View Single Post
  #2  
Old December 29th 06, 12:28 PM posted to alt.support.child-protective-services,alt.dads-rights.unmoderated,alt.parenting.spanking,alt.support.foster-parents
Dan Sullivan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,687
Default obnoxious people


Greegor wrote:
lostintranslation (Kim Olsen) wrote
Ok, Oscar. Does that mean that when Greg said I should get arrested in
court to challenge a law, he was in fact, breaking the law?


To be a bit technical,


You're simply trying to use smoke and mirrors to hide what you ACTUALLY
said.

See below.

I did not suggest you should get arrested.


Sure you did, Greg.

See below.

I suggested you could consider submitting the recordings of
government agents, and warned that you might need to
LITIGATE the issue.


Greg, you knew the recording was illegal and you said submitting it in
court was "a good way to get them to try and charge you."

And the only "issue" to be litigated would be her arrest.

See below.

"lostintranslation:
While your state laws may prohibit recording,
there is still a valid argument to make that a citizen
should STILL have a right to record a government
agent in the performance of their duties.

The caseworker should have no expectation of privacy.

It would need LITIGATION though.

If you want to play that one out you might actually
be better off to bait them into trying to
charge you for breaking the state law.

I think defending that one might be stronger
than arguing to have the tape be allowed.

Trying to have it allowed in court using that
"government agent in the performance of their duties"
argument might be a good way to get them
to try to charge you.

A charge I would WELCOME if I was in your state!"

Clearly I presented that as an option
that you probably did not want to persue.


You said YOU would WELCOME IT!!!!

But based on what you and your cronies have said, you
ALREADY had the child returned and no longer needed help.


She wasn't asking for help, Greg.

Come on Kim, or whoever you are, it was obvious from
early on that you had a huge CHIP on your shoulder long
before I made those statements.


If it was "obvious from early on" why did you give advice to someone
who wasn't asking for advice?

AND I STILL stand on the idea that privacy laws DO NOT
apply to government agents in the performance of their duty.
Any citizen, regardless of their local recording laws should
be able to record all interactions and interviews with CPS agents.


And if someone gets arrested they always can claim Greg "dingleberry"
Hanson says the law shouldn't apply.

Missouri REQUIRES such recordings, thanks to CPSWATCH.
Several other states do as well.


Which other states?