Tad <t@no-spam> wrote in message news:<fvligvgfjc1mu71qtsis42rraqih96l0uk@no-spam>...
> Hey Bisman, I'd bet that this excerpt from Hood describing fraud would
> be from one of your believable Civic Creche parent friends.
>
> Bisman, do you believe that this Civic Creche parent liar Hood writes
> about here should be charged with fraud?
>
> Chapter 5.II page 199 Lynley Hood A City Possessed (Dunedin NZ:
> Longacre, 2001).
>
> A solo mother - whose child never disclosed any sexual abuse by any
> crèche worker - recalled her response to the compensation offer:
>
> This counsellor said, `You know you can claim $10,000 from ACC.' She
> didn't even say `up to', she just said `$10,000'. I was on the benefit
> and that was a lot of money. Everyone was doing it. I didn't have a
> problem. Where do I sign? No problem. None whatsoever. The counsellor
> put in a report saying that my daughter was completely screwed up. I
> wondered if she'd got the kids muddled up, or maybe she wrote the same
> report for everyone. Anyway, the money came through really quickly.
>
> And is the above really much different to this bit on Catholic
> fraudster who admitted to fibbing?
>
> THE PRESS - LOCAL NEWS - 3 JUL 2003
>
> CHURCH-SEX COMPLAINANT ADMITS LYING TO GET PAYOUT
>
> By YVONNE MARTIN and DAVID CLARKSON
>
<snip for brevity>
Of course I believe that this fraudster should be prosecuted to the
full extent of the law, the money (plus interest) should be recovered
on behalf of the taxpayers and she should be publicly named as a fraud
and a thief. Why would you think I would think anything else?
BTW. Has anyone laid a complaint regarding her with the police yet? If
not, why not?
Cheers
David Bisman
Dunedin
New Zealand
dbisman@no-spam (David Bisman) wrote in message news:<d7d9f309.0307071820.16e8604b@no-spam>...
>
> Of course I believe that this fraudster should be prosecuted to the
> full extent of the law, the money (plus interest) should be recovered
> on behalf of the taxpayers and she should be publicly named as a fraud
> and a thief. Why would you think I would think anything else?
Because....
1.) You have no conscience.
2.) You routinely state that Ellis is guilty under the law. Because
of evidence from this liar, amongst other liars.
3.) This is a witch hunt, and what does it matter if you tell a pack
of lies? Just so long as you get your witch.