"I suspect that the Ellis County prosecutor knew it would be appealed, and realizes that the conviction probably will be overturned. He was under pressure to get a conviction. And that's politics for you."
Now as all of you know, the charges against Joey were spelled out clearly from day one of the raid on both his and his parents houses. Fraudulent use of identifying information was spelled out and sourced for anyone who even did a partial due diligence of this case would have known. The clear implication David is making is that Wilson rushed with these charges knowing that they were not applicable just because he had to show that he did something. This also impugns Carroll as he should have thrown these charges out as well. You can even take this one step further and say he is calling out Joey's public defender for not making that an issue during the trial, not to mention throwing the Red Oak PD under the bus in this as well since they were the ones who investigated and brought forth the charges. This is certainly a far cry from unbiased journalism, but it does explain why he was involved with Joey in the first place.
I'm happy that you were able to write something without referring to me being old and gay for a change, but how do you reach these conclusions? I didn't steer an appeal anywhere. I understand it was already filed by the time I got around to asking the defendant's side about it.I didn't say the Ellis County prosecutor rushed to do anything. I understand his lawyer raised issues that were rejected, including the one that no fraud was committed. It's well known that all prosecutors react to pressure from the community because they are elected officials. And as far as "it does explain why he (which would be me) was involved with Joey in the first place," I have no idea what you mean.
ReplyDeleteYou didn't say it, you implied it (under pressure to get a conviction). You also put politics and pressure together in relation to Wilson. Nothing could be further from the truth. Wilson was just recently re-elected by a landslide to another 4 year term. Out of all the DA's in the State of Texas he has got to be in the top 5% under the least amount of political pressure. So your theory holds no water.
DeleteNow, again you think you are right about the charges and while you cast aspersions on Wilson you are ignoring the fact that Carroll and two detectives in the Red Oak Pd signed off on these charges as well. All of these trained professionals must have made a mistake in the eyes of a semi-retired journalist.
Do you know, is it true that one of the policemen whom Joey had criticized severely previously either led or participated in the raid by the Red Oak Police Department?
DeleteAs I understand, this is the first time for this law to ever be used in this manner so of course the conviction will be appealed. It will be setting a precedent that could very well be used against anyone who blogs.
God knows I haven't followed Ellis County affairs over the years, but I would imagine Wilson has been under tremendous pressure for some time to do something about Joey Dauben, if what all of you say about the blogger running amok in the community is true. I suspect that Wilson decided to roll the dice and that Carroll decided to give him the benefit of the doubt since the law hadn't been used in that manner before. The Red Oak Police Department probably consulted with the district attorney's office, and they all came up with a plan of action.
I have no idea how all of this is going to turn out. But I'm hopeful that I will live long enough to see the conclusion of it all. Of course, no one ever knows at my age whether they will wake up in the morning or not.
yes, Dave Smith whom Joey was critical of during his days in Ennis was a detective with Red Oak at the time of the investigation. But he was not the detective involved in the case, in fact he really had nothing to do with it. The detective that did head up this case, and you are casting aspersions on, was a recently hired officer from another county. He didn't know Joey Dauben from Adam and he most certainly was not under any obligation to work with Wilson on it. Again, Joey koolaid vs reality, you keep drinking kool aid.
DeleteWilson succeeded Joe Grubbs whom Joey went after with a passion for years and years. Joey was a little knat to them, he had no power and was just a blowhard. Now yes, there is no doubt whatsoever that they wouldn't mind shutting him up and keeping him from slandering them on daily basis, but that doesn't mean they orchestrated this case.
"It will be setting a precedent that could very well be used against anyone who blogs."
DeleteI say great. So we are no longer going to be allowed to post a persons name, SS, address, place of work along with false allegations of sexually molesting your child and then saying that person should be killed if they did it. I can't believe that precedent wasn't already established, I just can't understand how this really bothers you.
As I've told you before, I don't drink Kool Aid. I like champagne. Nothing is going to happen with all of this stuff until next year, I'm sure. So in the meantime, have a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. I hope that you and Justin have a gay old time.
Deleteway to side step the obvious and run off David. Yes, the koolaid stain is visible in your posts.
