Funny Stuff

Posted in the Carondelet Forum

Comments

Showing posts 1 - 20 of48
< prev page
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Hilarious

Arnold, MO

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
Aug 14, 2013
 

Since: Apr 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
Aug 15, 2013
 
That was funny. Moss' lawyer was smart and kept his mouth shut. But then someone always has to make that carefree comment that just shows their contempt for the other person.

Since: Apr 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Aug 15, 2013
 
Oh my! It was on KMOV this morning just now. Seems like it is getting publicity now.
Good Morning

Arnold, MO

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
Aug 15, 2013
 
That, is a good thing. The more publicity the better.

Since: Apr 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Aug 15, 2013
 
The better for who?
say what

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
Aug 15, 2013
 

Judged:

1

This silly person takes moss in a back room threatens him to resign from council, his reputation and livelyhood.
Now wants to claim he was harassed.....oh my gaaawd!

Just how was his age discriminated against?

Since: Apr 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Aug 15, 2013
 
And yet you have no proof that he was harassed or threatened in a back room. That's part of what the lawsuit is proving, that you are making statements that you cannot prove in an attempt to defame an individual. That is harassment.

All you have is hearsay. Unless you had the room bugged you wouldn't know what happened exactly. You are defaming them the same way Moss has accused them of defaming him.
PrayingForAPower Outage

Saint Louis, MO

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Aug 15, 2013
 
Letusnamenames wrote:
And yet you have no proof that he was harassed or threatened in a back room. That's part of what the lawsuit is proving, that you are making statements that you cannot prove in an attempt to defame an individual. That is harassment.
All you have is hearsay. Unless you had the room bugged you wouldn't know what happened exactly. You are defaming them the same way Moss has accused them of defaming him.
For the love of God Lunn, go to a good bookstore and buy a book on evidence. You speak ad nauseum about the concept of proof yet you know nothing about it. You don't have to go to law school but if you're going to put yourself out there as an expert it might reduce the ridicule you're forced to endure if you actually become one first. Get a book on evidence, read it, then come back.
Huh

Boston, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Aug 15, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Letusnamenames wrote:
And yet you have no proof that he was harassed or threatened in a back room. That's part of what the lawsuit is proving, that you are making statements that you cannot prove in an attempt to defame an individual. That is harassment.
All you have is hearsay. Unless you had the room bugged you wouldn't know what happened exactly. You are defaming them the same way Moss has accused them of defaming him.
Except that Ron Counts told The Patch exactly the same thing, so it is not hearsay (which btw comes from a 3rd Party, so it is not the correct word given Mr. Moss was a witness to the event, not recalling someones recollection of it to him.) If someone is stating what their own words and actions were, which corroborates the accusations of Ken Moss, where is the factual dispute? In court, we call those stipulations, where both parties agree on certain facts, thus no evidence need be introduced as they are not in dispute.

If the admissions of those involved do not qualify as "proof" I think you need some of your own services there Doc. If the only thing in your mind that is proof is audio and video recorded evidence, which you know does not exist, then as far as we know, "proof" does not exist (however, even if it did, you would allege it was tampered with, and therefore not "proof" anyways.) So, since nothing exists which meets your standards of "proof" it must not have happened, correct?

How about in light of all of the overwhelming direct evidence which exists, you provide proof that what the evidence says occurs, didn't?

Since: Apr 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
Aug 15, 2013
 
PrayingForAPowerOutage wrote:
<quoted text>For the love of God Lunn, go to a good bookstore and buy a book on evidence. You speak ad nauseum about the concept of proof yet you know nothing about it. You don't have to go to law school but if you're going to put yourself out there as an expert it might reduce the ridicule you're forced to endure if you actually become one first. Get a book on evidence, read it, then come back.
Go "you know what" yourself. You're sole purpose is to follow and attack me as PROVEN by your posts on this board. You go read the book.

Since: Apr 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
Aug 15, 2013
 
Huh wrote:
<quoted text>Except that Ron Counts told The Patch exactly the same thing, so it is not hearsay (which btw comes from a 3rd Party, so it is not the correct word given Mr. Moss was a witness to the event, not recalling someones recollection of it to him.) If someone is stating what their own words and actions were, which corroborates the accusations of Ken Moss, where is the factual dispute? In court, we call those stipulations, where both parties agree on certain facts, thus no evidence need be introduced as they are not in dispute.

