Your girlfriend's daughter was never six?
Not during this case.

Yeah, I'm against blah, blah...
Who gives a rip? Nobody appointed you God.

Then why is there info about an earlier accusation
of child sexual abuse from a previous CPS investigation
regarding YOU in yer girlfriend's case, Greg?

1. There never was any prior accusation of any such thing.
2. There is no accusation of sexual abuse in this case.
3. The caseworker LIED, about past, in affidavit to court.

The ""game"" they're running is a LOT like the way
things worked for Joseph McCarthy when he ran the
HUAC hearings known as the 1950's witch hunts for
communists. If
[you]
are a moderate of their view and speak up about their
paranoia, expect to be vilified or at least chastised.

Is that a threat, Greg?

How is a description of your mode of operation in
any way a threat from me?

Greg, you aren't a bioparent and you're the only
one being accused of maltreatment.

Who else wants to volunteer to stand trial
before you, the grand inquisitor?

Parents see a fear of caseworkers taking their child
away for reasons that don't satisfy the requirements
of the US Constitution.

"Parents see a fear of caseworkers... ???"

The trolly has left the tracks again, Greg.

Yes, it has.

A basic Ethical contract
in our society.

Show yer proof to the psych evaluator and get it into evidence.

"Sure! Stick your neck right in this noose! We won't pull it!"

What makes you think that a psychologist (not a hard science remember)
who is unethical enough to accept a 1" stack of documents from
uncredentialed non-professionals would be rightious?
Wouldn't he want to please the CPS amateurs who send him so much
business? Do you think he didn't get the message that this stack
was intended to RIG the psych eval?

We've seen other fiascos first hand that don't put that
outside the realm of reasonable suspicion.

Kane believes he insults the people who DESERVE to be insulted.

And you teased because I made a redundant comment?

It was an "insufferable mess" before I got here.
No one ever got their children back from FC.

That is flat out not true. Why did you say it?

And when the first one did whatsisname chastized the
woman for not fighting "for society!!!!!"

Is this where you preach blind cooperation at all costs??

And then David and Amy Carl got their five kids back.

And you think you were the only person sending them info??
I thought it was pretty hilarious and idiotic how CPS
got a court order to abscond with their computer to look
for incriminating files, considering it was a
WEB TV terminal, which has NO FILES in it whatsoever!

Did you help them launch any action because of the
aggregious illegal search and seizure?

Do you think you have in any way stopped that sort of
violation of people's rights?

They haven't sued for the terrible FISHING EXPEDITION
this computer grab represents?

But I'm not making any claims to stroke my ego.

Chuck got his daughter back the day before her first birthday.

What did whatsisname ever do?

He posted that it was OK to force red pepper into children's mouths as
punishment and claimed that proof had already been posted on the NG.

You badgered him about it constantly. Familiar tactic from you.
Any contribution he could have made to this forum was obscured
by your endless and unprompted whining about your attitude.
Nobody Care's about your attitude.
The endless bandwidth wasted dealing with your puke could have
lead to something constructive, aside from your ego.

I posted pleadings. You puked all over it.

Where are yours? At least I TRIED. You didn't.

After being challenged for months to blah blah..

Nobody cares about your hysterical judgements of who you
decide to vilify. You are as rediculous as Joe McCarthy was.
He died of syphilis. What's your excuse?

For over a year whatsisname claimed the red pepper blah.

This NG is a place where people come to get OUT of trouble snip

Then why to you puke all over it with your incessant inane innuendo?

Hey, and you didn't mention that Bob SueCPS left too.

Altho he does pop in from time to time ( anonymously)
when you and Dennis can't take the heat.

Heat from you? You're just vomitous.

and a few have had comments in here used in court
to slam them as if they violated privacy laws.

Bull ****, Greg.
Name em.
Name one!

I don't drop names the way you do.
I'm not a pro, but I know that it would not be proper to do.
If you're such an expert, why don't you understand that?

You have done this sort of challenging a lot, apparently
completely ignorant of privacy laws and ethical issues.
You think I or others OWE you an answer to every question.
You're the grand inquisitor, put us on the rack!

Even parents smart enough to keep names and identifying
details out of this forum are inhibited by the CPS eye.

Why on earth would an anonymous person... someone who's
unrecognizable and untraceable... be inhibited?

That's the reason they ARE anonymous... NOT to be inhibited.

Ask Ron! He has the access to certain databases at work.
He thought he was anonymous, that when he posted his info
publicly on the internet, nobody would notice.

(Myself, If they brought something from here in, I
would simply demand that they bring the archive of
the ENTIRE newsgroup into evidence, or strike it
all for lack of contextual setting.)

YOU would demand???

That's a recommendation to help any who might
have that problem in the future.
If they want to USE THIS, make them BRING IT ALL IN
so that the comments can be put in context and
properly cross examined.

Too complex a concept, Dan?

You aren't convinced that you being in the bathroom blah.
Why should I be convinced of blah.
When CPS and the court have no legal issue there?

You waste everybody's precious time whining about these
things that the system here says are not issues in this case.

FOR AN EXAMPLE: FROM ANOTHER CASE
I didn't like that story about the cop who diddled
a 16 year old girl who volunteered at a fire station.

Whether I LIKE that or not, however, is NOT an issue
in that state where legally it was consensual.
If it's not illegal, drop it and move along.

Instead of harassing the cop for doing something you
and I both think was rotten, the way to deal with our
displeasure is to change the laws, not to do an
end-run around the meaning of a law because we don't
like it.

You have been redundant in your smear of me for a long time.
You have no grasp of facts from which to lecture me.

Your pretense of helpful attitude is ludicrous in this forum.
You have wasted this bandwidth for a long time.

Your redundant smear of me, prompted generally when
I criticize CPS, does not make you appear very good spirited.

I am able to agree to disagree. You seem unable to.