Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: sexual harrassment-see answers and some comments

Expand Messages
  • Ricky Gurley
    ... serious topic of which both men and women fall victim to. So whether you are sexxy or not, sexual harassment or assault is not subject matter to be
    Message 1 of 30 , Jan 8, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com, "karousel" <karousel@...> wrote:
      >
      > Well, Rick, I think you are trying to make humor about a very
      serious topic of which both men and women fall victim to. So whether
      you are "sexxy" or not, sexual harassment or assault is not subject
      matter to be taken lightly.


      I am making humor out of this situation. And when you put it into
      context, it is not so distasteful to do so. But, let me go a little
      further here, please...

      Most of the people that are responding here are Private Investigators.
      Experienced and seasoned Private Investigators. Most of the people
      that are in this discussion have been in the Investigative Industry
      for 20, 30, and more years. While withstanding the "test of time",
      seeing far worse things than what we are discussing here (murders,
      rapes, people being stripped of their hard earned "nest eggs", and
      more), and dealing with other people that would try to cause them
      problems simply because of what they do for a living; they have
      developed a "thick skin" and a sense of humor to deal with these very
      disturbing things that they have seen and still see. Personally
      speaking, I think humor can be found in almost anything.

      Now, furthermore, about putting this into proper context.... Jane was
      not raped, was she? As a matter of fact nobody even attempted to rape
      her, did they? If we are to believe Jane, then what happened is that
      Jane got "slapped on the ass"... Okay, not pleasant (well to some it
      may be). Not what I'd go to work looking forward to every day. But, at
      the same time not so serious that we can't make a joke about it. As a
      matter of fact, if all I had to worry about when I went to work
      everyday was some female I did not like "slapping me on the ass"; I'd
      pretty much be "worry free"! I pray, God give me only that, just that
      one and only worry to have in life!

      May I suggest that perhaps you are taking this a little too seriously?
      And if I had to guess, I'd say that you are "emotionally invested" in
      these types of issues and probably pretty biased about them too. But,
      that would not be a guess, would it? That would be taking your
      previous post at face value, right?


      Rick.



      Risk Management Research & Investments, Inc. & Thoth Data Systems
      Mailing Address: 2101 W. Broadway PMB 326, Columbia, MO. 65203
      Office Address: 1 E. Broadway Suite Z, Columbia, MO. 65203
      Direct Office Number: (573) 234-6876
      Office Phone: (573) 234-4647 Ext. 110
      Car Phone: (573) 529-0808
      Cell Phone: (573) 529-4476
      Toll Free Phone: (888) 571-0958
      Toll Free Fax: (877) 795-9800
      EMERGENCY LINE: (573) 234-4871

      RMRI, Inc. Websites
      (1) http://www.rmriinc.com
      (2) http://rmriinc.bestcyberinvestigator.com

      RMRI, Inc. Blogs
      (1) http://rmriinc.blogspot.com/index.html
      (2) http://rmriincspace.spaces.live.com/
    • suesarkis@aol.com
      Rick - You are right on point. For starters, folks, some male employee patting you on your female keister is NOT, I repeat, is NOT workplace sexual
      Message 2 of 30 , Jan 8, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        Rick -

        You are right on point.

        For starters, folks, some male employee patting you on your female keister
        is NOT, I repeat, is NOT "workplace sexual harassment". Had she reported it
        to her employer and then it continued, it would have been.

        I just wonder what has happened to our free loving, hard working, honest to
        goodness American spirit. When I was a waitress, and no smart ass remarks
        Rick, I was never truly offended when a guy pat me on the po-po. I'd rather be
        insulted if they didn't look and ogle and attempt their shenanigans which
        usually got them slapped. Perhaps too many people take light hearted jest too
        seriously. In my opinion people like Benjamin Spock and Gloria Allred are
        cancerous contagions better to be ignored than considered.

        I digress. Rick is one million percent correct about humor. It is an
        absolute necessity of life regardless of how grievous the situation lest you want
        to wind up in a rubber room.

        True story: About 30 yrs ago I'm on the witness stand testifying in
        Superior Court - Pasadena, CA. The judge interrupts me, or possibly it was at the
        end when I was finished, regardless the judge asked me a rather long question.
        He said words to the effect, "Ms. Sarkis, please explain to me how with you
        having 4 bullet holes in your body, 2 police helicopters overhead, the
        entire SWAT team standing your perimeter for no less than 3 hours, news media
        abounding, and a gun to your head, how could this defendant possibly have had an
        orgasm?"

        Since the court had already viewed the rape which GPD had filmed rather than
        interdicted, there was no doubt in his mind that it had happened so it was
        obviously a sincere question and not a flippant one. I just looked at him,
        smiled, and said, "Well, your Honor, some of us are just that good!". What
        else could I say?

        I wasn't making light of the entire situation but rather trying to protect
        myself from falling apart. It worked. I never had to seek counsel or
        therapy. Today people just take themselves all too seriously and don't realize that
        life gives us some nasty breaks. Get over it for God's sake. We/you will
        survive !!!!

        When a woman is walking around half clad or even fully clad and a guy pats
        her on the butt for the first time at work, she has three choices.

        1) if she likes him she can smile coyly and walk away;
        2) if she fears people might have witnessed and she's embarrassed, she
        should slap his hand away and while pointing her shaking finger at his nose
        declare that he should never do that again; or,
        3) if he's coyote ugly or she doesn't like him, knock his lights out and
        report it to the boss if for no other reason than to protect yourself from a
        battery charge.

        Milquetoasts. The late Benjamin Spock, Gloria Allred et al, have created
        nothing but a bunch of milquetoasts who can't handle things without filing
        lawsuits. UGH !! What has America come to?



        Sincerely yours,
        Sue
        ________________________
        Sue Sarkis
        Sarkis Detective Agency

        (est. 1976)
        PI 6564
        _www.sarkispi.com_ (http://www.sarkispi.com/)

        1346 Ethel Street
        Glendale, CA 91207-1826
        818-242-2505
        818-246-3001 FAX

        "one Nation under God"

        If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read it in English, thank
        a military veteran
        **************New year...new news. Be the first to know what is making
        headlines. (http://news.aol.com?ncid=emlcntusnews00000002)


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Joan Farley Nyobe
        That s very true. You have to be honest on your employment application. Everything is subject to validation. From: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com
        Message 3 of 30 , Jan 8, 2009
        • 0 Attachment
          That's very true. You have to be honest on your employment application.
          Everything is subject to validation.











          From: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com [mailto:infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com]
          On Behalf Of RanchoAttySvc@...
          Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 7:15 PM
          To: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: Re: [infoguys-list] Re: sexual harrassment-see answers and some
          comments





          In a message dated 1/8/2009 4:08:52 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
          jfarleynyobe@... <mailto:jfarleynyobe%40yahoo.com> writes:

          I still write everything down.but now it's on Twitter,
          a high tech level of documenting what's going on

          Joan - I'll bet you never lied on your employment application, did you?
          None of the other stuff really matters with regard to the "Bitchy Bimbo of
          Fufu". If you get caught lying, you are out on your tailfeathers. The
          employer
          doesn't NEED a reason at that point.

          And about "Twitter".....even that gets hacked and twisted. Ask Obama. :o)


          _"RASCAL" - Your friendly neighborhood Process Server_
          (http://www.ranchoattorneyservice.com/)

          Michele Dawn
          RPS 117 & CA PI 24790
          Rancho Attorney Service of California &
          RASCAL's Research & Location Services
          28465 Old Town Front St #318
          Temecula, CA 92590
          (951) 693-0165
          CALSpro NAPPS CAJP NCISS
          _www.ranchoattorneyservice.com_ (http://www.ranchoattorneyservice.com/)
          MC - Visa - American Express
          **************New year...new news. Be the first to know what is making
          headlines. (http://news.aol.com?ncid=emlcntusnews00000002)

          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • karousel
          When the thread started, there wasn t, IMO, enough information to offer a well rounded opinion to the question presented. I have not been able to follow the
          Message 4 of 30 , Jan 8, 2009
          • 0 Attachment
            When the thread started, there wasn't, IMO, enough information to offer a well rounded opinion to the question presented. I have not been able to follow the thread, and jumped in at a later time only to comment about the mindset of a woman that has been sexually harassed - not whether or not the petitioner had a solid case.


