Well, it's Q4, which means the Day Job is
Anyways, some stuff that caught my eye.
Jena Six Slapped With Lawsuit
Hmmm, just when you thought Mychal Bell was out of trouble after taking that guilty plea the other day, the bad news just keeps on comin'.
The family of the victim in the "Jena Six" case has sued the adults accused of beating him, the families of the juveniles allegedly involved and the board of the school where the attack occurred.Let's be honest here, the Barker family is not suing the Jena 6. Lord knows, even beyond the money some of these idiots are flossin' on MySpace and BET, these kids and their families don't have two nickels to rub together. This is all about trying to extort the county school board, which I think is pretty darned heinous when you think about it.
Justin Barker and his parents, David and Kelli, also accuse a seventh, uncharged student of being part of the group that attacked Justin on Dec. 4, 2006, as he walked out of Jena High School's gym headed to another class.
Barker spent several hours in the emergency room after the attack but was discharged and attended a school event the night after the attack.
The lawsuit was filed Nov. 29 in state district court. It alleges that the LaSalle Parish School Board is liable because school employees were not adequately supervising students and failed to maintain discipline.
Still, I can't help but wonder how much that MySpace fiasco might have agitated the Barkers to the point that they wanted their own money. If we see Justin Barker on Facebook covered in dollar bills, or on the CMT Awards next year, we really shouldn't be all that surprised.
Sperm Donor Sued For Back Child Support
Boy, talk about ungrateful recipients. This one takes the cake.
A sperm donor may have to pay child support after the mother's lawyer argued that the man has sent birthday cards and otherwise acted like a father to the teenage child, the donor's lawyer said.I know I usually side with men when it comes to issues of child support, so you could already color me biased, but this is just friggin' ridiculous. Granted, the donor probably didn't do the right thing by continually showering the kid with money, gifts, and letters all marked "Dad". He also probably shouldn't have maintained a relationship with the kid by phone. I guess the guy just couldn't help himself.
A Nassau County Family Court judge recently blocked the man from seeking a paternity test. The man's lawyer, Deborah Kelly, says the Nov. 16 ruling sets the stage for a magistrate to determine how much her client may owe in support. The parties in the case are listed anonymously.
The man, a doctor, donated sperm to a hospital resident and her female partner in the late 1980s. The child was born in July 1989.
The donor and the women agreed verbally that he wouldn't have any rights in the child's upbringing, according to court documents. But he allowed his name to appear on the child's birth certificate because he felt it was in the child's best interests to have "an identity," court documents say.
But Kelly said her client's gestures of goodwill were being unfairly used against him.
"What's the saying? No good deed goes unpunished," she said.
Still, how gully is it for the chicks to now ask this poor guy for years and years of back child support? I mean, really, he helped these women obtain the ultimate gift: life. I am guessing this is probably more of a personal beef because the women just wanted this guy to give his specimen and get lost, while he's probably had second thoughts and tried to maintain a distant relationship with the kid.
That said, if these women can take him to court for child support, couldn't he also sue for custody? Perhaps I'm way off after just shoveling a crapload of snow off my driveway, but that seems pretty fair to me.
I invite my resident attorneys to weigh in on both of these seemingly frivolous lawsuits in the comments.
Hot Links:
Victim in Jena 6 Case Sues Over Beating [ABC News]
Mychal Bell Of Jena Six To Remain In Jail As Part Of Plea Deal: Report [MTV]
Sperm Donor 'Dad' Must Pay Child Support [ABC News]
Average Email
Average FAQ
Average Bio
AB @ AOL BlackVoices
AB @ NPR
AB @ WashingtonPost
Posts
24 AverageComments™:
If you recall, the Jena 6 families have a fat defense fund under their control and that is a legitimate target for Barker's lawsuit.
I would expect the Jena 6 lawsuit, but suing a sperm donor for child support? Be serious...
Reminds me of this one time there was this homeless dude outside of CVS asking for change, so I bought him a bag of pretzels and he said "I dont like dem...I dont even eat dems."