DeleteGingersnap makes a great point about abuse of the internet as it pertains to Joey and you have no comment or defense of your statement "It will be setting a precedent that could very well be used against anyone who blogs."
And for the record, I don't hate or pre-judge Joey. I am disgusted by his claim of any journalistic protections. That boy went off on people as a hobby, usually with no fact checking, and without any integrity. He attempted to destroy people for sport. Yep, disgusted by everything about him. He is not, and never will be worth the effort to hate though.
@ oceanblues: Good job! You summed up Gingersnap, David and Joey nicely. Gingersnap made a great point, David is side stepping to go get another sip of that kool-aid, Joey did hurt people for sport and he's not worth the effort to hate.
DeleteMy concern in the beginning is that Joey needed a fair trial. I don't care what he did. If the judges new of him before hand (or prosecutor) and had ANY pressure on them, they should have stepped aside.
DeleteLook this rabbit hole is deep, way deeper than I thought. I am all about the constitution and a fair trial. If anybody had a beef against Joey other than the charges, they should have stepped aside and let somebody else handle it.
Judges and prosecutors have repeat customers occasionally, and do not step aside. Knowing someone or knowing of someone or even thinking they are a fool or dangerous does not preclude them having a fair trial. The jury decided in one case already, and the jury will decide in the next one too.
DeleteWhere is this pressure on them that you speak of? Seriously, Joey is just another person going to court- he really isn't all that special, there is not a conspiracy to charge him, or to pick on him. Joey brought all of this on himself- dragged people through mud he created with lies, and then instigated violence towards someone whose personal information he supplied. That God no one killed this man Joey targeted. Would you still feel the same about him being picked on if someone had followed Joey's lead and actually hurt or killed this man who was innocent?
The second trial should be interesting too. We won't know until it over if Joey is guilty. Seems like the state thinks it has a good case there too. Joey is very naive if he thinks he can just wish these charges away, or make them go away with his conspiracy claims.
whoops, that should say Thank God, not That God
DeleteI think Joey got a fair trail in Ellis and he will get one in Navarro. If you really look hard at the Ellis county case, I think Wilson could have gotten some jail time if he wanted it, but Wilson just wanted Joey to stop slandering innocent people and the probation they gave him will ensure that. As much bad stuff as he has said about Carroll and Wilson, I think both of them feel sorry for Joey more than they are angry at him and neither one would want him to spend his life in jail they just want him to stop his criminal behavior.
Delete"It's well known that all prosecutors react to pressure from the community because they are elected officials"
ReplyDelete"It's well known" - the phrase used by "journalists" have no data to back their assertion. Are prosecutors potentially under scrutiny or pressure from the cummunity? Sure. Does that mean that what they do is nothing more than reactive? Nope. And, let's see . . there was one woman in the jury pool that knew of Joey. So if assume the jury pool was representative of the general population, I highly doubt the majority of the community has an opinion on Joey. Yeeeah, tons of pressure there.
I've been reading Ginger and David's exchange now for quite a while. On this one, I have to go with David. He has steadfastly stated that he was not the instigator of the shut down or the appeal and his defenses are plausible. I'm not a Joey fan by any stretch. I've watched him slowly self-destruct for 12 years and it saddens me to see such a waste of a decent talent. Anyway, while I agree with Ginger on almost anything she/he/it has written, I have to take Mr. Webb’s side it this discourse.
ReplyDeleteBy the way, Ginger should be able to verify that I’ve never commented on any of the site until now.
In all fairness to the last statement, you could always be posting from a different location, but it doesn't really matter. Even if you regularly commented, you can still have your opinion.
DeleteI don't think it matters if David intigated the shut down or not. He's been clear on his opinion that we should hold our opinion until Joey is convicted . . .again. Apparently we have "convicted Joey in our hearts and minds." (Why do I see Thumper from Bambi saying that line?) I think anybody convicted of a felony is going to at least make an attempt to appeal. So of course David can say he's not the root of that. Did he not say that he suggested reaching out to the ACLU?
I can't see IP addresses on this new site, so I can't do that any more.
DeleteYou are right he has consistently claimed that he didn't get the site shut down, I just dont believe him and the more he keeps going back to it getting shut down for "hate speech" makes me more certain of my assumptions.
