| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Kent Wills
Guest
|
 Posted: Tue Aug 19, 2008 5:33 am Post subject: Re: tjab squirms |
 |
|
On 17 Aug 2008 21:31:41 -0400, tjab@wam.umd.edu (tjab) wrote:
[...]
| Quote: | The Iowa Supreme Court also claims he has a felony conviction. Why
don't you ask them to show you incontrovertable proof?
At one time there were at least three. Care to explain how the
other suddenly vanished,
There are no "vanished" felony convictions.
|
So where are the others? The ones that caused you and I to
discuss Iowa's three-strikes law?
| Quote: | The convictions that
were listed on the Iowa Courts web site remain on the Iowa Courts
web site.
|
So there are three, or four, felonies still listed, huh?
You have so abandoned all honesty that you simply can't stop
yourself from lying.
--
"Hail imp," shouted Vlad, the Imp Hailer. |
|
| |
|
 Back to top |
Kent Wills
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 19, 2008 5:36 am Post subject: Re: 484 F.3d 1281 |
|
|
On 17 Aug 2008 22:14:26 -0400, tjab@wam.umd.edu (tjab) wrote:
[...]
| Quote: | Why have you ignored the disappearing of these convictions? Is
it because acknowledging them would mean you've lost once again?
Nothing has disappeared. If you claim somthing has, prove it.
You and I discussed Iowa's three-strike law because of them. Now
only one felony appears.
The Iowa Courts web site shows convictions on three counts in your
08/12/2003 burglary case. Two of them are felonies:
|
What happened to the other felonies we discussed?
Do answer the question.
--
"The Doctor is coming..."
-- Dalek K=Cann 'Doctor Who: The Stolen Earth' |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
tjab
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 19, 2008 10:22 am Post subject: Re: 484 F.3d 1281 |
|
|
In article <la5ka4dfsf12l0ijar5lvth5tuj5d80aku@4ax.com>,
Kent Wills <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: | On 17 Aug 2008 22:14:26 -0400, tjab@wam.umd.edu (tjab) wrote:
[...]
Why have you ignored the disappearing of these convictions? Is
it because acknowledging them would mean you've lost once again?
Nothing has disappeared. If you claim somthing has, prove it.
You and I discussed Iowa's three-strike law because of them. Now
only one felony appears.
The Iowa Courts web site shows convictions on three counts in your
08/12/2003 burglary case. Two of them are felonies:
What happened to the other felonies we discussed?
Do answer the question.
|
What other felonies did you and I discuss? Message IDs please.
It does appear that in an earlier case you might have had felony
charges that were reduced to misdemeanors. Could that be what you're
remembering?
Oh, and why are you claiming only one felony appears on you record
when there are in fact two? |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
tjab
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 19, 2008 10:31 am Post subject: Re: tjab squirms |
|
|
In article <775ka498s4hd1n795all4r5ujs0irpeno4@4ax.com>,
Kent Wills <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: | On 17 Aug 2008 21:31:41 -0400, tjab@wam.umd.edu (tjab) wrote:
[...]
The Iowa Supreme Court also claims he has a felony conviction. Why
don't you ask them to show you incontrovertable proof?
At one time there were at least three. Care to explain how the
other suddenly vanished,
There are no "vanished" felony convictions.
So where are the others? The ones that caused you and I to
discuss Iowa's three-strikes law?
|
You raised the issue of the three-strikes law, not I.
Since even then it was you and not I who claimed there were others,
you tell me.
| Quote: | The convictions that
were listed on the Iowa Courts web site remain on the Iowa Courts
web site.
So there are three, or four, felonies still listed, huh?
|
Prove there were *ever* three or four felony convictions listed.
As you are so fond of saying, if you are not lying, you'll be able
to do so. (Not true, just thought you'd want to be held to your own
standard.)
Rule #1: Kent Wills always lies.
| Quote: | You have so abandoned all honesty that you simply can't stop
yourself from lying.
--
"Hail imp," shouted Vlad, the Imp Hailer. |
|
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
forevernitefan
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 19, 2008 4:20 pm Post subject: tjab feigns ignorance |
|
|
On Aug 19, 12:22 am, t...@wam.umd.edu (tjab) wrote:
| Quote: | In article <la5ka4dfsf12l0ijar5lvth5tuj5d80...@4ax.com>,
Kent Wills <compu...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 17 Aug 2008 22:14:26 -0400, t...@wam.umd.edu (tjab) wrote:
[...]
Why have you ignored the disappearing of these convictions? Is
it because acknowledging them would mean you've lost once again?
