Jump to content

Paetow HC Resigns as Police Launch Misconduct Investigation


bullets13

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, FALCONS2026 said:

Anyone know what this was about?

Just a guess but if it is a student involved, it could possibly be anything from sexting to sex with an adult who happens to be a student somewhere in the same district, improper recording or sexual assault of a child. 

Mainly I am saying that it doesn’t have to be sexual assault. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Bulldogs92 said:

I'll never understand why anyone in an authoritative position would ever compromise a career over something like this. We know it happens all the time and usually doesn't end well for anyone, The people doing it know that, too. 

Because sex, not money, is the most powerful attractant in the Earth.

It causes murders, suicides, making fortunes, losing fortunes, reward, punishment, blackmail, wars, depression, marriages, divorces, Supreme Court decisions, lawsuits, etc.

It’s not that money can’t cause the same but the emotional power is much more concentrated, compelling and is constant. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, tvc184 said:

Because sex, not money, is the most powerful attractant in the Earth.

It causes murders, suicides, making fortunes, losing fortunes, reward, punishment, blackmail, wars, depression, marriages, divorces, Supreme Court decisions, lawsuits, etc.

It’s not that money can’t cause the same but the emotional power is much more concentrated, compelling and is constant. 

If only that guy Adam resisted that apple craving we wouldn't be in this mess !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, tvc184 said:

Because sex, not money, is the most powerful attractant in the Earth.

It causes murders, suicides, making fortunes, losing fortunes, reward, punishment, blackmail, wars, depression, marriages, divorces, Supreme Court decisions, lawsuits, etc.

It’s not that money can’t cause the same but the emotional power is much more concentrated, compelling and is constant. 

Bingo.

 

My grandfather always said that it’s the only thing that’s undefeated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, CardinalBacker said:

“If the grass is growing, mow it.”

My Grandaddy. 
 

I’m not sure what he meant, but it sounds relevant to the subject. 

I couldn't find that one on a quick Google search. 

I once had two co-workers (male and female) who were both single, and they began seeing each other offsite. When anyone mentioned it to him, he'd always say "never dip your pen in company ink".  Well, you guessed it I'm sure. She became pregnant, and he transferred to another job at another site, and I don't want to even think about the rest of the story. But, I remember the guys in the office from then on adopting and using the "company ink" line for many various situations. Seems like a good adage, or idiom perhaps, especially for teachers and students. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, 1970 said:

I couldn't find that one on a quick Google search. 

I once had two co-workers (male and female) who were both single, and they began seeing each other offsite. When anyone mentioned it to him, he'd always say "never dip your pen in company ink".  Well, you guessed it I'm sure. She became pregnant, and he transferred to another job at another site, and I don't want to even think about the rest of the story. But, I remember the guys in the office from then on adopting and using the "company ink" line for many various situations. Seems like a good adage, or idiom perhaps, especially for teachers and students. 

I’ve heard the “company ink” one, too. 
 

There used to be one about her being hired “to take care of anything hard that comes up” also. 
 

I’m really glad that stuff like that isn’t nearly as common as it used to be, apparently. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Member Statistics

    45,937
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    jacobmartin
    Newest Member
    jacobmartin
    Joined


  • Posts

    • he'll 1000% abuse this if elected and given the chance.  he's like a petulant little kid.  again, I'm voting for his policy, but he's all about revenge against slights and wrongs, both real and perceived.  
    • 3 yrs ago LCM and Vidor played in Vidor for a play in game.  Game was on a Saturday and started around 1 or 2p.
    • It would shock me beyond belief if he tried to. Now, I hope and pray he appoints people that will investigate, charge, and imprison anyone found guilty of the crimes against him...including treason. I would be all for a special task force charged solely with the task of investigating crimes against Trump. Of course the Democrats will be screaming bloody murder that Trump is weaponizing the government against them. We all know the story. From a cursory standpoint, there seems to be a plethora of evidence to lock up many Democrats for a long time. Unless this is done, I see no end to destruction of our political system...and this country.
    • There is a difference, but I wouldn't at all put it past Trump to do so if he had the infrastructure in place to get away with it like the Dems currently do.  With the amount of effort he's invested in ruining those republicans who've opposed him, it wouldn't surprise me one bit.
    • I think it will be an interesting case and could potentially come up for appeal on a different constitutional point.  The Supreme Court has ruled in the past that the government doesn’t have to take possession of property in order to take it under the meaning of the Fifth Amendment.  If they take away the enjoyment or use of the property, it is no different than physically seizing it to build a highway for example. In a lawsuit as opposed to a criminal trial, a person/plaintiff doesn’t have to prove something beyond a reasonable doubt but rather by a preponderance of evidence or “more likely” to have happened. Maybe it could be described as more likely yes than no or 51%-49%.  ”IF” it can be shown at a trial by a preponderance of evidence that Texas more likely yes than no caused the flooding with its engineering of the project, the people suing might have a case. But…. Does that alone win the case under the Fifth Amendment taking clause? I am not so sure. In US v Causby the Supreme Court ruled that the US government took a man’s property by flying airplanes over it. It was a public airport lawfully leased by the US in WWII and used to fly heavy bombers from it. Causby had an egg farm and the extremely loud noise of some airplanes under full power and sometimes at night with a landing lights being so close, it bothered and scared the family and damaged his egg farm production. Some chickens died and some quit laying eggs due to the extreme disturbances and lights at night. The Supreme Court ruled in Causby’s favor saying that the US had taken away the enjoyment and use of his land even though they didn’t physically seize it. The use of the land was hampered and that was enough for the taking clause under the Fifth Amendment. So in the IH-10 case, did Texas take away the use or enjoyment of the property?  A point of Causby was that the military bombers at a public airport was certainly for “public use”. The planes were public/taxpayers’ and the airport and lease were taxpayers’ property so the “public” definitely used it   My question in this lawsuit against Texas, even in they can prove the damage, was the damage (like in Causby) for “public use”? If not would it then not be a Fifth Amendment case but rather a state law case?  If Texas law denies such a lawsuit under state sovereignty and the families can’t prove a Fifth Amendment case of “public use”, could they prove the damages but still lose the case under state law? I haven’t read that anywhere and just thinking out loud. I could be way off base. But I think it could be interesting…..
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...