| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 23 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 49:50:44 |
| Calls: | 583 |
| Files: | 1,138 |
| Messages: | 111,303 |
You keep claiming that you see no evidence of snit's criminal record
other than people mentioning it. So here is a screen grab of the
government site before snit settled with the prosecutor and the entry
was rightfully removed.
Now instead of supporting this lying asshole snit why don't you ask him
to explain.
He can't because numerous people saw the same thing and also took
screen grabs.His only defense is to claim why isn't it still on the
site and that's been explained. Of course that excuse was used by snit
after he claimed usenet isn't reliable despite the data being a direct
link to the site, when it was listed there. And of course the ever
popular it's a fake which is of course another snit lie.
There are plenty more where that came from.
https://imgur.com/a/tQxsmym
On Aug 27, 2025 at 1:56:41rC>PM MST, ""Sgt. Joe Friday"" wrote <108nre9$u03e$1@dont-email.me>:WTF does that mean?
You keep claiming that you see no evidence of snit's criminal record
other than people mentioning it. So here is a screen grab of the
government site before snit settled with the prosecutor and the entry
was rightfully removed.
Now instead of supporting this lying asshole snit why don't you ask
him to explain.
He can't because numerous people saw the same thing and also took
screen grabs.His only defense is to claim why isn't it still on the
site and that's been explained. Of course that excuse was used by
snit after he claimed usenet isn't reliable despite the data being a
direct link to the site, when it was listed there. And of course the
ever popular it's a fake which is of course another snit lie.
There are plenty more where that came from.
https://imgur.com/a/tQxsmym
* Inconsistent with other claimed "screenshots".
* How can something be illegal but "rightfully removed"?Reading comprehension seems to be difficult for you.
* The claim was a dozen or more charges. That does not back theThat's a different topic. I don't see a dozen or more charges mentioned
accusations.
I am sure there are other holes in your story, but that is a goodYou are crazy. You proved nothing. Zero. Nada.
start. LOL!
On Aug 27, 2025 at 1:56:41?PM MST, ""Sgt. Joe Friday"" wrote ><108nre9$u03e$1@dont-email.me>:
You keep claiming that you see no evidence of snit's criminal record
other than people mentioning it. So here is a screen grab of the
government site before snit settled with the prosecutor and the entry
was rightfully removed.
Now instead of supporting this lying asshole snit why don't you ask him
to explain.
He can't because numerous people saw the same thing and also took
screen grabs.His only defense is to claim why isn't it still on the
site and that's been explained. Of course that excuse was used by snit
after he claimed usenet isn't reliable despite the data being a direct
link to the site, when it was listed there. And of course the ever
popular it's a fake which is of course another snit lie.
There are plenty more where that came from.
https://imgur.com/a/tQxsmym
* Inconsistent with other claimed "screenshots".
* How can something be illegal but "rightfully removed"?
* The claim was a dozen or more charges. That does not back the accusations.
I am sure there are other holes in your story, but that is a good start. LOL!
On 27 Aug 2025 22:18:40 GMT, Brock McNuggets
<brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
On Aug 27, 2025 at 1:56:41?PM MST, ""Sgt. Joe Friday"" wrote
<108nre9$u03e$1@dont-email.me>:
You keep claiming that you see no evidence of snit's criminal record
other than people mentioning it. So here is a screen grab of the
government site before snit settled with the prosecutor and the entry
was rightfully removed.
Now instead of supporting this lying asshole snit why don't you ask him
to explain.
He can't because numerous people saw the same thing and also took
screen grabs.His only defense is to claim why isn't it still on the
site and that's been explained. Of course that excuse was used by snit
after he claimed usenet isn't reliable despite the data being a direct
link to the site, when it was listed there. And of course the ever
popular it's a fake which is of course another snit lie.
There are plenty more where that came from.
https://imgur.com/a/tQxsmym
* Inconsistent with other claimed "screenshots".
* How can something be illegal but "rightfully removed"?
* The claim was a dozen or more charges. That does not back the accusations. >>
I am sure there are other holes in your story, but that is a good start. LOL!
Top of the page: "Complaint dismissed by prosecutor"
Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote in news:68af8440$2$20$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com:
On Aug 27, 2025 at 1:56:41rC>PM MST, ""Sgt. Joe Friday"" wrote
<108nre9$u03e$1@dont-email.me>:
You keep claiming that you see no evidence of snit's criminal record
other than people mentioning it. So here is a screen grab of the
government site before snit settled with the prosecutor and the entry
was rightfully removed.
Now instead of supporting this lying asshole snit why don't you ask
him to explain.
He can't because numerous people saw the same thing and also took
screen grabs.His only defense is to claim why isn't it still on the
site and that's been explained. Of course that excuse was used by
snit after he claimed usenet isn't reliable despite the data being a
direct link to the site, when it was listed there. And of course the
ever popular it's a fake which is of course another snit lie.
There are plenty more where that came from.
https://imgur.com/a/tQxsmym
* Inconsistent with other claimed "screenshots".
WTF does that mean?
There are plenty of other screenshots posted in this group.
Some are different cases from what I can see.
