Ed Kramer case in Georgia
Joe Christ
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
And you might contact him if you witnessed appropriate behavior, too.
73, doug
Joel Rosenberg
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
> Detective C.L.Clemons of the Gwinnett County (GA) Police would like
> to hear from anyone else who has witnessed inappropriate behaviour
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
[...]
> 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
"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
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
>
> 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
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
>
> 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
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
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
<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
>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
> 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
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
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
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
>
> > 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
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
>"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
> 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
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
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
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
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
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
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
>
> 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
<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
> 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
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
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
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
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
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
>who read my posts are calling him with information and leads. That was
The lurkers support you in email?
P Nielsen Hayden
fia...@cpcug.org <fia...@cpcug.org> wrote:
>In article <slrn8tjse...@pnh-0.dsl.speakeasy.net>,
>>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.
>>
>>
>
>allow Mr. Kramer's attendance.
Yes, but they'll make him buy a banquet ticket before he can watch the
Hugos.
Joe Christ
that they're calling Det Clemons.
-Joe Christ
Joe Christ
to encourage people to call Det Clemons, and it's working; people are calling him.
-Joe Christ
Kevin J. Maroney
>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
>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
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
detective found it interesting and useful.
Avram Grumer
> 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
> 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
> I spoke with Det Clemons for about an hour today, and apparently
> people who read my posts are calling him with information and leads.
> 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
>
>
>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.
>>
>
>Who do you think made sure that there were cameras at Kramer's bail
>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.
Get back under that bridge!
--
Bernard Peek
b...@shrdlu.com
b...@shrdlu.co.uk
Joe Christ
> 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
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
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
>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
>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
>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
O'Brien) typed
>and the conflation might be regarded as a deliberate attempt to
>excite emotional responses.
>
No! You don't suppose...?!
Andrew Plotkin
> 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
>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
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
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
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
>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
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
<snip>
> I've been wondering if he was given immunity for his own works if he
> helps the detectives against Kramer.
I sure hope Ed's defense attorney sees this thread and Joe's
apparent admissions of criminal activity. Joe is setting himself
up to be one of the most impeachable witnesses in Georgia history.
(Oh, wait, do I smell a deal cooked up with the prosecutors?)
--
Ed Dravecky III (ed3 at panix.com)
Webmaster of http://www.deathsheep.com/
Keith Thompson
[...]
> 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.
That doesn't match my understanding of what "innocent until proven
guilty" means.
Suppose I rob a bank. I'm guilty of that crime from the moment I
commit it. It's the job of the court system to determine whether I'm
guilty. As part of that job, the court (particularly the jury) is
required to *presume* my innocence until and unless my guilt is proven
beyond a reasonable doubt.
You, as a private citizen, are under no legal obligation to make any
presumption at any time. If you saw me rob the bank, or even if you
just don't like my face, you're free to presume that I'm guilty --
even if I'm acquitted. Or you're free to presume that I'm not guilty
(i.e., that I didn't commit the crime) even if I'm convicted.
As a matter of common human decency, it would be nice if you didn't
jump to conclusions about my guilt in the absence of evidence, but
there's no legal requirement.
I'm not basing this on any legal documents, just my own common sense.
If you can refute this, by all means do so.
(Note that the concepts of "innocent until proven guilty" and "beyond
reasonable doubt" do not appear in the U.S. Constitution, including
the Bill of Rights. I believe they come to us from English common
law.)
--
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.
Kip Williams
>
> 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.
They support him in e-mail.
--
--Kip (Williams)
amusing the world at http://members.home.net/kipw/
Irv Koch
<snip>
> runs/ran occasional fetish shows at "The Chamber", local goth/fetish
> club {or so i am informed; i haven't checked it out personally):
The club is around the corner from The SF & Mystery Book Shop, Ltd. I
went in there at least once to check it out. It appeared to be more
"fetish" than "goth," but, in general, your information was correct.
Michael Benveniste
> Ulrika O'Brien wrote:
> > 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.
>
> 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.
If it's changed, not very much. Sodomy outside of marriage is still good
for 1-20 in the Georgia slammer. Code section 16-6-2 defines sodomy as:
(a) A person commits the offense of sodomy when he or she performs
or submits to any sexual act involving the sex organs of one person
and the mouth or anus of another. A person commits the offense of
aggravated sodomy when he or she commits sodomy with force and
against the will of the other person or when he or she commits
sodomy with a person who is less than ten years of age. The fact
that the person allegedly sodomized is the spouse of a defendant
shall not be a defense to a charge of aggravated sodomy.
