State of Washington, Laws, Stalking

To those who don't understand it, this asshole is taunting a childhood rape
survivor. Notice that no one objects. No one.

in article
a3JpbWluYWw=.999325b288576cb7272b33d68f92b7ca@1065 563013.cotse.net, The
Kriminal at wrote on
10/7/03 2:43 PM:

scottabe wrote:

in article
a3JpbWluYWw=.3b5c00ddd0d97b347eda2e5b3993f202@1065 474081.cotse.net,
The
Kriminal at wrote on
10/6/03 2:01 PM:

scottabe wrote:

You'll come up with some stupid ass reason why you chickened out.
How can my ass get hauled off to jail for asking a chicken****
coward
who
has threatened me on scores of occasions to take his best shot?
You named the place. You can run. Or you can listen to me tell
everyone in
the place what a dickless bitch you are.
Hey, is telling the truth illegal in Toledo?

|/
-O-
/|



Hey, asshole?

That's what this is a picture of, that's right.

Why don't you show up too?
Take care of two with one trip.

What's the matter, don't you like ASSCII art?

Vile E. Kriminal
President,
RSA (Ream Schattie Abraham)

in article , pigo at
wrote on 10/7/03 7:24 PM:


"The Kriminal" wrote
in message
news:a3JpbWluYWw=.999325b288576cb7272b33d68f92b7ca @1065563013.cotse.net.
..
Vile E. Kriminal
President,
RSA (Ream Schattie Abraham)


His, recorded, history is more pitcher (
http://www.backlash.com/content/email/1996/em0196.htm ) , but from what
we know he seems like more of a catcher to me.

It sure has been some great playoff games, eh?


More taunting, more false allegations.
Bob Thompson the coward didn't have the balls to spew his filth in person,
though, because like the gutless bitch he is, he ducked a personal
confrontation.
Bob Thompson knows the law. He knows what options I have if he says this in
person, especially in Utah.

One pathological liar quotes another pathological liar. More false
allegations of child molestation from another anonymous asshole.
Hey, coward? Wanna accuse me of molesting children in person?
I thought not. Your cowardly buddy Bob Thompson just ducked the
opportunity.

in article
cGhhdHBoaWw=.f7e6d2eedd17fdc2bfd0648a67267ca3@1065 646617.cotse.net,
Versotchey at wrote on 10/8/03 1:56 PM:

scottabe wrote:

To those who don't understand it, this asshole is taunting a
childhood rape
survivor. Notice that no one objects. No one.

Not according to this. It now all fits. What a loser

Repressed memories revisited

I am Scott Barak Abraham's brother. I started to write a long
rebuttal to his story in Backlash ("Repressed Memory Syndrome,"
The Backlash, March 1995), but then I stopped. No matter what I
say, some will accept, some will not. But there is a thing that must
be said. Scott Barak Abraham was not, I repeat not, abused within
our household. Since this alleged abuse is one of the pivotal
points of the article, I feel it calls the validity of the whole article into
question.

Mr. Abraham was a multiple substance abuser for over twenty
years, I have never used any drugs and haven't had a drink since I
was 15 years old, 27 years ago, and was never drunk even once. I
bring this up not for moral judgment, just for one point. Mr.
Abraham poisoned his mind and body for over twenty years with
mind altering drugs and substances, all of which have been
scientifically proven to affect intelligence, perception and memory.

Finally, as children, up to my 17th birthday Mr. Abraham molested
me, violently abused me almost daily, and to this day uses words
of derision and insult to attack and intimidate me. He denies this. If
nothing else, I remember him doing this, he denies it. He says
both of us were victims of multiple abusers, and I deny that with
absolutely no hesitation or reservation. Since the article says
False Memory Syndrome doesn't exist, he is quite wrong, as
apparently one of us is the victim of said syndrome.

A last thought. Mr. Abraham's behavior is nothing new, it hasn't
changed ever. He threatened and intimidated when he was six, he
threatened and intimidated when he was 15, he threatened and
intimidated when he was 25, he threatens and intimidates when
he is 43.

