Ott Lawsuit Settled

Letusnamenames

Since: Apr 13

Location hidden

#86 May 17, 2013
Lettucenamenames wrote:
<quoted text>Kinda like people from Elmhurst IL right?
You mean the ones that post from their cell phones. Google it brainiac.

Letusnamenames

Since: Apr 13

Location hidden

#87 May 17, 2013
Looks like Topix may have caught onto it. There's a post missing from the thread now.
Please

Imperial, MO

#88 May 17, 2013
Letusnamenames wrote:
Looks like Topix may have caught onto it. There's a post missing from the thread now.
Where oh where is the picture?whoot whoot!!!
Lettucenamenames

United States

#89 May 17, 2013
Letusnamenames wrote:
<quoted text>You mean the ones that post from their cell phones. Google it brainiac.
No need brainiac

Letusnamenames

Since: Apr 13

Location hidden

#90 May 17, 2013
More conspiracy theories and not posting proof with links on here? Have to call foul.

Letusnamenames

Since: Apr 13

Location hidden

#91 May 17, 2013
Please wrote:
<quoted text>Where oh where is the picture?whoot whoot!!!
Too bad all you can do is deflect instead of answering questions.
Please

Imperial, MO

#92 May 17, 2013
Letusnamenames wrote:
<quoted text>
Too bad all you can do is deflect instead of answering questions.
The picture, the picture, THE PICTURE! Where oh where is the picture. You promised a new and improved picture. Now show us the proof. You want to call everyone out on the proof. Put your money where your mouth is. THE PICTURE!

Letusnamenames

Since: Apr 13

Location hidden

#93 May 18, 2013
Please wrote:
<quoted text>The picture, the picture, THE PICTURE! Where oh where is the picture. You promised a new and improved picture. Now show us the proof. You want to call everyone out on the proof. Put your money where your mouth is. THE PICTURE!
Get help. No matter what picture I post or what I do you will act like a child because you cannot argue the subject. You make allegations that most of the time you never post proof or can back them up and most have been proven false.

I could act childish and ask how that other chat site is coming along that you can't get set up, but I'm a better person than that. Now run along.
Please

Imperial, MO

#94 May 18, 2013
Letusnamenames wrote:
<quoted text>
Get help. No matter what picture I post or what I do you will act like a child because you cannot argue the subject. You make allegations that most of the time you never post proof or can back them up and most have been proven false.
I could act childish and ask how that other chat site is coming along that you can't get set up, but I'm a better person than that. Now run along.
How can anyone argue a subject when it always leads back to Doris? I could give a rats behind about you being childish and asking how my site is going. I can assure you I never once said I was starting a site, as I am one of the most ignorant people when it comes to computer stuff. Not my thing if you get what I'm saying. I make no allegations that I can't back up. I only give my opinion, just as you do Doc.. Besides who can say anything without you threatening law suits everywhere. Now come on, how about that picture?

Letusnamenames

Since: Apr 13

Location hidden

#95 May 18, 2013
I'm not supplying it just for the fact that you want it so bad.

So you make no allegations you can't back up, you just give your opinion? So that means your allegations are just opinion by your own statement. Sounds like someone threatened you with a libel suit now that you're tarting to use the word OPINION.

Letusnamenames

Since: Apr 13

Location hidden

#96 May 18, 2013
And I made no mention of Doris...that was you. Caught in your own game, huh?
Please

Imperial, MO

#97 May 18, 2013
Letusnamenames wrote:
No proof needed. It was a closed meeting. All I would like to know is the amount of the settlement. If there was a settlement it means no party is innocent or guilty, just that it was cheaper for someone to pay the person instead of incurring legal costs.
And officials won't step down. Especially considering the voting public wants them there. Who is the mayor pro tem now that would take over should the mayor step down? Most likely not a Doris camp person so the appointees would be for the current administration supporters.
Hhhhhmmmmmmm........ And you don't bring up Doris. Bahahahahahaha.

Now, DOC. how about that picture?

Letusnamenames

Since: Apr 13

Location hidden

#98 May 18, 2013
Not happening just because you want it so bad.
Stay on Topic

Arnold, MO

#99 May 19, 2013
The taxpayers of this town deserve and NEED to be enlightened on the FACTS of the Ott case! It doesn't matter whether or not there is a settlement involved! This lawsuit incurred major expenses on the city's behalf (therefore utilizing taxpayer dollars) and the details and information involving this case should be made PUBICLICLY AVAILABLE!!! Those of you constantly blabbing about providing proof should DEMAND this information released. If you believe that there is no validity to this lawsuit and the ONLY reason for reaching a settlement is to derail any costly future incurred expenses, then why not release information regarding this case? If this were the factual basis of the proposed settlement, then why not at least provide a statement to citizens advising that the reasoning for settlement is due to the fact that it would cost the city more money in the long run to defend this case and that settling this is more cost effective and beneficial? THAT WILL NEVER HAPPEN BECAUSE IT IS NO WHERE NEAR THE TRUTH! The information and those investigated and/or involved in any way regarding the Ott case should, without a doubt, be made transparent. It will be a cold day in hell if anyone thinks that the Mayor, Sweeney, or Shockey will reveal ANYTHING pertaining to this lawsuit! In fact, EVERY measure/method will be taken on their behalf to make damn sure that no details about this case ever come to light. Should, by some miracle (given the underhanded, corrupt manor in which the City of Arnold is run) the details of this case be made available/known, current administration running this city, and those supporting them, will be exposed for the complete lying, harassing, idiots and scum that they are! We can view complaint filed by officer Ott, why not any information on the City's response to the "allegations", investigation info, and the statements/depositions of those subpoenaed on the case? Why was information on the Boone case made available and talked about and not this case? Counts, Shockey, and Sweeney all spoke about and were even quoted in articles in the Leader about Boone, why not Ott? If those at the Leader weren't one-sided and biased all the time and actually attempted to respectfully report/investigate fairly on matters involving Arnold and it's citizens, then maybe we would have been given a story providing some insight on Officer Ott's lawsuit, or better yet given the respect and opportunity of having an open government! If there is nothing to hide or cover-up, then why so hush-hush about this? I can promise you, should the TRUTH ever be revealed, shock and utter disgust would not even begin to describe the corrupt, inappropriate, malicious behavior and actions allowed to take place by those in charge of and running this City, AND THAT IS A FACT!

