This got us thinking, what are some other historical publicity stunts that backfired? Here are five of some of the biggest:
Aqua Teen terrorist attack.
O.J. Simpson,
In 2006, HarperCollins's thought it would be a good idea to publish a book written by O.J. entitled "If I Did It." Following the public's outrage, a big wig at the publishing company was fired and the project was scrapped.
A train wreck, literally.
In 1896, railroad companies decided to stage a controlled crash in Texas for publicity. With thousands of spectators watching, the trains collided head on as planned, but then unexpectedly exploded, killing three people and injuring countless others, including the event's photographer, who lost one of his eyes.
No Fly Zone.
In 2009, the Department of Defense flew Air Force One low over Manhattan to take some photos. The flight terrified many New Yorkers, causing "mayhem" as people who thought we were under attack again scrambled to evacuate. A White House aide resigned, authorities apologized and cancelled a similar photoshoot planned in D.C.
Please stop. Sincerely, Mr. President.
Harry Reichenbach was a big time press agent at the turn of the 20th century who promoted films like Return of Tarzan. He staged several outlandish publicity stunts, including a fake suicide, and a kidnapping to Mexico. His antics finally resulted in President Woodrow Wilson writing him a letter pleading with him to please stop his nonsense.
Where will Kate's blunder rank in history? Will Obama write to her asking her to please stop? Heh, never say never! What other publicity blunders would you add to this list?
1055 sediments (sic) from readers:
«Oldest ‹Older 401 – 600 of 1055 Newer› Newest»She screamed bloody murder because her stick got broken. She didn't have a stick like her siblings anymore and probably thought Daddy was mean. But nobody got hurt by her waving it at people anymore. A meaner parent might have swatted her on the back of her legs with that same stick.
{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{
To be fair, the child also reared back and cringed reflexively when he broke the stick.
Also, if we're assuming TLC edited out the footage of Kate hitting the kids, wouldn't they have edited out the footage of Jon hitting the kids, too?
I'm on the fence about whether he participated in the abuse. I'm pretty sure he didn't ACTIVELY participate but he did stand by and watch it.
I think I read somewhere that "low sales" is defined by fewer than 100 copies per WEEK.
Also, B&N's sales are usually considerably lower than Amazons. I think someone on this blog mentioned that awhile back, too.
That said, Pioneer Woman's Amazon plus B&M totals are probably really impressive. Plus any sales directly from the publisher. She may have to go for a second printing before long.
Good for her. She's not my style, but I still like her. She's unassuming and seems genuine enough to me.
WKRP in Cincinnati TV show, the turkey drop from the helicopter was so very very funny. And how it was done was amazing, we were watching TV characters on screen who were listening to a radio broadcast and reacting. The scene was in our heads, so very funny. Les Nessman, remember how they didn't have money for a cubicle for him so there was making tape on the floor outlining what would be his office cube. Anyone coming to talk to him had to come in via the door marked on the floor.
That show had lots of classic characters.
Sarah said... 117
Admin, found this definition online, can you clarify or expand on the use of Jane and John Doe in a lawsuit?
****
Sarah, I found that to be a fairly good, clear explanation of what a Doe defendant is. I'm not sure what point you might like clarified. I posted this example earlier, and I'll share it again.
1. I get hit by another driver running a red light. I am injured, and if I can't work out an acceptable settlement at the claim stage, I file a lawsuit (just like Kate did). I name the driver of the other car as the defendant, plus Does 1 through 10.
2. After the driver has appeared in the case (answered the complaint), discovery takes place. That means each side can take depositions, ask interrogatories (questions in writing), seek documents related to the case, from the other party.
3. I learn during discovery that the driver of the car was not the owner. I learn the owner's name. At this point, I might want to add the owner as a named defendant. Good thing I named Doe defendants! I file an amendment to the complaint, substituting the true name of the car's owner for Doe 1.
4. That's what a Doe defendant(s) is for. If during Kate's case, her attorney takes a deposition, or serves a request for production of documents on Jon or Robert, and from their response learns the name of another person that the attorney believes is allegedly responsible for the hacking, or other allegations in the complaint - then Kate's attorney will file an amendment to the complaint naming that person in place of one of the Doe defendants.
I notice that some people are wondering if this person or that person might be a Doe defendant. All I can say is that attorneys would prefer to name all possible defendants in the complaint. It's more efficient than filing an amendment later. So it would seem to me that Kate's attorneys do not already know the name of any other defendants for sure, or else they would have named them. Does that make sense?
As to the separate issue of the RWA owner voluntarily giving up the IP addresses of her posters - I still feel she did a disservice to her blog posters. If I were one of them, I'd feel a sense of betrayal. She can claim she got served a subpoena, but it was clearly a phony. It could not have possibly been real, since Kate's case was filed only this month. So let's put for rest once and for all that she got served an actual subpoena. She got afraid and caved. That's all. I'm very thankful I never even visited her blog, much less posted there.
Should any of those posters who are now being outed on BV's site start getting harassing phone calls, correspondence, or otherwise bothered in their daily lives, I hope they will consider hiring an attorney to write a "cease and desist" letter to the website owner. I'd love to see the tables turned on BV's owner and him be forced to respond to a civil action for damages.
Nillicent - #200
Jon no doubt remembers what it is to have a good relationship with his father. While Dr. Gosselin was a money tree for him while Jon "found himself" across Europe, I believe the bond went far deeper than what Daddy would provide monetarily. I think Jon wants the richness of sharing his life with these children, deal with them as individual gifts to his world, and to do his best to nurture them with genuine love.
Mistakes? Sure. Bad judgment? Sure. That's going to happen to the best parent. But the bottom line is he loves them and they love him with everything their hearts can hold. Just like Jon and his father.
She can claim she got served a subpoena, but it was clearly a phony. It could not have possibly been real, since Kate's case was filed only this month.
-------------------------------------
I thought that subpoena was for the class action lawsuit, not for Kate's lawsuit against Jon and Robert. Back then there were claims from BV that a class action was in the works and those who posted there were the targets, and thus, IPs were released and the outing began.
Mistakes? Sure. Bad judgment? Sure. That's going to happen to the best parent. But the bottom line is he loves them and they love him with everything their hearts can hold. Just like Jon and his father.
==============================================
Let's be honest here. Jon signed the very same contract Kate did to sell out their children and their lives.
We also have no evidence Jon had a wonderful relationship with his father. We can think so but to state otherwise is simply not true.
Let's stick to facts.
IMO said... 7
''Let's stick to facts.''
~~~~~
OK. Here is a fact.
''On October 13, 2010, I went to court to act in the best interest of
my children- to remove them from television. The judge respectfully
denied my plea, and granted filming rights to their mother. I honor
the judge’s decision, but I do not support it. I will not stop
fighting to remove my children from television. It is not a child’s
job to support themselves, or a lifestyle, they need to be kids. I
would like to apologize to my friends, family, and especially my
children for not taking a stand earlier in my life and not questioning
my decisions to have our lives documented and displayed. I will have
to answer to my children for the rest of my life. I will have to live
with this guilt the rest of my life. I am truly sorry!''
@HaTeRsStAnK: This comment brought to you by the letter J . Names that begin with J Jon Jen Julie Jodi & Jazz @Kateplusmy8 @BullyVille J J J J J J J J
Some Does according to sheeple
If Jon knew Kate abused the kids, I wonder why he wouldn't have said something during the divorce? His chance at getting custody would have been good. Also, if he witnessed abuse and didn't report it, wouldn't that make him just as guilty? If I knew my spouse was abusing my children, I would take my children and leave, then turn him in. Sorry, for some reason I'm unable to sign in.
Curious
That's a statement, not a fact.
Again, Jon participated for 3 years in that sham of a show. He stood by and watched his wife carry around a 'spanker', lied and bilked churchgoers out of their hard earned money (just like his wife did), and went back and forth on the issue of whether filming was exploitive or not.
You choose to believe him. That's great! He certainly needs supporters at this time in his life. Heck, I even feel badly for him. But the bottem line is he put himself in this situation.
Re: Jon's relationship with his father. I have never heard that it was contentious. Therefore, I am going to declare they had a good, loving relationship until there is reliable evidence to the contrary.
I thought that subpoena was for the class action lawsuit, not for Kate's lawsuit against Jon and Robert. Back then there were claims from BV that a class action was in the works and those who posted there were the targets, and thus, IPs were released and the outing began.
*****
There is no class action lawsuit. Therefore, there can be no subpoena issued in the class action lawsuit. There was rumor about such a lawsuit, but none has ever been filed. The only lawsuit to date is the one filed by Kate in Federal Court, that names only two defendants (Jon and Hoffman). Without a lawsuit being already on file, an ATTORNEY cannot issue a subpoena.
Any discovery an attorney might want to conduct prior to filing a lawsuit would have to be restricted to public records, or maybe having an investigator go out to an accident scene or talk to witnesses. But an attorney does not have subpoena power until a lawsuit has been filed, the defendants have been properly served and given time to file an answer, etc. And at that point, either side may serve subpoenas for records, but they must give the other side proper notice of such subpoenas.
You choose to believe him. That's great! He certainly needs supporters at this time in his life. Heck, I even feel badly for him. But the bottem line is he put himself in this situation.
August 30, 2013 at 11:47 PM
*******
I don't think anyone is disagreeing with you on the basic facts that Jon and Kate both willingly signed a contract with TLC to produce a reality show about them and their children. Nor do I disagree that he was actively involved in the filming of that show. I agree that he must have seen much (but probably not all) of Kate's treatment of the children.
But you cannot say that he sat idly by and did nothing when he saw that behavior. You cannot say he did the same behaviors either. There is no video proof of that contention.
On the show, I saw a father who was loved by his children. They ran to him for hugs and kisses, which he gave them. He bathed them, he helped them brush their teeth, he tucked them in bed. He built them bunk beds. He helped remodel a room for the older girls, so they could have a special private room of their own. He enjoyed playing with them. All this was clearly shown.
But it's pointless to point this out (for the nth time), because I accept that there a few posters here who want to blame Jon as an equally bad person as Kate. It will never matter to those people that there are vast differences between Kate's behavior and Jon's. They are determined that Jon is just as bad as Kate, and nothing will ever change their minds.
They refuse to take into account that at the time Jon and Kate signed with TLC, the invasive and terrible nature of reality tv shows and TLC/Disney were virtually unknown to the general public.