Don't see how this is a frivolous suit, people have the right to sue, doesn't mean they will automatically win.
The black folks there should also sue the school district for not doing enough to prevent this mess from happening in the first place.
Both of these lawsuits are ridiculous.
The fact of the matter is that Barker and his family ran up like 19,000 dollars in hospital bills because of an attack on him by six individuals.
To try to say it is frivilous is really triviliazing what really is indeed a HATE CRIME. Would you have make that claim if the roles were reverse, and the victim was black suing the white attackers for the money he had to pay for his bills?
It is not frivilous.
It is just.
Try playing the argument on Judge Joe Brown that since one already got punished in criminal court for this type of behavior, one should not be held liable in civil court. He will laugh at you (literally) and tell you that you were held liable to the state but you still need to be held liable to the victim of your crime.
What is frivilous is all these mockings of the REAL VICTIM in this one case.
If whites were to mock a black victim of an attack by whites for suing those responsible, how would they come across?
Ask yourself that question. Because this type of stuff where the Jena 6 are continually made out to be martyrs will only serve to discredit the civil rights movement more and more.
We need the civil rights movement to be at the high moral ground, not the lowest common denominator it has become.
If whites were to mock a black victim of an attack by whites for suing those responsible, how would they come across?
Where have you been? Black victims of attacks by whites get NO support whatsoever.
AB - why is it that everytime you point out something interesting the anonymous disgruntled whites come out? Seriously, are they hiding in some type of terrorist cell with ski masks on or what?
Nice try, but I am Asian, so NEITHER white nor black.
I am stating as a minority that minorities are not looking so good supporting the Jena 6 and worse, mocking the victim of the Jena 6.
We need to pick our causes better than this.
"I am stating as a minority that minorities are not looking so good supporting the Jena 6 and worse, mocking the victim of the Jena 6. We need to pick our causes better than this."
Well, Angry Anonymous Guy, you're preaching to the choir here. I'm the last one condoning the 6 on 1 beatdown turned civil rights crusade.
Peep the resume: http://www.averagebro.com/search?q=jena
That said, I guess this guy is well within his right to sue, but that doesn't mean the suit makes sense or that he should win. Let's not forget, Barker was the prime instigator in this whole thing. I'm not sayin' he should have gotten beaten bloody and unconscious, but he's hardly an innocent bystander.
"If whites were to mock a black victim of an attack by whites for suing those responsible, how would they come across?"
See Thembi's comment. You can't be serious.
How is he a prime instigator? By running his mouth? Talk about blaming the victim of a hate crime here.
I see that rhetoric employed by yourself used by people in Judge Joe Brown a number of times. The last time I saw that two gals blame the one they beat up for instigating, but the fact they continued the beatdown after the person is helpless (and shamelessly showed it to the judge on videotape) is what got them not only criminally in trouble. But also a huge tongue lashing from Judge Joe Brown for being sorry excuses of human beings (as he himself puts it in strong language, with added comments that the person instigating is no excuse for pathetic behaviour). And he threw in punitive damages to the full extent he could on all guilty of the beatdown.
So, no cigar there. Running one's mouth does NOT deserve what happened there.
That does not justify a beatdown like that.
And I saw Thembi's comments. Sorry, I am not white. The fact you repeat the race card played by Thembi there is telling, when I am not even white.
Guess what? It is not a black vs white issue.
It is right or wrong issue.
And there are a number of blacks, as well as Asians and whites who think the Jena 6 have this coming to them. They should be prosecuted to full extent of the law and sued for bills.
And since you want to claim black victims of white attacks get no support whatsoever, guess what?
In SOUTH CAROLINA, five white teenagers beat up a black teenager, and the prosecutor tried them as adults, to where if the judge had sentenced them to the max, it would have been 20 years. A number of them got like 12-18 years suspended to 6 years.
This is not 1960. This is 2007, when teenagers can put away for a long time, for violent crimes, no matter the race.
@ Angry Anonymous Guy,
Did you even bother reading any of the prior posts I linked to or were you just so intent on getting your point across that you lumped me with the legions of knumbskulls on a TV judge show.
