Letusnamenames

United States

#62 Feb 17, 2013
I've won in court before. Haven't lost yet. Had to testify and the side I testify for wins. I think you are the one that doesn't have the common sense, especially after posting that lawsuit in an act of retaliation for having a claim filed against you.
Good Morning

Arnold, MO

#63 Feb 17, 2013
Since you are so obsessed with it, let me provide the link to it in this thread also :)
http://www.scribd.com/doc/125664712/Ott-Lawsu...
Maybe more and more people will get to see what you are in a snit about.
Letusnamenames

United States

#64 Feb 17, 2013
Maybe each time you post the lawsuit it will be one count of retaliation against Shockey. You go ahead and post it 100 more times. Each time you post the lawsuit it is one more count of retaliation.

You just don't think that far ahead, do you?

If you would have posted this 3 months ago you wouldn't have had an issue. The fact that YOU knew about it and waited until AFTER Shockey filed the claim to post it displays malice and retaliation. If you knew about this, then why didn't YOU do something earlier? You're just as guilty as those you accuse for not taking action.
Letusnamenames

United States

#65 Feb 17, 2013
It looks like you swept it under he rug with the rest of them until it suited you to use it against someone.
Good Morning

Arnold, MO

#66 Feb 17, 2013
Just remember, truth, JUSTICE and the American way! There will be more truth and justice coming down the pike, count on it. That is ultimately what happens when some try to coerce, blackmail, intimidate, threaten, pressure, fool others by omitting facts, withholding material and use deceit to extort funds.
The truth will set you free, well, maybe not in this case.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/125664712/Ott-Lawsu ...
Maybe more and more people will get to see what you are in a snit about.
Letusnamenames

United States

#67 Feb 17, 2013
Keep posting it. You're doing it out of retaliation. Enough said.

And you keep preaching about the truth and that but yet in your 2 years in office I have not seen one single thing done. What charges have you files? What conspiracies have you uncovered (with posting the proof)? NONE. Same rhetoric from you different day.

And answer the question. If you knew about this for over a year, why didn't you post it sooner?
Letusnamenames

United States

#68 Feb 17, 2013
If you were truly "for the citizens" then you would have brought this lawsuit to light when you were informed of it. Instead you chose to hold onto it and hide it (making you no better than them) and I Lu use it in retaliation when it suited you. Sounds like you're the one playing the games, not them.

Please explain your actions since this is. Lear retaliation.
Good Morning

Arnold, MO

#69 Feb 17, 2013
I am posting a link to it, nothing more, nothing less. You act like you have some insight as to who you are addressing. Who do you think I am? What would it matter? Anyone can get the information posted, anyone can disseminate it, there is no law against putting out what is in the public domain. You cannot attribute malice to stating a fact. A fact just is.
Citizens are going to know the full story of this city and the people who have been running it for years and how they have enriched themselves and their friends and how they have kept those that would speak out quiet or drowned them out over the years. I think there is someone out there that will see to it.

Since: Dec 07

Location hidden

#70 Feb 17, 2013
Wow, this has deteriorated fast. Here are some things I can take from this whole thing.

1. Whose scribd account is this? If it belongs to a current city councilwoman, then they are at fault and it is definite retaliation. If it can be proven that it is not hers, but she has posted the link to the lawsuit, then she had someone post the lawsuit (using someone else's account...a scribd TOS violation) then it is still retaliation.

2. Do you have to pay the courthouse to get a copy of the lawsuit? I would like to see whose name it is on the check if so.

3. This is clear retaliation. Shockey filed a complaint against Moss and Doris. Doris is publicizing this lawsuit in the wake of that complaint. I share the same opinion as LUNN. If Doris knew about this lawsuit when it was first filed then why didn't she post it or information about it earlier? Why wait until a complaint is filed against her to post it? That is what makes it look like retaliation.

4. My other concern is the same as LUNN's. If you are representing the citizens and doing for them, then why did you hold onto this until something was done against you? This does seem like game playing to me also. A person who was looking out for the citizens would have brought this to their attention the moment they knew it was filed and not held onto it for a moment like this.
It Can Only Get Better

Arnold, MO

#71 Feb 17, 2013
Ha, you are real funny, of course you agree with yourself! You must be having a real lively conversation, is it just in your head or do you look in the mirror to talk to yourself?