This appeal claim started when David said that he was talking to his "legal scholar" and he was advised to refer the case to the ACLU. David said that he passed that information on to Joey. I would call that steering, he would say thats just professional courtesy, either way its an opinion. I just see it as going beyond the call of duty and becoming involved in the story.
http://youtu.be/vRIpAW5pYxA?t=20s
DeleteIP's don't matter. People can easily proxy or go to public wifi.
DeleteAs for David, I see him as a decent journalist. I do think the last blog went far on the hate honestly. Anyway, I think Joey will have a fair trial in Navarro despite any blog (like it would have effect anyway).
I do think it was wrong for the prosecutor to prosecute Joey when he had an agenda with him prior to the prosecution. I do believe he deserved the trial, just with a different prosecutor. Still though, the sentence probably won't last for 5 full years anyway.
So with this whole "OMG Loryn Ryder has been thrown in jail" stuff going on I took a few minutes to look at her stuff. First, funny how it seems like support has waned over the past 2 days. It really doesn't take people that long to loose interest. Also, there were at least 3 posts about it including one by Bill Windsor talking about what a good volunteer she had been. Those three are gone. But, somebody posted a couple of new ones. The old ones all ended up with people fighting over women vs men & PAS. But, Billy says there isn't in-fighting. It's just people wanting to destroy them from the outside . . .. . right. So now Billy says that somebody named "The Truth" has emailed him that he doesn't know everything about Loryn. He's invited them to go on video. Yeah, like everybody in this world wants to share their private battles on YouTube. Sorry Bill, not everybody is as self-obsessed as you are.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, in looking at Loryn's "documentation," I don't see anything that I would consider as evidence. So she's got a couple of pictures of an unhappy child at McDonalds or in a carseat going to be dropped off with her dad. That seems perfectly normal. I don't think most children enjoy being passed back and forth between their parents shared custody. There are only a couple of videos that involve allegations and there isn't enough context to even make a judgement if it's coached or taken out of context. I could go into detail, but it's just easiest to view the videos yourself and think critically about the content.
Now, I don't think that everybody in the Lawless group is dishonest. I'm sure there are a good number of people that truly feel mishandled or abandoned by the system. I feel sorry that they have decided that Bill is going to help them, because they are wasting their energy on false hope. What I do notice about Connie & Loryn's information is that it is missing a major key piece of information. Why were their daughters taken away? They say stupid stuff like "because she spoke out against a child molestor." Well, that's not the reason. So the courts & psych professionals don't believe their claims. That's not a reason to take them away. There is some reason on paper that they were deemed to be less fit. Drugs? Alcohol? DUIs? Strange behaviour? What is it? I'm sure they'd say the claims were unfounded, but they neglect to give the whole picture. They aren't saints, and it's not as simple as they'd try to have people believe.
Here's something else I find troubling. Connie & Loryn don't have much custody of their daughters. They can't afford attorneys and/or request public support. But, they seem to have tons of time on their hands. I take it Connie works nights at a bar. According to Bill, Loryn has put hours and hours into volunteering for him. That's all fine and dandy, but you don't have a child that you have to take care of. You want your child back. If that were me, I'd be working 3 jobs & consigning everything I had to get money to fight. Ohhhh and speaking of . . . in one of Loryn's videos, we get to stare at a Louis Vuitton for about a minute. I think it's an Aurelia - based on the straps. That's like a $2000 bag. (PS I hate Louis Vuitton - quality handbag, yes, but the amount of branding is ridiculous) So she has money for that bag, but not for rent or to pay an attorney? If it's a gift, previously used, old, whatever. It would have been in a consignment shop a long time ago if I needed money for ANYTHING involving a loved one.
Ollie & oceans have touched on the question that's bothered me since I first heard of Connie and Loryn. For that matter, we can throw Presley's step mom into the mix. How/why did they lose custody of their kids in the first place? The better question is probably, WHAT did they do to lose custody?
DeleteI don't know the entire history of either case, I assume at one time both mothers were the custodial parent or custody was shared. There had to be a catalyst for the change in status. Again, I'm assuming they were naughty in some way detrimental to the child's welfare - which is based on my perception that neither mother has visitation rights at this time.
