Author Topic: Ridge Creek School - Accreditation (Read 26072 times)

Anonymous · « **Reply #60 on:** August 29, 2009, 11:11:01 PM »

I thought Cates was on loan from the Atlanta zoo. Damn! Another lie!

RobertBruce · « **Reply #61 on:** August 30, 2009, 12:35:12 AM »

Quote

I care about getting murderers, thieves and rapists off the street, but I dont believe in unlawful wiretaps or searching a personâ€™s premises without a warrant to achieve that goal. I care about the kids and believe many programs scam parents and accept kids for the wrong reasons but I dont believe in making up lies in pursuant to achieve damaging a programsâ€™ reputation or the people who work there. They deserve the same chance as you and I do to defend ourselves and should be held accountable for what they do. But it should be done honestly.

Again, you are in fact a liar. You don't care about these kids, you dismiss their claims of abuse as a matter of habit. You stated openly that in 30 + years of operation, less than 1% had ever been abused. You made this claim without any basis, or facts to support your claim. You consistently dismissed and made fun of the kids who were murdered and abused at these places. Here, take a look:

Quote

Quote
3. Do you believe the 300lbs asst. counselor who sat on the kid at Eckert and killed him should have been brought up on criminal charges?

No I don?t, at 300lbs he might have sat down and then not been able to get up because of his weight issues, I wasn?t there, there could be reasonable doubt. I think the person feeding him should be charged, if its McDonalds then they should take responsibility. ?.after all this is America.

You chided posters on for exposing the employees of these places for not being licensed, yet you were estatic upon believing you were exposing any of us, or hearing news of threats and harrassment we recieved. Despite that you somehow felt it was unfair when you yourself were exposed, and you cried about it to no end. I'm amazed you even know the meaning of the word 'honest'.

http://fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php? ... ds#p247570

C. (at least I think so) take nothing this bufoon says as being forth right. His bread and butter come directly from locking kids up. He runs an organization that targets impoverished teens to be locked up in these places because he knows such families lack the resources to sue him or the gulags their children are locked up in after being abused, or far worse.

TheWho · « **Reply #62 on:** August 30, 2009, 08:24:25 AM »

Quote

Quote
3. Do you believe the 300lbs asst. counselor who sat on the kid at Eckert and killed him should have been brought up on criminal charges?

No I don?t, at 300lbs he might have sat down and then not been able to get up because of his weight issues, I wasn?t there, there could be reasonable doubt. I think the person feeding him should be charged, if its McDonalds then they should take responsibility. ?.after all this is America.

Let me jump in and respond:

The above seems like a reasonable response.... what was the outcome of the investigation? Does anyone know? Maybe the counselor couldnâ€™t get up without assistance. Maybe he didnâ€™t realize that his weight was enough to kill the boy. Maybe he had an eating disorder..... Maybe the food he was eating wasnâ€™t properly marked indicating the calorie intake. If he was eating at McDonalds he may be able to sue them or the boyâ€™s parents could sue.

These may all seem outrageous but this is how the courts work in America. The reason charges were not brought upon this boy shows that there were other circumstances like pointed out above which deemed this not to be criminal. Does anyone know if he intended to kill him? These are the questions that need to be asked to get to the "Truth"

Anonymous · « **Reply #63 on:** August 30, 2009, 11:01:59 AM »

"thieves and rapists off the street"......well then HLA should have provided an appropriate venue for you...

RobertBruce · « **Reply #64 on:** August 30, 2009, 11:45:50 AM »

And yet still you seek to absolve any program of respondsibility. The grand jury disagreed with you. Thank you for proving my point though, you've never cared about these kids.

TheWho · « **Reply #65 on:** August 30, 2009, 02:19:21 PM »

Recap:

Quote

Do you believe the 300lbs asst. counselor who sat on the kid at Eckert and killed him should have been brought up on criminal charges?

I responded:

Quote

No I don?t,

RobertBruce responds:

Quote

The grand jury disagreed with you. Thank you for proving my point though, you've never cared about these kids.

Bruce, again, do you have a link of some sort to back up your claim?

Anonymous · « **Reply #66 on:** August 30, 2009, 03:28:21 PM »

http://www.teenadvocatesusa.org/Remembe ... ltsie.html
http://www.ocala.com/article/20051201/N ... ld-s-death
http://www.isaccorp.org/documents/micha ... 24.00.html

This is beyond sad..The mother took her own life and that of her 7 year old son.

