19
   

Man's first meeting with girlfriend's parents turns violent

 
 
Reyn
 
  1  
Tue 4 Dec, 2012 06:39 pm
@Rockhead,
I don't want any trouble either.

If this topic can be removed, I would like it removed.

End of story.
Rockhead
 
  1  
Tue 4 Dec, 2012 06:47 pm
@Reyn,
I don't work here, I'm a guest just like you.

but I would not let this worry me too much iff'n I was you.

a real attorney would know that you are beyond his reach...
Reyn
 
  1  
Tue 4 Dec, 2012 06:53 pm
@Rockhead,
I understand, but if this thread is indeed bothersome to someone, I would like it removed, if possible.

All this did not come at a good time for me. Today is my wife's birthday, and I have other things on my mind.
Rockhead
 
  1  
Tue 4 Dec, 2012 06:56 pm
@Reyn,
happy birthday to mrs. reyn....
0 Replies
 
maxdancona
 
  0  
Wed 5 Dec, 2012 08:10 am
OK I am impressed.

When I first checked, there were several other sites that posted this story (6 years ago). Today the only one still up is the original new account of the story. It seems like these pseudo-threatening emails are working...

So maybe it is possible to erase embarrassing things off the Internet...
Ragman
 
  3  
Wed 5 Dec, 2012 08:57 am
@Reyn,
My belated happy birthday wishes to your wife.

What happened here reminds me of the quote, "Into Each Life Some Reyn Must Fall."

0 Replies
 
djjd62
 
  4  
Wed 5 Dec, 2012 09:03 am
@maxdancona,
it seems that message boards have pulled threads about the story, but the same two Wisconsin related news stories i found yesterday while googling his name are still there, i doubt news outlets will cave if the story is legit
ehBeth
 
  5  
Wed 5 Dec, 2012 09:42 am
@djjd62,
496 google hits on his name

lots of blogs/boards still have the AP newswire story up

interesting that someone managed to stir up interest in a long-dead story like this by poking at it




something about let sleeping dogs lie ... isn't there a saying or something?
maxdancona
 
  0  
Wed 5 Dec, 2012 09:49 am
@ehBeth,
Odd. Google only gives me one hit relating to the story. There are a bunch of hits for other things (there is someone with that name who is a Real Estate agent).

And why shouldn't we make sleeping dogs tell the truth?
ehBeth
 
  1  
Wed 5 Dec, 2012 09:55 am
@maxdancona,
I got 3 hits on the story on page 4 or 5 alone (I was on hold while I scrolled through with word search)

most of the links are to a real estate agent, a bunch were for sites saying how many domain names someone with that name owns (plenty), but plenty of links to the story - the first link was dead - the next 15 or 20 went to the story - I stopped clicking through the links at that point
0 Replies
 
Peter Frouman
 
  7  
Wed 5 Dec, 2012 02:20 pm
The original post here was removed by a moderator only because the original poster requested that it be removed. Giving users as much control over their own content and posts as possible is a good idea and the next version of able2know will include more editing and deletion functionality once the software is improved to handle this elegantly. Currently, due to technical limitations, only moderators can manually make these type of edits (some user edits are allowed for a brief period after posting) and deletions (and now they are only done for spam and in certain rare circumstances like this one) but eventually users will be able to edit and delete their own content at any time.

It seems these feckless legal threats and what some have characterized as persistent harassment by someone who first claimed to be a lawyer representing Conor Hammes and then later claimed to actually be Conor Hammes were partially successful in persuading a couple other forum sites to remove posts but all the facts about the case are still out there and easy to find. He can whine and lie about it and make all the feckless legal threats he wants but that will not erase or change the facts or do much of anything except make more people aware of the information he is trying to hide.

It is indeed interesting that he is now claiming that the reported information is defamatory and false when it only took about 10 minutes of research to conclusively and definitively disprove his absurd claim.

I have no idea whether this person is actually Conor Hammes or just someone trying to make Conor Hammes look like a complete idiot by using his name in stupid letters.

The original Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel article ("Man accused of attacking girlfriend's family") about the criminal charges against Conor S. Hammes is indeed still online.

The Wisconsin Circuit Court Access (WCCA) web site still has all the public records of the case available to anyone online.

