MB CIVIL SUIT UPDATE #10 K’s Request to Adjourn (delay) DENIED 11/01/22

If the system is that crowded, based on the AK recommendation, Michael should have been released with strong restrictions to immediately enter a private facility of his choosing at his own expense.

I do believe the letters sent to Taylor, if indeed there were letters, exuded Lauren’s profound fear of Michael and what he will do to her when released. Any fool watching the trial could see he wants to be as far away from these predators as possible now and forever more. Funny thing, it has always struck me as odd that she bought a house in Loxahatchee in close proximity to Michael’s Southern facility if she is so frightened. But of course they assumed he would never see that property again and it would be there’s after the civil suit. Another blown gambit.

17 Likes

No, you absolutely have not.
For one, the language used is against forum rules.
It was language straight out of hardcore porn, and it was beyond sickening, vile,… It truly defies description.

You clearly, luckily, never actually read it.
It was beyond…
.

42 Likes

GJ posted the comments in the earlier threads and they were immediately deleted they were so vile.

18 Likes

I’m not so sure you’ve been told you are responsible for your child’s death because you were busy doing “insert deviant sex act here” on this forum.

33 Likes

I understand all this thinking. I can also understand Taylor feeling that there is no real precedent here - that he should err on the side of caution, keep him in the system for at least a step down.

I was frustrated at the recommendation, I was not surprised, nor did I feel that there must be a deeper conspiracy. I feel that everyone is covering their own butts and ‘what’s another six months?’ (**I do not think that another 6 months is trivial at all, but I have no sway here)

1 Like

No, not those words exactly. NEVER SAID THAT. But similar vein, equally as cruel.

reply tagged in error sorry

Without his comment about how MB looked, the suggestion of faking… I’d be right there with you.

13 Likes

If they were similar, they would be gone from COTH and that person would be banned.
.

25 Likes

The comments are gone, sadly poster not banned.

Carry on.

I can’t imagine equally as cruel. Even comments directed at me, threatening me, were not as cruel.

I’d like to think the Mods wouldn’t permit the type of cruelty you speak of.

18 Likes

Ordering! thanks for the link!

3 Likes

That was beyond not ok for him to say in his position. There should absolutely be a formal consequence for that.

I do contract work for the Ombudsman of one of our health systems in Montreal. They receive complaints about stuff like this - inappropriate comments by doctors etc. Every single one is investigated. If the Ombudsman doesn’t feel that the consequence was appropriate, they will push further.

I imagine the system could be similar - I bet a few people at least submitted a formal complaint about Taylor’s comments. Whether you feel the consequence is appropriate is another story. (Often is just another note in the Drs file…)

ETA - in our health system they do have rules about how long they have to finish the investigation, I think it’s 8wks after receipt of letter. I have yet to review and draft a response letter for a complaint within that time period. These things take time and resources. Don’t hold your breath, and don’t expect a public notification that things went on behind the scenes.

6 Likes

Well thanks for telling me about my own experience. The posts were deleted.

and they were actually, they were horrible. They were beyond cruel and mean and designed to get me to leave the board.

Again I don’t care if you believe me I don’t have anything to prove on this. You can keep telling me it’s not true it’s not going to change my experience.

3 Likes

I didn’t say it wasn’t true. I was actually sympathizing with you. So much for that.

I don’t support cruelty.

10 Likes

Fair enough

What does SOA stand for?

Screen Shot 2022-10-14 at 9.52.34 AM

The only meanings of SOA that I know, don’t fit in here :sweat_smile:

2 Likes

On topic, In one of the responses, one of the lawyers ( I admit I do not remember which one) said they were fine with oral arguments to discuss these matters.
The docket currently says that the judge will make a decision on the 21st.
Is there a chance that this decision on the 21st will simply be they are going to have oral arguments?

2 Likes

@Jealoushe,

I am really sorry that happened. I don’t recall ever seeing anything personal and nasty directed at you, especially not anything on the level or what was said to GJ. How was that not reported and the poster banned?

FWIW, most of the time what I like about this forum (I stay out of CE!) is that people can disagree without being disagreeable. I sometimes disagree with you; but I’ve never had a reason to treat you disrespectfully.

I do think this thread would be much improved if we tried to remember that, and also not to take the bait from problematic posters.

25 Likes

Possibly “Separate Operating Agency”? Maybe airport police/security at JFK?

7 Likes