Fairfax CPS Socialworker fabricates Sexual Abuse Allegations.
robins...@gmail.com
Susan Alexander Ph: Susan Alexander: 703-324-7899,
Lura Bovee 703-324-7202, anna....@fairfaxcounty.gov,
Dana Page 703-324-7749
Dear Mr. Shuster:
Please click on these links to hear how leading questions have been
asked by Social worker Ms. Traore and outrageous conclusions made out
of them. And why it is important that all audio interviews are handed
to me for the forthcoming desposition hearing and trial.
http://whitecollarchildabuse.com/sveta_sw_11_09_06_part1.mp3
http://whitecollarchildabuse.com/lisa_sw_11_09_06_part1.mp3
http://whitecollarchildabuse.com/lisa_sw_11_09_06_part2.mp3
I am requesting your help in obtaining audio interview recordings of
my children for the following dates.
11/06/2006.
11/09/2006
11/15/2006
03/02/2007
According to CPS records - there were interviews of my children
conducted on all the above dates.
A desposition hearing has been scheduled and postponed twice. - The
CPS has not yet handed me all the requested material.
I have been unable to obtain these audio records except one.
( 11/09/06) or the photographs supposedly taken at INOVA emmergency of
fairfax. I have also been unable to get photos taken by CPS worker Ms.
Shannon Traore.
All these interviews were conducted by Ms. Shannon Traore CPS Social
worker.
There were other taped interviews conducted by Ms. Judy Parks, and Ms.
Sherrie Noud ( between Feb 06 - Sept 06) The tapes have not yet been
released to me. But the allegations were dismissed. I would
appreciate your help in obtaining these audio records too.
Based on Ms. Traore's interview, This social worker claims that my
children were sexually abused by me. My older daughter clearly states
that daddy touched her in he bath tub when she was three years old
during a bath. ( She is 7 now). There are other issues that I have
deep concerns regarding the way this social worker has been conducting
these interviews.
This tape has to be heard to be believed. Not only are leading
questions asked repeatedly. But the answers are twisted to obtain a
preliminary protective order.
Please help me obtain all the tapes and I would appreciate if you
listen to the above links and conclude why I believe this social
worker has mislead my children.
Thanking You,
Sincerely,
--
Ron Jagananthan
ron.jag...@gmail.com
WHITE COLLAR CHILD ABUSER Ms. Shannon Traore aka Shannon Tyler
Shannon Traore Social Worker CPS, 12011 Government Centre Parkway,
Suite # Fairfax, VA 22035 Ph:703-324-7738, Fax: 703-324-2267
email: "Traore, Shannon" <Shanno...@fairfaxcounty.gov>,
Dan Sullivan
On Jul 12, 6:45 am, robinsonve...@gmail.com wrote:
> To
> Susan Alexander Ph: Susan Alexander: 703-324-7899,
> Lura Bovee 703-324-7202, anna.bo...@fairfaxcounty.gov,
> Dana Page 703-324-7749
>
> Dear Mr. Shuster:
>
> Please click on these links to hear how leading questions have been
> asked by Social worker Ms. Traore and outrageous conclusions made out
> of them. And why it is important that all audio interviews are handed
> to me for the forthcoming desposition hearing and trial.
>
> http://whitecollarchildabuse.com/sveta_sw_11_09_06_part1.mp3
>
> http://whitecollarchildabuse.com/lisa_sw_11_09_06_part1.mp3
>
> http://whitecollarchildabuse.com/lisa_sw_11_09_06_part2.mp3
Clearly the interviewer is someone with a MAJOR agenda!
She should be asked if she is trained and QUALIFIED to interview
children in sexual abuse cases.
And if she says "yes" you ask what her qualifications are.
She is pathetic.
CWs believe it's their job (with no consequences for themselves if
they go completely over the line) to PRODUCE (read fabricate) the
evidence necessary to find somebody abusive or neglectful.
I was founded for SA of my daughter back in '93.
The "credible evidence" was my (3 yo) daughter's statement that "My
daddy touches me with the puppet bear in the toilet."
That's exactly what the CW wrote in my case record and THEN the CW
wrote."We didn't know what the child was trying to say!"
How can something be credible if you didn't know what they were
saying?
I can tell you when you gather all the "evidence" from CPS you'll find
they have nothing but hot air.
> I am requesting your help in obtaining audio interview recordings of
> my children for the following dates.
>
> 11/06/2006.
> 11/09/2006
> 11/15/2006
> 03/02/2007
>
> According to CPS records - there were interviews of my children
> conducted on all the above dates.
>
> A desposition hearing has been scheduled and postponed twice. - The
> CPS has not yet handed me all the requested material.
YOU should supply the blank audio tapes to CPS.
If the interviews were video taped, then you should supply blank video
tapes.
Best, Dan
Greegor
problems with unqualified "Evidenciary Interviewers".
Greegor
but not the other interview tapes?
I would strongly suspect they THOUGHT these interview
tapes they DID give you was the most damning about you.
Their mindset is so twisted that they would see it that way.
I betcha the OTHER tapes would reveal the caseworker
to be even more stupid or insane.
They might also reveal material more sensitive as
far as liability to LAW SUIT for the state worker.
My SO started taping supervised visits with her daughter
partly because the visit supervisor was making up fairy tales.
The taping was OK for a long time and suddenly the
visit supervisor (SW with NO LICENSE) started to worry
about being sued. Our favorite tape in the huge collection
is one where the ""SW"" tries to con my SO into stopping
with the audio recording, until they would check with
their corporate attorney about whether it was OK.
Then she proceeded to rave over and over about how
tapes can be altered. The woman sounded like
she was actually having a mental breakdown on tape!
The most rediculous part is that all she had to do is SHUT UP
and she wouldn't be on the tape! Her raving dominated most
of the two hour visit time.
We're in Iowa, a ONE PARTY state for tape recording phone calls.
The tapes of those are a riot too.
When I got MY chance in court I introduced 10 full size cassette
tapes with a log of the items on each tape, but I only played
one ten minute phone call where the caseworker revealed
her blatantly hostile and malicious attitude, as well as
refused reasonable requests and demanded submission
to services while refusing to repair RIGGED services.
Another agency MSW had confirmed UNDER OATH that the
amount of "Collateral Input" they had into my ""Psychological
Evaluation""
(which never took place for this very reason)
would have rigged the outcome and made it USELESS.
Suddenly the tape of the worker refusing to repair RIGGED
services was much more pertinent.
Do you intend to sue the agency under Chapter 42 Section 1983
for Civil Rights violations and Chapter 42 Section 1985 for conspiracy
to violate your civil rights? Make it about 10 Million or more
so it hurts them bad enough they don't let that crap happen again.
It might be hard to find an attorney who will actually take the
case, but keep looking until you find one, it's worth it.
Things that help decide how much to sue for:
How long was your child out of the home?
Did you "stipulate" or lose at the adjudication hearing?
Did they ever return the child to your home?
Did anybody from the agency ever apologize or
concede they screwed up?
Did they cover up the garbage done?
Did they file in court to correct their garbage or did
they persist in maintaining their lies?
Did they renew their lies a few times?
Did you fight them or were you submissive and cooperative?
They didn't Terminate your Parental Rights did they?
Did they try rigging any ""Services"" on the service plan to smear
you?
What things on the Service Plan would have fixed you if you
had actually been a child molester?
Did they go after you and/or the father for child support?
Was the child abused in Foster Care? (FC is a nightmare!)
How DID you get the tapes that you did?
The documents did NOT reflect the crap on these tapes did they?
Under the US Constitution they ripped you off in many more
ways than you probably realized.
Probably 8 or Nine numbered amendments to the US Constitution
and likely several counts of each, partly because you need to
come up with counts for the supervisory chain of command.
They get nailed under "failure to supervise" and
"knew or should have known" about dirt going on.
Remember you likely can't sue the agency itself, or the state,
but you can sue every idiot from the agency who touched
the case and didn't fix it! Which idiots in the agency
do you think didn't hear the crappy tapes?
Did any of the caseworkers turn against their own
agency after hearing those interview tapes?
Did they try the old "Divide and Conquer" tactic
to drive you and the Daddy apart?
( It's extremely common! Particularly since they're accusing him. )
Have you been warned about the "stipulation scam"?
Heading for the Adjudication Hearing right?
Often even paid attorneys will drop the "stipulation" bomb
on you 15 minutes before the adjudication hearing.
Your OWN attorney will suddenly urge you to "stipulate"
which is not technically a guilty plea but may as well be one.
They con you into stipulating by promising you an
easy services plan. This promise is usually broken.
Usually many services on the "Service Plan" are so
totally without any basis whatsoever that you will
not take it seriously.
They WANT you to not do things on the Service Plan.
Then they can go for Termination of Parental Rights
after maybe a year based on the fact that you didn't do
everything you were asked.
You're better off to never have any Court Approved ""Service Plan"".
Do not stipulate unless you are guilty and want them to OWN you.
Fight in the Adjudication hearing.
>From the sound of these tapes the agency might
actually want to DROP this case before the
adjudication hearing to save themselves the
embarassment should you decide to play the
tape and cross examine the caseworker about
her methods.
A properly trained "evidenciary interviewer" is extremely rare.
Tapes made by interviewers without the proper training
and qualifications can be barred from court.
(And everything collected in those interviews)
These botched interviews by idiots sometimes
mess up cases against real hardcore child abusers.
Trained interviewers ask a lot of questions called
"Epistemology" questions to get to the bottom
of how the child knows what they know.
Look up that word in the dictionary, it's crucial.
Kids have been interviewed five times about blue men
on the roof and by the third interview they are talking
very matter of fact like about the blue men on the roof.
NBC did a documentary about this problem.
Repeated interviews basically tell the kid what
the worker wants to hear. It's called "telegraphing".
In your case you might actually NOT want to throw
the crappy tapes out because the ones you have
are a GOLDEN OPPORTUNITY to show the warped
malicious behavior you are up against.
The OTHER tapes are probably even MORE damning
for the agency being a pack of idiots.
Ask your attorney if the process will use the burden
of proof "Preponderance" or "Clear and Convincing".
The Constitution ""guarantees"" Clear and Convincing
in a case where your LIBERTY INTEREST right
to be a family is in jeopardy, but in many states your
attorney has to shove Santosky v Kramer into the
Judge's face to raise the standard from Preponderance
to Clear and Convincing.
The depositions are probably being delayed because
they know they have a "crap case" and they're
desperately trying to come up with something
to make a case.
I expect they'll try a Child Psychologist or Therapist.
Careful, they use unqualified ""therapist"" contractors here.
The problem is they use "stooges", contractors who
depend on them for a lot of income, to "give them
the dirt they want" to make a case.
Often, the initial accusations and the ones launched
right before or IN court are wildly different.
Generally they use the spaghetti method, where
you throw it on the wall and see what parts stick.
I also call it the shotgun method.
If they launch the court case with 10 complaints
and you shoot down all but one, THAT will be all
they need to tear up your family.
They think like "Chicken Little" with that kind of hysteria.
My condolences, and welcome to the club of
people who know that the PR from the
Child Protection INDUSTRY is all a bunch of crap.
People will tell you that "Not all caseworkers are bad"
but after a whole bunch are involved in your case you
will wonder how the successive caseworkers live
with themselves knowing they are an accessoriy to
the agency abuse of your family. It's NOT just the
one moron who did these stupid interviews.
The others "play along" even when the case is absurd.
They are equally guilty.
When you win, don't think this is somebody else's problem.
Beware of Dan Sullivan, Kane and their pack of hyenas.
They ridicule Family Rights groups and Constitutional Rights.
Dan is like a Boll Weevil who wants to burrow inside to cause harm.
Greg Hanson, Cedar Rapids Iowa
On Jul 12, 5:45 am, robinsonve...@gmail.com wrote:
> To
> Susan Alexander Ph: Susan Alexander: 703-324-7899,
> Lura Bovee 703-324-7202, anna.bo...@fairfaxcounty.gov,
> Dana Page 703-324-7749
>
> Dear Mr. Shuster:
>
> Please click on these links to hear how leading questions have been
> asked by Social worker Ms. Traore and outrageous conclusions made out
> of them. And why it is important that all audio interviews are handed
> to me for the forthcoming desposition hearing and trial.
>
> http://whitecollarchildabuse.com/sveta_sw_11_09_06_part1.mp3
>
> http://whitecollarchildabuse.com/lisa_sw_11_09_06_part1.mp3
>
> http://whitecollarchildabuse.com/lisa_sw_11_09_06_part2.mp3
>
> I am requesting your help in obtaining audio interview recordings of
> my children for the following dates.
>
> 11/06/2006.
> 11/09/2006
> 11/15/2006
> 03/02/2007
>
> According to CPS records - there were interviews of my children
> conducted on all the above dates.
>
> A desposition hearing has been scheduled and postponed twice. - The
> CPS has not yet handed me all the requested material.
>
>
> WHITE COLLAR CHILD ABUSER Ms. Shannon Traore aka Shannon Tyler
> Shannon Traore Social Worker CPS, 12011 Government Centre Parkway,
> Suite # Fairfax, VA 22035 Ph:703-324-7738, Fax: 703-324-2267
> email: "Traore, Shannon" <Shannon.Ty...@fairfaxcounty.gov>,
On Jul 12, 11:46 pm, Greegor <Greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dan, Please look up my old posts in ascps where I described
> problems with unqualified "Evidenciary Interviewers".
