 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Family Forum / Parenting / Parenting / November 2005Child Support
Dear Reader: The deadline for submitting your comments about the Child Support Guidelines is November 30. I was surprised to learn that only about 100 comments have been submitted so far. Please submit your comments and recommendations to: childsupport@jud.state.ma.us Speak now or forever hold your piece. And have a great Thanksgiving! **************************************** BTW, one of the most important things that you can do as a member of this e-list is get other people to join. If you think of anyone who would enjoy or benefit from receiving our e-mails, please click on the link below that says "forward email." Best Regards, Ned Holstein, M.D., M.S. Fathers & Families >Speak now or forever hold your piece. *laugh* Seeing as this is about child support, that can't be unintentional.... >Dear Reader: > >The deadline for submitting your comments about the Child Support >Guidelines is November 30. >I was surprised to >learn that only about 100 comments have been submitted so far. Well, Ned, if the soc.men actually got off their a.ses and tried to change what they didn't like about the system, there'd be nothing left to bitch about. >Please submit your comments and recommendations to: > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >our e-mails, please click on the link below that says >"forward email." SVBSCREIBE!!!!!!!! Thanks, Ned! Jade > Best Regards, > > Ned Holstein, M.D., M.S. > Fathers & Families >Dear Reader: > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >childsupport@jud.state.ma.us I already submitted my comments and recomendations to the gov't socialists who thought they could run my life for me. Now they know better. "Mr. F. Le Mur" <flemur13013@yahoo.com> wrote in > I already submitted my comments and recomendations to the > gov't socialists who thought they could run my life for me. > > Now they know better. Ooooo, did your big bad Email message cause the Government machine to back off? LOL >"Mr. F. Le Mur" <flemur13013@yahoo.com> wrote in > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >Ooooo, did your big bad Email message cause the Government machine to back >off? LOL Who said anything about email? And, yes, they did back off. Thanks for asking. "Mr. F. Le Mur" <flemur13013@yahoo.com> wrote in > Who said anything about email? > > And, yes, they did back off. Thanks for asking. Well then lest have it man, what exactly did you say that would make anyone back off? >"Mr. F. Le Mur" <flemur13013@yahoo.com> wrote in > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >Well then lest have it man, what exactly did you say that would make anyone >back off? I filed a motion to find myself in contempt of court, then, when that was 'denied,' as usual, I quit my job, blew off a different contempt hearing, told 'em they'd have to come and get me, and went semi-underground until they gave up and/or lost the paperwork. Nobody should ever cooperate with those Junior Nazis. >>"Mr. F. Le Mur" <flemur13013@yahoo.com> wrote in >> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >until they gave up and/or lost the paperwork. Nobody >should ever cooperate with those Junior Nazis. So, you're a criminal on the lamb hiding from the courts like a craven soc.fr00t coward and lecturing Deb about personal wealth? > >>"Mr. F. Le Mur" <flemur13013@yahoo.com> wrote in > >> [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > So, you're a criminal on the lamb hiding from the courts like a craven > soc.fr00t coward and lecturing Deb about personal wealth? I think being "a criminal on the lamb" comes under the bestiality statutes, not contempt of court! ;-) In any case, you have insufficient evidence to decide whether M. LeMur has been convicted of any crime. Missing a hearing is not, in itself, a crime. Mark Borgerson > > >>"Mr. F. Le Mur" <flemur13013@yahoo.com> wrote in > > >> [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > Mark Borgerson Quitting your job so you don't have to pay child support also is not a crime, but it is still morally unconscionable. >> >>"Mr. F. Le Mur" <flemur13013@yahoo.com> wrote in >> >> [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] >insufficient evidence to decide whether M. LeMur has been convicted >of any crime. Not really, if you look above he plainly said he was supposed to appear and did not--then went into hiding. >Missing a hearing is not, in itself, a crime. Tell ya what, Mark: you try it over here in the US and report back to us when you get out of the pokey on how it isn't a crime to not show up in court for a contempt of court charge. > >> >>"Mr. F. Le Mur" <flemur13013@yahoo.com> wrote in > >> >> [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > us when you get out of the pokey on how it isn't a crime to not show > up in court for a contempt of court charge. Hello Sharon! I'll leave AUK in the newsgroups line. I'm about to spank you so I want your buddies to see it. Mark was observing a subtle distinction between failing to appear for a hearing (presumably civil), which isn't necessarily a crime, versus the consequences of failing to appear for a hearing (which can result in a default judgement including guilty of the crime which is being heard in a criminal case.) In the above case, the man-on-the-lamb may have been subject to a hearing for a comtempt-of-court for failing to appear for a previous hearing. It's kind of a catch-22. When he talked about "semi legal" status, he may have avoided prosecution but allowing the statute of limitations to expire on the previous charge before they could make him appear for a hearing. This especially applies in civil cases. Check out wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contempt_of_court "Typically judges in common law systems have more extensive power to declare someone in contempt than judges in civil law systems." regards, Mark Sobolewski PS: Have you figured out how to buy a cheesecake in less than an hour yet? On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 18:34:51 GMT, mark_sobolewski@yahoo.com posted something accessible as news:1132943691.329757.222930@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com in alt.usenet.kooks, selections of which I respond to below: >> >> >>"Mr. F. Le Mur" <flemur13013@yahoo.com> wrote in >> >> >> [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > I'll leave AUK in the newsgroups line. I'm about to spank you so I > want your buddies to see it. *chuckle* > Mark was observing a subtle distinction between failing to appear > for a hearing (presumably civil), which isn't necessarily a crime, [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > PS: Have you figured out how to buy a cheesecake in less than > an hour yet? Has Slobbo won a Bobo yet? It's hard to believe that he hasn't.  