|
|
Post by matisse on May 17, 2015 5:37:25 GMT -5
I asked: "How do you know the crimes are rapes? Okay. They might not be. Do you know how many people have gone to that sheriff department with allegations? If just SW, then the crimes would not be rapes. Even if just SW has made allegations, the crimes committed (as indicated) might not include rape, but some other crimes. Misrepresenting the status of the investigation, as LW did in his mass emailing, can be seen as "Obstruction of Justice", a crime in the State of Colorado. |
|
|
|
Post by Greg on May 17, 2015 5:50:23 GMT -5
Did I post that he wrote it? You posted with the word "say". Perhaps you heard him say that. I would then be wrong in my assumption that you were relating to the written letter. |
|
|
|
Post by elizabethcoleman on May 17, 2015 6:18:59 GMT -5
Greg, I don't know what you are getting at sorry. You know as well as everyone else reading here does that the complainant went to the law officer with an allegation of rape. For reasons unknown to us the Law Officer has issued an undated public document and mentions "committed criminal acts" I think it highly likely be has no basis for making such a public statement about an investigation in which the core issue is an allegation of rape/s. But if I am misrepresenting him or if I have it wrong then you could kindly make a post with the necessary correction. I'm reading here. I didn't know that. So far, the only mention of rape has been made by Review. |
|
|
|
Post by Greg on May 17, 2015 7:37:40 GMT -5
Greg, I don't know what you are getting at sorry. You know as well as everyone else reading here does that the complainant went to the law officer with an allegation of rape. For reasons unknown to us the Law Officer has issued an undated public document and mentions "committed criminal acts" I think it highly likely he has no basis for making such a public statement about an investigation in which the core issue is an allegation of rape/s. But if I am misrepresenting him or if I have it wrong then you could kindly make a post with the necessary correction. You are assuming the "committed criminal acts" is the same as or does include "allegations of criminal act committed by". They might be the same. If so, they are either "committed" or "allegedly committed" and they are either "acts" or "act". Or there are criminal acts committed by Leslie White outside the allegations of a criminal act. Further to this is your insertions of the words "rape" and "rapes". I do not know if the complaint has been posted on TMB or if you have read it elsewhere. I do not know if any indication of such has been made in any complaint. Further to this, you indicate that the officer has posted a letter here. I do not know if he has. I am of the understanding that Scott Ross has posted a letter by the officer. Further, that Scott Ross at first omitted the date, but later gave indication - even in this thread. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 17, 2015 11:14:00 GMT -5
in our effort to understand what is going on lets not forget LW is INNOCENT until proven guilty in a court of law or a complete confession of guilt. He is innocent in the eyes of the law. So is Bill Cosby. Do you presume the sister worker is a LIAR? LW has essentially branded her as such in the email in which he also makes false claims (it seems HE is...) about the status of the investigation. In a court of law, the burden of proof is on her. Lack of proof will NOT prove that SW was never the victim of a heinous crime at the hands of LW. they can't both be right so the presumption is innocent and the allegation is false until proven in a court of law... |
|
|
|
Post by kittens on May 17, 2015 11:39:43 GMT -5
He is innocent in the eyes of the law. So is Bill Cosby. Do you presume the sister worker is a LIAR? LW has essentially branded her as such in the email in which he also makes false claims (it seems HE is...) about the status of the investigation. In a court of law, the burden of proof is on her. Lack of proof will NOT prove that SW was never the victim of a heinous crime at the hands of LW. they can't both be right so the presumption is innocent and the allegation is false until proven in a court of law... 1
|
|
|
|
Post by snow on May 17, 2015 12:51:38 GMT -5
In what way am I reading the letter incorrectly? I understand a law officer is accountable for his words and actions in the USA. His email obviously is dated. Every email is but why is his document released for public distribution not dated. What is going on? Allegations. That word is no different from alleged in meaning. It's a matter of semantics and I really need to ask why you are so focused on trying to prove a police officer wrong? What is the reason behind your protests. Alleged means not proved and allegations also means not proved. Allegation: In the legal system, an allegation is a formal claim against someone. It sparks an investigation that leads to someone being proven innocent or found guilty. So why do you feel the wording was wrong? |
|
bulsi
Junior Member
WHAT WE DO IN LIFE ECHOES IN ETERNITY !