Source:
http://www.ganet.org/cgi-bin/pub/ocode/ocgsearch?docname=OCode/G/16/6/2
--
Michael Benveniste -- m...@webwhat.com
Any comments or statements made are not necessarily those of any
employer or client, their subsidiaries, or affiliates.
Janice Gelb
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.
>
I have been reading about this here and on one other fan-oriented
list. None of the people discussing this case in those arenas
fall into the category of "ill-informed people... who are so quick
to call this young victim a liar." (Although I have seen a few
people who have been quick to call Ed Kramer a liar in claiming
that he's innocent.)
What I have seen the majority of people saying is that we don't
know all the facts, we haven't seen the evidence, and we should
not be making judgments until we do.
And DragonCon is a total red herring: I have not seen any
accusations that indicate that any incidents occurred at
DragonCon; Ed's innocence or guilt should not affect the
convention in that sense. You seem to be claiming above
that if we all jump on some "Ed's an evil pervert"
bandwagon, this will somehow help DragonCon. I don't
see how.
I'm not saying here either that Ed is as pure as the driven
snow or guilty as sin: I'm saying that we don't know. And
that I doubt greatly that it's purely a concern for the
"young victim," or for DragonCon, that is the motive for
you trolling far and wide to help the police gather evidence
against Ed.
***********************************************************************
Janice Gelb | The only connection Sun has with
janic...@marvin.eng.sun.com | this message is the return address.
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/8018/index.html
"Politics is show business for ugly people" -- James Carville
Doug Wickstrom
excited the ether to say:
> 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.
You're repeating yourself. You're repeating yourself. You're
repeating yourself. You're repeating yourself. You're repeating
yourself. You're repeating yourself. You're repeating yourself.
You're repeating yourself. You're repeating yourself. You're
repeating yourself. You're repeating yourself. You're repeating
yourself. You're repeating yourself. You're repeating yourself.
<Plonk!>
--
Doug Wickstrom
"People that are really very weird can get into sensitive positions and have
a tremendous impact on history." --Dan Quayle
Thomas Galloway
P Nielsen Hayden <p...@panix.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 03 Oct 2000 15:40:57 GMT,
> fia...@cpcug.org <fia...@cpcug.org> wrote:
>>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.
On the other hand, since DragonCon is the same weekend as at least the
next three Worldcons, only Charlotte in 2004 if it wins, and, assuming
their bid is not for Labor Day weekend, Glasgow in 2005 will have to worry
about this act which could Throw All Fandom Into War.
tyg t...@panix.com
Paula Lieberman
news:8rdv03$6bf$1...@panix3.panix.com...
You're assuming that DragonCon doesn't declare him persona non grata and
make it stick, though.
>
> tyg t...@panix.com
Doug Berry
Christ <syl...@concentric.net>, wrote thusly:
>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.
I have seen Ed Kramer heal the sick, walk on water, and receive
the divine touch from Heaven.
Where do you want me to go?
Or perhaps I should just refer the entire M*C flamefest to Ed's
lawyers, to show that there have been previous attempts to
slander him with false accusations of this sort.
--
Douglas E. Berry grid...@mindspring.com
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as
when they do it from religious conviction."
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Pense'es, #894.
Doug Berry
Christ <syl...@concentric.net>, wrote thusly:
>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.
LOL! And you think they're taking you seriously? I'm just
picturing your cross-examination, as Ed's trial lawyer takes
apart your credibility as a witness and feeds it to the dogs.
Doug Berry
Dravecky III <e...@panix.com>, wrote thusly:
>I sure hope Ed's defense attorney sees this thread and Joe's
>apparent admissions of criminal activity. Joe is setting himself
>up to be one of the most impeachable witnesses in Georgia history.
>(Oh, wait, do I smell a deal cooked up with the prosecutors?)
That would be the icing on the cake. After asking Joe about his
credibility as a witness, asking him if he has made a deal with
the DA to avoid prosecution would sink everything he said.
Avedon Carol
wrote:
>"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.
According to newspaper reports, the boy originally denied any such
thing. A lot of tragic cases are the result of young people being
pressured into giving false evidence.
>> 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.
Another neat trick often used by "protectors" of children - kids never
lie, even under pressure. But anyone with any sense knows that kids
will be happy to fabricate in order to tell adults what they want to
hear. That doesn't make the kid "a liar"; it could make you or the
boy's mother exploiters, though.