SignatureRobert Buchanan Grand Moff of <http://www.robertbuchanan.name/> Custodian of <http://del.icio.us/rbuchanan> Master of Mindy (arf) Quote of the week: "Gee.... Porn is much more than that. It is the pillar of every publishinging revolution in history. Usenet may be gone soon, it would be easy to get rid of." -Tom "Tosser" Bishop, <438110cd$0$20265$8f2e0ebb@news.shared-secrets.com> >On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 18:34:51 GMT, mark_sobolewski@yahoo.com posted >something accessible as [quoted text clipped - 71 lines] > >Has Slobbo won a Bobo yet? It's hard to believe that he hasn't. What has made Rape Ape think that AUK wanted to read his kooky trash? Jade >>On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 18:34:51 GMT, mark_sobolewski@yahoo.com posted >>something accessible as [quoted text clipped - 73 lines] > >What has made Rape Ape think that AUK wanted to read his kooky trash? He's proud of himself because he thinks he's spanking me. On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 16:22:08 GMT, Daedalus <jade@my-deja.com> posted something accessible as news:jkbmo1t5njklobeenhre8sf8q1clv28tv0@4ax.com in alt.usenet.kooks, selections of which I respond to below: >>On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 18:34:51 GMT, mark_sobolewski@yahoo.com posted >>something accessible as [quoted text clipped - 73 lines] > > What has made Rape Ape ^^^^^^^^ LMAO > think that AUK wanted to read his kooky trash? Ego. A big one. SignatureRobert Buchanan Grand Moff of <http://www.robertbuchanan.name/> Custodian of <http://del.icio.us/rbuchanan> Master of Mindy (arf) Quote of the week: "Gee.... Porn is much more than that. It is the pillar of every publishinging revolution in history. Usenet may be gone soon, it would be easy to get rid of." -Tom "Tosser" Bishop, <438110cd$0$20265$8f2e0ebb@news.shared-secrets.com> >> >> >>"Mr. F. Le Mur" <flemur13013@yahoo.com> wrote in >> >> >> [quoted text clipped - 61 lines] >PS: Have you figured out how to buy a cheesecake in less than >an hour yet? Wikipedia is an authoritative source of case law? Who'd a thunk it... JD "i'm surprised law schools can stand the competition" S >> >> >>"Mr. F. Le Mur" <flemur13013@yahoo.com> wrote in >> >> >> [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] >I'll leave AUK in the newsgroups line. I'm about to spank you so I >want your buddies to see it. Be sure to let me know when you start. >Mark was observing a subtle distinction between failing to appear >for a hearing (presumably civil), which isn't necessarily a crime, [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >heard >in a criminal case.) You two fr00ts need to learn how to read. >In the above case, the man-on-the-lamb may have been subject to a >hearing for a comtempt-of-court for failing to appear for a previous >hearing. >It's kind of a catch-22. When he talked about "semi legal" status, Where did anyone talk about "semi legal status", ya goofy illiterate? What the heyull does "semi legal status" even mean? Do you ever bother to *read* the posts or do you just see my nym and reflexively knee jerk to plant your foot into your yap? Mr.F.LeMur didn't talk about "semi legal" status. He talked about going "semi underground" as in, what he did after he "blew off" his "contempt of court hearing", and hiding until they gave up actively looking for him. It's right in the post you replied to, you illiterate soc.fr00t. But soc.fr00ts being craven cowards and hiding from the Long Arm of the Law is no surprise to most. >he >may have avoided prosecution You mean as in, "flight to avoid prosecution"? Yah, "Failure to Appear" is a tried and true way to do that, at least in the short term. What remains to be seen is after pulling a World's Stupidest Criminal and bragging about his crimes whether he'll drop these threads and run like the coward he's told the world he is--hoping no one tracks him down, or whether he'll stay and tilt at windmills. >but allowing the statute of limitations >to expire on the previous charge before they could make him appear >for a hearing. So according to Sobolewski Law, all one has to do to get away with crime is fail to appear for court then hide until the statute of limitation expires and the courts will forget about the whole thing--both the crime *and* the failure to appear charge? Is that what you're saying? Please tell me you plan to represent yourself if you ever get into a legal jam. >This especially applies in civil cases. >Check out wikipedia: >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contempt_of_court > >"Typically judges in common law systems have more extensive >power to declare someone in contempt than judges in civil law systems." You should get someone to read and explain your links to you before you post them. >PS: Have you figured out how to buy a cheesecake in less than >an hour yet? That's cute the way you feel a need to bolster your ego around me by making things up. >>> >> >>"Mr. F. Le Mur" <flemur13013@yahoo.com> wrote in >>> >> >> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >>> >> >>> >I think being "a criminal on the lamb" comes under the bestiality on the lam... not lamb... >>> >statutes, not contempt of court! ;-) In any case, you have >>> >insufficient evidence to decide whether M. LeMur has been convicted [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > >Be sure to let me know when you start. Can I watch? >>Mark was observing a subtle distinction between failing to appear >>for a hearing (presumably civil), which isn't necessarily a crime, [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >>In the above case, the man-on-the-lamb may have been subject to a lam... not lamb... BAH! >>hearing for a comtempt-of-court for failing to appear for a previous >>hearing. >>It's kind of a catch-22. When he talked about "semi legal" status, > >Where did anyone talk about "semi legal status", ya goofy illiterate? >What the heyull does "semi legal status" even mean? Status semi doesn't exist. this is some sort of legal ruse? >Do you ever bother to *read* the posts or do you just see my nym and >reflexively knee jerk