On 28 Nov 2003 04:39:08 GMT, wrote:

(Kane) wrote:
On 27 Nov 2003 08:25:18 -0800, (Greg Hanson)
wrote:

When a caseworker swears in an affidavit that
I have a sex abuse history, and I don't,
that should be perjury.

Did they swear you have a sex abuse history,
or that they know you sexually abused?
If I read that you have a history and swear
I read it that is all I'm swearing to, not
that you sexually abused anyone.

No, he swore that I had a sex abuse history,
in reference to the past investigations which
were not only unfounded but also NOT SEXUAL.

Barbeque time, if you really wanted the child back. But hey, don't
listen to Dan, he's just successful. Can't have that, now can we,
Whore. Imagine your difficulty if the child returned.

Dan has offered no useful suggestions on
how to force blood from a stone.

Dan?

You are correct. He has on how to force CPS and the courts to return
children and get abuse findings unfounded.

"Blood from a stone" strongly suggests you are in this for the money.
I've never seen Dan, beyond possibly saying something on the order of
"So sue 'em" offer advice on how to get money out of the state. That's
not was he wishes to do here, if I understand correctly.

So because he won't do what YOU want you won't use what he is good at?

We know that of course, but I thought I'd remind you. 1

At the least, before he SWORE to it, he should
have looked it up on a computer. He did not.

How do you know he didn't?

Because it doesn't exist and I found the old
documents which prove he lied about the past
CPS investigation that found nothing.

And you don't know how to use them other
than to come here screeching "EVIL CPS EVIL CPS?"

Ignored by CPS.

When they are delivered in the manner in which you delivered your
demands in the Motion it is no wonder. I think you were lucky to be
heard at all, if you were.

Ignored in Juvenile Court.

Same as above.

Dan?

I can't answer for Dan but I can give my opinion. You are so obviously
a litiginous little creep, with delusions of getting off the state and
willing ot sacrifice a child and mother connection to do the court is
giving you ZERO credibility. Your "Motion" reeks of it. The deliberate
demands, the pompous pronouncements, the outrageous accusations
against people, the sick language about the grandmother, the things
you write here (it's my bet some worker from your area has heard about
you here and could well have googled your posts, copied and dropped
them off with the court clerk....wouldn't surprize me...it's a free
country after all.)

What a duplicitious thug you are. It's obvious that you don't want
that child back that I'm starting to think you've convinced the
mother
that if she can hold out you are going to make her rich with a
state
settlement.

I would MUCH RATHER put the caseworker who LIED in jail.

Bull****. If I offered you 10 k right now to walk and drop the whole
thing you couldn't pack fast enough. You are too obvious you stinking
Whore.

I'll bet that's it. It fits your profile and your admissions.

Right. In your own anonymous way you determined that.

Yep...right along with a few others that observe you here and make it
plan to you they think the same of you.

What's holdin' you up, besides your ****filled drawers?

CPS always claims the immmunity issue every time
somebody drags them into court for stuff like this.

Well, they can claim a mistake, and if it
wasn't, your lawyer should be able to take them apart.

We haven't seen a lawyer willing to get up off
their state paid arse and do diddly squat.

I haven't seen a "fiance" get up off his lazy unemployed ass, get a
job, and pay for a better lawyer. Have you noticed that yet?

You haven't had a kid there, and NO responsibilities for 2+ years, and
you still won't go out and earn enough to pay a better lawyer.

So much for defending "YOUR, 'family'"

Dedicated, aren't you.

The ones we have seen have been the sorriest
bunch of ass draggers I've ever seen in suits.

Well, check out what they get paid. You are just a stop gap until they
can get into a law firm, or you are pro bono for a more fully employed
lawyer that does public service.

They can claim irrelevance to the claim you are
making, such as THAT is no longer the reason
they are not returning the child.

A tactic you endorse?

It isn't up to me. But in YOUR particular case, I'd recommend
immediate arrest and a death penalty trial. You destroyed a family for
your greed and laziness. And the chance you can milk the state, much
more than you are currently milking the mother.

You are a "bummer calf."

A bully that took the love of a mother from the child, and the support
as well.

I think they have been more than patient with you, asshole,
considering what it's cost the child...I'm reaching the point where I
can't anything but the deepest pity for the mother, or if she knows
what she is doing, the deepest disgust.

I'd say you ought to go for it if you are
sure you have a case. Even if you are not.

I'd love to see what you do in the clinch.

I kinda thought making little girls let you
be their towelboy-shampoogirl and making
them take cold showers had more stink
of voyeurism.

Yes, it would if that was what took place, but it was not.

Says you. You had a hundred other choices about how to handle the
problem. One of which was to let the girl shower herself, after you
left her towels. This is, according to you, a child of nearly genius
capacity.