            >>>Most of the people that are responding here are Private Investigators. Experienced and seasoned Private Investigators. Most of the people that are in this discussion have been in the Investigative Industry for 20, 30, and more years. While withstanding the "test of time", seeing far worse things than what we are discussing here (murders, rapes, people being stripped of their hard earned "nest eggs", and more), and dealing with other people that would try to cause them problems simply because of what they do for a living; they have developed a "thick skin" and a sense of humor to deal with these very disturbing things that they have seen and still see. Personally speaking, I think humor can be found in almost anything. <<<

            ONE DOESN'T HAVE TO BE A SEASONED PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR TO SEE "FAR WORSE THINGS THAN WHAT WE ARE DISCUSSING HERE ...". I AM NOT IN YOUR PROFESSION BUT YET HAVE HAD TO WITNESS, DEAL WITH, AND ASSIST PEOPLE WITH HORRIFIC CIRCUMSTANCES AS YOU DESCRIBE. YOUR PROFESSION DOES NOT MAKE EXPOSURE TO THESE SITUATIONS UNIQUE.

            HUMOR IS GOOD - YOUR "THICK SKIN", (AS YOU CALL IT), HELPS YOU DEAL WITH IT. PERHAPS THE WAITRESS'S SILENCE WAS THE ONLY WAY SHE COULD DEAL WITH IT UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES. I DON'T KNOW. I'M SURE THE JURY WILL DECIDE BASED ON THE PRESENTATION OF THE CASE.


            <<<Now, furthermore, about putting this into proper context.... Jane was not raped, was she? As a matter of fact nobody even attempted to rape her, did they? If we are to believe Jane, then what happened is that Jane got "slapped on the ass"... Okay, not pleasant (well to some it may be).

            YOU ARE TRYING TO ELEVATE THE DESCRIPTION OF SOME OTHER CRIME TO MINIMIZE THE SERIOUSNESS OF THE "SLAP ON THE ASS". VIOLATING SOMEONE, WHETHER IT BE INVASIVE OR AN ASSAULT, AN UNWANTED AND UNSOLICITED PHYSICAL CONTACT OF THE LEAST DEGREE, IT IS STILL A VIOLATION AND SHOULD NOT BE TOLERATED.


            Not what I'd go to work looking forward to every day. But, at the same time not so serious that we can't make a joke about it. As a matter of fact, if all I had to worry about when I went to work everyday was some female I did not like "slapping me on the ass"; I'd pretty much be "worry free"! I pray, God give me only that, just that one and only worry to have in life! >>>

            I WONDER --- IF THE "SLAP ON THE ASS" HAPPENED TO YOUR WIFE ... OR DAUGHTER ... OR GRANDDAUGHTER, WOULD YOU BE SAYING THE SAME THINGS TO THEM? I ASK MYSELF QUESTIONS LIKE THAT AT TIMES WHEN I FEEL UNSURE OF CASES AND WANT A BETTER PERSPECTIVE OF MY JUDGMENT.




            >>> May I suggest that perhaps you are taking this a little too seriously? And if I had to guess, I'd say that you are "emotionally invested" in these types of issues and probably pretty biased about them too. But, that would not be a guess, would it? That would be taking your previous post at face value, right? <<<

            YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. I AM "EMOTIONALLY" AS WELL AS INTELLECTUALLY INVESTED - IN ALL VICTIMS' ISSUES - REGARDLESS OF WHAT TYPE OF CRIMINAL/CONSTITUTIONAL MATTER I WORK WITH. AND I DO TAKE THEM SERIOUSLY. VERY SERIOUSLY. THAT'S WHY I AM GOOD AT WHAT I DO.


            SYLVIA
            karousel@...


            ----- Original Message -----
            From: Ricky Gurley
            To: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com
            Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 7:35 PM
            Subject: [infoguys-list] Re: sexual harrassment-see answers and some comments


            --- In infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com, "karousel" <karousel@...> wrote:
            >
            > Well, Rick, I think you are trying to make humor about a very
            serious topic of which both men and women fall victim to. So whether
            you are "sexxy" or not, sexual harassment or assault is not subject
            matter to be taken lightly.

            I am making humor out of this situation. And when you put it into
            context, it is not so distasteful to do so. But, let me go a little
            further here, please...

            Most of the people that are responding here are Private Investigators.
            Experienced and seasoned Private Investigators. Most of the people
            that are in this discussion have been in the Investigative Industry
            for 20, 30, and more years. While withstanding the "test of time",
            seeing far worse things than what we are discussing here (murders,
            rapes, people being stripped of their hard earned "nest eggs", and
            more), and dealing with other people that would try to cause them
            problems simply because of what they do for a living; they have
            developed a "thick skin" and a sense of humor to deal with these very
            disturbing things that they have seen and still see. Personally
            speaking, I think humor can be found in almost anything.

            Now, furthermore, about putting this into proper context.... Jane was
            not raped, was she? As a matter of fact nobody even attempted to rape
            her, did they? If we are to believe Jane, then what happened is that
            Jane got "slapped on the ass"... Okay, not pleasant (well to some it
            may be). Not what I'd go to work looking forward to every day. But, at
            the same time not so serious that we can't make a joke about it. As a
            matter of fact, if all I had to worry about when I went to work
            everyday was some female I did not like "slapping me on the ass"; I'd
            pretty much be "worry free"! I pray, God give me only that, just that
            one and only worry to have in life!

            May I suggest that perhaps you are taking this a little too seriously?
            And if I had to guess, I'd say that you are "emotionally invested" in
            these types of issues and probably pretty biased about them too. But,
            that would not be a guess, would it? That would be taking your
            previous post at face value, right?

            Rick.

            Risk Management Research & Investments, Inc. & Thoth Data Systems
            Mailing Address: 2101 W. Broadway PMB 326, Columbia, MO. 65203
            Office Address: 1 E. Broadway Suite Z, Columbia, MO. 65203
            Direct Office Number: (573) 234-6876
            Office Phone: (573) 234-4647 Ext. 110
            Car Phone: (573) 529-0808
            Cell Phone: (573) 529-4476
            Toll Free Phone: (888) 571-0958
            Toll Free Fax: (877) 795-9800
            EMERGENCY LINE: (573) 234-4871

            RMRI, Inc. Websites
            (1) http://www.rmriinc.com
            (2) http://rmriinc.bestcyberinvestigator.com

            RMRI, Inc. Blogs
            (1) http://rmriinc.blogspot.com/index.html
            (2) http://rmriincspace.spaces.live.com/







            ------------------------------------------------------------------------------



            No virus found in this incoming message.
            Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
            Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.5/1882 - Release Date: 1/8/2009 8:13 AM


            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • Glad4JC@aol.com
            Joan & Sue I admire both of you for having the courage and tenacity to see it through, and to have overcome the trauma, and especially for sharing it here on
            Message 5 of 30 , Jan 8, 2009
            • 0 Attachment
              Joan & Sue

              I admire both of you for having the courage and tenacity to see it through,
              and to have overcome the trauma, and especially for sharing it here on this
              public forum, many of us would not have the courage to do that. I applaud you
              both!

