Wednesday, September 10, 2014

Body Posture Within a Statement

                                                                                 by Peter Hyatt

             Body Posture  found within an Interview or written statement.

When we measure a statement for time (subject, objective, and missing time) we are gathering information that will be critical to our interview.  An informed interview will help the subject bright forth truth, as the subject becomes aware that you, the Investigator, may already know the answer to questions being asked.  This puts the subject on alert and helps us get information.
When we analyze a statement prior to the interview, we take careful note of many different indicators of sensitivity.  As discussed earlier, we note body posture.

A statement is not reality.  A statement is the subject’s perception of reality.  In our analysis, we are seeking to enter into the subject’s perception of reality.  In this way, we take careful note of wording that describes body posture, and the inclusion of emotions.
Body posture in a statement is often unnecessary, and we know that any unnecessary information is to be deemed ‘doubly’ important for us.

“My supervisor said I should be at work by 9AM” is a simple statement.  The shortest sentence is always best, and any sentence that has aIDitional words should be considered important. Earlier, you learned to flag communicative language in a statement.  Let’s look at this simple statement to see what it tells us, and how it differs from one that appears similar:
Statement A:  My supervisor said I should be at work by 9AM
Statement B:   My supervisor told me I should be at work by 9AM”
Statement C:  My supervisor stood and told me I should be at work at 9AM”

In Statement A, you should have highlighted the communicative word “said” (yellow). 

If you did so, you then noticed that in Statement B, “said” is now “told.”  What is the difference between “said” and “told”?

Said” is softer, while “told” is firmer and more authoritative.

I went to the bank ATM at night and a person came up behind me and said that he had a gun and I should give him my money.  This statement indicates deception.  How do we know?

Let’s look the statement with emphasis:

“I went to the bank ATM at night and a person came up behind me and said that he had a gun and I
should give him my money.”

Did you notice that he reported that a “person” had a gun?  “Person” is gender neutral which suggests that the subject is attempting to conceal the identity; yet still said “he had a gun”; which is the masculine pronoun.  Next, notice that someone with a gun “said” he should give money?  What is the expected? “He told me to give…” or “demanded” would be the norm.  Robbery is not a gentle request.  Back to our original statement:
    1. The supervisor (who is not introduced by name) “said” to be at work.
    2. The supervisor “told” me to be at work, which is stronger, more authoritative.  But what of Statement C?  What does the inclusion of body posture tell us?
Whenever body posture (sit, sat, stood, standing, and so on) enters a statement, flag it for follow up questions, as it is an indication of tension.  It is not important that the subject tell us what body posture the supervisor is in that we know he should be on time; that is, it is not important to us.  But because the subject recalls the body posture, it shows that the event was memorable, likely an increase in tension, and even more authoritative.

I studied my science book” is simple and straight forward.  It has the first person singular, and the past tense verb. 


I sat down and studied my science book” shows an increase in emotional tension and a follow up question would likely show why:  the subject studied diligently, the subject worried about failure, the subject skipped basketball in order to study; that is, something that increased the tension enough that the subject not only reported the action, but the body posture as well. This is especially useful in determining “he said; she said” disputes as it causes us to ask questions about emotions during the event.

This may sound like a minor point, and, agreed, it is.  But every word that comes from a subject is important. 

In listening to the master of Statement Analysis, Avinoam Sapir, his words resonate with me:

"Every word, every letter, even, matters, and can contain valuable information."

Mr. Sapir is rare genius in his powers of observation, cohesion, and conclusion.  

I have learned over the years just how precise his work has been.  

In one investigation, I began with a short "statement"; that is, written words.  It was not so much a "statement" but a data entry.

In it, the alleged victim's name was used. 

In some spots it was:  "Mr. Smith" and it other places it was "Mr. smith" and the difference, in context, showed a difference in attitude towards the victim, confirming the victim's account. 

One letter changed. 

Before the encounter, he was "Mr. Smith" but after the encounter, which the victim said was an assault, the lower case "s" was used. 

Subsequent entries showed the same theme.

Even something this small can matter.  

When body posture is added to a statement, always note it. 

"He was seated in the car" instead of "he was in the car."

Note it. 

Ask questions. 

138 comments:

john said...

I love these lesson's, Thanks.

Peter,

Have you ever toyed with the notion of writing your own book. I for one would certainly purchase it. The books i have read on SA, in my opinion, don't touch on half of what you teach here.

Thanks again.

Anonymous said...

"The partial remains of missing Tennessee student Holly Bobo, a cousin of country music singer Whitney Duncan, have been found in Tennessee more than three years after she disappeared, officials said."

http://news.yahoo.com/remains-tennessee-student-found-three-years-her-disappearance-195334586.html

Anonymous said...

Peter, Deception indicated?
Is he really regretful or did he pull out of the movie because of certain career death?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2749556/Charlie-Hunnam-opens-realizing-quit-Fifty-Shades-Of-Grey-movie.html

Jeff said...

Completely off-topic: I hadn't heard any news about Justin DiPietro lately, so went looking...sure enough, there's recent activity: He's bred yet again :\ http://justiceforayla.blogspot.com/2014/09/how-many-kids-does-justin-have.html

Anonymous said...

Peter would you consider anylising "ISIS"statements?

john said...

OT

Suspect In Quadruple Killing Says He "Didn't Do It'

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/10/adam-matos-florida_n_5796398.html?ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000021

Sus said...

Thanks for this morning's lesson and reminding us each word is important.

This is my new google acct. Any other comment from "Sus" a fake.

To verify myself I am from Illinois. I am a Liberal and thorn in Peter's side. :-). I use the word "blender" rather than "liquisidor". I do not stick my name at the end of other poster's comments.

Yes Buckley, I have figured it out.

Buckley said...

In some spots it was: "Mr. Smith" and it other places it was "Mr. smith" and the difference, in context, showed a difference in attitude towards the victim, confirming the victim's account.

One letter changed.

Before the encounter, he was "Mr. Smith" but after the encounter, which the victim said was an assault, the lower case "s" was used.

Subsequent entries showed the same theme.

Even something this small can matter.


I'm glad you pointed this out; it's something I've noticed in various comments here and another blog, in terms of people spoken in a positive light vs negative and had noticed patterns. I hadn't thought about it in terms of the same person in different situations though. I'm curious if the attitude about the victim was one of disrespect or if the smaller "s" was an attempt at not drawing attention to, subconsciously.

tania cadogan said...

Regarding infividual letters mattering.


Thiose who know me or have seen my posts will hvae, over time, noticed a pecadillo of mine.

I always type the bad guys/suspects name in lower case, the exception obly being if the name is the start of a sentence.

The good guys/victims are always capitalised( unless by accident when i typo a small case and miss it before hitting enter.

Capitalizing a name indicated politeness and respect and i have none for criminals and bad giys hence the small letters.

A small point, yet it allows me to show my disdain for the perpetrator

i controlled u and john and.. said...

My method of cloning names...forces registration :)

Anonymous said...

It is bad grammar and a misuse of the rules of punctuation and use of the English language not to capitalize the first letter of an individuals' name; including the salutation, first name, middle initial or name, and their last name.

It is beside the point whether one respects or disrespects the individuals' name that they are not capitalizing, or whether you consider him/her guilty or not guilty.

Not cute. What you are actually doing is reflecting your lack of knowledge and education in the misuse of the English language.

Buckley said...

Meh- it's kinda cute. It is misuse, but she explained why so it's not a lack of knowledge. I wouldn't have lumped a First Lady in with my disrespect for child killers, but whatever floats your boat.

Anonymous said...

Nah.... not cute. It doesn't matter what the explanation is, it's still improper and incorrect. As for lumping her disrespect of Michelle Obama in with child killers, no excuse for this either. The First Lady has never been a child killer or any other kind of criminal to our knowledge.

In fact, Michelle Obama, like it or lump it, or whether it's simple green-eyed jealousy; has accomplished far more with her life than the writer of that particular post has. She IS First Lady of this great nation after all, certainly not a title this individual will ever lay claim too.

Anonymous said...

Interesting, thanks for posting that. After all the grief they all gave Trista...

I wish we could find out if he ever responded to that.

Anonymous said...

Lol. Marrying someone is an accomplishment? Besides that, sticking her nose in others food choices, is hardly an accomplishment either. I don't know what else she's done besides that, so it can't be anything too noteworthy. Maybe you can enlighten me.

Anonymous said...

Oh hush anonymous

Sus said...

First Lady Michelle Obama attended law school at Princeton and Harvard. She was the first African American woman to practice law in her law firm. As First Lady she has made childhood fitness a priority with her Let's Move program. She also works with Dr. Jill Biden to provide support for the families of the armed forces. By all accounts, she's raising two pretty normal daughters, also. I'm impressed.

Anonymous said...

Well duhh. YES, marrying a man of power and achievement IS an accomplishment. How many future presidents have you married; or who was in some other high achieving position of power? I'd guess this is an accomplishment you've never had the pleasure of making.

However, you can google her. Michelle Obama has more formal education than most here on this thread, also held jobs of considerable prominence prior too and during her life with Obama long before he became President; there again, which you've never accomplished.

Anonymous said...

Thank you Sus. I didn't see your post before I made my last one at 8:32. Yes, Michelle is very accomplished within her own right. Nobody 'gave' her a single one of her achievements, she earned every one of them on the lonely road to success.

I really get weary of seeing people kick her down, then try to stomp her in the head. I'd just like to see how many here could even get into Harvard or Princeton; much less have the balls to blaze the trail as the first black female lawyer in a white law firm. Michelle Obama is a woman of many focused talents and accomplishments.

Peter Hyatt said...

I can't speak for others, but I know for me and my family, I need the government to tell me how to feed my children.

Without Michelle Obama's guidance, I'd be packing snickers bars for lunch.

Anonymous said...

Her husband us a liar and manipulator who has no!moral character and abuses power. He was a failure as a Jr Senator from IL and marrying him might have given her a title that should mean something, but she means nothing to me and I don't respect her for who she married. It's she intelligent? Maybe. Did people pave her way? Definitely

Sus said...