They refuse to acknowledge that Kate was an abusive spouse who controlled her husband's every move, down to checking his credit card statement to see if he dared eat lunch out when she strictly forbade him not to. A wife who slapped her husband on camera, made fun of his weight, and otherwise emasculated him at every chance. A husband who was quite young and rather naive when he married his wife, and soon found it easier to accede to her wishes than deal with a constant barrage of anger, pleas, and other demands of a determined woman.
They refuse to acknowledge that Jon did act as a buffer between Kate and the children whenever he could, but that he worked outside the home for long hours and could not be present 24/7.
They refuse to acknowledge that many of Jon's "sordid exploits" during the divorce were made up by TLC/Disney's media empire, in order to discredit him and give Kate the upper hand in gaining primary custody, so that the show could continue despite his objections.
For them, Jon symbolizes a man who did wrong by his kids. There is nothing he can do to change their perception of him, and there will be no forgiveness from their corner. I don't know the root cause, only that there is definitely something very personal about their absolute refusal to see Jon as anything but equally as bad as Kate.
He EVENTUALLY decided to stop filming but he never said it was because Kate abused his kids. And he was THERE.''..''I just can't give Jon the pass that others seem to.''
***********************************************
If you reverse the male abuser/female victim to tfw/jon...
EVENTUALLY etc., because he had to get out himself first
"Many victims dated or knew their abuser for less than six months before they were engaged or living together. Abusers can come on like a whirl-wind claiming "love at first sight", and using flattery such as "you are the only person I could ever talk to", "I have never felt loved like this by anyone". They may need someone desperately, and will pressure the other partner to commit to a relationship before they are truely ready.
Often at the beginning, a batterer will say that this behavior is because they are concerned for your safety, a need for you to use time well or to make good decisions. Abusers will be angry if you are "late" coming back from the store or an appointment; you will be questioned closely about where you went, who you talked to. At this behavior gets worse, the abuser may not let you make personal decisions about the house, your clothing, or going to church. They may keep all the money; or may make you ask permission to leave the house or room.
Abusive people will expect their partner to meet all their needs: the perfect partner, lover, and friend. They say things like "if you love me, I'm all you need and you are all I need". They may expect you to take care of everything for them; emotionally, physically, and sometimes economically. However, this is not natural or healthy in a relationship. Instead, partners in healthy relationships encourage each other to pursue their dreams, to have friends and interests outside of the relationship and take pride in their partner in these things.
The abusive person tries to cut the partner off from all resources. The abuser will accuse people who are supportive of causing trouble, and may restrict use of the phone. They will gradually isolate you from all of your friends. Some abusers will try to get you into legal trouble so that you are afraid to drive or go out.
Abusers tend to hold very high and rigid rules about how they get act because they are "the man" - often leading them to feel the need to dominate and control and to expect their word and their needs to be catered to at all times. The abuser sees you as unintelligent, inferior, responsible for menial tasks, and less than whole without the relationship. They will often tell you that no one else would want you or that you are nothing without them. They will remind you of their "provider role" - everything they have done for you.
Commonly, batterers use the actions of others as excuses for their own behavior. They blame the person who made them angry, as if that person were pushing some magic button that released violent behavior. How often have victims heard "why did you make me do that"? If your partner is chronically unemployed, someone is always doing them wrong or is out to get them. They may make mistakes and then blame you for upsetting them so that they can't concentrate on their work. They may tell you that YOU are at fault for almost anything that goes wrong. Abusive people will might say, "you made me mad" and "I can't help being angry". Although they actually make the decision about how they think or feel, they will use feelings to manipulate you. Abusers see themselves as the "victim" in the relationship, and do not take responsibility for their own feelings or behaviors.
Abusers are easily insulted, and may take the slightest setback as a personal attack. They will rant and rave about the injustice of things that are really just a part of living, such as having to get up for work, getting a traffic ticket, or being asked to help with chores.
http://goodmenproject.com/uncategorized/men-victims-abuse/
http://www.heart-2-heart.ca/men/signs-abused-man.php
Regarding Jon's relationship with his father, during the episode where they go to Utah he makes reference to what a great relationship they had. I can't remember the exact wording he used. Also I can't remember which episode when he talks about his dad he becomes misty eyed.
I would like to hear what Jen Stokes has to say about what she witnessed. I remember she called Kate out when Kate threw a dirty diaper at her. I wonder if she called Kate out on any abuse.
I remember reading in Robert's book an email Kate had sent or maybe Jen about the difficulties they had working together. Again this is only my opinion.
Again, Jon participated for 3 years in that sham of a show. He stood by and watched his wife carry around a 'spanker', lied and bilked churchgoers out of their hard earned money (just like his wife did), and went back and forth on the issue of whether filming was exploitive or not.
You choose to believe him. That's great! He certainly needs supporters at this time in his life. Heck, I even feel badly for him. But the bottem line is he put himself in this situation.
**********************************************
From a Male Victim of Spousal abuse blog
"I felt that by being an active parent I could moderate or deflect any abuse that might be inflicted on the children. Today, they are adults. But I know that the courts don't give a man a fair shake when it comes to custody. A man can't be just a good father in order to gain custody of his children, he has to prove the mother to be incompetent.
This only makes an adversarial situation more adversarial and we know that the single biggest predictor of emotional and behavioral problems in children is open hostile conflict between parents.
I was unwilling to "go to bat" for my children as it would mean subjecting them to more negative behavior. By staying in an abusive relationship, I was able to assure myself that I would have access to my children and that they could see that there was a different way to have a relationship with a parent."
http://www.heart-2-heart.ca/men/inside-female-abusive-mind.php
Couldn't sleep peeps, read them if you'd like or scroll on by :)
September 9 issue of Purple came in mail yesterday. On the letters page are four re TFMJG cover story. One via email from Darla C, would love to see another show to see how kids grow up. Lauren K. Misses show, sorry about divorce. Natalie G. Happy to get update on kids but ”I wish just once she could do an interview without belittling the father of her children.” Barbara P asks ” why would People waste a covet on a washed out reality ” star”?”
I was wondering if they would print any negative comments. Yes Pepe did print the negative comments, and if the sales were as poor as we think for that issue, and the overwhelmingly negative comments online were an indicator of public opinion, then maybe this is the last People cover for TFMJG. Kate Coyne can advocate for her all she wants (WHY?) . Ultimately money talks, and if TFMJG does not sell issues, she will not be back on the cover. Hopefully.
It is a FACT that Jon made that statement of apology.
Millicent said... 16
''.......
But you cannot say that he sat idly by and did nothing when he saw that behavior. You cannot say he did the same behaviors either. There is no video proof of that contention.''....''For them, Jon symbolizes a man who did wrong by his kids. There is nothing he can do to change their perception of him, and there will be no forgiveness from their corner. I don't know the root cause, only that there is definitely something very personal about their absolute refusal to see Jon as anything but equally as bad as Kate.''
~~~~~~~~~~~
Thank you! I wanted to c/p every word of your comment, but forced myself to only quote some....though I agree with every word!
You know I keep reading about a $5,000 damage to her computer. It didn't specific which computer since they had numberous computers in that house. So i will think its the one in her room. i just keep thinking how in the world did he have
Access to her room when he was already banned from the house & her door was padlocked. Perhaps she did the damages herself? I wouldn't put it past her to something like that. God know how many times she has tried to pull the wool over our eyes.
LB
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lCPDa0gd3Bw
Just a little reminder of what his life was like with her.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vh_FPeiwHM
I see there were a few visitors from the pen last night. I'll make my point about Jon:
My proof that Jon was doing everything he could to protect his children? This was shown in how far TLC and Kate went in their efforts to destroy him financially and emotionally. One does have to expend that time of over the top effort to destroy someone if truth and what is right is on your side.
OT: what is everyone doing for Labor Day weekend? I hope you will be able to take some time to just do something fun! we are packing up to head to the Outer Banks a little later.
If anyone ever wants to go there, you do not have to rent an expensive house right on the ocean front. You can camp in the National Park for as little as twenty dollars. You can stay at a budget motel or rent a house away from the beach for lower cost, then drive to one of the many public access parking lots up and down Bodie Island from Southern Shores to Kitty Hawk to Kill Devil Hills to Nags Head.
It is free to visit most of the National Park visitor centers and wildlife preserves. You can do the beach on a budget, and have lots of things to do, and have fun!
I hope everyone has a chance to have some fun and relaxation this weekend. What are your plans?
I don't know the root cause, only that there is definitely something very personal about their absolute refusal to see Jon as anything but equally as bad as Kate.
*************************************
I agree.
Another thing that I believe is important when discussing TFW's abuse of their children is what she wrote about in her journal. Most of the really violent abuse happened when Jon was working outside the home. Many many times in the journal she talked about calling Jon at work, while sobbing so that he couldn't understand her, demanding that he come home. It seems clear to me that Jon left his job in order to be home in order to be a buffer between his children and TFMJG.
Thank you for the link to Signs of Abused Man. Jon was also abused by TFW, I have no doubt about that.
One can only imagine how much worse it would have been for the Gosselin children had their father not been there during filming. We saw how over the top and nasty Kate was during Kate + 8, which, in my opinion, is the reason TLC canned this show so quickly. Why do you think TLC insists that Jon be a part of any "reunion" show? Just curious...
Sleepless In Seattle said... 8
She can claim she got served a subpoena, but it was clearly a phony. It could not have possibly been real, since Kate's case was filed only this month.
-------------------------------------
I thought that subpoena was for the class action lawsuit, not for Kate's lawsuit against Jon and Robert. Back then there were claims from BV that a class action was in the works and those who posted there were the targets, and thus, IPs were released and the outing began.
*************
Such a mystery...here is part of her statement:
I also want everyone to be aware that BullyVille was not bluffing after all. I was served with a subpoena today. They are gathering information for the lawsuit that Kate has against Jon and Robert.
Joy we're in the middle of a bad heat wave right now, although only our second one of the summer. So the main plan this long weekend is to stay cool!
Remona Blue said... 181
localyocul said... 166
''Remona Blue, all due respect but Jon did nothing either. Yet you defend him. He EVENTUALLY decided to stop filming but he never said it was because Kate abused his kids. And he was THERE.''..''I just can't give Jon the pass that others seem to.''
~~~~~~~~~~
Localyocul, you are assuming that Jon did nothing. We don't know for a fact that Jon did not report TFMJG's abuse of his children. You choose to believe that Jon did nothing, and I choose to believe that Jon would do all in his power to get his children away from her abuse.