>
> On Jul 12, 6:56 am, Dan Sullivan <dsull...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Do you have an attny?
>
> > On Jul 12, 6:45 am, robinsonve...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > To
> > > Susan Alexander Ph: Susan Alexander: 703-324-7899,
> > > Lura Bovee 703-324-7202, anna.bo...@fairfaxcounty.gov,
> > > Dana Page 703-324-7749
>
> > > Dear Mr. Shuster:
>
> > > Please click on these links to hear how leading questions have been
> > > asked by Social worker Ms. Traore and outrageous conclusions made out
> > > of them. And why it is important that all audio interviews are handed
> > > to me for the forthcoming desposition hearing and trial.
>
> > >http://whitecollarchildabuse.com/sveta_sw_11_09_06_part1.mp3
>
> > >http://whitecollarchildabuse.com/lisa_sw_11_09_06_part1.mp3
>
> > >http://whitecollarchildabuse.com/lisa_sw_11_09_06_part2.mp3
>
> > Clearly the interviewer is someone with a MAJOR agenda!
>
> > She should be asked if she is trained and QUALIFIED to interview
> > children in sexual abuse cases.
>
> > And if she says "yes" you ask what her qualifications are.
>
> > She is pathetic.
>
Dan Sullivan wrote
> > CWs believe it's their job (with no consequences for themselves if
> > they go completely over the line) to PRODUCE (read fabricate) the
> > evidence necessary to find somebody abusive or neglectful.
Really Dan?
> > I was founded for SA of my daughter back in '93.
>
> > The "credible evidence" was my (3 yo) daughter's statement that "My
> > daddy touches me with the puppet bear in the toilet."
>
> > That's exactly what the CW wrote in my case record and THEN the CW
> > wrote."We didn't know what the child was trying to say!"
>
> > How can something be credible if you didn't know what they were
> > saying?
>
> > I can tell you when you gather all the "evidence" from CPS you'll find
> > they have nothing but hot air.
Of course Dan knows full well that the agency and courts
will NOT give you the tapes you seek unless and until
you take them into Federal Court and get a Federal Court
to subpoena the tapes for your law suit.
This is something Dan says he didn't do even though he claims
15 abuse reports and 5 foundeds that he had to reverse.
Don't you think it's ODD that he never sued the CPS agency
after all of that?
> > > I am requesting your help in obtaining audio interview recordings of
> > > my children for the following dates.
>
> > > 11/06/2006.
> > > 11/09/2006
> > > 11/15/2006
> > > 03/02/2007
>
> > > According to CPS records - there were interviews of my children
> > > conducted on all the above dates.
>
> > > A desposition hearing has been scheduled and postponed twice. - The
> > > CPS has not yet handed me all the requested material.
>
> > YOU should supply the blank audio tapes to CPS.
They would need to be duplicated professionally and
with some procedures to preserve the "chain of custody"
to be used as evidence. Best have them subpoena'd.
Our public defenders refused flat out anyway. Yours?
After we got a transcript that was blatantly altered in
at least three places, we requested the original tape.
The Iowa Supreme Court refused.
We wondered why they would refuse for some time.
We concluded that they KNOW the local court transcripts
are being tampered with but don't want it made public.
Imagine the embarassment if the news media actually
compared a transcriptionist tape to the printed transcript
and reported all of the alterations in a court transcript?
The whole state court system would be embarassed.
We also had a Judge who signed a court order for
a home inspection. We had been asking for the
STANDARDS for home inspection for YEARS and
never got any. Then he signed this order.
It took a little pondering but within a day I realized
that this was a SEARCH WARRANT with a bogus title.
And it was a search warrant lacking specifics, particularly
the STANDARDS for a home inspection.
This is a big no-no. The Judge had signed a search
warrant that was illegal for lack of specifics.
It's a big 4th Amendment issue.
The 4th Amendment protects us from searches looking
for something, anything, without specifics.
The legal term for these is "fishing expedition", a big no-no.
We had another Judge who recused herself from the case for bias.
She is the queen bee of our local Juvenile Court.
Six months later she apparently thought she could ""UNRECUSE""
herself and sit on the case. We actually appeared before
her bench, but she got word that I had squawked to
the court administrator's office about how there is no
such thing as UNRECUSAL. As we all appeared before her
on the bench she decided that another Judge should
handle the case.
> > If the interviews were video taped, then you should supply blank video
> > tapes.
>
> > Best, Dan
Chain of evidence might make this a bad idea.
Ask your attorney about certified legally solid duplicates.
Don't just let some moron at the agency make a lousy copy!
They might leave out the best parts!
SMHealthNick
http://www.vatechcoverup.com/PressReleases/LogoAnnounced12July2007.htm
Greegor
> If you want to know how really screwed up Virginia is, read this:
>
http://www.vatechcoverup.com/PressReleases/LogoAnnounced12July2007.htm
Thanks Sam!
Have you ever heard how the Child Protection INDUSTRY
abuses parents using Psychological Evaluations?
They use it as a tool for their "Witch Hunts" to try
to justify their ""protection"" of children.
The unqualified Child Protection Caseworkers write
up who needs a Psych Eval as an item on their "Service Plan".
They commonly provide a list of "concerns" and issues
they wanted the psychologist to explore and investigate.
In some cases they provide a considerable volume of their
unqualified written gibberish to the psychologist as
"collateral input". In my case a caseworker had fabricated
a horrific LIE that I had a ""Sex Abuse History". This
horrific false assertion fabricated by a Child Protection
caseworker was disproven with old documents from the
very same office of the very same Child Protection
agency. The same caseworker who had fabricated the
SAH lie and who had seen and had access to the
exculpatory old documents was the one who sent a
ONE INCH stack of COLLATERAL INPUT into my
Psych Eval. The big LIE was in there, but not
the exculpatory documents.
Then I called up the psychologist and asked how
he could ethically allow this psych eval to be
directed by unqualified Child Protection caseworkers.
I asked him if I was to be Judged objectively by the
standardized testing and how much of this would
be subjective (personality) judgements.
I asked him how I could get a fair Psych Eval
in the face of this one inch stack of INPUT documents.
One of the "concerns" was about my ability to parent.
I asked him how he could POSSIBLY judge my ability
to parent without seeing me actually trying to DO it.
I asked him if he could honestly make such a
judgement "in a vacuum".
He said that in order for me to understand I would
need to take a college course.
(Later I found he teaches community college
classes for ""Social Workers"".)
I never took the psych eval and this Psychologist
reported to Child Protection that I was asking
a lot of legal questions.
Much later I was in court and asked if I had done
something that seemed mentally ill.
I asked if I had been found running down a street
naked and yelling gibberish, or what I had done
that was a BASIS, a "probable cause" for such
an invasive search.
I asked this openly of the prosecutor and the
agency people. They had nothing.
Even BETTER, the most educated caseworker,
one with a Master of Social Work, had testified
that INPUT into a psych eval, whether a short list
or a one inch stack, would skew a psych eval
and taint the results making it useless.
Some of the abuses you describe do seem to be
shared, overlap or are in common with the abuses
of the corrupt Child Protection INDUSTRY.
It is well known by Family Rights people that many
psychologists doing "psych evals" feel a pressure to
give the idiot caseworkers the ""dirt"" they seek to
make a case, because Child Protection agencies
have and do actually decide NOT to send the
psychologist any more business if they aren't happy.
A few psychologists have actually LOST BUSINESS
doing psych evals for Child Protective Services for
failing to find any dirt for them.
It's much MORE than a conflict of interest.
In a few cases where the "raw data" results from
the objective paper test forms have been looked over
by a second psychologist, it's been found that the
first psychologist actually LIED about the test results
in an effort to please the agency and of course
cause TRAGIC harm to a family being investigated.
I know that in one case the second psychologist
had some rather strong words with the first "dirty" one
and insisted that he change his evaluation or
suffer some drastic professional and financial consequences.
He quickly responded to her demand.
I have described in alt.support.child-protective-services before
that when somebody has multiple problems the system players
don't bother much with even major issues once the person
is LABELED so that the FUNDING stream is already set up.
An example is that once a person is LABELED for
one kind of problem that opens the FUNDING spigot,
the system players are not highly motivated to remediate
issues that are secondary as far as funding.
There is a huge web of social services and allied professions
like psychologists, attorneys and even Judges who depend
on this web for their very livelihood.
Have you had any luck with your biting sarcasm and wit
at catalyzing any serious movement toward a less corrupt system?
On Jul 14, 12:29 am, SMHealthNick <SMHea...@gmail.com> wrote:
> If you want to know how really screwed up Virginia is, read this:
>
> http://www.vatechcoverup.com/PressReleases/LogoAnnounced12July2007.htm
Va Tech Cover-up announces accreditation initiative
ef-U™ program slashes cost of mental health certification, improves
quality
July 13 , 2007
VTC Gold Seal Award - 2007 Recipients
H. Lynn Chenault
Former director New River Valley Community Services
Chenault directed New River Valley Community Services in December 2005
when Virginia Tech shooter Seung Hui Cho was supposed to have been
assessed and processed for mental health treatment. He's currently
hard to find.
James Martinez Director Virginia Office of Mental Health Services
Martinez directed Virginia Office of Mental Health Services when when
the Virginia Tech massacre occurred. A veteran of the mental health
bureaucracy, he is expected to schedule more meetings and
"brainstorming" sessions, keep things pretty much the way they are,
and talk about "exciting" changes and "fresh ideas".
VA Tech Cover-up (VTC), a Virginia based mental health advocacy group
has created a free program to expand on traditional certification
instruments, so clients can better understand their role in the public
mental health delivery system. Certified programs and agencies earn
the right to display the stylized logo shown on the left side of this
page.
Community mental health agencies and/or hospitals proudly display the
gold "Joint Commission" (for accreditation of healthcare
organizations)"Joint " seal and/or the CARF (Committee on
Accreditation of Rehabilitation Facilities) Logo to communicate a
sense of security to mental health clients and their families.
The VTC ef-U™ logo program operates similarly to the programs
described above, but goes much farther in emphasizing the unique role
of the mentally ill in the public mental health treatment system.
We designed the Virginia Tech Cover-up Seal to focus attention on the
fact that people who enter the American public mental health system
become capital equipment for which the technical term is "consumers".
Our program is based on a simple idea -- "Consumers" matter.
"Consumers" matter to big government because they are a permanent
source of revenue. They are a mechanism to bill medicaid. "Consumers"
matter to corporate America because they are a source of profits for
the sale of pharmaceutical products.
"Consumers" matter.
Of course, the individual medical mental health needs of "consumers"
are irrelevant to big business and big government, because the
mentally ill are a commodity. When "consumer" dies, another "consumer"
is brought in to fill their "bed"; therefore the billing factory
always runs at full capacity.
We painstakingingly researched the standards for CARF and Joint
Commission, but found no requirement for doctors and mental hospitals
to fuck over captive defenseless mentally ill clients.
We realized something was missing from the CARF and the Joint
Commission certification processes -- someone needed to tell
"consumers", their families, and their loved ones that public mental
hospitals are dangerous places where people die (see stories -- 14
year old Sarah Crider and Gloria Huntley and list of abuse cases).
Then we had an epiphany. We had an idea so simple, we wondered why no
one ever did it before.
We realized that America needs a whole new kind of a certification
program -- a program that tells the truth.
Furthermore, we thought, since public mental health system uses people
as disposable cash cows and enslaves them for medicaid billing
purposes, why should hospitals pay high costs for certification?
We thought to ourselves, we can certify them for free; and plus our
our logo will tell the the truth about the American public mental
health system (see logo at the top of article). Our logo proudly
proclaims -- "We can't help you, but we can fuck you good".
No one sets out to deliberately harm the mentally ill (well almost no
one), but the state uses the mentally ill the way plantation owners
used negroes before the civil war -- capital equipment. The state
can't bill medicaid without a supply of mentally ill people in their
hospitals/facilities. When the state runs out of bed space, they stop
bringing in people for treatment, when the state has extra beds they
go out and find some mentally ill people. That's how healthcare
corporations and the public mental health system work. They don't have
any kind of a personal interest.
When a facility displays the VTC ef-U™ Seal, here are the standards
you and your family can depend on:
Your needs are third. Get in line behind big government, and corporate
health care. You are not a human being; you are a billing mechanism to
transfer money from medicaid or your insurance company.
If you are injured, raped, or die under suspicious circumstances, you
get second class justice. They have separate police forces (tinker toy
cops), investigators, and "judicial" system; all to protect the state
from financial liability.
The "citizen boards" that operate and advise the public mental health
system don't care what happens to you. They are easily flattered;
their meetings are run like United Nations Rose Garden Parties. If
they lose meeting minutes, meet irregularly, or just do nothing no one
cares.
Our seal tells the world is that once you enter a facility you're
fucked.
A doctor who doesn't like you could keep you there until you die.
Your rights depend on your ability to enforce them, and you have no
such ability.
Theoretically anything that could happen to someone in a Mexican
prison could happen to you, and you are beyond the reach of the media,
ordinary justice, or anyone who might want to collect evidence to
prove what is happening. While the rest of humanity is drinking beer,
toasting marshmallows, and watching Fourth of July fireworks; you get
roach stew and reruns of Gilligans Island. You can't even get out to
see the stars at night -- all so the government and pharmaceutical
companies can make a few more sheckles.