Be at peace, Peter. You still can send a snickers bar in your kid's lunch. But the school will not give them one. Nope, no more handing out sugar in reduced and free lunches.

Plenty of veggies, tho. Ronald Reagan made sure of that when he declared KETCHUP a vegatable in the school lunch programs.

Buckley said...

Actually, budget cuts to school lunches began under Carter and then Reagan a year later. The budget cuts made it tough for schools to meet budgets, and the D of Ag provided some "guidelines" to help. One guideline was that pickle relish could count as a vegetable. No mention of ketchup. Before the end of Reagan's first year, his admin had USDA remove any mention of pickle relish as a suggested vegetable.

What personally drove me nuts, as a teacher, was seeing kids eat froot loops drenched in chocolate milk as their breakfast I helped pay for. They may be taking our money, now for a somewhat healthier lunch, but no one us taking our personal freedom to buy and eat whatever crap we want for us or our kids.

Though, here's where I'm having trouble with Mrs. Obama being bunched in with "criminals and bad guys" like the mcanns. Here we have pretty harsh words for parents who endanger their kids' lives by (over)giving them a sedative or making a choice to be a house length away from their kids. And correct me if I'm wrong here, but not only that it may have resulted in a death, but because it could have resulted in death or harm. Here, Obama wants some guidelines to protect children from the types of parents we bash daily here. I trust Peter and Heather are great parents, but I would also think we wouldn't need laws to say hey don't put your kid in a dryer or be with a man who would. I frequently hear comments of the need for government to intervene on behalf of kids. I guess if we're buying foods that make then unhealthy and lead to a life of obesity, we shouldn't intervene? Just bad mouth parents who make bad decisions?

I can see how M Obama's lunch suggestions are kinda sorta big govt, but to lump her into the lower case for "criminals and bad guys" for trying to help kids, that's where I'm not seeing the parallel.

Buckley said...

And to add, I'm not saying abusing or accidentally killing your child is equal to feeding them junk food, but at the same time not feeding enough or not having a nutritional standard for kids can cause harm and sickness and emotional problems. I guess conservatives here are arguing she's being over protective with government standards for child care, but that's the opposite of not caring about the well being of kids at all.

Anonymous said...

More laws don't work. If it did, our prisons would not be full. If you can't see that, there is nothing I can do for you.

Anonymous said...

M. Obamas' lunch and other food (non sugar) suggestions are just that. Suggestions. Nobody has to adhere to them; there is no government inspector hanging out in your kitchen or inspecting your kids lunch boxes. We are not under a Michelle Obama dictatorship, anymore than we are required to plant our own garden just because she paved the way for those in her area, dug her own hands down into the dirt and made a few encouraging and helpful suggestions to America.

Were we required to plant flowers in our back yard when Lady Bird Johnson carried through with her beautify America program, even going so far as to have valuable billboards outlawed and removed from our highways that interfered with the livelihood of those who rented their ground spaces?

Or were we required to run seeking out the practices of witchcraft just because Nancy Reagan sought the advice of her psychic reader to help run this country while we all slept at the helm and did nothing to stop this ridiculous practice that could have had a serious impact on the security of this country?

Which one of these three First Ladies took the least amount of risks with their 'programs' to cause the least amount of harm to the citizens in this country?

The answer clearly speaks for itself. You can dog her all you want too because she is black, or because she is a democrat married to a black democrat who you despise; or simply because you don't like her belts (neither do I), but M.Obama has in no way affected your lifestyle or your pocketbook, or that of your kids, or even attempted too.

Jen Ow said...

The issue that most have with M.O.'s school lunch guidelines is not only the fact that it is government overreaching, but that it limits caloric values for children who are on reduced or free lunch. These children are on free lunch because they are from low income homes, and limiting their caloric intake is counterproductive to the wellbeing of these children due to the fact that the school provided meal is many times the ONLY meal that the child is guarenteed to get that day!

My sister has taught for 6 years at a primary school where the majority of the students are from low income households. Many are in foster care, or in guardian situations due to parental incarceration, or loss of custody. The problem of her students coming to school hungry is so bad that my sister buys protein bars in bulk, and other snacks to provide her students on their morning break.

Limiting caloric intake does not make sense for kids who are going hungry. The meals provided by the school are supposed to be healthy and balanced, not calorie controlled. Funny enough junk food, and ice cream are still available to these kids, IF they have the .75c to pay for it, so it's really not about health! The only 'banned' item in their school district is soda.

Anonymous said...

I am an independent and her skin color isn't the issue. I was born and raused in IL and have heard enough about Obama from some true Chicagoans to know that he is dangerous. The poor black people of Chicago do not trust him. He is not a true Chicagoan and he does not want what's best for our country. Every time I go home for a visit, it is worse. Oh and ftr, I coupd have gone to any grad school I wanted, but learned something in my undergrad sociology classes, Ivy League only matters to the people pretentious enough to give it weight. I could get as equal quality education for a fraction of tge cost and the peace of mind that I wasn't paying for a stamp of a special name on a diploma.

Jen Ow said...

Anon 11:05

You are incorrect. They are not just suggestions, they are law. The guidelines she championed, and which were passed in 2010 by the Democratic congress set a MAXIMUM caloric value of 850 for high school students, and 650 for elementary aged students.

The Obama administration claimed the solution to kids complaining of hunger was for their parents to 'pack snacks', but in reality that is not an option for many low income families.

This idiocy leaves kids hungry, unable to concentrate, and prone to behavior issues. It's a lose/lose policy, and it has nothing to do with health, and everything to do with $$$. The government subsidized meals became cheaper to provide, and the hungry kids have to go feed $1.00 into a vending machine to buy a .25c bag of chips.

(**That is if they have the money, and don't have to just go hungry!)

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/snacks-usdas-solution-healthy-school-lunch-protests/story?id=17324285

Sus said...

Buckley,
My mistake on the ketchup. It never made sense to me since a tomato is a fruit. Lol. And I know what you mean about the sugar load up at breakfast.

Jen Ow,
I also taught many years at a school which qualified as a Chapter One school, meaning the majority of our students qualified for free or reduced lunches. Reduced calories makes sense to me. There were always plenty of low calorie foods to fill up on. And I believe every school now serves breakfast, plus most have a "take home" dinner and weekend bag.

The purpose is to eat healthy and reduce childhood obesity. It works in conjunction with the "Let's Move" program. I don't have stats, but I can see childhood obesity and inactivity is a major health problem now.

Buckley said...

This is about how much we give them for free: a 650 calorie breakfast and an 850 calorie lunch. You're saying we need to collectively purchase more food for them? Not arguing, really asking.

Anonymous said...

Off topic and in my area. Police say the friend isn't a suspect but he definitely refers to her in past tense.
http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/Search-Efforts-Continue-for-Missing-Fort-Worth-Woman-274404321.html

Buckley said...

Steven Nickerson was with Morris before she went missing and said she seemed a little upset that night, but he didn't know what was wrong. He said she insisted on driving back home to Fort Worth, but he never realized it would be the last time he saw her before she was reported missing.
"She was loved by everyone. She was the nicest person I've ever met, great personality," said Nickerson. "I don't see anyone that could lay a finger on her."


Hmmm

Jen Ow said...

We'll have to agree to disagree on this one Sus. Already underprivileged kids shouldn't have to suffer because SOME kids are overweight.

There have been serious issues at my sister's school with the cafeteria program, resulting in my strong feelings about the topic. The former school board Pres. authorized the cafeteria workers to refuse hot trays to the reduced lunch kids if they didn't have money on their card, and to only give them a milk and a cold cheese sandwich.

Once she was on the hot seat, she explained that she meant the policy as a deterrent, thinking that the parents would be more diligent about loading their kids cards if they were refused a hot tray. But, that isn't what happened, because these parents were not 'forgetting', they were unable to pay.

When I found out that 6-7yo's were being denied their hot, government subsidized lunch, I nearly popped an aneurysm. Long story short, it was a big stink, the school board Pres. and two other members resigned, and the kids now get hot trays regardless of the balance on their card.

I am still disgusted that anyone, 'authorized' or not, would deny food to a hungry child, to teach their parents a lesson. And I feel the same way about the measly lunch M.O. promotes... legislating meals and 'health' doesn't work, because it's not a one size fits all situation. They're even limiting protein! In what world do you reduce children's protein intake?! Some kids are more/less active, higher metabolism, or as I said....going hungry at home!

While you may have been able to fill up on your teacher's portions, you likely had breakfast, snacks, and a nice meal to look forward to for dinner. Sadly, that's not the reality for many of these kids.

Jen Ow said...

Well, we used to with no problems or complaints.

The maximum calorie numbers used to be the minimum, and nobody was complaining to reduce the amount we spent on free and reduced lunch subsidies.

Jen Ow said...

If we are going to spend our tax dollars, shouldn't it be to feed hungry AMERICAN school kids? Before we feed, house, doctor, and 'reunite' illegals, or give billions in 'humanitarian aid' to people who want to wipe us off the face of the earth?

john said...

Anons OT

September 11, 2014 at 12:54 AM

Search Continues for Missing Fort Worth Woman

Snipped:

Steven Nickerson was with Morris before she went missing and said she seemed a little upset that night, but he didn't know what was wrong. He said she insisted on driving back home to Fort Worth, but he never realized it would be the last time he saw her before she was reported missing.
"She was loved by everyone. She was the nicest person I've ever met, great personality," said Nickerson. "I don't see anyone that could lay a finger on her."

http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/Search-Efforts-Continue-for-Missing-Fort-Worth-Woman-274404321.html

Anonymous said...

Yeah I definitely caught that but I suppose there could be more unknown and unreleased information. She lived with a boyfriend yet he didn't report her missing for days and it took her employer calling her family before she was reported missing.

john said...

Apart from not using her name, i don't see and sensitivities in this FB post. Are there any statements from him.?