              Gladys Brierley
              ACCURATE INVESTIGATIONS
              PO Box 872
              Newton, MS 39345
              601-683-2094 bus & fax
              601-480-3181 cell
              Bus Lic # 1499
              Duns# 8082376
              _www.accurateinvestigation.com_ (http://www.accurateinvestigation.com/)
              Member of NAIS, NLLI, ACI, MPIA, APIA
              Regional Director NLLI
              Public Relations Officer MPIA






              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • Ricky Gurley
              ... DAUGHTER ... OR GRANDDAUGHTER, WOULD YOU BE SAYING THE SAME THINGS TO THEM? I ASK MYSELF QUESTIONS LIKE THAT AT TIMES WHEN I FEEL UNSURE OF CASES AND WANT
              Message 6 of 30 , Jan 8, 2009
              • 0 Attachment
                --- In infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com, "karousel" <karousel@...> wrote:

                > I WONDER --- IF THE "SLAP ON THE ASS" HAPPENED TO YOUR WIFE ... OR
                DAUGHTER ... OR GRANDDAUGHTER, WOULD YOU BE SAYING THE SAME THINGS TO
                THEM? I ASK MYSELF QUESTIONS LIKE THAT AT TIMES WHEN I FEEL UNSURE OF
                CASES AND WANT A BETTER PERSPECTIVE OF MY JUDGMENT.

                I will address this issue, the other issue are just mute points,
                apparently falling on deaf ears.....

                If my significant other were to encounter this, I would not have to
                worry about it in the least.. I probably would not even hear about it,
                as she can take care of herself. And with a combination of a good
                slap, and a strong complaint to her employer which would be my
                significant other's reaction, I'd probably wind up feeling sorry for
                the poor schmuck if I did hear about it....

                Daughter; (don't have one), but if I did, she would learn to react the
                same way as my significant other would at an appropriate time in her
                life. And thus, the result would be the same, I'd probably wind up
                feeling sorry for the poor schmuck!

                You see, what I would want to teach my family is to handle their own
                problems appropriately. I would also want to teach my family to handle
                their problems with some dignity, and there is not much dignity in
                turning a minor problem that you can handle yourself into a law suit
                so that you can keep your job (that you probably deserved to be
                terminated from) or because you see "dollar signs".. And I don't think
                many people respect someone that could handle a problem with a good
                slap, and a strong complaint but would rather choose to try to turn it
                into something they could profit from.

                So, let's get something straight. As you admit that you are
                "emotionally invested" in this issue, you have a harder time seeing
                both sides of this issue. And as I admit that I and many others here
                can take this situation into proper context, I will say that is what
                makes us good at what we do. And if we were to put you (as
                "emotionally invested" as you admit you are) on one side of the court
                room in this case, and someone like Sue Sarkis, Bill Branscum, or
                Chuck Chambers (people that understand how to put these things into
                proper perspective and be reasonable about them) on the other side of
                the court room, the end result is that the only purpose you would
                serve in that court room would be that of a mop, as these
                investigators mopped the court room floor with you. And that is what
                makes them EXCELLENT at what they do!


                Rick.



                Risk Management Research & Investments, Inc. & Thoth Data Systems
                Mailing Address: 2101 W. Broadway PMB 326, Columbia, MO. 65203
                Office Address: 1 E. Broadway Suite Z, Columbia, MO. 65203
                Direct Office Number: (573) 234-6876
                Office Phone: (573) 234-4647 Ext. 110
                Car Phone: (573) 529-0808
                Cell Phone: (573) 529-4476
                Toll Free Phone: (888) 571-0958
                Toll Free Fax: (877) 795-9800
                EMERGENCY LINE: (573) 234-4871

                RMRI, Inc. Websites
                (1) http://www.rmriinc.com
                (2) http://rmriinc.bestcyberinvestigator.com

                RMRI, Inc. Blogs
                (1) http://rmriinc.blogspot.com/index.html
                (2) http://rmriincspace.spaces.live.com/
              • karousel
                ... The other points are not falling on deaf ears. We just have a difference of opinion. We have a right to disagree, do we not? ... That s not necessarily a
                Message 7 of 30 , Jan 8, 2009
                • 0 Attachment
                  >>>I will address this issue, the other issue are just mute points, apparently falling on deaf ears..... <<<
                  The other points are not falling on deaf ears. We just have a difference of opinion. We have a right to disagree, do we not?


                  >>>And if we were to put you (as"emotionally invested" as you admit you are)
                  That's not necessarily a bad thing. It puts me in a better position of being able to relate to the victim in such circumstances.

                  >>> on one side of the courtroom in this case, and someone like Sue Sarkis, Bill Branscum, or Chuck Chambers (people that understand how to put these things into proper perspective and be reasonable about them) on the other side of the court room, the end result is that the only purpose you would serve in that court room would be that of a mop, as these investigators mopped the court room floor with you. And that is what makes them EXCELLENT at what they do!>>>

                  It's amazing how you have taken a serious topic of discussion and turned it into a personal mud slinging event because I don't agree with you. Think about this. I described a scenario of why the waitress may not have reported the incident, so for that reason three other people on this list are going to mop the courtroom floor with me? Is your expression of degradation and disrespect meant to cower me into some form of submission?

                  Your posts on this subject matter are very telling.

                  I've explained my opinion on the initial point. No reason to rehash it further.

                  Sylvia
                  karousel@...



                  ----- Original Message -----
                  From: Ricky Gurley
                  To: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com
                  Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 9:19 PM
                  Subject: [infoguys-list] Re: sexual harrassment-see answers and some comments


                  --- In infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com, "karousel" <karousel@...> wrote:

                  > I WONDER --- IF THE "SLAP ON THE ASS" HAPPENED TO YOUR WIFE ... OR
                  DAUGHTER ... OR GRANDDAUGHTER, WOULD YOU BE SAYING THE SAME THINGS TO
                  THEM? I ASK MYSELF QUESTIONS LIKE THAT AT TIMES WHEN I FEEL UNSURE OF
                  CASES AND WANT A BETTER PERSPECTIVE OF MY JUDGMENT.

                  I will address this issue, the other issue are just mute points,
                  apparently falling on deaf ears.....

                  If my significant other were to encounter this, I would not have to
                  worry about it in the least.. I probably would not even hear about it,
                  as she can take care of herself. And with a combination of a good
                  slap, and a strong complaint to her employer which would be my
                  significant other's reaction, I'd probably wind up feeling sorry for
                  the poor schmuck if I did hear about it....

                  Daughter; (don't have one), but if I did, she would learn to react the
                  same way as my significant other would at an appropriate time in her
                  life. And thus, the result would be the same, I'd probably wind up
                  feeling sorry for the poor schmuck!

                  You see, what I would want to teach my family is to handle their own
                  problems appropriately. I would also want to teach my family to handle
                  their problems with some dignity, and there is not much dignity in
                  turning a minor problem that you can handle yourself into a law suit
                  so that you can keep your job (that you probably deserved to be
                  terminated from) or because you see "dollar signs".. And I don't think
                  many people respect someone that could handle a problem with a good
                  slap, and a strong complaint but would rather choose to try to turn it
                  into something they could profit from.

                  So, let's get something straight. As you admit that you are
                  "emotionally invested" in this issue, you have a harder time seeing
                  both sides of this issue. And as I admit that I and many others here
                  can take this situation into proper context, I will say that is what
                  makes us good at what we do. And if we were to put you (as
                  "emotionally invested" as you admit you are) on one side of the court
                  room in this case, and someone like Sue Sarkis, Bill Branscum, or
                  Chuck Chambers (people that understand how to put these things into
                  proper perspective and be reasonable about them) on the other side of
                  the court room, the end result is that the only purpose you would
                  serve in that court room would be that of a mop, as these
                  investigators mopped the court room floor with you. And that is what
                  makes them EXCELLENT at what they do!

                  Rick.