If you have questions, or your want to recommend a program or facility
for the VTC ef-U™ Certification Program, contact us at
Edi...@VaTechCoverup.com, or fill out our contact form.
Virginia Tech Cover-up is not affiliated with Virginia Polytechnic
Institute and State University in Blacksburg Virginia.
# # # #
Who needs a Virginia Tech cover-up site?
A declaration of editorial policy
June 14, 2007
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I'd trade every man in the Virginia Legislature for one Atticus
Finch."
- Anonymous Virginia Mental Health Advocate -
Lynchburg, Virginia- Not since the days of slavery has the Virginia
government had so much of which to be ashamed.
The Virginia Tech tragedy did not just suddenly happen on April 16,
2007.
The Virginia community mental health system was operated in a reckless
and dangerous fashion for more than 20 years, by "citizen boards",
untrained in and uneducated about their responsibilities.
If anyone doubted that the community mental health "citizens boards"
were token figure heads, that doubt should have been eradicated after
the Virginia Tech Tragedy. Virginia Governor Tim Kaine bypassed the
citizen board that runs New River Valley Community Services (NRVCSB),
and created his own investigatory commission.
No one interviewed NRVCS board Chair Richard Gregory, and it appears
he was not involved in a decision to stop sending representatives to
all the emergency mental health hearings; although he certainly should
have been.
Citizen boards are a tool for mental health bureaucrats in Virginia to
have their cake and eat it too; though for what monstrous purpose is
not clear, because when they don't do their job people die, and
clearly they have not been doing their job.
Virginia has a problem. They let some people die in institutions and
under mysterious circumstances as clients of Community Services
Boards. Sometimes the deaths are investigated. Sometimes they are not.
Once people realize the Virginia Government considers life to be so
cheap, they have little incentive to voluntarily comply with any law
the state general assembly makes. If the government doesn't respect
the law, then why should anyone else?
Why wouldn't you speed? Why wouldn't you steal? Why wouldn't you sell
or use illegal drugs, if you knew that the Attorney General of the
State of Virginia was willing to compromise criminal justice in order
to avoid financial liablity to the state?
Then answer is, of course, that you would. When justice breaks down in
the most trusted office in the state, it breaks down everywhere else
-- guaran-effing-teed.
There is only one solution. Honest citizens must create a compelling
record of what the state has been doing (and not doing); and that is
the purpose of this site -- to collect information and testimony.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
More fallout from the Virginia Tech Tragedy
Proliferation of state boards/councils undermines mental health
accountability
June 24, 2007
Virginia state mental health councils, commissions, boards, and panels
pop up like mushrooms. They spend tax payer money on travel, meals,
accommodations. But at the end of the day, what do the taxpayers
really have? Nothing, if public bodies don't post their meeting
minutes.
Interagency Civil Admissions Advisory Council
Protection and Advocacy for Individuals with Mental Illness Council
Virginia Board of Mental Health, Mental Retardation, and Substance
Abuse Services
Virginia Mental Health Planning Council
Virginia Office for Protection and Advocacy
New River Valley Community Services Board
Virginia State Human Rights Committee
New River Valley Local Human Rights Committee
Office of the Inspector General
Virginia State Association of Community Services Boards
System Leadership Council
TABLE 1: Virginia entities that could have prevented the Va Tech
Tragedy
There's been a lot of talk about accountability in Virginia since the
Virginia Tech shootings.
Unfortunately, the government's idea for making themselves accountable
is to just add more government. As can be seen in Table 1 on the
right, this has led to an incredible proliferation of boards,
councils, and inspectors; but ultimately there is less accountability
not more accountability, since an increase in the number of government
agencies leads to increased confusion and diluted responsibility.
Any of the government agencies listed in Table 1 conceivably could
have played a role in preventing the Virginia Tech tragedy by
aggressively monitoring the quality of the Virginia mental health
system, but no such activity took place.
With each additional board/council, the public bodies that are
responsible to monitor the Virginia mental health system all slow down
a little more. They meander along, seemingly without any rhyme nor
reason, with their little guest speaker agendas, presentations, random
training activities. Month in/ month out they burn through tax payer
money on travel, lodging, and meals; but there is a relaxed, aloof,
sort of a UN rose garden party feel to what they do, and absolutely no
sense of urgency.
Figure 1: Janace Johnson after receiving
"help" from the state. Click to read her
story at Justice for Janace Johson. Their agendas resemble something a
recreation director on a Senior Citizen cruise might put together.
As we shall see in the next section of this article, what the mental
health public bodies do, is often so inconsequential and so pointless
that no one even bothers to record and post their activities properly
on the internet in compliance with the laws of the Commonwealth of
Virginia. Meanwhile, people like Janace Johnson (Figure 1) and the
victims of their mismanagement.
And the citizens who sit on the mental health councils and boards are
well shielded from the tragic results of their lackadaisical
management. When disaster strikes, no one ever looks to the existing
citizen boards for responsibility; rather they create a new board or a
new panel to investigate, such as Governor Tim Kain's panel to
investigate the Blacksburg tragedy.
Problems with Mental Health Boards
Someone once said "Communication is the cornerstone of good
government". If that is true, then the Commonwealth public mental
health system is without a cornerstone.
The work product of the councils which advise the mental health system
is their decisions and the record of how they reached those decisions,
which is required by law to be recorded in meeting minutes.
So really, there is no mystery to the lack of accountability in the
Virginia public mental health system.
There is no mystery to why people fall through the cracks.
Virginia § 2.2-3707.1. Posting of minutes for state boards and
commissions
"All boards, commissions, councils, and other public bodies created in
the executive branch of state government and subject to the provisions
of this chapter shall post minutes of their meetings on such body's
web site, if any, and on the Virginia Regulatory Town Hall. Draft
minutes of meetings shall be posted as soon as possible but no later
than ten working days after the conclusion of the meeting. Final
approved meeting minutes shall be posted within three working days of
final approval of the minutes."
Status of compliance with Code of Virginia § 2.2-3707.1 as of 24 June
2007
Virginia Mental Health Planning Council
Some minutes posted, appears to be random. Some minutes missing for
2006. No minutes listed for 2005, but some for 2004. Listing on
Commonwealth calendar has no E-mail address, randomly lists a Web
site, but not the actual page of the Council although they do in fact
have one at http://www.dmhmrsas.virginia.gov/MHPC/ .
Protection and Advocacy for Individuals with Mental Illness (PAIMI)
Minutes are randomly posted going back to 2004. Most are there for
more recent meetings. If you wanted to use the Commonwealth Calendar
to find them it's super confusing because PAIMI is listed 6 different
ways and there are some meetings under each listing, so it's pretty
much impossible to get a complete listing of past minutes and look for
the meetings. Listings are:
Protection & Advocacy for Individuals with Mental Illness (PAIMI)
Protection and Advocacy for Individuals with Mental Illness
Protection and Advocacy for Individuals with Mental Illness (PAIMI)
Protection and Advocacy for Individuals with Mental Illness Advisory
Council Protection and Advocacy of Individuals with Mental Illness
Advisory Council
System Leadership Council
Very strange. They have a web page of sorts, but meeting dates and
meeting minutes stop on September 22, 2004.
Do they still exist? A report of the Virginia Mental Health Inspector
General dated March 31, 2007 mentions the System Leadership Council.
Perhaps they had to abandon their earlier web page. We couldn't find
their meetings listed on the Commonwealth Calendar. It's a mystery.
TABLE 2: Virginia Mental Health Councils Meeting Minute Compliance
The answer is in Table 2, which demonstrates that public mental health
councils cannot consistently perform the primary activity that creates
accounability -- they don't even consistently record and posting their
meeting minutes as required by the code of the Commonwealth of
Virginia § 2.2-3707.1.
There are definite cancer like qualities to the proliferation of so-
called "citizen" boards, councils, and advisory panels in Virginia's
public mental health sector. They seem to spring up randomly, with no
clear discernable purpose to distinguish them from other boards and
councils.
For instance, in addition to having its own Community Services Board
and local Human Rights Board, Fairfax County in Northern Virginia just
created a the Josiah H. Beeman Commission to "To advise the Board of
Supervisors on the future direction and design of the mental health
services delivery system serving Fairfax County, the City of Fairfax,
and the City of Falls Church".
Not a bad idea, maybe; there's always room for another board or
commission to fix problems in the mental health system, right?
Particularly when the same people who are going to sit on the new
boards and commissions to fix and reform the mental health system and
the same people who sat on the old boards and commissions and created
the problems.
Purpose, methods, accomplishments, and even legal operation are
questionable for many of the boards and councils for the simple reason
that they do not post their meeting minutes consistently which, it
turns out, is a violation of § 2.2-3707.1 of the code of the
Commonwealth of Virginia.
So, once again, we emphasize that if the the legislature of the
Commonwealth of Virginia wants to know why there is no accountability
in the public mental health system; they should realize it starts with
the fact that many of the councils and boards are out of compliance
with the laws for posting minutes and even when they do post minutes,
there is no consistency.
Meanwhile, it appears that old mental health boards don't go away,
they just languish in abandoned neighborhoods of the Commonwealth
Internet Server overgrown with weeds and plywood nailed over the
windows, and the mental health stalwarts, the architects of the system
that dropped the ball in Blacksburg, just move on to newer more
vigorous exciting Boards, create fresh Utopian mission statements,
create new reports, ask for more money, and everything stays pretty
much the same.
# # # #
Dan Sullivan
> On Jul 14, 12:29 am, SMHealthNick <SMHea...@gmail.com> wrote:> If you want to know how really screwed up Virginia is, read this:
>
> http://www.vatechcoverup.com/PressReleases/LogoAnnounced12July2007.htm
>
> Thanks Sam!
>
> Have you ever heard how the Child Protection INDUSTRY
> abuses parents using Psychological Evaluations?
OH! Here we go... Greg switches everything to his situation.
See how many times Greg mentions his former girlfriend's daughter who
was removed more than six years ago because of what Greg was doing to
her!!!!
The mother hasn't had custody from Feb of 2001!
The little girl was removed at seven years of age and now she's 13 or
14.
Do ya think a little girl might need her mother during those formative
years?
> They use it as a tool for their "Witch Hunts" to try
> to justify their ""protection"" of children.
>
> The unqualified Child Protection Caseworkers write
> up who needs a Psych Eval as an item on their "Service Plan".
>
> They commonly provide a list of "concerns" and issues
> they wanted the psychologist to explore and investigate.
>
> In some cases they provide a considerable volume of their
> unqualified written gibberish to the psychologist as
> "collateral input". In my case a caseworker had fabricated
> a horrific LIE that I had a ""Sex Abuse History".
Greg admitted in the current case to forcing the little girl into
taking cold showers as "aversion therapy."
And he admitted physically forcing the naked little girl into the
shower.
And he admitted whenever the girl took a "regular" shower he went into
the bathroom to hand her a towel... like she couldn't pick one up
herself.
> This
> horrific false assertion fabricated by a Child Protection
> caseworker was disproven with old documents from the
> very same office of the very same Child Protection
> agency. The same caseworker who had fabricated the
> SAH lie and who had seen and had access to the
> exculpatory old documents was the one who sent a
> ONE INCH stack of COLLATERAL INPUT into my
> Psych Eval.
A one inch stack which contained what information, Greg?
That you were accused of molesting a child in an earlier
investigation?
> The big LIE was in there, but not
> the exculpatory documents.
>
> Then I called up the psychologist and asked how
> he could ethically allow this psych eval to be
> directed by unqualified Child Protection caseworkers.
>
> I asked him if I was to be Judged objectively by the
> standardized testing and how much of this would
> be subjective (personality) judgements.
>
> I asked him how I could get a fair Psych Eval
> in the face of this one inch stack of INPUT documents.
>
> One of the "concerns" was about my ability to parent.
> I asked him how he could POSSIBLY judge my ability
> to parent without seeing me actually trying to DO it.
You wanted the psych to watch while you forced a naked little girl
into a cold water shower?
You are nuts, Greg.
> I asked him if he could honestly make such a
> judgement "in a vacuum".
>
> He said that in order for me to understand I would
> need to take a college course.
Or at least grow a conscience.
> (Later I found he teaches community college
> classes for ""Social Workers"".)
>
> I never took the psych eval and this Psychologist
> reported to Child Protection that I was asking
> a lot of legal questions.
>
> Much later I was in court and asked if I had done
> something that seemed mentally ill.
> I asked if I had been found running down a street
> naked and yelling gibberish,
You didn't get caught?
American Greed
> On Jul 14, 5:32 am, Greegor <Greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Jul 14, 12:29 am, SMHealthNick <SMHea...@gmail.com> wrote:> If you want to know how really screwed up Virginia is, read this:
>>
>> http://www.vatechcoverup.com/PressReleases/LogoAnnounced12July2007.htm
>>
>> Thanks Sam!
>>
>> Have you ever heard how the Child Protection INDUSTRY
>> abuses parents using Psychological Evaluations?
>
> OH! Here we go... Greg switches everything to his situation.
>
> See how many times Greg mentions his former girlfriend's daughter who
> was removed more than six years ago because of what Greg was doing to
> her!!!!
Tell everybody about your daughter and what you did to her. How old is
she now?
>
> The mother hasn't had custody from Feb of 2001!