This is Hunter Foster Christina's Boyfriend. She went out with friends to shops of legacy. She has been missing for 4 day her car has been found at the shops of legacy but not her! I'm worried sick and will do anything to get any information on the last time anyone has seen her or talked to her please help and pray that she is ok! Police are involved and we are going to find her and whoever has taken her or whoever she is with. Any information would be a blessing please call 1(940) 597 6061 which is her mothers number or 972 658 6462 her fathers number! please pray for her and her family.

Scott K Bedwell Wtf... Is this a serious post??
September 3 at 8:24am

Christina Morris yes this is a real post..... and yes we will find her. thank you to all who repost this and share to others please just keep praying she is ok! and again any info about her at all would be the greatest news for her family and me as well she is very loved by so many, like i said she will be found just please keep praying for her!
September 3 at 8:54am · 10

https://www.facebook.com/christina.morris.714?fref=ts

Anonymous said...

No other statements I have seen aside from police talking about how cooperative he has been and the early questions of why he wouldn't have at least called her family when she didn't come home. There are 2 major tollways in that area. At least if he was in the area they will be able to verify that not to mention possible pictures that could be taken. There are no toll booths in the area and just scanning and photos of license plates. Idk how clear they are but there are also numerous red light cameras. Hopefully they can be useful.

Anonymous said...

What do you mean for free? The paid lunches are the same. The prices went up, portions down.

john said...

Thanks Anon @

September 11, 2014 at 4:13 AM

john said...

OT

Breaking News:

Oscar Pistorius Cleared Of Reeva Murder

Judge Masipa is yet to rule on whether the athlete is guilty of culpable homicide - manslaughter - over his girlfriend's death.

http://news.sky.com/story/1333817/oscar-pistorius-cleared-of-reeva-murder

Anonymous said...

I like you Sus, but this is something I guess we won't agree on. Those are things for her to personally be proud of, but the way the other Anon was talking, I was expecting some great, noteworthy accomplishments. As far as her supporting families of armed forces, it would be nice of her to look into the VA.

Anonymous said...

Well, most of that is a matter of opinion.

Anonymous said...

Mine prefer Reese's. ;)

Buckley said...

Jen, I'm just surprised you're arguing the Obamas aren't left wing enough, that we need to spend more to help poor kids. And yes, there are conservatives who say we shouldn't be spending so much; the Republican House resisted spending more in 2011x

"The Obama administration claimed the solution to kids complaining of hunger was for their parents to 'pack snacks', but in reality that is not an option for many low income families. "

I mean Obama above is making a family "personal responsibility" argument, and you're saying we should do more. I agree we've spent too much on Iraq over the last 12 years and should bring that money home.

Anonymous said...

I usually agree with most of what you say, Jen. I especially agree with your last comment.

Anonymous said...

Peter, are you going to analyze Obama's speech, from last night?

Anonymous said...

Jen Ow, thank you for your enlightening response at 11:56 to my post at 11:05. Also your subsequent posts. Thank you, I stand updated on those issues you well pointed out in re the low calorie foods that are being handed out at our public school cafeterias to poor kids who are going hungry; although I had not referred to this sad situation.

If you will go back and take note of the comments in my earlier post, my point was to point out that we are not being forced by any governmental agency in the feeding of our kids in our homes; there is no government investigator or agency standing over our shoulder telling any of us what we have to eat or feed our kids. (Yes Peter, you can feed your kids candy bars).

However, Sus is also correct in her comments relative to the obesity of so many of our youth due to their main food intake being from high calories and junk foods; being fattened up like hogs being prepared for the kill. You see them everywhere, fat kids that can't even run.

ON THE OTHER HAND, growing children need far more food than the small number of calories they are being allowed in their free lunch programs at breakfast and lunch; but also they need to be taught how to eat and WHAT to eat. You are also correct, many of these poor children are going hungry at home; for many the only meals they get are at school.

Some don't even get that, such as in the case of Hailey Dunn whose mother and father frequently did not give her lunch money and she had to beg a counselor for lunch money or go hungry all day, which she frequently did. I'm sure there are many more of these children from drug addled homes who go hungry than we know about. It is a very sad situation.

tania cadogan said...

off topic
My two books Behavior Analysis and InterviewingTtechniques(BAIT) and Statement Analysis - An ISS Course Workbook arrived todat.

Im gonna get an edjumacation Yaaay

C5H11ONO said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
C5H11ONO said...

http://madworldnews.com/charlie-sheen-nfl-player-tip/

--I believe this is a truthful statement from the restaurant owner.

MESSAGE FROM THE OWNER:

I would like to address the LeSean McCoy tipping situation and our role in it.

For starters, I take total and complete responsibility for sharing this receipt. It was not our server’s decision, it was mine. I am to blame.

I decided to take action after some serious thought. And while I’d like to apologize to Mr McCoy, I cannot in good conscience do so. I stand by my actions one hundred percent.

Mr McCoy and his three companions came into my place on Monday afternoon, and immediately the whole staff was excited. Mr McCoy is a skilled athlete and is one of our beloved Philadelphia Eagles. A true Philly legend and a sports hero. Understandably my staff was really pumped, especially on the heels of they terrific win the day before. (Go Eagles!).

Mr McCoy and his friend sat inside at a booth next to my management and next to me. They were given excellent service. Impeccable service. If anything, our server was a little nervous as was our food runner, because they are big, big fans.

He and his group, from the moment they sat down, were verbally abusive to our staff in the most insulting ways. The derogatory statements about women and their sheer contempt for the staff serving them wasn’t the end, however. After Mr McCoy and his group left I looked over and saw their server, my friend, with his head bowed down and with a very confused look on his face. I took the receipt out of his hand and I couldn’t believe that anyone could be so callous. Mr McCoy had left a .03% tip for our staff. Our staff that was beyond excited to see him walk into our burger joint and was excited to serve him. That’s twenty cents on a tab of over $60. Twenty cents that our server has to split with the food runner and the bartender. Two dimes from an insulting multimillionaire.

I bet Mr McCoy is usually an awesome dude. And everyone has their bad days. But I’m from Philly and have had the pleasure of meeting many of our bad ass sports heroes. Ron Jaworski I met as a kid and I love. Iverson I loved. Mike Schmidt! You name ‘em. I love all of our athletes past and present. Hometown heroes who treat those below them with some respect. And maybe Mr McCoy was having a “bad day” after his big victory all that, but the reports of him receiving “bad service” is a complete slanderous lie, and my crew here is better than that and deserves better than that.

At the end of the day, I did what I felt my heart told me to do. And I don’t want anything from Mr McCoy, but…maybe an apology to his server who gave him excellent service would be cool.

Again, I am the owner and I take full responsibility for my actions. Eagles fans, I feel ya. Id be pissed too. But a man’s gotta do what a man’s gotta do and stick up for his friends.

Hate mail should be directed to tommy@pytburger.com. I will respond to you right after I catch up on this mornings hate mail.

Sus said...

I feel I can't let this conversation go by without suggesting some ways to help with childhood hunger....locally.
1. Please give to your local good pantry. It's easy. As I grocery shop, I buy the specials and take them to the pantry the next day.
2. Pay for a child's school lunches for the year or semester. Or pay for their afternoon milk snack. Just call the office, they'll be happy to take your money. :-)
3. Get involved in your local school's "lunch box" program, either by helping pack bags for home, donating, or even starting a program.


I'm certain there are other ways to help. Please do. I know a lot of people read hear so I'm hoping it puts a bug in someone's ear to help.

Anonymous said...

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/oscar-pistorius-will-not-be-found-guilty-of-murder-104616981.html

Anonymous said...

i don't find obama to represent left wing, not what I consider/want left wing to be. I find him to be deceptively ultra conservative. but the ideas of right and left, conservative and liberal are loosing/changing their meaning last few years. we probably need a new set of vocabulary to decribe what we want and mean.

C5H11ONO said...

http://freebeacon.com/politics/dem-senate-candidate-dodges-questions-about-ties-to-communist-group/

Curtis laughed when asked about her ties to IWW in a Friday interview and dodged two questions about those ties.


CURTIS: Well, there is a clear distinction between millionaire congressman Steve Daines and working class teacher Amanda Curtis. I stand for working Montanans, I will be the voice of working Montanans everywhere I go, every day of my life, and I’ll continue that in the United States Senate.

O’BRIEN: But I think the critics would say that sounds like contemporary communism.

CURTIS: I stand for working Montanans, I will do what’s right for all Montanans, on this campaign and in the U.S. Senate.

--Sheesh, when they don't answer your question, they have.

S + K Mum said...

OT! Scotland's independence referendum is a week today! Exciting times to be a Scot :-)

Anonymous said...

Good post Sus @ 10:52. I concur.

Now, maybe I didn't dig deep enough but in googling "Are public school lunches federally funded or state funded?" I read that the National School Lunch Program was first signed into law by Harry S. Truman in 1946, initially being held to the responsibility of each state according to their budgets; however, was not ruled into Federal Law until this August 14th, 2014, just prior to the beginning of the current school year.

I ask, how could so much of it already be declared low-budget food just in the past two weeks? Has it already been deemed that our poor children are going hungry in our public schools due to the low calorie foods they are being fed? Where are the complaints being filed? The photos I saw of the plate lunches looked pretty darned good to me!

john said...

Hi Tania,

The latter of the two, is arriving tomorrow :)

trustmeigetit said...





It amazes me that they cut funds for school lunchs for our children, but criminals get 3 meals a day.



Oh, and cable…. Lets not forget cable.



This world is so messed up.


And what woman is such a moron she would have a baby with Justin. Seriously are people getting more stupid each generation?

Sus said...

OT, really OT. Here is the transcript of Dorian Johnson's first media interview as he stood by the shooting scene.

