Ed Kramer case in Georgia

11 views
Skip to first unread message

Joe Christ

unread,
Oct 2, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/2/00
to
Detective C.L.Clemons of the Gwinnett County (GA) Police
would like to hear from anyone else who has witnessed
inappropriate behaviour by Ed Kramer with young boys
(or children, in general):

(770) 513-5355 -phone
(770) 513-5309 -fax

Many of the readers of this newsgroup have attended
conventions where Ed Kramer was present. If you, too,
have seen anything suspicious between Ed and any underage
child, we strongly urge you to contact Detective Clemons.

Joe Christ & Nancy A Collins


Doug Faunt N6TQS +1-510-655-8604

unread,
Oct 2, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/2/00
to
Joe Christ <syl...@concentric.net> writes:

And you might contact him if you witnessed appropriate behavior, too.

73, doug


Joel Rosenberg

unread,
Oct 2, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/2/00
to
>>>>> In article <mfrr95y...@panix3.panix.com>, Doug Faunt N6TQS +1-510-655-8604 <fa...@panix.com> writes:

Doug> Joe Christ <syl...@concentric.net> writes:
>> Detective C.L.Clemons of the Gwinnett County (GA) Police would
>> like to hear from anyone else who has witnessed inappropriate
>> behaviour by Ed Kramer with young boys (or children, in
>> general):
>>
>> (770) 513-5355 -phone (770) 513-5309 -fax
>>
>> Many of the readers of this newsgroup have attended conventions
>> where Ed Kramer was present. If you, too, have seen anything
>> suspicious between Ed and any underage child, we strongly urge
>> you to contact Detective Clemons.
>>
>> Joe Christ & Nancy A Collins

Doug> And you might contact him if you witnessed appropriate
Doug> behavior, too.

I dunno. Seems to me that "man exhibits appropriate behavior with
children" isn't a matter that ought to concern the detective. It
probably ought not even concern his defense counsel. I don't imagine
that "look at all the children he didn't molest" would be a terribly
effective defense for even the most unfairly accused.


--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
This is my .sig file.
There are many like it, but this one is mine.
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Keith F. Lynch

unread,
Oct 2, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/2/00
to
Joe Christ <syl...@concentric.net> writes:
> Detective C.L.Clemons of the Gwinnett County (GA) Police would like
> to hear from anyone else who has witnessed inappropriate behaviour
> by Ed Kramer ... Joe Christ & Nancy A Collins

Doug Faunt N6TQS +1-510-655-8604 <fa...@panix.com> wrote:
> And you might contact him if you witnessed appropriate behavior, too.

Or if you witnessed inappropriate behavior by Joe Christ and/or Nancy
A Collins.

Sounds like the prosecution's case is falling apart if they have to go
trolling newsgroups in search of victims.

How many of us could survive such an inquisition unscathed?

"Yes, officer, I witnessed Dr. Asimov carrying on like a dirty old
man. He also has a foreign sounding name. Better pick him up for
questioning. And check his home for inappropriate books, photographs,
movies, convention souvenir books, etc."
--
Keith F. Lynch - k...@keithlynch.net - http://keithlynch.net/
I always welcome replies to my e-mail, postings, and web pages, but
unsolicited bulk e-mail sent to thousands of randomly collected
addresses is not acceptable, and I do complain to the spammer's ISP.

Keith Thompson

unread,
Oct 2, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/2/00
to
Joel Rosenberg <jo...@winternet.com> writes:
[...]

> I dunno. Seems to me that "man exhibits appropriate behavior with
> children" isn't a matter that ought to concern the detective. It
> probably ought not even concern his defense counsel. I don't imagine
> that "look at all the children he didn't molest" would be a terribly
> effective defense for even the most unfairly accused.

Punch line: "Fortunately, the captain was sober all day."

(Joke available on request.)

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) k...@cts.com <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://www.sdsc.edu/~kst>
Welcome to the last year of the 20th century.

Joe Christ

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 12:11:13 AM10/3/00
to

"Keith F. Lynch" wrote:

> Or if you witnessed inappropriate behavior by Joe Christ and/or Nancy
> A Collins.
>

Yes, by all means. Luckily, no 13-year-old boys have accused either of us
of sodomizing them, as is the case with Kramer.

> Sounds like the prosecution's case is falling apart if they have to go
> trolling newsgroups in search of victims.
>

No, we're the ones issuing this call. We're both dismayed at the harm being
done to DragonCon and the world of fandom by ill-informed people, with
their own agendas, who are so quick to call this young victim a liar.
Defending Kramer is not helping DragonCon.

> How many of us could survive such an inquisition unscathed?

Those of us without child pornography in our possession would certainly
have an advantage.

> "Yes, officer, I witnessed Dr. Asimov carrying on like a dirty old
> man. He also has a foreign sounding name. Better pick him up for
> questioning. And check his home for inappropriate books, photographs,
> movies, convention souvenir books, etc."

Geez, what a moron.

Joe Christ

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 12:22:24 AM10/3/00
to

Doug Faunt N6TQS +1-510-655-8604 wrote:

> And you might contact him if you witnessed appropriate behavior, too.

Why do something like that to the young victim? That would be like
calling the fire department to tell them that your house isn't on fire.
While this may be a fantasy-oriented newsgroup, what's being discussed
here is a real crime, with a real victim [or victims]. And Kramer isn't
the victim here, he is the accused.
Have you forgotten that there's a child who has told the police that
Ed Kramer sodomized him?


Loren MacGregor

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 12:37:13 AM10/3/00
to
Joe Christ wrote:
>
> No, we're the ones issuing this call. We're both dismayed at the harm being
> done to DragonCon and the world of fandom by ill-informed people, with
> their own agendas, who are so quick to call this young victim a liar.
> Defending Kramer is not helping DragonCon.

I'm not defending Kramer; I'm defending the United States standard
of law, which states that people are presumed innocent. An
accusation is not a proof of guilt. I don't know Ed Kramer, and
have no interest in DragonCon one way or the other, but I -do- have
an interest in defending the Constitution and the rights and
freedoms espoused therein and in related documents.