                  Risk Management Research & Investments, Inc. & Thoth Data Systems
                  Mailing Address: 2101 W. Broadway PMB 326, Columbia, MO. 65203
                  Office Address: 1 E. Broadway Suite Z, Columbia, MO. 65203
                  Direct Office Number: (573) 234-6876
                  Office Phone: (573) 234-4647 Ext. 110
                  Car Phone: (573) 529-0808
                  Cell Phone: (573) 529-4476
                  Toll Free Phone: (888) 571-0958
                  Toll Free Fax: (877) 795-9800
                  EMERGENCY LINE: (573) 234-4871

                  RMRI, Inc. Websites
                  (1) http://www.rmriinc.com
                  (2) http://rmriinc.bestcyberinvestigator.com

                  RMRI, Inc. Blogs
                  (1) http://rmriinc.blogspot.com/index.html
                  (2) http://rmriincspace.spaces.live.com/






                  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------



                  No virus found in this incoming message.
                  Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
                  Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.5/1882 - Release Date: 1/8/2009 8:13 AM


                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • suesarkis@aol.com
                  In a message dated 1/8/2009 7:38:17 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, karousel@warwick.net writes: I described a scenario of why the waitress may not have reported
                  Message 8 of 30 , Jan 8, 2009
                  • 0 Attachment
                    In a message dated 1/8/2009 7:38:17 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
                    karousel@... writes:

                    I described a scenario of why the waitress may not have reported the
                    incident, so for that reason three other people on this list are going to mop the
                    courtroom floor with me?


                    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

                    Sylvia -

                    You seem to be missing the point. It doesn't matter WHY she didn't report
                    it. The fact remains that because she did NOT report it until after she was
                    canned or made aware that she was being canned, her chances of ever winning a
                    legitimate case would be between slim and none. However, in the case at
                    hand, it is not even a legitimate work place sexual harassment matter since it
                    was a ONE time incident, at least as it was reported.


                    Sincerely yours,
                    Sue
                    ________________________
                    Sue Sarkis
                    Sarkis Detective Agency

                    (est. 1976)
                    PI 6564
                    _www.sarkispi.com_ (http://www.sarkispi.com/)

                    1346 Ethel Street
                    Glendale, CA 91207-1826
                    818-242-2505
                    818-246-3001 FAX

                    "one Nation under God"

                    If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read it in English, thank
                    a military veteran
                    **************New year...new news. Be the first to know what is making
                    headlines. (http://news.aol.com?ncid=emlcntusnews00000002)


                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • karousel
                    Hi Sue: I didn t miss the point. I wasn t addressing that point. If you go back to my posts on the subject, I said: When the thread started, there wasn t,
                    Message 9 of 30 , Jan 8, 2009
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Hi Sue:

                      I didn't miss the point. I wasn't addressing that point.

                      If you go back to my posts on the subject, I said:

                      "When the thread started, there wasn't, IMO, enough information to offer a well rounded opinion to the question presented. I have not been able to follow the thread, and jumped in at a later time only to comment about the mindset of a woman that has been sexually harassed - not whether or not the petitioner had a solid case."

                      I merely commented about the mindset of a woman that has been sexually harassed - that such an incident may not be reported because of her personal circumstances. That's it - that's all it was. I can't be drawn into the full discussion because I haven't followed the thread.

                      But even if I WAS commenting about DETAILS in that case - and had a difference of opinion - is that cause for a personal attack? It was inappropriate.

                      Sue, I did what I intended to do - I gave my opinion as stated above. I appreciate your comment below, but as I mentioned, I didn't follow the thread.

                      Sylvia
                      karousel@...



                      ----- Original Message -----
                      From: suesarkis@...
                      To: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com
                      Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 11:16 PM
                      Subject: Re: [infoguys-list] Re: sexual harrassment-see answers and some comments



                      In a message dated 1/8/2009 7:38:17 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
                      karousel@... writes:

                      I described a scenario of why the waitress may not have reported the
                      incident, so for that reason three other people on this list are going to mop the
                      courtroom floor with me?

                      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

                      Sylvia -

                      You seem to be missing the point. It doesn't matter WHY she didn't report
                      it. The fact remains that because she did NOT report it until after she was
                      canned or made aware that she was being canned, her chances of ever winning a
                      legitimate case would be between slim and none. However, in the case at
                      hand, it is not even a legitimate work place sexual harassment matter since it
                      was a ONE time incident, at least as it was reported.


                      Sincerely yours,
                      Sue
                      ________________________
                      Sue Sarkis
                      Sarkis Detective Agency

                      (est. 1976)
                      PI 6564
                      _www.sarkispi.com_ (http://www.sarkispi.com/)

                      1346 Ethel Street
                      Glendale, CA 91207-1826
                      818-242-2505
                      818-246-3001 FAX

                      "one Nation under God"

                      If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read it in English, thank
                      a military veteran
                      **************New year...new news. Be the first to know what is making
                      headlines. (http://news.aol.com?ncid=emlcntusnews00000002)

                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






                      ------------------------------------------------------------------------------



                      No virus found in this incoming message.
                      Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
                      Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.5/1882 - Release Date: 1/8/2009 8:13 AM


                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • Ricky Gurley
                      ... Is your expression of degradation and disrespect meant to cower me into some form of submission? Even here, you turn this into some type of a male
                      Message 10 of 30 , Jan 8, 2009
                      • 0 Attachment
                        --- In infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com, "karousel" <karousel@...> wrote:
                        Is your expression of degradation and disrespect meant to cower me
                        into some form of submission?

                        Even here, you turn this into some type of a "male harassing a female
                        situation". So, your posts speak volumes about you, also.....

                        But, let me try to give you a better understanding of what I am saying...

                        You are emotionally invested here, and you admit it. Because of events
                        that have occurred in your past, you find it hard to be objective. You
                        are making excuses for Jane, and overlooking what everyone else here
                        is pretty much seeing as obvious. You WANT Jane to be a victim. Truth
                        be damned, as long as Jane is the victim! Not once have I seen you
                        post any possibilities as to why her employer might be the victim of a
                        frivolous lawsuit, or worse a SCAM so that Jane can profit and/or keep
                        her job!

                        Not once have you considered the possibility that he employer had
                        several good reasons to fire Jane: Poor performance, lying on her
                        application, calling in drunk. Not once have you considered the
                        employer's right o insure that he or she runs a business that is
                        conducive to having repeat customers by keeping the employees that
                        deal well with customers and getting rid of the ones that don't. You
                        have not even stopped to consider this from the employer's side for
                        the first second, and if you have you certainly have not written about
                        it here. As long as Jane is the "victim", that is all that matters to you.

                        You WANT to believe Jane, even if it is obvious that she is lying.
                        Again, this means you are not even approaching this objectively. And
                        how much of a fool do you look like if the obvious is proven, that
                        Jane is lying? So, if you had a case like this, you would COMPLETELY
                        believe your client without question, and therefore either advise your
                        client wrongly, or just look like a completely, naive fool after what
                        we already strongly suspect, from the little bit of TELLING
                        information that we do have, is proven.

                        VET YOUR CLIENT FIRST! Every P.I. here KNOWS that! The FIRST person
                        you check out is your client! EVERY P.I. HERE KNOWS THAT! Jane's story
                        does not pass the "preliminary smell test", so she has to answer
                        before anyone else does! All you have done is taken Jane's word as the
                        gospel, and made excuses for her whenever there is something that
                        calls for closer examination regarding her story!

                        So, instead of saying that these P.I.s would have "mopped the floor
                        with you", let's say it like this, these P.I.s would have been more
                        than happy to allow you to make a complete fool out of yourself if you
                        were on Jane's side and they were on her employer's side. Because if
                        they would take a case like this working on the side of Jane's
                        employer, the FIRST thing they would do is vet Jane's employer, he or
                        she would have to answer the hard questions first, and if they chose
                        to work for him or her, it would be because he or she passed that
                        "preliminary smell test", they did not make excuses for him or her,
                        and they believed in their client and KNEW that he or she was worth
                        fighting for, due to their OBJECTIVE examination of their client to
                        begin with.


