"an old friend" wrote


more forgery stveie grow up


WHARF!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WORF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WHARF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

KØHB wrote:
"an old friend" wrote


more forgery stveie grow up


WHARF!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WORF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WHARF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

stevei is the asshole that cried worf

you can find the phrase on google I suspect

"an old friend" wrote

stevei is the asshole that cried worf

WHARF!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WORF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WHARF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

KØHB wrote:
"an old friend" wrote

stevei is the asshole that cried worf

WHARF!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WORF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WHARF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

porr hans brain stuck again

gues you are just not up on modern lit

"an old friend" wrote

gues you are just not up on modern lit

Here's some modern lit for you......

---- http://www.amishrakefight.org/gfy

WHARF!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WORF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WHARF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

KØHB wrote:
"an old friend" wrote

gues you are just not up on modern lit

Here's some modern lit for you......

poor

WHARF!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WORF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WHARF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

just check out real lit but you are too much of an old foggey to learn
much

On 27 Dec 2005 00:17:54 GMT, "Christy D"
wrote in
:

On 26 Dec 2005 14:28:34 -0800, an_old_friend wrote:
[a bunch of pipe dreams]

Here is the real truth: You can be charged with stalking, fined
$1,000, and sent to jail for one year. If you threatened someone's
life, you can be charged with a felony, fined $10,000, and spend five
years in jail. Mr. Robeson won't have to spend one penny.

===(begin quote from http://www.counseling.mtu.edu/Stalking.htm)===

According to Michigan Penal Code........


Irrelevant. Dudly lives in Tennessee (or so he claims). That makes it
a federal issue which precludes state jurisdiction in both civil and
criminal matters. Federal stalking violations require the stalker to
physically cross state boundries, something which doesn't happen on
the internet (unless someone has secretly invented some sort of Star
Trek internet transporter device.....).

But let's get into this a little deeper. Stalking may be defined
differently in different states, but all states have stalking laws
that have two things in common: 1. The stalker presents a "threat";
and 2. That threat induces "fear".

First, the "threat". There are threats made all the time, both on and
off the internet. The vast majority of those threats never amount to
squat. This is even more true with internet threats since people tend
to be a little more 'outspoken' when they don't have to worry about
getting punched in the face (kind of ironic how easy threats are made
when there is no fear of retaliation). Add to that the abusive nature
of this paticular forum, the fact that Major Dud has participated in
this forum for at least seven years, seen many threats made by others,
and has even made a few threats himself.

Second, the "fear". Actually, the issue is how to demonstrate that the
threat caused fear. This is done by showing how any reasonable person
reacts to fear and comparing those reactions to the reactions of the
person claiming to be the victim. After receiving a threat, does a
reasonable person remain in the presence of the stalker and provoke
the stalker to make more threats? Of course not. I doubt that very
many UN-reasonable people would do that. But Dudly does, and he does
so with an odor of conceit that, in and of itself, evokes .

There was no fear, and therefore no threat. And therefore no case.

Now that we have covered criminal stalking laws at the state and
federal levels, let's try civil law. Civil cases are adjudicated by a
preponderance of the evidence, -not- by reasonable certainty. That, in
and of itself, pretty much throws Dudly out of court since his own
behavior in this newsgroup has been..... well, less than admirable.
There have been no racial slurs against him (although he has made a
couple of marginally prejudicial statements about "do-rag wearing,
be-bop hopping delinquents who think that a 'drive-by' is an Olympic
Sport"), so there are no grounds for federal action based on racial
discrimination (-by- him; however, there might be grounds to bring
action -against- him depending on what he has written as one of his
sock-puppets.....).

What's left? Libel? That might be a valid argument if not for the fact
that Dudly's name and reputation were disgraced by his own lies and
****-poor behavior -long- before said threat occured. No case there.

Finally, let's try the court of public opinion. This is the USA,
right? Well, just how patriotic is it to have a bumper sticker that
says "UAW can KMA"? Especially for a retired USMC Gunnery Sergeant
(who claims to have never been a reservist yet also claims to have
served with 1/24, a USMC Reserve unit)? Then there is the little issue
about his claims to be an EMT yet was refused a license to pursue that
"hobby". So now he cruises the streets with a scanner, a medical bag,
and a light-bar in the trunk, looking for an opportunity to be a hero.
I'm sure that doesn't present a good image to the public..... do you?

If there is -any- legal action to be taken here is should be -against-
Major Dud for impersonating a Marine, an emergency services official,
and an FCC-licensed amateur radio operator. If you want to play the
lawyer, "Cristy", then cite some law in regards to -THOSE- offenses.
If not then shut the **** up and let Dudly reap what he has sown.