That, my friend, is quite telling.
All I can say is wow...
With that said, love your blog AverageBro. It's refreshing to see what black men think about some of the issues I care about and can care about...
I hope Justin gets a good chunk of the money that has been 'donated' to the Jena Six cause...see what crunkin' at the BET Awards will get you?
Poor sperm donor...no good deed goes unpunished.
Averagebro,
Yes, I read all your past posts on this.
You made the claim here that Justin is prime instigator, so that is your argument it is frivolous.
Guess what? That is the type of argument those same knuckleheads (to use your words on them) used on Judge Joe Brown. They blame the victim as prime instigator then beat her up, and continue doing so when she is helpless (though unlike Justin, still conscious).
Judge Joe Brown lashed out at this very type of defense. The same defense you used for the Jena 6.
Yes, I know from your past posts, you have doubts about this case, saying things like this is no Scottsboro boys, that the Jena 6 get on your nerves, that this is not a good cause to get involved in, etc.
But you say one thing but you turn around and say since Justin acted in ways you think makes him some sort of instigator, it is somehow frivolous lawsuit?
Like Judge Joe Brown say, you need to do better. :)
And btw, the reason I am even debating you is because I like alot of what you have to say on this issue, from past pasts. Just on this one, I disagreed with you on. :)
You still run a good blog in my book, no matter where we differ on.
Wow you really idolize judge joe brown anonymous asian person.
I also know that the "Jena 6" are not saints.
But like most white people and apparently 1 asian person, that I know of, you all miss the point.
The whole issue is the prosecutor was trying to peg attempted murder on these teens for this crap. That is just a little over board imo.
As an example and keeping with your Television based defense of this kids suit. I watch the show "Most shocking video" or something on court tv.
And in one particular show on police dash cam, there was one dude shooting a shotgun at his brother he shot two times in front of a police officer.
The cop shoots him in the hand, he drops the shotgun. The cop then ran over and secured the shotgun, while he was doing this the dude's mother came and assaulted the cop and even went so far as to reach for his gun. All these people were white.
Now what do you guess would have happened if the dude shooting the shotgun at his brother was black? The dude was just charged with aggravated assault. Why no attempted murder charge?
This also happened in LA.
"The whole issue is the prosecutor was trying to peg attempted murder on these teens for this crap. That is just a little over board imo."
I didn't miss the whole point at all. I am fully aware people are crying foul that it is an attempted murder. But to me they are the ones who need to look up case laws and leave race out of the equation. They are the ones making it about race. If race has not been in the equation, the charges would still be correct.
In a case where white fellas stomped (with sneakers) a black fella in New York, Al Sharpton said sneakers are dangerous weapons, and the person could have been killed. So Sharpton is a bit dishonest in his claims about Jena, when he make claims like sneakers can't be used as dangerous weapons.
Yes, stomping someone can be seen as attempted murder. And yes, it has caused deaths.
And yes, there are precedents where one can get charged with attempted murder for something like this, regardless of race.
And there are also legal precedents, to charge REPEAT offenders HARSHER than first time offenders.
I suggest you read this from a black law professor Carol Swain (whose brother was killed in incident by stomping with sneakers:
http://www.expertclick.com/NewsReleaseWire/default.cfm?Action=ReleaseDetail&ID=18156&NRWid=5194
Thoughts about Jena 6, The District Attorney, and Black Leaders
Nashville, TN 37203-1181 October 1 2007
------------------------------------------------------
About Mychal Bell:
"I hope that the 10 months of incarceration will serve as a wakeup call for young man who seems headed for trouble." He is on probation already for committing similar crimes."
"If Justin Barker were a black teen, we would not have heard of this incident."
(The above comments are based on Bell's probation for 2 assaults and criminal property damage)
------------------------------------------------------
About the Jena District Attorney:
"I don't know if he is a racist or not. A prosecutor is in a position to see all sorts of crimes, and he or she knows from previous cases that under the right circumstances sneakers and fists can become deadly weapons, especially if a victim takes a blow to the head. Had not bystanders intervened, we don't know what would have happened."