>> How many of us could survive such an inquisition unscathed?
>
>Those of us without child pornography in our possession would certainly
>have an advantage.
A careful reading of the reports shows that so far the supposed "child
porn" appears to be kids posing around while partially clothed. That
may turn you on, but to me it isn't pornographic. Those of us who
assume such pictures are "child pornography" are much more likely to
be child molesters than those of us who don't.
>> "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.
Thank you for that closely-reasoned refutation; we are stunned by your
intellectual rigor.
mike weber
<mjla...@erols.com> typed
>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?
>
Do a Google on, oh, say "Joe Christ" and "fetish". Or maybe just on
"joe christ".
Check the DragonCon participants list online.
DragonCon has, for some time, had a very sleezy side, and JC has been
part of it.
This sounds like an attempt to distance himself from Ed.
mike weber
typed
>
>If it's changed, not very much. Sodomy outside of marriage is still good
>for 1-20 in the Georgia slammer. Code section 16-6-2 defines sodomy as:
>
> (a) A person commits the offense of sodomy when he or she performs
> or submits to any sexual act involving the sex organs of one person
> and the mouth or anus of another. A person commits the offense of
> aggravated sodomy when he or she commits sodomy with force and
> against the will of the other person or when he or she commits
> sodomy with a person who is less than ten years of age. The fact
> that the person allegedly sodomized is the spouse of a defendant
> shall not be a defense to a charge of aggravated sodomy.
>
>Source:
>http://www.ganet.org/cgi-bin/pub/ocode/ocgsearch?docname=OCode/G/16/6/2
>
But only if you're gay, based on past history -- which included a
Supreme Court ruling that the State of Georgia *could* selectively
enforce the sodomy laws against gays.
mike weber
<irv...@pop.a001.sprintmail.com> typed
I know exactly where the club is. I know some habitues, though we've
been out of touch.
Deb Geisler
>
> And lo, it came to pass on 03 Oct 2000 14:15:07 GMT that Joe
> >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.
>
> I have seen Ed Kramer heal the sick, walk on water, and receive
> the divine touch from Heaven.
>
> Where do you want me to go?
>
> Or perhaps I should just refer the entire M*C flamefest to Ed's
> lawyers, to show that there have been previous attempts to
> slander him with false accusations of this sort.
Actually, given the Court's acceptance of what constitutes "publication" in
defamation cases, Mr. Christ's comments fall into the category of "libel" if
they may be proven false.
Although I'm not a great fan of Mr. Kramer, I consider attempts to massacre
the reputation of someone who is unable to defend himself (even if it is
because he is a guest of the Georgia prison system) as contemptable as Doug
Berry does.
--
Deb Geisler
Department of Communication & Journalism
Suffolk University
Boston, MA 02114
Voice: 617.573.8504
Email: dgei...@acad.suffolk.edu
"Sure, everyone always said 'Socrates what is the meaning of life?' or
'Socrates how can I find happiness?' But did anyone ever say 'Socrates
hemlock is poison.'???"
-Socrates, minutes before death
Marilee J. Layman
weber) wrote:
>On Tue, 03 Oct 2000 17:19:02 -0400, Marilee J. Layman
><mjla...@erols.com> typed
>
>>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?
>>
>Do a Google on, oh, say "Joe Christ" and "fetish". Or maybe just on
>"joe christ".
Yes, I already know this. He used to advertise his movies here.
Ray Radlein
>
> fia...@cpcug.org <fia...@cpcug.org> wrote:
> >
> >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.
*Sigh*. There are disadvantages to getting online and posting so late:
A good straight line has to survive so many hours of online existence
to still be around when I get to it. *Sigh*.
- Ray R.
--
**********************************************************************
"LOS ANGELES: A city of millions; thousands more are born each day.
Some in maternity wards, some in creche incubators. The Artificial
ones don't have civil rights, but they still need the law. That's
why they turn to me. My name is Friday. I carry a badge."
-- Robert A. Heinlein's "Dragnet"
Ray Radlein - r...@learnlink.emory.edu
homepage coming soon! wooo, wooo.
**********************************************************************
Michael Brashier
I met Kramer a few years ago while on "staff" at DragonCon (photographer).
While I did not think that he was very organized, that's all.
You like to think that if someone can do something as evil as what he is
accused of doing,
that you can see it in them. It kinda rattles me that I did not see
anything.
In a way I hope he is found innocent, just to restore my faith in my own
judgment.
Joe Christ wrote:
> 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
Martin Wisse
> 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.
