Everest Charter School: their Institutional and Economic Racism

[Taylor]

accusations about citizens on this forum. Because of his misconduct, the editors at the Daily Journal shut down the entire forum for a week in June.

[Samuel Blair]

Taylor:thanks for your information. Sadly the history makes it clear that reasonable dialogue with this individual is not possible.

Mr. Kirkpatrick:
Your rants demonstrate hypocrisy and some basic misunderstanding of almost all facts of the Everest situation. It would appear that someone told you at some point in your life that if you keep repeating falsehoods enough times and in an offensive enough manner, that you'll get your way.
Trying reasonable discussion with you is clearly pointless but you should realize that from the news reports, Everest is not locating in EPA. I would recommend that as a first step, if you want to help the EPA community that you work with the charter high schools that are in EPA rather than trying name calling with Everest. Your rants actually do you and your causes more harm than good.

[Jill]

Dear Mr. Blair,

I also filed a complaint about Mr. Kirkpatrick to the Daily Forum Editor right before it was closed down. While on one hand Jack Kirkpatrick was quoting his ability to be honest he was referring to women as "beavers."

So in addition to his perceived racism in general, he lacks fundamental respect for women. I found his use of the word offensive.

Mr. Kirkpatrick claims to be a Christian, I certainly feel that is not reflective in his behavior and writing here on the forum. He is certainly in my opinion abusive towards everybody. Opinions are fine, abuse is not.

[Jack Kirkpatrick]

Originally Posted by Jill

Dear Mr. Blair,

I also filed a complaint about Mr. Kirkpatrick to the Daily Forum Editor right before it was closed down. While on one hand Jack Kirkpatrick was quoting his ability to be honest he was referring to women as "beavers." So in addition to his perceived racism in general, he lacks fundamental respect for women. I found his use of the word offensive. Mr. Kirkpatrick claims to be a Christian, I certainly feel that is not reflective in his behavior and writing here on the forum. He is certainly in my opinion abusive towards everybody. Opinions are fine, abuse is not.

Jill - don't be a martyr - My Post 493 did use a demeaning word, but you followed up immediately with your Post 496, when you ask about "when was the last time...." and reminded me to keep a sense of humor. I do not see how you can be so offended by the demeaning word and now cry foul and remind others of this as a foul!

For those readers that might be interested - here are the posts that created part of this firestorm of debate in the Local - Crime & Courts - Dr. William Ayres Arrested.

Post From 493:

Originally Posted by Jack Kirkpatrick

If Ms. Balfour is a witness, she should not be in the chicken coup. It would not be healthy for the victims, the prosecution or the defense that needs objectivity and not emotionalism. Witnesses can be sure to taint the testimony if they hear the other testimony and adjust their testimony to fit the circumstances. I never trust a wittiness to be objective if they are over identified with the victim or defendant who, if they sit in a trial and then testify directly or in rebuttal. There are too much chance to embellish or diminish the truth, the trust or overstated or understate previous testimony depending upon where one's allegiances lies. This is just patently unethical in a charged trial such as is the Dr. Ayres case!

Balfour can be an advocate and a "Mother Theresa" outside of the courtroom or in a therapist chair if she is a licensed psychologist in California. Otherwise she can cool her heels and heal the old non-statute members of this ordeal! She is in it for the money at this stage, not really as a altruistic advocate who has insufficient bearing on the statute victims that reopened a dead on arrival out-of-statute case tat is next to useless and probably embellished over the years like sexist "locker room" talk of last lovers, beaver counts and "war" stories, like it or not!

The trial is not a training or advocate exercise in a testimonial setting - it is advocacy in outside training and social practice, otherwise it would taint the testimony & jury pool and has no bearing on the behavior of the defendant or the victim! The foundation of the case lies elswhere and the summation of the proceeding after the trial is over becomes the curriculum for the advocate to train the public and professionals!

Post 496

Originally Posted by Jill

P.S. When was the last time you saw a beaver Jack? Was it when you were wearing your gym sneakers, the kind you dump powder in?

I know you said keep a sense of humor so of course I am.

Post 553

Originally Posted by Jill

I request you remove your post with the word beavers, your reference to diaper changes too Jack. Those are not in line with this forum either!