Me and my um friend, we was walking down the street, the middle of the street. And we wasn't causin' any harm to nobody. Uh we had no weapons on us at all. Uh we was just walkin havin a um conversation. No cars were blowin at us or no honkin horns at us like we was uh holdin up traffic or anything like that. And um a police officer squad car pulled up and when he pulled up these was his exact words, 'Get the F on the sidewalk.' And we told the officer we was not but a minute away from our destination. And um and we was sure to be off the street us was having a conversation. And uh he went on about his way for about one or two seconds as we continued to walk and then he reversed his uh truck, his car, in a manner to where it almost hit us. And it blocked both lanes off the way uh he turned his car.

Sus said...

Cont Dorian Johnson first media interview, Michael Brown shooting.

So he pulled up on aside us. He tried to thrust his door open, but but we was so close to it that it ricocheted off us and it bounced back to him and I guess it, that you know, that uh got him a little upset. At that time he reached out the window. He didn't get out the car. He just reached his arm out the window and grabbed my friend around his neck. And was trying to, as he was trying to choke my friend. And he was trying to get away and the officer then reached out and he he grabbed his arm to pull him into the car. So now it's like the officer trying to pull him inside the car and he's trying to pull away and at no time the officer said uh he was going to do anything until he pulled out his weapon. And his weapon was drawn and he said. 'I'll shoot' or 'I'm going to shoot.' And and I'm at the same moment the first shot went off. And we looked at him. He was shot. There was blood coming from him. And we took off running. And as we took off running, I ducked and hidded for my life because I was fearin for my life. And I hid by the first car that I saw.

Anonymous said...

You can also google "Are all school lunches federally funded in every state?" and come up with the same answer. Federal funding for school lunches was signed into law by Harry S. Truman in 1946, and left up to each individual state according to their budget guidelines...It was not until August 14, 2014 (beginning with THIS school year) that lunch programs became the responsibility of federal funding with mandatory criteria being met. This was an Act of Congress and not an act of Michelle Obama.

How is Michelle Obama responsible for any lunch programs that were provided to our children prior to this date, and how is she responsible NOW for the instigation and approval of what our kids are being fed now, other than having voiced her opinions, which, no one else seems to have done since 1946? But she is not the voice of Congress anymore than any of us are.

Would someone please enlighten me otherwise?

Anonymous said...

THAT, I can agree with! Good ideas! :)

Sus said...

Cont Dorian Johnson first media interview. Michael Brown shooting. 3/3

My friend, he kept running and he told me to keep running because he feared for me , too. So as he was running, the officer uh was trying to get out of the car and once he got out of the car, he uh he pursued my friend. But he, well his weapon was drawn. Now he didn't see any weapon drawn at him or anything like that, us going for any weapon. His weapon was already drawn when he got out of the car. He shot again. And once my friend felt that shot he turned around and he put his hands in the air and he started to get down, but the officer still approached with his weapon drawn. And he fired several more shots and my friend died.

Anonymous said...

Idk, I'm sure Jen probably has some answers to that. I try to stay on top of things as best I can, I've noticed that she keeps up very well.

I had a question above though. I didn't realize, at first, that we were talking about free/reduced lunches. The lunches paid for by the parents are the same lunches. Where I am, the prices went up, and the portions and quality went way down. Yes, it has to do with supposed "healthy" and "caloric" issues. My kid is a string bean. He eats all day long, when at home. Why shouldn't my kid be able to have a decent lunch, that I pay for, because other kids are un-fit? He's older, he's not allowed to bring snacks anymore, and he will not bring his lunch (I guess that's geeky?). We can have healthy, yet filling lunches, can't we? I pre-pay online for his lunch, and he sometimes buys 2 lunches, because the portions are SO small.

This is turning out to be like a lot of other issues. Everyone has to suffer, because of some.

Jen Ow said...

Hi Buckley,

I see it as the federal government sticking their nose into an issue better handled at state/local level, where community economics can be taken into consideration. Plus, it's a crap shoot! Sure, it would be great if these parents and guardians took responsibility, but their top priority goes in the end of a pipe. Meth is a huge problem in this area, and these kids are living in hell. At the very least, I want to make sure their bellies are not growling while they sit in class. Our tax money is going to be spent anyway, (and then some) so spend it on this.

I also second what Sus said! Get involved, this is going on everywhere!

Anonymous said...

Here's one article regarding Michelle Obama and school lunches. There are others, with pictures of the lunches, one of which included pictures and quotes directly from their social media, but it has "colorful" language from some of the srudents, so I'm not sure if you guys wanted to see/read that.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/mar/6/1m-kids-stop-school-lunch-due-michelle-obamas-stan/?page=all

Jen Ow said...

If you notice in the article I posted, these caloric cuts have been in effect since early 2010. It's an issue way too involved to completely discuss here, but basically what the schools serve is easy to regulate, because the foods are USDA (federally) provided commodities.

When I got involved with the cafeteria issue at my sister's school, I learned that basically the only thing that the school makes from scratch anymore is rolls, and some desserts. With very few exceptions, the food that they serve comes prepared from the USDA, in a box. It is opened by a box cutter (they even joked that a box cutter was the only cooking utensil they really needed anymore), then poured into a pan, and warmed up.

Then the cooks serve up the required serving size of these commodities, slap a milk and a roll on the tray, and voila... your government subsidized school lunch! (still chock full of sodium and preservatives, just not as much protein, or calories.)

Jen Ow said...

Also anon 12:37,

To answer your question, 'The Healthy, Hunger Free Kids Act Of 2010', was the beginning of these caloric restrictions, championed by M.O. as part of her initiative to reduce childhood obesity.

This article outlines the history of the federal school lunch program, along with funding, and the Healthy Hunger Free Act. It places the federal guidelines for M.O.'s initiative being officially enacted for the 2012 school year.

http://febp.newamerica.net/background-analysis/federal-school-nutrition-programs

Anonymous said...

Okay then. We all win. At least all kids are being fed now and not just those who can afford to pay, even if we don't exactly like what they're having to eat.

As to those parents paying for school lunches even when they have to buy two lunches for their energetic rapidly growing kid, isn't it still cheaper than fixing a prepared meal for them at home, or paying for a private school for your kid; and aren't you all still getting a free babysitter all day long five days a week?

Count your blessings. It could be worse and might be before it's all over.

tania cadogan said...

At that time he reached out the window. He didn't get out the car. He just reached his arm out the window and grabbed my friend around his neck. And was trying to, as he was trying to choke my friend.

How could he reach out through his car window whilst he was seated and grab a grown man who was standing tound the neck?

Anonymous said...

Idk what happened to my comment, sorry if it appears twice.

It's not really cheaper, it would depend on what I would be preparing.

Lol. A babysitter? My son is too old for a babysitter.

Idk if you're being sarcastic 1/2 the time, or if you have an attitude.

I do agree with your last paragraph.

john said...

Hi Sus,

Re Dorian Johnson

That statement is loaded for SA.

Buckley said...

He was in an SUV. I have one. Neck level is an easy grab.

Buckley said...

Though I agree the part about pulling him in through the window is hinky.

Sus said...

Notice he reached out again, according to DJ, while his arm is already choking "his friend."

Sus said...

Yes, and the beauty of the statement is that it is his first, no questions, no interruptions...just his words.

I don't like it. It has too many sensitive parts. I've been holding onto it thinking about whether it could be that DJ is sensitive to no one believing him against the police. But there are some parts that I can't put out of my mind...

"Uh we had no weapons on us at all."
DJ introduced weapons (plural) on them. It could have been he wanted to point out ahead to the unfair shooting of his friend. But then he added AT ALL. Those extra words bother me.

"Now he didn't see any weapon drawn at him or anything like that, us draw any weapons."
DJ did not say he did not have a weapon, or that he didn't draw a weapon. He said the officer didn't see it. That's an important distinction. "Us draw any weapons" gives the impression they had weapons to draw. Note again DJ keeps using plural when the officer has one weapon.

Buckley said...

I'm assuming he has two arms.

Jen Ow said...

The biggest thing I notice is how he doesn't mention that he and his, um friend, um, just robbed a store!

Sus said...

Another thing is the language DJ uses for "shots."

"A shot went off" in the car.

He "shot again" as Michael Brown ran.

He "fired some more shots" and his friend died.

What changed DJ's perception in these three incidents? When a shot goes off I think of it happening suddenly, unexpected, perhaps in a struggle. To say the officer shot him is pretty straight forward. He aimed and shot. The last shots were not the same for DJ, not aim and shoot, but firing shots. Almost as an afterthought his friend died. Why are they different? Did DJ only hear those shots?

Anonymous said...

Anon, 12:37
http://febp.newamerica.net/background-analysis/federal-school-nutrition-programs

The link, it Shows the stats of 2013, percentages of breakdown.

Total funding for all nutrition programs sums to $16.3 billion in both cash and commodity payments in fiscal year 2014.

The amount of money collected and spent on prepackaged, frozen food for kids, am, midday, pm enrolled is astounding. We've all seen Mooch and her imitative of organic farming, as it is the garden in DC. She to have her photo ops with kids spending the day with her PR team.

Why not go this direction within areas that are of smaller population of enrolled. I am sure a person/s would allow the use of their land. Kids " K-12" to learn how to plant something, to learn earth science as the benefit. They to learn that sustainability doesn't come from a federal fund. It starts with a good teacher, who is a leader that inspires participation. Kids are magnet to being involved to see a project through. They then to learn economics, skills of possibly preparing their food they grew.

How cool would this be for kids who are hungry for hands on learning, they to be outdoors, or indoors greenhouse either way. I bet if anyone asked an ave 8 yr old from anywhere USA if they rather eat fresh food, or canned goo slop on a tortilla, that they cannot distinguish what it is, as it's just brown. They would choose fresh especially if they had the experience of planting, of being a part of the process. From seed to table. They too would understand that food is much more than filling oneself with empty nutrition. As this is what this program provides, substituted crap food vs a starving kid, pick one of the two lesser evils.