Almost as long as you diddler. And you lost custody fer diddlin yer own
kids.
Did you take your own advice and voluntarily sign up for sexual
offenders class??
If not, why not?
<snipped Dans pathetic false allegations and ad hom>
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Dan Sullivan
> Dan Sullivan wrote:
> > On Jul 14, 5:32 am, Greegor <Greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Jul 14, 12:29 am, SMHealthNick <SMHea...@gmail.com> wrote:> If you want to know how really screwed up Virginia is, read this:
>
> >>http://www.vatechcoverup.com/PressReleases/LogoAnnounced12July2007.htm
>
> >> Thanks Sam!
>
> >> Have you ever heard how the Child Protection INDUSTRY
> >> abuses parents using Psychological Evaluations?
>
> > OH! Here we go... Greg switches everything to his situation.
>
> > See how many times Greg mentions his former girlfriend's daughter who
> > was removed more than six years ago because of what Greg was doing to
> > her!!!!
>
> Tell everybody about your daughter and what you did to her. How old is
> she now?
She's not old at all.
> > The mother hasn't had custody from Feb of 2001!
>
> Almost as long as you diddler. And you lost custody fer diddlin yer own
> kids.
That's not true.
> Did you take your own advice and voluntarily sign up for sexual
> offenders class??
That's not my advice.
> If not, why not?
>
> <snipped Dans pathetic false allegations and ad hom>
I simply posted what Greg admitted doing to his former girlfriend's
seven year old daughter.
American Greed
> On Jul 14, 7:53 am, American Greed <mo...@fu.com> wrote:
>> Dan Sullivan wrote:
>>> On Jul 14, 5:32 am, Greegor <Greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Jul 14, 12:29 am, SMHealthNick <SMHea...@gmail.com> wrote:> If you want to know how really screwed up Virginia is, read this:
>>>> http://www.vatechcoverup.com/PressReleases/LogoAnnounced12July2007.htm
>>>> Thanks Sam!
>>>> Have you ever heard how the Child Protection INDUSTRY
>>>> abuses parents using Psychological Evaluations?
>>> OH! Here we go... Greg switches everything to his situation.
>>> See how many times Greg mentions his former girlfriend's daughter who
>>> was removed more than six years ago because of what Greg was doing to
>>> her!!!!
>> Tell everybody about your daughter and what you did to her. How old is
>> she now?
>
> She's not old at all.
Dodging again.
>
>>> The mother hasn't had custody from Feb of 2001!
>> Almost as long as you diddler. And you lost custody fer diddlin yer own
>> kids.
>
> That's not true.
Proof please.
Post a link to your public divorce records.
Show the class what you did to your own children.
>
>> Did you take your own advice and voluntarily sign up for sexual
>> offenders class??
>
> That's not my advice.
Waffling again? Of course it's your advice. Pre-emptive confessions. You
said it works every time. lol.
You know nothing about Greg - post what you know about - post about your
sick perversion and the misery it has caused your family for all these
years.
Your constant false allegations against parents is nothing we haven't
seen before. You're a typical CPS scummer.
Dan Sullivan
> Dan Sullivan wrote:
> > On Jul 14, 7:53 am, American Greed <mo...@fu.com> wrote:
> >> Dan Sullivan wrote:
> >>> On Jul 14, 5:32 am, Greegor <Greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> On Jul 14, 12:29 am, SMHealthNick <SMHea...@gmail.com> wrote:> If you want to know how really screwed up Virginia is, read this:
> >>>>http://www.vatechcoverup.com/PressReleases/LogoAnnounced12July2007.htm
> >>>> Thanks Sam!
> >>>> Have you ever heard how the Child Protection INDUSTRY
> >>>> abuses parents using Psychological Evaluations?
> >>> OH! Here we go... Greg switches everything to his situation.
> >>> See how many times Greg mentions his former girlfriend's daughter who
> >>> was removed more than six years ago because of what Greg was doing to
> >>> her!!!!
> >> Tell everybody about your daughter and what you did to her. How old is
> >> she now?
>
> > She's not old at all.
>
> Dodging again.
Who me?
> >>> The mother hasn't had custody from Feb of 2001!
> >> Almost as long as you diddler. And you lost custody fer diddlin yer own
> >> kids.
>
> > That's not true.
>
> Proof please.
You can take my word for it.
> >> Did you take your own advice and voluntarily sign up for sexual
> >> offenders class??
>
> > That's not my advice.
>
> Waffling again? Of course it's your advice.
Citations?
> Pre-emptive confessions.
???
> You said it works every time. lol.
Confessions to what?
> You know nothing about Greg - post what you know about - post about your
> sick perversion and the misery it has caused your family for all these
> years.
>
> Your constant false allegations against parents is nothing we haven't
> seen before. You're a typical CPS scummer.
How many 55 gallon drums did it take to make your trailer two stories,
Dennis?
Do you call it a sculpture?
Or "Home Sweet Home?"
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!
American Greed
Never met a diddler that didn't want to change the subject.
Come on Danno - talk about what you know. Tell the group what you did to
your own children.
You could write a book - how to beat the rap when caught diddlin your
own kids. lol.
Dan Sullivan
You hang out with diddlers?
Have you been watching Nightline?
No wonder they're so careful.
> Come on Danno - talk about what you know.
I know you're an AH, Dennis.
> Tell the group what you did to
> your own children.
My children are the foundation of my life!
It's in the Family Court records... by CPS' own expert!!!
Greegor
> And you lost custody fer diddlin yer own kids.
Dan Sullivan wrote > That's not true.
Dan could not LOSE custody he didn't HAVE!
His EX had child custody.
Dan Sullivan
That's not true.
Greegor
> Your ego needs got in the way, did they not? You needed to NOT justify
> the honorable lie so that you could claim I was a liar, and never
> answer for your dishonorable claim, when you KNEW that I would only
> lie to protect lives and physical safety. Is that not correct, Greg?
Could you please diagram this gibberish?
Is this like antidisestablishmentarianism?
Greegor
>
> After all the lies spouted by you, Dennis, and other little pisspants,
> it comes out that Dan indeed did NOT lose custody, and the courts in
> fact set his access to his children through divorce
> proceedings...something he retains TO THIS VERY DAY, little man.
>
> And YOu and your phony baloney cronies have been lying all along.
And yet you didn't specify exactly HOW!
> I'm going to risk violating Dan's privacy and let you in on more. He
> enjoys their company and they his any damn time he and they please,
> stupid.
>
> Thus he not only has court appointed
appointed?
> 'custody' and access he has more
> of it by far than Lisa does to her child. Waaaaaay more.
Can you prove this?
> Now I think I'll take a break and look again at the pics Dan sent me
> of a recent birthday party with his kids, and the obvious joy they
> take in each other.
You wouldn't lie, WOULD YOU Donald?
> A happy family by virtue of Dan's willingness to fight for his
> children.
>
> Cheers me up every time I look at them. I think I'll make a montage
> out of them for a desktop. 0:]
>
> And a sad family for Lisa and her daughter, compliments of Gregory
> Hansen, still Non-compos Sabbaticus.
>
> All she's got is ... greg?
You have no clue do you?
> I'd say she shit in her bed, wouldn't you Greg? What do YOU think of a
> mother that puts her boyfriend first over her child?
A fiance is not just a boyfriend.
DHS never said they wanted me to leave.
They didn't have the guts to outright say it.
Divide and conquer is one of their major tactics used.
By destroying the family they weaken their opponent parent.
> Or do I have that wrong? Did she really put the child over you?
Would you please explain the government and law
enforcement policy of refusing to PAY kidnappers?
Don't they CARE for the kidnap victims??
What's more important to them, the money or the victim??
Are you saying that people should give in
to EXTORTIONISTS who got caught red handed
telling LIES in court?
Greegor
> On Sat, 14 Jul 2007 07:40:30 -0700, Greegor <Greego...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Kane wrote
> >> Your ego needs got in the way, did they not? You needed to NOT justify
> >> the honorable lie so that you could claim I was a liar, and never
> >> answer for your dishonorable claim, when you KNEW that I would only
> >> lie to protect lives and physical safety. Is that not correct, Greg?
>
> >Could you please diagram this gibberish?
>
>
> >Is this like antidisestablishmentarianism?
>
> Gibberish example?
>
> http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/antidisestablishmentarianism
>
> ... -noun
> opposition to the withdrawal of state support or recognition from an
> established church, esp. the Anglican Church in 19th-century England.
> ...
>
> But no, nothing like that at all was meant by my comment.
>
> Here, let me take the highly complex presentation and simplify it for
> the simple.
>
> Your ego needs got in the way, did they not?
>
> responding to, right....thus hiding what I thought your ego needs
> were. ]]]
>
> You needed to NOT justify the honorable lie --
>
> [[[ As in my asking you, which you've snipped reference to, of course,
> little liar, if you'd lie to protect your mother. ]]]
What does my Mother need protection from?
> - so that you could claim I was a liar,
>
> [[[ By refusing to answer my question you preserved your claim that I
> was a liar... ]]]
Is THAT all that makes you a liar, Donald?
> - and never answer for your dishonorable claim,
>
> [[[ That I was an unethical immoral liar, when of course, according to
> most societies values there IS such a thing as an honorable lie. ]]]
I just LOVE it when you attempt to justify your lies.
> when you KNEW that I would only
> lie to protect lives and physical safety.
How do I know that Donald?
You post fictional quotes of your opponents.
How is that to protect lives and property?
> [[[ Which of course I was referring to in that last statement. ]]]
>
> Is that not correct, Greg?
Why would I trust you, Donald?
> [[[ The question you tried to dodge yet again, by changing the
> subject, AND DELETING THE QUESTION WHEN IT WAS ASKED OF YOU YET AGAIN.
> And I shall do now....R R R R R ]]]
>
> So Greg, would you lie to protect your mother?
>From what?
> If not why not, and why have you refused to answer it now three times
> or more, and instead just erase it and change the subject to HOW I
> discussed this issue?
Ah ah ah.. You're starting to fall back into raving and run on
sentences!
> The sentence too complex for you? Is that why you don't answer?
>
> Would ... you ... lie ... to ... protect ... your ... mother?
How would a lie protect my mother, Donald?
>From what?
> Or are you so lost in the unethical lies, you cannot bear to deal with
> the morally defensible ones,
Yeah, I cannot BEAR it, can't you tell?
> for fear you'd have to give up calling me a liar WITHOUT
> EVER PROVING SO EXCEPT FOR MY OWN
> ADMISSION OF THE USE OF ETHICAL LIE?
You're a PATHOLOGICAL LIAR, and you think this
bluster will distract from that?
> In other words, you are an immoral thug?
You're a con artist, an ""infiltrator"" and you're
angry that somebody exposed your racket.
Big deal!
American Greed
> On Sat, 14 Jul 2007 07:40:30 -0700, Greegor <Gree...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Kane wrote
>>> Your ego needs got in the way, did they not? You needed to NOT justify
>>> the honorable lie so that you could claim I was a liar, and never
>>> answer for your dishonorable claim, when you KNEW that I would only
>>> lie to protect lives and physical safety. Is that not correct, Greg?
>> Could you please diagram this gibberish?
>
>
>> Is this like antidisestablishmentarianism?
>
> Gibberish example?
>
> http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/antidisestablishmentarianism
>
> opposition to the withdrawal of state support or recognition from an
> established church, esp. the Anglican Church in 19th-century England.
> ...
>
> But no, nothing like that at all was meant by my comment.
>
> Here, let me take the highly complex presentation and simplify it for
> the simple.
>
>
> responding to, right....thus hiding what I thought your ego needs
> were. ]]]
>
>
> You needed to NOT justify the honorable lie --
>
> [[[ As in my asking you, which you've snipped reference to, of course,
> little liar, if you'd lie to protect your mother. ]]]
>
> [[[ By refusing to answer my question you preserved your claim that I
> was a liar... ]]]
But Don, everyone knows you're a liar. You have publicly justified your
lies and false allegations.
>
> - and never answer for your dishonorable claim,
>
> [[[ That I was an unethical immoral liar, when of course, according to
> most societies values there IS such a thing as an honorable lie. ]]]
Citations.
Don, you sure would have quite a few lifetimes to go before you could
approach anything that may be 'honorable'. You're a sniveling coward -
a liar and false accuser. You live off the misery you create for others
- you sir are pathetic.
>
> when you KNEW that I would only
> lie to protect lives and physical safety.
Which of course can be twisted to mean 'anytime I feel like'.
>
>
> [[[ Which of course I was referring to in that last statement. ]]]
>
> Is that not correct, Greg?
Why do you speak in this round the bush double negatives, like a dummy
trying to sound 'smart'?
>
> [[[ The question you tried to dodge yet again, by changing the
> subject, AND DELETING THE QUESTION WHEN IT WAS ASKED OF YOU YET AGAIN.
> And I shall do now....R R R R R ]]]
>
> So Greg, would you lie to protect your mother?
You were lying all these years to protect your mother?
What has she done that requires you to lie about her?
>
> If not why not, and why have you refused to answer it now three times
> or more, and instead just erase it and change the subject to HOW I
> discussed this issue?
Are you an oxymoron?
>
> The sentence too complex for you? Is that why you don't answer?
>
> Would ... you ... lie ... to ... protect ... your ... mother?
Don, what has your mother done? How has she become the topic of
conversation? Is she the reason you hate parents?