Posts: 197
|
Post by bulsi on May 17, 2015 13:01:11 GMT -5
This is Not about hurting anyone's feelings...Just keeping it real in this cruel world of Justice
|
|
rs
Junior Member
Posts: 77
|
Post by rs on May 17, 2015 13:27:08 GMT -5
Review, you remind me of another, picking apart the wording of a post and ignoring the meaning...
|
|
|
|
Post by fixit on May 17, 2015 15:06:56 GMT -5
Is it similar to the statement :'If you have a problem with the fellowship you can leave '? Yes! That's what made me think of it. |
|
|
|
Post by fixit on May 17, 2015 15:11:31 GMT -5
If you have a problem with TMB you can leave... Is it similar to the statement :'If you have a problem with the fellowship you can leave '? Just curious, how would you two get on if Review was the worker in fixit's area. It is very possible. Who knows God with Alan's help might just do that one year. How would the 2 of you cope? I think we understand each other quite well. I guess you'd like to be a fly on the wall Mary. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 17, 2015 15:21:48 GMT -5
they can't both be right so the presumption is innocent and the allegation is false until proven in a court of law... Do any of you who are saying he is innocent until proven guilty realise how hurtful this would be to the female worker? It sounds like there is lots of other evidence against him, not just this one case. She must be an extremely strong person to come forward in the first place and then to be told she is a liar would be a huge blow to her. How can she prove it unless someone caught him in the act? It's the same with CSA. How can the child prove it? Everyone expects the children and parents to come forward and go to the police (and I agree with this) but when they do they are put through a persecution that would completely break their spirit. If you don't have proof of whether he did or didn't do it please keep your opinions to yourself. No I don't condone false allegations and would feel very sorry for someone who was blamed for doing an act like this when it wasn't true but let the police go through the evidence they have and I hope the courts will come to the correct conclusion. God knows the full truth in matters of this sort and the only thing that keeps me sane is the thought that the guilty party WILL be punished by Him after He has judged them.
whats the saying?
better that 99 guilty go free than 1 innocent man going to prison?
as to more evidence that remains to be seen...
true God knows the matter and what really happened and will punish accordingly...
|
|
|
|
Post by snow on May 17, 2015 21:48:45 GMT -5
On what basis do you say I am seeking to say the man is wrong? What I have said is that he has issued a public document that contains the words "committed criminal acts" There is a single suspect, the allegation made against one man only. I doubt the law officer would be able to present evidence in a court of law to convince a judge or jury that a criminal act/s has been committed. Why? Because if he did the investigation would not be continuing, rather an arrest would have been made of the one and only suspect! If he can say a criminal act has been committed.... there is only one suspect then.....  Well in this case there is only one man that has these alleged charges against him. So I imagine there is only one suspect in this case. I think the police officer said the investigation is ongoing and he did call the charges allegations. I really don't see what's wrong with that. |
|
|
|
Post by withlove on May 17, 2015 22:46:30 GMT -5
On what basis do you say I am seeking to say the man is wrong? What I have said is that he has issued a public document that contains the words "committed criminal acts" There is a single suspect, the allegation made against one man only. I doubt the law officer would be able to present evidence in a court of law to convince a judge or jury that a criminal act/s has been committed. Why? Because if he did the investigation would not be continuing, rather an arrest would have been made of the one and only suspect! If he can say a criminal act has been committed.... there is only one suspect then..... Well in this case there is only one man that has these alleged charges against him. So I imagine there is only one suspect in this case. I think the police officer said the investigation is ongoing and he did call the charges allegations. I really don't see what's wrong with that. It sounds like Review means that the officer should not have used the term "committed criminal acts" since he has not proved that the acts were actually committed...or made an arrest based on evidence. |
|
|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on May 18, 2015 2:04:09 GMT -5
The officer is still looking for evidence and that is the purpose of the letter, an invitation to come in and discuss.
As for three that know the truth Mr Review, if this ever goes to court then it will be a judge or jury of this world that sits in judgement. One thing judges and juries are allowed to do in regard to evidence is judge whether the person speaking the evidence is in fact plausible. Just saying that I wasn't there doesn't cut the mustard.
