Greg's Gratitude ...

Kane, You accused Fern of having said things
that she did not. Rather than provide
a link to the actual message you were referring to,
you posted or linked to YOUR WORDS.
You tried linking to comments about the WRONG case.
You cited where Fern said the prosecutor should
have never prosecuted one case. You actually
had the nerve to say THAT was supporting ABUSE,
even though the JURY found the case inadequate!

Being that you are obsessed with making ALL
spanking illegal, you fell prey to your own
rhetoric, calling spanking BEATING.

The JURY didn't see spanking as BEATING.

When I pointed out that you would also have
to blame the JURY, you agreed and said that
you DO. Yet you persist in singling out Fern.

Mighty bold of you to repeatedly attack Fern
after she left the newsgroup, by the way.

You falsely claimed to have shown her evil posts
to your little cult which patted you on the back of course!

Greg appears to have reposted, and started a new thread, his post
accusing me, apparently to avoid anyone seeing my reply that dumped his
garbage back in his lap.

Fern said what I said she said. I provided links to her posts that said
those things.
I posted my posts to prove that I had indeed posted her quoted words
accurately, as I had been accused yet again of not having done so.

Now Greg is accusing me of answering his challenges as a bad thing.
Interesting debating style, what?

All this was covered in another post. Greg is lying again, as usual.

- Diversion to avoid dealing with his having advised someone to admit
to a crime in court, with the evidence of the crime in hand, to fight
CPS and get her children back.

- More diversion to having been caught at the above by Dan, who he
accuses of trespass in an OPEN FORUM, and quoting him Feloniously.

- And finally Greg is avoiding answering my request for him to correct
the Congressional Record as to his mistaken accusation that Iowa
misused government funds by violating Federal directives to establish a
certain number of CRB offices.

Same old Greg.


Greegor wrote:
Kane, You accused Fern of having said things
that she did not. Rather than provide
a link to the actual message you were referring to,
you posted or linked to YOUR WORDS.
You tried linking to comments about the WRONG case.
You cited where Fern said the prosecutor should
have never prosecuted one case. You actually
had the nerve to say THAT was supporting ABUSE,
even though the JURY found the case inadequate!

Being that you are obsessed with making ALL
spanking illegal, you fell prey to your own
rhetoric, calling spanking BEATING.

The JURY didn't see spanking as BEATING.

When I pointed out that you would also have
to blame the JURY, you agreed and said that
you DO. Yet you persist in singling out Fern.

Mighty bold of you to repeatedly attack Fern
after she left the newsgroup, by the way.

You falsely claimed to have shown her evil posts
to your little cult which patted you on the back of course!

How many JURIES will you whine about before you are done, Kane?

Greegor wrote:
How many JURIES will you whine about before you are done, Kane?

None.

My remarks were about the judge and how he or she can nullify the jury
either by blocking testimony and evidence as prejudicial, or instructing
the jury NOT to consider some they have learned in their deliberations
and decision.

How many time will I have to repeat this, as I have had to repeat every
lesson I've ever given you many times?

Why did you strip the attributions, Greg? To hide what I actually said
so you could make a stupid insinuating accusation?

Here below, is everything I said on the subject directly to YOUR
questions and challenges just a few posts ago in this very thread.

Why do you lie like this, Greg? Do you wish to be disbelieved in all
things, or do you need the attention, even if negative?


.....My prior post.....

NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 23:52:35 -0600
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 21:52:22 -0800
From: "0:-"
Newsgroups: alt.support.child-protective-services
Subject: Greg's Gratitude ...alt.support.child-protective-services:93389

"Greegor wrote:
Please vilify THE JURY Kane!

Why would I do that?

Not only have I said they made a "mistake" but in an earlier post on
this subject I discussed how judges manipulate juries by keeping them
either ignorant of critical evidence that, as the defense puts it,
"prejudice the jury against my poor vicious beating children client."

In fact I believe that you, or someone or someone in your little klan
has discussed the issue of jury nullification and made exactly the same
point.

I can't vilify the jury for being ignorant, since other's withheld the
facts from them most likely.

Judges respond to "community standards," which can be shaped in hours by
TV and other media.

Which tend to be subject to those that can put on the best show.

The judge, considering when he's up for reelection again, and whether or
not he has higher political ambitions WILL pay attention to such things.

I don't totally disapprove, because I think community standards matter,
and being somewhat over on the side of States Rights politely, can't
really protest when it works against me.

No, Greg, those that are ignorant through no fault of their own I would
never 'vilify.'

Now those the cultivate ignorance might be another matter.

Tell me, did your mom do drugs while pregnant with you, or drop you from
higher than five feet more than six times when you were a baby?

Otherwise, Greg, your studied ignorance, your conveniently forgetting
that we have told you many facts over the years, and your instance that
we trot them out yet again, shows that you likely are working really
hard to maintain ignorance.

It's about all you have left to garner the attention you seem to need so
badly.

Imagine telling a parent to admit to a crime in court in a civil child
custody case.

You HAVE to be practicing and practicing your capacity to block out
reality and remain ignorant to have done that. I mean look at all the
sources you've had access to over the years.

Have you EVER seen one of them suggest what you suggested to her, boy
wonder?

0:-
.....

Now Greg, can you explain this claim of yours that I whine about
"juries" when in fact my bitch was about judges?

Please be brief, and directly to the point.

An "I'm sorry, I made a mistake," would suffice.

I don't hold grudges when people are honest, admit an error.

Even Dan and I disagree, and I learn thereby. I hope he does as well.

Same goes for all honest people that do not see things the same way.

What happened to you?

0:-

Greegor wrote:
How many JURIES will you whine about before you are done, Kane?

None.

My remarks were about the judge and how he or she can nullify the jury
either by blocking testimony and evidence as prejudicial, or instructing
the jury NOT to consider some they have learned in their deliberations
and decision.

Are you saying the Judge should disallow the Jury
from seeing their state LAW which allows spanking,
in order that spanking can be judged to be ABUSE??

Perhaps they were less impressed than you are
with the modern no-spank parenting methods?

You did say you blamed the JURY earlier.

Greegor wrote:
Greegor wrote:
How many JURIES will you whine about before you are done, Kane?
None.

My remarks were about the judge and how he or she can nullify the jury
either by blocking testimony and evidence as prejudicial, or instructing
the jury NOT to consider some they have learned in their deliberations
and decision.

Are you saying the Judge should disallow the Jury
from seeing their state LAW which allows spanking,
in order that spanking can be judged to be ABUSE??

No. Where did I mention state law?

Perhaps they were less impressed than you are
with the modern no-spank parenting methods?

Could be. They are a paddling state, and in addition known to be more
attracted to child beating there.

On the other hand, had they been shown the evidence fully, both
testimony and the marks on the one child that were described by a police
investigator as an open wound, do you think it was right to acquit?

And do you think such wounds are acceptable as "spanking?"

You did say you blamed the JURY earlier.

I might have. NO offense intended.

That's why I qualified with my discussion of how they came to likely be
so ignorant.

And Greg, if a lawyer can convince a judge that the reading of a law to
the jury would be prejudicial, the judge would bar it.

They'd bar the recording of dogs barking if it was successfully argued
as prejudicial to the accused.

You don't really understand our judicial system at all, do you Greg?

A judge might well bar the statements to the press, and the prior
conviction of one of the accused, the minister, admitting happily to,
and promising to continue, that he had indeed whipped a child blood, a
17 year old girl.

-- Dan's felonious Quoting?

-- What he quoted of yours?

-- A flawed written testimony to the HW&MC hearing?