You think it was pleasant having you post your thoughts about beavers and viewing diaper changes?

Remove your posts out of decency to women and children who need to have diapers changed! You think it is ok for Jack Kirkpatrick to say what ever he wants and steamroll over everyone but a photo sends you into suppressing the very things you usually like to dabble in.

The one positive is that we sure no how the jury will act if they see the photos!

I wish Jack was on the jury, slam dunk on a win for the prosecution...Jack changed his mind when he saw the photos, first it's art now he's wiggin out. Make up your mind Jack..........ok for you to demean women and talk about beavers and get your jollies over referencing a diaper change.

A link provides a choice you can click it or not. With your posts Jack we barely have a choice but to skim over your perverted thoughts. Thanks for providing the link in your post.

Post 554

Originally Posted by Jack Kirkpatrick

Jill, I'll let the readers judge my views in context to what I wrote. I did not post any URL with explicit pictures contained in a mainstream book that may be offensive, but does not reach the level of legal obscenity

My comment was not about diapers - it was about the public news media placing a full nude frontal picture of Palin's grandson having his diapers change - the full frontal exposure was inappropriate when modesty could have sufficed to tell the story of Levi Johnston changing his son's diapers.

As to the beaver comment, you may be right..., but it wasn't explicit and again, it is the context that sets it apart. After all, "chomo," prison slang for child molesters, could fall within the same urban slang context. Even calling or suggesting a person is a "prevert" (pervert) changes the tone and context.

The URL is still inappropriate and directs the person to explicit pictures; a title of a book is another matter and if the person is motivated to take a look, that is on them to find the URL. You are enticing them through direct action (a click of the mouse on your URL post) to take a look. That is far more inflammatory than anything else in the stream of these posts!

The problem with this stream is it is very one sided and I think there is another view in context of what is said. I intend to offset the general trend in this stream (unsuccessfully, I am sure). It just may be that Dr. Ayres is not guilty but his actions may be out of tune with today's medical/psychiatric protocols, but that along does not make him a pedophile. I have my doubts that this case will be proven beyond a reasonable doubt in the long run despite inflammatory books and questionable actions or interpretation of the alleged victims testimony.

I don't expect you to apologize and I am not offended by anyones' comments here; I just think that is a grave error on your judgement and again suggest that you remove the URL and keep the name of the book!

Post 558

Originally Posted by Jill

Jack,

I have a few last comments for you and then I will no longer waste time on you. This thread is a discussion about a legal case. If you can't weigh the potential evidence (although some may feel it is graphic) then your comments are useless.

You remind me of a lot of double-tongued people I know, one day this one day that. When something is objectionable, graphic, possibly even pornographic you want to cover your eyes, hide it in a tattered and torn envelope, and stuff it in the cabinet drawer!

My interests in the case are how the jury will weigh all the potential evidence if it is admitted. If I haven't seen the evidence, although it may not be pleasant to look at, I shall refrain from expressing an opinion.

You want to hide the URL, oh my gosh, don't look, don't help anyone find this stuff, one week ago you called it art. Quick! Remove the link if it stays buried we can pretend it doesn't exist.

JUST LIKE MANY DIDN’T WANT TO BELIEVE THIS CASE EXISTED.

So in many ways Jack, you are like Ayres, he had the book and he had it in a cabinet, some other items in a tattered envelope. Hide it!

Now Jack, I want to bring you up to the year 2009. If you say “beaver” at work, in political speeches, well you can kiss your career goodbye. Maybe you got away with that in the 1960's and 1970's. I am here to tell this is 2009 and you would not get away with it now, not at work, not in a room of decent people. It is offensive and you have the choice to edit your words now!

If you had been savvy enough to check back I removed my URL and the complete post as unlike you I do not wish to offend anybody.

Right now Jack, you are one of two who posted the URL which links to the photos in the book the Coming of Age. If anyone wishes to see them may I direct you to Jack Kirkpatrick’s post or Wilson's. They both kindly provided you with a choice to click the link or abstain. It is a choice.

The most important thing Jack, is I want to thank you for showing us all who are interested in this case the impact the book will have if it is admitted into evidence. You wanting to hide the URL speaks louder than the book!

Hide it Jack, quick it is in your post, you copied the URL! You republished it.