Re: Ray attempts Biblical justification: was Re: U.N. rules Canada should ban spanking

> > I think people should KNOW the kind of garbage
> > that caseworkers spew onto reports, and that judges
> > don't throw said obvious spew out of court.
> 
> ".... said obvious spew..."

For example:  Caseworker said that I stood around outside
their building "in an intimidating manner" for hours.
Supposedly caseworkers spent HOURS watching some guy
standing around outside of their building.
They say it was me.

1. Not true.
2. No witness provided
3. It's a large public building.
4. I did visit a congressman's office in that building.
   I was never near that building for hours.
5. Even if it WERE true, it's a LEGAL and Constitutionally
   protected activity.  1st Amendment no less.
6. When I DO stand around outside their building I
   will be carrying a picket sign which they
   will no doubt find to be "intimidating".
7. Logical problem.  They have window ledges that would
   obstruct such observation of the sidewalk below from
   their 3rd floor offices.
8. The complaint is more interesting because
   it makes apparent their interest in violating
   people's constitutional rights.
9. Which caseworker had HOURS to waste on watching
   somebody on the sidewalk below their windows?


But why didn't the JUDGE throw this out of court
based on number 5?

Why should a person prove or disprove something
that from all descriptions is 100% LEGAL?

The Judge should have thrown it out based
on obvious conflict with 1st Amendment.

It's supposed to be part of their job to do that.