I do not use my name at the request of the publisher.

in article
cGhhdHBoaWw=.42d30878c3d5025b9947c1895bafcded@1065 697779.cotse.net, Karl
with a K at wrote on 10/9/03 4:09 AM:

scottabe wrote:

snip

I am part of a medical dialysis team.

Bull****. Where and what is your name, asshole?


I work every day with people
suffering from the long term effects of substance abuse. Patients
very often suffer from the loss of cognitive function as well as the
failure of one or more major body system, renal, liver, and CNS
(premature stroke is a definite problem).

Obviously, you suffer from a loss of moral and ethical function.

Mr. Abraham, you need
to be under the care of highly skilled professionals and
participating in extensive rehabilitation instead of raging in some
stupid internet forum over real or imagined injustices. You should
be making better use of your time.

Mr. Asshole, you should show some decency and ethics rather than taking
cheap shots. Been sober 14 and a half years. Nothing but a gross and
detestable smear from a typical rsa poster.

Got a name and want to tell me who you work for? If they see this post, you
get fired. Medical ethics. Something you wouldn't understand.

"Karl with a K" wrote in message
news:cGhhdHBoaWw=.42d30878c3d5025b9947c1895bafcded @1065697779.cotse.net...
scottabe wrote:

snip

I am part of a medical dialysis team. I work every day with people
suffering from the long term effects of substance abuse. Patients
very often suffer from the loss of cognitive function as well as the
failure of one or more major body system, renal, liver, and CNS
(premature stroke is a definite problem).

Careful, this may be construed as a death threat.

Mr. Abraham, you need
to be under the care of highly skilled professionals and
participating in extensive rehabilitation instead of raging in some
stupid internet forum over real or imagined injustices. You should
be making better use of your time.


What did you have in mind? Some of us think that S being confined in a
basement in front of a computer monitor all day is a benefir to society.

in article Y5fhb.11549$La.9836@fed1read02, Richard Henry at
wrote on 10/9/03 8:25 AM:


"Karl with a K" wrote in message
news:cGhhdHBoaWw=.42d30878c3d5025b9947c1895bafcded @1065697779.cotse.net...
scottabe wrote:

snip

I am part of a medical dialysis team. I work every day with people
suffering from the long term effects of substance abuse. Patients
very often suffer from the loss of cognitive function as well as the
failure of one or more major body system, renal, liver, and CNS
(premature stroke is a definite problem).

Careful, this may be construed as a death threat.

No, it is just construed as a lie and a smear..

Mr. Abraham, you need
to be under the care of highly skilled professionals and
participating in extensive rehabilitation instead of raging in some
stupid internet forum over real or imagined injustices. You should
be making better use of your time.


What did you have in mind? Some of us think that S being confined in a
basement in front of a computer monitor all day is a benefir to society.


Another lie and a smear from a psychopathic rsa stalker. You should be
under the care of highly skilled professionals. Like prison guards.

in article
cGhhdHBoaWw=.e694672f63dd6cabb7d13cdccaec29f3@1065 717382.cotse.net,
CurtisLemay at wrote on 10/9/03 9:36 AM:

scottabe wrote:

snip

This will be the last time we converse.

You call your stalking, defamation, and lies conversation? I call it
terrorism.

If you are referring to the
HIPAA act, then you have completely misread it.

Wanna bet? Whoever wrote that, if they are actually employed doing what
they said, would be fired outright.

Stating the long-term
ramifications of substance abuse is public information, sir.

Doing so about someone you have no medical knowledge about and diagnosing a
medical condition is defamation, dumb****.

And you
have stated as have many others that you were an abuser.

Funny the asshole didn't mention that I have fourteen and a half years of
continuous sobriety. Tell me, wack job, why aren't you worried about your
buddies on this board who continue to consume illegal substances and brag
about their beer consumption? Bit of a double standard, eh?