Neither of us should forget that during the time that TFW was writing in her journal the details of what we found horrific abuse of her toddlers, they had film crews ''THERE'' just as Jon was. None of us have any idea how many people, how many times tried to do something about the abuse.
IF it seems to you that I'm giving Jon a pass, it would be because I base my opinion on the stark difference in the behavior of Jon and TFW that I saw with my own eyes as I watched that show.
******
Just for clarification, that was Shelby that said that. I did agree about not giving him a pass though. :)
I just don't know. That's all. Right now it's he said she said. I give him the most benefit of the doubt because TFW has been obviously emotionally abusive to both him and the kids and she IS a shrew and a liar IMO. But I don't want to say 100% that Jon is completely innocent. And I do think if he DID take the hard drive and have R lie about it, that was wrong.
Millicent @15,
do you have any idea why the lawsuit is contradictory:
Item #4 of the lawsuit states that the John/Jane Does are individuals whose names and addresses are unknown.
Item #8 of the lawsuit states that ALL of the parties reside in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.
When they refer to all the parties, I believe they mean all the named parties. Not the does. If they don't even know who they are, how can they know where they live?
As Millicent explained, the Doe a Deers appear to just be a standard placeholder. To stop the statute of limitations from running anymore just in case you decide to add anyone else to the suit. They may not add anyone at all in the end, who knows. But if they do, they want those placeholders to stick them on.
I think her great example was you get hit by a car and sue the driver, but you want to have a couple does reserved in case you find out later the driver of the car wasn't the owner so you need to sue the owner too. Or, to take the example further, say you found out someone maliciously gave the driver a sleeping pill before they got behind the wheel to make them impaired. You'd want to sue them too. Does make perfect sense to me now.
Leelee said....
Yet, we are all individuals and need to set our own boundaries and parameters that keep us feeling safe and honors our own values.
------------
Yes --Part of my recovery is being able to take ownership of my life story. It is mine to tell, and, only mine. One of the effects of abuse is a lack of healthy boundaries. For myself, choosing who and when I tell my story is a healthy boundary.
And, as I said, I worked with teenagers from abusive families. I am very grateful that my career path brought me the information I needed when I had my own children. I made plenty of mistakes, but my kids were raised with respect for what is appropriate.
And I can tell you that my kids never ran up to adults, even when invited into our home, and wrap themselves around their legs. I find it very disturbing that, in the People magazine article, and others, that the kids are always described as happy and outgoing to strangers.
Ex nurse@ 38
I wonder that too but I thought perhaps Kate threatened them or disciplined them when they didn't run and say hi or hug a leg.
I read Robert's book and the discipline that is in it is shocking however, whatever he left out would make me retch I am sure. I think back to when they were showing the kids the new house and she made it a point to say to the kids to never come in her room, if they did there would be severe discipline. After what Robert did put in the book I hate to imagine or think what these poor children go through. Kate will never realize how lucky she is to have eight healthy children. They were not born to be her little robots.
I have a child that suffers from postpartum depression. Mental illness is very hard not only for the person dealing with it but for there loved ones. My child had a beautiful baby in January and until about a month ago would not do anything with the baby. However, she sought help when the baby was 2 weeks old and it has been a long process of changing medication and counseling. I see such a difference in her and I am so proud of her. Kate really ticked me off when she made her comment on Twitter about willing herself not to get postpartum a few months back. My point in all of this is Kate needs help for her illness. She will not recognize on her own that she is sick. She has chosen to push aside all people close to her. I think it might be because they did try to help her or tell her she needed help. She is so spiteful and whoever compared her to Betty Broderick was spot on. If Jon passes away before her she will still be badmouthing him and say something on the lines of "he could not even stop breathing right".
From the CFAA expert-
The two-year statute of limitations on CFAA starts accruing when you suspect someone has hacked your computer. It's been four years. How was this even filed?
http://shawnetuma.com/2013/01/04/two-year-statute-of-limitations-of-computer-fraud-and-abuse-act-accrued-when-plaintiff-suspected-wrongdoing/
It is quite possible that Jon was unaware of the extent and severity of the abuse that the children suffered. In my own case, my father accepted that my mother was the disciplinarian but he really did not know to what extent. He was not there as he was usually at work and we were never battered while he was present. We were also very fearful of revealing to anyone, including our father, just how we were abused as we would have gotten more of the same and worse. In fact my father never laid a finger on us ever. Not ever. In fact I remember one occasion when my mother started to go into a rage over something I had done and he stopped her with one word. He said her name. She stopped but I knew she was furious and I would pay later.
I agree somewhat with Ex Nurse in that I have kept my own story very private and I have worked through it on my own. Everyone chooses their own method of healing and for some it is a total reveal and for others it is a slower more internal healing. No one else should say which method is better. It is what works for each individual.
I admire all the posters here who keep the discussions civil and respectful even though some may disagree with others. It is in part why I continue to read here. Not to mention all the recipes.
According to ziggys blog this is not a slapp suit because Kate's pa lawyer is a ricco lawyer. I don't even understand what's going on any more. I just hope that John and Robert can defend themselves. She doesn't seem to care how much she spends to ruin John. Something someday has to come back on her. Money can't buy everything, or can it? How can bullyville get away with everything their doing? Don't they have to Answer to anyone?
Let the chips fall where they may. I'm done with this whole thing.
I'm confused too anonymous. The way the suit reads versus everything else there simply doesn't compute. My best guess is this was put together to intimidate Jon without regard for whether it would actually hold up if held to task, but I'm not going to be betting any money on that theory. The problem is applying a certain set of thought processes to people who don't think on that spectrum whatsoever is difficult. What we do seem to agree on is the kids will suffer for all this turmoil.
Anonymous said... 42
''According to ziggys blog this is not a slapp suit because Kate's pa lawyer is a ricco lawyer.''
~~~~~~~~~
For crying out loud. I think I've heard everything now! How on God's green earth would RICCO apply here? For what it's worth, here is what RICCO is:
''Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, commonly referred to as the RICO Act or simply RICO, is a United States federal law that provides for extended criminal penalties and a civil cause of action for acts performed as part of an ongoing criminal organization. The RICO Act focuses specifically on racketeering, and it allows the leaders of a syndicate to be tried for the crimes which they ordered others to do or assisted them, closing a perceived loophole that allowed someone who told a man to, for example, murder, to be exempt from the trial because he did not actually commit the crime personally.''
Shaking my head at the utter stupidity of all this!
Maybe the mob was involved?
The hyperbole is over the top. It was a bleepin' hard drive. It was a book that was on the market for 48 hours that said next to nothing we haven't heard or seen before. The media is laughing at this. Time to call a truce.
Where's the ongoing criminal investigation? What criminal investigation? RICCO is for criminals, not civil defendants. It's how they put mobsters in prison.
Again with the not understanding the difference between civil and criminal.
Mommy, where did our college funds go?
They went to make sure your sperm donor spends the rest of his life in a cardboard box and is hated by the general public. After that, Mommy is going to go get a manicure. Isn't Mommy fun?
''According to ziggys blog this is not a slapp suit because Kate's pa lawyer is a ricco lawyer.
Just "researching" Kate's lawyer online and via his "tweets", it looks as if most of his work is in zoning cases. I wonder how Kate came across this firm? It is basically a 2-lawyer firm.
There have been attempts to use RICO in civil matters (NOW v Pro-life groups) but that was shot down by the Supreme Court.
This has truly reached the theater of the absurd.
For crying out loud. I think I've heard everything now! How on God's green earth would RICCO apply here? For what it's worth, here is what RICCO is:
------------------------------------
Federal racketeering? I know a little bit about RICO and nothing in the complaint falls under racketeering. Good gawd.
Where in the world did that person come up with that? Is that the person who has a problem with plural nouns? Can she/he even read a complaint?
Just when I think they can't get any more stupid...
Thank you Millicent for the explanation, and had I looked back a bit, I would have seen your brief description! The comments are coming in droves! Your description makes defendant Doe easy to understand. And in my opinion it is one more feature of this entire out of focus legal action. Add to that TFW's written motivation for the suit and I have to ask, "What is this really about?"
I wish TFW would sit down with her preacher, therapist (is she has one) and any close friends she may have and ask that same question.
I think winning this suit will come at a great cost to all involved, especially the children. Besides creating further divides between herself and extended family, I imagine as the children grow older there will be a split, as well as a lot of emotional baggage. I think this is so damaging for all.
I wonder have they tried mediation, some compromise, but then how do you compromise with the author of a "tell all."
Maybe it would have been better had she ignored his book, left twitter and reinvented herself. Lay low for awhile, seek counseling, work on anger issues and forgiveness. Learn and develop a new skill, get involved in her community on some level. I don't know.
I just think right now it is tragic for those children. I am sure some of the children are resilient but to what extent, still I imagine all will be affected by this, emotionally and mentally. Family divides without public attention are draining, add court and the public eye to it and I worry for those children.
In today's environment with so much divorce, we have all experienced or witnessed the secrecy that is forced on children caught in the middle.
Sometimes the secrecy is to protect the parents' feelings, often if not always, the task of staying quiet comes with guilt. It is an unfair pressure to place upon a child. And children caught in the crossfire often will not complain. They shoulder the responsibility of trying to make peace, or at least not add to any of the fighting and they do it in silence. Fortunately for most families, there is a beginning and an end to the warring. In this case it has been going on for at least 4 years, (nearly half the tups lives) and is now becoming much more toxic.
Is this really about and for the children? Or is it about anger, hurt, fear, failed dreams of three adults? No matter what the $$$ award of this suit, I wish they could give an accurate accounting of the emotional costs to each one of those eight children over the next 60 to 80 years of their lives.
Edited to add: The pro-life group was previously arrested for blocking the entrance to an abortion clinic. That's where the criminal charges fell into play and that's where the RICO charge was conjured up then won by the accused.
Oh my gosh, I just realized that the Anons and Sheeple have been accusing the Twitter haters of being organized. The haters took it as a joke. They were being serious. Unbelievable.
Millicent...I always find your posts informative. Thank you.
To all the posters who had the courage to share their childhood abuse, my heart goes out to you. Even though you shared the story, I can't begin to imagine the hell you went through. I hope you all have found peace. Hopefully, the G8 will make it through.
Hope everyone has a wonderful Labor Day weekend.
JMHO, but I think Kate's lawyer is taking this on just for the money - the Gosselin children's money. Also it appears Razmatazz was in Philly on 7/11. Rushdie posted an instagram picture...
