If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
firemonkey and dan are you two whacked or what?
On Sep 3, 8:31 pm, wrote:
Subject: firemonkey and dan are you two whacked or what? Greg and Ken put a beating on you and all you can do is spam the group with [s] about looking at their shortcomings! [ Dan Sullivan removed the below two sentences. ] You two have enough skeletons in your closets! Your little game of trying to divert attention from you cps lovers isn't working. DS Greg, the wife abusing convict, Yes, 11 year old misdemeanors. DS and ken pangborn, the world renowned DS bull**** artist, didn't put a "beating" on DS me or anyone else. DS Ken must have been laughed out of every DS courtroom he ever opened his mouth in. Since WHEN does a TRIAL CONSULTANT open their mouth in court? What is it you think TRIAL CONSULTANTS do Dan? DS And Greg Hanson is a registered child abuser in Iowa Dan, did you know that a bunch of states have actually stopped even HAVING the child abuse registry because the process is so horribly unconstitutional? I'd think you would understnd how the registry lacks "due process" since you were placed on your states registry FIVE TIMES according to you. with multiple convictions for beating his mentally ill wife. You mentioned that before and you mentioned that before. Did I mention that you mentioned that before? The two have NOTHING BUT shortcomings. Dan keeps trying to kill the messenger(s) because he is not capable of arguing about the issue itself. Basically EVERY attorney going into a Juvenile Court Family Court or dependency court that removes or may at a later date consider removing children should be filing the Santosky v Kramer caselaw and demanding the Clear and Convincing (80%) standard rather than the Preponderance (51%) standard for the burden of proof that their state mandates. Almost all attorneys in "preponderance" states fail to do this and have failed their client. This 29% difference in the burden of proof is a big deal! The lower (unconstitutional) standard makes the job of removing children, controlling families and putting them through the Child Protection INDUSTRY meat grinder 29% easier! Caseworkers can run the show because the improper standard makes it 29% easier for them to meet the "burden of proof". Except for the two or three states that already specify Clear and Convincing as the burden of proof the caseworkers have to meet, the courts are by default substandard and unconstitutional. All Dan can do is talk about the registry which is a different process, one that is also shoddy but violates DUE PROCESS so badly that several states have been forced to throw them out. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
firemonkey and dan are you two whacked or what?
"Greegor" wrote in message ups.com... On Sep 3, 8:31 pm, wrote: Subject: firemonkey and dan are you two whacked or what? Greg and Ken put a beating on you and all you can do is spam the group with [s] about looking at their shortcomings! [ Dan Sullivan removed the below two sentences. ] You two have enough skeletons in your closets! Your little game of trying to divert attention from you cps lovers isn't working. DS Greg, the wife abusing convict, Yes, 11 year old misdemeanors. DS and ken pangborn, the world renowned DS bull**** artist, didn't put a "beating" on DS me or anyone else. DS Ken must have been laughed out of every DS courtroom he ever opened his mouth in. Since WHEN does a TRIAL CONSULTANT open their mouth in court? Well Dan obviously refers to my appointments BY courts as Guardian Ad Litem for children. Dan softened his claim from"EVERY TIME" I open my mouth, a delcarative sentence, to now "must have" which means "maybe" in every courtroom. Of course neither is true. A prosecutor in a midwestern city TRIED to use the Moore website against me and wound up with a very angry admonishment from the judge. I await Dan's PROOF that I have EVER been "laughed out" of ANY court room much less EVERY one. What is it you think TRIAL CONSULTANTS do Dan? DS And Greg Hanson is a registered child abuser in Iowa Dan, did you know that a bunch of states have actually stopped even HAVING the child abuse registry because the process is so horribly unconstitutional? I'd think you would understnd how the registry lacks "due process" since you were placed on your states registry FIVE TIMES according to you. with multiple convictions for beating his mentally ill wife. You mentioned that before and you mentioned that before. Did I mention that you mentioned that before? The two have NOTHING BUT shortcomings. Dan keeps trying to kill the messenger(s) because he is not capable of arguing about the issue itself. Basically EVERY attorney going into a Juvenile Court Family Court or dependency court that removes or may at a later date consider removing children should be filing the Santosky v Kramer caselaw and demanding the Clear and Convincing (80%) standard rather than the Preponderance (51%) standard for the burden of proof that their state mandates. Almost all attorneys in "preponderance" states fail to do this and have failed their client. This 29% difference in the burden of proof is a big deal! The lower (unconstitutional) standard makes the job of removing children, controlling families and putting them through the Child Protection INDUSTRY meat grinder 29% easier! Caseworkers can run the show because the improper standard makes it 29% easier for them to meet the "burden of proof". Except for the two or three states that already specify Clear and Convincing as the burden of proof the caseworkers have to meet, the courts are by default substandard and unconstitutional. All Dan can do is talk about the registry which is a different process, one that is also shoddy but violates DUE PROCESS so badly that several states have been forced to throw them out. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
gregg scott hanson, Cat Trainer or Pedophile?