I like fandom a lot, but fandom as I know it could not exist without
the related freedoms. Even if it could, I would prefer a country
without fandom over a fandom absent my favorite country.

-- LJM

Paula Lieberman

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 1:05:02 AM10/3/00
to
Joe Christ <syl...@concentric.net> wrote in message
news:39D95EBF...@concentric.net...

And the kid may be telling the truth, the kid may be lying, or the kid may
have been coached into claiming sexual abuse. I knew a LOT of creeps during
my internment in public school, the rattlesnake that crawled into bed with
my father when he was stationed in Dothan, Alabama, that had twelve buttons
on its tale, was a more upstanding and honest and polite citizen than
various of the slime I had as school classmates. I also had classmates
who -weren't- lying loathsome despicable slime, but the pernicious verbal
and physical (none of it sodomy, however....) abuse I received from the
scum, has forever left me with a view that not all kids are "innocent
children." Some of them are malicious slime, and some of them will say what
their friends/associates/parents tell them to say....

Again, the kid may be telling the truth, or not....
>
>

Loren MacGregor

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 12:51:28 AM10/3/00
to
Joe Christ wrote:
>
> Have you forgotten that there's a child who has told the police that
> Ed Kramer sodomized him?

The child may even be telling the truth. I don't know; I wasn't
there. Neither were you. You are not the judge nor the jury; you
are someone who has read the same news reports that others have
read, and formed your conclusion based on them. That's your right.

But -whatever the truth,- Kramer has a right before the law to a
hearing based on the evidence, and the child's testimony is a single
part of the evidence -- a given statement -- that may or may not be
validated by further evidence presented. Kramer has the right to be
tried in a court of law. That's the way the system works -- for
your benefit as well as his.

-- LJM

P Nielsen Hayden

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 12:55:29 AM10/3/00
to
On 03 Oct 2000 04:22:24 GMT,
Joe Christ <syl...@concentric.net> wrote:


>And Kramer isn't the victim here, he is the accused.


I suppose I need to reiterate here that I don't actually like Ed
Kramer much at all, and that if he's guilty I think he should be
convicted.

That said, the statement that "X isn't the victim here, he is the
accused" would have sounded perfectly natural coming from Torquemada.

Since I basically like people and tend to trust in the idea that
moral progress will happen, by hook or crook, I trust that whatever
the outcome of the Kramer case, Joe Christ will eventually look back
on this post with exquisite embarrassment. I'm embarrassed for him
already.


--
Patrick Nielsen Hayden : p...@panix.com : http://www.panix.com/~pnh

Ulrika O'Brien

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 1:22:40 AM10/3/00
to
In article <39D95EBF...@concentric.net>,
syl...@concentric.net says...

My recollection of the Georgia sodomy laws is that "sodomy" is
pretty much any sexual act other than consensual intercourse in the
missionary position between a married, heterosexual couple. That
being the case, a careful writer will perhaps choose another noun,
since Georgia-defined "sodomy" is emphatically not necessarily
identical to sodomy as that term is understood in ordinary English,
and the conflation might be regarded as a deliberate attempt to
excite emotional responses.

--
Ulrika O'Brien * member fwa * Soon-to-be-armed rabble without a
clue

Mitch Wagner

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 2:01:12 AM10/3/00
to
syl...@concentric.net (Joe Christ) wrote in
<39D95EBF...@concentric.net>:

> Have you forgotten that there's a child who has told the police that
>Ed Kramer sodomized him?

Not at all, Joe. It's just that I'd like to, y'know, let the judicial
process run its course before deciding to condemn Ed Kramer.

--
Mitch Wagner

Mitch Wagner

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 2:01:16 AM10/3/00
to
syl...@concentric.net (Joe Christ) wrote in
<39D95C20...@concentric.net>:

>No, we're the ones issuing this call. We're both dismayed at the harm
>being done to DragonCon and the world of fandom by ill-informed people,
>with their own agendas, who are so quick to call this young victim a
>liar. Defending Kramer is not helping DragonCon.

This is a pretty warped sense of priorities. DragonCon's reputation, and
the reputation of all of fandom, is pretty damn trivial compared with the
other issues under discussion here.
--
Mitch Wagner

Danny Lieberman

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 2:31:12 AM10/3/00
to

> Detective C.L.Clemons of the Gwinnett County (GA) Police
>would like to hear from anyone else who has witnessed

>inappropriate behaviour by Ed Kramer with young boys
>(or children, in general):

> Many of the readers of this newsgroup have attended
>conventions where Ed Kramer was present. If you, too,
>have seen anything suspicious between Ed and any underage
>child, we strongly urge you to contact Detective Clemons.

>Joe Christ & Nancy A Collins


Joe and Nancy,

I'm saddened to see your post to this particular newsgroup and your
implied assumption of Ed Kramer's guilt. While the rasf regulars
have already jumped down your throats for what appears to be an
attack on your (former?) friend, I just feel sadness.

Its not that I need to defend Kramer, or his right to a fair hearing,
there are plenty here who can speak of his rights and the fact that
there are many questions about the case that we dont know.

By posting a trollish request with the phone number of the Gwinnett
Cty authorities, you appear to have turned on someone I thought was
your friend. Have the authorities asked for your help to bring
evidence against your pal?

Ive already seen announcements from the DragonCon committee stating
that they'll keep the convention afloat, despite what fate Ed faces.
So, I don't think the convention is the issue - DragonCon will remain.

Whatever happens to Ed Kramer, his life won't be the same, and he's
going to suffer, even if he is falsely accused. If the charges are
true, he will likely be punished. If it's true, I'll be sad for
the children involved as well.

I'm just surprised that you are trolling for information on "inappropriate
behavior", and it occurs to me that post above does not read like the
usual Joe Christ rant I'm used to. Did you really write that?

Well, Ive been to conventions where Ed Kramer was in attendance.
But all I remember was him promoting his own conventions, books,
and other projects he was involved with.