Daily recommended "calories" without nutritional value. The kids remain hungry, and some remain overweight due to this reason. Their bodies nutritional values are not being met, as they are growing human beings. They provided only the meals they receive from the program. And or once they are at home, they continue to eat as their inner bodies are starving. If they are on the program at school, chances are the household isn't going to be able to afford or have access to healthy food choices. They to again fill up on empty calories, sugar salt no meaning, it's the base food has no substance. They then feel cranky, like crud, and have daily difficulties, can't sleep, can't concentrate. They gain weight, it's kinda easy to figure out, they are being filled up with " fillers and preservatives" not true food.

GMO, Non GMO, our produce, people can argue it all day long, that this is a movement and or of tactics of money. It's not difficult to understand, it all boils down to " science" Earth Vs Man. Read this article, learn the numbers of PLU codes on your produce: 4, 8, 9

http://www.drfranklipman.com/what-do-those-codes-on-stickers-of-fruits-and-some-veggies-mean/

There is a documentary that is very educational, Food Inc. "Our Food industry" which is
already outdated.

It made in 2008, as one of these corps they show, are no long food manufacturing in the US. They now are overseas, not under our FDA, they not of any standards other
than to meet the quality standards that they are allowed to import into the US for consumption.

How our entire food industry is made of four major corporations, it may be 2 now(?) That doesn't matter if you price comparison shop, your dollars are all going to the same place. How Corps own our Farmers. Fair warning for kids, adults, they show footage of animals, genetically modified, grown for corps(profit). Parental guidance is necessary, it's of few scenes, not constant. Food Inc, profiteering, not only is inflation setting in, downgrading our health too. This the circle, as the foods of dairy meat are filled with " antibiotics" so when we become ill: our body is antibiotic resistant. It's profit all around. Engineered by our own Govt, the lobbyists hold the leverages.

Sus said...

I don't find that as strange as calling him "my friend" throughout the narrative. Someone with more SA knowledge tell me why he can't say Michael Brown.

Peter Hyatt said...

Sus,

context is telling.

If I am writing a police statement, the social introduction is critical.

If I am writing to strangers...

If I am writing to a friend, "my wife Heather" would not be expected, should this friend know her.

The context is key.

Buckley: I always get a kick out of your posts!

Peter

Sus said...

Help. I'm not sure I understand. DJ was talking to strangers, the news media, for the first time. It seems distancing to me to not name his friend, yet at the same time makes himself important by being there. It's like he doesn't trust his own words. In later interviews he could name his friend...Big Mike. He more trusted his story then, or knew others did?

There is another twist in that there were others standing beside and behind DJ at the interview. Could he possibly have not felt the need for an introduction because THEY knew Michael Brown?

Sus said...

Buckley,
He must have three because he next drew his gun.

ima.grandma said...

Sus, I'm so glad you've decided to travel using the "google acct" road although I've always known which posts were yours. It's impossible to copycat sincerity, class and common sense. Thanks for the smile, my friend :)

john said...

OT

Hi Peter, would you consider analyzing this statement in more depth. I have highlighted some of what i would flag, given my limited knowledge, thanks

'Tactile' DLT Brands Alleged Victims 'Liars'

The former DJ tells a court he would have to be a "moron" to molest someone he worked with and attacks the legal system.


Dave Lee Travis has attacked the legal system for allowing "liars" to give evidence against him anonymously.

The former Radio 1 DJ says defending himself at court cases has cost him "half a million pounds, his home and his health".

Travis, 69, is on trial at Southwark Crown Court in London for two allegations of indecent assault and one of sexual assault.

He was cleared of a number of similar charges earlier this year, but is being retried on two charges which the jury were unable to reach verdicts on, and a new charge relating to an alleged assault of a researcher on the Mrs Merton television show.

Prosecutor Miranda Moore QC took Travis through each of the allegations and drew responses including "liar".

He told the jury: "The thought of sexually someone as part of that team is just not something you would want to do.

would have to be a complete moron to do that. Something I am hoping no one is going to suggest is that I am a moron."

He admitted he was "tactile"but denied he is an opportunist who touches young women.

Travis, who has been a household name since the 1970s, said there was a culture of friendliness in the world of showbusiness where you might touch someone on the shoulders.

"I am tactile with everybody - men, women, certainly women. Anyone, because it's just a natural thing for me to greet someone. I give a and have been known to give a guy a hug and a kiss on the cheek if I know he is a great guy. "

Travis, who is charged under his real name David Griffin, was asked what had happened to his career since his arrest. He replied: "It stopped dead. I haven't done a single thing since then."

But there was laughter in court when he talked about a pantomime in Crawley, West Sussex, where he is accused of assaulting a member of the theatre staff.

"I loved playing a baddie. There's nothing better than going on stage and saying I hate kids," he said.

His barrister said this would provide the press with a headline tomorrow - prompting Travis to say he regretted the comment.

But under cross examination, the defendant became more irritable as he was asked about the charges.

Discussing an accusation that he groped a researcher while she was having a cigarette during a recording of the Mrs Merton show, he said: "Fifteen seconds is a heck of a long time for a man to be squeezing a woman's breasts who is shorter and had a cigarette in her hand. She is lying about it."

He was asked whether it was fair to try historical cases of abuse.

He said that it was, but added: "There was a different attitude in the '70s.

"People used to pat women on the bum but it wasn't a sexual assault. But if they sexually assaulted somebody they have to be brought to court.

"There was a time when these things happened, and it seemed to be acceptable then, but not now. These days you can be brought to court for opening a door for somebody, it is that bad.

"If someone has made a serious allegation I want to see them, I don't want them hiding behind a curtain. Who are these women? There are no pictures in the papers whether they're lying or not.

"They should have their day in court but I am someone who has lost half a million pounds, his house and his health."


The hearing was adjourned until Friday.

http://news.sky.com/story/1334085/tactile-dlt-brands-alleged-victims-liars

Buckley said...

Me and my um friend, we was walking down the street, the middle of the street. And we wasn't causin' any harm to nobody. Uh we had no weapons on us at all. Uh we was just walkin havin a um conversation. No cars were blowin at us or no honkin horns at us like we was uh holdin up traffic or anything like that. And um a police officer squad car pulled up and when he pulled up these was his exact words, 'Get the F on the sidewalk.'

"These" shows closeness, he seems to be owning it. There's sensitivity in "exact words" but could be coming from the surprise of being told to "get the F..."

And we told the officer we was not but a minute away from our destination. And um and we was sure to be off the street us was having a conversation.

"Told"- They are asserting themselves to officer, tense, not resistant but not immediately complying.

"not but a minute...destination...sure to be...conversation" These sound more high brow than much of his word choice. He wants us to believe they were respectful to the official who just cussed at them. I think he is being persuasive and deceptive.

And uh he went on about his way for about one or two seconds as we continued to walk and then

Missing information. What caused him to reverse?

he reversed his uh truck, his car, in a manner to where it almost hit us. And it blocked both lanes off the way uh he turned his car.

He wants us to believe that the officer who was concerned about blocking the street, has now blocked the street. He's being persuasive in what he chooses to tell us, but I don't believe he's fabricating every detail.

Buckley said...

So he pulled up on aside us. He tried to thrust his door open, but but we was so close to it that it ricocheted off us and it bounced back to him and I guess it, that you know, that uh got him a little upset.

Officer "thrusts" door, but it more passively "ricochets" back. There's a need to explain why.

At that time he reached out the window.

This seems like a transition from intro to event. If so, seems an appropriate intro, though intro is persuasive and setting up the argument cop was aggressive and they were not.

He didn't get out the car. He just reached his arm out the window and grabbed my friend around his neck.

Here, I take this"just" as more of a time transition word- "at that moment" indicating sudden or unexpected, not a just that means "only" or "simply"

And was trying to, as he was trying to choke my friend. And he was trying to get away and the officer then

Missing information- this is where we lose what happened to the neck "choking" arm, Sus.

reached out and he he grabbed his arm to pull him into the car. So now (see "then" above) it's like the officer trying to pull him inside the car and he's trying to pull away and at no time the officer said uh he was going to do anything until he pulled out his weapon.

Long sentence! I believe there's a struggle, but DJ can't say the officer tried to pull M in car.

And his weapon was drawn and he said. 'I'll shoot' or 'I'm going to shoot.' And and I'm at the same moment the first shot went off.

And we looked at him. He was shot.


Confused- who's we? M and DJ looked at PO or DJ and PO looked at Mike? With "he was shot", it seems the latter- but so unexpected for DJ and officer to be a "we." Seems to communicate a shared sense of shock at seeing the M shot. But no actual statement of emotion. (Why say "we looked at him"?)

There was blood coming from him. And we took off running. And as we took off running, I ducked and hidded for my life because I was fearin for my life. And I hid by the first car that I saw.

I believe this is the first statement of emotion in a very tense situation. Seems appropriately placed, considering.

I'm not bothered by "my friend." In fact, I think it shows closeness, he accepts the shared experience with M, not distance from the guy he robbed the store with, the guy who just struggled with a cop. I'd almost expect more distance.

I think DJ exaggerated things to contrast cop's aggressiveness with their "compliance". He left things out; I don't think he fabricated details out of thin air.

Sus said...

Oh. I'm glad you're looking at it! Anyone else...please help.

"He tried to thrust his door open, but we was so close to it ricocheted off us and bounced back to him."
Obviously "tried" means he did not open his door. DJ states that they were close to the door, not that the car was close to them. I think that's claiming ownership in them blocking it. Notice also, the door bounced back to HIM, not it or the car. The officer must have been partially out.

"He didn't get out of the car. He JUST reached..."
Saying it in the negative makes getting out of the car sensitive to DJ. He then uses "just" to compare the thought of reaching out.

Putting these statements together, I think there is a distinct possibility the officer was out of the car and forced back in.

Sus said...

"So NOW it's like the officer trying to pull him inside the car and he's trying to pull away..."

This statement begins with 'so', a need to explain. He signals that he is switching to present tense with the word 'now.' He proceeds to tell this part in the present tense. It is made up.