On Sep 4, 2:29 am, " krp" wrote:
"Greegor" wrote in message ups.com... On Sep 3, 8:31 pm, wrote: Subject: firemonkey and dan are you two whacked or what? Greg and Ken put a beating on you and all you can do is spam the group with [s] about looking at their shortcomings! [ Dan Sullivan removed the below two sentences. ] You two have enough skeletons in your closets! Your little game of trying to divert attention from you cps lovers isn't working. DS Greg, the wife abusing convict, Yes, 11 year old misdemeanors. DS and ken pangborn, the world renowned DS bull**** artist, didn't put a "beating" on DS me or anyone else. DS Ken must have been laughed out of every DS courtroom he ever opened his mouth in. Since WHEN does a TRIAL CONSULTANT open their mouth in court? Well Dan obviously refers to my appointments BY courts as Guardian Ad Litem for children. Dan softened his claim from"EVERY TIME" I open my mouth, a delcarative sentence, to now "must have" which means "maybe" in every courtroom. Of course neither is true. A prosecutor in a midwestern city TRIED to use the Moore website against me and wound up with a very angry admonishment from the judge. I await Dan's PROOF that I have EVER been "laughed out" of ANY court room much less EVERY one. What is it you think TRIAL CONSULTANTS do Dan? DS And Greg Hanson is a registered child abuser in Iowa Dan, did you know that a bunch of states have actually stopped even HAVING the child abuse registry because the process is so horribly unconstitutional? I'd think you would understnd how the registry lacks "due process" since you were placed on your states registry FIVE TIMES according to you. with multiple convictions for beating his mentally ill wife. You mentioned that before and you mentioned that before. Did I mention that you mentioned that before? The two have NOTHING BUT shortcomings. Dan keeps trying to kill the messenger(s) because he is not capable of arguing about the issue itself. Basically EVERY attorney going into a Juvenile Court Family Court or dependency court that removes or may at a later date consider removing children should be filing the Santosky v Kramer caselaw and demanding the Clear and Convincing (80%) standard rather than the Preponderance (51%) standard for the burden of proof that their state mandates. Almost all attorneys in "preponderance" states fail to do this and have failed their client. This 29% difference in the burden of proof is a big deal! The lower (unconstitutional) standard makes the job of removing children, controlling families and putting them through the Child Protection INDUSTRY meat grinder 29% easier! Caseworkers can run the show because the improper standard makes it 29% easier for them to meet the "burden of proof". Except for the two or three states that already specify Clear and Convincing as the burden of proof the caseworkers have to meet, the courts are by default substandard and unconstitutional. All Dan can do is talk about the registry which is a different process, one that is also shoddy but violates DUE PROCESS so badly that several states have been forced to throw them out. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
gregg scott hanson, Cat Trainer or Pedophile?