What you've missed since you're not a regular in this particular NG
is that a lot of people are willin to give Ed the benefit of the
doubt, and I for one hope he has good legal counsel, because in
Georgia he's going to need it.

Joe, can you explain?

Danny

--

Danny Lieberman
d...@panix.com

Doug Wickstrom

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 2:41:43 AM10/3/00
to
On 03 Oct 2000 04:11:13 GMT, Joe Christ <syl...@concentric.net>
excited the ether to say:

>
>"Keith F. Lynch" wrote:
>
>> Or if you witnessed inappropriate behavior by Joe Christ and/or Nancy
>> A Collins.
>>
>
>Yes, by all means. Luckily, no 13-year-old boys have accused either of us
>of sodomizing them, as is the case with Kramer.

Yet. I'm sure that if some prosecutor were to look hard enough
he might be able to find some. Janet Reno found plenty of
children willing to accuse innocents.

>> Sounds like the prosecution's case is falling apart if they have to go
>> trolling newsgroups in search of victims.
>>
>
>No, we're the ones issuing this call. We're both dismayed at the harm being
>done to DragonCon and the world of fandom by ill-informed people, with
>their own agendas, who are so quick to call this young victim a liar.
>Defending Kramer is not helping DragonCon.

You've actually come to the wrong place. alt.fandom.cons is down
the hall.

>> How many of us could survive such an inquisition unscathed?
>
>Those of us without child pornography in our possession would certainly
>have an advantage.

Define "child pornography." Can't, can you? Got any pictures at
all of your own children? Got any JC Penney's catalogs? You
too, have child pornography.

>> "Yes, officer, I witnessed Dr. Asimov carrying on like a dirty old
>> man. He also has a foreign sounding name. Better pick him up for
>> questioning. And check his home for inappropriate books, photographs,
>> movies, convention souvenir books, etc."
>
>Geez, what a moron.

Hardly. You, OTOH, are an off-topic drive-by. Your father is a
hamster and your mother smelt of elderberries.

--
Doug Wickstrom
"ISO 9000 is an attempt to turn everyone into bureaucrats. This works about
as well as attempts to turn bureaucrats into people." -- Samuel S. Paik

Doug Wickstrom

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/3/00
to
On 03 Oct 2000 04:22:24 GMT, Joe Christ <syl...@concentric.net>

excited the ether to say:

>While this may be a fantasy-oriented newsgroup,

In _your_ fantasy, maybe.

--
Doug Wickstrom
"I know, indeed, the evil of that I purpose; but my inclination gets the
better of my judgement." --Euripides


Elisabeth Carey

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/3/00
to
"Joe Christ" <syl...@concentric.net> wrote in message
news:39D95EBF...@concentric.net...
>
>
> Doug Faunt N6TQS +1-510-655-8604 wrote:
>
> > And you might contact him if you witnessed appropriate behavior, too.
>
> Why do something like that to the young victim?

Providing evidence that the accused may not be guilty is not "doing
something to the young victim"; it's part of the normal judicial process in
this country, where the accused gets a trial, including the right to present
evidence against the charges against him--and where the prosecution has to
prove guilt, not merely make the accusation and then proceed directly to the
sentencing.

> That would be like
> calling the fire department to tell them that your house isn't on fire.

If you know that someone has falsely called in a report that your house is
on fire, it's not merely appropriate, but your duty, at least morally and
possibly legally, to call and correct the false report, so that the
firefighters don't make that (always risky) high-speed trip to the alleged
scene unnecessarily.

> While this may be a fantasy-oriented newsgroup,

No, it's not. Paying attention to where you're posting might help you avoid
gaffs like that. And it's something of a disappointment to see someone who
is apparently a fan of some kind using "fantasy" as a pejorative this way.

> what's being discussed
> here is a real crime, with a real victim [or victims].

Alleged crime, alleged victim. None of us knows what really happened. At
thirteen, this boy is possibly old enough to make up a story like this as
revenge for something, and possibly still young enough to be manipulated
into it by an adult. Or, Ed Kramer may really have molested him. We don't
know. Certainly I don't know, and nothing that's been presented to the
public so far is sufficient to persuade me to abandon the presumption of
innocence.

> And Kramer isn't
> the victim here, he is the accused.

Yes, the _accused_. Not convicted. Not even tried, yet. We've so far seen
only highly colored accounts of what the police say is evidence against him
seized from his home--accounts which, so far, lack the specificity necessary
for us to judge for ourselves what's really been seized.

> Have you forgotten that there's a child who has told the police that
> Ed Kramer sodomized him?

There's a child who's made an accusation--perhaps on his own, perhaps under
considerable prompting from some adult. I remember my own childhood,
including the hell I went through with some of my "innocent" little
classmates, too clearly to presume that a thirteen-year-old is _necessarily_
too innocent to make such an accusation falsely. I've also followed some of
the most notorious child molestation cases while they collapsed, after
months or years, under the accumulating evidence that most or all of the
accusations involved in those cases were wholly the result of adult
manipulation of young children to get the children to testify to what the
adults thought they "already knew".

Very little that I've ever heard about Ed Kramer inspires me to think well
of him, but you'll just have to forgive me if I don't leap to the conclusion
that, because he's been accused of this particular heinous crime, he must
necessarily be guilty of it. This crime requires evidence and a trial and an
opportunity for him to defend himself, just as if he were accused of
embezzlement, or murder.

--

Lis Carey

Copyright 2000 by Elisabeth Carey. Any hyperlinks present in the text of
this message were added without my permission.


David G. Bell

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/3/00
to
On 03 Oct, in article <39D95C20...@concentric.net>
syl...@concentric.net "Joe Christ" wrote:

> No, we're the ones issuing this call. We're both dismayed at the harm being
> done to DragonCon and the world of fandom by ill-informed people, with
> their own agendas, who are so quick to call this young victim a liar.
> Defending Kramer is not helping DragonCon.

Defending Kramer is defending Kramer.

