Whooter I wonder if it's at all possible for you to simply debate someone, without resorting to attempts at personal attacks or lying about the other person.
That being said, do you happen to know for a fact what the incident was in question that the report refers to?
If I attacked anyone, I apologize, I didnt see any attacks in the last several posts. As far as the report goes here is a clip:
Based on record review, resident and staff interviews, the agency failed to provide for the needs,
care, protection, and supervision of the children in care;
Findings Include:
(1) During an interviews conducted on September 1, 2010 from 1:00 pm-3:30 pm with Residents
101, 102, 108, 109, 110, and 112 in which all residents acknowledged that they are aware of
residents engaging in sexually inappropriate behavior. It was reported that the residents would
sneak off in designated areas unbeknownst to staff.
(2) Record review on September 1, 2010 of Incident Report dated 06-06-10 for Resident #11
revealed Resident #11 along with 6 other females disclosed to staff an incident involving sexual
activity between Resident #11 and an older male resident. It was documented that Resident #11
appeared upset and stated that what occurred between herself (R11) and the male resident was
an unwelcome encounter.
I was speculating as to why DJ would make up a lie about any of the above kids being raped at RCS and I believe it is probably due the fact that he is still upset about being fired from HLA. If you can think of another reason he would lie I would be open to your input.
...
Here's the definition of "sexual activity":
Noun 1. sexual activity - activities associated with sexual intercourse; "they had sex in the back seat"
definition
So, now we see "sexual activity" by defintion means "sexual intercourse." We also see from the report that this sexual intercourse was "unwelcome," i.e. the girl was raped. "Unwelcome sexual intercourse," Whooter. Read it carefully and try to understand what it means. It's the definition of "rape."
Like I said, Whooter, educate yourself before you take extreme positions like this and expose yourself not only as an extremist, but also a liar. Not good.
Lol, Whooter. I guess The Dictionary also used to work at HLA and was fired and because it's disgruntled now it changed its definition of "sexual activity" to support its agenda.
I'll go with The Dictionary on this one, Whooter.
It's actually very clear, RB. The report states she was the victim of "unwanted sexual activity" from and older male inmate. That happens to meet the dictionary definition of "rape."
See the link above.
I don't believe ORS is using the "wikipedia" definitions that Whooter provided, lol.
RB, you also have to keep in mind that Whooter is strongly motivated to change the defintion of rape. Earlier in this thread when he was talking about his time in isolation cells while he was in prison, he didn't give you all the details. He wasn't a threat to others and in need of solitary confinement. He was in what's called "protective custody" when he was in prison to protect him from other inmates because of the nature of his crimes. He has admitted this before.
Whooter went to prison because he was convicted of "sexual contact with a child" which he descirbed to the prosecutor as "flirting," but the court saw it differently and put him in prison for it. Each conversation we have here about rape involves Whooter trying to redefine the word because of his previous prison experience.
This is also why he accuses everyone here of "molesting their own kids" when he feels like he lost an argument. He has to live with the fact that this is exactly what he did and went to prison for, so he knows the shame and it causes when people know this about him, so he tries to put that same shame on others. It's called "projection."
If you can think of any other reasons he would lie about this girl's rape and the documentation about it, I'd be interested to hear. This is not an attack, either. It's just what Whooter has already admitted and I think it colors his opinions on the subject.
Of course I was never fired from HLA, RB. We know that. Many HLA employees have posted here before and not one sinle one ever accused me of that - they know better. HLA/RCS intentionally hires people with felony convictions because they consider it "life experience" and we already know from the reports they don't do background checks. There were at least three convicted felons working at HLA when I was there. It was pretty common. Looks like it's still their policy at RCS.