TheWho · « **Reply #67 on:** August 30, 2009, 03:46:05 PM »

Thanks Jill. The whole story is sad and it affected the entire family and I would guess the counsellor and his family also. This shows again why I post here. If it were left to Bruces posts people would think the counselor was indicted by the grand jury and was guilty of doing something wrong.... but the posts reveal:

"A grand jury cleared the counselor of wrongdoing, saying he was following proper restraint procedures."

If I recall correctly the family of the boy still went after him and tried to sue him. But the Grand jury never believed he was libel.

What puzzles me is why posters like DJ and RobertBruce cannot stick with facts and just come out and state the truth. This really hurts the forums credibility and it is a continuous struggle to hold them both accountable. This is why I insist on links from the 2 of them especially.

RobertBruce · « **Reply #68 on:** August 30, 2009, 06:05:49 PM »

I've got to say John, I love that you no longer have the ability to edit your post, or blame your edits on others. Take a look:

Quote

The above seems like a reasonable response.... what was the outcome of the investigation?

You didn't ask if the counselor was brought up on charges John, what you asked was what the outcome of the investigation ended up being. The outcome being that both the program and the Juvenile Justice department were found to be at fault. The counselor, Joseph Cooley, followed the restraint procedures as he'd been trained, or in your own terms, he followed the porper procedure for killing a child. The DJJ later stated that the method used was actually improper. Despite what I'm sure you believe to be your expert opinion, McDonald's was never brought up on charges, or sued in civil court.

Thanks again for playing though, and again confirming for everyone you do not care about these children.

TheWho · « **Reply #69 on:** August 30, 2009, 06:19:41 PM »

Sorry Bruce, you try to wiggle out of every lieyou tell. We all read it and now you are trying to change your story. You and DJ have a long history of doing this and I catch you every time. Show us a link where the grand jury disagrees with me when I said the counselor should not be criminally charged. I will tell you again and again. Every time you open your mouth I am going to ask you for a link to back up what you say... and this is why I ask:

RobertBruce:

Quote

The grand jury disagreed with you. Thank you for proving my point though, you've never cared about these kids.

The facts:

"A grand jury cleared the counselor of wrongdoing, saying he was following proper restraint procedures."

RobertBruce · « **Reply #70 on:** August 30, 2009, 06:52:06 PM »

No problem John, here you go.

Quote

I think the person feeding him should be charged, if its McDonalds then they should take responsibility. ?.after all this is America.

Then here I go:

Quote

The grand jury disagreed with you

Again, neither McDonald's nor Mr. Cooley's wife or mother, or any other resturant was either brought up on charges or sued by the victims mother. Hence the grand jury disagreed with you. How this escapes you is baffling.

You can't escape your own words John. You're trying to avoid accountablilty and run away but your own record speaks for itself.

TheWho · « **Reply #71 on:** August 30, 2009, 06:52:37 PM »

Robertbruce wrote:

Quote

3. Do you believe the 300lbs asst. counselor who sat on the kid at Eckert and killed him should have been brought up on criminal charges?

Link

TheWho Wrote:

Quote

No I donâ€™t,.......

Link

RobertBruce Wrote:

Quote

The grand jury disagreed with you. Thank you for proving my point though, you've never cared about these kids.

Link

The facts:
â€œA grand jury cleared the counselor of wrongdoing, saying he was following proper restraint procedures.â€
Link

So again, RB,you said the grand jury disagreed with me. I provided facts and a link to back up my words. Do you have a link to what the Grand jury said to support your post and your words? (I know the answer but I need to ask).

RobertBruce · « **Reply #72 on:** August 30, 2009, 06:54:01 PM »

Do you have a link proving McDonald's was brought up on charges. Cause otherwise it appears as if they disagreed with you.

TheWho · « **Reply #73 on:** August 30, 2009, 06:59:56 PM »

Quote from: "RobertBruce"

Do you have a link proving McDonald's was brought up on charges. Cause otherwise it appears as if they disagreed with you.

Why do you continue to lie? Bruce, Support your post with what you claimed the grand Jury said. I have provided links which proves you to be a liar... what do you have to say for yourself! Show us the links which support your words.

RobertBruce · « **Reply #74 on:** August 30, 2009, 07:26:17 PM »

:roflmao: :roflmao:

I'll tell you what John, I will do just that, the second you can provide me with a link showing where I claimed the counselor was brought up on charges.

Fornits
Fornits Home for Wayward Web Fora
An open discussion about the troubled parent industry