to plant your foot into your yap? [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >looking for him. It's right in the post you replied to, you >illiterate soc.fr00t. However the charge doesn't go away... and IIRC the limitation doesn't exist if he is charged with the crime. The law limits the time for authorities to charge and indite one for the crime. if after being indited, the person flees trial.. proceeding are frozen until the criminal is returned to jurisdiction of the court. >But soc.fr00ts being craven cowards and hiding from the Long Arm of >the Law is no surprise to most. >>he >>may have avoided prosecution > >You mean as in, "flight to avoid prosecution"? Yah, "Failure to >Appear" is a tried and true way to do that, at least in the short >term. Flight itself is an on-going crime. minute by minute. >What remains to be seen is after pulling a World's Stupidest Criminal >and bragging about his crimes whether he'll drop these threads and run >like the coward he's told the world he is--hoping no one tracks him >down, or whether he'll stay and tilt at windmills. it might be windmill time... That's like miller time, but popcorn is served. >>but allowing the statute of limitations >>to expire on the previous charge before they could make him appear [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >Please tell me you plan to represent yourself if you ever get into a >legal jam. This could be fun.... Oh, Howard? Paging, mr chief investigator! >>This especially applies in civil cases. >>Check out wikipedia: [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >You should get someone to read and explain your links to you before >you post them. wiki is now a legal authority? >>PS: Have you figured out how to buy a cheesecake in less than >>an hour yet? > >That's cute the way you feel a need to bolster your ego around me by >making things up. the way of a kook? SignatureAk'toh'di >>>> >> >>"Mr. F. Le Mur" <flemur13013@yahoo.com> wrote in >>>> >> >> [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > >on the lam... not lamb... Still think you got it wrong, should be lame.... >>>> >statutes, not contempt of court! ;-) In any case, you have >>>> >insufficient evidence to decide whether M. LeMur has been convicted [quoted text clipped - 116 lines] > >the way of a kook? "The best proof of intelligent life in space is that it hasn't come here." - Sir Arthur C. Clarke > >>> >> So, you're a criminal on the lamb hiding from the courts like a craven > >>> >> soc.fr00t coward and lecturing Deb about personal wealth? > >>> >> > >>> >I think being "a criminal on the lamb" comes under the bestiality > > on the lam... not lamb... im on the lamb but i aint no sheep > >>I'll leave AUK in the newsgroups line. I'm about to spank you so I > >>want your buddies to see it. > > > >Be sure to let me know when you start. > > Can I watch? in your workshop of telescopes? > >You two fr00ts need to learn how to read. > > > >>In the above case, the man-on-the-lamb may have been subject to a > > lam... not lamb... BAH! then came the last days of may > >>hearing for a comtempt-of-court for failing to appear for a previous > >>hearing. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Status semi doesn't exist. this is some sort of legal ruse? its a career of evil > >Mr.F.LeMur didn't talk about "semi legal" status. He talked about > >going "semi underground" as in, what he did after he "blew off" his [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > flees trial.. proceeding are frozen until the criminal is returned to > jurisdiction of the court. just take me away > >You mean as in, "flight to avoid prosecution"? Yah, "Failure to > >Appear" is a tried and true way to do that, at least in the short > >term. > > Flight itself is an on-going crime. minute by minute. with wings wetted down > >What remains to be seen is after pulling a World's Stupidest Criminal > >and bragging about his crimes whether he'll drop these threads and run [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > That's like miller time, but popcorn is served. showtime > >So according to Sobolewski Law, all one has to do to get away with > >crime is fail to appear for court then hide until the statute of [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > This could be fun.... goin through the motions > Oh, Howard? > > Paging, mr chief investigator! hes just moon crazy > >>"Typically judges in common law systems have more extensive > >>power to declare someone in contempt than judges in civil law systems." [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > wiki is now a legal authority? the old gods return > >>PS: Have you figured out how to buy a cheesecake in less than > >>an hour yet? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > the way of a kook? dont turn your back arf meow arf - contemplate the serene vacuity of the gumbyism if you meet buddha on the usenet killfile him [...] >>>I'll leave AUK in the newsgroups line. I'm about to spank you so I >>>want your buddies to see it. >> >>Be sure to let me know when you start. > >Can I watch? You and Lionel, I swear.... [...] >>>It's kind of a catch-22. When he talked about "semi legal" status, >> >>Where did anyone talk about "semi legal status", ya goofy illiterate? >>What the heyull does "semi legal status" even mean? > >Status semi doesn't exist. this is some sort of legal ruse? I think it's Soboloonski Law. >>Do you ever bother to *read* the posts or do you just see my nym and >>reflexively knee jerk to plant your foot into your yap? [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >flees trial.. proceeding are frozen until the criminal is returned to >jurisdiction of the court. Yes, but that's in the real world, not soc.fr00t land. [...] >>You mean as in, "flight to avoid prosecution"? Yah, "Failure to >>Appear" is a tried and true way to do that, at least in the short [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > >That's like miller time, but popcorn is served. and BEER?? Guinness, please. >>>but allowing the statute of limitations >>>to expire on the previous charge before they could make him appear [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > >Paging, mr chief investigator! Guinness, please. >wiki is now a legal authority? > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >the way of a kook? cartooneys are fun >[...] >>>>I'll leave AUK in the newsgroups line. I'm about to spank you so I [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >You and Lionel, I swear.... You know how it is when you get old... Watching is fun... even when you forget what it is you are doing? <naps seem to happen at the oddest times....