This from Rushdie's blog:
...Truth be told? Money is still tight. I’m worried that every client who calls will be our last. I am still learning the basics of how to run a business, and I have made mistakes. I work longer hours than I did as an associate at a law firm, and there is no guarantee there will be enough money at the end of the month to buy craft beer...
Here is the entire blog:
Some Thoughts...
"According to ziggys blog this is not a slapp suit because Kate's pa lawyer is a ricco lawyer.''
****************
I don't "know" these people or their names. I don't have Twitter or visit the blogs, but I do read Kate's TL. Is that the one they call "The Zipper" on Twitter? If so, that doesn't surprise me at all! You can bang your head against the wall until you have a perpetual migraine, but they are never going to understand the difference between a civil and criminal lawsuit.
How can bullyville get away with everything their doing? Don't they have to Answer to anyone?
******************
All in good time. It's waiting to happen, and when it does, Kate is going to rue the day she ever got involved in all of that.
Interesting about the pro-life group and creativity with the law that alas didn't work, but points for trying. Nine times out of ten getting creative doesn't work but once in awhile it will and then you get a big case overturned on appeal. I love how stuff like this leads to learning more interesting stuff I never heard of before.
A real suit about important things like abortion.
Shelby said:
He was physically PRESENT when Kate used her 'spanker'. That alone speaks volumes. Jon's not innocent in this.
August 30, 2013 at 6:22 PM
******
I posted a previous response to Shelby's comment, but as I was going to sleep last night, I thought of something that I don't think has been discussed recently.
Kate using a spoon or a cardboard tube to discipline the children is probably not illegal (unless PA has some more stringent laws in place than CA), nor would be considered child abuse by CPS.
I personally do not agree with corporal punishment, including spanking. But that's a decision I made for myself and my child - and if I changed my mind and decided that he should be spanked, the law would protect me from claims of child abuse.
So while I strong disagree with Kate's discipline, finding it harsh and arbitrary, I am fairly sure that what we saw or discerned from the TV show was not actually illegal. Perhaps people who were on the film crew did report some of this to CPS, perhaps Jon did too. But we will not know this, because such reports are confidential and are never made public.
What we had were parents who probably disagreed upon discipline, and that's not uncommon in marriages. Perhaps they fought about it off camera - we know they fought a lot about many things. But if one parent is gone all day at work, they cannot be responsible for the discipline meted out by the other in their absence.
And if you say that Jon should have taken the children and divorced Kate, I would reply, "It's not that simple." We all saw how he got screwed during the divorce, ordered to pay a huge amount of child support and given very little visitation time.
But back to my original point - I really hate Kate's harsh discipline methods. I chose not to use physical punishment on my child. However, in a court of law, I think Kate would be found "not guilty" of abuse based solely on her use of the spanker and the cardboard roller.
localyocul said:
Such a mystery...here is part of her statement:
I also want everyone to be aware that BullyVille was not bluffing after all. I was served with a subpoena today. They are gathering information for the lawsuit that Kate has against Jon and Robert.
*****
Thank you for this information. All I can say is that if she received a subpoena, it was a phony. A subpoena cannot be issued by an attorney in a civil matter, until AFTER a lawsuit has been filed. Even then, the plaintiff must wait until the lawsuit is properly served on the named defendants and those defendants have appeared in the action.
After that occurs, either party (via their attorney) may have subpoenas issued for records or other documents that they think are pertinent to the case. If the other side thinks the records are irrelevant, or should not be released for some reason, they can file a motion to quash the subpoena.
I don't want to get into a long-winded explanation. However, an attorney does not have the legal power to issue a subpoena PRIOR to the filing of a lawsuit. So if I were the owner of RWA, I might contact the State Bar in the state where RazzleDazzle practices law, and tell them he tricked her into producing personal records. The State Bar is the one who will consider what legal action should be taken against any attorney who violates the law. Anyone still in contact with the owner of RWA might want to pass this suggestion along to her.
If she is correct in her description of what happened, it sounds like RazzleDazzle pulled a fast one. He ought to be reported to his State Bar.
Tweet-le De Tweet-le DUMB said... 36
Millicent @15,
do you have any idea why the lawsuit is contradictory:
Item #4 of the lawsuit states that the John/Jane Does are individuals whose names and addresses are unknown.
Item #8 of the lawsuit states that ALL of the parties reside in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.]
****
Tweetle,
I don't know for sure, but my first thought is that the complaint was put together rather hastily, and not carefully proofread. Perhaps what #8 should have said is that all NAMED parties reside in the Eastern District.
I agree with Millicent. Simply inserting "named" or "identified by name" would have cleared things up. I forgot what else it was but there was another part where one little word I think was left out that would have made it much clearer. Mistakes happen but you can't blame people for being confused by them not to mention all the talk about criminal cases and class action cases (not what this is whatsoever) confusing things more.
Happy Labor Day Week-end Everyone!
'
I have a clogged kitchen drain - I know enough to discover that the clog is further down into the main line, so it's time to call in a real plumber. Of course, it's a 3-day week-end! So I guess I will be without kitchen sink until Tuesday. That means a lot of pre-made meals. I cannot do much cooking without a kitchen sink.
I hope everyone is having a good week-end so far. My son has a scrimmage (football) this afternoon. I'm excited but hope it's not too hot out there :)
But back to my original point - I really hate Kate's harsh discipline methods. I chose not to use physical punishment on my child. However, in a court of law, I think Kate would be found "not guilty" of abuse based solely on her use of the spanker and the cardboard roller.
*******
I think you are correct. PA residents on this blog have told us that the damage must be so severe that a child's life is in real, actual danger (as opposed to "just being whipped" or bruised). We have been informed that it may be the old stern religious PA Dutch belief in the right of parents to raise their children as they see fit. BTE, Kate used those same words when there was all the backlash over her spanking Leah by the garage that one day.
But back to my original point - I really hate Kate's harsh discipline methods. I chose not to use physical punishment on my child. However, in a court of law, I think Kate would be found "not guilty" of abuse based solely on her use of the spanker and the cardboard roller.
&&&
In most states she would, I think. Corporal punishment, without more or much more, isn't going to get you much more than a parenting class if that. It's just the way it is. I believe Delaware has taken steps to outlaw spanking but they are the only state that is really serious about it. It will be a long road if that's what the public wants. It's much easier to lose your kids if you just take some PCP at a party or trade a little meth.
That said, I don't like the implication well they didn't lose their kids so must not have been an issue. Just because CPS declines to get involved doesn't mean abuse isn't going on. It merely means they've determined that for whatever reason they can't make much of a case out of it--due to lack of evidence or inability to make it jurisdictional (find a law that it falls under).
It's not unlike a criminal case. You may have stolen that T.V. but if they don't have enough proof of it it's not happening. Or you may have done something mean and nasty like saying calling someone ugly, but if there's no law to stop you, you're not being charged.
It makes sense to me that Jon didn't know how serious the abuse was because when he was home, Kate would probably control herself somewhat with the kids and take it out on him or make him take the kids away. When she was home alone and drastically outnumbered is probably when she was the most frustrated and probably the most violent.
Does anyone have any suggestions what to do with computer ink that has leaked onto a light carpet? It seems to have set in and I didn't realize the extent of the damage that it caused to the carpet. This printer was given to my son by his father, and sat on the garage floor and was pretty much neglected for about a year until I cleaned it up and brought it into the house. Unfortunately, I placed it down on a carpeted floor that was only four years old. I recently realized it leaked ink, the red seems to be impossible to get out and don't know what to do with this situation. My son told me there is no ink cartridge left in this printer, but something must be leaking. The printer can be thrown out for all I care, but now I am left with a huge spot in my carpet. I've tried numerous products and treatments, blotting etc. but nothing seems to be working. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.
@ 177: A must see.
Venus Flytrap explains the atom:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hhbqIJZ8wCM
We have been informed that it may be the old stern religious PA Dutch belief in the right of parents to raise their children as they see fit. BTE,
&&&&&&&&&&&
Yes, and it's also based on "Spare the rod, spoil the child," and goes back to the 18th century here. While many in this area still believe that spankings are the discipline measure of choice, with this generation, thankfully, it doesn't seem to be carried out the way it was in the past. I have no idea if it still goes on within the very strict Plain community, but I would think that those are the last faction that still carries on the generation old practice. Old child-raising methods die hard.
Even though I was brought up in this area by descendants of the Plain (Mennonite) people, my parents never used physical punishment on me, and I've never used it on my children,,,not with a wooden spoon, cardboard roll, or my hand. I couldn't live with myself if I did that. How could a parent hit a child, or grab a child by the hair? It makes me sick just thinking about her doing that to one of her children -- it it's true.
Kate, on the other hand, may have been brought up in a family who saw nothing wrong with spanking, and it's carried through to the next generation. It may be what she learned, figured she grew up just fine with that method of punishment, and therefore just continued disciplining that way.
OT hello from beautiful Currituck County, North Carolina, in the way to the Outer Banks, where it is a beautiful sunny day and a seasonable 88 degrees. Only one more hour until I have my feet in the water! This weekend is not virtual, there wool be a houseful of ladies at the beach. I did not bring any rumspringa, this group is to rowdy for that.
Hope everyone has a great weekend!
Millicent...save yourself some money and get a Drain King or a drain bladder. I swear by this! You hook it up to your hose, open up the sink pipe past the U shaped piece (the trap). Shove that 'rubber end' into the pipe a ways down. Turn on the water and it 'jets the water' into the clog.
Drain Bladder information Check out the reveiws I've used this before and it really works. Less than $15.00
I don't know how many remember Geraldo Rivera's big publicity stunt regarding Al Capone's vault. That was a huge fail.
Regarding the kitchen drain, see if you can snake something down into the drain that may loosen it up, like a bent coat hanger or something else that can bend easily and some Draino. I've done this and unclogged drains with hot water left running, and it worked.
Kate jumped on Twitter today with a coupon for sneakers, but nobody offered any praise or comment that her site is the best, etc. etc., and a fantastic place to go for saving big bucks. She also tweeted something "cute" the kids said at breakfast, and was basically ignored.
If it weren't for the bots on there, her TL would be on life support, and I think she knows it.