If the only way Dragoncon can be helped is by attacking Kramer, it isn't
worth helping.


--
David G. Bell -- Farmer, SF Fan, Filker, and Punslinger.

Copyright 2000 David G. Bell
The right to insert advertising material in the above text is reserved
to the author. The author did not use any form of HTML in the above text.
Any text following this line was added without the author's permission.


Chris Malme

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/3/00
to

>"Keith F. Lynch" wrote:
>
>> How many of us could survive such an inquisition unscathed?
>
>Those of us without child pornography in our possession would
>certainly have an advantage.

Are you asserting that Ed Kramer *did* have child pornography in his
possession?

Not in the latest news reports that I have read, he hadn't. Police were
quoted as saying they couldn't even catagorise anything they found as
hard-core.

Chris

Joe Christ

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/3/00
to

> This is a pretty warped sense of priorities. DragonCon's reputation, and
> the reputation of all of fandom, is pretty damn trivial compared with the
> other issues under discussion here.
> --
> Mitch Wagner

Yes, it's mind-boggling.


Joe Christ

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/3/00
to

Chris Malme wrote:

> Are you asserting that Ed Kramer *did* have child pornography in his
> possession?
>
> Not in the latest news reports that I have read, he hadn't. Police were
> quoted as saying they couldn't even catagorise anything they found as
> hard-core.
>

I know what the paper said; I've been speaking with the reporters daily.
Who do you think made sure that there were cameras at Kramer's bail
hearing? Child pornography is what they've found in his house, according to
the detective with whom we've been talking.
Besides, it's not as if anyone's opinion here matters to us; we know other
victims will come forward, we've even spoken to a few. That's why we're
posting here, to encourage more people to contact the police.
-Joe Christ


Joe Christ

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/3/00
to
No, I won't look back with embarrassment. It's not as if anyone's opinion

here matters to us; we know other victims will come forward, we've even
spoken to a few. That's why we're posting here, to encourage more people
to contact the police.
-Joe Christ

Joe Christ

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/3/00
to
Until a few years ago, that was the case. They actually arrested & convicted
a man for licking his wife's genitalia. But that has changed. For clarity's
sake, however, let's say from now on that the child has accused Kramer of
blowing him.

Joe Christ

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/3/00
to
We'd like the same thing...hence our call for more people, besides us,
who've witnessed activities on Kramer's part that the police should hear of.
I guess I should also say, if you know of something which exonerates Kramer,
please come forward, too.
-Joe Christ

Joe Christ

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/3/00
to
Hi Danny,
Yes, former friends of Ed Kramer is a good description of us. The Gwinnett County
police asked us to lend our names, so to speak, to the investigation, to help
encourage more people to come forward, especially those who are from outside the
Atlanta area.
Nancy spent several hours yesterday with the police, and another law enforcement
agency, and my turn with them is coming up. We're describing things to them which we
have seen, and so are many others.
We've been lurking here for years, especially given the recent developments with
Kramer. While RASF regulars may have their input about our posts, we're counting on
the other lurkers and others who will read what we say. Maybe there are many people
who are too embarrassed to say anything here, but will talk to someone in private
about it. That's our motivation here.
Trust me, this whole thing is a lot bigger and a lot nastier than most people can
fathom. For years we'd been defending Kramer against rumors of his being a child
molester, until we saw something that changed our minds, and made it impossible to
ever defend him again.
-Joe Christ

P Nielsen Hayden

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/3/00
to
On 03 Oct 2000 14:35:04 GMT,
Joe Christ <syl...@concentric.net> wrote:

>Trust me, this whole thing is a lot bigger and a lot nastier than
>most people can fathom. For years we'd been defending Kramer against
>rumors of his being a child molester, until we saw something that
>changed our minds, and made it impossible to ever defend him again.


As it happens, the way our legal system works is that we don't "trust
you," as you suggest we should. We have a trial and all that stuff.

Loren MacGregor

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/3/00
to
Joe Christ wrote:
>
> We'd like the same thing...hence our call for more people, besides us,
> who've witnessed activities on Kramer's part that the police should hear of.

Ah, so you've -personally- witnessed acts which you believe show
Kramer's guilt, but did not come forward until he was arrested?
Doesn't this make you an accessory?

-- LJM

Mary Kay Kare

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/3/00
to
In article <39D9E7F8...@concentric.net>, Joe Christ
<syl...@concentric.net> wrote:

> Chris Malme wrote:
>
> > Are you asserting that Ed Kramer *did* have child pornography in his
> > possession?
> >
> > Not in the latest news reports that I have read, he hadn't. Police were
> > quoted as saying they couldn't even catagorise anything they found as
> > hard-core.
> >
>
> I know what the paper said; I've been speaking with the reporters daily.
> Who do you think made sure that there were cameras at Kramer's bail
> hearing? Child pornography is what they've found in his house, according to
> the detective with whom we've been talking.

> Besides, it's not as if anyone's opinion here matters to us; we know other


> victims will come forward, we've even spoken to a few. That's why we're
> posting here, to encourage more people to contact the police.
> -Joe Christ

You might want to check out some posts in a recent thread on this topic.
What police and media consider/call child porn is frightening. One
example which particularly stuck in my mind was a video of a man's
daughter and her friends practicing gymnastics. I'd like a lot more than
the assurance that the police consider something porn before I believe
it. Like a description and why, exactly, they consider it to be child
porn.

MKK

--
Stamp out tin toys!

Dave Weingart

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/3/00
to
One day in Teletubbyland, Joe Christ <syl...@concentric.net> said:
> Have you forgotten that there's a child who has told the police that
>Ed Kramer sodomized him?

Nope, nor have we forgotten that an accusation does not meet the burden
of proof under the US system of justice. Nor, I suspect, have we
forgotten that the accusation may well be tainted by a number of things.

But I don't suppose you bother with little things like the constitution
of the United States.