Based on my perceptions and assumptions, it only makes sense that the courts have ruled in favor of the child's best interest by giving full custody to the fathers. Removing visitation rights is an awfully severe penalty for the mothers, but I get a sense that they deserved it. If either mother had any concern for the emotional health of and respect for their tiny little beings, they would have never lost their kids. To be a good parent, you have to be selfless. With these women all I see is me, me, me, me, I hate him, me, me...
I hope none them have a dog.
These people do not care what they do to the children that they continuously post online. It doesn't matter that their need for attention comes at a cost of their children. It is absolutely mind-boggling on how they refuse to see the destruction they cause. Someday the people that have exposed their children like this will have some tough but simple questions to answer when their children are older such as "Why?"
DeleteSC
I hate that these girls will someday look up their own name on the internet and see the insane allegations and dozens if not hundreds of websites dedicated to destroying their father's. They will know the truth of the matter, and will still have to live with the legacy their mothers give them. I breaks my heart. It will be awful, and will follow them into their future.
DeleteI know in Connie's case, there were many CPS (11)investigations, multiple MDIC exams, no medical records of abuse despite the xrays Connie had done so her chiropractor could diagnose the child as abused(that didn't work out for her). There was a 730 exam and report, there were refusals to attend co-parenting counseling, and on and on. She had supervised visitation after she refused to stop making allegations, and making and posting videos. The video most know about is the daddy's worm clip. That was made after she had her daughter for visitation, and potentially coached her for days. All according to her own published timeline.
When those allegations weren't enough, she added to them, always getting more and more abusive. And yet, she says her daughter complained about sore private parts for months and months and she NEVER took her daughter in for an exam. She says police stopped her from getting her daughter examined. SMH there is more, but you get the idea.
When she crossed the line again, and posted pictures of her child taken while in the secured supervised visitation facility contrary to their rules, and to what the court ordered, she lost all visitation. She went so far as to say the court required her to have metal detectors and guards at a visitation facility in order for her to see her daughter. Sometimes I think she really believes the stuff she says, other times I think she is mentally ill. Hard to say because I have never met her and am not qualified to say. What I do know is her daughter is safe and happy and thriving without her. I believe she may have been prohibited from bringing more things to the courts because they felt it was excessive, but I am not sure about that.
I agree SC, they don't care about these children. They only care about the attention and feeding their own needs and agendas.
I pray these children survive the devastation their mothers(in the cases I follow) have left them. It is beyond cruel, and none of these children deserved to have their pictures or names put online for any of this.
oops lose, not loose. There are other typoes I'm sure, but that one was on the top line just popped out when it posted.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you Ollie Reader, I would work 3 jobs, and sell everything not needed to support working those 3 jobs. I would jump through hoops and say whatever it takes to at the minimum get visitation(Connie has none). I would bite my tongue and not argue with anyone or anything having to do with getting access to my child. I would stay the hell off of the internet. I would attend co-parenting mediation and classes- basically whatever it took.
ReplyDeleteConnie hasn't got a shred of evidence. All she has is attitude and family witness statements. All the medical and cps reports are showing no abuse, except potentially by her. She refused to co-parent, and refused to cooperate with the courts, and visitation center. She ended up with no access to her child. Her choice purely based on her actions. I don't know what happened to Loryn, but she is another conspiracy (Illuminati) follower and some of her posts sound pretty out there. Not that it should preclude her from seeing her child, but it don't help. Given how easy it is to see all the online footprints(crazy comments and abusive statements) these women leave strewn about, they just aren't helping themselves. As I said, I would stay the hell off the internet and work my ass off with a lawyer until I had my child again.
Some of these women really have histrionic personalities. Connie gets a comment from someone(probably not even her ex) and turns it into a death threat. She and her pals just keep doing the same stupid crap over and over and wonder why it never works. They blame everyone but themselves and then cry to the internet how unfair it all is, and oh yeah, send donations...
I do wonder how they see this lawless movie and visit to DC(if that ever pans out) as actually saving the country and their children. Some of those followers seem so torn up and in need of hope, that I can see why they are drawn to this 'pie in the sky' story(pun intended).