"...and at no time the officer said uh he was going to do anything until he pulled out his weapon."
He told us what the officer didn't do...and when he didn't do it. Lol. He then proceeds to tell us the warning the officer didn't give..."I'll shoot." Or "I'm going to shoot."

Yes Buckley! The 'we' shows unity with someone and he doesn't say with whom.

Buckley said...

"He didn't get out of the car."

It's in the negative, but it's one of his stronger statements- cogent, matter of fact, brief. I believe it.

john said...

OT

Oscar Pistorius Guilty Of Culpable Homicide

For killing his girlfriend, the athlete is convicted of a charge which is the equivalent of manslaughter in South Africa.


http://news.sky.com/story/1334596/oscar-pistorius-guilty-of-culpable-homicide

john said...

OT

Without a Trace: Boyfriend Speaks Out About Missing Girlfriend

PLANO, TX — One missing person showed up in Plano Tuesday — Christina Morris’ boyfriend, Hunter Foster.

“I’ve known her since grade school,” he tearfully told our cameras.

Questions have been swirling all week — Why didn’t he report her missing? Why did she call him 15 times the morning before she disappeared?

“He does feel like an idiot for not contacting us and waiting four days,” Christina’s mother, Jonni McElroy said. “It was a typical boyfriend-girlfriend fight on the phone and he just really wish he would have contacted us. He said he has to live with that the rest of his life.”

“I just want her to come home and be alive and safe,” Foster said.

Beefing Up Search: Drones Get Greenlight to Help Find Missing Woman

Meanwhile, the search for the missing 23-year-old Fort Worth woman is expanding. A command center was set up at Legacy Church in Plano Tuesday.

Texas Equusearch has worked on high-profile cases like Natalee Hollway and Caylee Anthony. Now they’re bringing in their expertise and equipment to find Christina Morris.

ATVs joined the foot brigade of volunteers who have been out looking for Morris for the past 10 days. Drones will also be used in wooded and high grass areas where volunteers can’t go.

Christina Morris disappeared from the Shops of Legacy nearly two weeks ago. She was last seen on surveillance video walking into a parking garage with a friend around 3 a.m.

http://cw33.com/2014/09/10/without-a-trace-boyfriend-speaks-out-about-missing-girlfriend/

Lynn Messer missing for more than two months
HUSBAND OPENS LEGISLATIVE VETO SESSION WITH PRAYER


This man likes to talk.

http://dailyjournalonline.com/news/local/missing-and-crimes/unsolved-missing/lynn-messer-missing-for-more-than-two-months/article_e50b4ef5-4f72-59f0-9cf8-b7cb3ac3553d.html

Hearing: now more difficult for Parsons to win custody of youngest children

http://www.wbtv.com/story/26507224/adoptive-parents-of-missing-teen-erica-parsons-back-in-court-fighting-for-custody-of-youngest-children

Anonymous said...

John; OT, it is unimaginable that Foster Hunter did not report Christina Morris missing for four days. Really unbelievable. What was he doing during those four days to find her since he didn't even bother to call her parents? Didn't call her friends, didn't call the police?

Wasn't he even concerned that she might be being tortured but if found soon enough could be saved, or could be left lying somewhere to die a slow death? Is he implying that he was just driving around peering here and peering there on his own but not taking her disappearance seriously? What the hell, I don't believe this guy!

Now her own mother excuses him by saying he feels like an idiot, that it was a typical girlfriend/boyfriend argument even though Christina had made fifteen calls to Hunters' cell phone right before she disappeared? That's all he is, just an idiot? I don't believe this, do you?

Anonymous said...

If Christinas' employer had not reported her missing four days later, I wonder if this guy would have ever reported her missing? We're to presuppose that her mother usually didn't call her daughter or hear from her for days at the time so she wasn't concerned about the whereabouts of her either?

Didn't anyone even care about her other than her boss, or did he (assuming it's a he), have his own agenda in reporting Christina missing? In any event, the boyfriend, not buying his story.

Anonymous said...

Sus, you are aware that the officer who shot Brown was not aware of the robbery (or attempted?) just prior to the apprehension and shooting, right? You (and Jen) realize this has no bearing on why this officer was pursuing Brown, nor did it have anything to do with his reasons for shooting him?

You also realize that, being a former teacher, teenage kids coming from lower socioeconomic backgrounds and families, and differences in culture such as these, do not always speak fluently or as well as we would, right? You also know they will sometimes embellish on their stories but this does not mean they are deliberately or outright lying?

You know this is a very excitable situation for this teenaged friend of Browns who was shot dead in his tracks? Perhaps with a little deviation here and there; personally, I believe his story.

It would be like throwing the baby out with the bathwater to disregard his story entirely just because he might have a few little chronological details out of order or left out, or slightly embellished.

You make some excellent points; but you, as a teacher, (or former teacher) and from your vast experience, know that it is not wise to do this with kids his age and from his socioeconomic upbringing, class distinction and neighborhood. IMO, sometimes we have to dig a little deeper to figure out what it is they are trying to say. Just my thoughts.

john said...

Anon September 12, 2014 at 7:12 AM

HI, there was a statement made by the lad who was the last person to see her. I think it is him in the cctv footage. I'm sure i posted it here somewhere, and, if memory serves me correct, there where a few sensitivities within his statement?

john said...

DOH, iv'e just realized its further up on this thread :/

Anonymous said...

Yes it is posted above John.... Thanks, I read it earlier but haven't seen the cctv footage.

Sooo, you are wondering about the last person who saw Christina, but not the errant boyfriend who didn't think much about not reporting her missing for four days?

Buckley said...

Anon at 8:19:

As a teacher, I know, like with all people, there are ranges to how much a person lies or embellishes. His assumed socioeconomic background explains some of his language choices, but there's enough statement to gauge when he's having trouble verbalizing something and when he's not. I agree his age and race are likely part of why he feels the need to persuade us he and Mike were compliant, but placing too much emphasis on his "poor, urban youth" identity, flies in the face of "the subject is dead, the statement is alive." In fact, asserting he is "poor" makes assumptions about his family income that are likely a generalized guess. I'd rather analyze the statement.

It is human nature to want to break things down so incidents like these are clear cut- we like "heros and villains" in our stories and enough evidence to exalt the former and condemn the latter. Life is so much more grey area than our culture pretends. Which is why it's best, other than understanding "personal vocabularies" and recognizing personal patterns of speech, to leave societal perceptions out of it.

Anything about the officer's motivation needs to be analyzed in the statement from the officer. Has anyone posted that? Oh, right...

john said...

Anon @9:35

I think more statements are needed from both of them especially the boyfriend.

The past tense Reference from the lad who was the last one to see her, is concerning.

Sus said...

Anon 8:19,
I am aware that the officer MAY not have known about the robbery. We haven't heard from the officer. I am also aware that Michael Brown and Dorian Johnson knew about the robbery.

I agree that Dorian Johnson would have a different perception of police and different reactions to police than I do because of his previous experiences. Our perceptions are always based upon our experiences.

I can assume how Dorian Johnson saw and sees the officer, BUT I'm instead looking at his statement only to see WHAT HAPPENED.

I believe DJ's statement about the officer telling them to get on the sidewalk then reversing his car.

I find DJ's account at the car deceptive. It is chalk full of bridges which means missing information. He switches to present tense at a critical point. He tells us too often what didn't happen. Which often means it did.

The struggle at the car is pivotal because once you attack, hit, go for an officer's gun, or enter the officer's car, Missouri law says to pursue and stop the threat is justified, even a shot from behind. The attacker has now become a threat to the officer and the community.

Anonymous said...

All these things may be true Sus, and rightly so; however, the officer did NOT have the right to become judge, juror and executioner. It's not like Brown was firing back!

The Officer COULD have apprehended Brown without killing him and it was his duty to do so.






































































him!

Sus said...

I'm apologizing in advance, anon. This is where I get argumentative on this point...

"The officer COULD have apprehended Brown without killing him..."

We hire police to do a job, to protect our communities. They are trained to face life and death situations and to make quick judgements on which are which. And yes, Ferguson officers are trained, also. It isn't some little isolated town. Ferguson is part of St. Louis, citizens there identify as North St. Louis. St. Louis ranks fourth as rate of most violent crime in America. My point is police there are trained and face violent crime daily.

Which leads me to my pet peeve. I'm not trained in facing those daily decisions. Neither are the millions of internet commentors, or Monday Morning Quarterbacks.

I wish Michael Brown were alive and attending trade school. I wish the officer hadn't used deadly force. But he made the decision to use it for a reason. Did Dorian Johnson have a gun? His statement leads me to think so. Did the officer consider Michael Brown's body a weapon? Stats show more murders occur by fists and feet than guns. Many on this blog use that argument to justify carrying a gun.


trustmeigetit said...





OT Oscar Pistorius verdict

Now, I understand Oscar was not found guilty of pre-meditated. I don’t think he planned this but rather killed Reeva after a big fight.



But I have as of this morning lost respect for this judge who was supposedly such an advocate for violence against women.

This was part of the article I just read that she said.

Masipa accepted that Pistorius believed Steenkamp was in the bedroom, noting that this part of his account had remained consistent since the moments after the shooting. It is "highly improbable the accused would have made this up so quickly", she said.

Ok, FIRST of all, his story was NOT consistent. He first said Reeva was asleep when he woke up. THEN later said she was not only awake but STILL AWAKE. That is such a huge contradiction and if she is awake, why would you not assume she was in the bathroom.

And he didn’t have time to make up a story? What world does she live in? People kill their own family and make up immediate lies. Madeline Mccann, Hailey Dunn, Haileigh Cummings. I can go on.



This judge just made a bad decision.

trustmeigetit said...

Also I still believe if you are that dam scared, of u think someone is hiding in the toilet stall.. Do u really run to them or do you grab Reeva and go out your bedroom door and out of the home and call the police.

Him using the scared card then running to the scary intruder to me also proves he was not actually scared but went to that bathroom with a purpose.

john said...