I've used white vinegar and baking soda to clear a clogged drain in the past. It did work.
http://m.wikihow.com/Clear-a-Clogged-Drain-with-Vinegar
Failed publicity stunt: @Kateplusmy8
localyocul said... 33
Such a mystery...here is part of her statement:
I also want everyone to be aware that BullyVille was not bluffing after all. I was served with a subpoena today. They are gathering information for the lawsuit that Kate has against Jon and Robert.
_______
Legal Questions.
So let's say a subpoena was served on that site for the lawsuit against Jon & Robert (to see if they were posting there.)
Is it legal for a lawyer to share subpoenaed information with someone who is not a named party in the lawsuit? (like maybe their top-notch bully-finding investigator?)
And if that information can be shared legally, can the person they shared it with just do what they want with it once they have access? Like out people who don't like Kate?
I just have an inquiring mind and know next to nothing about the legal system.
Remona Blue said... 44
Anonymous said... 42
''According to ziggys blog this is not a slapp suit because Kate's pa lawyer is a ricco lawyer.''
~~~~~~~~~
For crying out loud. I think I've heard everything now! How on God's green earth would RICCO apply here? For what it's worth, here is what RICCO is:
___________
Listen. If I find out Jon & Robert have been paying you all to say unflattering things about Kate and I've been doing it for FREE ... I'm gonna be so pissed! :-)
So let's say a subpoena was served on that site for the lawsuit against Jon & Robert (to see if they were posting there.)
------------------------------------
If the lawsuit was just filed, I don't know how a subpoena was issued on RWA without a file number or certification that a complaint was filed. I didn't think that an attorney could just throw subpoenas around to whomever he/she sees fit at the moment.
Even if Robert and/or Jon were posting on that site, what does it have to do with the computer hacking charge, who stole what and who got into her phone? Did they think that if Jon took the hard drive without Kate's permission and lifted her password that he was going to post it on the RWA blog and therefore admit to the wrongdoing?
Hoosier Girl said... 78
''Listen. If I find out Jon & Robert have been paying you all to say unflattering things about Kate and I've been doing it for FREE ... I'm gonna be so pissed! :-)
~~~~~~~~~~
Oh my goodness....I was just about to jump all over you for not putting me on the list of those who must be paid!
You know, the funniest thing about this entire RICCO stupidity is that I have been all over that attorney's site, and there is not one thing on there that could even be twisted into sounding like ricco. Hold the phone!
I just went to ziggy's site, and she said,
''A. Jordan Rushie''
''He is also one of the top RICO lawyers in the United States.
Do you know what RICO stands for?''
~~~~~~~~
No, ziggy, I don't know what ''RICO'' stands for. I've been all over that site looking for RICCO, not RICO. However, there is nothing on his site that says anything about RICO or RICCO! Period.
I don't want to get into a long-winded explanation. However, an attorney does not have the legal power to issue a subpoena PRIOR to the filing of a lawsuit.
------------------
If there really was a subpoena. I think it was stated on the blog that the owner showed it to an attorney and was told it was legit. I would think that this attorney should have known this and asked for the lawsuit filing before anything was turned over. It's just all so confusing.
Lisa, the RWA owner's husband is an attorney. That's why I'm confused on all of this. I'm sure he checked everything out and deemed it legit. That's why I'm so confused on all of this.
just went to ziggy's site, and she said,
''A. Jordan Rushie''
''He is also one of the top RICO lawyers in the United States.
Dear ziggy....Rushie is one lawyer in law firm of two that desperately needs clients and money. They saw Kate Gosselin coming and new they had their moneymaker.
So far TFW's "statement", issued two days ago, has not been picked up even by the gossip sites. She must be fuming
bm
Now the attorney is saying how desperately he needs clients, that he can't even buy a beer if he doesn't get another client? Oh sheesh, you can't make this stuff up. As my BF would say: really? .... REALLY?
Remona, I just searched Jordan Rushie+RICO and the only thing that comes up is a lawsuit charging HIM with RICO crimes. I think the woman who did it IS a wack-a-doodle, from what I read, though.
As is the case with Ziggy, she probably saw the name Jordan Rushie and RICO in the same line on Google and figured he's a great and powerful RICO attorney. As is always the case with the sheep, they never ask any questions, such as, "Where did you find the information that he is a RICO lawyer?" They just baaaa and give her high fives.
According to Super Lawyers he specializes in:
Practice Areas: Business Litigation (40%), Transportation/Maritime (40%), Intellectual Property Litigation (20%)
Law School: Temple University Beasley School of Law
Oh, man. Now Gosselinbook has a video up of the Three Stooges. And another one about 'it ain't over til it's over.'
Sure does make you wonder just exactly what concrete evidence he has, anyway....
Gotta give the guy credit....he ain't gonna cave. The child abuse disturbed him to his soul, like it did many of us. But unlike us, he's got the ammunition to do something about it.
Oh dear, url. What a mess.
I don't have a personal remedy for your ink stained carpeting, but I googled the problem and found some possible solutions.
I searched for: "cleaning computer ink from carpeting" and found everything from using rubbing alcohol to vinegar and water, to shaving cream. My best suggestion is to look at some of the online tips and try on a very small outside edge of the stain. And, good luck!
Also, just because you happened to have taken on one or a few cases involving a certain aspect of the law in no way means that your experience in that particular area is the reason you took on subsequent cases.
Cochran and Kardashian defended O.J. It does not mean that every single case they take on since then must involve murder. That's absurd logic. Cochran took on all kinds of cases, as did Kardashian. Moreover Kardashian has made it very clear he doesn't think O.J. is innocent. Like any attorney, he was putting his personal feelings aside and doing what he was hired to do. You have to REALLY believe in the legal system as a whole as an attorney, and not make it too personal about your own feelings about a case as a person, or you'll go nuts. For all we know Jazz Hands thinks this whole case is stupid.
Wow everyone is really dishing it back to TFW this time, even Robert. Everyone is laughing.
I think the most irritating thing when you're trying to be so serious and make people take something seriously, is when the other side is just laughing. I mean how can you respond to that? If they don't take you seriously in the first place you can't even begin to make your points. And the second worst thing is when you make a public statement (a statement I don't recall anyone at all asking for), you get ignored. She must be livid.
Admin said.......
But back to my original point - I really hate Kate's harsh discipline methods. I chose not to use physical punishment on my child. However, in a court of law, I think Kate would be found "not guilty" of abuse based solely on her use of the spanker and the cardboard roller.
Commonwealth of Pa often seems medieval to me.
http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/opinion/perspectives/child-abuse-in-pennsylvania-is-worse-than-you-think-301748/
But things are changing:
http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/local/state/pa-legislature-readies-big-changes-to-child-abuse-law-692922/
Tweet-le De Tweet-le DUMB said... 84
''Remona, I just searched Jordan Rushie+RICO and the only thing that comes up is a lawsuit charging HIM with RICO crimes.''
''...As is the case with Ziggy, she probably saw the name Jordan Rushie and RICO in the same line on Google and figured he's a great and powerful RICO attorney.''
~~~~~~~~~~~
Thank you! I think you've solved the puzzle where ziggy got sideways! The lawsuit charging HIM with RICO crimes was was crazy! LOL
Kate, on the other hand, may have been brought up in a family who saw
nothing wrong with spanking, and it's carried through to the next
generation. It may be what she learned, figured she grew up just fine
with that method of punishment, and therefore just continued
disciplining that way. 70
I think that when she stated that she was afraid she would really hurt
one or more of her children, even she realized that she was capable of
going too far.
I understand from many posters that what TFW did to her children did
not meet criteria for child abuse in PA, but grabbing a child by the
hair and throwing him and using a cooking spoon to make a child "happy
up" is abuse in my book.
I'm also not sure that TFW thinks she is just fine. However, in her
mind she is always RIGHT.
So let's say a subpoena was served on that site for the lawsuit
against Jon & Robert (to see if they were posting there.) 77
We all appear to be presuming that the administrator of RWA was
telling the truth about being served.
Hoosier Girl said...
Listen. If I find out Jon & Robert have been paying you all to say unflattering things about Kate and I've been doing it for FREE ... I'm gonna be so pissed! :-)
Bwahahahaha. Let me know when you get your check because I'm gonna submit my bill, too. These past past 7 years of tireless service is gonna be pricey! lol
Sadly Rain most states are Medieval. For various reasons, in this country you can be physical with your kids and probably not pay a price for it. Now try other things (drugs, sex abuse, various crimes) and you're going to be in deep water, but simple physical abuse, doubtful. It would have to be BAD.
I kind of laugh when people say oh it's the old German roots in PA why we're like this, because it's the exact same way in CA, which is supposed to be a very progressive state. In fact CA's abuse statutes aren't really all that different than PA's. Slightly different words but still requires SERIOUS physical harm.
url: I have had luck with hairspray for ink stains. Good luck.
Lots of insightful comments today- catching up.
I know for a fact that BV did not get all the photos from FB. One person didn't even have a FB account but he found her picture elsewhere.
Lisa claimed BV hacked into the blog. I think she was lying to protect herself and I think she gave the password to BV for the same reason.
Anybody who goes to BV or a fan site will be charted/documented for further harassing. It's what they do. Everybody laughs at IPs being captured but BV has proven that having your IP can help him to find your identity. Be careful.
Mel said... 87
Oh, man. Now Gosselinbook has a video up of the Three Stooges. And another one about 'it ain't over til it's over.'
88888888888888888
Where are you seeing this? I looked at Gosselinbook and I'm not seeing any of that. Can you post a link?
Admin said.....
Sadly Rain most states are Medieval. For various reasons, in this country you can be physical with your kids and probably not pay a price for it.
************************
And how all people don't see that as completely wrong is beyond me. A boss can't walk around the office and hit employees with an object for their mistakes. If someone comes up to me in the grocery store, or anywhere in public and hits me, I can press charges. If one spouse can prove the other physically abused them, the abuser goes to jail! But if a child - without the reasoning or emotional maturity of an adult-drops a loaded diaper on the dining room floor, whipping his bottom, causing pain and bringing tears, is within the parents right.
This makes no sense to me.
url...nail polish remover possibly.
Lalalalala,
Where are you seeing this? I looked at Gosselinbook and I'm not seeing any of that. Can you post a link?
Robert has the book site and a blog. Go to his blog:
http://www.gosselinbook.blogspot.com/
url...I asked my husband and he says he's had good luck with paint thinner but to try it on an inconspicuous area first. He also said people at work swear by Mr. Clean Magic Eraser.
This despicable woman needs to blame somebody for the fact that she has "messed in her own nest." Too many people know it to be true. Simple truth. Not really complicated is it?