Yeah, basically these women are all talk (type) and no action. They aren't doing the real things that need to be done to win their children back. Blogging & picketing don't get the job done as well as following specific court orders. I think at some point all of us either growing up on in our professions have gotten reprimanded for something we didn't feel was our fault. Most of us learned that while it might be important to state that we felt it was unjust, sometimes it was just better to do whatever was asked of us to correct the situation. Throwing a hissy fit only let to worse consequences. If Connie or Loryn would just follow court orders, they could have a more active role in their children's lives. They'd actually have some credibility and leverage to correct whatever injustice/abuse is happening. Sure, they could still be active in women's rights groups & child advocacy groups. But it would be more of a behind the scenes thing. The same with involving media. If Connie had a legitimate case & real evidence, the media would have paid more attention to it. She could have shopped it to the media behind closed doors. If they'd picked it up, it might have shown some validity. But, they haven't. Instead she shops it online to the internet surfing conspiracy gurus. That actually harms her case. She should work within the system & show them she is willing to do whatever it takes. If she befriended people as an involved and concerned mother, they might take interest. Instead she makes enemies of everybody and ends up looking like a lunatic. Loryn just seems dumb. She's grasping at anything she can to explain her situation. I think she's actually the one behind the little stats that Presley posted. She got them from a video that she's misquoted. The comments themselves were misleading but honest. They also were proving a different point. Her transcription of them is misleading as well as inaccurate. Connie, on the other hand, just seems mentally disturbed. Histrionic, borderline, bipolar, narcissitic, all are good candidates. Good news for Connie though, a couple of those are marked for deletion in the DSM 5. So she can pretend she's less insane in just a matter of months!
ReplyDeleteSo to sum up the David Webb episode, he becomes a texting budding with Presley (this came out in his latest story) along with FB buddies with Presley, Daddy Dauben, Loryn, Loraine and all the other side show clowns. They tell him all kinds of stuff about this website and how we are all a bunch of homophobic, hate mongering lunatics. He comes on here offended by something that was never even said on this site and a war breaks out. In the middle of the fight it slowly starts to dawn on him that he received faulty intelligence and we are actually a group of critical thinkers who slowly dissect every word he says, words which he didn't think all the way through because he let his guard down assuming we were just a bunch of homophobics. He still continues to lob depth charges our way until he discovers something that makes the situation untenable for him; we are infinitely more knowledgeable about the Joey situation than he could ever dream.
ReplyDeleteSo he wishes us (assholes) a merry Christmas and he is off to covering the real issues that people in this world want to know about, like what happens on a gay cruise.
LOL umm yep, that about covers it all.
DeleteI had to laugh when he did not get the analogy to calling him a child molester (he's not) and how that was exactly what Joey does to people. Or the part about don't bring a knife to a gun fight- seriously David, you really had to stretch reality way too far to make that a threat, dude it is only an idiom, which a journalist should already know.
This past case with Joey does not now and never has had anything to do with journalism or freedom of speech. What Joey did was equivalent to yelling 'fire' in a crowded theater. There are repercussions that were given by way of the guilty verdict. What makes you so sure these statutes have never been used in this way before anywhere else? Bottom line David, Joey is not special, there is no plot to get even, and there was no misuse of the laws or the courts IMO.
Or his photography of farm animals mating . . . or is fondness for Truman Capote . . . hardcore reporting I tell ya
DeleteDavid made a comment somewhere around here that he thinks Wilson used the wrong law to prosecute Joey. I'm curious as to what law David thinks Wilson should have used. Are we finally past the 1st amendment debate? Is David conceding that there has to be some kind of law against what Joey did?
DeleteConnie tried shopping her 'story' and 'evidence' to real media via a mail campaign of the daddy's worm video IIRC. They all passed. She was heartbroken that Dr. Phil passed her story by. But having followed her story since it first popped up on blogger news site, and reading all her so called evidence etc, I can say she hasn't got a case at all. Any close scrutiny of her documentation causes it to fall apart. Too many doctors and professionals who say nothing has happened. Too many holes in her timeline and story as she tells it. It is sad that she has left such an internet legacy for her child to someday find...and her daughter's future friends, employers and others she may meet in the future.