Nothing has disappeared. If you claim somthing has, prove it.
You and I discussed Iowa's three-strike law because of them. Now
only one felony appears.
The Iowa Courts web site shows convictions on three counts in your
08/12/2003 burglary case. Two of them are felonies:
What happened to the other felonies we discussed?
Do answer the question.
What other felonies did you and I discuss? Message IDs please.
It does appear that in an earlier case you might have had felony
charges that were reduced to misdemeanors. Could that be what you're
remembering?
Oh, and why are you claiming only one felony appears on you record
when there are in fact two?- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
|
Oh shit here goes Tjab's attempt to red herring this.
Quit your damn lying Tjab. You don't have a memory deficit problem.
The three felonies, three strikes then the odd changing of the
felonies to misdemeanors. Shall I take some time and list the
sequence of posts about this web site that you shitfuckers made?
Tjab, are you EVER honest? Ever?
Moe
Eternal FOREVER KNIGHT fan
" A vampire cop? REALLY?"
http://www.boblarsonfanclub.tk/ |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Kent Wills
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 20, 2008 12:02 am Post subject: Re: tjab squirms |
|
|
On 19 Aug 2008 01:31:24 -0400, tjab@wam.umd.edu (tjab) wrote:
| Quote: | In article <775ka498s4hd1n795all4r5ujs0irpeno4@4ax.com>,
Kent Wills <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote:
On 17 Aug 2008 21:31:41 -0400, tjab@wam.umd.edu (tjab) wrote:
[...]
The Iowa Supreme Court also claims he has a felony conviction. Why
don't you ask them to show you incontrovertable proof?
At one time there were at least three. Care to explain how the
other suddenly vanished,
There are no "vanished" felony convictions.
So where are the others? The ones that caused you and I to
discuss Iowa's three-strikes law?
You raised the issue of the three-strikes law, not I.
|
Actually, it was Ken Smith who brought it up. I hadn't even
considered it before that.
| Quote: | Since even then it was you and not I who claimed there were others,
you tell me.
|
You accepted there were others, but have since ignored it since
they vanished.
| Quote: |
The convictions that
were listed on the Iowa Courts web site remain on the Iowa Courts
web site.
So there are three, or four, felonies still listed, huh?
Prove there were *ever* three or four felony convictions listed.
|
You already commented on them.
| Quote: |
As you are so fond of saying, if you are not lying, you'll be able
to do so. (Not true, just thought you'd want to be held to your own
standard.)
|
I can prove it. You and I discussed the matter. No amount of
your lying will ever alter the truth.
--
Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons...
for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup.
| Quote: |
Rule #1: Kent Wills always lies.
You have so abandoned all honesty that you simply can't stop
yourself from lying.
--
"Hail imp," shouted Vlad, the Imp Hailer.
|
|
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Kent Wills
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 20, 2008 12:02 am Post subject: Re: 484 F.3d 1281 |
|
|
On 19 Aug 2008 01:22:01 -0400, tjab@wam.umd.edu (tjab) wrote:
| Quote: | In article <la5ka4dfsf12l0ijar5lvth5tuj5d80aku@4ax.com>,
Kent Wills <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote:
On 17 Aug 2008 22:14:26 -0400, tjab@wam.umd.edu (tjab) wrote:
[...]
Why have you ignored the disappearing of these convictions? Is
it because acknowledging them would mean you've lost once again?
Nothing has disappeared. If you claim somthing has, prove it.
You and I discussed Iowa's three-strike law because of them. Now
only one felony appears.
The Iowa Courts web site shows convictions on three counts in your
08/12/2003 burglary case. Two of them are felonies:
What happened to the other felonies we discussed?
Do answer the question.
What other felonies did you and I discuss? Message IDs please.
|
The ones that would activate Iowa's three-strike law, simpleton.
| Quote: |
It does appear that in an earlier case you might have had felony
charges that were reduced to misdemeanors. Could that be what you're
remembering?
|
No. There were only felonies listed.
| Quote: |
Oh, and why are you claiming only one felony appears on you record
when there are in fact two?
|
The site so often mentioned names only one.
--
Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons...
for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup.
|
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Reality_Check©
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 20, 2008 12:02 am Post subject: Re: moe's compulsive coprophagia <= she just CAN'T STOP eati |
|
|
forevernitefan wrote:
| Quote: | On Aug 19, 12:22 am, t...@wam.umd.edu (tjab) wrote:
In article <la5ka4dfsf12l0ijar5lvth5tuj5d80...@4ax.com>,
Kent Wills <compu...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 17 Aug 2008 22:14:26 -0400, t...@wam.umd.edu (tjab) wrote:
[...]