--
73 de Dave Weingart KA2ESK Consonance 2001! Urban Tapestry!
mailto:phyd...@liii.com Mike Stein! Oh, yeah, and some guy
http://www.liii.com/~phydeaux named Dave Wein-something-or-other.
ICQ 57055207 http://www.consonance.org

fia...@cpcug.org

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/3/00
to
In article <slrn8tjse...@pnh-0.dsl.speakeasy.net>,

P Nielsen Hayden <p...@panix.com> wrote:
>On 03 Oct 2000 14:35:04 GMT,
> Joe Christ <syl...@concentric.net> wrote:
>
>>Trust me, this whole thing is a lot bigger and a lot nastier than
>>most people can fathom. For years we'd been defending Kramer against
>>rumors of his being a child molester, until we saw something that
>>changed our minds, and made it impossible to ever defend him again.
>
>
>As it happens, the way our legal system works is that we don't "trust
>you," as you suggest we should. We have a trial and all that stuff.
>
>

Just from a historical perspective, I wonder if worldcon committees will
allow Mr. Kramer's attendance.


Rich (who has no opinion on this matter [pending court proceedings], just
a knowledge of what happened in 1964)
====
MIMOSA web site: http://www.jophan.org/mimosa

Joe Christ

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/3/00
to
That's good. So, if anyone has something that they would like to
contribute for the trial, please come forward.
I spoke with Det Clemons for about an hour today, and apparently people
who read my posts are calling him with information and leads. That was
our intent, not a debate on the rights of the accused.
Again, anyone who knows anything, or has seen anything that would assist
in the investigation, please call Det Clemons: (770) 513-5355.
-Joe Christ


P Nielsen Hayden wrote:

> On 03 Oct 2000 14:35:04 GMT,
> Joe Christ <syl...@concentric.net> wrote:
>
> >Trust me, this whole thing is a lot bigger and a lot nastier than
> >most people can fathom. For years we'd been defending Kramer against
> >rumors of his being a child molester, until we saw something that
> >changed our minds, and made it impossible to ever defend him again.
>
> As it happens, the way our legal system works is that we don't "trust
> you," as you suggest we should. We have a trial and all that stuff.
>

Joe Christ

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/3/00
to
I'm not going to be on the jury for this particular case, so I'm not one of
the 12 people who has to presume Kramer to be innocent until he's proven
guilty.

I spoke with Det Clemons for about an hour today, and apparently people
who read my posts are calling him with information and leads. That was our
intent, not a debate on the rights of the accused.
Again, anyone who knows anything, or has seen anything that would assist in
the investigation, please call Det Clemons: (770) 513-5355.
-Joe Christ

Joe Christ

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/3/00
to
What we've seen wasn't criminal, but in light of the current investigation, it
is now relevant. We also have provided many leads which will help.
Anyone who knows us personally would know of our utter distaste for having to
speak with any law-enforcement agency.

I spoke with Det Clemons for about an hour today, and apparently people who
read my posts are calling him with information and leads. That was our intent, not
a debate on the rights of the accused.
Again, anyone who knows anything, or has seen anything that would assist in the
investigation, please call Det Clemons: (770) 513-5355.
-Joe Christ

Evelyn C. Leeper

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/3/00
to
In article <39DA0030...@concentric.net>,

Joe Christ <syl...@concentric.net> wrote:
> I'm not going to be on the jury for this particular case, so I'm not one of
> the 12 people who has to presume Kramer to be innocent until he's proven
> guilty.

If you think that the presumption of innocence applies only to the
twelve people on the jury, you are so confused that I can't see why I
should trust anything else you say.
--
Evelyn C. Leeper, http://www.geocities.com/evelynleeper
What is boredom? It is when there is simultaneously too much and not enough.
--Jean-Paul Sartre

Dave Weingart

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/3/00
to
One day in Teletubbyland, Joe Christ <syl...@concentric.net> said:
>I spoke with Det Clemons for about an hour today, and apparently people
>who read my posts are calling him with information and leads. That was

The lurkers support you in email?

P Nielsen Hayden

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/3/00
to
On Tue, 03 Oct 2000 15:40:57 GMT,
fia...@cpcug.org <fia...@cpcug.org> wrote:
>In article <slrn8tjse...@pnh-0.dsl.speakeasy.net>,
>P Nielsen Hayden <p...@panix.com> wrote:
>>On 03 Oct 2000 14:35:04 GMT,
>> Joe Christ <syl...@concentric.net> wrote:
>>
>>>Trust me, this whole thing is a lot bigger and a lot nastier than
>>>most people can fathom. For years we'd been defending Kramer against
>>>rumors of his being a child molester, until we saw something that
>>>changed our minds, and made it impossible to ever defend him again.
>>
>>
>>As it happens, the way our legal system works is that we don't "trust
>>you," as you suggest we should. We have a trial and all that stuff.
>>
>>
>
>Just from a historical perspective, I wonder if worldcon committees will
>allow Mr. Kramer's attendance.


Yes, but they'll make him buy a banquet ticket before he can watch the
Hugos.

Joe Christ

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/3/00
to
Who cares about whether or not they're supporting us? The important thing is
that they're calling Det Clemons.
-Joe Christ

Joe Christ

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/3/00
to
As I've stated, no one's opinion here matters to me. The purpose of the posting was
to encourage people to call Det Clemons, and it's working; people are calling him.
-Joe Christ

Kevin J. Maroney

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/3/00
to
Joe Christ <syl...@concentric.net> wrote:
>No, I won't look back with embarrassment. It's not as if anyone's opinion

>here matters to us; we know other victims will come forward, we've even
>spoken to a few. That's why we're posting here, to encourage more people
>to contact the police.

*plonk*

--
Kevin Maroney | kmar...@ungames.com
Kitchen Staff Supervisor, New York Review of Science Fiction
<http://www.nyrsf.com>

Dave Weingart

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/3/00
to
One day in Teletubbyland, Joe Christ <syl...@concentric.net> said:
> I'm not going to be on the jury for this particular case, so I'm not one of
>the 12 people who has to presume Kramer to be innocent until he's proven
>guilty.