> >[...] >>>>It's kind of a catch-22. When he talked about "semi legal" status, [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >I think it's Soboloonski Law. Hopeless people... no wonder idiots get elected to public office. >>>Do you ever bother to *read* the posts or do you just see my nym and >>>reflexively knee jerk to plant your foot into your yap? [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > >Yes, but that's in the real world, not soc.fr00t land. one of these days I will have to read sco.Fr00t... >[...] >>>You mean as in, "flight to avoid prosecution"? Yah, "Failure to [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > >and BEER?? Well miller isn't really Beer... One of the local places is making a hell of a barley whine this year... Not too sweet and not to hoppy, a Medium Weight Brown (not pale) Ale. >Guinness, please. This Stuff is not as heavy as Guinness. , his stout is however as good as Guinness' and his porter is better. >>>>but allowing the statute of limitations >>>>to expire on the previous charge before they could make him appear [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > >Guinness, please. Remember is an authority. >>wiki is now a legal authority? >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >cartooneys are fun Always. SignatureAk'toh'di > >> >> >>"Mr. F. Le Mur" <flemur13013@yahoo.com> wrote in > >> >> >> [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > > Be sure to let me know when you start. I'm happy to help! Generally, when you hurl out crude, troll-like invectives in leau of a counter-point, you're being spanked down. Don't hesitate to ask me for more help in the future. > >Mark was observing a subtle distinction between failing to appear > >for a hearing (presumably civil), which isn't necessarily a crime, [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > You two fr00ts need to learn how to read. It begins. :-) > >In the above case, the man-on-the-lamb may have been subject to a > >hearing for a comtempt-of-court for failing to appear for a previous > >hearing. > >It's kind of a catch-22. When he talked about "semi legal" status, > > Where did anyone talk about "semi legal status", ya goofy illiterate? So this is this best you're going to do. Quibble over me saying "semi legal" instead of "underground." > What the heyull does "semi legal status" even mean? > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > looking for him. It's right in the post you replied to, you > illiterate soc.fr00t. For someone quibbling over terms, you should learn how to spell "fruit". This kewl spelling is just so 90's and AOLish. So when will you try to invalidate my point that merely not showing up for a hearing doesn't necessarily result in going to the "pokey?" Until you do, consider yourself spanked. > But soc.fr00ts being craven cowards and hiding from the Long Arm of > the Law is no surprise to most. Versus a non-craven coward? :-) On the contrary, he says he engaged in a legal tactic to his advantage. Lawyers engage in similar tactics by sometimes seeking delays and continuences in an effort to drag out a case long enough to win by default. > >he > >may have avoided prosecution > > You mean as in, "flight to avoid prosecution"? Yah, "Failure to > Appear" is a tried and true way to do that, at least in the short > term. So is exercising the "right to remain silent". Last time I checked, not volunterring information and confessions wasn't against the law. So far, you have not disproved my original point. Or in terms you may understand better: You're a lus3r who kan't understand l0gic because you're st00pid and ill1ter@te. > What remains to be seen is after pulling a World's Stupidest Criminal > and bragging about his crimes whether he'll drop these threads and run > like the coward he's told the world he is--hoping no one tracks him > down, or whether he'll stay and tilt at windmills. It's possible that after the statue of limitations expired or the case was dropped, that was the end of it with no term in the pokey awaiting him. Care to prove otherwise? Let us know when you can. > >but allowing the statute of limitations > >to expire on the previous charge before they could make him appear [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > limitation expires and the courts will forget about the whole > thing--both the crime *and* the failure to appear charge? If the crime is a failure to appear for a civil case and the judge requires him to appear before pressing charges, that's entirely possible. Yes. I had a discussion with my lawyer and recall him laughing that if I was to tell a judge he was a corrupt motherf..ker, I could probably get away with it because I wouldn't be held in contempt because he hadn't yet warned me not to use such language. > Is that what you're saying? Since it was so terribly important for you to get quotes exact, it's interesting that you seem to be making up statements from me out of thin air. > Please tell me you plan to represent yourself if you ever get into a > legal jam. In some cases, I've done just that and it's worked out very well. I think lawyers can be very useful but they often have their own interests that can be in conflict with their clients'. > >This especially applies in civil cases. > >Check out wikipedia: [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > You should get someone to read and explain your links to you before > you post them. I still see you haven't addressed my point that failure to appear especially for a civil matter doesn't automatically result in a default prison sentence. > >PS: Have you figured out how to buy a cheesecake in less than > >an hour yet? > > That's cute the way you feel a need to bolster your ego around me by > making things up. Oh, good point. I think you said 2 hours. :-) regards, Mark Sobolewski >>> Hello Sharon! >>> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > I'm happy to help! Generally, when you hurl out > crude, troll-like invectives in leau of a counter-point, ^^^^ That ain't no typo. That's just ignorance. No proof of basic literacy? Claim fails! <rape apologist's wankery snipped> PJR :-) SignatureNemo hibericam exspectat inquisitionem. alt.usenet.kooks award-winners and FAQ: <http://www.insurgent.org/~kook-faq/> >>>> Hello Sharon! >>>> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > ^^^^ > That ain't no typo. That's just ignorance. It's the right blend of the arrogant trying to use a french expression and the stupidity to get it right. > No proof of basic literacy? Claim fails! > > <rape apologist's wankery snipped> > > PJR :-) Signaturemhm 27x12 smeeter #28 Usenet Valhalla Circle #19 & #21 Bartlo's hate lits #1: <40376AD8.C83FBF5A@enter.net> CEO Alcatroll Labs Inc. The Way of the Kook: http://www.insurgent.org/~jhd/kookway.htm in Message-ID:<1132269600.466534.275940@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com> Raving Loonie shows his homoerotical masturbatory fantasms: "w.nk on, twit." in Message-ID:<adurg15tk0vd6ip6r1lh297cequd35addb@4ax.com> Alexa "Crackpot" Cameron explains electromagnetism, and how the sun has an 'iron core': "The sun and the earth are 'magnets', each with an iron based core, and both have an electrical force between them." in Message-ID: <rjise19nrclufrgjg5ragcpbbihn3coliv@4ax.com> Mark "Woody" Ferguson shows his mastery of the English language: "With patients and practice you could be nominated next time around..." in Message-MID: <k1kte1hu59khhkt4m1g42g52gkacmcokin@4ax.com> Mark "The illiterate" Ferguson astonishes everybody saying: "Oh, for f.cks sake, Gary no matter how angery he thinks he makes there are lines I will not cross unless I believe what I say is the true, I know more then you." in Message-ID: <lhic01pc5svudk22n6rpcvovskdmpi3ir8@4ax.com> Alexa "Tequila Titsz" Cameron explains world religions: "The jews roots are islamic." in Message-ID: <j1b5c1l2629tc6afu575d5puclm321knok@4ax.com> Alexa "dumbass" Cameron shows her knowledge of history: "WRONGO. There was NO Bible before King James had it written." in Message-ID: <5g89d15kbjd3cd7i6fn9c3ke93n12dm406@4ax.com> Alexa "Word Salad" Cameron shows her knowledge of science: "Einstein never found the double superimposed doubl 'equilateral' triangle." in Message-ID: <1rfee1d5iuhq3piii8b9dtq9rtk5uatr1h@4ax.com> Alexa "Kook of the year 2004" Cameron uses words she doesn't understand again: "Why is the Pentagon killing American citizens with non-lethal technology?" in Message-ID: <2mrge1phgk68ourdt2eq8thne0h7hv0sb6@4ax.com> Alexa "Imnotalexadammit" Cameron has problems with that extra finger on her hand: "Why do the Jews use the Star of David as symbolic of the Pentagon, or Pentagram?" reminder: Message-ID: <pan.2005.09.01.00.52.15.77207@localhost.localdomain> The quote naziwhore Don Ocean stole. > >>>> Hello Sharon! > >>>> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > It's the right blend of the arrogant trying to use a french expression and > the stupidity to get it right. the french leautenants woman? arf meow arf - contemplate the serene vacuity of the gumbyism if you meet buddha on the usenet killfile him >> >>>> Hello Sharon! >> >>>> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > the french leautenants woman? I'm sure he lives in the banleau. > arf meow arf - contemplate the serene vacuity of the gumbyism > > if you meet buddha on the usenet > killfile him Signaturemhm 27x12 smeeter #28 Usenet Valhalla Circle #19 & #21 Bartlo's hate lits #1: <40376AD8.C83FBF5A@enter.net> CEO Alcatroll Labs Inc. The Way of the Kook: http://www.insurgent.org/~jhd/kookway.htm in Message-ID:<1132269600.466534.275940@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com> Raving Loonie shows his homoerotical masturbatory fantasms: "w.nk on, twit." in Message-ID:<adurg15tk0vd6ip6r1lh297cequd35addb@4ax.com> Alexa "Crackpot" Cameron explains electromagnetism, and how the sun has an 'iron core': "The sun and the earth are 'magnets', each with an iron based core, and both have an electrical force between them." in Message-ID: <rjise19nrclufrgjg5ragcpbbihn3coliv@4ax.com> Mark "Woody" Ferguson shows his mastery of the English language: "With patients and practice you could be nominated next time around..." in Message-MID: <k1kte1hu59khhkt4m1g42g52gkacmcokin@4ax.com> Mark "The illiterate" Ferguson astonishes everybody saying: "Oh, for f.cks sake, Gary no matter how angery he thinks he makes there are lines I will not cross unless I believe what I say is the true, I know more then you." in Message-ID: <lhic01pc5svudk22n6rpcvovskdmpi3ir8@4ax.com> Alexa "Tequila Titsz" Cameron explains world religions: "The jews roots are islamic." in Message-ID: <j1b5c1l2629tc6afu575d5puclm321knok@4ax.com> Alexa "dumbass" Cameron shows her knowledge of history: "WRONGO. There was NO Bible before King James had it written." in Message-ID: <5g89d15kbjd3cd7i6fn9c3ke93n12dm406@4ax.com> Alexa "Word Salad" Cameron shows her knowledge of science: "Einstein never found the double superimposed doubl 'equilateral' triangle." in Message-ID: <1rfee1d5iuhq3piii8b9dtq9rtk5uatr1h@4ax.com> Alexa "Kook of the year 2004" Cameron uses words she doesn't understand again: "Why is the Pentagon killing American citizens with non-lethal technology?" in Message-ID: <2mrge1phgk68ourdt2eq8thne0h7hv0sb6@4ax.com> Alexa "Imnotalexadammit" Cameron has problems with that extra finger on her hand: "Why do the Jews use the Star of David as symbolic of the Pentagon, or Pentagram?" reminder: Message-ID: <pan.2005.09.01.00.52.15.77207@localhost.localdomain> The quote naziwhore Don Ocean stole. >>> >>>> Hello Sharon! >>> >>>> [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > >I'm sure he lives in the banleau. He lost his big rape battle at Waterleau. Jade >> arf meow arf - contemplate the serene vacuity of the gumbyism >> >> if you meet buddha on the usenet >> killfile him >>>> >>>> Hello Sharon! >>>> >>>> [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > He lost his big rape battle at Waterleau. Good job, did you claim outraped a man? > Jade > >>> arf meow arf - contemplate the serene vacuity of the gumbyism >>> >>> if you meet buddha on the usenet >>> killfile him [...] >> >Hello Sharon! >> > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >crude, troll-like invectives in leau of a counter-point, >you're being spanked down. you forgot to add, 'in my fantasies' >Don't hesitate to ask me for more help in the future. ^^^^ Wouldn't I have had to ask you for help a first time for there to be "more"? [...] >It begins. :-) > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >So this is this best you're going to do. Quibble over me >saying "semi legal" instead of "underground." Considering you're basing your entire "spanking" on something someone said but turns out to be something you made up? Yah. [...] >> Mr.F.LeMur didn't talk about "semi legal" status. He talked