Frank Gilliland, pro se.








----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Frank Gilliland wrote:
On 27 Dec 2005 00:17:54 GMT, "Christy D"
wrote in
:

On 26 Dec 2005 14:28:34 -0800, an_old_friend wrote:
[a bunch of pipe dreams]

Here is the real truth: You can be charged with stalking, fined
$1,000, and sent to jail for one year. If you threatened someone's
life, you can be charged with a felony, fined $10,000, and spend five
years in jail. Mr. Robeson won't have to spend one penny.

===(begin quote from http://www.counseling.mtu.edu/Stalking.htm)===

According to Michigan Penal Code........


Irrelevant. Dudly lives in Tennessee (or so he claims). That makes it
a federal issue which precludes state jurisdiction in both civil and
criminal matters. Federal stalking violations require the stalker to
physically cross state boundries, something which doesn't happen on
the internet (unless someone has secretly invented some sort of Star
Trek internet transporter device.....).

But let's get into this a little deeper. Stalking may be defined
differently in different states, but all states have stalking laws
that have two things in common: 1. The stalker presents a "threat";
and 2. That threat induces "fear".

First, the "threat". There are threats made all the time, both on and
off the internet. The vast majority of those threats never amount to
squat. This is even more true with internet threats since people tend
to be a little more 'outspoken' when they don't have to worry about
getting punched in the face (kind of ironic how easy threats are made
when there is no fear of retaliation). Add to that the abusive nature
of this paticular forum, the fact that Major Dud has participated in
this forum for at least seven years, seen many threats made by others,
and has even made a few threats himself.

Second, the "fear". Actually, the issue is how to demonstrate that the
threat caused fear. This is done by showing how any reasonable person
reacts to fear and comparing those reactions to the reactions of the
person claiming to be the victim. After receiving a threat, does a
reasonable person remain in the presence of the stalker and provoke
the stalker to make more threats? Of course not. I doubt that very
many UN-reasonable people would do that. But Dudly does, and he does
so with an odor of conceit that, in and of itself, evokes .

There was no fear, and therefore no threat. And therefore no case.

Now that we have covered criminal stalking laws at the state and
federal levels, let's try civil law. Civil cases are adjudicated by a
preponderance of the evidence, -not- by reasonable certainty. That, in
and of itself, pretty much throws Dudly out of court since his own
behavior in this newsgroup has been..... well, less than admirable.
There have been no racial slurs against him (although he has made a
couple of marginally prejudicial statements about "do-rag wearing,
be-bop hopping delinquents who think that a 'drive-by' is an Olympic
Sport"), so there are no grounds for federal action based on racial
discrimination (-by- him; however, there might be grounds to bring
action -against- him depending on what he has written as one of his
sock-puppets.....).

What's left? Libel? That might be a valid argument if not for the fact
that Dudly's name and reputation were disgraced by his own lies and
****-poor behavior -long- before said threat occured. No case there.

Finally, let's try the court of public opinion. This is the USA,
right? Well, just how patriotic is it to have a bumper sticker that
says "UAW can KMA"? Especially for a retired USMC Gunnery Sergeant
(who claims to have never been a reservist yet also claims to have
served with 1/24, a USMC Reserve unit)? Then there is the little issue
about his claims to be an EMT yet was refused a license to pursue that
"hobby". So now he cruises the streets with a scanner, a medical bag,
and a light-bar in the trunk, looking for an opportunity to be a hero.
I'm sure that doesn't present a good image to the public..... do you?

If there is -any- legal action to be taken here is should be -against-
Major Dud for impersonating a Marine, an emergency services official,
and an FCC-licensed amateur radio operator. If you want to play the
lawyer, "Cristy", then cite some law in regards to -THOSE- offenses.
If not then shut the **** up and let Dudly reap what he has sown.

and if stveie in fact gets some one to pay attention to his BS it will
liely give me the chance to get them to deal with him

Stevie might be able to spin a good tale to inconvence me awhile but
then....


Frank Gilliland, pro se.








----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

an old friend wrote:
Frank Gilliland wrote:
sewer output flushed. Frank and you belong together. no one else would
bother with the two of you. enjoy your gay sex about how you are un
touchable. ah hahahahahahahah!

Mark Freak wrote:
an old friend wrote:
Frank Gilliland wrote:
sewer output flushed. Frank and you belong together. no one else would
bother with the two of you. enjoy your gay sex about how you are un
touchable. ah hahahahahahahah!

right that has to be stevie everyone that opposes stevie is gay