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

Kane wrote
> You think one worker that didn't get
> reported equated with ALL parents
> being reported. Prove it.

Your equation, your problem.
Why should I prove something I never said?

However, even ONE caseworker caught at child
molesting is something the community should
be made aware of.  Don't you think, Kane?

> >Clearly some favoritism exists.

> I've not seen that. In fact I have never
> in all these years seen a single instance
> where a client of CPS, unless they have
> been accused of murder, get newscoverage.

Well, CRIMINAL CHARGES are ALL reported in
our local newspaper, at the PROSECUTORS
descretion. It's a quite busy column!
Interesting eh?

> So you always set traps for people?

Kane, this is PRECIOUS!  You did it to yourself!

> Is this how you parented the little girl?
> No wonder she pissed herself.
> She had to guess what shit you'd come up
> with next to torture her with.

But the girl generally had the problem
in the middle of her school day.
She also told us truthfully that she
held her bladder because she didn't
want to take 5 minutes out of school fun
to go to the bathroom.  Kids do this.
And you've been told this many times.

> So tell me, if it wasn't in the media how
> did you manage to find out about it?

It was completely blacked out HERE until the
guy did it in COLORADO SPRINGS, COLORADO.

Isn't the internet wonderful?

> I mean what with Iowa CPS keeping it
> all hush hush. And how did the authorities
> in Colorado find out about this carefully
> kept secret?

ONLY after he was caught molesting THERE!
That caused a lot of fussing in COLORADO
about how the CPS dorks there never did any
background check and actually hired a
KNOWN PEDOFILE CASEWORKER.

> Come on, dimwit, don't you know by now
> I know how you find out about
> it and they got it from the media?

Commander McBrag, Do Tell!

> And what did he offer in exchange for this "bargain"?

Don't know.
 
> Trust me on this. I know criminals.

Yes, It's the WORLD OF COMMANDER MCBRAG!

You nit picked about the "bargaining" but you
never explained why the criminal charges were
brought forth and then DISMISSED.

You focused instead on the REGISTRY.

> >Case ID Title Name DOB
> >06571  FECR009803
> >STATE OF IOWA VS RANTZ, GEOFFREY DEL
> >DOB 12/08/1974  Offence date: August 1, 1994
> >-------------------------------------------------
> >Count 01 Charge Charge: 709.8 Description: LASCIVIOUS ACTS WITH A
>  CHILD (FELD)
> >Offense Date:  08/01/1994 Arrest Date:  Against Type: 
> >Adjudication Charge:
> >709.8 Description: LASCIVIOUS ACTS WITH A CHILD (FELD) 
> >Adj.: DISMISSED Adj.Date: 09/19/1996
> >Adj.Judge: KOEHLER, THOMAS L 
> >-----------------------------------------------
> >Count 02 Charge Charge: 
> > 709.4-2 Description: DNU - SEXUAL ABUSE 3RD DEGREE - 1978 (FELC) 
> >           Offense Date:  08/01/1994 Arrest Date:  Against Type:

Kane wrote
> this was a skillful criminal who
> figured out how to slide through
> the checks in the system.

That would imply there WERE checks to slide through.
There were NOT.

> Thanks for all the information, finally. Much
> quicker this time.

It was on the net, just like I said.

> I'll get you to come to heel yet, boy.

Megalomania AGAIN?
Get over yourself.

> That little trickster will probably do all he
> can, as cons do, to get out early, and go
> back to scammin one way or another.

Yeah, but you said you personally ARCHIVE all of this.
Store it on your bookshelf next to your
jars of urine, Doctor Strangelove.