about >> going "semi underground" as in, what he did after he "blew off" his [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >For someone quibbling over terms, *snarf* There's a huge difference between "semi legal status" and hiding out from the law. It's *hardly* "quibbling over terms". >you should learn how >to spell "fruit". This kewl spelling is just so 90's and AOLish. seems to get up *your* nose. >So when will you try to invalidate my point that merely not showing >up for a hearing doesn't necessarily result in going to the >"pokey?" That wasn't the discussion, you silly little man. Your point was that Le Mur failing to appear for a /contempt of court/ hearing (in essence, displaying direct contempt for the court), is okay. Now just why the hell do you *think* Le Mur went into hiding? *I'm* telling you, you fr00ts go right ahead and do that....and either hide from the police like Le Mur does or tell us all about how contempt of court isn't a crime when y'all get out of the pokey. Do you seriously think because Le Mur didn't show for his contempt of court hearing that the judge just said, 'oh well, never mind'? Folks who don't appear when the judge sez so tend to have bench warrants issued for their arrests....and I don't care if it's a speeding ticket. except in soboloonski-land, where the judge just says 'oops never mind, he's hid long enough we'll just forget about it'. >Until you do, consider yourself spanked. r-i-g-h-t >> But soc.fr00ts being craven cowards and hiding from the Long Arm of >> the Law is no surprise to most. > >Versus a non-craven coward? :-) On the contrary, >he says he engaged in a legal tactic to his advantage. Are you completely insane? That is not what he said at all. "I filed a motion to find myself in contempt of court, then, when that was 'denied,' as usual, I quit my job, blew off a different contempt hearing, told 'em they'd have to come and get me, and went semi-underground until they gave up and/or lost the paperwork." >Lawyers engage in similar tactics by sometimes seeking >delays and continuences in an effort to drag out >a case long enough to win by default. Having a judge grant a continuance is the same thing as failing to appear in court to face a criminal charge and hiding from the police? I swear you soc.fr00ts live in an imaginary world all your own. >> >he >> >may have avoided prosecution [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >I checked, not volunterring information and confessions >wasn't against the law. Was there a point to this meandering? Or are you trying to say flight to avoid prosecution is the same thing as the 5th Amendment? >So far, you have not disproved my original point. Oh, I have...you've just no sense at all. >> What remains to be seen is after pulling a World's Stupidest Criminal >> and bragging about his crimes whether he'll drop these threads and run [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >Care to prove otherwise? Sure. >Let us know when you can. Right now, in Le Mur's own words....unless you think he doesn't know his own situation? "...and went semi-underground until they gave up and/or lost the paperwork." I dun see any mention there of statute of limitations or dropping the case. I see where he was hiding so well they quit actively looking for him and he hopes they lost the paperwork. [...] >If the crime is a failure to appear for a civil case and >the judge requires him to appear before pressing charges, >that's entirely possible. Yes. R-i-g-h-t. Not only do you not read what others write, you don't even read what you write you bumbling cartooney. I know you have reading impairment, so I'm gonna post Le Mur's own words again: "I quit my job, blew off a different contempt hearing, told 'em they'd have to come and get me, and went semi-underground." >I had a discussion with my lawyer and recall him laughing >that if I was to tell a judge he was a corrupt motherf..ker, >I could probably get away with it because I wouldn't >be held in contempt because he hadn't yet warned me not >to use such language. And did this fantasy conversation take place in an actual attorney's office or while you were driving your car into vehicles stopped at red lights? >> Is that what you're saying? > >Since it was so terribly important for you to get quotes >exact, it's interesting that you seem to be making up >statements from me out of thin air. That's why I asked for clarification, soc.fr00t--to make sure I was getting what you were trying to say. >> Please tell me you plan to represent yourself if you ever get into a >> legal jam. > >In some cases, I've done just that and it's worked out >very well. You've had "cases", as in more than one, and you represented yourself in these legal jams? So are you a convicted criminal, too? Or are you talking about representing yourself for a speeding ticket? >I think lawyers can be very useful but >they often have their own interests that can be in >conflict with their clients'. you are completely delusional--unless you're saying you wanted him to perjure himself for you and he refused. or are you talking about that woman attorney you lusted after? [...] >I still see you haven't addressed my point that failure >to appear especially for a civil matter doesn't automatically >result in a default prison sentence. Fr00tl00p, we weren't talking about civil matters, we were talking about contempt of court. Here's your first clue: if you can go to jail for it, it's not a civil matter. dunbass >> >PS: Have you figured out how to buy a cheesecake in less than >> >an hour yet? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >Oh, good point. I think you said 2 hours. :-) that's cuz you're delusional >[...] >>> >Hello Sharon! [quoted text clipped - 68 lines] >issued for their arrests....and I don't care if it's a speeding >ticket. maybe they have been reading KaZoo's lawbooks? You do recall the only Crime bRay had a bench warrant out for was failure to appear for a traffic infraction. Since then the charges have escalated to Felony Charges and a possible crime of fleeing across state lines to avoid prosecution, Resisting arrest, and host of other crimes... Yes it looks like the Slob is heading down the 'bRay Legal Trail of Fame' >except in soboloonski-land, where the judge just says 'oops never >mind, he's hid long enough we'll just forget about it'. Sounds like early bRay, doesn't it >>Until you do, consider yourself spanked. > >r-i-g-h-t Sure... I wonder how long the bSlob will realize the self spank he is been doing. >>> But soc.fr00ts being craven cowards and hiding from the Long Arm of >>> the Law is no surprise to most. [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > >I swear you soc.fr00ts live in an imaginary world all your own. MJ found out that showing up late in court was not a good thing. :) >>> >he >>> >may have avoided prosecution [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >Was there a point to this meandering? Or are you trying to say flight >to avoid prosecution is the same thing as the 5th Amendment? looks like it, Doesn't it? >>So far, you have not disproved my original point. > [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] >case. I see where he was hiding so well they quit actively looking >for him and he hopes they lost the paperwork. just a simple traffic stop. most states have list of people with Wants and warrants. They now share them after 9-11. the feds have ordered and supplied the computers. NDR assures they we catch you sooner or later. Look how long the "SLF" gang hid. they are finding them one by one and hauling them all back into court. >[...] >>If the crime is a failure to appear for a civil case and [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >"I quit my job, blew off a different contempt hearing, told 'em they'd >have to come and get me, and went semi-underground." Gosh, if the judge asks him, did you post that usenet article, and then Le Mur answers yes, the judge might allow him to change his name to La Screwed. >>I had a discussion with my lawyer and recall him laughing >>that if I was to tell a judge he was a corrupt motherf..ker, [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >office or while you were driving your car into vehicles stopped at red >lights? I bet he didn't. The judge might not show any public bias, but Why in the world would anyone piss off the judge. >>> Is that what you're saying? >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >That's why I asked for clarification, soc.fr00t--to make sure I was >getting what you were trying to say. Did you finally understand Slob's statement... I translated it to something like "I'm nuts, your honor" >>> Please tell me you plan to represent yourself if you ever get into a >>> legal jam. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >in these legal jams? So are you a convicted criminal, too? Or are >you talking about representing yourself for a speeding ticket? questions I think he might not want to answer. >>I think lawyers can be very useful but >>they often have their own interests that can be in [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >perjure himself for you and he refused. or are you talking about that >woman attorney you lusted after? I do need to read soc.fr00ts... this is interesting. >[...] >>I still see you haven't addressed my point that failure [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >about contempt of court. Here's your first clue: if you can go to >jail for it, it's not a civil matter. Isn't contempt a criminal charge? The judge can keep you there forever if he elects if your do not comply with court orders. IIRC there was a judge in NY that kept a "Journalist" in jail for over 200 days for refusing to disclose a source of information to a grand jury. >dunbass that's an insult to all a.ses... >>> >PS: Have you figured out how to buy a cheesecake in less than >>> >an hour yet? [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >that's cuz you're delusional or just confused. SignatureAk'toh'di [...] >>Do you seriously think because Le Mur didn't show for his contempt of >>court hearing that the judge just said, 'oh well, never mind'? Folks [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > >Yes it looks like the Slob is heading down the 'bRay Legal Trail of Fame' It's one of those 'You have to see it to believe it' things. [...] >>>Until you do, consider yourself spanked. >> >>r-i-g-h-t > >Sure... I wonder how long the bSlob will realize the self spank he is been >doing. I don't think he ever will. I think he'll continue to believe this is him spanking *me*. [...] >>>Lawyers engage in similar tactics by sometimes seeking >>>delays and continuences in an effort to drag out [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >MJ found out that showing up late in court was not a good thing. :) Would have been funnier if he'd pulled a page out of Soboloonski's Law Book and told the judge it was just him being granted a continuance. [...] >>>So is exercising the "right to remain silent". Last time >>>I checked, not volunterring information and confessions [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >looks like it, Doesn't it? Sometimes it's hard to follow these fr00ts. [...] >>"...and went semi-underground until they gave up and/or lost the >>paperwork." [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >Look how long the "SLF" gang hid. they are finding them one by one and >hauling them all back into court. aye. can't hide forever, even though it looks like Le Mur has realized what a stupid thing he did and has taken off. [...] >>"I quit my job, blew off a different contempt hearing, told 'em they'd >>have to come and get me, and went semi-underground." > >Gosh, if the judge asks him, did you post that usenet article, and then Le >Mur answers yes, the judge might allow him to change his name to >La Screwed. Looks like a confession to *me*. >>>I had a discussion with my lawyer and recall him laughing >>>that if I was to tell a judge he was a corrupt motherf..ker, [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >I bet he didn't. The judge might not show any public bias, but Why in the >world would anyone piss off the judge. Sounds like things weren't going his way...I bet Soboloonski *would* ask his attorney something that stupid. [...] >>That's why I asked for clarification, soc.fr00t--to make sure I was >>getting what you were trying to say. > >Did you finally understand Slob's statement... >I translated it to something like "I'm nuts, your honor" Net Legend Nuts. >>>> Please tell me you plan to represent yourself if you ever get into a >>>> legal jam. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >questions I think he might not want to answer. He likes nothing more than to talk about himself. >>>I think lawyers can be very useful but >>>they often have their own interests that can be in [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >I do need to read soc.fr00ts... this is interesting. You'll need hip waders. >>[...] >>>I still see you haven't addressed my point that failure [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >Isn't contempt a criminal charge? ayup. except in soc.fr00t world. >The judge can keep you there forever if he >elects if your do not comply with court orders. IIRC there was a judge in NY >that kept a "Journalist" in jail for over 200 days for refusing to disclose >a source of information to a grand jury. >[...] >>>Do you seriously think because Le Mur didn't show for his contempt of [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > >It's one of those 'You have to see it to believe it' things. I know, it is odd watching some of these happenings on the net. When the Pete-suit was going on I was tempted to show up and watch. But I know I was a named person, but unserved in the action and didn't want to boost his ego anymore than what it was already pumped up. >[...] >>>>Until you do, consider yourself spanked. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >I don't think he ever will. I think he'll continue to believe this is >him spanking *me*. Amazing... bSlob and the law... coming to a sitcom near you... >[...] >>>>Lawyers engage in similar tactics by sometimes seeking [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >Would have been funnier if he'd pulled a page out of Soboloonski's Law >Book and told the judge it was just him being granted a continuance. I was surprised the judge didn't tell him, "no more stage costumes in this courtroom. Most courts have strict dress codes. The judge should have said "the next time he shows up in a glitzy costume, the court will provide him an orange jumpsuit to wear and a contempt charge... this is the one and only warning. >[...] >>>>So is exercising the "right to remain silent". Last time [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >Sometimes it's hard to follow these fr00ts. Really, I scan about 2500 articles by this "fr00tl00p connor... does he realize some of what he has said is just wrong... and unlawful, I hope no one does some of the things he has said to do... if it does happen a DA may charge him with conspiracy to commit a criminal act. >[...] >>>"...and went semi-underground until they gave up and/or lost the [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >can't hide forever, even though it looks like Le Mur has realized what >a stupid thing he did and has taken off. the action in most cases is frozen until he is returned to court. I wonder did anyone post bail? do you a bond agent doesn't have to follow most state rules... picking up a bail jumper is a way to make some nice bucks... I know a retired LA cop that pulls in a about 15G a month, picking up bail jumpers and taking them back to court. >[...] >>>"I quit my job, blew off a different contempt hearing, told 'em they'd [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >Looks like a confession to *me*. sure does... to *me* too. and those people that advised him can be charged with conspiracy, and anyone that physically helped him directly or indirectly is aiding and abetting a fleeing criminal... >>>>I had a discussion with my lawyer and recall him laughing >>>>that if I was to tell a judge he was a corrupt motherf..ker, [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >Sounds like things weren't going his way...I bet Soboloonski *would* >ask his attorney something that stupid. bSlob would from what I have read... and he would even ignore the advice not to do it... I could see bSlob telling the judge he and his lawyer had discussed him calling the judge "a corrupt motherf..ker" and the statement that is was ok... the lawyer would be sitting in the cell right next to bSlob.... >[...] >>>That's why I asked for clarification, soc.fr00t--to make sure I was >>>getting what you were trying to say. >> >>Did you finally understand Slob's statement... >>I translated it to something like "I'm nuts, your honor" > >Net Legend Nuts. LMA nuts... >>>>> Please tell me you plan to represent yourself if you ever get into a >>>>> legal jam. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > >He likes nothing more than to talk about himself. No fooling... lots of that activity... >>>>I think lawyers can be very useful but >>>>they often have their own interests that can be in [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >You'll need hip waders. and lots of aspirin... >>>[...] >>>>I still see you haven't addressed my point that failure [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >ayup. except in soc.fr00t world. Shame, they don't know that... >>The judge can keep you there forever if he >>elects if your do not comply with court orders. IIRC there was a judge in NY >>that kept a "Journalist" in jail for over 200 days for refusing to disclose >>a source of information to a grand jury. MAybe we should just let bSlob and LaScrewed continue on their merry way to the "hotel with iron bars"... SignatureAk'toh'di > >"Mr. F. Le Mur" <flemur13013@yahoo.com> wrote in > > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > until they gave up and/or lost the paperwork. Nobody > should ever cooperate with those Junior Nazis. In the meantime, how are your children doing? You remember them don't you? They used to think you walked on water, now they wonder why you won't even come by and buy them a bottle of water. > > Well then lest have it man, what exactly did you > > say that would make anyone back off? > I filed a motion to find myself in contempt of court, Awesome! You could have just slipped away, but instead you shoved their ruling right back into their faces. Good show! > then, when that was 'denied,' as usual, I quit my job, > blew off a different contempt hearing, told 'em they'd > have to come and get me, Oh man that is awesome. > and went semi-underground until they gave up and/or > lost the paperwork. Have you ever considered writing a book? You could write a book on what you did and how you made it work, and it would serve as a guide for a lot of other men who are also getting tired of Big Mother telling them what to do. It could also make you a few bucks. Even the obediant types will read it, as even they fantasize about splitting from the whole frigging program. > Nobody should ever cooperate with those Junior Nazis. No they shouldn't, and it would be great if they heard from people who have successfully given them the finger and walked away. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2010 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.