On Sep 4, 7:24 am, firemonkey wrote:
On Sep 4, 2:29 am, " krp" wrote: "Greegor" wrote in message oups.com... On Sep 3, 8:31 pm, wrote: Subject: firemonkey and dan are you two whacked or what? Greg and Ken put a beating on you and all you can do is spam the group with [s] about looking at their shortcomings! [ Dan Sullivan removed the below two sentences. ] You two have enough skeletons in your closets! Your little game of trying to divert attention from you cps lovers isn't working. DS Greg, the wife abusing convict, Yes, 11 year old misdemeanors. DS and ken pangborn, the world renowned DS bull**** artist, didn't put a "beating" on DS me or anyone else. DS Ken must have been laughed out of every DS courtroom he ever opened his mouth in. Since WHEN does a TRIAL CONSULTANT open their mouth in court? Well Dan obviously refers to my appointments BY courts as Guardian Ad Litem for children. Dan softened his claim from"EVERY TIME" I open my mouth, a delcarative sentence, to now "must have" which means "maybe" in every courtroom. Of course neither is true. A prosecutor in a midwestern city TRIED to use the Moore website against me and wound up with a very angry admonishment from the judge. I await Dan's PROOF that I have EVER been "laughed out" of ANY court room much less EVERY one. What is it you think TRIAL CONSULTANTS do Dan? DS And Greg Hanson is a registered child abuser in Iowa Dan, did you know that a bunch of states have actually stopped even HAVING the child abuse registry because the process is so horribly unconstitutional? I'd think you would understnd how the registry lacks "due process" since you were placed on your states registry FIVE TIMES according to you. with multiple convictions for beating his mentally ill wife. You mentioned that before and you mentioned that before. Did I mention that you mentioned that before? The two have NOTHING BUT shortcomings. Dan keeps trying to kill the messenger(s) because he is not capable of arguing about the issue itself. Basically EVERY attorney going into a Juvenile Court Family Court or dependency court that removes or may at a later date consider removing children should be filing the Santosky v Kramer caselaw and demanding the Clear and Convincing (80%) standard rather than the Preponderance (51%) standard for the burden of proof that their state mandates. Almost all attorneys in "preponderance" states fail to do this and have failed their client. This 29% difference in the burden of proof is a big deal! The lower (unconstitutional) standard makes the job of removing children, controlling families and putting them through the Child Protection INDUSTRY meat grinder 29% easier! Caseworkers can run the show because the improper standard makes it 29% easier for them to meet the "burden of proof". Except for the two or three states that already specify Clear and Convincing as the burden of proof the caseworkers have to meet, the courts are by default substandard and unconstitutional. All Dan can do is talk about the registry which is a different process, one that is also shoddy but violates DUE PROCESS so badly that several states have been forced to throw them out. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Moore than you think, kenny boy!!!!!
On Sep 4, 3:29 am, " krp" wrote:
"Greegor" wrote in message ups.com... On Sep 3, 8:31 pm, wrote: Subject: firemonkey and dan are you two whacked or what? Greg and Ken put a beating on you and all you can do is spam the group with [s] about looking at their shortcomings! [ Dan Sullivan removed the below two sentences. ] You two have enough skeletons in your closets! Your little game of trying to divert attention from you cps lovers isn't working. DS Greg, the wife abusing convict, Yes, 11 year old misdemeanors. DS and ken pangborn, the world renowned DS bull**** artist, didn't put a "beating" on DS me or anyone else. DS Ken must have been laughed out of every DS courtroom he ever opened his mouth in. Since WHEN does a TRIAL CONSULTANT open their mouth in court? Well Dan obviously refers to my appointments BY courts as Guardian Ad Litem for children. Dan softened his claim from"EVERY TIME" I open my mouth, a delcarative sentence, to now "must have" which means "maybe" in every courtroom. Of course neither is true. A prosecutor in a midwestern city TRIED to use the Moore website against me and wound up with a very angry admonishment from the judge. What does Moore's website have to do with you getting laughed out of every courtroom you opened your mouth in? Nothing at all. This is just another example of you failing to follow a conversation, kenny boy. Tell me this only happens on this NG... and NOT when you're dealing with Courts and CPS. I await Dan's PROOF that I have EVER been "laughed out" of ANY court room much less EVERY one. Do you have any idea how many people are laughing at you because of the third-rate bull**** you post here, kenny boy? Moore than you