                        Do you believe the employer should have some say so over who works for
                        him or her, and have the right o fire those that may hurt his or her
                        business?

                        Don't you find Jane's timing a little odd for making this complaint?

                        Don't you find it odd that she is reporting this now instead of when
                        it happened?

                        Did it occur to you that if she LIED on her application, she might be
                        lying now?

                        Don't you think that the fact that Jane called in to take time off
                        because she was DRUNK, goes to her character?

                        Or are you willing to overlook these points so that Jane can be the
                        "victim" that you seem to need her to be?


                        Rick.


                        Risk Management Research & Investments, Inc. & Thoth Data Systems
                        Mailing Address: 2101 W. Broadway PMB 326, Columbia, MO. 65203
                        Office Address: 1 E. Broadway Suite Z, Columbia, MO. 65203
                        Direct Office Number: (573) 234-6876
                        Office Phone: (573) 234-4647 Ext. 110
                        Car Phone: (573) 529-0808
                        Cell Phone: (573) 529-4476
                        Toll Free Phone: (888) 571-0958
                        Toll Free Fax: (877) 795-9800
                        EMERGENCY LINE: (573) 234-4871

                        RMRI, Inc. Websites
                        (1) http://www.rmriinc.com
                        (2) http://rmriinc.bestcyberinvestigator.com

                        RMRI, Inc. Blogs
                        (1) http://rmriinc.blogspot.com/index.html
                        (2) http://rmriincspace.spaces.live.com/
                      • karousel
                        Rick: I m really sorry, but this is now getting laughable. I feel like I m on Candid Camera but there s no trace of the late Allen Funt. Let me put it this
                        Message 11 of 30 , Jan 8, 2009
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Rick:

                          I'm really sorry, but this is now getting laughable. I feel like I'm on "Candid Camera" but there's no trace of the late Allen Funt. Let me put it this way:

                          <<<Is your expression of degradation and disrespect meant to cower me into some form of submission? >>>
                          >>>Even here, you turn this into some type of a "male harassing a female situation".>>>

                          I HAVE MADE NO REFERENCE TO GENDER. MY COMMENT IS GENDER-FREE AND APPLICABLE TO EITHER SEX. (WOMEN CAN ALSO EXPRESS DEGRADATION AND DISRESPECT - THIS IS NOT SOLELY A MALE PERSONALITY TRAIT.)


                          PLEASE READ AGAIN WHAT YOU WROTE BELOW.

                          NOW THAT YOU'VE READ YOUR LAST POST, I WILL TRY TO REPHRASE THIS. I KNOW NOTHING ABOUT THE CASE AND HAVE MADE NO COMMENTS ABOUT THE CASE. I HAVE MADE NO COMMENTS ABOUT WHETHER JANE IS A VICTIM, WHETHER JANE IS NOT A VICTIM, WHETHER YOU SHOULD APPLAUD JANE'S BOSS FOR FIRING HER, IF SHE SHOULD LOSE THE CASE, AND ON AND ON.

                          MY COMMENT WAS A GENERAL STATEMENT OF THE MINDSET OF A WOMAN THAT HAS BEEN SEXUALLY HARASSED - NOT WHETHER OR NOT THE PETITIONER HAD A SOLID CASE. I DON'T KNOW IF SHE HAS A SOLID CASE AS I DID NOT READ THE DETAILS OF HER CLAIMS OR OTHER INFORMATION.

                          HOPEFULLY, THIS CLARIFIES MY POSITION ON THE CASE - WHICH IS NO POSITION AT ALL. I'M SORRY TO DISAPPOINT YOU, BUT I AM ANNOUNCING THIS SPARRING MATCH TO BE OVER.

                          HAVE A GOOD NIGHT.

                          SYLVIA
                          karousel@...





                          ----- Original Message -----
                          From: Ricky Gurley
                          To: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com
                          Sent: Friday, January 09, 2009 12:03 AM
                          Subject: [infoguys-list] Re: sexual harrassment-see answers and some comments


                          --- In infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com, "karousel" <karousel@...> wrote:
                          Is your expression of degradation and disrespect meant to cower me
                          into some form of submission?

                          Even here, you turn this into some type of a "male harassing a female
                          situation". So, your posts speak volumes about you, also.....

                          But, let me try to give you a better understanding of what I am saying...

                          You are emotionally invested here, and you admit it. Because of events
                          that have occurred in your past, you find it hard to be objective. You
                          are making excuses for Jane, and overlooking what everyone else here
                          is pretty much seeing as obvious. You WANT Jane to be a victim. Truth
                          be damned, as long as Jane is the victim! Not once have I seen you
                          post any possibilities as to why her employer might be the victim of a
                          frivolous lawsuit, or worse a SCAM so that Jane can profit and/or keep
                          her job!

                          Not once have you considered the possibility that he employer had
                          several good reasons to fire Jane: Poor performance, lying on her
                          application, calling in drunk. Not once have you considered the
                          employer's right o insure that he or she runs a business that is
                          conducive to having repeat customers by keeping the employees that
                          deal well with customers and getting rid of the ones that don't. You
                          have not even stopped to consider this from the employer's side for
                          the first second, and if you have you certainly have not written about
                          it here. As long as Jane is the "victim", that is all that matters to you.

                          You WANT to believe Jane, even if it is obvious that she is lying.
                          Again, this means you are not even approaching this objectively. And
                          how much of a fool do you look like if the obvious is proven, that
                          Jane is lying? So, if you had a case like this, you would COMPLETELY
                          believe your client without question, and therefore either advise your
                          client wrongly, or just look like a completely, naive fool after what
                          we already strongly suspect, from the little bit of TELLING
                          information that we do have, is proven.

                          VET YOUR CLIENT FIRST! Every P.I. here KNOWS that! The FIRST person
                          you check out is your client! EVERY P.I. HERE KNOWS THAT! Jane's story
                          does not pass the "preliminary smell test", so she has to answer
                          before anyone else does! All you have done is taken Jane's word as the
                          gospel, and made excuses for her whenever there is something that
                          calls for closer examination regarding her story!

                          So, instead of saying that these P.I.s would have "mopped the floor
                          with you", let's say it like this, these P.I.s would have been more
                          than happy to allow you to make a complete fool out of yourself if you
                          were on Jane's side and they were on her employer's side. Because if
                          they would take a case like this working on the side of Jane's
                          employer, the FIRST thing they would do is vet Jane's employer, he or
                          she would have to answer the hard questions first, and if they chose
                          to work for him or her, it would be because he or she passed that
                          "preliminary smell test", they did not make excuses for him or her,
                          and they believed in their client and KNEW that he or she was worth
                          fighting for, due to their OBJECTIVE examination of their client to
                          begin with.

                          Do you believe the employer should have some say so over who works for
                          him or her, and have the right o fire those that may hurt his or her
                          business?

                          Don't you find Jane's timing a little odd for making this complaint?

                          Don't you find it odd that she is reporting this now instead of when
                          it happened?

                          Did it occur to you that if she LIED on her application, she might be
                          lying now?

                          Don't you think that the fact that Jane called in to take time off
                          because she was DRUNK, goes to her character?

                          Or are you willing to overlook these points so that Jane can be the
                          "victim" that you seem to need her to be?

                          Rick.