Roll on the trial. I'd like to see LW telling his story in front of a jury that has never heard of the "Truth" and is only concerned with what truth in this matter really is.
|
|
|
|
Post by snow on May 18, 2015 11:19:27 GMT -5
Well in this case there is only one man that has these alleged charges against him. So I imagine there is only one suspect in this case. I think the police officer said the investigation is ongoing and he did call the charges allegations. I really don't see what's wrong with that. It sounds like Review means that the officer should not have used the term "committed criminal acts" since he has not proved that the acts were actually committed...or made an arrest based on evidence. I thought though that the word allegations that he committed criminal acts was meant to mean they were not proven. What ever. I, personally, don't see what the problem is. Allegations means not proven. |
|
|
|
Post by Gene on May 18, 2015 12:02:01 GMT -5
Review005, what's your point? Do you think maybe the alleged letter from the alleged officer is a fake?
|
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on May 18, 2015 15:04:47 GMT -5
Review, you remind me of another, picking apart the wording of a post and ignoring the meaning... You feel that is an unimportant minor detail for him to state that a criminal act has been committed? LW 'shot himself in the foot' with his email. Has the law officer to some extent 'following suit' with the questionable statement in his undated document released to the public? |
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on May 18, 2015 15:05:08 GMT -5
As I see it three know the truth of the allegation. The woman who made it, LW and God. Unless either of the first two make a 'death bed' confession or such like the status quo is likely to remain. The woman and her supporters obviously can't supply conclusive or even circumstantial evidence that the Law Officer could use as basis of an arrest. LW and his supporters have not provided conclusive evidence that meant the Law Officer could close the investigation. Thus the status quo will remain. |
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on May 18, 2015 15:05:48 GMT -5
Review005, what's your point? Do you think maybe the alleged letter from the alleged officer is a fake? Gene what is your point of asking a question that you know the answer to? |
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on May 18, 2015 15:06:36 GMT -5
Sorry my phone doesn't show bold print, had to look on a PC. I understand that this law officer has issued an undated contradictory public statement. He firstly writes of allegations and then contradicts that later in his document he writes of "committed criminal acts". He speaks of act (singular) in the first instance and acts (plural) in the second. His public document is undated, the only way we know the date is because Scott later posted the personal email part to him. I am no fan of LW; never heard him speak, never met him in fact. But I do have expectations of a law officer responsible for investigating a serious criminal allegation. |
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on May 18, 2015 15:07:38 GMT -5
Scott My question is simply this. What basis does this law officer have for saying a criminal act (rape) has been committed? Since you have communication with him I wondered if you would you ask him? You know as well as I do that it is highly unlikely that he has any basis for the statement. I am surprised that he made it. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2015 15:31:59 GMT -5
Review005, what's your point? Do you think maybe the alleged letter from the alleged officer is a fake? Gene what is your point of asking a question that you know the answer to? I would suggest that there are several possibilities here. First it is possible that your assumption that Gene knows the answer to the question that he poses is wrong and that he poses the question solely for the purpose of obtaining the answer. Given that I have no idea either what your point is, this may be the most likely scenario and consequently there is nothing peculiar whatsoever about him asking. Alternatively he may well know the answer to his question but he is asking you for the purpose of encouraging you to post it publicly. Perhaps he suspects that your point is a foolish one and he wishes it to be recorded either for posterity or for the amusement of the rest of us. There isn't much to laugh about around here at the best of times. Another possibility is that Gene may in fact suspect that you don't actually have a point and is merely calling your bluff on this. Not appearing to have a point seems to be a recurring theme in your posts so I'm voting for this one. A fourth option might be that Gene being one of the more perceptive people on board has noticed that not answering questions is another recurring theme in your posts and he is merely providing you with a further opportunity to demonstrate this. He may well wish to highlight what is rumoured to be a common trait in your profession. If this is indeed the case the boy had done good because you have played a blinder here by not responding. Responding to a question with a question is often a tactic used to avoid answering a question that (a) one doesn't wish to answer lest one risks looking a fool, (b) one doesn't know the answer to and wishes to hide the fact, or (c) one fears would expose something that one doesn't wish to have exposed. I trust thus has given you some insight into the possible reasons that Gene has asked this question. Hopefully now we've cleared this up there will be no further impediments to you answering. Matt10 |