think!!! BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!! What is it you think TRIAL CONSULTANTS do Dan? DS And Greg Hanson is a registered child abuser in Iowa Dan, did you know that a bunch of states have actually stopped even HAVING the child abuse registry because the process is so horribly unconstitutional? I'd think you would understnd how the registry lacks "due process" since you were placed on your states registry FIVE TIMES according to you. with multiple convictions for beating his mentally ill wife. You mentioned that before and you mentioned that before. Did I mention that you mentioned that before? The two have NOTHING BUT shortcomings. Dan keeps trying to kill the messenger(s) because he is not capable of arguing about the issue itself. Basically EVERY attorney going into a Juvenile Court Family Court or dependency court that removes or may at a later date consider removing children should be filing the Santosky v Kramer caselaw and demanding the Clear and Convincing (80%) standard rather than the Preponderance (51%) standard for the burden of proof that their state mandates. Almost all attorneys in "preponderance" states fail to do this and have failed their client. This 29% difference in the burden of proof is a big deal! The lower (unconstitutional) standard makes the job of removing children, controlling families and putting them through the Child Protection INDUSTRY meat grinder 29% easier! Caseworkers can run the show because the improper standard makes it 29% easier for them to meet the "burden of proof". Except for the two or three states that already specify Clear and Convincing as the burden of proof the caseworkers have to meet, the courts are by default substandard and unconstitutional. All Dan can do is talk about the registry which is a different process, one that is also shoddy but violates DUE PROCESS so badly that several states have been forced to throw them out. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Moore than you think, kenny boy!!!!! THE DAN CHALLENGE
"Dan Sullivan" wrote in message ups.com... On Sep 4, 3:29 am, " krp" wrote: Since WHEN does a TRIAL CONSULTANT open their mouth in court? Well Dan obviously refers to my appointments BY courts as Guardian Ad Litem for children. Dan softened his claim from"EVERY TIME" I open my mouth, a delcarative sentence, to now "must have" which means "maybe" in every courtroom. Of course neither is true. A prosecutor in a midwestern city TRIED to use the Moore website against me and wound up with a very angry admonishment from the judge. What does Moore's website have to do with you getting laughed out of every courtroom you opened your mouth in? Danny yesterday I challenged you to prove that I have been "laughed out" of even ONE courtroom. So let's see it. PROOF of just ONE there Mister Sullivan. Your credibility is riding on it. Obviously you think you have some PROOF of it. NAME ONE... We both know you can't. I just want to see how far your lying will go. Tap dance around it and everyone will take it as an admission you are LYING! Of course both you and I - KNOW you are! |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Moore than you think, kenny boy!!!!! THE DAN CHALLENGE
On Sep 5, 6:33 am, " krp" wrote:
"Dan Sullivan" wrote in message ups.com... On Sep 4, 3:29 am, " krp" wrote: Since WHEN does a TRIAL CONSULTANT open their mouth in court? Well Dan obviously refers to my appointments BY courts as Guardian Ad Litem for children. Dan softened his claim from"EVERY TIME" I open my mouth, a delcarative sentence, to now "must have" which means "maybe" in every courtroom. Of course neither is true. A prosecutor in a midwestern city TRIED to use the Moore website against me and wound up with a very angry admonishment from the judge. What does Moore's website have to do with you getting laughed out of every courtroom you opened your mouth in? Danny yesterday I challenged you to prove that I have been "laughed out" of even ONE courtroom. So let's see it. PROOF of just ONE there Mister Sullivan. Your credibility is riding on it. Obviously you think you have some PROOF of it. NAME ONE... We both know you can't. I just want to see how far your lying will go. Tap dance around it and everyone will take it as an admission you are LYING! Of course both you and I - KNOW you are! I say you "must have been laughed out of every courtroom you opened your mouth in" based on the third-rate bull**** you post on this NG. SUCH AS you claiming a prosecutor trying to use Moore's website against you was proof that you weren't laughed out of court for opening your mouth!!! Can you NOT see the stupidity in that? It makes no sense at all. It was the PROSECUTOR who opened his mouth. NOT you. And he didn't get laughed out of Court. He was admonished by the Judge. It's no wonder people are so extremely unhappy with your "services." |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Moore than you think, kenny boy!!!!! THE DAN CHALLENGE STILL LYING AND NO PROOF
