On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 19:38:31 -0700 (PDT), Greegor
<Greegor47@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>G > This would not have been half as much fun if Kent
>G > had just acknowledged this Felony record.
>G > Kent's raging denial and the enlisted stooges make it much more
>fun!
>
>tjab > Kent, why *don't* you just acknowledge your
>tjab > felony record? Even Larry says it's no big deal.
>
>Kent has LIED PUBLICLY when he denies his Felony.
Liar.
>He has no legal right against having this
>proven to be a LIE using links to and public records.
Pretending I have such a record, has anyone even IMPLIED
otherwise?
Why, exactly, are you deceptively implying (read: LYING) someone,
namely me, has?
>
>Exposing Kent's dishonesty in this regard is not stalking.
>
Your stalking is stalking.
Lie all your ill mind requires, but the truth will remain the
truth. You are a stalker. You offered the proof of it yourself.
--
"I am erudite [sic] but not Buckelyesque"
Greg Hanson, Jan 22, 2008
>http://www.judicial.state.ia.us/Supreme_Court/Recent_Opinions/20050506/04-0202.asp?search=+Kent+Wills+#_1
|