I actually think quite a few people would be all too happy to see us crack down on physical abuse. I am not intending to be political but rather just stating the facts--there is a lot of lobbying against strengthening child abuse laws from SOME religious groups and conservative groups who have framed the issue as government interfering in your right to parent your child. Just look at the recent attempt to eliminate the statute of limitations on sexual abuse in CA, which will hopefully past this winter. Who opposes it? Many CHURCHES! Now ask yourself why in the world would CHURCHES oppose such a great thing? I can go into their laundry list of reasons, but not a single one impressed me or convinced me. Many of them has to do with them feeling singled out and targeted, to which I say, DUH EXACTLY.
These are strong lobbies who put a lot of people in office, and no politician can easily risk running on a platform of no more physical abuse. Even if they did, it probably would never pass. I have found this to be true nationwide, with the exception of maybe Delaware. It's not just PA. It is EVERYWHERE.
Until these groups get on board with no tolerance for hurting your kids, I don't see this changing. Just my observations on it.
I kind of laugh when people say oh it's the old German roots in PA why we're like this,
&&&&&&&&&&&&&
It's not only the old German roots in Pa, but much of it also has to do with the Quakers' methods of disciplining. When old Billy founded the Commonwealth, I'm sure he brought some of the Quakers' methods of parenting along with him. The Quakers here, too, were known for the rod/spare method of discipline and they took it literally. Any kind of physical punishment would be remembered for many years. This is because they believed that children are born sinful and a very strict discipline is necessary to teach children how to be righteous. When children were very young, according to the Quakers, they were either obedient (righteous) or disobedient (sinful). They knew very little about the developmental phase in children in which parental guidance played an integral role. Force, in the form of physical punishment was intended to produce righteous children, and that's what they did -- most likely with straps and wooden paddles (not sure about spoons!).
URL -- the prognosis for getting out printer ink completely is pretty grim. One option, is to have a repair done, where they remove a circle of carpet and take the same shape from a closet or remnant if you have it. Done professionally, it will be unnoticeable. Works best for small stains. Look for a professional carpet cleaner who advertises carpet repair.
Probably so Dutch, but that doesn't explain why the entire country (sans Delaware) goes easy on physical abuse.
FYI said... 98
"I know for a fact that BV did not get all the photos from FB. One person didn't even have a FB account but he found her picture elsewhere."
=============
But he got it off the internet, right?
"Anybody who goes to BV or a fan site will be charted/documented for further harassing. It's what they do. Everybody laughs at IPs being captured but BV has proven that having your IP can help him to find your identity. Be careful."
-----------
And let's say he gets an IP from Los Angeles,
Ca. How does he know if that's from a hater, a fan or some person who isn't following Kate at all?
Amanda Parkin @1998Fairy 10m
@Kateplusmy8 Hi Kate, just wondering if there are any floor plans for your house? I'm trying to build it, but with no success
&&&&&&&&&&&
Make her an offer. She might sell it.
@Kateplusmy8 Hi Kate, just wondering if there are any floor plans for your house? I'm trying to build it, but with no success
&&&
What? What's that for, a replica for QuintLand?
And no one thought it strange or questioned when the RWA "administrator" put an IP tracker on the blog? Those posters actually believed it was to track down the "sheeple". SMH.
I strongly disagree to the suggestion that Quakers used harsh discipline on children. Quakers believe and have always believed children were innocent, not guilty of original sin, and Quakers rejected corporal punishment, instead using reasoning to deal with children. Quakers also believed as far back as the 1600's that females had the right to an education just as much as their male siblings.
I know for a fact that BV wrongly identified one person and lumped comments together from two posters and labeled them as the same poster. I'm sure there are other errors.
When I look at parents who beat their children, whether it be the child's rear end or elsewhere, I honestly do not for a moment wonder about their religion, or nationality. I just think the parent must have been beaten as a child, or feel out of control in trying to teach their own children.
Still, that being said I can say quite confidently that the Quaker philosophy is one of non violence and that includes children and family.
Hm. Apparently at least a Nevada based Quaker group doesn't believe in spanking. "The case against spanking" is one of their links.
http://www.angelfire.com/ab8/lasvegas_quakers/
@Kateplusmy8 Hi Kate, just wondering if there are any floor plans for your house? I'm trying to build it, but with no success.
Admin said: What? What's that for, a replica for QuintLand?
It's not out of the realm of possibility that someone's curious as to where the kids' bedrooms are, in relation to all doors & windows. Wow! I'd be very worried about this one...Talk about a potential security breach.
Lalalalala said... 82
Lisa, the RWA owner's husband is an attorney. That's why I'm confused on all of this. I'm sure he checked everything out and deemed it legit. That's why I'm so confused on all of this.
********
I don't believe her husband is an attorney at all. I think she was at one time trying to convince the sheeple of that.
My opinion is bv had some kind of goods on her (or her family) and I think that's why she turned over the information.
And how all people don't see that as completely wrong is beyond me. A boss can't walk around the office and hit employees with an object for their mistakes.
&&&
IMO that is one of the best arguments against such tactics. If an adult can go to jail for hitting another adult, why on earth would you teach that behavior to a child?
Tweet, When you go to a site the tracker will show where what site you came from and what site you go to. Of couse, JUST an IP # won't give you away but your activity, matched with activity on other sites can help them figure out who you are and/or if hater or fan. It's not foolproof but it can be done. Of course, when a blog owner GIVES the password of her blog to somebody, they can match IPs with names and figure it all out from there.
FYI, some of BV's outings were wrong. He attributed comments to the wrong people, assuming that no two haters lived in the same city.
As far as the picture, yes, it was on the internet at a very obscure site that even the subject of the picture couldn't find.
Also now widely known as the Religious Society of Friends, or Quaker Friends.
I know for a fact that BV wrongly identified one person and lumped comments together from two posters and labeled them as the same poster. I'm sure there are other errors.
Yes, this is true.
http://radaronline.com/exclusives/2013/04/kate-gosselin-lawsuit-jon-gosselin-book-author-robert-hoffman/
I strongly disagree to the suggestion that Quakers used harsh discipline on children. Quakers believe and have always believed children were innocent, not guilty of original sin, and Quakers rejected corporal punishment, instead using reasoning to deal with children. Quakers also believed as far back as the 1600's that females had the right to an education just as much as their male siblings.
&&&&&&&&&&&&&
I did an extensive research paper for a course in religion and those were my findings. It was probably one of the most difficult papers I ever worked on because there was conflicting information.
Of course, just like with the Plain People, there were various groups of Quakers, and many of them differed in their beliefs. Somewhere in my papers I have writings by Penn suggesting that children were either righteous or sinful and that parents should train up a child in the way he should go and when he was old he would not depart from it. He wrote a treatise on the role of parents and suggested that whatever form of discipline needed should be left up to the parents, and if physical punishment was successful for an unruly child, then so be it.
I think that over the centuries, though, the religion has evolved to such an extent that guidance, rather than corporal punishment, is the accepted form of discipline among parents.
It goes without saying I have nothing to do with any financial scheme with Jon or Robert and I am very tired of being accused of that.
Sorry, I've been working my second job all day. Has anyone here mentioned this:
Bullyville @BullyVille 10h
Jane Does......now you will see what it's like to have your entire life put under a microscope and judged by public opinion. Oh the irony...
Fired Up 4 Kate @MiloandJack 9h
@BullyVille Yes, they will NOW "walk a mile" in the shoes they criticized so mercilessly! A sad "do unto others" as they did 2Kate!
And let's say he gets an IP from Los Angeles,
Ca. How does he know if that's from a hater, a fan or some person who isn't following Kate at all?
&&&&&&
My IP says I'm somewhere around Lewes, Delaware. Um, not so much, although the ferry ride to Cape May would be fun this weekend!
At least this tweeter had some common sense in reply:
Walking Dead @DeadFan1973 6h
@BullyVille Don't most celebrities have their lives scrutinized by the public? Am I missing something in the @Kateplusmy8 case?
What? What's that for, a replica for QuintLand?
&&&&&&&&
Who in the heck knows, admin? Some of these fans just aren't playing with a full deck. Are they dumb enough to expect Kate to give out floor plans for her house...with security being an issue?
Suzee said... 102
88888888888888888
Thank you, Suzee :)
OT - haven't read all comments, but hand sanitizer on ink stains works.
Alberta Girl
Hm. Apparently at least a Nevada based Quaker group doesn't believe in spanking. "The case against spanking" is one of their links.
&&&&&&&&&&&
Correct. This is NOW, not three centuries ago. Beliefs change.
I have "Do Not Track Me" and "Mask Me" installed on my computer. They're both free. It stops people and companies from tracking you on the computer. Every time you log into a website, blog or doing internet shopping, everyone is blocked from seeing what sites you're visiting. They give you a running tally on how many networks and companies are trying to track you and are blocked on whatever site you go to. I highly recommend this.
Realitytvkids.com (Administrator) said... 125
It goes without saying I have nothing to do with any financial scheme with Jon or Robert and I am very tired of being accused of that.
&&&&&&&&
Would that fall under libel or slander?
Fired Up 4 Kate @MiloandJack 13m
@Kateplusmy8 The folks who have relentlessly, mercilessly put U under a microscope 4yrs R now being scrutinized closely by the LAW! #Payback
What is she talking about? What "folks?" Robert and Jon?
Do the sheeple know for a fact that other lawsuits have been filed?
I am so lost...
Pat, I don't think so yet because he merely said he is investigating it. He may investigate it, by all means.
While I am totally against "outing" in any shape or form, I'd really like to know (without any names, addresses, phone numbers or personal information) if Milo is a Catfish.
I just think that, with so much information known about fans, nobody has ever come out and revealed just what kind of a game she/he is playing.
Clogged drain: I had a plumber doing work on my kitchen ceiling once and we were talking about clogs and he said, "have you ever noticed that you never have a problem with the drain to the washer?" and I said "no, i never noticed but you're right...I've never had a clog there" and he said it's because of the bleach. He told me to put some bleach in all my drains once every couple of weeks. I have NEVER had another clogged drain since. I even put it in the shower drains. Works like a charm!
Milo, what "law" is doing the scrutinizing? Kate filed a CIVIL lawsuit.
one thing with both "Do Not Track Me" and "Mask Me" they will stop most add on IP trackers from "seeing" you but your Ip is still recorded for each site you visit. For instance blogger will still have your IP attached to your post here (but even admin can't see it only google can) Those programs also sometimes randomly drop the mask so you will be seen by the IP tracker.