I know I shouldn't get involved with a troll, I *know* I shouldn't, but...

I don't know Ed Kramer from a hole in the ground. I've never met the man,
never been to a Dragon*con, never ran into him in the fishing section
of the local K-Mart.

But.

You clearly have no clue whatsoever as to the nature of the term "innocent
until proven guilty." It doesn't reference the jury, the judge, the police,
you note.

A person is innocent of all charges unless clear and compelling proof beyond
a reasonable doubt is brought before the court. So, yes, you are in fact
one of the people who should assume innocence, as are all citizens.

Until you understand that fact, go away and study how the criminal justice
system works.

Vicki Rosenzweig

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/3/00
to
In article <39DA1844...@concentric.net>,
Joe Christ <syl...@concentric.net> wrote:
> As I've stated, no one's opinion here matters to me.

You've noted this repeatedly, so I hope you won't
mind this pointer:

http://www.bme.freeq.com/dib/01/index.html

Memo to my fellow rassefarians: this is a reminder that
anyone can have an odd reputation. It is not evidence
that Joe Christ has violated any law, nor is it intended
to suggest such.

--
Vicki Rosenzweig
v...@redbird.org | http://www.panix.com/~vr/


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

Joe Christ

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/3/00
to
I guess what I've seen is what's relevant. It's good enough for me and the
detective found it interesting and useful.

Avram Grumer

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/3/00
to
In article <8rd7dc$325$1...@cedar.ggn.net>, phyd...@liii.com wrote:

> You clearly have no clue whatsoever as to the nature of the term
> "innocent until proven guilty." It doesn't reference the jury,
> the judge, the police, you note.
>
> A person is innocent of all charges unless clear and compelling
> proof beyond a reasonable doubt is brought before the court. So,
> yes, you are in fact one of the people who should assume innocence,
> as are all citizens.
>
> Until you understand that fact, go away and study how the criminal
> justice system works.

I wasn't under the impression that Usenet discussion were part of the
criminal justice system.

I thought the way it worked was that the courts were required to consider
a person innocent till proven guilty, but that citizens chatting around
water coolers were could hold whatever opinions they wanted. Though wise
citizens will keep in mind that people do get falsely accused, and that
lots of distorted information tends to come out of police stations and
district attorneys' offices, especially when the accusation involves sex
or an alleged crime against children, and doubly especially when it
involves both.

--
Avram Grumer | av...@grumer.org | http://www.PigsAndFishes.org

"I think anybody who doesn't think I'm smart enough to handle the job
is underestimating." -- George W. Bush, quoted in U.S. News & World
Report, 3 April 2000

Ed Dravecky III

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/3/00
to
Joe Christ <syl...@concentric.net> wrote:
> I know what the paper said; I've been speaking with the
> reporters daily. Who do you think made sure that there were
> cameras at Kramer's bail hearing?

Are you implying that it was you, Joe?

> Child pornography is what they've found in his house, according

> to the detective with whom we've been talking. Besides, it's not
> as if anyone's opinion here matters to us; we know other victims


> will come forward, we've even spoken to a few. That's why we're
> posting here, to encourage more people to contact the police.

So you're on a witchhunt, possibly acting as an "agent" of the
police, and you state flat out that "it's not as if anyone's
opinion here matters to us" on rasff. You're a dessert topping
*and* a floor wax. <plonk>

--
Ed Dravecky III
(ed3 at panix.com)

Ed Dravecky III

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/3/00
to
Joe Christ <syl...@concentric.net> wrote:
> I spoke with Det Clemons for about an hour today, and apparently
> people who read my posts are calling him with information and leads.
> That was our intent, not a debate on the rights of the accused.
> Again, anyone who knows anything, or has seen anything that would
> assist in the investigation, please call Det Clemons: (770) 513-5355.

Conversely, if you know of *anything* that might call into question
the character or motives of "Joe Christ" in the minds of the good
people of Gwinnett County, please be sure to let the detective know of
that information, too. Joe says he has nothing to hide so I'm sure
that all of his art and posessions are due for a tumble by Georgia's
finest. It would make for exciting articles in the AJC featuring the
people leading the charge against Ed, wouldn't it? I think it would.

Bernard Peek

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/3/00
to
In article <39D9E7F8...@concentric.net>, Joe Christ
<syl...@concentric.net> writes

>
>
>Chris Malme wrote:
>
>> Are you asserting that Ed Kramer *did* have child pornography in his
>> possession?
>>
>> Not in the latest news reports that I have read, he hadn't. Police were
>> quoted as saying they couldn't even catagorise anything they found as
>> hard-core.
>>
>
>I know what the paper said; I've been speaking with the reporters daily.
>Who do you think made sure that there were cameras at Kramer's bail
>hearing? Child pornography is what they've found in his house, according to

>the detective with whom we've been talking.
>Besides, it's not as if anyone's opinion here matters to us; we know other
>victims will come forward, we've even spoken to a few. That's why we're
>posting here, to encourage more people to contact the police.
>-Joe Christ

Get back under that bridge!

--
Bernard Peek
b...@shrdlu.com
b...@shrdlu.co.uk

Joe Christ

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/3/00
to
Ed Dravecky III wrote:

> Are you implying that it was you, Joe?

Not implying: stating. Both Nancy & I contacted the media on the day
before the bail hearing.

> So you're on a witchhunt, possibly acting as an "agent" of the
> police, and you state flat out that "it's not as if anyone's
> opinion here matters to us" on rasff. You're a dessert topping
> *and* a floor wax. <plonk>
>

No witch hunt, just encouraging people who know something that may aid
the investigation to come forward. If you know something which may
exonerate Kramer, by all means, come forward with that, too. I'm
perfectly comfortable with my actions thus far.
-Joe Christ

Joe Christ

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/3/00
to
We've told the authorities up front about the content of my movies, that my
most recent one was edited in Kramer's office at the Dept of Education,
about my constant marijuana use, the fact that I hang out with known
criminals. Maybe they'll come after me later. But, for now, anyone with
information about the Ed Kramer case should come forward.
-Joe Christ


Ed Dravecky III wrote:

Evelyn C. Leeper

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/3/00
to
In article <39DA3720...@concentric.net>,

Joe Christ <syl...@concentric.net> wrote:
>
> No witch hunt, just encouraging people who know something that may aid
> the investigation to come forward. If you know something which may
> exonerate Kramer, by all means, come forward with that, too. I'm
> perfectly comfortable with my actions thus far.