Letusnamenames

Since: Apr 13

Location hidden

#100 May 19, 2013
Stay on Topic wrote:
The taxpayers of this town deserve and NEED to be enlightened on the FACTS of the Ott case! It doesn't matter whether or not there is a settlement involved! This lawsuit incurred major expenses on the city's behalf (therefore utilizing taxpayer dollars) and the details and information involving this case should be made PUBICLICLY AVAILABLE!!! Those of you constantly blabbing about providing proof should DEMAND this information released. If you believe that there is no validity to this lawsuit and the ONLY reason for reaching a settlement is to derail any costly future incurred expenses, then why not release information regarding this case? If this were the factual basis of the proposed settlement, then why not at least provide a statement to citizens advising that the reasoning for settlement is due to the fact that it would cost the city more money in the long run to defend this case and that settling this is more cost effective and beneficial? THAT WILL NEVER HAPPEN BECAUSE IT IS NO WHERE NEAR THE TRUTH! The information and those investigated and/or involved in any way regarding the Ott case should, without a doubt, be made transparent. It will be a cold day in hell if anyone thinks that the Mayor, Sweeney, or Shockey will reveal ANYTHING pertaining to this lawsuit! In fact, EVERY measure/method will be taken on their behalf to make damn sure that no details about this case ever come to light. Should, by some miracle (given the underhanded, corrupt manor in which the City of Arnold is run) the details of this case be made available/known, current administration running this city, and those supporting them, will be exposed for the complete lying, harassing, idiots and scum that they are! We can view complaint filed by officer Ott, why not any information on the City's response to the "allegations", investigation info, and the statements/depositions of those subpoenaed on the case? Why was information on the Boone case made available and talked about and not this case? Counts, Shockey, and Sweeney all spoke about and were even quoted in articles in the Leader about Boone, why not Ott? If those at the Leader weren't one-sided and biased all the time and actually attempted to respectfully report/investigate fairly on matters involving Arnold and it's citizens, then maybe we would have been given a story providing some insight on Officer Ott's lawsuit, or better yet given the respect and opportunity of having an open government! If there is nothing to hide or cover-up, then why so hush-hush about this? I can promise you, should the TRUTH ever be revealed, shock and utter disgust would not even begin to describe the corrupt, inappropriate, malicious behavior and actions allowed to take place by those in charge of and running this City, AND THAT IS A FACT!
I agree with the other poster on here. I hope you have proof for your statements.
Please

Imperial, MO

#101 May 19, 2013
Letusnamenames wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree with the other poster on here. I hope you have proof for your statements.
I think this poster is telling you to stop asking for proof on hear, where it is simple opinions and go to you council/mayor and ask them for the proof. I'm pretty sure the have the proof?;) Now if they give it to you is another story. Do you have proof that it isn't true? No! So shut your trap and go ask your local government for the truth.

Picture?
HoHo

High Ridge, MO

#102 May 19, 2013
Did they finally prove in a court of law that those "Ralph Ott is 40" bumper stickers were libelous? Thank Allah!
Flower Pot

Arnold, MO

#103 May 19, 2013
Letusnamenames wrote:
All I would like to know is the amount of the settlement. If there was a settlement it means no party is innocent or guilty, just that it was cheaper for someone to pay the person instead of incurring legal costs.
Cheaper compared to what? A jail hanging at $950,000 where heads rolled or $55,000 because someone heard second hand they were called a name? Anything in between that is a drain on the taxpayers and was caused by failure to do the right thing on the part of those in charge. Heads should roll and they should be those directly responsible for making sure the "rules" are followed.

Letusnamenames

Since: Apr 13

Location hidden

#104 May 19, 2013
Sounds to me like these people are just sore losers of an election where the voters made their voice heard loud and clear.

Letusnamenames

Since: Apr 13

Location hidden

#105 May 19, 2013
Please wrote:
<quoted text>I think this poster is telling you to stop asking for proof on hear, where it is simple opinions and go to you council/mayor and ask them for the proof. I'm pretty sure the have the proof?;) Now if they give it to you is another story. Do you have proof that it isn't true? No! So shut your trap and go ask your local government for the truth.

Picture?
Provide the proof of the allegations. You keep saying opinion, but what you are posting doesn't say "my opinion is" or "I think". That takes opinion out of the picture.

I still stand by my thoughts that someone was threatened with a libel suit.

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.

Imperial Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
bryan weber (Feb '13) 4 hr gonna get yur family 60
Hit & Run Driver On The Loose 17 hr White Vehicle 1
Shades of Brown 23 hr Thata fact 2
Know Missouri Law Regarding Cameras Before You ... (Sep '14) 23 hr Embarrassed 178
Fox C6 Board of Education : Discussion (Jun '14) Thu Tom 1,397
Who Are You Voting For Trump or Clinton Thu Stupid Voters 5
News Brutcher gets life plus 109 years (Sep '06) Thu Brutchers Awesome 173
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Imperial Mortgages