Why have you ignored the disappearing of these convictions? Is
it because acknowledging them would mean you've lost once again?
Nothing has disappeared. If you claim somthing has, prove it.
You and I discussed Iowa's three-strike law because of them. Now
only one felony appears.
The Iowa Courts web site shows convictions on three counts in your
08/12/2003 burglary case. Two of them are felonies:
What happened to the other felonies we discussed?
Do answer the question.
What other felonies did you and I discuss? Message IDs please.
It does appear that in an earlier case you might have had felony
charges that were reduced to misdemeanors. Could that be what you're
remembering?
Oh, and why are you claiming only one felony appears on you record
when there are in fact two?- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Oh shit here goes Tjab's attempt to red herring this.
Quit your damn lying Tjab. You don't have a memory deficit problem.
The three felonies, three strikes then the odd changing of the
felonies to misdemeanors. Shall I take some time and list the
sequence of posts about this web site that you shitfuckers made?
|
"Frankly I've had enough of both of them. I have better things to do
with my time than their crap over and over again."
-- Moe (forevernitefan), obsessive-compulsive psycho , 8-13-08 |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
tjab
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 21, 2008 10:51 pm Post subject: Re: 484 F.3d 1281 |
|
|
In article <2tjma4935mafmlskoc2r47aima3fbl950b@4ax.com>,
Kent Wills <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: | On 19 Aug 2008 01:22:01 -0400, tjab@wam.umd.edu (tjab) wrote:
In article <la5ka4dfsf12l0ijar5lvth5tuj5d80aku@4ax.com>,
Kent Wills <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote:
On 17 Aug 2008 22:14:26 -0400, tjab@wam.umd.edu (tjab) wrote:
[...]
Why have you ignored the disappearing of these convictions? Is
it because acknowledging them would mean you've lost once again?
Nothing has disappeared. If you claim somthing has, prove it.
You and I discussed Iowa's three-strike law because of them. Now
only one felony appears.
The Iowa Courts web site shows convictions on three counts in your
08/12/2003 burglary case. Two of them are felonies:
What happened to the other felonies we discussed?
Do answer the question.
What other felonies did you and I discuss? Message IDs please.
The ones that would activate Iowa's three-strike law, simpleton.
It does appear that in an earlier case you might have had felony
charges that were reduced to misdemeanors. Could that be what you're
remembering?
No. There were only felonies listed.
|
On the Iowa Courts web site? Or are you changing the subject? If so,
be specific about which web site you are changing the subject to.
| Quote: | Oh, and why are you claiming only one felony appears on you record
when there are in fact two?
The site so often mentioned names only one.
|
Many sites have been often mentioned. Which one are you talking about?
The Iowa Courts web site shows two. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
tjab
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 22, 2008 4:03 am Post subject: Re: tjab squirms |
|
|
In article <7vjma4dl6vjot8ihvb5ke58kf3nok1jja5@4ax.com>,
Kent Wills <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: | On 19 Aug 2008 01:31:24 -0400, tjab@wam.umd.edu (tjab) wrote:
In article <775ka498s4hd1n795all4r5ujs0irpeno4@4ax.com>,
Kent Wills <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote:
On 17 Aug 2008 21:31:41 -0400, tjab@wam.umd.edu (tjab) wrote:
[...]
The Iowa Supreme Court also claims he has a felony conviction. Why
don't you ask them to show you incontrovertable proof?
At one time there were at least three. Care to explain how the
other suddenly vanished,
There are no "vanished" felony convictions.
So where are the others? The ones that caused you and I to
discuss Iowa's three-strikes law?
You raised the issue of the three-strikes law, not I.
Actually, it was Ken Smith who brought it up. I hadn't even
considered it before that.
Since even then it was you and not I who claimed there were others,
you tell me.
You accepted there were others, but have since ignored it since
they vanished.
The convictions that
were listed on the Iowa Courts web site remain on the Iowa Courts
web site.
So there are three, or four, felonies still listed, huh?
Prove there were *ever* three or four felony convictions listed.
You already commented on them.
As you are so fond of saying, if you are not lying, you'll be able
to do so. (Not true, just thought you'd want to be held to your own
standard.)
I can prove it.
|
You can but you just don't feel like it, eh, Kent?
First graders don't fool anyone with that line and neither do you.