No, you did not encourage people who know something that may aid


the investigation to come forward.

What you posted was:

o> Detective C.L.Clemons of the Gwinnett County (GA) Police
o> would like to hear from anyone else who has witnessed
o> inappropriate behaviour by Ed Kramer with young boys
o> (or children, in general):
o> ...
o> Many of the readers of this newsgroup have attended
o> conventions where Ed Kramer was present. If you, too,
o> have seen anything suspicious between Ed and any underage
o> child, we strongly urge you to contact Detective Clemons.

This is a far cry from asking people to aid the investigation.

Loren Joseph MacGregor

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/3/00
to
In rec.arts.sf.fandom, Joe Christ <syl...@concentric.net> wrote:

>I know what the paper said; I've been speaking with the reporters daily.
>Who do you think made sure that there were cameras at Kramer's bail
>hearing?

You know, this begins to sounds as if you orchestrated the whole thing.

-- LJM

mike

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/3/00
to
On 3 Oct 2000 04:55:29 GMT, p...@panix.com (P Nielsen Hayden) typed

>On 03 Oct 2000 04:22:24 GMT,
> Joe Christ <syl...@concentric.net> wrote:
>
>
>>And Kramer isn't the victim here, he is the accused.
>
>
>I suppose I need to reiterate here that I don't actually like Ed
>Kramer much at all, and that if he's guilty I think he should be
>convicted.
>
>That said, the statement that "X isn't the victim here, he is the
>accused" would have sounded perfectly natural coming from Torquemada.
>
>Since I basically like people and tend to trust in the idea that
>moral progress will happen, by hook or crook, I trust that whatever
>the outcome of the Kramer case, Joe Christ will eventually look back
>on this post with exquisite embarrassment. I'm embarrassed for him
>already.
>
I doubt it.

A quick Google on "joe christ" and "fetish" gave 33 hits, of which
this is an excerpt from the second found (since the time of the
article, JC and NAC have moved to Atlanta, where, last i heard, he
runs/ran occasional fetish shows at "The Chamber", local goth/fetish
club {or so i am informed; i haven't checked it out personally):

*******************************************

http://bme.freeq.com/news/softtoy/010/

Meanwhile, back at the raunch, the spectre of Harry VonGroff lives on
in The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, where penile amputee Joe Christ
-- who resides in Lancaster with spouse Nancy A. Collins, the
"extreme-horror" writer -- continues to make headlines...if only on
Usenet.

Those who remember Joe Christ's observations that the NYPD officers
now on trial for feloniously invading the rectum of Abner Louima
"contaminated a perfectly good plunger" will not be surprised by the
penectomized underground-video star's recent attempts to cash in on
the Columbine High School massacre.

"Joe Christ weighed in with His mighty opinion", revealed writer Lisa
Rose of The Star-Ledger, New Jersey's largest newspaper. "He was
responding to a post I put in alt.goth regarding the Colorado
shooting."

Joe Christ's numerous observations in alt.goth on the Columbine
massacre are clearly the bruised fruit of Mr. and Mrs. Nancy A.
Collins' own ignominious experience in the Denver area, culminating
several years ago in a pepper-spray attack on the nihilistic nullo at
a bar where Boyd Rice was deejaying.

Joe Christ, whose credentials as an applied-thanatology pundit include
the video "sex-comedy" Is It Snuff? You Decide! -- in which "a
screen-test for a low-budget porn flick quickly turns to rape, murder
& necrophilia" -- offered up this newsflash from the goth frontiers::
".... since I don't own a black trench coat, I had to borrow one from
my wife, to go to WalMart..."

****************************************

And this:

http://www.spectatoronline.com/1999/020699/headliners.html

GOT A FETISH?

Subversive filmmaker Joe Christ makes a triumphant return to Garner
this weekend. If big budget fluff movies aren't your ticket to film
fantasies, try out a Joe Christ flick. With titles like Sex, Blood and
Mutilation - featuring the multi-pierced genitalia of Genesis P.
Orridge - and Amy Strangled A Child, these movies aren't for the
squeamish.

Avoid the big crowds of the multiplex movie theaters and give
underground cinema a try. Go on... I dare ya.

***************************************************

The "spectator", BTW, is North Carolina publication of the "Creative
Loafing" group, whose Atlanta organ "Flamingauto" has been so happy to
quote to us from.

**************************************************

This excerpted quote involving a story apparently about JC himself:
http://www.sexpositive.com/SPIweb/essays/production_essays/shannon_larratt.htm

Interview With Body Modification Ezine Editor - Shannon Larratt
Written by: Raven Rowanchilde

BME: And you’ve also faced some legal risks by publishing the
"Dickless In Babylon" serial?

SHANNON: I’ve faced the threat thereof at least. However, whenever
I’ve need the writer Mark Kramer to provide corroboration for his
facts, he has done so at length. And whenever Joe Christ has tried to
refute it, his facts have either turned out to be false or
nonexistent. I have done everything I can to allow Joe Christ to
present his side of the story, but he doesn’t seem to want to.