------------------------------------------------------
About my personal experiences with a similar crime
"I have had my own experience with a similar such crime. Last November one of my brothers died from a brain injury that he sustained after being attacked by a gang of five teenage boys." A neighbor pulled the boys off him, he staggered home, lapsed into a coma, and was declared brain dead within hours.
Apparently, the injury caused massive hemorrogaging. Two of the boys were charged. One is still in jail awaiting sentencing. The DA hopes to try the others."
------------------------------------------------------
About my qualms with civil rights leaders
"Mychal Bell is no choir boy. I find it regrettable that civil rights leaders have downplayed and minimized the seriousness of the criminal act against Justin Barker. There should have been a serious condemnation of the manner in which six--on-one attack."
"I would like to see Reverends Jackson and Sharpton organize a massive civil rights march to condemn the rates of violent crime in black communities. Much of this is black-on-black crime. Unfortunately, too many of our so-called leaders remain silent on the issue."
About my brother's death
------------------------------------------------------
For more information, please see my op ed in the Tennessean (September 28, 2007).
When teens aren't taught value of life, it can have deadly consequences
http://www.tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070928/OPINION03/709280414
"Now what do you guess would have happened if the dude shooting the shotgun at his brother was black? The dude was just charged with aggravated assault. Why no attempted murder charge?
This also happened in LA."
Different cities handle cases differently. It depends on who the district attorney is.
For example, a mob of black teens beat up and nearly fatally injured three white women in Cali, and all they got is probation. (Btw, the hero in this whole mess was some black motorist who pulled the thugs off and put his body on top of the ladies so he would get the stomping instead of them- now that is A REAL MAN!).
in South Carolina, five white teenagers could have been put in jail for 20 years for beating up a black teen- the max sentence by which they would have gotten.
The fact they got less than 20 makes a point here.
Just because one faces like Bell 2years does NOT mean he gets 22 if convicted. He could get a lot less if the judge chooses.
And keep in mind the prosecutor at Jena offered them ORIGINALLY a plead bargain where the Jena 6 might have gotten very LITTLE jail time. The original defense attorney of Bell (himself black) told him he should have taken the plead bargain.
PS: There are black folks who agreed with me on this.
LA=Louisiana (brought up the whole LA case to keep within precedent..)
Most people get beat to death outside of school grounds...
If this was a gang fight scheduled for some field out in the middle of nowhere then I could possibly see attempted murder.
In my experience people that really want to hurt someone do it off campus. You really aren't that interested in fighting or hurting someone if you do it on campus (of course not counting the people that shoot schools up, totally different animal)
Prosecutors have way too much discretion imo.
I don't care that you have some black friends.
By the way it is called the Jena 6 not the Jena 1, why focus only on Michael Bell?
Notice the plea bargain offered now? misdeamenor charges versus attempted murder...hmm what changed???
Oh I know the media exposure and maybe not wanting to look like a racist railroading bastard.
Marcus: I don't care that you have some black friends."
Me: Missed my point. Check out other black bloggers besides the pro-Jena crowd. Not every blacks fall in line with the liberal moral equivocally, morally bankrupt rhetoric of Sharpton, Jackson, etc.
And I don't care if you don't care. I didn't mention I have black friends (which I do, but not my point or what I said at all).
By your logic, then white teenagers are being railroaded in South Carolina for being tried as adults and faced 20 years in jail by the prosecution for beating up a black teen.
Btw, I do believe the sentencing of those teens ended up being TOO LIGHT. If they got 20, they DESERVED it to the max for beating up a black teen for skin of his color.
But those on your side of the debate can't consistently make that argument since you advocate light sentence for the Jena 6 when what they did was an extreme act of hate crime and violence to a person of different color.
And just because in your experience, people don't try to kill another on campus does not mean such attempt does not exist.
See Columbine, VA Tech, Kentucky school shootings, etc., etc. Extreme violence do exist on campuses.