                          Risk Management Research & Investments, Inc. & Thoth Data Systems
                          Mailing Address: 2101 W. Broadway PMB 326, Columbia, MO. 65203
                          Office Address: 1 E. Broadway Suite Z, Columbia, MO. 65203
                          Direct Office Number: (573) 234-6876
                          Office Phone: (573) 234-4647 Ext. 110
                          Car Phone: (573) 529-0808
                          Cell Phone: (573) 529-4476
                          Toll Free Phone: (888) 571-0958
                          Toll Free Fax: (877) 795-9800
                          EMERGENCY LINE: (573) 234-4871

                          RMRI, Inc. Websites
                          (1) http://www.rmriinc.com
                          (2) http://rmriinc.bestcyberinvestigator.com

                          RMRI, Inc. Blogs
                          (1) http://rmriinc.blogspot.com/index.html
                          (2) http://rmriincspace.spaces.live.com/







                          ------------------------------------------------------------------------------



                          No virus found in this incoming message.
                          Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
                          Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.5/1882 - Release Date: 1/8/2009 8:13 AM


                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        • Ricky Gurley
                          ... I m on Candid Camera but there s no trace of the late Allen Funt. Let me put it this way: Yes! Yes it is getting laughable... The fact that you are
                          Message 12 of 30 , Jan 9, 2009
                          • 0 Attachment
                            --- In infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com, "karousel" <karousel@...> wrote:
                            >
                            > Rick:
                            >
                            > I'm really sorry, but this is now getting laughable. I feel like
                            I'm on "Candid Camera" but there's no trace of the late Allen Funt.
                            Let me put it this way:

                            Yes! Yes it is getting laughable... The fact that you are defending
                            yourself is laughable.


                            > MY COMMENT WAS A GENERAL STATEMENT OF THE MINDSET OF A WOMAN THAT
                            HAS BEEN SEXUALLY HARASSED - NOT WHETHER OR NOT THE PETITIONER HAD A
                            SOLID CASE. I DON'T KNOW IF SHE HAS A SOLID CASE AS I DID NOT READ
                            THE DETAILS OF HER CLAIMS OR OTHER INFORMATION.

                            And you applied that comment in defense of Jane.


                            Not to mention that since we have been "arguing" here, you
                            have had plenty of time to research this thread, so you should be well
                            read up on the details that Amy has provided to us on this issue thus
                            far. Care to comment on this thread a little more now?

                            Well.. Now I have a much more entertaining thing to deal with than
                            you.. I have an XBox 360 upstairs just waiting on me to come play with
                            it..

                            Now, now, don't go saying that I "objectified" you by comparing you to
                            an XBox. Or I made some kind of a sexual innuendo towards you by using
                            the term "play with it"... Because although you may see the big,
                            hairy, pervert of a bad man around every corner; it just isn't so......

                            If you believe that I am a bit upset, or frustrated, well then you
                            don't know me very well. But... What I must say though, is that
                            through all of this posting back and forth between you and I; I have
                            come to feel that you are the type of female that a male would want to
                            make sure to deal with when witnesses are present, or with an audio
                            recording device of some sort going. I am quite thankful that our
                            "conversation" has been with witnesses present and has been in the
                            "public", because there is no telling what kind of "offense" you would
                            have dreamed up otherwise.

                            Toodles!



                            Rick.


                            Risk Management Research & Investments, Inc. & Thoth Data Systems
                            Mailing Address: 2101 W. Broadway PMB 326, Columbia, MO. 65203
                            Office Address: 1 E. Broadway Suite Z, Columbia, MO. 65203
                            Direct Office Number: (573) 234-6876
                            Office Phone: (573) 234-4647 Ext. 110
                            Car Phone: (573) 529-0808
                            Cell Phone: (573) 529-4476
                            Toll Free Phone: (888) 571-0958
                            Toll Free Fax: (877) 795-9800
                            EMERGENCY LINE: (573) 234-4871

                            RMRI, Inc. Websites
                            (1) http://www.rmriinc.com
                            (2) http://rmriinc.bestcyberinvestigator.com

                            RMRI, Inc. Blogs
                            (1) http://rmriinc.blogspot.com/index.html
                            (2) http://rmriincspace.spaces.live.com/
                          • Philip M. Payes
                            Sylvia, Typing in all caps is the internet equivalent of shouting. You don t want to be shouting with your message do you? Philip M. Payes PA State Police
                            Message 13 of 30 , Jan 9, 2009
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Sylvia,



                              Typing in all caps is the internet equivalent of shouting. You don't want to
                              be shouting with your message do you?





                              Philip M. Payes

                              PA State Police (Ret)

                              Florida Investigators License: # C2700904

                              ppayes@...

                              717.421.3392



                              From: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com [mailto:infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com]
                              On Behalf Of karousel
                              Sent: Friday, January 09, 2009 12:45 AM
                              To: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com
                              Subject: [SPAM]Re: [infoguys-list] Re: sexual harrassment-see answers and
                              some comments



                              Rick:

                              I'm really sorry, but this is now getting laughable. I feel like I'm on
                              "Candid Camera" but there's no trace of the late Allen Funt. Let me put it
                              this way:

                              <<<Is your expression of degradation and disrespect meant to cower me into
                              some form of submission? >>>
                              >>>Even here, you turn this into some type of a "male harassing a female
                              situation".>>>

                              I HAVE MADE NO REFERENCE TO GENDER. MY COMMENT IS GENDER-FREE AND APPLICABLE
                              TO EITHER SEX. (WOMEN CAN ALSO EXPRESS DEGRADATION AND DISRESPECT - THIS IS
                              NOT SOLELY A MALE PERSONALITY TRAIT.)

                              PLEASE READ AGAIN WHAT YOU WROTE BELOW.

                              NOW THAT YOU'VE READ YOUR LAST POST, I WILL TRY TO REPHRASE THIS. I KNOW
                              NOTHING ABOUT THE CASE AND HAVE MADE NO COMMENTS ABOUT THE CASE. I HAVE MADE
                              NO COMMENTS ABOUT WHETHER JANE IS A VICTIM, WHETHER JANE IS NOT A VICTIM,
                              WHETHER YOU SHOULD APPLAUD JANE'S BOSS FOR FIRING HER, IF SHE SHOULD LOSE
                              THE CASE, AND ON AND ON.

                              MY COMMENT WAS A GENERAL STATEMENT OF THE MINDSET OF A WOMAN THAT HAS BEEN
                              SEXUALLY HARASSED - NOT WHETHER OR NOT THE PETITIONER HAD A SOLID CASE. I
                              DON'T KNOW IF SHE HAS A SOLID CASE AS I DID NOT READ THE DETAILS OF HER
                              CLAIMS OR OTHER INFORMATION.

                              HOPEFULLY, THIS CLARIFIES MY POSITION ON THE CASE - WHICH IS NO POSITION AT
                              ALL. I'M SORRY TO DISAPPOINT YOU, BUT I AM ANNOUNCING THIS SPARRING MATCH TO
                              BE OVER.

                              HAVE A GOOD NIGHT.

                              SYLVIA
                              karousel@... <mailto:karousel%40warwick.net>

                              ----- Original Message -----
                              From: Ricky Gurley
                              To: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com <mailto:infoguys-list%40yahoogroups.com>
                              Sent: Friday, January 09, 2009 12:03 AM
                              Subject: [infoguys-list] Re: sexual harrassment-see answers and some
                              comments

                              --- In infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com
                              <mailto:infoguys-list%40yahoogroups.com> , "karousel" <karousel@...> wrote:
                              Is your expression of degradation and disrespect meant to cower me
                              into some form of submission?

                              Even here, you turn this into some type of a "male harassing a female
                              situation". So, your posts speak volumes about you, also.....

                              But, let me try to give you a better understanding of what I am saying...

                              You are emotionally invested here, and you admit it. Because of events
                              that have occurred in your past, you find it hard to be objective. You
                              are making excuses for Jane, and overlooking what everyone else here
                              is pretty much seeing as obvious. You WANT Jane to be a victim. Truth
                              be damned, as long as Jane is the victim! Not once have I seen you
                              post any possibilities as to why her employer might be the victim of a
                              frivolous lawsuit, or worse a SCAM so that Jane can profit and/or keep
                              her job!