It sounds like somebody who has already made up his mind about the guilt
of Mr. Kramer or who wants to believe he's guilty because he has his own
agenda..
Nasty.
Martin Wisse
Avedon Carol
wrote:
>Ulrika O'Brien wrote:
>
>> 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.
>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.
So, in other words, you _did_ use the word "sodomized" to obscure the
fact that he isn't even accused of fucking anyone.
Batting .1000 so far - child porn that isn't porn, sodomy that isn't
sodomy, a girlfriend who wasn't a girlfriend...and what else that
isn't as claimed?
Avedon Carol
wrote:
>> 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.
One of which is the pre-judgement of Ed Kramer being created by a lot
of innuendo including unsubstantiated claims that he had "child porn",
and the other of which is the harm that is apparently being done to
his alleged victim by putting him through the legal circus, apparently
against his will.
Avedon Carol
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?
So you are the person who has been going out of his way to make sure
that Kramer gets tried in the media, and that even if he is innocent,
his life will be ruined by an accusation that was widely reported?
>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.
Yeah, no pre-judgment there, huh?
Avedon Carol
wrote:
>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.
You should be ashamed.
>> 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.
God spoke to me last night and told me Kramer was innocent, and now
he's really got it in for you.
Avedon Carol
weber) wrote:
>DragonCon has, for some time, had a very sleezy side, and JC has been
>part of it.
>This sounds like an attempt to distance himself from Ed.
"I may be a pervert, but at least I'm not one of _them_!"
Avedon Carol
wrote:
>I guess what I've seen is what's relevant. It's good enough for me and the
>detective found it interesting and useful.
That'd be the same detective who described as "child porn" what others
have described as videos of movie try-outs?
Makes me wonder what dark thing you've "seen". Ed Kramer actually
talking to a minor without use of baby-talk? Ed Kramer letting kids
pester him into taking their picture? Ed Kramer offering a kid a
stick of gum? I mean, c'mon, what's so suspicious about this guy that
we should all be trying to get him lynched?
David G. Bell
e...@panix.com "Ed Dravecky III" wrote:
> Marilee J. Layman <mjla...@erols.com> wrote:
> <snip>
> > I've been wondering if he was given immunity for his own works if he
> > helps the detectives against Kramer.
>
> I sure hope Ed's defense attorney sees this thread and Joe's
> apparent admissions of criminal activity. Joe is setting himself
> up to be one of the most impeachable witnesses in Georgia history.
> (Oh, wait, do I smell a deal cooked up with the prosecutors?)
If I were a DA seeking re-election, I wouldn't touch this case with the
proverbial bargepole. There's enough been said about the parties in
this case to really make the shit hit the fan if a smart news reporter
were to come across it.
--
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.
Irv Koch
<snip re Ed Kramer being excluded from cons>
> You're assuming that DragonCon doesn't declare him persona non grata and
> make it stick, though.
That they won't, is a good assumption, based on knowledge of who runs
D*C and following alt.fandom.dragoncon -- being kept off the board or
high position is another story.
David G. Bell
<ttvlts46ibfblhun3...@4ax.com>
ave...@thirdworld.uk "Avedon Carol" wrote:
> On Wed, 04 Oct 2000 02:02:34 GMT, kras...@mindspring.com (mike
> weber) wrote:
>
> >DragonCon has, for some time, had a very sleezy side, and JC has been
> >part of it.
>
> >This sounds like an attempt to distance himself from Ed.
>
> "I may be a pervert, but at least I'm not one of _them_!"
As you may know, the term "Purity Test" refers to a type of detailed,
rather smutty, questionnaire listing a wide variety of sexual, and other
controversial, personal acts, for which points are scored by positive
answers.
May I present for your delectation the official
Georgia Purity Test.
Read the following list of activities. If you have ever done one of the
listed activities, record the points listed against the activity. At
the end of the test, total the points you have been awarded.
If you have been awarded 1000 or more points, you are a depraved,
repulsive, sicko, who should be locked up to protect Society.
Have you ever had thoughts, or committed acts, of a sexual nature,
whether or not there was the intent to enjoy such acts or thoughts?
1000 points.
Are you black?
1 point.
Are you Jewish?
1 point.
Are you a Damn Yankee?
999 points.
paghat
Ed Kramer helping sell a film by Joe Christ called "Amy Strangles a Small
Child" that makes a pornographic joke out of the violent deaths of
children?