And even the punishment, you sick ****, could have been different..but
no, it had to be a shower, and you had to bring towels to a child of
six and more, and you had to stand by while she shampooed instead of
simply giving her instructions to go back and rinse the shampoo out.

No, Greeg, you wanted to be there in the bathroom.

You recently popped up with a new bit on
your prior retraining order
history. Brand new stuff to me.

New to me also, WHAT THE HECK ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?

You didn't talk recently about your wife
or was it a prior "fiance"
having a restraining order against you?

Nope. So it seems these new revelations
you yapped about were just some fairy tale.

Then why did you say, about a domestic violence complaint, to Dan, it
was twice then it was once?

You could have easily, instead of denying the restraining order
admitted it was a domestic violence beef. Why is it you hold out so on
information, teasing, teasing, teasing, until you finally stupidly
blurt it out?

This is a lot like why caseworkers mucking
around in peoples LIVES is a dangerous thing.

How is it "a lot like why" "mucking?"

Somebody who can't keep facts straight and
turns it into glorified gossip can be
extremely dangerous to families.

And a big fat hole out of the system for the child and the parents,
and even for stupid selfish little pricks like you...if that was what
you wanted.

You are looking for something you think you have a chance of sueing
for...and no matter the cost to mother and child.

highly likely fact.

Here's a "thinking error" again.

Speculation is not a ""thinking error."" That is why I used the word
"likely."

As long as you post here, trying to convince us,
and possibly yourself, that you are the victim
in the mother/child/CPS escapade you
will blow it and spill more.

You are carefull, and neurotically, building
around yourself, lying to yourself, a victim
state of mind so that you can keep your
indignation quotient up for your suit against CPS.

I did not MAKE CPS side with a Prozac patient against us.
I did not MAKE CPS fabricate a ""Sex Abuse History".

You love it. You love it. You can't and don't want to counter it. You
just are ragingly frustrated that you can't figure out how to make it
a civil case. Poor little Greegor.

We have both admitted that there are things we could
have done better.

I should hope.

We will NOT melt into quivering
masses of jelly over the mistakes we made, especially
since small things have been used to cause GREAT HARM.

Translation: "no matter how innocuou the demands of CPS and the judge
we will not comply as the child is not the point here...my ego and my
pocketbook are."

A simple warning would have been enough.

"Now that you have been in the bathroom with the naked child X number
of times, don't do it again."

Yeah, that's sure how CPS can protect children from predatory
pedaphiles. Sure, that's it.

A stated requirement would have been enough.

"If we catch you again we will give you another warning."

That's even better.

Like you, a grown adult male, with the mind of a creepy hormone
impaired adolescent (aren't they darling though?) are unable to figure
out you have no business in the bathroom with an unrelated female six
year old with NO ONE ELSE IN THE HOUSE.

Standards for clutter would have helped.

I'll give you one. Get your **** out of the house that doesn't belong
to you and most especially OUT OF THE CHILDS TINY BEDROOM IN A
SINGLEWIDE MOBILE HOME, you twit.

But the RIGGED services,

Oh, how do you "rig" an order to attend, what is obviously badly
needed, parenting classes for the little male whore living with the
mother sans matrimony"

the bitchy caseworker,

I would have much preferred a six foot 4 hairly ape that would check
quick and make sure no one was looking and popped you a hefty one to
your fat lazy gut.

I'm surprised the worker doesn't spit on you. It's a credit to her
professionalism. Thank heaven's for your sake I'm not a CPS caseworker
and more especially not your girl friend's.

the huge lies they have deliberately NOT corrected,
these show us malevolent intent.

They are holding they file open on you to see what comes up. I
certainly would consider that a smart thing to do. They DON'T HAVE TO
unless you can bring a successful court challenge, just like Dan
showed you and many others how to do. And even then I doubt they are
required to remove their information on YOU an unrelated adult
squating in the house.

A large number of parents who have dealt with
CPS have found that this "immunity" amounts
to a freedom for caseworkers to DELIBERATELY LIE.

Then they should sue. And bring criminal charges anyway.

Civilians can't bring criminal charges.

A civilian can't sign a complaint against
another person for actions that are criminal?

Our country is in some trouble.

You are being a nit picking dip**** yet again.
Why do you do that when you have
been called on your bull****?

You use sophistry constantly, so get used to nit picking.

Bull****. I call it like it is. That may be too sophisticated for you
but it isn't "sophistry." My arguments aren't fallacious. They are
factual. Hence sophistry is the incorrect term.

I just see through your highly transparent veneer of ****.

The Prosecutor would do that.