If the admissions of those involved do not qualify as "proof" I think you need some of your own services there Doc. If the only thing in your mind that is proof is audio and video recorded evidence, which you know does not exist, then as far as we know, "proof" does not exist (however, even if it did, you would allege it was tampered with, and therefore not "proof" anyways.) So, since nothing exists which meets your standards of "proof" it must not have happened, correct?

How about in light of all of the overwhelming direct evidence which exists, you provide proof that what the evidence says occurs, didn't?
Post the link where he said he "threatened" him. And it has to have that EXACT word. You have a he said she said and that is all.

And this statement is false. It is meant to defame and has no basis in truth.

"however, even if it did, you would allege it was tampered with, and therefore not "proof" anyways."

Quit trying to act like you know me and how I would act. You have no clue.
Names Named

Anonymous Proxy

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13
Aug 15, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Letusnamenames wrote:
And yet you have no proof that he was harassed or threatened in a back room. That's part of what the lawsuit is proving, that you are making statements that you cannot prove in an attempt to defame an individual.
So by these standards, Moss's suit against Shockey, Counts and Sweeney means his claims are true as the lawsuit is "proving" it, right? On the other hand, how does Shockeys lawsuit prove he didn't do what Moss says he did? Prove that Shockey didn't take Moss into a back room and try to force him to resign! There are at least 6 council members that would certainly swear under oath that Shockey, Sweeney and Counts took Moss out of the chambers.
Huh

Boston, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#14
Aug 15, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Letusnamenames wrote:
<quoted text>
Post the link where he said he "threatened" him. And it has to have that EXACT word. You have a he said she said and that is all.
And this statement is false. It is meant to defame and has no basis in truth.
"however, even if it did, you would allege it was tampered with, and therefore not "proof" anyways."
Quit trying to act like you know me and how I would act. You have no clue.
http://arnold.patch.com/groups/politics-and-e...

"I told him (Moss) that he might want to consider resigning because he's a young guy with a business, and this isn't going to look good," Counts told Patch.

Since: Apr 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15
Aug 15, 2013
 
Names Named wrote:
<quoted text>So by these standards, Moss's suit against Shockey, Counts and Sweeney means his claims are true as the lawsuit is "proving" it, right? On the other hand, how does Shockeys lawsuit prove he didn't do what Moss says he did? Prove that Shockey didn't take Moss into a back room and try to force him to resign! There are at least 6 council members that would certainly swear under oath that Shockey, Sweeney and Counts took Moss out of the chambers.
Ah, but they don't know what happened in the room and that is the key.

The part of Moss' lawsuit that has merit is the dragging of his name through the mud and the investigation, which speaks for itself and even I feel it was a sham.

However, the back room has no merit and it a he said she said situation.

Since: Apr 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16
Aug 15, 2013
 
Huh wrote:
<quoted text> http://arnold.patch.com/groups/politics-and-e...

"I told him (Moss) that he might want to consider resigning because he's a young guy with a business, and this isn't going to look good," Counts told Patch.
And yet the word threaten isn't in there. He made a suggestion and offered advice. Where's the threat? He was stating circumstance. See how that works?
Huh

Boston, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#17
Aug 15, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Letusnamenames wrote:
<quoted text>
And yet the word threaten isn't in there. He made a suggestion and offered advice. Where's the threat? He was stating circumstance. See how that works?
So threats and extortion typically have the word "threaten" or "threat" in them?

Perhaps you had better bone up on the legal definition of Extortion.

Extortion is forcing action (as in the case of Ken Moss) or obtaining something by illegal means. Anyone may commit extortion through force or coercion. A public or private official may also commit extortion under the color of office.

DEFINITION FROM NOLOíS PLAIN-ENGLISH LAW DICTIONARY

The crime of obtaining money or property by threat to a victim's property or loved ones, intimidation, or false claim of a right (such as pretending to be an IRS agent). A direct threat to harm the victim is usually treated as the crime of robbery, however. Extortion is a felony in all states. Blackmail is a form of extortion in which the threat is to expose embarrassing and damaging information to family, friends, or the public.(as in the case of Ken Moss).