Marcus: By the way it is called the Jena 6 not the Jena 1, why focus only on Michael Bell?
Me: Because, he is the only one whose record we know in terms of the past. The others' are sealed.
Bell had four priors.
If the town was so racist, and the prosecutor was so racist, I would think he would be jailed after his time. Not after frigging FIVE TIMES!
All the complaints about one white guy only getting light sentence for battery ignores that it was his first offense and he got SAME SENTENCE as Bell did for Bell's FIRST sentence.
I have ZERO RESPECT for law and order in Jena in that sense.
Jena is too liberal (and yes the prosecutor is a LIBERAL DEMOCRAT). It won't punish ANYONE, white or black until it gets as ugly as the Jena 6 incident.
In that sense, when it did come down harshly on the Jena 6, it comes across as too harsh because it was TOO LENIENT on everyone, white or black UP TO THAT POINT.
And in that sense, Jena brought all that on itself.
Marcus: Notice the plea bargain offered now? misdeamenor charges versus attempted murder...hmm what changed???
Me: Not unusual. Plus the original conviction was thrown out.
Plea bargains happen all the time.
A person can usually avoid alot of substantial jail time by accepting plea bargains.
Check what was initially offered as plea bargain to the Jena 6 before all the controversy. It looked like they would have gotten off lightly.
Marcus: Oh I know the media exposure and maybe not wanting to look like a racist railroading bastard.
Me: Play the race card all you want.
But if you do that, then you have to consider the fact the prosecutor could have charged the Jena 6 with a hate crime and did NOT.
And you will have to advocate whenever the roles are reverse, the same LIGHT SENTNECES you demand for the Jena 6. Lest the prosecutor be accused of racist against white.
That is for you to be consistent and truly trying to advocate a single standard for everyone.
But my sense is the pro-Jena 6 crowd won't go near the possibilty that what the Jena 6 did was extreme hate crime, and should be prosecuted as such, but will demand that kind of tough justice when it is a white on black crime.
That is why I find the pro-Jena 6 movement to morally, intellectually, and spiritually bankrupt.
Throw all the thugs in jail, let them do some time and let them figure it out.
Be it the white teens who beat up the black teen in NY.
Or be it the Jena 6.
My take is that if people had lived by Christian principles these things would not happen. Love thy God and thy neighbor.
Or one go by biblical law in OT, the penalty for the form of slavery that was practiced by whites on blacks would have been DEATH. IN the OT, African slavery practiced by Europeans and white Americans amounted to kidnapping, manstealing, and also resulting in rape, all capital cases in the OT.
Now, I am not a big fan of the death penalty as we have now, but can y9u imagine how many problems we would avert if that has been in force in the 1600s-1800s?
But back to my point on Christian principles, the reason we have the Jena 6 beating up another person, or Klans attacking blacks, is lack of love for God or for fellow man.
It is that simple.
Sharpton and Jackson came late to the party they did not start any of the Jena 6 protests.
Why do white people think that Sharpton and Jackson are in the forefront of black politics and thought? Black people do not control the media, whites do white media their faces in front of every black issue lol.
I love when a person says blacks play the race card lol whites get to play the race card by default and just hate when anyone shows them any indication that institutional racist against non whites is very much alive and well lol.
It would have been a total disaster for the prosecutor to charge those boys with a hate crime since apparently hanging nooses in trees isn't a hate crime ,lol, in LA (Louisiana).
What happened to the boy was not an "extreme" hate crime, what happened to Mr. Byrd in Texas is an example of an "extreme" hate crime.
What you see happening today as far as race relations is a direct result of the past sins of white folks in this country. Black people did not start any of this mess we live in today. And only today can blacks protest and question what happens in the modern criminal justice system.
To protest injustice is human nature. Why people act so surprised and outraged is a wonder to me. It will probably only get worse before it gets better, such is the cycle of life.
50 years ago this wouldn't even be an issue because the Jena 6 would have just been lynched or sent to prison for life lol.
Pick a nickname Anon really its easy.
First off, I am not white.