Whats with your mother anyhow?
>
> Or are you so lost in the unethical lies, you cannot bear to deal with
> the morally defensible ones, for fear you'd have to give up calling me
> a liar WITHOUT EVER PROVING SO EXCEPT FOR MY OWN ADMISSION OF THE USE
> OF ETHICAL LIE?
You spammed your states most vulnerable children to perverts on usenet
and now hide behind your lies. Now you talk of morals and ethics -- like
Jeffry Damer talking about table manners. lol.
You're pathetic, Don.
>
> In other words, you are an immoral thug?
>
> 0:]
Greegor
Kane wrote
> By answering, when someone came to the door, "No she's not home, but
> I'll be glad to die in her place...that's why I moved home with her."
> ... after Lisa gave me the boot.
My folks and I don't live in the same state.
robins...@gmail.com
> How did you get the tapes of this second date
> but not the other interview tapes?
My friend Ron Jagannathan was the one accused. His lawyer had to fight
for 8 months to get this tape. My friend had to face a criminal and a
civil trial without these tapes. He prevailed on the criminal and is
fighting a civil appeal.
The social worker is working with his ex's lawyer who has had three
felony convictions. THis is a crazy case so far.
Thanks for your help.
VR.
>
> I would strongly suspect they THOUGHT these interview
> tapes they DID give you was the most damning about you.
>
> Their mindset is so twisted that they would see it that way.
>
> I betcha the OTHER tapes would reveal the caseworker
> to be even more stupid or insane.
> They might also reveal material more sensitive as
> far as liability to LAW SUIT for the state worker.
>
> My SO started taping supervised visits with her daughter
> partly because the visit supervisor was making up fairy tales.
> The taping was OK for a long time and suddenly the
> visit supervisor (SW with NO LICENSE) started to worry
> about being sued. Our favorite tape in the huge collection
> is one where the ""SW"" tries to con my SO into stopping
> with the audio recording, until they would check with
> their corporate attorney about whether it was OK.
> Then she proceeded to rave over and over about how
> tapes can be altered. The woman sounded like
> she was actually having a mental breakdown on tape!
> The most rediculous part is that all she had to do is SHUT UP
> and she wouldn't be on the tape! Her raving dominated most
> of the two hour visit time.
>
> We're in Iowa, a ONE PARTY state for tape recording phone calls.
> The tapes of those are a riot too.
> When I got MY chance in court I introduced 10 full size cassette
> tapes with a log of the items on each tape, but I only played
> one ten minute phone call where the caseworker revealed
> her blatantly hostile and malicious attitude, as well as
> refused reasonable requests and demanded submission
> to services while refusing to repair RIGGED services.
>
> Another agency MSW had confirmed UNDER OATH that the
> amount of "Collateral Input" they had into my ""Psychological
> Evaluation""
> (which never took place for this very reason)
> would have rigged the outcome and made it USELESS.
>
> Suddenly the tape of the worker refusing to repair RIGGED
> services was much more pertinent.
>
> Do you intend to sue the agency under Chapter 42 Section 1983
> for Civil Rights violations and Chapter 42 Section 1985 for conspiracy
> to violate your civil rights? Make it about 10 Million or more
> so it hurts them bad enough they don't let that crap happen again.
>
> It might be hard to find an attorney who will actually take the
> case, but keep looking until you find one, it's worth it.
>
> Things that help decide how much to sue for:
>
> How long was your child out of the home?
> Did you "stipulate" or lose at the adjudication hearing?
> Did they ever return the child to your home?
> Did anybody from the agency ever apologize or
> concede they screwed up?
> Did they cover up the garbage done?
> Did they file in court to correct their garbage or did
> they persist in maintaining their lies?
> Did they renew their lies a few times?
> Did you fight them or were you submissive and cooperative?
> They didn't Terminate your Parental Rights did they?
> Did they try rigging any ""Services"" on the service plan to smear
> you?
> What things on the Service Plan would have fixed you if you
> had actually been a child molester?
> Did they go after you and/or the father for child support?
> Was the child abused in Foster Care? (FC is a nightmare!)
> How DID you get the tapes that you did?
> The documents did NOT reflect the crap on these tapes did they?
>
> Under the US Constitution they ripped you off in many more
> ways than you probably realized.
>
> Probably 8 or Nine numbered amendments to the US Constitution
> and likely several counts of each, partly because you need to
> come up with counts for the supervisory chain of command.
> They get nailed under "failure to supervise" and
> "knew or should have known" about dirt going on.
> Remember you likely can't sue the agency itself, or the state,
> but you can sue every idiot from the agency who touched
> the case and didn't fix it! Which idiots in the agency
> do you think didn't hear the crappy tapes?
>
> Did any of the caseworkers turn against their own
> agency after hearing those interview tapes?
>
> Did they try the old "Divide and Conquer" tactic
> to drive you and the Daddy apart?
> ( It's extremely common! Particularly since they're accusing him. )
>
> Have you been warned about the "stipulation scam"?
> Heading for the Adjudication Hearing right?
> Often even paid attorneys will drop the "stipulation" bomb
> on you 15 minutes before the adjudication hearing.
> Your OWN attorney will suddenly urge you to "stipulate"
> which is not technically a guilty plea but may as well be one.
> They con you into stipulating by promising you an
> easy services plan. This promise is usually broken.
>
> Usually many services on the "Service Plan" are so
> totally without any basis whatsoever that you will
> not take it seriously.
>
> They WANT you to not do things on the Service Plan.
> Then they can go for Termination of Parental Rights
> after maybe a year based on the fact that you didn't do
> everything you were asked.
>
> You're better off to never have any Court Approved ""Service Plan"".
>
> Do not stipulate unless you are guilty and want them to OWN you.
>
> Fight in the Adjudication hearing.
>
> >From the sound of these tapes the agency might
>
> actually want to DROP this case before the
> adjudication hearing to save themselves the
> embarassment should you decide to play the
> tape and cross examine the caseworker about
> her methods.
>
> A properly trained "evidenciary interviewer" is extremely rare.
> Tapes made by interviewers without the proper training
> and qualifications can be barred from court.
> (And everything collected in those interviews)
>
> These botched interviews by idiots sometimes
> mess up cases against real hardcore child abusers.
>
> Trained interviewers ask a lot of questions called
> "Epistemology" questions to get to the bottom
> of how the child knows what they know.
> Look up that word in the dictionary, it's crucial.
>
> Kids have been interviewed five times about blue men
> on the roof and by the third interview they are talking
> very matter of fact like about the blue men on the roof.
>
> NBC did a documentary about this problem.
>
> Repeated interviews basically tell the kid what
> the worker wants to hear. It's called "telegraphing".
>
> In your case you might actually NOT want to throw
> the crappy tapes out because the ones you have
> are a GOLDEN OPPORTUNITY to show the warped
> malicious behavior you are up against.
>
> The OTHER tapes are probably even MORE damning
> for the agency being a pack of idiots.
>
> Ask your attorney if the process will use the burden
> of proof "Preponderance" or "Clear and Convincing".
>
> The Constitution ""guarantees"" Clear and Convincing
> in a case where your LIBERTY INTEREST right
> to be a family is in jeopardy, but in many states your
> attorney has to shove Santosky v Kramer into the
> Judge's face to raise the standard from Preponderance
> to Clear and Convincing.
>
> The depositions are probably being delayed because
> they know they have a "crap case" and they're
> desperately trying to come up with something
> to make a case.
>
> I expect they'll try a Child Psychologist or Therapist.
> Careful, they use unqualified ""therapist"" contractors here.
>
> The problem is they use "stooges", contractors who
> depend on them for a lot of income, to "give them
> the dirt they want" to make a case.
>
> Often, the initial accusations and the ones launched
> right before or IN court are wildly different.
>
> Generally they use the spaghetti method, where
> you throw it on the wall and see what parts stick.
> I also call it the shotgun method.
> If they launch the court case with 10 complaints
> and you shoot down all but one, THAT will be all
> they need to tear up your family.
>
> They think like "Chicken Little" with that kind of hysteria.
>
> My condolences, and welcome to the club of
> people who know that the PR from the
> Child Protection INDUSTRY is all a bunch of crap.
>
> People will tell you that "Not all caseworkers are bad"
> but after a whole bunch are involved in your case you
> will wonder how the successive caseworkers live
> with themselves knowing they are an accessoriy to
> the agency abuse of your family. It's NOT just the
> one moron who did these stupid interviews.
> The others "play along" even when the case is absurd.
> They are equally guilty.
>
> When you win, don't think this is somebody else's problem.
>
> Beware of Dan Sullivan, Kane and their pack of hyenas.
> They ridicule Family Rights groups and Constitutional Rights.
> Dan is like a Boll Weevil who wants to burrow inside to cause harm.
>
> Greg Hanson, Cedar Rapids Iowa
>
> On Jul 12, 5:45 am, robinsonve...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > To
> > Susan Alexander Ph: Susan Alexander: 703-324-7899,
> > Lura Bovee 703-324-7202, anna.bo...@fairfaxcounty.gov,
> > Dana Page 703-324-7749
>
> > Dear Mr. Shuster:
>
> > Please click on these links to hear how leading questions have been
> > asked by Social worker Ms. Traore and outrageous conclusions made out
> > of them. And why it is important that all audio interviews are handed
> > to me for the forthcoming desposition hearing and trial.
>
> >http://whitecollarchildabuse.com/sveta_sw_11_09_06_part1.mp3
>
> >http://whitecollarchildabuse.com/lisa_sw_11_09_06_part1.mp3
>
> >http://whitecollarchildabuse.com/lisa_sw_11_09_06_part2.mp3
>
> > I am requesting your help in obtaining audio interview recordings of
> > my children for the following dates.
>
> > 11/06/2006.
> > 11/09/2006
> > 11/15/2006
> > 03/02/2007
>
> > According to CPS records - there were interviews of my children
> > conducted on all the above dates.
>
> > A desposition hearing has been scheduled and postponed twice. - The
> > CPS has not yet handed me all the requested material.
>
> > I have been unable to obtain these audio records except one.
> > ( 11/09/06) or the photographs supposedly taken at INOVA emmergency of
> > fairfax. I have also been unable to get photos taken by CPS worker Ms.
> > Shannon Traore.
>
> > All these interviews were conducted by Ms. Shannon Traore CPS Social
> > worker.
>
> > There were other taped interviews conducted by Ms. Judy Parks, and Ms.
> > Sherrie Noud ( between Feb 06 - Sept 06) The tapes have not yet been
> > released to me. But the allegations were dismissed. I would
> > appreciate your
>
> ...
>
> read more »
Dan Sullivan
> On Jul 13, 5:12 am, Greegor <Greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > How did you get the tapes of this second date
> > but not the other interview tapes?
>
> My friend Ron Jagannathan was the one accused. His lawyer had to fight
> for 8 months to get this tape.
He should have rec'd copies of the tapes in discovery BEFORE the crim
trial.
Ct appointed attny?
> My friend had to face a criminal and a
> civil trial without these tapes. He prevailed on the criminal and is
> fighting a civil appeal.
How many days was the crim trial?
CPS founded him for abuse?
> The social worker is working with his ex's lawyer who has had three
> felony convictions. THis is a crazy case so far.
Not really.
Dan
firemonkey
gregs people live in Mn.
Greegor
Kane wrote
> By answering, when someone came to the door, "No she's not home, but
> I'll be glad to die in her place...that's why I moved home with her."
> ... after Lisa gave me the boot.
You haven't established that she did.
G > My folks and I don't live in the same state.
F >gregs people live in Mn.
K > No relevant to the issue.
K > Greg claims I lie.
K > I have confessed to doing do...ONLY
K > for the protection of other's safety.
No, Kane, you claimed you lie for "moral or ethical reasons".
WHO do you think doesn't know what those words mean
when they come from a rabid crusader like yourself?
Infiltrating groups you are directly opposed to,
using fake identity, fake IP address, etc?
Kane wrote
> I've claimed he lies.
>
> We've seen so many examples I've lost count.
Kane struggles to compare a partial quote with a
paraphrased statement, HOPING to twist something
into a lie.
Did you notice he switched betwen the royal "We"
and saying he has lost count?
Yet he didn't offer even ONE example!
Not even the strained one where they compared
a partial quote with a complete paraphrase! LOL
Kane wrote
> I asked him if he would lie to protect someone important to him.
> He is so busy trying to make ME out as unethical, he forgets what
> ethics actually are.
Kane, you admitted to telling lies.
Then you attempt to justify them as "moral or ethical".
But you also stated that you set up a "false trail" to
Donald L. Fisher of Oregon.
If that was a lie, how could it be "moral or ethical"?
Kane wrote
> Now he's dodging, just as he dodged the
> "use of lethal force" question for so long.
Kane, you are a nutcase.
I answered your "use of lethal force" question early on.
My answer just didn't suit your needs, so you badgered
about it for a long time.
K > He's that desperate.
Kane, you asked me if I would LIE to keep my mother safe.
I immediately asked a QUALIFIER question which is obvious.
How would telling a LIE keep my mother safe?
Have you answered that QUALIFIER question?
> Would you lie to protect your mother, or child, or anyone important to
> you if the one asking was a risk to them?
>
> He won't answer.
You haven't qualified the question by explaining how a LIE
would protect my mother.