And in response to your filing a complaint, no? Dip**** nitpicker
caught at it. Don't you know that you can't get away with anything
here. Someone, me mostly, Dan comes in second (R R R R), others
from
time to time, will call you on your crap.

They will not prosecute the caseworker.

Liar. The media as posted by your other
Dip**** Tree buddy proves you
wrong time and again.

Started by the state prosecutor.

Which is completely incomprehensible dribbling diarrhea considering th
three previous statements.

Caseworkers have been successfully prosecuted.
And on many kinds of charges.

Never started by a parent.
Only when started by the state itself.

Oh...?

You better call or write real quick. These folks, one of the more
rabid anti CPS groups at their web site made the claim:

http://www.beanswers.com/pages/miscinfo.htm page to the bottom.

LAWSUITS (THE TORT CLAIM)

"It is now possible for parents to sue agencies and their personnel.
Many states have already allowed such lawsuits, and parents have often
won them. "

Were they lying, Whore, or were you? Or are you just too stupid to
look up things so easily found in the Web before you run off at the
mouth.

Watch folks. Yet another claim by the asshole child abuser displacer
shot down that he will suddenly lose complete interest in.

And for your information The State rarely starts civil suits on behalf
of parents that don't themselves file a complaint and intent to sue
through an attorney. So your statement is yet another weaseling bit of
SOPHISTRY... a fallacious attempt to con the reader.

You are, as I've said many a time, a liar.
Or stupid. Or abysmally ignorant.
Or neurotic as a lonesome puppy.

But you can't decide?

No. You put on so many faces here.

If you can't decide then why have
you asserted I am a liar?

That is obvious. All too obvious. I just caught you in one above.

Stating something you apparently haven't
decided is so would make you a liar.

I beg your pardon?

Would you mind terribly doing a dictionary search for us and show
where a speculative statement is a lie, or stating they one doesn't
know something but is considering alternatives is a lie?

Are you out of your freekin' mind?

Oh, now it's difficult and expensive. No longer absolute immunity.

Absolute immunity applies to actions within their manual.

Well, do you think they should be able to do their work or not. If a
cop, butcher, doctor, lawyer, adheres to their standards and it turns
out badly for the patient, customer, client, the professional, with no
intent to harm, should be paying you off?

The trick is to find intent of harm. THAT is what you assholes keep
crying about. You want some one sued when they meant no harm and did
exactly as stipulated as a professional standard, even under the law.

If they violate their manual and the law, they
then have partial immunity.

Not if there was intent to harm, and you can prove it.

Caseworkers are under a mixture of partial and absolute.

Not if you can prove intent to harm. You and your little army of anti
CPS dipwads want to confuse the issue, so you make these stupid
claims.

It's called "qualified immunity" I think.

Yes, they have "QUALIFIED IMMUNITY." So do parents. I can't spank
their child, but they can. The qualification is that they are the
paretn. The workers qualification is that they are a state worker.

Without that immunity they cannot perform their duties.

When the **** up...they are YOURS, dummy...as Dan has proven time and
time again...and they don't even have to have had BAD INTENT.

You don't want the child back, you want to sue and the child be
damned. It's so obvious now you cannot possibly weasel your way out of
people seeing it plainly.

You want the reader

Is anybody reading this dreck?

You hope not.

I hope they are so that the next time you jump on a new poster, as is
your habit, to try and mislead them and subvert them you will be even
MORE easily exposed for the lying sneaking child abusing mother
****ing-up smelly asshole you really are.

Kane wrote
to think there is something perverse
in my showering with my own children...

Could you please SAY THAT A LITTLE LOUDER, KANE?

Sure, only I won't arfully snip to make me look like a perv, as NON of
us have had to snip you to show you as the perv YOU ARE

You have tried to make people think that my showering with my children
until they were old enough, LONG BEFORE SIX, to notice our sexual
differences is perverse.

I can understand why you must have to not go out to work or deal with
anyone in the real world by the refund clerk at the supermarket.

You are such a loser it's beat you into retreat. If you are this
hapless, and a loser with me in a silly ass newsgroup, what must your
failures look like in real life?

Oh, wait, you've found someone to share your loser victim role,
haven't you now:

The mother.

By the way, you carefully have avoided, snipped I imagine, the
question I asked:

Given that YOU had to shower and attend the child when she was there,
before you came into the household, while the mother was working, who
supplied child care?

Betcha snip it again to avoid answering, eh? Thought up a good enough
lie yet...

Try it out on us. I've a hunch there are four or five of us just
waiting to see your newest bit of sick nonsense

~yawn~

Still suffering from that lack of oxygen thingie then?

Go suck a Plant Dennis instead of your buddy's Bong.

Does your CPSWatch know where you are tonight?

Kane