Secondly, I didn't claim Jackson and Sharpton are at the forefront. I am pointing out things they said that are also used by those who screamed injustice over the Jena 6 case. Maybe I should next time point out those arguments without using their names and simply state arguments used by Jena 6 supporters.
As to your point, it would be a total disaster for prosecutor to charge the Jena 6 with hate crime, since he didn't do it with hanging nooses, guess what?
For a hate crime to exist, it must involve actual violence or direct threat of actual violence against a particular person.
Not merely use a symbol that people find offensive.
I found the nooses offensive, too.
But to argue that hanging noose is more of a hate crime than six blacks beating a white kid up shows how far below moral standards the Jena 6 movement has gone to.
It is funny people claim the prosecutor has double standards against blacks and whites. Yet, now you say he didn't charge them with a hate crime to avoid double standards. How does that sound?
And he sure give a number of guys like Bell many free passes. It is not just whites who get free passes in Jena.
Jena is a bastion of liberal justice at its finest- give criminals of all colors, white or black or otherwise, as many free passes as one can get. Nice.
Heck, I can moan about every racial slur at my Asian ethnicity is a hate crime. But it does not make it a hate crime. It makes me a crybaby for demanding it be made a hate crime.
Swastikas when used by neo-Nazis is a symbol of hate against Jews (given it symbolized the gas chambers and all other horrific ways the Nazis used to torture, maim, kill, etc., the Jews and others). But that does not make it a hate crime in itself.
People sure didn't protest injustice done to one person.
You state you wonder why people act all surprised an dutraged. Well, then your side need to take a hard look in the mirror. That is precisely how the pro-Jena 6 camp is acting, and in support over people whose actions if they had been over the age of 18, would have gotten substantial jail time, this day and age, regardless of what the race they are.
It looks pretty bad to anybody, outside the pro-Jena 6 camp.
And your claim that since there is institutionalized racism means somehow the Jena 6 boys should not be seen as acting in violation of hate crime laws show that indeed the Jena 6 movement are the ones with the double standards, not those they protested again.
I hope you don't ever get stomped by six white racists after being knocked out on the head, and lived to tell about it, because people intervened in time to save you from real damage. Because you would not have much credibility to claim it to be hate crime, when you yourself state the same crime of blacks on white is not a hate crime.
Look, in other blogs, when it comes issues like Civil War (which I am an avid reader of) and segregation and the whole nine yards, I have stated that the nation is still paying for the sins of the past, done to blacks, Native Americans, and even Asians (see the use of Asian slaves to build railroads in the North even as the North supposedly was fighting to end slavery in the South).
But at the same time, to use that to ezcuse or minimize the behaviours of people like the Jena 6 as well as their parents who shamelessly play the race card so to keep their kids out of jail, is simply deplorable.
Sins of others in the past does not excuse one today from personal responsibility.
All the "free the Jena 6" movement does is cast those who make those demands in a bad light and confirm the worst of stereotypes from white racists (whose idiocies we don't need to confirm by our behaviours).
That is the sad thing about it.
I love history, and I studied it hard as a major with degree in it.
I am so aware of of what MLK did in the 1960s. I am grateful that the reason I can own a nice house, get a good college education, have a decent job, etc., goes back to what MLK did. He did it not only for blacks, but for all races.
Somehow I don't think MLK would be leading the Jena 6 movement.
First of all, BOTH PARTIES ARE GUILTY!
The Jena 6:
All be it they did not like what was said and/or done to them, however that never gives anyone the right to violently attack someone. Words have power this is true, but self control should play a part in there some where. The Six should have found a legal way to deal with the harassment rather than resort to violence.
Justin Barker and his boys:
Had no business spouting those racial epithets or engaging in any other types of activities that they knew would be offensive to blacks in general, and could lead to hostile action.