"Dan Sullivan" wrote in message ps.com... Since WHEN does a TRIAL CONSULTANT open their mouth in court? Well Dan obviously refers to my appointments BY courts as Guardian Ad Litem for children. Dan softened his claim from"EVERY TIME" I open my mouth, a delcarative sentence, to now "must have" which means "maybe" in every courtroom. Of course neither is true. A prosecutor in a midwestern city TRIED to use the Moore website against me and wound up with a very angry admonishment from the judge. What does Moore's website have to do with you getting laughed out of every courtroom you opened your mouth in? Danny yesterday I challenged you to prove that I have been "laughed out" of even ONE courtroom. So let's see it. PROOF of just ONE there Mister Sullivan. Your credibility is riding on it. Obviously you think you have some PROOF of it. NAME ONE... We both know you can't. I just want to see how far your lying will go. Tap dance around it and everyone will take it as an admission you are LYING! Of course both you and I - KNOW you are! I say you "must have been laughed out of every courtroom you opened your mouth in" based on the third-rate bull**** you post on this NG. No you state it as a FACT! YOUR PROOF!!!! NAME ONE! Show us you are NOT full of **** Danny! PROVE even ONE courtroom I have been laughed out of.. A REAL one of course. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Moore than you think, kenny boy!!!!! THE DAN CHALLENGE STILL LYING AND NO PROOF
On Sep 5, 2:22 pm, " krp" wrote:
"Dan Sullivan" wrote in message ps.com... Since WHEN does a TRIAL CONSULTANT open their mouth in court? Well Dan obviously refers to my appointments BY courts as Guardian Ad Litem for children. Dan softened his claim from"EVERY TIME" I open my mouth, a delcarative sentence, to now "must have" which means "maybe" in every courtroom. Of course neither is true. A prosecutor in a midwestern city TRIED to use the Moore website against me and wound up with a very angry admonishment from the judge. What does Moore's website have to do with you getting laughed out of every courtroom you opened your mouth in? Danny yesterday I challenged you to prove that I have been "laughed out" of even ONE courtroom. So let's see it. PROOF of just ONE there Mister Sullivan. Your credibility is riding on it. Obviously you think you have some PROOF of it. NAME ONE... We both know you can't. I just want to see how far your lying will go. Tap dance around it and everyone will take it as an admission you are LYING! Of course both you and I - KNOW you are! I say you "must have been laughed out of every courtroom you opened your mouth in" based on the third-rate bull**** you post on this NG. No you state it as a FACT! You can interpret what I said any way you choose to, kenny boy. It is simply my opinion. I said you"must have." I didn't say "you were." |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Moore than you think, kenny boy!!!!! THE DAN CHALLENGE STILL LYING AND NO PROOF
"Dan Sullivan" wrote in message ups.com... Since WHEN does a TRIAL CONSULTANT open their mouth in court? Well Dan obviously refers to my appointments BY courts as Guardian Ad Litem for children. Dan softened his claim from"EVERY TIME" I open my mouth, a delcarative sentence, to now "must have" which means "maybe" in every courtroom. Of course neither is true. A prosecutor in a midwestern city TRIED to use the Moore website against me and wound up with a very angry admonishment from the judge. What does Moore's website have to do with you getting laughed out of every courtroom you opened your mouth in? Danny yesterday I challenged you to prove that I have been "laughed out" of even ONE courtroom. So let's see it. PROOF of just ONE there Mister Sullivan. Your credibility is riding on it. Obviously you think you have some PROOF of it. NAME ONE... We both know you can't. I just want to see how far your lying will go. Tap dance around it and everyone will take it as an admission you are LYING! Of course both you and I - KNOW you are! I say you "must have been laughed out of every courtroom you opened your mouth in" based on the third-rate bull**** you post on this NG. No you state it as a FACT! You can interpret what I said any way you choose to, kenny boy. no you SAID it that way Danny boy AND you were lying your ass off! It is simply my opinion. You stated it as FACT and you were LYING! |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Firemonkey == LostInTranslation == oldmom | Greegor | Spanking | 16 | January 18th 07 09:30 PM |
Firemonkey == LostInTranslation == oldmom | Greegor | Foster Parents | 16 | January 18th 07 09:30 PM |
Firemonkey == LostInTranslation == oldmom | Greegor | Spanking | 1 | January 18th 07 03:38 AM |
Firemonkey == LostInTranslation == oldmom | Greegor | Foster Parents | 1 | January 18th 07 03:38 AM |
When women get 'whacked' | Todd Gastaldo | Pregnancy | 1 | January 15th 05 03:16 PM |