Since: Dec 07

Location hidden

#72 Feb 17, 2013
Sorry, but I think you are mistaken. I'm nowhere near Elmhurst, IL.

Let's get it back on track. Please answer the questions in the post below.

1. Whose scribd account is this? If it belongs to a current city councilwoman, then they are at fault and it is definite retaliation. If it can be proven that it is not hers, but she has posted the link to the lawsuit, then she had someone post the lawsuit (using someone else's account...a scribd TOS violation) then it is still retaliation.

2. Do you have to pay the courthouse to get a copy of the lawsuit? I would like to see whose name it is on the check if so.

3. This is clear retaliation. Shockey filed a complaint against Moss and Doris. Doris is publicizing this lawsuit in the wake of that complaint. I share the same opinion as LUNN. If Doris knew about this lawsuit when it was first filed then why didn't she post it or information about it earlier? Why wait until a complaint is filed against her to post it? That is what makes it look like retaliation.

4. My other concern is the same as LUNN's. If you are representing the citizens and doing for them, then why did you hold onto this until something was done against you? This does seem like game playing to me also. A person who was looking out for the citizens would have brought this to their attention the moment they knew it was filed and not held onto it for a moment like this.
It Can Only Get Better

Arnold, MO

#73 Feb 17, 2013
Yes let's keep it on topix, it is at least the third harassment claim.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/125664712/Ott-Lawsu ...

If you want the answers, why don't you do the research? Make phone calls ask these people you accuse of things that you just seem to make up in your head. Accuse away, have fun!
Letusnamenames

United States

#74 Feb 17, 2013
That seems to be the typical response when you don't want to answer the questions. Can we say guilty?
It Can Only Get Better

Arnold, MO

#75 Feb 17, 2013
Letusnamenames wrote:
That seems to be the typical response when you don't want to answer the questions. Can we say guilty?
You can say whatever you want. You don't accept anything that doesn't agree with your position. Nobody cares. However, it would be nice if you would stop muddying the waters with your insane take on things. Just let the facts sit out there in plain view and let others come to their own conclusions

http://www.scribd.com/doc/125664712/Ott-Lawsu ...
Letusnamenames

United States

#76 Feb 17, 2013
So you think you can censor freedom of speech. You can't boss me around like you do Hay and Boyer. I'll day and do whatever I want.

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#77 Feb 17, 2013
CC,
I agree that this has deteriorated.

At this point, however, I do not think we need to know whose scribd account the information is posted on.

All a person needs to do is go to DorisBorgeltsForMayorofAnroldM o facebook page. On that page you will see that the information seems to have been posted after the complaint was made by Shockey and reported in the press. Since then, someone posting from her account as asked for people to continue to share the information. The link to this is below and the information is still posted as of 2:00 on Sunday 2-17-13.

If someone feels that this is retaliation, and wants to file a complaint, that is all they will really need.

I would like to point out that some may think it is just politics. Doris is running for Mayor. As a candidate for the top job in Arnold, every candidate should be able to highlight what the other person or group is up to that shows a change is needed.

If this stuff had been posted at a different time of year, I would agree it might be called retaliation, not now. It seems to be JUST POLITICS.

Dave

http://www.facebook.com/ #!/DorisBorgeltForMayorOfArnol dMo?fref=ts
ArnoldCC wrote:
Wow, this has deteriorated fast. Here are some things I can take from this whole thing.

1. Whose scribd account is this? If it belongs to a current city councilwoman, then they are at fault and it is definite retaliation. If it can be proven that it is not hers, but she has posted the link to the lawsuit, then she had someone post the lawsuit (using someone else's account...a scribd TOS violation) then it is still retaliation.
Letusnamenames

United States

#78 Feb 17, 2013
Then she should answer the question. If she knew about this before the claim then why didn't she do her job and bring it to the citizen's attention at that point in time?