Here are some links to those records:

State of Wisconsin vs. Conor S. Hammes
Outagamie County Case Number 2006CF001032


Outagamie County Case Number 2006CF001032 Case history and details of charges and sentences

Outagamie County Case Number 2006CF001032 Case events/docket report

Those records substantiate the veracity of the original newspaper article about the case and reveal the final outcome:

Conor S. Hammes was arrested in November 2006 and charged with one felony and three misdemeanors. On October 26, 2007, Conor S. Hammes pled guilty in Outagamie County Circuit Court to one felony and "no contest" to three misdemeanors. On October 26, 2007, Conor S. Hammes was sentenced to 12 months in jail, 24 months of probation and required to pay $26881.72 in restitution, a court surcharge of $2688.17 and $200 in court costs as well as comply with numerous other conditions including submitting to random drug tests and random searches of his home. For the most serious felony charge, he entered into a deferred prosecution agreement which required him to both plead guilty and admit to all the facts that constituted the criminal offense he pled guilty to. On December 22, 2010 (more than 4 years after he was charged and more than 3 years after he pled guilty), the court ruled that he had fulfilled the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement and the felony charge was dismissed. He was very fortunate to get this deal as it meant he was able to avoid having a felony conviction on his permanent criminal record. However, that is all the deferred prosecution agreement did for him. He did not escape punishment and the public records of his criminal behaviour were not expunged or sealed.
ossobuco
 
  2  
Wed 5 Dec, 2012 02:59 pm
@Peter Frouman,
Thank you, Peter.
0 Replies
 
Ragman
 
  2  
Wed 5 Dec, 2012 03:55 pm
@Peter Frouman,
Thanks for the in-depth info and explanation.

Wonder what the motivation was if it was that RE promoter. Makes little sense that all of those gyrations would be such a plot to promote their RE firm.

Maybe it was all placed here by a relative or some non-legal representative of Hammes?
0 Replies
 
jespah
 
  4  
Wed 5 Dec, 2012 04:03 pm
@Peter Frouman,
Ah, thank you for doing the legwork.

And it should be noted, there are 3 elements to a defamation claim in Wisconsin (online or offline) -
  1. a false and defamatory statement concerning another;
  2. made in an unprivileged publication or broadcast to a third party; and
  3. with fault amounting to at least negligence on the part of the speaker.


The guilty plea means any claim of defamation fails on the first element.
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  2  
Wed 5 Dec, 2012 04:47 pm
Come back, Reyn!!!
0 Replies
 
Below viewing threshold (view)
Region Philbis
 
  2  
Thu 6 Dec, 2012 05:17 am
@maxdancona,

there were some follow-up posts that were nasty and accusatory in nature.

those posts were removed...
0 Replies
 
JPB
 
  7  
Thu 6 Dec, 2012 05:56 am
@maxdancona,
The threatening nature of the "request" against a member who was only sharing an AP story was over the top and (I imagine) instilled far more emotions in Reyn than just wanting "to let this guy remove one google hit".

I didn't see the posts that were removed but it sounds like the "lawyer" wasn't a lawyer and may or may not have been the subject of the article. I don't know Peter at all, but I appreciate the fact that he is standing up for a member who was only sharing public access information and was being threatened with legal action for doing so.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  4  
Thu 6 Dec, 2012 06:49 am
reyn is the sort of gentleman that felt he ought to remove an article causing discomfort. Whether the subject of the article has reformed himself or not is immaterial since we cannot see into his mind. I agree with reyn that removal was an acceptable response.
0 Replies
 
maxdancona
 
  -4  
Thu 6 Dec, 2012 07:39 am

Vindictiveness is not a virtue.

At most this was a issue between Reyn and "jgarrison".

For a third, unrelated, party to jump in the middle of this in a way for no reason other than to cause pain really rubs me the wrong way. He completely undid the magnanimous action on Reyn (who was the person who has any claim of harm here).

If Reyn had don this it would have perhaps been justified, although Reyn is a better person that. For random bystander to jump in without provocation is unwarranted bullying.

Sorry, but this type of behavior really bothers me.
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 04/26/2024 at 05:21:53