> But then, if you review his posting history, and that of some of his
> buddies, you can plainly see that the cultivation of lies makes up the
> majority, in fact almost the whole of their postings.
Does this finger pointing justify Kanes lies?
I thought Kanes justification was "moral or ethical"
and later a "safety" claim. If those justifications are
true, then why does he need to justify his lies
by finger pointing?
> They have posted opinion as fact for years, and when confronted with a
> challenge, simply lie their way out of it, or run, which is even
> stupider for a liar to do.
Kane is the expert on what a liar should do.
> Where do these pathological moral cretins come from I wonder.
You play at ""secret agent"" and ""infiltrate"" so
you desperately NEED to vilify somebody!
Greegor
> On Jul 13, 5:12 am, Greegor <Greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
Shh!
Dan Sullivan
> but not the other interview tapes?
>
> tapes they DID give you was the most damning about you.
>
> Their mindset is so twisted that they would see it that way.
>
> I betcha the OTHER tapes would reveal the caseworker
> to be even more stupid or insane.
Your degree in psychiatry is from which college, Greg?
How do you know "it's worth it," Greg?
How much have you won yourself?
> Things that help decide how much to sue for:
>
> How long was your child out of the home?
> Did you "stipulate" or lose at the adjudication hearing?
> Did they ever return the child to your home?
> Did anybody from the agency ever apologize or
> concede they screwed up?
> Did they cover up the garbage done?
> Did they file in court to correct their garbage or did
> they persist in maintaining their lies?
> Did they renew their lies a few times?
> Did you fight them or were you submissive and cooperative?
> They didn't Terminate your Parental Rights did they?
> Did they try rigging any ""Services"" on the service plan to smear
> you?
> What things on the Service Plan would have fixed you if you
> had actually been a child molester?
> Did they go after you and/or the father for child support?
> Was the child abused in Foster Care? (FC is a nightmare!)
> How DID you get the tapes that you did?
> The documents did NOT reflect the crap on these tapes did they?
>
> Under the US Constitution they ripped you off in many more
> ways than you probably realized.
Please explain in detail, Greg.
> Probably 8 or Nine numbered amendments to the US Constitution
> and likely several counts of each, partly because you need to
> come up with counts for the supervisory chain of command.
Exactly which amendments are you referring to, Greg?
How can anyone prevent a Court from approving a Service Plan, Greg?
> Do not stipulate unless you are guilty and want them to OWN you.
>
> Fight in the Adjudication hearing.
>
> >From the sound of these tapes the agency might
>
> actually want to DROP this case before the
> adjudication hearing to save themselves the
> embarassment should you decide to play the
> tape and cross examine the caseworker about
> her methods.
I doubt that.
> A properly trained "evidenciary interviewer" is extremely rare.
> Tapes made by interviewers without the proper training
> and qualifications can be barred from court.
> (And everything collected in those interviews)
I've never seen that, Greg.
> These botched interviews by idiots sometimes
> mess up cases against real hardcore child abusers.
>
> Trained interviewers ask a lot of questions called
> "Epistemology" questions to get to the bottom
> of how the child knows what they know.
> Look up that word in the dictionary, it's crucial.
>
> Kids have been interviewed five times about blue men
> on the roof and by the third interview they are talking
> very matter of fact like about the blue men on the roof.
>
> NBC did a documentary about this problem.
>
> Repeated interviews basically tell the kid what
> the worker wants to hear. It's called "telegraphing".
>
> In your case you might actually NOT want to throw
> the crappy tapes out because the ones you have
> are a GOLDEN OPPORTUNITY to show the warped
> malicious behavior you are up against.
>
> The OTHER tapes are probably even MORE damning
> for the agency being a pack of idiots.
>
> Ask your attorney if the process will use the burden
> of proof "Preponderance" or "Clear and Convincing".
Won't make a bit of difference.
> The Constitution ""guarantees"" Clear and Convincing
> in a case where your LIBERTY INTEREST right
> to be a family is in jeopardy, but in many states your
> attorney has to shove Santosky v Kramer into the
> Judge's face to raise the standard from Preponderance
> to Clear and Convincing.
See above.
Hilarious!
BTW notice that Greg didn't offer ANY advice on how to get the
children back!!!!
Greegor
Who's swearing?
> Say, tell me, do you think Donald L. Fisher, who you have identified
> as living in Bend Oregon and an employee of CPS, actually pandered to
> perverts and spammed children in state custody to them, Greg?
Yes.
> Speak right up, don't be shy, back your buddy Dennis.
> He's going to need your support.
> >G > My folks and I don't live in the same state.
> >F >gregs people live in Mn.
>
> >K > No relevant to the issue.
> >K > Greg claims I lie.
> >K > I have confessed to doing do...ONLY
> >K > for the protection of other's safety.
>
> >No, Kane, you claimed you lie for "moral or ethical reasons".
>
> Let's see a citation Greg. Point right to my words where I said that,
> and nothing else. Go for it.
Why would I need to?
> Mmm..Greg, I gave an example when I first mentioned that. YOU and DOAN
> chose, when replying and bringing it up to NOT include the context.
>
> In other words, YOU, to try and prove me a liar, LIED, little man. YOu
> and Doan.
You flatter me so!
> >WHO do you think doesn't know what those words mean
> >when they come from a rabid crusader like yourself?
>
> I can't say, since that's not all I said. I qualified what I
> considered a moral and ethical lie, Greg, and to further your
> understanding I pointed out that it would be, only to protect
> another's safety.
See, I didn't need to prove it at all. You admitted to those words.
> But you continue to lie about that, by omitting my actual full
> comment, and the one's following each time you tried to lie about it.
Yet you haven't posted the quote with the allegedly missing context.
Why is that?
> But you feel free, little man, to go right out there, dredge up that
> post, and link to it right here. We'll wait. I got time.
LOL
> >Infiltrating groups you are directly opposed to,
> >using fake identity, fake IP address, etc?
>
> Now let me see. Has Greg lied again? Why yes he has.
>
> I have, about three or four times in as many months, approximately,
> mentioned that I used to have great respect for and supported that
> very group in it's best use...the support of folks that could come
> together and work on getting their children back and providing MORAL
> support...and that I was disappointed in the direction it had gone.
>
> Does everyone there post with their real name, Greg?
>
> And I'm still not opposed to that group, Greg. I'm opposed to a few
> assholes, you and a couple of others, that behave immorally, luring
> and tricking people into doing things that could cause people to lose
> their children.
>
> If YOU want to fight constitutional battles, Greg, or CB wants to,
> I've not a thing against that. Trying to con OTHERS into doing so when
> it may be the worst thing they could do, and assuring them that they
> have a good chance of winning if they force a case into court so they
> can appeal on constitutional grounds is a piece of evil, malicious
> shit, little man.
>
> No Greg, I still would support every single person there that is NOT
> selling your brand of "I'm a Loser, So Come Join ME and FUCK YOUR
> KIDS."
>
> That's basically it, Greg...and you and others have succeeded in the
> past in influencing people so that is exactly what happened to them,
> and the wound up in jail for their trouble.
>
> You are a poison to parents, and children, Greg. You and just a small
> handful.
>
> For your size, little man, you can be very destructive to families.
You're a complete system suck, so your complaints
are music to my ears!
You worked as a caseworker, you contracted,
you served on a board to pull for funding to enlarge the agency.
You were a webmaster for the state web site with the photos
and brief bio on kids the state had removed and TPR'd from their
parents.
You and your fellow travelers all have the witch hunter mentality.
<snip!>
> >Kane wrote
> >> I asked him if he would lie to protect someone important to him.
> >> He is so busy trying to make ME out as unethical, he forgets what
> >> ethics actually are.
>
> >Kane, you admitted to telling lies.
>
> Yep. I sure enough did.
>
> >Then you attempt to justify them as "moral or ethical".
>
> Yep, in the very same post I said the above. I would lie under ONLY
> very special circumstances. I said it. I explained it and I gave
> examples.
>
> You have done everything possible to avoid including the clear
> explanation of when I would lie for what purpose. And my example.
>
> >But you also stated that you set up a "false trail" to
> >Donald L. Fisher of Oregon.
>
> >If that was a lie, how could it be "moral or ethical"?
>
> Now how would I be honoring my possible ethical lie by answering that
> question, little man?
>
> You don't know if it was a lie, or the truth. At least not by MY
> words, stupid.
>
> For if I tell an ethical lie to protect people I'd surely be, as you
> are, a stump stupid unethical pissant, to turn around and tell the
> truth...right?
On the other hand, if you fraudulently posed as Donald L. Fisher
and then worked for YEARS to make a lot of people hate you,
the lie would actually be endangering Donald L. Fisher,
on top of being identity fraud since YOU set him up as a ""false
trail"".
If you were NOT Donald L. Fisher, setting him up to get YOUR
feedback is the opposite of moral, ethical or safety.
If you ARE Donald L. Fisher, then saying you're NOT him is
the obvious safety issue, but PARTICULARLY because you
power tripped on your anonymity and insulted and attacked
many people while hiding behind your duck blind of anonymity.
You were the ultimate coward, an impotent weasel who
hid behind ""anonymity"" to attack others.
It would seem that when you were a government employee,
you had to identify yourself and get kicked around a lot.
So when you could be ""anonymous"" you went APE,
taking out your deep seated resentments on people
you decided were good targets.
You're a frustrated crusader, angry that the world
won't accede to your Megalomaniac dreams.
OF COURSE you'd go ape harassing people when
you think you are invincibly anonymous.
And foul your underwear when you get ID'd.
> >Kane wrote
> >> Now he's dodging, just as he dodged the
> >> "use of lethal force" question for so long.
>
> >Kane, you are a nutcase.
>
> Nope. YOU are liar,
ADHD hyperactivity?
> and unethical, by the accepted social standards
> that would allow someone to lie to protect others, and Greg, even
> one's self, if they were presented with a danger, that could be
> averted by misleading a questioner.
And causing people to blame your own friend for your attacks on
others?
> I asked you a question. You are still dodging it as fast as our little
> feet can peddle on your little bikey with training wheels.
>
> >I answered your "use of lethal force" question early on.
>
> R R R R R...now you lie again?
Coming from you that's flattery!
> You answered by DENIAL. By asking
> question after question for clarification then complaining that I
> wasn't sticking to my original question.
It's a bit OLD to be picking these nits.
> You ARE a case, Greg. As in nut.
I have no ADHD, Donald.
> >My answer just didn't suit your needs, so you badgered
> >about it for a long time.
>
> Okay, show us the answer you gave me when I first asked.
Post my denial that you CLAIMED.
> And include my question in original form. Cited...quoted...linked.
You think you're no OBSESSED?
> Here, I'll even help you. Here is the post of YOURS that prompted my
> question, Greg.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.child-protective-services/...
>
> And here is what you said that my question went to:
>
> [[[ It's pretty obvious from your opening line you were not have a one
> on one with this ex cop, but simply made it appear that way by your
> interspersed answers and challenges. ]]]
>
> Greg Hanson
> View profile
> More options Aug 8 2001, 12:22 am
> Newsgroups: alt.support.child-protective-services
> From: "Greg Hanson" <Gree...@Hotmail.com>
> Date: Wed, 08 Aug 2001 07:22:07 GMT
> Local: Wed, Aug 8 2001 12:22 am
> Subject: ex-cop?
> Reply to author | Forward | Print | View thread | Show original |
> Report this message | Find messages by this author
> ex-cop in a Portland TV chat room
>
> > I'm always appalled at the ignorance I find in
> > opinions regarding SCF. I worked in child
> > abuse with the Portland Police for a lot of
> > years and dealt with
>
> Must've made you somewhat unpopular
> among your fellow officers. More than half
> of one police force by me will not work
> with CPS. "I have a family too."
>
> >First, doesn't anyone understand that the
> > courts are involved in these things? CSD
> > and police remove kids, but it is reviewed
> > the next court day by a judge.
>
> In my families case, child was removed by
> police, noteably one who is an over-the-fence
> neighbor of the falsely accusing grandparents,
> further, there was NO court removal order
> for over two weeks.
>
> > the kids are taken, the judge, NOT SCF
> > OR THE COPS have any say as to when
> > the kids go back.
>
> It's more like the judge has no say, and
> rubber stamps every CPS request.
> This is documented in many statements
> and in caselaw where "thin" cases were
> turned around on appeal.
>
> > For the Caring Mom, it is pretty
> > easy to tell when bruises and other injuries
> > are caused by playing and when they are
> > caused by abuse. To say your child will be
> > taken away because he fell off a bike is silly.
>
> would you believe removal for "clutter"?
>
> > And as far as the Christian kids,
>
> surname Christine, not Christian. Broken in to the wrong house
> lately?
>
> > I imagine when these childred finally starved
> > to death, the same people would be
> > screaming because the state didn't do anything.
>
> How many starvation cases were there last year?
>
> > And, for what it's worth, children are not removed
> > from families because they are homeless. They are
> > removed because of abusive situations. No judge
> > in Oregon would allow poverty to be a reason to
> > remove children.
>
> McGuckin accusations were no electricity, not enough food, etc.
> Christine accusations were malnourishment and dehydration.
>
> > And if you really want to know what
> > you are talking about, don't listen to
> > the people who have lost their children
> > because of abusive behavior, but go to
> > a juvenile court one day and listen to
> > the proceedings.
>
> Juvenile court is closed to public.