Just some info so people won't think those kinds of programs are fool proof.
The will also stop people who work hard to maintain their sites (like Admin) from getting any ad revenue for your visit.
Paula said... 135
Milo, what "law" is doing the scrutinizing? Kate filed a CIVIL lawsuit.
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
There is absolutely nothing one can say or do to convince these people that this is not a criminal proceeding, so all you can do is to let them believe what they want.
Milo...get a room.
In the ROL article linked, I noticed that bv said:
''And in the course of sorting through the situation, McGibney said he came across compelling evidence that Jon took Kate’s computer hard drive without her permission and got it to Hoffman “in an effort to defame Kate for monetary gain.”
~~~~~~~~
Good ole BV! HE found the evidence that TFMJG needed in order to file her lawsuit. Whatta guy<<<<snark!
Info said... 136
888888888888888888888
Thanks for your input, Info. I didn't think it was totally foolproof but every little bit helps. I know that the number of items in my spam folder has decreased dramatically. I'm also wondering if it would stop people like Bullyville from tracking me. Do you know?
Paula said... 83
''Dear ziggy....Rushie is one lawyer in law firm of two that desperately needs clients and money. They saw Kate Gosselin coming and new they had their moneymaker.''
~~~~~~~~~~
And.......I'll bet Rushie took the advice he said he was given by an older attorney who told him to get the money up front instead of billable hours, because a client would fork over big bucks up front, but would squawk over a $3000.00 bill. LOL
Admin, could you make some kind of statement regarding promising us you will NEVER hand over this blog and its' IPs to BV?
I'm a little afraid to post here.
If it's illegal to hit an adult, why is it legal to hit a child who is learning the rules of society?
The goal of discipline is to change a behavior, but many people use discipline to punish and seek retribution. There are other ways to discipline, but sadly, many parents--not all, discipline the way they were w/ the idea that, "I grew up just fine."
He told me to put some bleach in all my drains once every couple of weeks.
8888888888888888888888
I don't recommend this if you have a septic tank.
This is getting good! i'm popping popcorn! Anyone wanna join me??
I have weblock for my iPad and if I do anything from work during lunch or a break I'm bit locker encrypted.
In addition to the physical abuse and neglect, all those shows where TFW was in the kids' faces, firing off questions, barking orders, demanding answers just broke my heart. Do you know that before age 8, a child's brain processes information TWELVE times slower than an adults? It took me two shows to conclude that she was an unfit mother and desperately needed parenting classes. I continued to watch just to see WHEN someone from the network would intervene and help these children...and no one ever did. Money was more important than their emotional and physical well beings.
@Remona, I hope he got his money upfront because we all know Kate does not honor her debts...see Sylvia LaFair.
OK, I'll bite. If one of us gets hit with a lawsuit by Kate, what part of our private lives will be scrutinized? Will we be forced to let a network film our kids on the toilet, fighting, vomiting, in pain from constipation? Will I suddenly start bickering and screaming for the camera? Will my kids have to show their bowel movements and baths on TV? Will I be photographed hanging out in Mexico with my bodyguard? Just what will this turnaround look like?
Kate Gosselin @Kateplusmy8 38s
Watching Pretty Woman... 'I want the fairy tale...'
-------------------------
"Come on, Barney...you and me live in the real world, most of the time."
Problem is, Kate doesn't.
I still think it's funny they're saying that's her hard drive but then crying untrue. Think about that a second.
CarleneMarie @CarleneMarie_1 39s
@Kateplusmy8 Someday you'll have it, Kate. :)
Speaking of fairy tales, Kate might want to rethink that. Hansel and Gretel is a fairy tale, but that didn't end well for the witch. She was shoved into the oven.
@Kateplusmy8: My Mady hears a beat on tv, in a store, anywhere and she instantly starts dancing... She doesn't even realize it many times.... :) 💃
Still pushing how talented Mady is. I guess Disney hasn't called with a contract offer yet. Hopefully she's got a little more rhythm than TFW.
Sleepless In Seattle said... 152
Kate Gosselin @Kateplusmy8 38s
Watching Pretty Woman... 'I want the fairy tale...'
88888888888888888888
She'd be the wicked witch in any fairy tale.
Anonymous said... 153
''I still think it's funny they're saying that's her hard drive but then crying untrue. Think about that a second.''
~~~~~~~~~
You lost me, Anonymous, even though I thought about it more than a few seconds. Who is they? Who is crying untrue? Robert has said over and over and over and over that he found DISKS in the trash.
146: Lalala.....you are correct...I don't have a septic tank though and it really helped
Sleepless 152: TFW lives in the real world...she knows the only way for HER to have the fairy tale is: snag a rich guy (which we already know hasn't worked ever OR become a hooker ...and even Hugh Hefner rejected her so in reality what SHE wants is indeed a fairy tale and it will never happen
Will we be forced to let a network film our kids on the toilet, fighting, vomiting, in pain from constipation? Will I suddenly start bickering and screaming for the camera? Will my kids have to show their bowel movements and baths on TV? Will I be photographed hanging out in Mexico with my bodyguard? Just what will this turnaround look like?
-------------------------
We'll have to let Steve carry our purse.
Kate Gosselin @Kateplusmy8 38s
Watching Pretty Woman... 'I want the fairy tale...'
To quote Mammy from GWTW, "Wantin' Ain't Gettin'"
Fired Up 4 Kate @MiloandJack 10m
@Kateplusmy8 The #FairyTell can be reality...:) Ur LitesOut Man is somewhere...U just haven't found each other yet! He's looking 4U! :)
------------------
What happened to the Irish Creeper? Did he give up?
I still think it's funny they're saying that's her hard drive but then crying untrue. Think about that a second.
--------------
What they are saying is that what was published was altered or fabricated...it was all edited to make her look bad.
Fired Up 4 Kate @MiloandJack 9m
@Kateplusmy8 Your namesake http://twitpic.com/dbbv5j heard me say ur NAME & she gave me her attention instantly! #Respect HaHa :)
------------
Milo talks to Kate -- out loud -- while she's tweeting her?
Fired Up 4 Kate @MiloandJack 5m
@Kateplusmy8 Your namesake http://twitpic.com/dbbv5j heard me say ur NAME & she gave me her attention instantly! #Respect HaHa :)
______________
Milo's dog, Katie Irene, looked up when Milo said Kate's name. Why is Milo saying Kate's name out loud?So weird. Does Milo think she's talking to Kate? When I'm typing a comment to someone I don't say their name out loud. Of course, just naming her dog after Kate is weird.
Kate Gosselin @Kateplusmy8 38s
Watching Pretty Woman... 'I want the fairy tale...'
----
Ah yes, the fairy tale where the prostitute & the paying customer fall in love. Unfortunately all of Kate's paying customers have dumped her.
"That'll take care of the mice!" smiled the farmer as he set the barn on fire.<-- This is you suing Robert Hoffman
(from TFMJG's timeline)
Late to the party as always and haven't read everything but I'm sadly not surprised that the "Jon was just as guilty" too sentiments are going round again. It's like the worm that ate it's own tail. Yep Jon was slimey when participating in the grifting, he also was wrong in allowing the filming. There's a bunch of other things he was wrong about. What separates him from Kate is he admitted to most of it and changed his behavior. You can't hope to change your bad deeds unless you own it. Therefore, in the contest between the who was/& still is, the worst parent - Kate wins, hands down. And also, I know this is going to sound sexist and wrong, but he was p*ssy whipped BIG TIME (it happens to alot of young men!), top that off with too many children and financial hardship and you have this shit storm aka J&K+8 round 543.
On being a survivor of a mother who was quite a bit like Kate, a friend send me a quote off Pinterest. It simply said "I survived you". I forwarded it to my very own Mommy Dearest this week and for some reason, an immense feeling of joy came over me. I imagine it drives her insane that not only did I survive her, but thrived once I kicked her out of my life for good. I pray the same thing happens for the Gosselin kids.
About the ink stain in the carpet, my mom is a seamstress, and swears by using lighter fluid.
I use it on my clothing, and it works and has never damaged anything. Kind of smells like what the Dry Cleaners use. Good luck!
Milo gave Kate a long-winded blow by blow description of her golf game (29 tweets) gushing about how it was through Kate's encouragement and support that she was able to do it. Kate didn't comment on the golf. Her only tweet was:
1hKate Gosselin @Kateplusmy8
@MiloandJack awwww xo... Keep on moving !!!
Milo's dog, Katie Irene, looked up when Milo said Kate's name. Why is Milo saying Kate's name out loud?So weird. Does Milo think she's talking to Kate?
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
She must! How else could the dog have heard her name? Does she pretend to be sitting there with Kate? How bizarre!
I almost feel sorry for Milo. She says she has a husband and children, and yet she sits at her computer talking out loud to Kate. I wonder if the LOM and kids are just part of a fantasy world she'd built for herself.
In Massachusetts, spanking is allowed but is clearly defined as an open handed slap to specific areas of the body. As soon as Kate picks up one of her "spankers", she is wielding a weapon, and it is abuse in this state. Spanking is not a popular form of discipline in my neck of the woods, and the few parents who do spank (who have either owned up to it or been caught in the act) are generally seen as less than stellar parents. Whether or not religion may be a factor for those people's choice of parenting methods (or excuse for abuse, IMO) I don't think much about it. I'm with the others who generally assume they had been spanked themselves, and are acting in the only way they learned how, or are overwhelmed/unequipped for the challenges of raising their children and are taking it out on their kids.
I am catching up and reading bottom to top, so I apologize if I am repeating others' comments.
Pixie no I wouldn't and I don't know your IPs in the first place. That's the advantage of not having a tracker, no fear of it being misused by someone.
Regarding the raging hard drive vs discs debate:
Here is a scenario in which both can be true, and the filed complaint could be accurate. Jon takes a hard drive, without Kate's knowledge, which could have come from an old computer. Certainly TFW didn't have a computer for more than a year or two. Possibly those files were transferred to a new computer. (I personally have at least 8--count 'em 8, old hard drives laying around), or backed up on a portable drive.
Then, Jon backs up the hard drive to disks, and plants them in the garbage for Robert. See, everyone is telling the truth. Robert found the disks in the garbage, so he can pass a lie detector test (assuming that was actually asked). And, Jon took a hard drive after they were separated.