Rule #1: Kent Wills always lies.
| Quote: | You and I discussed the matter. No amount of
your lying will ever alter the truth.
|
What lie have I told?
| Quote: |
--
Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons...
for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup.
Rule #1: Kent Wills always lies.
You have so abandoned all honesty that you simply can't stop
yourself from lying.
--
"Hail imp," shouted Vlad, the Imp Hailer. |
|
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Kent Wills
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 22, 2008 4:40 am Post subject: Re: 484 F.3d 1281 |
|
|
On 21 Aug 2008 13:51:21 -0400, tjab@wam.umd.edu (tjab) wrote:
[...]
| Quote: | It does appear that in an earlier case you might have had felony
charges that were reduced to misdemeanors. Could that be what you're
remembering?
No. There were only felonies listed.
On the Iowa Courts web site? Or are you changing the subject? If so,
be specific about which web site you are changing the subject to.
|
The same site we discussed before.
You can't be as dense as you present.
| Quote: |
Oh, and why are you claiming only one felony appears on you record
when there are in fact two?
The site so often mentioned names only one.
Many sites have been often mentioned. Which one are you talking about?
The Iowa Courts web site shows two.
|
So you claim.
Residential burglary is the only one listed in the site that's
been spammed so much.
I understand in your desperate need to gain just one win against
me, you've abandoned all sense of honesty. Still, your deception will
only serve to fail you.
--
Aspire to inspire before you expire. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Kent Wills
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 22, 2008 5:09 am Post subject: Re: tjab squirms |
|
|
On 21 Aug 2008 19:03:59 -0400, tjab@wam.umd.edu (tjab) wrote:
[...]
| Quote: | Prove there were *ever* three or four felony convictions listed.
You already commented on them.
As you are so fond of saying, if you are not lying, you'll be able
to do so. (Not true, just thought you'd want to be held to your own
standard.)
I can prove it.
You can but you just don't feel like it, eh, Kent?
|
Since you already commented on them, there is no cause of me to
offer the proof again.
Do you really need to be proved the liar you are once again?
Really?
| Quote: |
First graders don't fool anyone with that line and neither do you.
|
Since you are the one who presented the line, your dishonest claim
(read: lie) that I offered it only serves to prove, again, that you're
lying.
| Quote: | Rule #1: Kent Wills always lies.
|
Odd that I keep proving you the liar.
| Quote: |
You and I discussed the matter. No amount of
your lying will ever alter the truth.
What lie have I told?
|
When you wrote, "You raised the issue of the three-strikes law,
not I."
As you know, it was Ken Smith, who raised the issue. Knowing
this, you chose to LIE and claim it was me.
There are other examples, of course, but this alone cites one of
your most recent lies.
Anyone reading can also see where you attribute to me a line you
post.
You aren't going to get that win you want by lying. I suggest
you try being honest. You'll still lose, but at least you'll give me
a bit of a challenge in defeating you.
--
Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons...
for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
forevernitefan
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 22, 2008 7:37 pm Post subject: Re: tjab squirms |
|
|
On Aug 21, 6:03 pm, t...@wam.umd.edu (tjab) wrote:
| Quote: | In article <7vjma4dl6vjot8ihvb5ke58kf3nok1j...@4ax.com>,
Kent Wills <compu...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 19 Aug 2008 01:31:24 -0400, t...@wam.umd.edu (tjab) wrote:
In article <775ka498s4hd1n795all4r5ujs0irpe...@4ax.com>,
Kent Wills <compu...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 17 Aug 2008 21:31:41 -0400, t...@wam.umd.edu (tjab) wrote:
[...]
The Iowa Supreme Court also claims he has a felony conviction. Why
don't you ask them to show you incontrovertable proof?
At one time there were at least three. Care to explain how the
other suddenly vanished,
There are no "vanished" felony convictions.
So where are the others? The ones that caused you and I to
discuss Iowa's three-strikes law?
You raised the issue of the three-strikes law, not I.
Actually, it was Ken Smith who brought it up. I hadn't even
considered it before that.
Since even then it was you and not I who claimed there were others,
you tell me.
You accepted there were others, but have since ignored it since
they vanished.
The convictions that
were listed on the Iowa Courts web site remain on the Iowa Courts
web site.
So there are three, or four, felonies still listed, huh?
Prove there were *ever* three or four felony convictions listed.
You already commented on them.
As you are so fond of saying, if you are not lying, you'll be able
to do so. (Not true, just thought you'd want to be held to your own
standard.)
I can prove it.
You can but you just don't feel like it, eh, Kent?
First graders don't fool anyone with that line and neither do you.