********************************
Joe Christ's DragonCon bio:
http://www.dragoncon.org/people/christj.html

Joe Christ's Website:
http://geocities.com/joechrist.geo/
==========================================================
The man who sets out to carry a cat by its tail learns
something that will always be useful and which never will
grow dim or doubtful. -- Mark Twain.

mike

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/3/00
to
On 3 Oct 2000 04:55:29 GMT, p...@panix.com (P Nielsen Hayden) typed

>On 03 Oct 2000 04:22:24 GMT,
> Joe Christ <syl...@concentric.net> wrote:
>
>
>>And Kramer isn't the victim here, he is the accused.
>
>
>I suppose I need to reiterate here that I don't actually like Ed
>Kramer much at all, and that if he's guilty I think he should be
>convicted.
>
>That said, the statement that "X isn't the victim here, he is the
>accused" would have sounded perfectly natural coming from Torquemada.
>
>Since I basically like people and tend to trust in the idea that
>moral progress will happen, by hook or crook, I trust that whatever
>the outcome of the Kramer case, Joe Christ will eventually look back
>on this post with exquisite embarrassment. I'm embarrassed for him
>already.
>

See my post (under the title "Why Joe Christ Will Not Be
Embarrassed...")

mike

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/3/00
to
On Tue, 03 Oct 2000 05:22:40 GMT, uaob...@earthlink.net (Ulrika
O'Brien) typed


>and the conflation might be regarded as a deliberate attempt to
>excite emotional responses.
>
No! You don't suppose...?!

Andrew Plotkin

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/3/00
to
Joe Christ <syl...@concentric.net> wrote:
> Who cares about whether or not they're supporting us? The important thing is
> that they're calling Det Clemons.

That's important, but it's only *good* if they're giving true
information. If they're lying, it's important and bad.

I don't know you, I don't know Ed Kramer, and I don't know anything
about the case except what's been posted here. But I know damn well that
it can be just as easy to get false accusations as true accusations,
when you go out trolling for dirt.

--Z

"And Aholibamah bare Jeush, and Jaalam, and Korah: these were the
borogoves..."

mike

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/3/00
to
On 03 Oct 2000 14:35:04 GMT, Joe Christ <syl...@concentric.net>
typed

>Hi Danny,
> Yes, former friends of Ed Kramer is a good description of us. The Gwinnett County
>police asked us to lend our names, so to speak, to the investigation, to help
>encourage more people to come forward, especially those who are from outside the
>Atlanta area.

Oh, *that's* why Nancy was feeding me inflammatory "information" in
e-mail and saying "if you want to post this, go ahead, but please
don't mention my name". I don't like attempts to use me as a catspaw,
and i didn't publish it.

((Nancy and i have not even *communicated* since i ran into her at the
1995 [i think it was] JazzFest in New Orleans, and suddenly here she
was sending me these long e-mails...))

And, of course, it's just a co-incidence that "flamingauto", and
obvious sock puppet, published exactly that info here when i decided i
didn't want to be a tool of someone with a vendetta, for whatever
reason.

What's up? Get in trouble for something yourself with the local
polizei and offer to give up someone bigger than you?

Marilee J. Layman

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/3/00
to
On 03 Oct 2000 14:07:54 GMT, Joe Christ <syl...@concentric.net>
wrote:

>I know what the paper said; I've been speaking with the reporters daily.


>Who do you think made sure that there were cameras at Kramer's bail

>hearing? Child pornography is what they've found in his house, according to
>the detective with whom we've been talking.
>Besides, it's not as if anyone's opinion here matters to us; we know other
>victims will come forward, we've even spoken to a few. That's why we're
>posting here, to encourage more people to contact the police.

What's your stake in this? Why do you want Ed found guilty?

--
Marilee J. Layman The Other*Worlds*Cafe
HOSTE...@aol.com A Science Fiction Discussion Group.
AOL Keyword: OWC http://www.webmoose.com/owc

Joel Rosenberg

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/3/00
to
>>>>> In article <39D9EE56...@concentric.net>, Joe Christ <syl...@concentric.net> writes:

Joe> motivation here. Trust me, this whole thing is a lot bigger
Joe> and a lot nastier than most people can fathom.

Okay, I trust you. But I don't trust you enough to waive what I think
is merely a civilized suspension of judgment about Ed Kramer's
supposed guilt, and I'm sort of surprised that you'd think that
anybody should.

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
This is my .sig file.
There are many like it, but this one is mine.
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Joel Rosenberg

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/3/00
to
>>>>> In article <97060346...@rexx.com>, Andrew Plotkin <erky...@eblong.com> writes:

Andrew> Joe Christ <syl...@concentric.net> wrote:
>> Who cares about whether or not they're supporting us? The
>> important thing is that they're calling Det Clemons.

Andrew> That's important, but it's only *good* if they're giving
Andrew> true information. If they're lying, it's important and
Andrew> bad.

It's also bad if they're giving true, but irrelevant albeit apparently
inculpatory information.

Marilee J. Layman

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/3/00
to
On 3 Oct 2000 18:54:09 GMT, Ed Dravecky III <e...@panix.com> wrote:

>Joe Christ <syl...@concentric.net> wrote:
>> I spoke with Det Clemons for about an hour today, and apparently
>> people who read my posts are calling him with information and leads.
>> That was our intent, not a debate on the rights of the accused.
>> Again, anyone who knows anything, or has seen anything that would
>> assist in the investigation, please call Det Clemons: (770) 513-5355.
>
>Conversely, if you know of *anything* that might call into question
>the character or motives of "Joe Christ" in the minds of the good
>people of Gwinnett County, please be sure to let the detective know of
>that information, too. Joe says he has nothing to hide so I'm sure
>that all of his art and posessions are due for a tumble by Georgia's
>finest. It would make for exciting articles in the AJC featuring the
>people leading the charge against Ed, wouldn't it? I think it would.

I've been wondering if he was given immunity for his own works if he
helps the detectives against Kramer.

Joel Rosenberg

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/3/00
to
>>>>> In article <39DA0030...@concentric.net>, Joe Christ <syl...@concentric.net> writes:

Joe> I'm not going to be on the jury for this particular case,
Joe> so I'm not one of the 12 people who has to presume Kramer to
Joe> be innocent until he's proven guilty.

And that's fair enough. But I would hope that you're one of the
270,000,000 or so US citizens who should understand that a rush to
judgment is unfair, unseemly, unAmerican, and all too common.

Ed Dravecky III

unread,
Oct 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM10/3/00