ReplyDeleteThat is what bothers me the most about these women and people like Joey. 'The internet is forever' is a saying that they disregard. The vile statements they make as if they are fact (and we all know they aren't true or are extremely exaggerated at best) are out there, replicated hundreds of times. They never use the word alleged or any other qualifier. They omit facts like the court never found these things true, or charges were never brought, or accusations were unfounded.
Bottom line, they spread the images of innocent children as fodder for their own anger and agenda. They do not consider the damage they are doing to the futures of these children they supposedly care about. It is about revenge for not getting what they want in these types of cases. It denigrates the plight of women with real issues and real abuse.
There are some real nut jobs out there screaming about abuse that is not real anywhere but in their mind. It is sad, but I am angry that these children will ultimately suffer, and others are not believed because of people like Connie and Presley and Susan Beth Hulsebus and their ilk.
Not only will these daughters have an internet legacy that will follow them forever. Think how maladjusted they will be. Let's pretend every word they have written is true. These mothers have made the choice between following court orders to at least get SOME time with their daughters & spreading their stories to strangers that can't/won't do anything. (they couldn't get Loryn out of jail) Let's see. Your daughter is abused. You are being screwed by the system. You can A.) follow court directives, continue your protests but in a civil, law abiding manner, provide your child with as much love and support in the time you spend with her & hope you can win somebody of influence over to your side or B.) refuse to follow any court order, continue treating everyone involved in the case in a hostile manner, so that everyone will think you are ticking time bomb & deny you ALL rights. That way you can't have any positive influence on your child & your kid can spend ALL her time with an abuser.
DeleteBut, if you get something out of the attention, being a martyr, and have no real interest in the actual responsibility of having a child, B is the best option.
Can't you fools figure out on your own that I just went on your website to see what I could figure out about you and to get a rise out of you -- which I did very well? In fact, I did such a good job of it that you got your own website shut down for hate speech. Even if I had reported you -- which I didn't -- it was your own stupid statements that got you shut down. Do you really think I don't understand that you weren't actually talking about using a gun on me or that I didn't under the analogy you were making? I just wanted to see how much you would reveal about yourselves. If you think that I decided you had any sense in your heads or that you have any critical information about the case, you really are crazy. And to the fool that said that was a picture of farm animals mating, that was a female in the upright position on top of a bull who was butting heads with another bull. Can't you tell the difference between the sexes? I sent the photo off for publication with the caption, "Let me get up here and help push and see if we can get rid of this guy." Now, I wasn't running away for any reason, I'm just tired of carrying on a debate with you. I've given you all of the information I plan to on this blog. You'll just have to wait for me to write something again to learn what else I might know. Again, Merry Christmas and Happy New Year. May all of your needs be met in 2013, especially the delivery of something better to do with your time than to wallow around in the mud and grunt.
Deleteif it's totally natural for you to be gay, why can't animals have different sexual orientations? maybe she is trying to show she wants to be a top. You are soooo closed minded.
DeleteYou keep saying good bye and then returning David.
DeleteMerry Christmas to you and yours, and may your New Year be blessed.
See how simple that was to do without the caveat at the end?
LOL, and I don't buy your explanation about why you were/are here at all. Keep on trying to spin this, but know it's not working. Is that some koolaid all over your post? Yes, I think it is.
Oh David, BTW thanks for admitting you are only a troll.... good to know nothing you say matters by your own admission.
Delete"Can't you fools figure out on your own that I just went on your website to see what I could figure out about you and to get a rise out of you -- which I did very well"
Most people would come to a website and just ask questions or debate opinions, and feel no need to act the fool. Guess that never crossed your mind? Especially after reading the posts and comments? I don't see anyone here shy about answering or debating.
Just like Team Joey. Complain that we are all idiots. Or, depending on the day and hour, complain that we are all one idiot posting under different names. Lament that we are haters and should find something better to do with our time. Accuse us of being bias and wallowing around in muck for no good reason. But, whatyaknow? Guess who's right there with us?
DeleteIt's OK. I'm glad David is here. Even if only because he thinks it's "to get a rise out" of us. I think it's too funny that all of Joey's associates have the same opinion about us, say the same thing about us in so many different ways, but they just keep coming back........