I say again, BOTH PARTIES ARE GUILTY! What is the first rule in making a "choice"? If a choice is made then the person making it better be ready to accept the consequences for that choice, otherwise do not make the choice. Both parties made bad choices neither choice any worse than the other. The Jena 6 should have weighed the consequences of what could happen if they resorted to violence; they could have killed this kid, then what? No matter what those boys said or did the Jena 6 had no business retaliating with violence that could have resulted in death. If the Jena 6 did not want to be sued in civil court then they should not have chosen to violently attack Justin. Romans 12:17-19 says, “Repay no one evil for evil. Respect what is honorable in the sight of all men. If it is possible, as much as it is up to you, be at peace with all men. Don't seek revenge yourselves, beloved, but give place to God's wrath. For it is written, “Vengeance belongs to me; I will repay, says the Lord.” Simply put, we should love our brothers/sisters regardless of what they do; God understands that we may be hurt by the actions of others. However, it is not up to us to retaliate for a wrong done to us, let God handle it, He is the only one capable of handling anything in such a way that we know and they know it was Him! When he handles it, its HANDLED(.)
Justin Barker and his boys should have held their tongues especially considering the historical meaning behind the racist remarks used and the threats of violence by pointing weapons at blacks. They made the choice to engage in speech and actions that obviously ignited a situation beyond their control. If they weren’t going to be willing to accept the responsibility for their speech/actions then they should not have made the choice to harass the Jena 6. Some of us in this society have obviously not learned that what you say and do has a price whether that price (consequence) be good or bad depends on that action or use of words. Proverbs: 18:21 says “Death and life are in the power of the tongue: and they that love it shall eat the fruit thereof.” Which simply means that if a man/woman’s speech is good/proper (life) then the reward for that speech shall be good for them and others. On the other hand if that man/woman’s speech is bad/hateful (death) than that speech will cause them and others harm.
We all need to evaluate our options more carefully before making choices. We folks in this country love to use that statement “I have the right to choose!” But once that choice is made and the consequences do not work in our favor we want to whine about it and point fingers at everyone else except at the one responsible for making that choice (ourselves). It’s time to get real people!! We need to look at the choices made by both parties instead of their color, then maybe we will be able to come to the appropriate conclusion/opinion.
I will comment on the other issue later.
There is a legacy of theft in this family. Mom used to steal supplies and had for DECADES!!! To maximize damage they likely told her why::::::To establish this legacy of theft so they can justify pushing me into stealing, ensuring indifference from society's elite who will be positioned to be involved in this Situation.
The proceeds from disposition went into their pockets instead of the estate.
She clears the pantry and cases of wine without splitting with the resident, packs them in her car and drove it all home. As if she needs to pickle her brain any more.
They say she went into my room and selected some CDs from my collection.
Next time the boy shoplifts I hope he gets arrested.
They offered dishonest soldier the temptation of maximizing the prices he commands by pushing people into buying at above market value. And I suspect his selling history will attest to this. Not to mention the two $20 Starbucks gift cards he stole out of my car.
Think this will shut the tough guy up? Because I can go on about his schitzophrenia and how it makes him more likely to be a recidivist pediophile.
His parents were both good but became corrupted. As a result, he is good as well. Unfortunately, he became corrupted and subscribed to evil. The result is this internal battle of good and evil that he experieces as schitzophrenia.
And, like so many of you, he will do EVERYTHING he is told. The difference is they will ask him because of his morbid disfavor.
Just like his mom::::She lit her own house on fire intentionally.
Thank you, all of you, for stealing my jewelry. The proceeds from disposition went into their pockets instead of the estate. And they intend to do the same with the house.
May I remind you they flew to the Far East and the SouthPacific during the 50s in the context of their employment. Access to nice jewelry dirt cheap was likely at their disposal. As well as the ability to skirt the intent of customs laws with their repetitive trips.
It was better than Mexico in the 70s!!!
I wash my hands of you all. And it was very interesting how you corrupted your children to play a part, sitting them down to divy up the costume jewelry. Or how they scurried upstairs, as if by cue, when that lush was screaming in my face.
Enjoy your "alcoholic haze". Comes through LOUD AND CLEAR. Your employer thanked me for giving you this warning, so be prepared.
Post a Comment