Believe me, this isn't politics, it's a clear case of retaliation that I hope Shockey, Sweeney and Counts file a complaint over.
CC Sybil

Saint Louis, MO

#79 Feb 17, 2013
Vinny63010 wrote:
CC,
I agree that this has deteriorated.
At this point, however, I do not think we need to know whose scribd account the information is posted on.
All a person needs to do is go to DorisBorgeltsForMayorofAnroldM o facebook page. On that page you will see that the information seems to have been posted after the complaint was made by Shockey and reported in the press. Since then, someone posting from her account as asked for people to continue to share the information. The link to this is below and the information is still posted as of 2:00 on Sunday 2-17-13.
If someone feels that this is retaliation, and wants to file a complaint, that is all they will really need.
I would like to point out that some may think it is just politics. Doris is running for Mayor. As a candidate for the top job in Arnold, every candidate should be able to highlight what the other person or group is up to that shows a change is needed.
If this stuff had been posted at a different time of year, I would agree it might be called retaliation, not now. It seems to be JUST POLITICS.
Dave
http://www.facebook.com/ #!/DorisBorgeltForMayorOfArnol dMo?fref=ts
<quoted text>
Mr. Venable,

Hypothetically, how would you feel if there had been a MCHR investigation, which substantiated the allegations with regard to Chief Shockey, but that this information was never presented to the Council, nor was mention of this fact with regard to the Ott Case? Do you think that substantiated allegations against our Police Chief, or a failure to disclose any of this information is proper? I would think that even you would think that once the MCHR issued "Notice to Sue" as a result of substantiating the allegations, that at the least, the individual should have been suspended pending a review of the substantiated allegations, and then a decision made by the Council as to what disciplinary action be taken.

I am just floored by the fact that so many do not see a stink in "investigating" what is, even if 100 percent accurate, very weak claims, versus no investigation into very serious allegations, substantiated by the body charged with doing so, and as a result a lawsuit which could cost 6-7 figures. You can bet that the City's refusal to take any disciplinary action will end up as a damage multiplier.

Surely, you would have a concern had you been on the Council during this, no?

As for retaliation, it is "employment" related retaliation that the law refers to, which has nothing to do with this....retaliation in itself is not illegal.
Twirly Shirley

Saint Louis, MO

#80 Feb 17, 2013
Letusnamenames wrote:
Then she should answer the question. If she knew about this before the claim then why didn't she do her job and bring it to the citizen's attention at that point in time?
Believe me, this isn't politics, it's a clear case of retaliation that I hope Shockey, Sweeney and Counts file a complaint over.
Where in the heck did Counts and Swindler come into this? You ignore the fact that as it pertains to labor law, retaliation is referred to as a decrease in position, rank, pay, hours or some other employment related injury. Even if it was Doris, and she did it with malice, one would hard pressed to get away with calling the posting of a public document "retaliation" under State Statute. One cannot claim injury because a statement of fact is made, as veritas is an affirmative defense to libel.
Fenton CC

Saint Louis, MO

#81 Feb 17, 2013
Would't it be nice if Hay would harass Fenton now.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form 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.

Eureka Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Simpson Jr.? 11 hr Wowzer 14
Abundance of Fat Slobs 15 hr HerePiggy 3
Fox C6 Board of Education : Discussion (Jun '14) 16 hr WDCJ 910
Know Missouri Law Regarding Cameras Before You ... Dec 24 ZiessCamera 26
Fox High School Superintendent (Sep '10) Dec 23 WDCJ 1,473
Seckman Elementary parents...our problems are s... Dec 22 LittleLostLamb 10
Bad Neighbors (Mar '07) Dec 21 cup of sugar 8
Eureka Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Eureka People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Eureka News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Eureka

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 2:01 pm PST

Yahoo! Sports 2:01PM
Chiefs quarterback Smith out with lacerated spleen
Yahoo! Sports 4:37 PM
Chargers RB Mathews out against Chiefs
NBC Sports 5:11 PM
Russell Okung cleared to play from bruised lung, Max Unger a game-time decision
Bleacher Report 6:17 PM
Smith Injury Gives Chiefs Gauge of QB's Value
NBC Sports 8:41 PM
Report: Chargers worked out Austin Pettis