|
|
|
Post by whyisitso on May 18, 2015 16:35:55 GMT -5
Gene what is your point of asking a question that you know the answer to? I would suggest that there are several possibilities here. First it is possible that your assumption that Gene knows the answer to the question that he poses is wrong and that he poses the question solely for the purpose of obtaining the answer. Given that I have no idea either what you point is, this may be the most likely scenario and consequently there is nothing peculiar whatsoever about him asking. Alternatively he may well know the answer to his question but he is asking you for the purpose of encouraging you to post it publicly. Perhaps he suspects that your point is a foolish one and he wishes it to be recorded either for posterity or for the amusement of the rest of us. There isn't much to laugh about around here at the best of times. Another possibility is that Gene may in fact suspect that you don't actually have a point and is merely calling your bluff on this. Not appearing to have a point seems to be a recurring theme in your posts so I'm voting for this one. A fourth option might be that Gene being one of the more perceptive people on board has noticed that not answering questions is another recurring theme in your posts and he is merely providing you with a further opportunity to demonstrate this. He may well wish to highlight what is rumoured to be a common trait in your profession. If this is indeed the case the boy had done good because you have played a blinder here by not responding. Responding to a question with a question is often a tactic used to avoid answering a question that (a) one doesn't wish to answer lest one risks looking a fool, (b) one doesn't know the answer to and wishes to hide the fact, or (c) one fears would expose something that one doesn't wish to have exposed. I trust thus has given you some insight into the possible reasons that Gene has asked this question. Hopefully now we've cleared this up there will be no further impediments to you answering. Matt10 Well, we know it's not (a) He has no problem doing that! |
|
|
|
Post by Gene on May 18, 2015 16:52:03 GMT -5
Review005, what's your point? Do you think maybe the alleged letter from the alleged officer is a fake? Gene what is your point of asking a question that you know the answer to? Thanks for the confirmation. |
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on May 19, 2015 0:26:57 GMT -5
Gene what is your point of asking a question that you know the answer to? I would suggest that there are several possibilities here. First it is possible that your assumption that Gene knows the answer to the question that he poses is wrong and that he poses the question solely for the purpose of obtaining the answer. Given that I have no idea either what your point is, this may be the most likely scenario and consequently there is nothing peculiar whatsoever about him asking. Alternatively he may well know the answer to his question but he is asking you for the purpose of encouraging you to post it publicly. Perhaps he suspects that your point is a foolish one and he wishes it to be recorded either for posterity or for the amusement of the rest of us. There isn't much to laugh about around here at the best of times. Another possibility is that Gene may in fact suspect that y ou don't actually have a point and is merely calling your bluff on this. Not appearing to have a point seems to be a recurring theme in your posts so I'm voting for this one. A fourth option might be that Gene being one of the more perceptive people on board has noticed that not answering questions is another recurring theme in your posts and he is merely providing you with a further opportunity to demonstrate this. He may well wish to highlight what is rumoured to be a common trait in your profession. If this is indeed the case the boy had done good because you have played a blinder here by not responding. Responding to a question with a question is often a tactic used to avoid answering a question that (a) one doesn't wish to answer lest one risks looking a fool, (b) one doesn't know the answer to and wishes to hide the fact, or (c) one fears would expose something that one doesn't wish to have exposed. I trust thus has given you some insight into the possible reasons that Gene has asked this question. Hopefully now we've cleared this up there will be no further impediments to you answering. Matt10
Thanks once again!
|
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on May 19, 2015 0:40:44 GMT -5
Matt 10 old chap, l dear say you've been very economic & scant on details . You'll need to provide a little more detail if you expect me to commit myself to an answer to this life and death question that has been put to me.
You really know them all, don't you!
Congratulations on the art of dissembling!
You have graduated with honors!
Right up there on the dean's list!
What was the name of your thesis for you Ph.D? Who was your mentor?
("dear"? Freudian slip?)
|
|
|
|
Post by rational on May 19, 2015 9:51:54 GMT -5
Maybe it is time for a reboot.
From the letter the parts that seem to raise some issues:
I, Sgt. Joel Heap of the Elbert County Sheriff’s Office along with the Investigations Unit, located in Kiowa, State of Colorado have been investigating the allegations of a criminal act committed by Leslie White.
I, (Sgt. J. Heap) would like to make it very clear that this case is still under investigation with Mr. White as the suspect of the criminal acts committed.
@review005, specifically, what issues do you have with these statements? The fact that the first one refers to a single act and the second to multiple acts?
|
|