Oscar Pistorius verdict questioned by South African legal experts
Lawyers are particularly uneasy over the decision on 'dolus eventualis' murder, arguing that Pistorius could have known it was likely the person he shot would be killed


http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/12/pistorius-verdict-questioned-by-south-african-lawyers?CMP=twt_gu

Anonymous said...

Right on Trustmeigetit! This mo'f'ker Judge "Matilda" has all but excused Oscar in every way she could. She even IGNORED the fact that poor Reeva ran into the bathroom with her cell phone as fast as she could; with Oscar so close and quick behind her that she didn't even have time to punch three little keys: 911!

You shoot four bullets into the closed door of a small bathroom and you're not expecting (or trying!) to kill the person behind it? SHE'S CRAZY!

ALSO, ignored every witnesses account that they had heard Oscar and Reeva arguing loudly just moments (as well as earlier) before they heard gunshots, claiming they were "in and out of sleep". NOW, it was his screams that were heard and not Reevas'? Jesus help us all.

Damned liar, he wouldn't have been lying in bed with the patio door open had he been so scared of a possible intruder, NOR would he have left a ladder leaning up against the wall outside near his bathroom window, that any intruder could have entered.

This lyin' b'stard deliberately shot and killed this poor woman, I don't give a damn WHAT Judge Matilda says. I just CAN'T BELIEVE this freak of nature, based on HER decision alone, is letting this hair-trigger killer off the hook when it is clear that he INTENTIONALLY murdered this poor girl who had already become frightened of him. There again; PROOF, but again, those witnesses too were ignored.

It appeared to me that the prosecutor did an excellent job in presenting his case; makes me wonder what kind of hocus-pocus and exchange of money or other favor this so-called judge played in secret with the defense within the mahogany walls of her private office? No wonder crime is so rampant in South Africa. The judges are their leaders.

I feel so sorry for Reevas' lost life, the horror of her death, her parents and others who loved her who will know no justice for her murder. I just hope her lunatic killer never has another peaceful day in this lifetime. Or Judge Matilda either.

tania cadogan said...

I agree John

shooting 4 bullets into a small enclosed space, particularly the type of bullets he used (Black Talon is a brand of hollow-point pistol and rifle ammunition. Black Talon rounds were known for the unique construction of the bullet and its sharp petal shape after expansion following impact with tissue or other wet medium)
These bullets are designed to spread on impact and cause massive damage, these are designed to cause death or at least maximum damage to wherever they hit.

he knew on firing those shots he would kill whoever was inside, if not directly such as a head shot, then indirectly due to massive blood loss and trauma.

If he was so scared, why run towards the danger when the 'intruder' was in a confined space with escape via the window or exit via the door making him an easy target?
he had a security system in pace to deal with such a scenario.
call security and get his and Reeva's asses out of danger via the bedroom door.

This was deleiberate, he knew who was in there, there was a fight and she ran for her life, his temper got the best of him and she murdered her.

I suspect the prosecution will appeal on the dolus eventualis ( he knew what would happen when he fired his gun)

tania cadogan said...

off topic

INDIANAPOLIS, Ind. (Sept. 3, 2014)– It was a week ago Wednesday a west side man told police strangers kidnapped his baby from his arms in an alley not far from the family home.

While the search of Little Eagle Creek, a nearby wooded area and the banks of the White River have proven fruitless, detectives also have no evidence or eyewitness accounts to confirm the father’s story.

The search for 6-week-old Delano Anthony Wilson continues. While IMPD is leading the investigation, the FBI is involved as well.

Two federal agents came by the family’s house on Wednesday. They were inside for a short time before one of the agents left with Trina Perkins, Delano’s grandmother. They left in a van and returned less than an hour later. The agents then left with Taniasha Perkins, Delano’s mother, again returning less than an hour later.

“We’re not going away,” said IMPD Chief Rick Hite. “This is a case we have to put down.”

Detectives have repeatedly questioned the Delano’s mom and her brother. They spoke with them Monday night, while a search warrant was being served at their home in the 500 block of South Chase Street.

Swatches of carpeting and pieces of plumbing were among the items seized by investigators.

Willie Wilson, the child’s father who provided detectives with a detailed description of the alleged armed kidnapper, stayed behind and sobbed, refusing to talk to investigators without a lawyer present.

Chief Hite remains steadfast in his belief that the answers to the case of the missing infant can be found among the residents who live on that block southwest of downtown Indianapolis.

“I think people may not remember what they think is important or may not think what they remember is important, we need to have that information. Anything and everything is important at this point,” said Hite. “It’s not snitching. It’s about doing the right thing, and there’s never a wrong time to do that right thing. Now it’s time to do the right thing.”

Members of the faith-based community have leant their voices to the chorus seeking information regarding the whereabouts of the missing child.

“We want to make a clarion call throughout the city,” said Pastor Horatio Luster of the Ten Point Coalition, “right now regardless to who you are, regardless to what you have done, regardless to what the circumstances or situations been….we need someone right now. Whether you are involved in it, whether you know anything at all about it, we need you to come forth now.”

Luster and a handful of other ministers lead a front yard prayer vigil at the family home over the Labor Day weekend.

Delano’s mother noticeably sobbed when one pastor announced that God forgives all sins.

“You’re walking around and you’re carrying this thing within you and its festering, it’s eating at you like cancer, and once you come forth and release it, you will feel a whole lot better about yourself,” said Luster, speaking to anyone who may have information on the child’s disappearance. “Our job as clergymen…our job is not to judge. We’re there even for the perpetrators as well as the victims.

tania cadogan said...

“If they’re scared to come in, walk into the police department, we’ll be more than happy if they give us a call to meet with them,” said Luster, referring to the Safe Surrender program that has brought other witnesses and suspects forward in the past. “We can sit with them. We can pray with them even before they come in. We will be more than happy to walk in and bring them in…even go through the process with them.”

Sources told FOX59 News that Tuesday’s search of Little Eagle Creek, approximately two miles due west of the family’s neighborhood, was not based on a tip, but rather the location’s proximity and relative remoteness.

A witness told FOX59 News and investigators that she spotted Wilson earlier on the morning of Aug. 27 running from the same alley, where hours later, he claimed he was the victim of an attempted robbery. Wilson said a white male with a pistol and a Hispanic female left behind his wallet, two cell phones and marijuana, but took his child.

The witness said that as soon as Wilson spotted her, he came to an abrupt halt and began walking back to his home.

While individual detectives and officers continued informal searches Wednesday, IMPD will return to the neighborhood Friday night as the southwest district will hold its late shift roll call near the home Delano shared with his parents and several extended family members.

The Ten Point Coalition is also considering a faith walk in the community Friday night to show its support for the recovery of the missing baby.

http://fox59.com/2014/09/03/indianapolis-police-chief-calls-missing-baby-search-a-case-we-have-to-put-down/

tania cadogan said...

off topic

PHILADELPHIA – A former day care worker has been convicted of abducting a 5-year-old girl from her Philadelphia classroom and sexually assaulting her during a 19-hour ordeal.

Christina Regusters was convicted of all counts Friday, including kidnapping, aggravated assault, and indecent deviate sexual intercourse.

Prosecutors said the 21-year-old donned a Muslim dress and veil to pose as the girl's mother and take her from Bryant Elementary School in January 2013, then posed as three different people to trick the blindfolded child. The girl was found the next morning at a cold, dark playground.

The defense had questioned whether Regusters could have acted alone. But prosecutors said she had viewed child pornography and looked up how to destroy DNA evidence.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/09/12/ex-day-care-worker-convicted-abducting-girl-5-from-philadelphia-school/

tania cadogan said...

another off topic



ORLANDO, Fla. – Police say a driver has reported that George Zimmerman threatened to kill him after a confrontation on the road.

Police are investigating two reports involving the driver and 30-year-old Zimmerman, who was acquitted last year of a second-degree murder charge for shooting an unarmed teenager.

Police say that on Tuesday, the man called police after a truck pulled up next to him and the driver yelled, "Why are you pointing a finger at me?"

Police spokeswoman Bianca Gillett says the man recognized the truck driver as Zimmerman. The man says Zimmerman asked, "Do you know who I am?" and threatened to kill him.

Two days later, the man says he saw Zimmerman in his truck outside his work. He called police but declined to press charges. His name hasn't been released.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/09/12/george-zimmerman-accused-threatening-to-kill-driver-police-say/?intcmp=trending

Buckley said...

It's truly amazing GZ hasn't gotten himself killed.

This statement has been bugging me, and for much more than the past tense references:

Steven Nickerson was with Morris before she went missing and said she seemed a little upset that night, but he didn't know what was wrong. He said she insisted on driving back home to Fort Worth,

I know this isn't direct quote, but the word choice has to come from somewhere.

"Insisted" seems an odd word- there was tension around her driving back home, even though he didn't know what was wrong. Did they argue about her leaving? Did he want her to stay and she refused?

Also, note we don't hear him say she actually did leave, only that she insisted she leave. Also, if there was tension about her "driving home" should we wonder why HE didn't check to see she made it home and report it when she didn't?

but he never realized it would be the last time he saw her before she was reported missing.

This is just strange. How could he have realized she would go missing? Now that he knows she is missing, why use the word "never" realized? Can't be sure it's his word, though...

"She was loved by everyone. She was the nicest person I've ever met, great personality,"

Past tense reference. Y'all know...

said Nickerson. "I don't see anyone that could lay a finger on her."

He's pointing to abduction and harm. Seems to preclude a few possibilities (wreck, suicide). Plus, he says "don't see anyone that could". Really? No idea of a person who could harm a young woman in the wee hours of the morning? The wording is strange, too. I'd expect "I can't imagine anyone who would hurt her." "Could" implies she's too tough for anyone to hurt.

Anonymous said...

Sounds like he wanted her to stay but she insisted on going home to her bf. he is very suspicious but so is not reporting her missing for days. Maybe it wasn't unusual of her to get mad and hang out with friends for a few days to cool down. Definitely need to be looking at that friend.

Anonymous said...