Possibly, TFW didn't know about the hard drive until Robert started his taunting and teasing. Then, the discovery would be within the statute of limitations. We know that she knew about the alleged hacking into her email and phone in 2009, but nothing was said about computer files being stolen.
I am not saying this is what happened. I am saying that this scenario, and probably other scenarios, exist in which all of it could be true. It is hard to believe that any attorney would use those those terms interchangeably--seems incredibly sloppy.
People keep coming up with these gotcha statements about disks vs hard drives, and are assuming that the missing hard drive came from a currently used computer.
One other scenario is that the hard drive was never installed in a computer--ie, it was a portable drive, possibly used for backups. She might not have even known what it was, or, that it existed because certainly Jon maintained their computers. I believe that a portable drive could accurately be called a hard drive.
Personally, I think it COULD have happened, meaning, it is a possibility. I would not go so far as to say that I am certain that's what happened. I am a very logical person, and the gotcha scenarios just don't add up. Whereas, to me, this scenario does. Maybe there is another scenario where Jon is not implicated, and all of the assertions out there are true--I just can't think of any.
Ex Nurse, who's on first? :)
Of course you can't accept any number of reasonable explanations like it happened just as Robert said and everything else is a lie. Only the explanation that places the blame all on Jon is what makes sense to you.
Sara said...
Kate really ticked me off when she made her comment on Twitter about willing herself not to get postpartum a few months back.
--------------
Of all the stupid and insensitive things she has ever said, this has to be at the top of the list. My heart goes out to you and your family.
Also, to Shelby and Swingsandroundabouts, thank you for your kind comments. I have been reading on and off today, losing my place, and then seeing missed posts today. Someone said something about disappearing ones?
Some people call the hard drive a hard disk.
Just like Teresa Guidice, all this tv footage is going to be the nail in TFW's tv show coffin! This is the video where she admits to Mary Hart that she kept a daily journal!! So in essence there is proof that ll those journal entries where he beat the kids was true! What an idiot!
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=kate%20gosselin%20bitter&source=video&cd=5&ved=0CEAQtwIwBA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DfTgJn3qxxkI&ei=KDAjUpSbI7Ks4APXxYGoCA&usg=AFQjCNEuQLlpc1DD3OX3vWr_UEU5vRTuUA&bvm=bv.51495398,d.cWc
url...
sounds weird but try baby oil,ink is probably dry now, and oil will moisten it, then you can lift it off. Worse case, try light, sounds weird again, but magenta is the weaker of the print colours, the rays of the sun degrade it faster than even blue. Think of faded posters, they turn blue before anything.
Good luck.
ps, Kh8ie still sucks
franky
Nonameplease said... 179
RWA didn't have a tracker either.
September 1, 2013 at 5:20 AM
____________
Yes it did. Lisa would mention when someone from Eastern PA was reading. She thought it was Kate.
I lived in Boston when they pulled that stunt with the digital boards. It was scary because the idiots decided to place them under bridges and other obscure places that could be perceived as "high value" targets.
As for TFW I think this stunt will backfire on her to the point that no one will touch her.
Franky lol!
If anyone is into lighthouses and ever on the West Coast check out the lighthouse at Rancho Palos Verdes. That was our "staycation" yesterday, sunset, and it was breathtaking.
Boston Bonnie agree--one never wants to be too litigious. What happens is people wise up and realize "well wait a minute we may be good friends now or have a good employer-employee relationship or in the middle of a nice romance, but what happens if anything ever doesn't work out? Then I'm up to be sued next. NO THANKS." I love the burning the barn down to get the mice analogy. Indeed.
As much as I would like to think that Jon wasn't involved with gossekinbook having discs, and I truly hope he honestly wasn't (not a gane-playing honest), my suspicion is that he was involved somehow, even if it was inadvertent.
I do think that the only scenario the TFW is happy with is one in which Jon is guilty. Which he may or may not be.
His involvement may not be there at all, it may have been inadvertent/accidental, it may have been deliberate.
Her child/animal abuse is 100% guilty. It's on film for the whole world to see. Plus her diaries where she details even worse abuse.
I don't know what to think about gosselinbook's claim that Jon wasn't involved. Maybe he wasn't, maybe he was.
Jon has never publicly said, one way or the other.
Gosselinbook's passion about the child/animal abuse feels genuine.
When he said he did this for Collin, I believe him.
I also believe the diaries are genuine...TFW's own words.
The rest of the story, who knows. Remains to be seen.
I think Jon was involved somehow probably, but in a way we haven't thought of yet. I don't think he's 100% innocent, nor do I think he's 100% guilty.
Gosselinbook, hard to say. His story could be true, or maybe isn't exactly true. I don't think it's a flat out lie.
Whereas the TFW has been busted lying so many times it isn't funny. Of all the people in this story who could be 100% guilty, it's her.
Hmmmmm.......
I think the bottom line is only the people who were there know what really happened and we'll probably never know the whole truth.
I think the public's reaction was, even IF your worst case scenerio is true, this still seems pretty vindictive and made it seem like TFW can't move on from a divorce four years old. What really happened has started to become secondary. They waited too long to act on it. You have to keep in mind the general public's memories are fickle and there is no way most people are going to hang onto a grudge that long. People move on at lightning speed these days. Basically she asked the public to dig up something they've long buried, and to be outraged. It wasn't going to happen. Thus, the outrage turned on someone who was asking them to do some digging, especially in this heat.
A thought about what is perceived as missing posts...I think what happens is that you start typing your post at 9:03, but don't hit submit until 9:20.
In the meantime, a bunch of other posts are posted. When your post is posted, it comes in with a post time of 9:03, behind all those other posts.
You see all the posts timed after 9:20 but not your post at 9:20, and think your post is missing. But it's not missing, it's just back there aways.
I think the real bottom line is the public's opinions don't really matter with regard to the lawsuit. It's all about if Kate wins or loses.
What really happened has started to become secondary. They waited too long to act on it.
*********************
Totally agree.
And just why did TFW wait so long to act on it, anyway?
She clearly knew about the allegations of hacking way back in 2009. Why would she wait *4* years to file????
She either has no proof, or it didn't happen.
People move on at lightning speed these days. Basically she asked the public to dig up something they've long buried, and to be outraged. It wasn't going to happen.
====
Then she made matters worse by her association with BV. When you hire a thug to threaten and intimidate the people who find you repugnant, don't expect too many invitations to the ball. We always said she was her own worst enemy.
Actually I don't know if hire is the correct word. Is she paying BV to bully her 'haterz'?
Some quotes from that Mary Hart interview....
"Sometimes it's because I have to be that old-time strict mom"
And there you have it. What some of you have said all along.
"I had kept a journal for a year, almost daily, and it was around the time our show Jon& Kate plus 8 first started, and it occurred to me that that was always the goal, to turn this into a book because there was a lot of good information there..."
Yup, there sure was a lot of good information there.
Mary Hart asked TFW well, what about when the kids watch the show and hear your very direct words about the divorce, custody.
TFW responds with, I don't let the kids hear all that. I shelter them from all that. I keep my words to them age-appropriate, yada, yada.
So.....I thought the kids watched the shows, over and over. Aren't they going to hear those very direct words she said...that Jon should have NO input into their lives???
Here's a question, because I think Robert has other evidence that was not found on whatever it is Kate thinks Robert and Jon took:
Why would Kate keep a pictures of herself holding and using a "spanker"? Kate didn't take that picture so I wouldn't think it would be on "her" computer.
Sara said...
Kate really ticked me off when she made her comment on Twitter about willing herself not to get postpartum a few months back.
***********************************************
Of course she didn't get postpartum, she was too busy beating the crap out of her kids. Great stress reliever for her.
Ex nurse @177
Thank you for your kind words. It has been hard on our family especially me and my daughter. For me, coming from a mother's perspective it hurts my heart watching my child suffering, wanting to hold her baby but she mentally can't and for my daughter because she tells me how guilty she feels by missing out on her first born's first.
BTW, I had some curtains dry-cleaned...and they came back hanging on HARD thick cardboard tubes...hmmm.
Two Year Statute of Limitations for Computer Fraud and Abuse Act Accrued When Plaintiff “Suspected” Wrongdoing
There have not been many Computer Fraud and Abuse Act cases where the statute of limitations has been a key issue in the case so there are not many cases that have analyzed the issue. A new one just came out on January 2, 2013. In the case Higgins v. NMI Enterprises, Inc., 2013 WL 27556 (E.D. La. Jan. 2, 2013), the court offers a fairly detailed analysis of the applicable two year statute of limitations and ultimately decides to grant a Motion to Dismiss based thereon.
The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act has a two year statute of limitations that runs from “the date of the act complained of or the date of the discovery of the damage.” In Higgins, the Plaintiffs claimed that, while they “suspected” some sort of wrongdoing more than two years prior to the filing of their CFAA claim, they did not “actually discover the violations or damage” until later. The court found that “the statute of limitations ‘begins when facts that would support a cause of action are or should be apparent.’” Accordingly, when the Plaintiff suspected that those acts had occurred, those facts should have been apparent for purposes of limitations and limitations began to run at that time.
http://shawnetuma.com/2013/01/04/two-year-statute-of-limitations-of-computer-fraud-and-abuse-act-accrued-when-plaintiff-suspected-wrongdoing/
Admin, thanks for the RPV lighthouse tip, sounds lovely, must check it out. Enjoy the rest of your staycation weekend, we are having same with visiting grandchildren.
Here's a question, because I think Robert has other evidence that was not found on whatever it is Kate thinks Robert and Jon took:
*****************
I think so, too. I think he has a smoking gun.
Whatever it is, she's scared to death of it being made public, and is willing to lie in a lawsuit to keep it from getting out.
My suspicion is that Jon and Robert colluded to obtain some things, perhaps, but not the things that TFW thinks they are.
@Paula
I think those are still shots from the show? Can anyone else vouch?
I can't decide if TFW knows what Robert has and is afraid of it becoming public, or if she doesn't know and is in for the surprise of her life.
Maybe both scenarios are true.
Accordingly, when the Plaintiff suspected that those acts had occurred, those facts should have been apparent for purposes of limitations and limitations began to run at that time.
---------------
Interesting, and in Kate's own words back in 2009, she had suspected something had occurred. Is that correct?
Should details of that decision from January of this year to forwarded to Robert and Jon? I would imagine that their attorneys could easily find the opinion by the courts on the case, but still, it wouldn't hurt.
New comments are not allowed.