>
> > And to believe that threatening anyone
> > with a gun to their face is justified is
> > just plain sick.
>
> THIS from an ex-cop?
> Was this some new kind of unarmed cop?
> I suspect this person was never a cop.
> If he had been, he wouldn't have accused
> himself and fellow officers of being "sick" like this. ...
If that is an accurate quote, it's from August 2001.
Why did you skip to Mar 2005?
firemonkey
> > wrote:
>
> >> Kane wrote
> >>> Your ego needs got in the way, did they not? You needed to NOT justify
> >>> the honorable lie so that you could claim I was a liar, and never
> >>> answer for your dishonorable claim, when you KNEW that I would only
> >>> lie to protect lives and physical safety. Is that not correct, Greg?
> >> Could you please diagram this gibberish?
>
> > Sure. Happy to.
>
> >> Is this like antidisestablishmentarianism?
>
> > Gibberish example?
>
> >http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/antidisestablishmentarianism
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
Greed,why do you refer to the rape of children as diddling? Please
explain.
Firemonkey
American Greed
Why do you weird-o's always want to talk about sex with children? Pull
your head out of your partners crotch long enough to learn exactly what
diddling means.
Diddling; or the abstract idea conveyed by the verb to diddle; is
sufficiently well understood. Yet the fact, the deed, the thing
diddling, is somewhat difficult to define. We may get, however, at a
tolerably distinct conception of the matter in hand, by defining- not
the thing, diddling, in itself; but man, as an animal that diddles.
![0:]'s profile photo](http://lh3.googleusercontent.com/a-/ALV-UjWfxYkvOkkwbLOWpExoUjiZVjIIrjv2sX8xgAJfGvY7bulmJA=s40-c)
0:]
Mmmm...in response to you bringing it up?
Well, probably to easily refute your homophobic claims, little monkey
spanker.
> Pull
> your head out of your partners crotch long enough to learn exactly what
> diddling means.
From you? If you can get your head out of Greg's butt long enough to
teach us?
> Diddling; or the abstract idea conveyed by the verb to diddle; is
> sufficiently well understood. Yet the fact, the deed, the thing
> diddling, is somewhat difficult to define. We may get, however, at a
> tolerably distinct conception of the matter in hand, by defining- not
> the thing, diddling, in itself; but man, as an animal that diddles.
And your source there would be your sex sodden Greg masturbating cum
gulping self?
Or is it just too intense a session at the bong?
0:]
American Greed
Edgar Allen Poe. lol.
YooperBoyka
"0:]" <pohak...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ft-dnZ1XUsi3_QDb...@scnresearch.com...
> >
> And your source there would be your sex sodden Greg masturbating cum
> gulping self?
>
> Or is it just too intense a session at the bong?
Oh yes,...I can see now that you are possessed of a fine intellect and
you're not just another attention grubbing narcissist.
Fuckin' K00K.
Shouldn't you be studying your spelling list?
You have a test Friday don't you?
0:]
> "0:]" <pohak...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:ft-dnZ1XUsi3_QDb...@scnresearch.com...
>> And your source there would be your sex sodden Greg masturbating cum
>> gulping self?
>>
>> Or is it just too intense a session at the bong?
>
> Oh yes,...I can see now that you are possessed of a fine intellect and
> you're not just another attention grubbing narcissist.
>
> Fuckin' K00K.
> Shouldn't you be studying your spelling list?
> You have a test Friday don't you?
I'm sorry, I can't hear you very well.
Relax your sphincter a bit to let more sound out.
And so that you don't strangle yourself.
0:]
YooperBoyka
A fixation with poop and anuses, I see.
Sounds pre-teen to me.
0:-]
<cjdon'tl...@no.spam> wrote:
>
>"0:]" <pohak...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:hOSdnY98WYXXCgPb...@scnresearch.com...
>> YooperBoyka wrote:
>>> "0:]" <pohak...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:ft-dnZ1XUsi3_QDb...@scnresearch.com...
>>>> And your source there would be your sex sodden Greg masturbating cum
>>>> gulping self?
>>>>
>>>> Or is it just too intense a session at the bong?
>>>
>>> Oh yes,...I can see now that you are possessed of a fine intellect and
>>> you're not just another attention grubbing narcissist.
>>>
>>> Fuckin' K00K.
>>> Shouldn't you be studying your spelling list?
>>> You have a test Friday don't you?
>>
>> I'm sorry, I can't hear you very well.
>>
>> Relax your sphincter a bit to let more sound out.
>>
>> And so that you don't strangle yourself.
>
>A fixation with poop and anuses, I see.
>Sounds pre-teen to me.
Yet I have not, as yet, posted a photo of my colon to a webpage for
people to admire...right, Dennis.
R RRRR RR R R R R
0:]
Nor have I, Dennis, the fixation you have with little boy's butts,
exhibited by your "buttfuckers," comment in so many posts.
Nor is an Asshole named Greg my buddy I try to cover the backside of.
0:]
>
>
>
firemonkey
> Sounds pre-teen to me.
No! you can't be serious! Kane???
Whoops!! Can't talk, got to go take a dennis and wipe my greg. Back
later
Firemonkey
robins...@gmail.com
> On Jul 15, 9:27 am, robinsonve...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > On Jul 13, 5:12 am, Greegor <Greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > How did you get the tapes of this second date
> > > but not the other interview tapes?
>
> > My friend Ron Jagannathan was the one accused. His lawyer had to fight
> > for 8 months to get this tape.
>
> He should have rec'd copies of the tapes in discovery BEFORE the crim
> trial.
The Fairfax County CPS has a fleet of attorneys who kept quashing
subpoenas and did all kinds of crazy things.
> Ct appointed attny?
No, He had three lawyers. One of his lawyer is Burce McLaughlin. Who
was accused of sexually abusing his 4 children. Went to Jail for 4
years. Got a 10 year jail sentence. He filed an appeal from jail. Got
a new trail and walked out free. Got back custody of his 4 children. -
He is having a wonderful time with his children now.
See this web site. http://www.truthinjustice.org/mclaughlin.htm
> > My friend had to face a criminal and a
> > civil trial without these tapes. He prevailed on the criminal and is
> > fighting a civil appeal.
>
> How many days was the crim trial?
A lenghty trial. His older daugher 7 years testified. She did a
wonderful job stating that she loves her father. What happened. And
the Judge dismissed the charges. Also, The photos were a lie. The
social worker did not obtain any of the photos from the INOVA
emmergency hospital as she stated to a detective.
She was trying to nail Ron Jagannathan because he is a children's
rights activist. Google Ron Jagannathan and find out more.
>
> CPS founded him for abuse?
Yes, He is fighting right now. He has the Fairfax County Board on his
side now.
Greegor
> How did you get the tapes of this second date
> but not the other interview tapes?
robinsonve wrote
> My friend Ron Jagannathan was the one accused. His lawyer had to fight
> for 8 months to get this tape.
Dan Sullivan wrote
> He should have rec'd copies of the tapes in discovery BEFORE the crim
> trial.
robinsonve wrote
> The Fairfax County CPS has a fleet of attorneys who kept quashing
> subpoenas and did all kinds of crazy things.
Dan lives under the delusion that just because something is
SUPPOSED TO work a certain way, that is what actually happens.
Even though he says he personally experienced things gone
wrong in the system he is flabbergasted when somebody
explains to him that something that was SUPPOSED TO
happen a certain way does not in the real world.
I wonder what Dan thinks Ron's paid lawyers
failed to do, or should have done...
That the accused had to face a criminal trial without
the tapes speaks VOLUMES about how useful the
tapes would have been to the defense attorney.
Clearly the tapes would have been EXCULPATORY
and so the system kept out EXCULPATORY information
as they attempted to prosecute.
Will this friend of yours Ron be able to obtain the other
tapes before the civil trial?
Civil trials for criminal acts that could NOT be proven
have become an acceptable form of "double jeopardy"
and used to try to incapacitate somebody seen as a criminal
that they could not criminally convict.
Lots of people think that was a good thing about
how they nailed OJ Simpson, but the PRECIDENT
and pattern of using civil court where criminal
proceedings failed can be extremely abusive.
Dan > Ct appointed attny?
>
> No, He had three lawyers. One of his lawyer is Burce McLaughlin. Who
> was accused of sexually abusing his 4 children. Went to Jail for 4
> years. Got a 10 year jail sentence. He filed an appeal from jail. Got
> a new trail and walked out free. Got back custody of his 4 children. -
> He is having a wonderful time with his children now.
>
> See this web site. http://www.truthinjustice.org/mclaughlin.htm
>
> > > My friend had to face a criminal and a
> > > civil trial without these tapes. He prevailed on the criminal and is
> > > fighting a civil appeal.
>
> > How many days was the crim trial?
>
> A lenghty trial. His older daugher 7 years testified. She did a
> wonderful job stating that she loves her father. What happened. And
> the Judge dismissed the charges. Also, The photos were a lie. The
> social worker did not obtain any of the photos from the INOVA
> emmergency hospital as she stated to a detective.
> She was trying to nail Ron Jagannathan because he is a children's
> rights activist. Google Ron Jagannathan and find out more.
>
>
>
> > CPS founded him for abuse?
>
> Yes, He is fighting right now. He has the Fairfax County Board on his
> side now.
> > > The social worker is working with his ex's lawyer who has had three
> > > felony convictions. THis is a crazy case so far.
>
> > Not really.
The people on these recordings need to be sued for MILLIONS.
He needs to use Civil Suits to incapacitate those idiots.
Watch them try to quash FEDERAL subpoenas for the tapes.
Possible but MUCH less likely.
I'd like to see the Judges face when he hears
these interview recordings.
They'll be very anxious to settle out of court
rather than have a JURY hear those interview tapes.
Exactly why I would not settle out of court.
They are desperate to avoid having the public
find out just how idiotic the Child Protection witch hunters really
are.
If he settles out of court he can't claim he
BEAT the agency, or that they LOST.
They would want a secrecy clause with any settlement.
Another reason not to settle out of court.
The witch hunters are terrified of being put on trial.
Another reason not to settle out of court.
I personally cross examined several CPS caseworkers
and it was one of the better days of my life!
After YEARS of being beat up by them it
was interesting to see THEM with red faces.
That is another reason not to settle out of court.
Dan Sullivan
> Greegor (Greg) wrote
>
> > How did you get the tapes of this second date
> > but not the other interview tapes?
>
> robinsonve wrote
>
> > My friend Ron Jagannathan was the one accused. His lawyer had to fight
> > for 8 months to get this tape.
>
> Dan Sullivan wrote
>
> > He should have rec'd copies of the tapes in discovery BEFORE the crim
> > trial.
>
> robinsonve wrote
>
> > The Fairfax County CPS has a fleet of attorneys who kept quashing
> > subpoenas and did all kinds of crazy things.
>
> Dan lives under the delusion that just because something is
> SUPPOSED TO work a certain way, that is what actually happens.
Before the trial started the attny should have informed the Judge they
hadn't rec'd the tapes in discovery.
> Even though he says he personally experienced things gone
> wrong in the system he is flabbergasted when somebody
> explains to him that something that was SUPPOSED TO
> happen a certain way does not in the real world.
This is crim ct, Greg.
> I wonder what Dan thinks Ron's paid lawyers
> failed to do, or should have done...
See above.
> That the accused had to face a criminal trial without
> the tapes speaks VOLUMES about how useful the
> tapes would have been to the defense attorney.
He won anyway.
> Clearly the tapes would have been EXCULPATORY
> and so the system kept out EXCULPATORY information
> as they attempted to prosecute.
>
> Will this friend of yours Ron be able to obtain the other
> tapes before the civil trial?
What does your crystal ball say, Greg?
> Civil trials for criminal acts that could NOT be proven
> have become an acceptable form of "double jeopardy"
> and used to try to incapacitate somebody seen as a criminal
> that they could not criminally convict.
Two different forums.
> Lots of people think that was a good thing about
> how they nailed OJ Simpson, but the PRECIDENT
> and pattern of using civil court where criminal
> proceedings failed can be extremely abusive.
More of Greg's BS.
How's your case coming along, Greg?
> Possible but MUCH less likely.
>
> I'd like to see the Judges face when he hears
> these interview recordings.
>
> They'll be very anxious to settle out of court
> rather than have a JURY hear those interview tapes.
Why would a jury hear the tapes?
> Exactly why I would not settle out of court.
Hilarious!
> They are desperate to avoid having the public
> find out just how idiotic the Child Protection witch hunters really
> are.
>
> If he settles out of court he can't claim he
> BEAT the agency, or that they LOST.
> They would want a secrecy clause with any settlement.
Really, Greg?
> Another reason not to settle out of court.
>
> The witch hunters are terrified of being put on trial.
> Another reason not to settle out of court.
>
> I personally cross examined several CPS caseworkers
> and it was one of the better days of my life!
How much money did you get so far, Greg?
> After YEARS of being beat up by them it
> was interesting to see THEM with red faces.
As usual you're forgetting that your former girlfriend still hasn't
had custody of her daughter since 2001.
> That is another reason not to settle out of court.
It's never about the children with Greg.
It's always about the piles of cash he'll die dreaming about.
firemonkey
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
greg, you make me sick, it was never about YOU, it was about Lisa's
Watkins little girl.
We see you, you sick fuck. Thats why you hate us so. Your a whore
greg, and your own pimp.