Sounds to me like they have him on video going to his car and leaving. Would make sense why they aren't thinking it was him. It's not a bad area at all.

Anonymous said...

What I don't understand is why the guy George Zimmerman threatened to kill in his latest road rage episode did not file charges against him. I certainly would have! He'd be off the streets again, at least for a little while.

Well, until hook-or-crook, lying judge magistrate daddy got him out again, that is.

Anonymous said...

'His hands were up!' New footage shows Ferguson witnesses reacting to teen's death (VIDEO)

New footage of the moments just after Ferguson, Missouri teenager Michael Brown was killed by a local police officer indicates that a witness on the scene said the unarmed 18-year-old’s hands were raised while he was fatally shot.

http://rt.com/usa/187400-ferguson-witnesses-shooting-reaction/

How long and why, how long did it take this person with the video to come forward. Is it really relevant to the actual incident or it's being spun, that it is?

Anonymous said...

Anon @ 8:14, this is not really new footage. This story came out the same day and again the next day after Michael Brown was murdered by the judge-juror-turned-executioner vengeful cop, who did it just because he had a badge to kill and could.

Anonymous said...

Anon @ 8:14, this is not really new footage. This story came out the same day and again the next day after Michael Brown was murdered by the judge-juror-turned-executioner vengeful cop, who did it just because he had a badge to kill and could. September 12, 2014 8:39PM

I appreciate your reply, no sarcasm.

The video captured is trending on the news right now, this is my question, Why?

It's being used to spin? it's being used as it's fair rights usage? or it's being spun for purposes of ?

A case right now, in my State, I use as example. Road Rage incident where a unarmed man was shot and killed point blank.

The incident happened broad daylight. Witnesses driving began calling 911 upon what they saw and or what they thought they saw, depending upon when they viewed the tragic happening.

As it happened on a busy roadway at a red light. A man accompanied by his wife, they were driving to go pick up their kids from school. They driving an SUV, they were approached by another, driving erratically.

Article here: http://www.livingstondaily.com/story/news/local/community/genoa-township/2014/09/03/attorney-slain-mans-children-asking-father/15041993/

The offending driver, his truck stopped at a red light. The man upset, he exited his vehicle and approached the driver of the truck, stopped at the light.

He erratic driver rolled down his window, verbal exchange unknown, he shot the man in the head who approached, he killed him instantly.

The 911 calls you can listen to by witnesses. The variations in the witnesses is substantial. They to witness the event as it happened and or they were driving thru the intersection while it happened. http://www.livingstondaily.com/videos/news/local/community/genoa-township/2014/09/03/15044805/

This is my point, why is the video captured of the contractors, their body language and overheard expletives relevant? Case of Michael Brown. MSM is portraying the video is relevant.

Is it perceived what happened via the captured footage? or is it what truly did happen? as it was observed from a great distance away. Eye witness reporting by citizens who offer their footage to press, is it used for their (MSM)intensive purposes?

Lemon said...

OT

Has anyone taken a gander at Mark Sanford's epic sad sack missive on FB? It is a target rich environment for SA. Also, the comments are, shall I say, expressive.

https://www.facebook.com/RepSanfordSC/posts/280140345529087

Jen Ow said...

Wow, Lemons!

I just read Mark Sanford's novel sized FB post... what a martyr, lol

Funny, in those 3000-ish words he wrote about all the hell 'Jenny' has put him through, he takes no responsibility for his starring role in the demise of their marriage.

Sus said...

I read it, Lemon, and I wish I had that hour back.

Anonymous said...

Peter can u do a statement analysis on Tania Grogan? She's the mother of the missing, now deceased 8 year old in Bullhead City Arizona.

Anonymous said...

To Anon @9:19 pm (9/12) from Anon @ 8:39 pm, I wish I had an answer to your questions but I don't. Alls I can say is that the media will do what the media does; I just know that this info was/is not new.

There were several witnesses, including the little thug who had been with Brown, who gave similar interviews immediately after the shooting; that being, that Brown had both arms raised above his head at the time the cop deliberately shot/murdered him, firing six shots; I presume because Brown got sassy and possibly had attempted to rough him up through his squad car window before Brown ran and this set the cops' temper off.

Sorry hon, wish I could be more helpful.

Anonymous said...

Ha! I got a laugh out of Jenny Sanfords' retaliation against Marc Sanfords' attempts at dragging her/their teenage son into his illicit affair during and subsequent to their marriage; not wanting her son to be a part of HIS subsequent engagement and forthcoming marriage to the woman who participated in his adulterous affair. Hip-hip horay for Jenny!

Good on her! It's about time that hurt and humiliated, GOOD wives AND mothers, honoring their marriage vows; started taking back their rights against their husbands' extra-marital affairs and who dishonor their vows as if they meant nothing, and as if their childrens' lives should go on as before with total disrespect for their mother who is now out in the cold. All glowing love now for the woman who helped to destroy their lives?

Well, guess what Marc? It ain't gonna happen, you dirtbag you.

Anonymous said...

Active children can require up to 2,200 - 2,600 calories per day. A teenager can get into the 3,000 - 5,500 calorie range depending upon sports participation.

There are children who bring a can of pop and bag of chips for their lunch. Or buy that if it is available in the vending machine. Not every child comes from a home where there is adequate knowledge of nutrition.

Michelle Obama is a good mother and she cares about the children of the United States.

People who are upset about her campaign strike me as defensive. If you are giving your child proper nutrition why do you care if she is promoting it? Perhaps the truth hurts.

Anonymous said...

Agreed with whomever said you need to write a book on this- an easy place to read and refer to these tents of SA without the glare of a screen (and scrolling past inane insults between commentators, etc)

Peter Hyatt said...

There are a number of volunteers who do the deletion for me.

It's a drag.

I also do it, but not as often as I used to. Spam filter takes time to memorize an IP address.

They also delete ignorance, as this is a personal, not public blog, giving me control.

Generally, ignorance is introduced by a call to freedom to disagree.

It's a sure way to get deleted without having the entire comment read:

"Peter may not like disagreements, but..."

boom!

Deleted.

Also consider what it must be like to post hundreds of trolling posts, only to have them deleted every day, but continuing to do so. Something must be very wrong.

Then there are those who feel it is their duty to defend a liar if the liar fits their political party.

Delete!

Then there is the emotional, "I don't feel welcome when I am deleted posts" which...

get deleted and Spammed out!

There are plenty of places online to go to propagate ignorance.

This isn't one of them.

Peter

trustmeigetit said...

Well said Peter.

My favorite is when people say "freedom of speech" but forget this is your blog.

They can say what ever they want on their own blog.

Anonymous said...

Trustmeigetit; this subject has come up many times concerning Peters' ownership of this SA blog site. I'm a little confused about this. Here's why; the only other blog site that I'm familiar with that was entirely privately owned was called "The Water Cooler". It was totally private and not publically posted on Google or anywhere else.

The person who bought and paid for this site was its' administrator AND owner, who had complete control of it and was personal friends with all who posted there. You had to be invited/accepted to be a member. The only way to read or post on that site was to submit your password to her, she would discuss with the other participants whether they wanted to accept you as a friend, then she would give her approval (or not) and turn your password on so that you could read and post there.

The difference here is that this site is publically announced on Google (possibly other places) and anyone can click it on from anywhere around the world without approval, and can read and post here unless/until they get deleted by its' administrator (s).

How does it work that this SA site is 'privately owned', even if Peter is paying a fee for it, since it is publically on display and open to all; even I've noticed a few times was soliciting for donations to further its' SA work? Wouldn't you think this is very much public and not so private? Not creating controversy; I'm just wondering, that's all.

Buckley said...

It's not a government site. Freedom of speech protects us from the government making laws that abridge our speech and expression. People don't have a right to come into our "homes" an invoke a right to say whatever they want, whether we own or rent. Peter may "rent" the site from google or blogger, but, aside from any user agreements when he signed up, it's his to write, delete, or block as he sees fit.

Anonymous said...

I don't have a dispute with this Buckley. It goes without saying that none of the open to the public blog sites in the U.S. are 'government sites' to my knowledge, or do you know something different?

I wouldn't exactly call this Peter's home, whether rented or owned; since it is publically displayed on Google and wherever else and is offered publically to all.

Obviously he has control of this site since he set it up and pays for it, in that he can write as he pleases, delete or block any he sees fit; but I'd still like to know how this makes it a 'private' site? In my experience a 'private' site is one that is totally private and none can read or post there without invitation and approval by it's owner/administrator.

I don't really care one way or the other but I keep reading how this is a privately owned site, or is it since it IS open to the public? Perhaps you can further enlighten me? I don't wish to argue the point, I'm just curious, that's all. TY!

Buckley said...

I don't see this reference to "private" you mention except in your post- I see Peter said "personal blog"; I don't see who used the word "private" other than you.

It seems you are making a semantic argument over the adjective "private." One definition (of 17 at the site I looked at) is "1. belonging to some particular person", but it seems you are using the definition "8. not open or accessible to the general public".

My comment, not that it addresses your non-argumentative comment directly, was based on trustmeigetit's comment about "freedom of speech," ("My favorite is when people say "freedom of speech" but forget this is your blog.")
as freedom of speech, which I'm sure you know, prohibits government from making rules that abridge our freedom of speech, which differs from the private ("16. of, pertaining to, or coming from nongovernmental sources") sector, where our speech is not constitutionally protected from consequences.

Anonymous said...

It's okay Buckley, I understand what you are trying to say; also understood the Trustmeigetit comments too, as well as all those before it.

Just so you know, over the several years that I've been reading here, (off and on, not religiously) there have been many references made to this being a 'private' site and that if anyone didn't like it they could go somewhere else.

Sure they can, I agree. Paid for and monitored by Peter Hyatt. No problem. Just, I don't think it could be called 'private' (or not even really personal?) since it IS open to the public and publically displayed on Google, which also leads back to freedom of speech, does it not?

But I don't care, either one way or the other; it's not my site and not my problem. You've made your position clear and I'm good with that. TY!