Kip Williams
"Look at the low-life scum he hangs out with, detective -- me! That
should prove he's beyond redemption."
--
--Kip (Williams)
amusing the world at http://members.home.net/kipw/
Mitch Wagner
<39DB062B...@earthlink.net>:
>You know what bothers me about this whole Kramer thing?
>I met Kramer a few years ago while on "staff" at DragonCon (photographer).
>While I did not think that he was very organized, that's all.
>You like to think that if someone can do something as evil as what he is
>accused of doing,
>that you can see it in them. It kinda rattles me that I did not see
>anything.
Perhaps you didn't see anything because there was nothing there to see.
--
Mitch Wagner
Mitch Wagner
<39D9FF33...@concentric.net>:
> That was
>our intent, not a debate on the rights of the accused.
By all means, we wouldn't want to get distracted by discussion of
trivial matters of rights of the accused as we get on with the real
important business of making sure the noose is tied nice and tight.
--
Mitch Wagner
Mitch Wagner
>I guess what I've seen is what's relevant. It's good enough for me and
>the detective found it interesting and useful.
Joe, it does not seem to me to be possible that you could have seen
something that led you to believe Ed Kramer is a child molester - but which
would have only had that effect AFTER he'd been charged with the crime.
Either you saw him diddling a child, or you saw him trying to do so, or you
didn't.
If what you saw could be interpreted ambiguously at the time you saw it,
then it would STILL be ambiguous after he was charged.
--
Mitch Wagner
Mitch Wagner
<pqfjts4vr4i6r4gic...@4ax.com>:
>>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.
>
>Another neat trick often used by "protectors" of children - kids never
>lie, even under pressure. But anyone with any sense knows that kids
>will be happy to fabricate in order to tell adults what they want to
>hear. That doesn't make the kid "a liar"; it could make you or the
>boy's mother exploiters, though.
Actually, I'll go a step further and say that kids are natural liars.
Anyone who's spent any time around kids, or spent any time BEING a kid,
knows this. "No, Mom, I didn't eat the last cookie, I don't know why it was
missing."
--
Mitch Wagner
Doug Berry
spam-me-n...@my-deja.com (paghat), wrote thusly:
>Ed Kramer helping sell a film by Joe Christ called "Amy Strangles a Small
>Child" that makes a pornographic joke out of the violent deaths of
>children?
Which is not a crime, and does show any connection to the crime
he is accussed of, and in any event he can rightly claim that
attempting to link an author or filmmaker with his work would
result in the immediate jailing of every mystery writer and
scriptwriter in the nation.
Vicki Rosenzweig
10:39:26 GMT:
>You know what bothers me about this whole Kramer thing?
>I met Kramer a few years ago while on "staff" at DragonCon (photographer).
>While I did not think that he was very organized, that's all.
>You like to think that if someone can do something as evil as what he is
>accused of doing,
>that you can see it in them. It kinda rattles me that I did not see
>anything.
>
>In a way I hope he is found innocent, just to restore my faith in my own
>judgment.
I hope he's innocent because if he is, then no crime took place,
and that's better than if one did.
But we--by which I mean we humans, not we fans or we Americans or
anything like that--really can't tell someone is evil by looking
at him, or spending a weekend with him. The families and friends
of murderers are frequently surprised by the fact that this perfectly
nice person could do something like that.
--
Vicki Rosenzweig | v...@redbird.org
r.a.sf.f faq at http://www.redbird.org/rassef-faq.html
Cally Soukup
in article <8FC3983EBas...@127.0.0.1>:
>>Another neat trick often used by "protectors" of children - kids never
>>lie, even under pressure. But anyone with any sense knows that kids
>>will be happy to fabricate in order to tell adults what they want to
>>hear. That doesn't make the kid "a liar"; it could make you or the
>>boy's mother exploiters, though.
> Actually, I'll go a step further and say that kids are natural liars.
> Anyone who's spent any time around kids, or spent any time BEING a kid,
> knows this. "No, Mom, I didn't eat the last cookie, I don't know why it was
> missing."
I heard the mother of a just-under two year old (and not very vocal
yet) kid tell this story:
She walked into the kitchen, and found the kid with a crayon in hand,
and a scribble on the wall. She looked at him, and said (lord knows
why; the answer was obvious), "Who did that?" And the kid looked up
at her, all wide eyed, and pointed, and said "Cat did!"
--
"I may disagree with what you have to say, but I will defend
to the death your right to say it." -- Beatrice Hall
Cally Soukup sou...@pobox.com