* How can something be illegal but "rightfully removed"?
Reading comprehension seems to be difficult for you.
The OP explained it.
* The claim was a dozen or more charges. That does not back the
accusations.
That's a different topic.
I don't see a dozen or more charges mentioned
in the post. Could be true, but irrelevant to this thread.
The governor is claiming no proof of your criminal activity has been
posted. The OP posted proof.
I am sure there are other holes in your story, but that is a good
start. LOL!
You are crazy. You proved nothing. Zero. Nada.
Other than you are a terrible liar.
That you did prove beyond doubt.
On Aug 27, 2025 at 5:15:39rC>PM MST, "Governor Swill" wrote <ps7vak5hh2h8lv60epjcpuic0f7ph9jkfl@4ax.com>:
On 27 Aug 2025 22:18:40 GMT, Brock McNuggets
<brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
On Aug 27, 2025 at 1:56:41?PM MST, ""Sgt. Joe Friday"" wrote
<108nre9$u03e$1@dont-email.me>:
You keep claiming that you see no evidence of snit's criminal
record other than people mentioning it. So here is a screen grab of
the government site before snit settled with the prosecutor and the
entry was rightfully removed.
Now instead of supporting this lying asshole snit why don't you ask
him to explain.
He can't because numerous people saw the same thing and also took
screen grabs.His only defense is to claim why isn't it still on the
site and that's been explained. Of course that excuse was used by
snit after he claimed usenet isn't reliable despite the data being
a direct link to the site, when it was listed there. And of course
the ever popular it's a fake which is of course another snit lie.
There are plenty more where that came from.
https://imgur.com/a/tQxsmym
* Inconsistent with other claimed "screenshots".
* How can something be illegal but "rightfully removed"?
* The claim was a dozen or more charges. That does not back the
accusations.
I am sure there are other holes in your story, but that is a good
start. LOL!
Top of the page: "Complaint dismissed by prosecutor"
Overly long response warning:
So in this version of the screenshot: Contrary to the claims of a
dozen or so charges I was found guilty of, or plea bargained down, now
it is one charge and it was dismissed. So not guilty. But why would it
not show in public records? Even dismissed charges show UNLESS they
are sealed or expunged. That can take YEARS -- which does not fit with
the timeline given:
https://www.azleg.gov/viewdocument/?docName=https://www.azleg.gov/ars/1 3/00911.htm
-----
1. Ten years for a class 2 or 3 felony.
2. Five years for a class 4, 5 or 6 felony.
3. Three years for a class 1 misdemeanor.
4. Two years for a class 2 or 3 misdemeanor.
-----
But that is just what is theoretically possible. What is likely:
https://snaderlawgroup.com/expungement-diversion-dismissal/
-----
And, although I am asked many times every week, sealing onerCOs
record is extremely rare. In 25 years, I have never had a
request granted.
-----
So sealing or expunging is pretty much impossible. The record must
still be there. But looking for the above I found this:
Carroll <v7m64o$ll5a$22@fretwizzer.eternal-september.org>:
-----
https://i.ibb.co/3ScqzLJ/not-everything-is-gone.png
-----
Hmmm, NOT there. Why would the OLD screenshot not show it (look quick
before Carroll takes it down). So which of their many different
stories is true?
Carroll makes these claims and other trolls latch onto them and expand
them. But his every accusation is an admission:
Snit:
-----
Are you denying that the police contacted you over your
harassment? -----
Steve Carroll
<782ad182-b975-4be4-a1c0-49cb57ea2855@googlegroups.com>:
-----
They did! Didn't they? And it appears to still be working ;)
-----
To be fair, Carroll later claimed he did not mean what he said and
meant to reply to something else in the post. Riiiiiight. LOL!
Say that is even true... the bigger point: the insane accusations
against me, going on for years, have been contradictory to each other, contrary to the law, contrary to what is likely to happen even if
legally possible, and utterly unsupported.
But maybe they were just "some state-level bureaucrat making erroneous entries" (Carroll also made that claim).
Anyway, so now the claim is I had a charge that was dismissed. Not
found guilty. No plea bargain.
Why aren't the trolls calling out the false accusations Carroll made:
"Why did you stalk her? What did you think would happen?!"
"I was mainly interested in why you stalked her..."
"Why did you stalk her?"
"> Given how I never stalked anyone,
I say you did..."
"you were arrested for stalking after having a court order
issued for you to not stalk"
"what you did, is a crime"
"Said the projecting, dishonest hypocrite who stalked his wife"
"I was mainly interested in why you stalked her"
"To Goofy: Why did you stalk her? What did you think would
happen?!"
"My concerns clearly were, and are:
1. Why you stalked her"
"you're a wife-stalking man-child"
"Why did you stalk her?"
I never stalked anyone. Carroll has. Notice the trolls are not
obsessing over his actions.
Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote in news:68afa91d$0$10360$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com:
On Aug 27, 2025 at 5:15:39rC>PM MST, "Governor Swill" wrote
<ps7vak5hh2h8lv60epjcpuic0f7ph9jkfl@4ax.com>:
On 27 Aug 2025 22:18:40 GMT, Brock McNuggets
<brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
On Aug 27, 2025 at 1:56:41?PM MST, ""Sgt. Joe Friday"" wrote
<108nre9$u03e$1@dont-email.me>:
You keep claiming that you see no evidence of snit's criminal
record other than people mentioning it. So here is a screen grab of
the government site before snit settled with the prosecutor and the
entry was rightfully removed.
Now instead of supporting this lying asshole snit why don't you ask
him to explain.
He can't because numerous people saw the same thing and also took
screen grabs.His only defense is to claim why isn't it still on the
site and that's been explained. Of course that excuse was used by
snit after he claimed usenet isn't reliable despite the data being
a direct link to the site, when it was listed there. And of course
the ever popular it's a fake which is of course another snit lie.
There are plenty more where that came from.
https://imgur.com/a/tQxsmym
* Inconsistent with other claimed "screenshots".
* How can something be illegal but "rightfully removed"?
* The claim was a dozen or more charges. That does not back the
accusations.
I am sure there are other holes in your story, but that is a good
start. LOL!
Top of the page: "Complaint dismissed by prosecutor"
Overly long response warning:
So in this version of the screenshot: Contrary to the claims of a
dozen or so charges I was found guilty of, or plea bargained down, now
it is one charge and it was dismissed. So not guilty. But why would it
not show in public records? Even dismissed charges show UNLESS they
are sealed or expunged. That can take YEARS -- which does not fit with
the timeline given:
https://www.azleg.gov/viewdocument/?docName=https://www.azleg.gov/ars/1
3/00911.htm
-----
1. Ten years for a class 2 or 3 felony.
2. Five years for a class 4, 5 or 6 felony.
3. Three years for a class 1 misdemeanor.
4. Two years for a class 2 or 3 misdemeanor.
-----
But that is just what is theoretically possible. What is likely:
https://snaderlawgroup.com/expungement-diversion-dismissal/
-----
And, although I am asked many times every week, sealing onerCOs
record is extremely rare. In 25 years, I have never had a
request granted.
-----
So sealing or expunging is pretty much impossible. The record must
still be there. But looking for the above I found this:
Carroll <v7m64o$ll5a$22@fretwizzer.eternal-september.org>:
-----
https://i.ibb.co/3ScqzLJ/not-everything-is-gone.png
-----
Hmmm, NOT there. Why would the OLD screenshot not show it (look quick
before Carroll takes it down). So which of their many different
stories is true?
Carroll makes these claims and other trolls latch onto them and expand
them. But his every accusation is an admission:
Snit:
-----
Are you denying that the police contacted you over your
harassment? -----
Steve Carroll
<782ad182-b975-4be4-a1c0-49cb57ea2855@googlegroups.com>:
-----
They did! Didn't they? And it appears to still be working ;)
-----
To be fair, Carroll later claimed he did not mean what he said and
meant to reply to something else in the post. Riiiiiight. LOL!
Say that is even true... the bigger point: the insane accusations
against me, going on for years, have been contradictory to each other,
contrary to the law, contrary to what is likely to happen even if
legally possible, and utterly unsupported.
But maybe they were just "some state-level bureaucrat making erroneous
entries" (Carroll also made that claim).
Anyway, so now the claim is I had a charge that was dismissed. Not
found guilty. No plea bargain.
Why aren't the trolls calling out the false accusations Carroll made:
"Why did you stalk her? What did you think would happen?!"
"I was mainly interested in why you stalked her..."
"Why did you stalk her?"
"> Given how I never stalked anyone,
I say you did..."
"you were arrested for stalking after having a court order
issued for you to not stalk"
"what you did, is a crime"
"Said the projecting, dishonest hypocrite who stalked his wife"
"I was mainly interested in why you stalked her"
"To Goofy: Why did you stalk her? What did you think would
happen?!"
"My concerns clearly were, and are:
1. Why you stalked her"
"you're a wife-stalking man-child"
"Why did you stalk her?"
I never stalked anyone. Carroll has. Notice the trolls are not
obsessing over his actions.
Who said you stalked anyone?
The charge is "Public Harassment"
not staking and just because you worked
out some deal with the state does not negate the fact, and it is a fact,
that you were indeed arrested for public harassment, booked,
fingerprinted and let out on bail pending a hearing.
You can't deny this.
Oh, and did you know there was an order of protection filed against you
as well?
A few years before your public harassment charge but there just the same.
You like to play word games snit however the deck is stacked against you
and you will be unable to weasel your way out of your criminal record.
There are methods of acquiring the cases which have been removed from the public sites and the fact that people have taken screen prints makes it
so much easier.
So do you still want to play, loser?
On Aug 28, 2025 at 3:01:35?PM MST, "Octal" wrote ><XnsB349B75F65565jijq@62.164.182.22>:
On 29 Aug 2025 02:02:46 GMT, Brock McNuggets
<brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
On Aug 28, 2025 at 3:01:35?PM MST, "Octal" wrote
<XnsB349B75F65565jijq@62.164.182.22>:
<snip>
Ignoring trolls works in both directions.
Just sayin'.