                              Not once have you considered the possibility that he employer had
                              several good reasons to fire Jane: Poor performance, lying on her
                              application, calling in drunk. Not once have you considered the
                              employer's right o insure that he or she runs a business that is
                              conducive to having repeat customers by keeping the employees that
                              deal well with customers and getting rid of the ones that don't. You
                              have not even stopped to consider this from the employer's side for
                              the first second, and if you have you certainly have not written about
                              it here. As long as Jane is the "victim", that is all that matters to you.

                              You WANT to believe Jane, even if it is obvious that she is lying.
                              Again, this means you are not even approaching this objectively. And
                              how much of a fool do you look like if the obvious is proven, that
                              Jane is lying? So, if you had a case like this, you would COMPLETELY
                              believe your client without question, and therefore either advise your
                              client wrongly, or just look like a completely, naive fool after what
                              we already strongly suspect, from the little bit of TELLING
                              information that we do have, is proven.

                              VET YOUR CLIENT FIRST! Every P.I. here KNOWS that! The FIRST person
                              you check out is your client! EVERY P.I. HERE KNOWS THAT! Jane's story
                              does not pass the "preliminary smell test", so she has to answer
                              before anyone else does! All you have done is taken Jane's word as the
                              gospel, and made excuses for her whenever there is something that
                              calls for closer examination regarding her story!

                              So, instead of saying that these P.I.s would have "mopped the floor
                              with you", let's say it like this, these P.I.s would have been more
                              than happy to allow you to make a complete fool out of yourself if you
                              were on Jane's side and they were on her employer's side. Because if
                              they would take a case like this working on the side of Jane's
                              employer, the FIRST thing they would do is vet Jane's employer, he or
                              she would have to answer the hard questions first, and if they chose
                              to work for him or her, it would be because he or she passed that
                              "preliminary smell test", they did not make excuses for him or her,
                              and they believed in their client and KNEW that he or she was worth
                              fighting for, due to their OBJECTIVE examination of their client to
                              begin with.

                              Do you believe the employer should have some say so over who works for
                              him or her, and have the right o fire those that may hurt his or her
                              business?

                              Don't you find Jane's timing a little odd for making this complaint?

                              Don't you find it odd that she is reporting this now instead of when
                              it happened?

                              Did it occur to you that if she LIED on her application, she might be
                              lying now?

                              Don't you think that the fact that Jane called in to take time off
                              because she was DRUNK, goes to her character?

                              Or are you willing to overlook these points so that Jane can be the
                              "victim" that you seem to need her to be?

                              Rick.

                              Risk Management Research & Investments, Inc. & Thoth Data Systems
                              Mailing Address: 2101 W. Broadway PMB 326, Columbia, MO. 65203
                              Office Address: 1 E. Broadway Suite Z, Columbia, MO. 65203
                              Direct Office Number: (573) 234-6876
                              Office Phone: (573) 234-4647 Ext. 110
                              Car Phone: (573) 529-0808
                              Cell Phone: (573) 529-4476
                              Toll Free Phone: (888) 571-0958
                              Toll Free Fax: (877) 795-9800
                              EMERGENCY LINE: (573) 234-4871

                              RMRI, Inc. Websites
                              (1) http://www.rmriinc.com
                              (2) http://rmriinc.bestcyberinvestigator.com

                              RMRI, Inc. Blogs
                              (1) http://rmriinc.blogspot.com/index.html
                              (2) http://rmriincspace.spaces.live.com/

                              ----------------------------------------------------------

                              No virus found in this incoming message.
                              Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
                              Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.5/1882 - Release Date: 1/8/2009
                              8:13 AM

                              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





                              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                            • karousel
                              No, I wasn t shouting. I type in caps when I try to distinguish between what I am currently writing with the text of a previous poster. I use to
                              Message 14 of 30 , Jan 9, 2009
                              • 0 Attachment
                                No, I wasn't shouting. I type in caps when I try to distinguish between what I am currently writing with the text of a previous poster.

                                I use <<< and >>> to isolate the previous text I am commenting on, but I have found that on lists, the text doesn't always appear as written in regards to paragraphs, spacing, italics, etc. And many times, everything looks like one giant run-on sentence.

                                Sylvia
                                karousel@...



                                ----- Original Message -----
                                From: Philip M. Payes
                                To: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com
                                Sent: Friday, January 09, 2009 8:42 AM
                                Subject: Re: [infoguys-list] Re: sexual harrassment-see answers and some comments


                                Sylvia,

                                Typing in all caps is the internet equivalent of shouting. You don't want to
                                be shouting with your message do you?

                                Philip M. Payes

                                PA State Police (Ret)

                                Florida Investigators License: # C2700904

                                ppayes@...

                                717.421.3392

                                From: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com [mailto:infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com]
                                On Behalf Of karousel
                                Sent: Friday, January 09, 2009 12:45 AM
                                To: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com
                                Subject: [SPAM]Re: [infoguys-list] Re: sexual harrassment-see answers and
                                some comments

                                Rick:

                                I'm really sorry, but this is now getting laughable. I feel like I'm on
                                "Candid Camera" but there's no trace of the late Allen Funt. Let me put it
                                this way:

                                <<<Is your expression of degradation and disrespect meant to cower me into
                                some form of submission? >>>
                                >>>Even here, you turn this into some type of a "male harassing a female
                                situation".>>>

                                I HAVE MADE NO REFERENCE TO GENDER. MY COMMENT IS GENDER-FREE AND APPLICABLE
                                TO EITHER SEX. (WOMEN CAN ALSO EXPRESS DEGRADATION AND DISRESPECT - THIS IS
                                NOT SOLELY A MALE PERSONALITY TRAIT.)

                                PLEASE READ AGAIN WHAT YOU WROTE BELOW.

                                NOW THAT YOU'VE READ YOUR LAST POST, I WILL TRY TO REPHRASE THIS. I KNOW
                                NOTHING ABOUT THE CASE AND HAVE MADE NO COMMENTS ABOUT THE CASE. I HAVE MADE
                                NO COMMENTS ABOUT WHETHER JANE IS A VICTIM, WHETHER JANE IS NOT A VICTIM,
                                WHETHER YOU SHOULD APPLAUD JANE'S BOSS FOR FIRING HER, IF SHE SHOULD LOSE
                                THE CASE, AND ON AND ON.

                                MY COMMENT WAS A GENERAL STATEMENT OF THE MINDSET OF A WOMAN THAT HAS BEEN
                                SEXUALLY HARASSED - NOT WHETHER OR NOT THE PETITIONER HAD A SOLID CASE. I
                                DON'T KNOW IF SHE HAS A SOLID CASE AS I DID NOT READ THE DETAILS OF HER
                                CLAIMS OR OTHER INFORMATION.

                                HOPEFULLY, THIS CLARIFIES MY POSITION ON THE CASE - WHICH IS NO POSITION AT
                                ALL. I'M SORRY TO DISAPPOINT YOU, BUT I AM ANNOUNCING THIS SPARRING MATCH TO
                                BE OVER.

                                HAVE A GOOD NIGHT.

                                SYLVIA
                                karousel@... <mailto:karousel%40warwick.net>

                                ----- Original Message -----
                                From: Ricky Gurley
                                To: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com <mailto:infoguys-list%40yahoogroups.com>
                                Sent: Friday, January 09, 2009 12:03 AM
                                Subject: [infoguys-list] Re: sexual harrassment-see answers and some
                                comments

                                --- In infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com
                                <mailto:infoguys-list%40yahoogroups.com> , "karousel" <karousel@...> wrote:
                                Is your expression of degradation and disrespect meant to cower me
                                into some form of submission?