Rule #1: Kent Wills always lies.
You and I discussed the matter. No amount of
your lying will ever alter the truth.
What lie have I told?
|
Ohh, so many lies, so little time......
Moe
Eternal FOREVER KNIGHT fan
" A vampire cop? REALLY?"
http://www.boblarsonfanclub.tk/
| Quote: |
--
Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons...
for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup.
Rule #1: Kent Wills always lies.
You have so abandoned all honesty that you simply can't stop
yourself from lying.
--
"Hail imp," shouted Vlad, the Imp Hailer.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text - |
|
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
forevernitefan
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 22, 2008 7:43 pm Post subject: Re: tjab squirms |
|
|
On Aug 21, 7:09 pm, Kent Wills <compu...@gmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: | On 21 Aug 2008 19:03:59 -0400, t...@wam.umd.edu (tjab) wrote:
[...]
Prove there were *ever* three or four felony convictions listed.
You already commented on them.
As you are so fond of saying, if you are not lying, you'll be able
to do so. (Not true, just thought you'd want to be held to your own
standard.)
I can prove it.
You can but you just don't feel like it, eh, Kent?
Since you already commented on them, there is no cause of me to
offer the proof again.
Do you really need to be proved the liar you are once again?
Really?
|
Hold the phone. HE COMMENTED ON THEM? And now he's denying they
existed?
OooKAY, do you think if I dug up Tjab's post and copied it that
Timmy will do his usual avoidance and not admit he was mistaken? IOW
what he usually does when confronted with the evidence.
| Quote: |
First graders don't fool anyone with that line and neither do you.
Since you are the one who presented the line, your dishonest claim
(read: lie) that I offered it only serves to prove, again, that you're
lying.
|
Tjab lying is to be expected. I have yet to see him be honest about
anything.
| Quote: |
Rule #1: Kent Wills always lies.
Odd that I keep proving you the liar.
|
He blindy follows the leads and lies of a fecal-eating racist and
misogynist. His spasms of mindless stupidity will come up more and
more.
| Quote: |
You and I discussed the matter. No amount of
your lying will ever alter the truth.
What lie have I told?
When you wrote, "You raised the issue of the three-strikes law,
not I."
As you know, it was Ken Smith, who raised the issue. Knowing
this, you chose to LIE and claim it was me.
There are other examples, of course, but this alone cites one of
your most recent lies.
Anyone reading can also see where you attribute to me a line you
post.
You aren't going to get that win you want by lying. I suggest
you try being honest. You'll still lose, but at least you'll give me
a bit of a challenge in defeating you.
|
Tjab honest? When there are snowstorms in hell.
Moe
Eternal FOREVER KNIGHT fan
" A vampire cop? REALLY?"
http://www.boblarsonfanclub.tk/
| Quote: |
--
Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons...
for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup. |
|
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
tjab
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 22, 2008 9:22 pm Post subject: Re: 484 F.3d 1281 |
|
|
In article <64vra4h398l4hte55h68ed6s0rgs3maq3c@4ax.com>,
Kent Wills <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: | On 21 Aug 2008 13:51:21 -0400, tjab@wam.umd.edu (tjab) wrote:
[...]
It does appear that in an earlier case you might have had felony
charges that were reduced to misdemeanors. Could that be what you're
remembering?
No. There were only felonies listed.
On the Iowa Courts web site? Or are you changing the subject? If so,
be specific about which web site you are changing the subject to.
The same site we discussed before.
|
We've discussed many sites. Which one are you writing about?
Your evasiveness is indicative of your dishonest intent.
| Quote: | You can't be as dense as you present.
Oh, and why are you claiming only one felony appears on you record
when there are in fact two?
The site so often mentioned names only one.
Many sites have been often mentioned. Which one are you talking about?
The Iowa Courts web site shows two.
So you claim.
|
And I notice you don't deny it.
| Quote: | Residential burglary is the only one listed in the site that's
been spammed so much.
|
"The site that's been spammed so much?" Is that your idea of specificity?
There are several official Iowa State web sites that show you to be
a convicted felon. For example, the Iowa Department of Corrections
database, the Iowa Courts database, and the Iowa Supreme Court web site.
The Iowa Courts database shows that burglary charges have been lodged
against you on more than one occasion.
There is also a charge of involving a juvenile in your crimes, for
which you have an additional conviction.
| Quote: | I understand in your desperate need to gain just one win against
me, you've abandoned all sense of honesty. Still, your deception will
only serve to fail you.
|
What deception would that be?
Rule #1: Kent Wills always lies. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
|
