a complaint about this.
G > YOU have an obsession about it.
DJS3 > The authorities in Iowa removed the little girl from the
mother.
DJS3 >
DJS3 > I don't have an obsession, grag, the fact
DJS3 > is you don't even care about
DJS3 > the removal.
Dan Sullivan
Post the proof.
> G > That is how child abuse registries
> G > work and you know it is.
>
> DJS3 > I don't know that all the child abuse registries work the same.
>
> DJS3 > If you have credible evidence that they
> DJS3 > do work the same, post the proof, grag.
>
> What remarkeable reason would there be
> why they would supposedly NOT have
> placed you on the registry when you were FOUNDED?
CPS is incompetent.
> Such exceptional behavior would carry great
> risk for the agency, and possibly result in
> more failure to protect by the agency!
What risk?
> Please make your assertion regarding this
> and of course PROVE IT!
YOU need to prove I was on the registry for four years because YOU
claim for a fact that you know I was on the registry, grag.
> > > G > and also by your
> > > G > own admission you were FOUNDED on
> > > G > FOUR other investigations.
>
> > > G > How long did it take you to supposedly
> > > G > get them to reverse all of those?
>
> > > DJS3 > And they were all reversed on appeal.
>
> > > G > Announcing that all 20+ cases were unfounded
> > > G > is not exactly true,
>
> > > DJS3 > It is exactly true.
>
> > > That is a LIE, of the half-truth variety.
>
> G > 5 of the cases were FOUNDED by caseworkers,
>
> DJS3 > With no credible evidence to support the
> DJS3 > decisions, which is why NY state
> DJS3 > reversed the decisions.
>
> G > one of them for SEXUAL ABUSE,
>
> How long did the NY CPS agency delay
> on your other 4 registry hearings?
Didn't.
> I've asked this several times.
>
> Are you avoiding this question, Dan?
>
> > See above.
>
> > > and you CLAIM
> > > that you got them reversed through registry
> > > appeal processes.
>
> > True.
>
> > > G > and qualifies as
> > > G > a half truth considering your OWN assertions
> > > G > that you reversed 5 FOUNDEDS.
>
> DJS3 > NY state reversed five CPS decisions that
> DJS3 > were erroneously made with a total lack
> DJS3 > of credible evidence.
>
> HOW LONG did they delay on the other 4
> FOUNDEDS you supposedly reversed?
See above.
> DJS3 > I didn't reverse anything, grag.
>
> G > THAT I believe!
>
> DJS3 > New York state reversed the decisions.
>
> One was delayed FOUR years, so
> how long were the other four cases
> supposedly delayed?
See above.
Kent Wills
wrote:
[...]
>> What remarkeable reason would there be
>> why they would supposedly NOT have
>> placed you on the registry when you were FOUNDED?
>
>CPS is incompetent.
Not in Greg's view. CPS can do NO wrong, as far as Greg is
concerned.
>
>> Such exceptional behavior would carry great
>> risk for the agency, and possibly result in
>> more failure to protect by the agency!
>
>What risk?
>
Crickets on stand-by.
>> Please make your assertion regarding this
>> and of course PROVE IT!
>
>YOU need to prove I was on the registry for four years because YOU
>claim for a fact that you know I was on the registry, grag.
Greg wants to pretend that his precious CPS works exactly the
same in every state.
Greegor
DJS3 > True.
G > Yes I do.
DJS3 > Post the proof.
No proof needed. It's automatic.
Are you asserting that your state agency is
f-ing up something new in this regard, Dan?
If you're FOUNDED for child abuse or neglect
in any US state with a child abuser registry,
your name is automatically placed on the
registry when you're marked FOUNDED.
If YOU want to argue with that, YOU will
need to provide some proof.
Do you think NY F'd up and FAILED to
put you onto their registry automatically
when they FOUNDED you for Child
Sexual Abuse, Dan Sullivan?
Feb 2002
Dan Sullivan wrote "I was founded for SA of my daughter back in '93."
[...]
'The "credible evidence" was my (3 yo) daughter's statement that "My
daddy touches me with the puppet bear in the toilet." '
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.child-protective-services/msg/52b49e5611d619ea
April 2004 Dan Sullivan wrote
"My daddy touched me with the puppet bear in the toilet."