How are not all the elements of extortion/blackmail not met? No one is alleging the threat of physical harm, but it is more than implied by counsel, a counsel which Mr. Moss did not seek, and was physically forced to hear, that if he did not undertake the requested action, his family and business would be damaged as a result. It is the textbook definition. I hear the new edition of Black's is going to us this very scenario in Arnold as an example for the definition of blackmail.

Since: Apr 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#18
Aug 15, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Huh wrote:
<quoted text>So threats and extortion typically have the word "threaten" or "threat" in them?

Perhaps you had better bone up on the legal definition of Extortion.

Extortion is forcing action (as in the case of Ken Moss) or obtaining something by illegal means. Anyone may commit extortion through force or coercion. A public or private official may also commit extortion under the color of office.

DEFINITION FROM NOLO’S PLAIN-ENGLISH LAW DICTIONARY

The crime of obtaining money or property by threat to a victim's property or loved ones, intimidation, or false claim of a right (such as pretending to be an IRS agent). A direct threat to harm the victim is usually treated as the crime of robbery, however. Extortion is a felony in all states. Blackmail is a form of extortion in which the threat is to expose embarrassing and damaging information to family, friends, or the public.(as in the case of Ken Moss).

How are not all the elements of extortion/blackmail not met? No one is alleging the threat of physical harm, but it is more than implied by counsel, a counsel which Mr. Moss did not seek, and was physically forced to hear, that if he did not undertake the requested action, his family and business would be damaged as a result. It is the textbook definition. I hear the new edition of Black's is going to us this very scenario in Arnold as an example for the definition of blackmail.
They didn't say the WOULD damage his business. They said that it could damage his business. And it isn't blackmail either. He didn't say "resign or we will destroy your reputation". He said that if this became public (Susie took it to the media for example) it could harm his reputation.

And who exactly did make this public. Was it someone stepping down from their council seat and talking as though they were a citizen from business from the floor? Maybe Moss is sueing the wrong person for defamation.
Sup

Saint Louis, MO

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20
Aug 15, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Hey LUNN, fyi Don't write a check with your mouth that your ass can't cash.
PrayingForAPower Outage

Saint Louis, MO

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#22
Aug 15, 2013
 
Letusnamenames wrote:
<quoted text>
Go "you know what" yourself. You're sole purpose is to follow and attack me as PROVEN by your posts on this board. You go read the book.
I'm pretty sure it's anatomically impossible to "you know what" myself but if I manage it what sort of proof would you like to see?

And no, my sole purpose is not to attack you. A more appropriate description of my role is that I'm like the guy with the shovel following the elephant on parade.

Since: Apr 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#23
Aug 15, 2013
 
Sup wrote:
Hey LUNN, fyi Don't write a check with your mouth that your ass can't cash.
I just asked a simple question. The fact that you took it that way speaks wonders. Too bad you can't just answer the question without making threats. You're doing EXACTLY what you are accusing the administration of doing. That makes you all no better than them in that respect.

And ever think Moss may be sueing the wrong people? What about Boone? Was she in the lawsuit? What about the council members that have her the payout and extension? Wouldn't they be part of the conspiracy by voting for it making them liable in their individual capacities? This could go so many directions. Heck, he could sue anybody that brings it up on the basis that it is further dragging his name through the mid by the mere mentioning of it. That would implicate some of his friends though.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 1 - 20 of48
< prev page
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Other Recent Carondelet Discussions

Search the Carondelet Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
Feral Cats 4 min can man 3
MO Who do you support for U.S. Senate in Missouri ... (Oct '10) 11 min Obama Bitches 95,400
Arnold Historical Society 31 min Offensive 9
Describing Lack of Character 1 hr Doris Borgelt 1
Fox C6 Board of Education : Discussion 4 hr Time Will Tell 136
MO August 3 Missouri Primary Election: Did you vote? (Aug '10) 6 hr chico 10,206
MO Who do you support for Auditor in Missouri in 2... (Oct '10) 8 hr Canopy 267
•••
•••
•••
•••

Carondelet Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Carondelet People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Carondelet News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Carondelet
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••