                                Even here, you turn this into some type of a "male harassing a female
                                situation". So, your posts speak volumes about you, also.....

                                But, let me try to give you a better understanding of what I am saying...

                                You are emotionally invested here, and you admit it. Because of events
                                that have occurred in your past, you find it hard to be objective. You
                                are making excuses for Jane, and overlooking what everyone else here
                                is pretty much seeing as obvious. You WANT Jane to be a victim. Truth
                                be damned, as long as Jane is the victim! Not once have I seen you
                                post any possibilities as to why her employer might be the victim of a
                                frivolous lawsuit, or worse a SCAM so that Jane can profit and/or keep
                                her job!

                                Not once have you considered the possibility that he employer had
                                several good reasons to fire Jane: Poor performance, lying on her
                                application, calling in drunk. Not once have you considered the
                                employer's right o insure that he or she runs a business that is
                                conducive to having repeat customers by keeping the employees that
                                deal well with customers and getting rid of the ones that don't. You
                                have not even stopped to consider this from the employer's side for
                                the first second, and if you have you certainly have not written about
                                it here. As long as Jane is the "victim", that is all that matters to you.

                                You WANT to believe Jane, even if it is obvious that she is lying.
                                Again, this means you are not even approaching this objectively. And
                                how much of a fool do you look like if the obvious is proven, that
                                Jane is lying? So, if you had a case like this, you would COMPLETELY
                                believe your client without question, and therefore either advise your
                                client wrongly, or just look like a completely, naive fool after what
                                we already strongly suspect, from the little bit of TELLING
                                information that we do have, is proven.

                                VET YOUR CLIENT FIRST! Every P.I. here KNOWS that! The FIRST person
                                you check out is your client! EVERY P.I. HERE KNOWS THAT! Jane's story
                                does not pass the "preliminary smell test", so she has to answer
                                before anyone else does! All you have done is taken Jane's word as the
                                gospel, and made excuses for her whenever there is something that
                                calls for closer examination regarding her story!

                                So, instead of saying that these P.I.s would have "mopped the floor
                                with you", let's say it like this, these P.I.s would have been more
                                than happy to allow you to make a complete fool out of yourself if you
                                were on Jane's side and they were on her employer's side. Because if
                                they would take a case like this working on the side of Jane's
                                employer, the FIRST thing they would do is vet Jane's employer, he or
                                she would have to answer the hard questions first, and if they chose
                                to work for him or her, it would be because he or she passed that
                                "preliminary smell test", they did not make excuses for him or her,
                                and they believed in their client and KNEW that he or she was worth
                                fighting for, due to their OBJECTIVE examination of their client to
                                begin with.

                                Do you believe the employer should have some say so over who works for
                                him or her, and have the right o fire those that may hurt his or her
                                business?

                                Don't you find Jane's timing a little odd for making this complaint?

                                Don't you find it odd that she is reporting this now instead of when
                                it happened?

                                Did it occur to you that if she LIED on her application, she might be
                                lying now?

                                Don't you think that the fact that Jane called in to take time off
                                because she was DRUNK, goes to her character?

                                Or are you willing to overlook these points so that Jane can be the
                                "victim" that you seem to need her to be?

                                Rick.

                                Risk Management Research & Investments, Inc. & Thoth Data Systems
                                Mailing Address: 2101 W. Broadway PMB 326, Columbia, MO. 65203
                                Office Address: 1 E. Broadway Suite Z, Columbia, MO. 65203
                                Direct Office Number: (573) 234-6876
                                Office Phone: (573) 234-4647 Ext. 110
                                Car Phone: (573) 529-0808
                                Cell Phone: (573) 529-4476
                                Toll Free Phone: (888) 571-0958
                                Toll Free Fax: (877) 795-9800
                                EMERGENCY LINE: (573) 234-4871

                                RMRI, Inc. Websites
                                (1) http://www.rmriinc.com
                                (2) http://rmriinc.bestcyberinvestigator.com

                                RMRI, Inc. Blogs
                                (1) http://rmriinc.blogspot.com/index.html
                                (2) http://rmriincspace.spaces.live.com/

                                ----------------------------------------------------------

                                No virus found in this incoming message.
                                Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
                                Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.5/1882 - Release Date: 1/8/2009
                                8:13 AM

                                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

                                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------



                                No virus found in this incoming message.
                                Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
                                Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.5/1883 - Release Date: 1/8/2009 6:05 PM


                                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                              • Bob Hrodey
                                ... And failing to trim your posts of all but that which you are specifically commenting on does very little to help. You might want to delve into your e-mail
                                Message 15 of 30 , Jan 9, 2009
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  karousel, wrote the following at or about 1/9/2009 8:15 AM:
                                  > No, I wasn't shouting. I type in caps when I try to distinguish between what I am currently writing with the text of a previous poster.
                                  >
                                  > I use <<< and >>> to isolate the previous text I am commenting on, but I have found that on lists, the text doesn't always appear as written in regards to paragraphs, spacing, italics, etc. And many times, everything looks like one giant run-on sentence.
                                  >

                                  And failing to trim your posts of all but that which you are
                                  specifically commenting on does very little to help.

                                  You might want to delve into your e-mail client's capabilities with
                                  regard to message quoting. That may save you the trouble of typing in
                                  caps to separate the wheat from the chaff in your replies. Amazingly,
                                  others who use Outlook Express as their client, as you do, seem to have
                                  mastered that "skill." Once you do, you can share what you learned with
                                  Amy who, while having been advised of the problem has done nothing to
                                  correct it in her posts. Reading one of her responses to queries about
                                  the case is a lot like trying to reconstruct a note that's been through
                                  a cross-cut paper shredder... Twice!

                                  Then again, if you cannot automatically quote in Outlook Express you
                                  might wish to consider using an e-mail client that does. There are many
                                  to choose from and almost every single one is more user friendly and
                                  more secure than Microshaft's OE. Take a look at Mozilla's Thunderbird
                                  - probably the best one going and it's totally free.


                                  --

                                  Enjoy,

                                  /Bob/
                                  ________________________________________________________________
                                  Hrodey & Associates Established 1977
                                  Post Office Box 366 Member of NALI, ASIS, FBINAA,
                                  NAPPS
                                  Woodstock, IL 60098-0366 NCISS, & P.A.W.L.I.
                                  Licensed in IL & WI (815) 337-4636 Voice
                                  337-4638 Fax
                                  email: inquiry@... <mailto:inquiry@...>
                                  or rth@... <mailto:rth@...>
                                  Illinois License 115-000783 Wisconsin 8045-063



                                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                • RanchoAttySvc@aol.com
                                  In a message dated 1/9/2009 6:18:13 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, karousel@warwick.net writes: No, I wasn t shouting. I type in caps when I try to distinguish
                                  Message 16 of 30 , Jan 9, 2009
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    In a message dated 1/9/2009 6:18:13 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,
                                    karousel@... writes:

                                    No, I wasn't shouting. I type in caps when I try to distinguish between
                                    what I am currently writing with the text of a previous poster.


                                    Try using italics or bold face. Gets the point across without shouting.
                                    (assuming that this list service will allow italics or bold face) :o)

                                    _ "RASCAL" - Your friendly neighborhood Process Server_
                                    (http://www.ranchoattorneyservice.com/)
                                    Michele Dawn

                                    RPS 117 & CA PI 24790
                                    Rancho Attorney Service of California &
                                    RASCAL's Research & Location Services
                                    28465 Old Town Front St #318
                                    Temecula, CA 92590
                                    (951) 693-0165
                                    CALSpro NAPPS CAJP NCISS_www.ranchoattorneyservice.com_
                                    (http://www.ranchoattorneyservice.com/)
                                    MC - Visa - American Express
                                    **************New year...new news. Be the first to know what is making
                                    headlines. (http://news.aol.com?ncid=emlcntusnews00000002)


                                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.