LieGuyToo wrote on May 1
st, 2008 at 3:41pm:
Fat-ing Irish wrote:
I can give you reasons why the suit will survive. Can you give me reasons why it will be dismissed?
By the way you need to look up fraudulent you pinhead. I have clear causes of action which your desperation proves you're afraid of.
This could all be done in a few hours; you are the one that wants to stretch this for months. Please give us the reason it will be dismissed? You appear to seem entitled to business and because you hang your shingle out you feel as if you DESERVE business. Now, kicking and screaming
you are trying to force people to have a business relationship with you... All can see throuh your transparent suit
you have distanced yourself from those you desire to be next to...
You are the only one that appears "Desperate"
again, tell everyone about the firing of your wife, the firing of you and the fact your co-instructor at Skyhawk Poly Institute wanted NOT to graduate you...
OK. Let's dance.
My wife was let go because of her connection with this action. I feel
the idea that she believes in what we are doing more than her former
employer is a credit to the term "stand by your man". She took a stand and her boss did not like it. You are just pissed because you do not have anyone in your life that believed in you that much. You need to stop kicking and screaming because you were and are unloved both as a child and as an adult.
Let's move to the next issue. It is funny but I just spoke with Don.
It seems the incompetent issue is now officially laid to rest. My
departure from Dalhousie Polygraph Services was because we had
different directions that we both wished to take. Don said that I run great tests and charts and that he has never said that I was incompetent to anyone.
Therefore, either you are lying or he is lying. I would venture to say
that it is you. I hope that you can prove that he called me
incompetent. Otherwise, we can add libel to the laundry list of
actions against you. Prove Don said that! You cannot because he did not. I was just in his office speaking with him. Are you calling Don Ramsey a liar?
You seem too chicken shit to tell these half truths and lies and not
identify yourself, but I have a very good idea who you are. A wee bit
of investigation will nail that down.
There are lots of instances when co-instructors do not want to graduate
a student. Mostly it is because of personal issues. Someone did not
like me. But I did not like him until now. He was a hard ass to try
to prepare me for an industry that is cut throat. I did not see that
then, but I see it now. I bare no ill will to any instructor at Skyhawk. It was an outstanding school which left no stone unturned regarding
polygraph procedure and technique. Was there an instructor that did
not want to graduate me? I was unaware of one. But if that is what he is telling you, then there are some massive breaches in privacy which will clearly need to be addressed with the school and instructor alike. My attorney will be on that right away. Thank you for making me aware of that.
In any event, I did graduate, completed my internship with good
reviews, and passed my oral and written state exams on the same day. I took my PCSOT training at what is arguably the best private polygraph school in the country. I passed that course as well.
I continued to work for Don for a few years after that. I got burned
out on PE tests and wished to go into a different direction so I did.
In speaking with Don this morning, he does not know who would write
what is clearly a lie to discredit me and denies that he has ever called me or my work incompetent. So unless you can prove otherwise, you should check your facts before putting pen to paper.
Don has also made very clear that he wishes to stay out of this. Who
ever wrote this should stop writing lies just to try to intimidate me.
I plan on respecting Don's wishes. If you had any class, then you
would too.
Now I am going to address the last issue and your accusations of
"entitlement" and "deserving".
I will present to every one Exhibits A, B, and D. Now follow along with me Baby Huey. I can understand how you have some difficulty in grasping complicated issues and engaging in basic problem solving skills.
Documents attached First, I will point out at the top of the approved polygraph examiners
list, which is public record. These are the instructions to the
probationer.
Quote
"Your conditions to supervision require you to complete CLINICAL POLYGRAPH EXAMS." Now here comes the hard part Baby Huey so pay attention.
"Select the provider of YOUR CHOICE from the list below."Wow.
"Your choice" hummmm..... I am just trying to see if there is any other way to interpret this. Well you are so smart. Why don't you tell me how you interpret that? I am sure the world would love to here your cognitive thought distortions on this.
Let's move on.
"You are expected to attend appointments as scheduled and complete testing in a timely manner. You are responsible for full payment of fees." OK. Now let's pick this apart.
"Select the provider of YOUR CHOICE from the list below." Maybe this is just written in a special form of English, but I don't
think it said "Select a provider or your therapist's choice". Ah Ha.
I know. It is written in invisible ink that only some polygraph
examiners and therapists can see, but no one else can. Maybe all one needs is a special decoder ring that you can only get if you send in 50 box tops of Froot Loops and learn a secret hand shake.
Now let's move on to Exhibit B.
When I found out that the above directions were being usurped (you can find the meaning of the word usurped in what is called a
"dictionary".) My attorney emailed Mr. David Kilpatrick with Tarrant County CSCD. For those of you who don't know who Mr. Kilpatrick is, he is the number two guy in the department. As one can clearly see, the issue is addressed clearly.
Mr. Kilpatrick's response was clear and definitive.
"Please give me the name of the probationer involved. We've just dealt with one of the providers on this issue and I need to know if it's the same one, same issue, or a new one". Holy bat crap Batman! This needed to be addressed once before? Well, I am very sure that whichever providers and the documentation of the incident will be clarified during discovery.
Let's continue with this exhibit. It continues
"Yes the P (clearly referring to probationer) gets to choose, and both the treatment provider nor the officer can insist on one over the other." This is pretty clear language too. Are you reading something different into this? If so, please share your thoughts with us. I am very sure that we would love to hear excuses as well.