Fact of the
matter is that substance abusers often times have severely shortened
lifespans due to renal failure, liver failure, stroke, and diabetes.
In addition there is every increasing evidence that substance abuse
contributes to dementia because the drugs are known to cross the blood
brain barrier. Whether it happened fourteen years ago or yesterday is
immaterial. You would be considered an at-risk individual.

You would be considered a pathological liar and an all around asshole by
any decent human being. More defamations, more lies.

You can scream, stomp around, threaten, anything you want but you can't
change mother nature without the help of highly qualified medical
professionals. Goodbye.

You can't change your insanity without the helop of some highly qualified
medical professionals. Get help. You truly are insane. And THAT is a
diagnosis I will stand by, wack job.

in article
cGhhdHBoaWw=.8afa903b62115aba138431288d05424b@1065 733749.cotse.net,
CurtisLemay at wrote on 10/9/03 2:09 PM:

spongebob dirty pants wrote:

snip
You are so ****ing stupid. You have no knowledge about Hipaa
because it only applies to medical professional working releasing
information about patients passing through their institution.

you are so ****ing stupid. I just had a refresher on Hipaa the other day.
I've only worked in healthcare for twenty years. BMDF, wacko.

Telling an asshole like you that you are at risk doesn't ****ing
violate anything especially since you've been flaunting the abuse in
everybody's face for the last 14 years.

You truly are insane. If it is no problem, why does this asshole stay
anonymous, post from anonymity?
Clue time. He's run the same game befo he lies just like you.


And here's another little
gem you can shove up your ass sideways.

Why not show up and try it yourself, coward?

Permanent damage is
just that, permanent.

So your insanity is drug induced?


You got diabetes, right? Where the **** do
you think that came from, coke and fat.

Wrong.


You have problems inside
your body that YOU created and don't even know about, count on it.
They don't reverse themselves especially after 20 years of abuse.
They're in there and will be until they decide to knock you on your
ass. If you don't want to take some wise advice about consulting
professionals, you're a moron. Why don't you challenge Mother
Nature to duke it out? When she shows up, you won't be getting
up.

I'd rather challenge YOU to duke it out, coward. Because you won't be
showing up-that's not a worry, none of you sick ****s ever have or ever
will.

"Terd Fartingmor" wrote in message
...
RCW 9A.46.110
Stalking. (Effective July 1, 2004.)
(1) A person commits the crime of stalking if, without lawful
authority and
under circumstances not amounting to a felony attempt of another
crime:

(a) He or she intentionally and repeatedly harasses or repeatedly
follows another person; and

(b) The person being harassed or followed is placed in fear that
the
stalker intends to injure the person, another person, or property of
the
person or of another person. The feeling of fear must be one that a
reasonable person in the same situation would experience under all the
circumstances; and

(c) The stalker either:

(i) Intends to frighten, intimidate, or harass the person; or

(ii) Knows or reasonably should know that the person is afraid,
intimidated, or harassed even if the stalker did not intend to place
the
person in fear or intimidate or harass the person.

(2)(a) It is not a defense to the crime of stalking under
subsection
(1)(c)(i) of this section that the stalker was not given actual notice
that
the person did not want the stalker to contact or follow the person;
and

(b) It is not a defense to the crime of stalking under subsection
(1)(c)(ii) of this section that the stalker did not intend to
frighten,
intimidate, or harass the person.

(3) It shall be a defense to the crime of stalking that the
defendant
is a licensed private investigator acting within the capacity of his
or her
license as provided by chapter 18.165 RCW.

(4) Attempts to contact or follow the person after being given
actual
notice that the person does not want to be contacted or followed
constitutes
prima facie evidence that the stalker intends to intimidate or harass
the
person. "Contact" includes, in addition to any other form of contact
or
communication, the sending of an electronic communication to the
person.

(5)(a) Except as provided in (b) of this subsection, a person who
stalks another person is guilty of a gross misdemeanor.