FM
FM
0:-]
wrote:
>Greegor (Greg) wrote
>> How did you get the tapes of this second date
>> but not the other interview tapes?
>
>robinsonve wrote
>> My friend Ron Jagannathan was the one accused. His lawyer had to fight
>> for 8 months to get this tape.
>
>Dan Sullivan wrote
>> He should have rec'd copies of the tapes in discovery BEFORE the crim
>> trial.
>
>robinsonve wrote
>> The Fairfax County CPS has a fleet of attorneys who kept quashing
>> subpoenas and did all kinds of crazy things.
>
>Dan lives under the delusion that just because something is
>SUPPOSED TO work a certain way, that is what actually happens.
Well, he has developed this "delusion" because one, he does not say
that something done a certain way WILL in fact come out a certain way,
and two, he has developed a strategy, a set of tactics, so generally
effective that he just keeps winning. Damn it.
It's so hard to fight success. It could go to his head, yah think?
>Even though he says he personally experienced things gone
>wrong in the system
MMMM, careful there, you'll give away his big secret that he blabs out
publicly that YOU keep missing somehow. (I'm going to point you right
AT it and see if you still can't see it...he is dynamite at spotting
"things going wrong in the system" and exploiting those so adroitly
that CPS loses and the family wins. At the fastest rate, and the
lowest cost possible)
Now is that going to be too much for you to sort through? HE STARTED
TELLING YOU HOW HE DID IT WHAT FIVE OR SIX YEARS AGO, and you still
are in denial? Family after family dropping by here to thank him?
People you had watch carry on conversations in the open right here in
ascps?
And YOU STILL DON'T GET IT. What a wonder you are, boy.
>he is flabbergasted when somebody
>explains to him that something that was SUPPOSED TO
>happen a certain way does not in the real world.
Flabbergasted? Can you give us a few verifiable examples Greg?
What did Dan suppose, and how did it fail to come out that way?
Was it that he was unable, as you were, to find the good side to a
TPR? Heck I know that one, Greg. I know your secret.
You get to have those pesky kids taken off your hands until they reach
their majority. Saves money AND you might be able to sue and win if
you are enormously more lucky than lottery winners.
Hooray for the TPR, right, Greg. It's good side that is. A couple of
years emptying your pockets, a parting visit with your kids, and you
got to try and defend the violation of you civil rights, and learn
learn learn, the system is evil evil evil. What satisfaction, eh?
I been looking for the chink in this guy Dan's armor for years now.
Dan just keeps slapping me down each time I meet yet another family
he's helped.
He refuses to see the good side of a TPR so I KNOW he doesn't know
what he's talking about...but damn that winning thing. If he'd just
stop that I'd find his weakness.
>
>I wonder what Dan thinks Ron's paid lawyers
>failed to do, or should have done...
Me to. But then he'll say or he won't and your innuendo won't be the
arbiter of that.
>That the accused had to face a criminal trial without
>the tapes speaks VOLUMES about how useful the
>tapes would have been to the defense attorney.
Can you tell us just one volume?
>
>Clearly the tapes would have been EXCULPATORY
Oooo....stop that, I'm getting a woodie. You know how legal language
turns me on. 0;]
>and so the system kept out EXCULPATORY information
>as they attempted to prosecute.
Now stop that.
Once is exiting, but twice in a paragraph, that's just talkin' dirty.
>Will this friend of yours Ron be able to obtain the other
>tapes before the civil trial?
What would you advise he do with them, and how should he use them.
Give us the <blush> legal language that applies.
>Civil trials for criminal acts that could NOT be proven
>have become an acceptable form of "double jeopardy"
>and used to try to incapacitate somebody seen as a criminal
>that they could not criminally convict.
Think OJ.
>Lots of people think that was a good thing about
>how they nailed OJ Simpson, but the PRECIDENT
>and pattern of using civil court where criminal
>proceedings failed can be extremely abusive.
So all I have to do is commit a crime, and I should be safe from civil
suit if the crime can't be proven in a criminal court. Yippee.
Is that going to be the Greg's et al strategy?
Or cause them to put out and hire killer attorneys themselves and
counter sue.
>
>Possible but MUCH less likely.
>
>I'd like to see the Judges face when he hears
>these interview recordings.
Me too. But I'm not salivating as heavily as you.
>They'll be very anxious to settle out of court
>rather than have a JURY hear those interview tapes.
>Exactly why I would not settle out of court.
Of course you would. You'd just advise others not to risking THIER
chances of getting one of those infamous One Dollar settlements, and
still have court costs to cover.
>They are desperate to avoid having the public
>find out just how idiotic the Child Protection witch hunters really
>are.
Says the expert at law.
>If he settles out of court he can't claim he
>BEAT the agency, or that they LOST.
>They would want a secrecy clause with any settlement.
But he'll have a much greater chance of not ending up with a buck to
show for his trouble. ONE buck.
You don't read much and follow civil suits, do you, boy?
YOu get a little green blood rising into to your head, and you're all,
"you and HIM fight," aren'tcha boy?
>
>Another reason not to settle out of court.
>
Yeah. It's going to be great fun to have both a dollar, and have gone
to court and heard, "find in favor of the plaintiff, and the
proceedings are closed to the public, and violation of my gag will
result in 30 days and fines."
You go boy. Tell those folks to do it, and you'll bless them as they
go for it and down the tubes. NO settlement, just a high risk of
getting a poor judgement.
>The witch hunters are terrified of being put on trial.
That has NO bearing on the finding of the court as to the size of the
award in the favor of the plaintiff.
You really really need to get out of the fundy thinking box you have
your head stuffed in.
There is a great deal more than just FACTS that influence the court,
my boy.
>Another reason not to settle out of court.
Yeah, take the risk. If you get a buck award, and a guilty, will damn
fine, and Greg will cover court costs and give you a nice sculpture of
a horse head.
That will hold the paper work you will be forbidden to share. Or
worse, it will include things YOU Did that are questionable. Hardly
any of us are totally without fault..and trust me, the opposition,
regardless of whose side, WILL look for anything and everything to
bring up in court credibility killing wise.
I won't tell you what to do, but I will suggest you give lots of
thought to this and consult with your attorney on all the possibly
outcomes and probability for each, with the variables factored in,
like the judges finding history in similar cases, the size of awards
he had given, what jury trials have produced in similar cases...you
know, something beside the quagmire thinking of our little buddy
there.
>
>I personally cross examined several CPS caseworkers
>and it was one of the better days of my life!
Greg, you think a cat barking is a great achievement in child rearing
methods.
You pissed yourself just having the thrill of being in the courtroom.
It's like no one there but you was anything but disgusted, laughing
inside, puzzled, and afraid for your mental health by turns.
>After YEARS of being beat up by them it
>was interesting to see THEM with red faces.
I have one of those kinds of complexions. You can't really tell if I'm
angry, or about to burst out laughing.
It's the Irish in me, I guess.
>
>That is another reason not to settle out of court.
For the pleasure of seeing people turn red because they are amused and
disgusts by turns, and afraid for your sanity?
Did you ramble on a bit about your dog training and your offer to
teach CPS clients how to spank properly?
I absolutely ache for your embarrassment, until I consider the very
possible chance you aren't constitutionally capable of it.
I hope you vetted your answers to weed out any language that might
interpret as legal 'advice.'
And I'm sorry to say some of your past posts...well, Greg. Let's hope
Doan will help you get them removed, as he wanders about ghost like
assuring you he's going to help you take me down.
It might get tough to run down all archives and attributed posts
though, especially on individuals own workstations not open to the
public.
Disregading that I've done nothing illegal, or in violation of any
government entities policies that have consequences, and you, well,
just may have, along with him, and your buddy dennis.
I'm growing impatient. Let's get on with this.
I can't wait for you stupes to make a hero out of me.
But YOU have to do it. I'm too shy and modest, me own self.
And I refuse to take the first poke, as they say. My daddy taught me
to fight honorably. But oh boy, when it's MY turn.
0:]
Greegor
I didn't force DHS into this situation.
They have had many opportunities to do the right thing.
Their new perjury is not my fault.
> > That is another reason not to settle out of court.
>
> It's never about the children with Greg.
The child is part of the family.
Do you think I forced them to commit perjury multiple times?
Did I force them to refuse all efforts to CORRECT the record?
I never got the feeling that the agency people were
"about the children". Some were very willing to LIE
hoping to cover up where they screwed up BIG TIME.
> It's always about the piles of cash he'll die dreaming about.
I'd much rather see the perjorous caseworker in chains
on his way to prison.
But MONEY is the language the agency seems to respond to.
Dan Sullivan
The credible evidence says you did, Greg.
> They have had many opportunities to do the right thing.
They did the right thing.
They removed the little girl from living with a pervert and a loser.
> Their new perjury is not my fault.
CPS made mistakes and you won't take your focus off of it regardless
of the fact that you and your former girlfriend could have gotten her
daughter back years ago.
Explain to me how you and Lisa doing what you've been doing the last
six years plus justifies Lisa not having physical custody of her
daughter.
> > > That is another reason not to settle out of court.
>
> > It's never about the children with Greg.
>
> The child is part of the family.
I notice you're not claiming it's YOUR family anymore.
And that doesn't explain why you're willing to leave her in the
custody of other's when she could have been back with her mother in
the spring or summer of 2001, does it, Greg?
> Do you think I forced them to commit perjury multiple times?
> Did I force them to refuse all efforts to CORRECT the record?
How do you propose they correct the record, Greg?
Alter transcripts?
Erase recordings?
If what's in the record ever become an issue you have the evidence to
show their claims to be erroneous, don't you, Greg?
> I never got the feeling that the agency people were
> "about the children". Some were very willing to LIE
> hoping to cover up where they screwed up BIG TIME.
You screwed up far greater than CPS ever did, Greg.
And the fact that you and Lisa have chosen to leave her daughter in
the custody of other's while you delude yourselves into thinking the
longer Lisa doesn't have custody the greater the financial settlement
will be, only demonstrates what a pair of uncaring dirtbags you are.
> > It's always about the piles of cash he'll die dreaming about.
>
> I'd much rather see the perjorous caseworker in chains
> on his way to prison...
than the little girl be in the custody of her mother.
BTW no one is going to jail over any errors in the Watkins CPS case.
I can tell you from personal experience CPS will claim it to be "an
error in the case record entry."
> But MONEY is the language the agency seems to respond to.
What evidence is there in Lisa's situation with CPS that proves that
to be true, Greg?
If you haven't gotten any money yet, how much do you project you will
get?
Post projections separately for yourself and Lisa.
Greegor
MONEY is the language the agency seems to respond to.
his way to prison..." than the little girl be in the custody of her
Partial quote, partial fiction, AKA HALF TRUTH.
LIE Dan added on:
than the little girl be in the custody of her mother..
Next Dan will claim he is honest except when he has
moral or ethical reasons to lie...
firemonkey
>
> - Show quoted text -
ROFL
FM
Dan Sullivan
> Dan renamed the thread:
> MONEY is the language the agency seems to respond to.
> "I'd much rather see the perjorous caseworker in chains on
> his way to prison..." than the little girl be in the custody of her
> mother..
True.
> Partial quote, partial fiction, AKA HALF TRUTH.
It's not a partial quote, Greg.
It's a complete quote of something you said.
> LIE Dan added on:
> than the little girl be in the custody of her mother..
That is correct, Greg.
I added on.
I didn't include what I said within the quotation marks of what you
said.
> Next Dan will claim he is honest except when he has
> moral or ethical reasons to lie...
I didn't lie about it, Greg.
It's all there in plain sight.
It is just as you said.
Dan added on...
0:-]
wrote:
>Dan renamed the thread:
>MONEY is the language the agency seems to respond to.
>"I'd much rather see the perjorous caseworker in chains on
>his way to prison..." than the little girl be in the custody of her
>mother..
>
>Partial quote, partial fiction, AKA HALF TRUTH.
Interesting claim. Yet you didn't bother to post the rest of material
he left out to look at what the context actually was.
Any particular reason for that?
>
>LIE Dan added on:
>than the little girl be in the custody of her mother..
He didn't put it in quotes as your comment.
So I have to assume, Dan being literate and all, and you not, that he
was voicing an opinion. Until notified otherwise by him, I'm going
with standard English, as it is written.
You wish to correct him, do so by putting in the quoted material that
would be ACCURATE AND TRUE, from your post, that would chance the
meaning.
Use quotes, as he did, then add your opinion, as he appeared to do.
>Next Dan will claim he is honest except when he has
>moral or ethical reasons to lie...
Okay, let's see if your prediction is true, or were you just giving an
opinion?
How is it you have not answered my question regarding YOUR honesty,
which I presume you claim you are, and if you would lie if it might
save your mother...feel free to insert someone else you do love, if
there is any such person.
Oh, wait, I know. IF IT WOULD SAVE GREG HANSON.
That flesh it out in terms you can better incorporate into your world
view?
So, you going to answer, or just dodge again, as you do on the current
lethal force question.....what qualifications for acceptance or
rejection of the use of lethal force by parents to take children back
from CPS do you require to give you opinion, based on the legal
ramifications of the removal?
And would you lie to save your life?
Pretty simple eh?
Would you like me to start two new threads on those subjects, so you
won't become confused, lose track, and fail to answer again?
Please don't abort, or I'll just have to find the fetus and show it to
you again.
0:]