Now I will draw your attention to Exhibit D.
In this email transmission, my attorney made a simple request.
"Is there any way Tarrant County can send a letter to the sex offender therapists to reiterate to them that the polygraph examiner is the choice of the probationer and no one else?" I think this is a very clear request. Is there any one in the forum
that finds one of those requests unclear?
Mr. Kilpatrick's response was once again clear and immediate. A
response was received seven minutes from the request being sent.
"Great. Yeah, we can do that. We just sent one such letter to one provider. It's a warning letter stating that continuing to do this will lead to the suspension of referrals to them." Wow, apparently some are
"entitled" to receive a timely response from Tarrant County CSCD but I am not. You are right. Here I am with this sense of "entitlement" to have a governmental agency enforce their rules that are set up for everyone to be on a level playing field. I am
"entitled" to ask them to send a letter that they had to send out once before because someone else was being trampled. You are right. I should not be "entitled" to equal treatment. After all, I am but a humble business man who wants the level playing field that he was told he would get. Oh wait, there's more!
"The strange symbiotic relationship between sex offender providers and polygraphists hasn't been addressed to clarify this doctrine with them, but it is way over due." OK. Let's dissect this shall we?
"Strange symbiotic relationship between sex offender providers and polygrahers" This would imply that Mr. Kilpatrick has knowledge that this behavior
has been going on for sometime. I bet that I am the first examiner
that has called Tarrant County CSCD to the plate on this and stood his
ground. I dare say that is the reason that everyone is so angry with
me about filing this lawsuit. After all, that is what the Chairman of the
Executive Committee of TAPE said when he ambushed me at the TAPE
convention by saying
"Joe you're the one who started all of this." That was the wrong forum and the wrong venue. He was strongly admonished after the fact.
I informed him that I merely took steps to resolve the issue and did
not start this. I then told him what a peice of crap he is and how that was a chicken S thing to do. This was not even my idea at first. Do I have proof of that? Well, let's move on with this exhibit.
At the end of the email Mr. Kilpatrick clearly informs me
"This will ultimately have to be resolved by the department and/or the courts". Whose idea was this? Our survey says................. Mr. David
Kilpatrick of Tarrant County CSCD. Ding, ding, ding, ding, and ding.
And tell us what we have for Mr. Kilpatrick today Bob. "Joe, what we
have is the correct finger of blame! This finger of blame has been all
elusive until now. But, because now one seems to want to read the court documents, we at the game show "What is the Truth" feel that this is an appropriate prize for his valiant efforts to keep Tarrant County CSCD free of corruption. There may be more prizes coming down the pike. These are not the only emails that prove this case. So tell the audience to stay tuned."
Want to blame all this on someone Baby Huey? Call David Kilpatrick. I did not even have it in my mind to file an action until I saw that
email. Even then I did my best to clear all this up with Tarrant
County CSCD. I have the emails to prove that as well. What proof, other than the discovery I feel you are trying to hide, do you have that you were not engaging in these special relationships that were unauthorized and subject to disciplinary action? I am looking forward to seeing it.
For everyone else who hates my guts for expecting nothing more than
what I was told I would get, which was A FAIR SHAKE, I think you need to put yourself in my shoes for a minute because someday this could be you.
I was entitled to get what I was told existed, which was a fair, open,
and free market place. I deserved to have issues addressed and fixed
the same way others in the past have. You are the ones that seem to
have a problem being treated like everyone else. Clearly, there are
some ethics and morals which you have not ....... adopted...... over the
years. So go back to mommy and daddy and kick, scream and cry. Go put on your; what did you call it? Oh yea MANPON! And get over yourself!
If you are trying to get me to drop the suit, threats and intimidation
do not work. It is also my understanding that for your counterclaims
to be awarded, you have the burden of proof in proving that I filed this
in bad faith. Given that the suggestion was made by Tarrant County CSCD, I doubt you can do that.
There is just one more thing. You are on notice not to make direct
contact with me again. If you have something to say to me, then send it through my lawyer and I will get back to you.
Lieguy. This is an email address that I have heard of before but I
just can not put my finger on it.
Lieguytoo. Could this imply that you are lieguy's son? Only time will
tell.
I will be around for at least a year. The rent here is paid. The only
thing I have to worry about now is overhead, which I figured I can
cover at about $50.00 to $75.00 a FAIR TEST. Maybe I will win and maybe I will not. One thing is for sure. I am around for at least a year competing with you. I may just give them away for free for a small time to see if that generates getting some people in the door. No one can turn away that price. This has only begun.
My attorney will be contacting Mr. Webster to inform you that Judges do not like intimidation tactics. I am pretty sure there is a rule about
that kind of thing. Maybe we will drag everyone in to the next date do
he can explain it to everyone.
You do really show yourself to be a coward though. I hide behind no
one. You hide behind an alias and not an original one.
F3 baby, the reason that he is trying so hard to discredit me is fear. I must have hit a nerve in my last few posts or in documents filed with the court last week.
Thank you Baby Huey for letting me know I'm hitting that nerve.
Don't worry someday some one will love you, other than you loving yourself. Or maybe you love yourself too much? Better be careful I hear you can go blind like that.