Really learned a ton of experience after, what...a 30+ year career in journalism I see. "The Rare Reporter" definitely fits. As rare as Dauben's career in...anything.
DeleteSC
I forgot, for all you city folk: the photo David took of the two male cows (can't tell in the photo if they are steers or bulls) head butting, while the cow mounts one of the males is just mother nature at work. There's actually a name for it, it's called "bulling". Cows do this when they are fertile and ready to conceive. Sometimes they will mount another female. Ranchers watch for this behavior when they intend to breed.
ReplyDeleteMares (female horse, for those that don't know) also do it. I know of a mare that ALWAYS mounts another mare and always the same mare, when "it's her time".
And while we're on the subject: geldings (neutered male horses) will mount a mare and behave as a stud (not neutered male) if a mare teases him enough. Mare's tease by "flagging", swishing their tails in a certain way and winking (I'll leave that one to your imagination).
So he posted a photo of foreplay? He's the one reading Truman Capote and imagining his farm animals are having threesome. I made the mating comment cause he said the ménage à trois part in his blog. I didn't make it up. I'm no fool. He's just sick. Maybe he should put down the TC novels.
ReplyDeleteYeah, I read the article. I wasn't sure if he thought "menage a trois" because what the cows are doing just looked sexual to him or if he actually knew what was going on. Either way, seemed like he was trying to down play the sexual connection and references here when he made very clear sexual connections in his article. And, yes - in a manner of speaking he posted a photo of cattle foreplay.
DeleteHowever, I did appreciate the article and his reflections on Capote.
My thoughts on the Daddy's worm crap....
ReplyDeleteAs a sort through the muck and see more of it...
I don't care about any prior evidence, depth, videos, or conspiracy. All slurry poop.
This Connie person needs to take simple steps:
Take the kid to the doctor who is part of a practice. Get a doctor to verify abuse occurred. Get a second opinion from another doctor in the practice for evidence. Then submit the evidence notes from the doctors along with their contact number to the district attorney.
Live happily ever after...
To make videos, protest, muck, and allegations is not good. If this girl passionately believes that her old "guy" is abusing this child, I will pay CASH (to a doctor's office) to take the child to a doctor to verify abuse. NO DONATIONS. Most offices have about an $85-115 cash patient system. If the doctor denies it, she has to agree to STFU for the rest of her life, because SHE is sexually abusing this child by teaching her all this "daddy's worm" crap.
If they verify abuse, she'll have the paperwork she needs to ruin this guy.
I'll pay for 3 doctors to get 3 doctor notes.
Dang whats $300 bucks to make a kid's life safe?
She wouldn't need a lawyer because the prosecutors would eat his lunch alive. She could easily get full custody.
If he did not do this, then she is abusing her teaching her some freaking "daddy's worm" b.s. barf.
Dang it this stuff ticks me off. Freaking cute little kid all caught up in some dramatic junk. I don't know either of em either. I have no idea if he did or didn't.... Poor kid either way.
I feel that I've stumbled into a rabbit hole 50 miles deep. I thought Joey just went after wasteful tax spending etc. Seriously all this sex abuse crap, and gayness accusations from a teen minor at church camp, and sex ring cop junk... Then Amber H.? Like seriously her family had to ask him to stop? That's just riveting up serious pain for them when they want to let her be in peace. I hope he asked them first or something. I have no idea though...
I tripped, fell into the rabbit hole. I seriously think I want to climb out and not go through the little door. Sorry but the rabbit can just go on its date. Besides who wants to see that old funky lady singing in that creepy way "Jam tomorrow jam yesterday, but never ever jam today", then it just turns out to be a cop in drag looking for his buddy the jabberwake. LOL
WHAT THE FRIGGING HECK? This stuff is nuts.
@ Jimmy S: so glad to see you've been reading up on this stuff. I'm sorry your "Joey bubble" burst, but welcome to our world........
DeleteConnie has no access to her child. She has no prospect for any contact with this child. There have been numerous doctors who have examined this child specifically looking for abuse, and found none. They have found that Connie should not have contact with her child due to the crap she was trying to get her daughter to say.
ReplyDeleteI agree, this is not something that follows logic.