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.child-protective-services/msg/d15f8e338226b780
July 2007 Dan Sullivan wrote
"My daddy touches me with the puppet bear in the toilet."
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.foster-parents/msg/2d04c26b08f9f2b9
G > Until you got the FOUNDEDS reversed,
G > if you really did get them reversed, you
G > were placed on the registry until then.
DJS3 > Post the proof.
G > That is how child abuse registries
G > work and you know it is.
DJS3 > I don't know that all the child abuse registries work the same.
DJS3 > If you have credible evidence that they
DJS3 > do work the same, post the proof, grag.
G > What remarkeable reason would there be
G > why they would supposedly NOT have
G > placed you on the registry when you were FOUNDED?
DJS3 > CPS is incompetent.
They hired YOU didn't they?
Seriously, Dan, with all of your supposed experience
with CPS, you know that when CPS marks
somebody as FOUNDED, that placing that on the
REGISTRY is what it's all about.
G > Such exceptional behavior would carry great
G > risk for the agency, and possibly result in
G > more failure to protect by the agency!
DJS3 > What risk?
Failing to place a FOUNDED child abuser named
Daniel J. Sullivan on the Child Abuse Registry?
They'd risk Public Relations problems, scolding
and funding cuts from the state legislature.
G > Please make your assertion regarding this
G > and of course PROVE IT!
DJS3 > YOU need to prove I was on the registry
DJS3 > for four years because YOU claim for a
DJS3 > fact that you know I was on the registry, grag.
Dan, You already stated you were FOUNDED
which MEANS you were on the registry.
Word games and sophistry is not enough
for you to weasel out of that!
Feb 2002
Dan Sullivan wrote "I was founded for SA of my daughter back in '93."
[...]
'The "credible evidence" was my (3 yo) daughter's statement that "My
daddy touches me with the puppet bear in the toilet." '
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.child-protective-services/msg/52b49e5611d619ea
April 2004 Dan Sullivan wrote
"My daddy touched me with the puppet bear in the toilet."
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.child-protective-services/msg/d15f8e338226b780
July 2007 Dan Sullivan wrote
"My daddy touches me with the puppet bear in the toilet."
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.foster-parents/msg/2d04c26b08f9f2b9
> > > > G > and also by your
> > > > G > own admission you were FOUNDED on
> > > > G > FOUR other investigations.
>
> > > > G > How long did it take you to supposedly
> > > > G > get them to reverse all of those?
>
> > > > DJS3 > And they were all reversed on appeal.
G > Announcing that all 20+ cases were unfounded
G > is not exactly true,
DJS3 > It is exactly true.
G > That is a LIE, of the half-truth variety.
G > 5 of the cases were FOUNDED by caseworkers,
DJS3 > With no credible evidence to support the
DJS3 > decisions, which is why NY state
DJS3 > reversed the decisions.
G > one of them for SEXUAL ABUSE,
DJS3 > How long did the NY CPS agency delay
DJS3 > on your other 4 registry hearings?
DJS3 > Didn't.
A veritable MIRACLE if true!
Their Standard Operating Procedures
are to delay and hope people will
forget, go away, or die.
SHREDDING the appeals is just the
later result of this behavior.
Remember the part in the article about
calling potential employers to ask if
they still wanted to hire the person
before they would say the person is FOUNDED?
> > I've asked this several times.
>
> > Are you avoiding this question, Dan?
>
> > > See above.
>
> > > > and you CLAIM
> > > > that you got them reversed through registry
> > > > appeal processes.
>
> > > True.
>
> > > > G > and qualifies as
> > > > G > a half truth considering your OWN assertions
> > > > G > that you reversed 5 FOUNDEDS.
>
> > DJS3 > NY state reversed five CPS decisions that
> > DJS3 > were erroneously made with a total lack
> > DJS3 > of credible evidence.
>
> > HOW LONG did they delay on the other 4
> > FOUNDEDS you supposedly reversed?
>
> See above.
>
> > DJS3 > I didn't reverse anything, grag.
>
> > G > THAT I believe!
>
> > DJS3 > New York state reversed the decisions.
>
> > One was delayed FOUR years, so
> > how long were the other four cases
> > supposedly delayed?
>
> See above.