(b) A person who stalks another is guilty of a class C felony if
any of
the following applies: (i) The stalker has previously been convicted
in this
state or any other state of any crime of harassment, as defined in RCW
9A.46.060, of the same victim or members of the victim's family or
household
or any person specifically named in a protective order; (ii) the
stalking
violates any protective order protecting the person being stalked;
(iii) the
stalker has previously been convicted of a gross misdemeanor or felony
stalking offense under this section for stalking another person; (iv)
the
stalker was armed with a deadly weapon, as defined in RCW 9.94A.602,
while
stalking the person; (v) the stalker's victim is or was a law
enforcement
officer, judge, juror, attorney, victim advocate, legislator, or
community
correction's officer, and the stalker stalked the victim to retaliate
against the victim for an act the victim performed during the course
of
official duties or to influence the victim's performance of official
duties;
or (vi) the stalker's victim is a current, former, or prospective
witness in
an adjudicative proceeding, and the stalker stalked the victim to
retaliate
against the victim as a result of the victim's testimony or potential
testimony.

(6) As used in this section:

(a) "Follows" means deliberately maintaining visual or physical
proximity to a specific person over a period of time. A finding that
the
alleged stalker repeatedly and deliberately appears at the person's
home,
school, place of employment, business, or any other location to
maintain
visual or physical proximity to the person is sufficient to find that
the
alleged stalker follows the person. It is not necessary to establish
that
the alleged stalker follows the person while in transit from one
location to
another.

(b) "Harasses" means unlawful harassment as defined in RCW
10.14.020.

(c) "Protective order" means any temporary or permanent court
order
prohibiting or limiting violence against, harassment of, contact or
communication with, or physical proximity to another person.

(d) "Repeatedly" means on two or more separate occasions.


[2003 c 53 § 70. Prior: 1999 c 143 § 35; 1999 c 27 § 3; 1994 c 271 §
801;
1992 c 186 § 1.]

NOTES:


Intent -- Effective date -- 2003 c 53: See notes following RCW
2.48.180.


Intent -- 1999 c 27: See note following RCW 9A.46.020.


Purpose -- Severability -- 1994 c 271: See notes following RCW
9A.28.020.



Hero@Horvath

I don't spend my money on food. I spend most of my money
on women, porn, and recreation. The rest of it I just waste.

Andy Horvath mis-states the law, of course. What else would we expect?

It doesn't say "(effective July 1,2004)". It's the *current* law, except for
a technical revision breaking Sec. 5 into an (a) and (b). See
http://www.leg.wa.gov/pub/billinfo/2...74/5758_sl.pdf

Washington law also specifies:
"It is the intent of chapter 27, Laws of 1999 to clarify that electronic
communications are included in the types of conduct and actions that can
constitute the crimes of harassment and stalking. It is not the intent of
the legislature, by adoption of chapter 27, Laws of 1999, to restrict in any
way the types of conduct or actions that can constitute harassment or
stalking."
Intent -- 1999 c 27: , cit. supra

People who satisfy those criteria include Andy Horvath, Richard Henry, Alex
Heney, Bev Ashley, Eric Leonard, Vern(Dave), and others.

Bert

"Bert Hoff" wrote in message
...

Andy Horvath mis-states the law, of course. What else would we expect?

It doesn't say "(effective July 1,2004)". It's the *current* law, except
for
a technical revision breaking Sec. 5 into an (a) and (b). See
http://www.leg.wa.gov/pub/billinfo/2...74/5758_sl.pdf

Washington law also specifies:
"It is the intent of chapter 27, Laws of 1999 to clarify that electronic
communications are included in the types of conduct and actions that can
constitute the crimes of harassment and stalking. It is not the intent of
the legislature, by adoption of chapter 27, Laws of 1999, to restrict in
any
way the types of conduct or actions that can constitute harassment or
stalking."
Intent -- 1999 c 27: , cit. supra

People who satisfy those criteria include Andy Horvath, Richard Henry,
Alex
Heney, Bev Ashley, Eric Leonard, Vern(Dave), and others.

In what way?

This is false and defamatory. Retract and apologize.