Category Archives: police relations

children, Free Article, Law Enforcement, Media, Police, police relations, predatory, Uncategorized

Berwick PA man accused of sexually assaulting a minor

Recently, a disturbing case was brought to us by an anonymous contact. Because of the nature of the accusation, we have decided to push this article forward. 23-year-old, Nathain Ryan Hisey, of Berwick PA, is accused of sexually assaulting a 6-year-old child. According to the child, whose name has been withheld due to her age, the incident occurred at Hisey’s home. So, what exactly happened on that day? That’s exactly what we’re about to dive into.

On December 7,2021 the child had gone over to Hisey’s home for a play date. According to the child, she had gone into the restroom to wash her hands when Hisey, a father of two, soon to be three, followed her and asked if she needed help. It was, at this point, the predator made his move. According to the victim, she was instructed to close her eyes and open her mouth. Upon doing so, she states that he placed something into it.

On the drive home, Hisey made yet another attempt to assault the young child. Unlike the first time, the girl refused to comply. She was then instructed to tell nobody about the assault. Upon arriving home, the mother noted that the girl was in a clear state of distraught, reportedly crying. The girl proceeded to inform the mother of what had happened while at the Hisey residence. The girl explained that she could hear him unzip his pants. The “object” he inserted was described as “soft and round, like a hotdog. She further elaborated by describing the object as “hairy but not cold.”

We asked an individual, who was before the accusation, friends with Hisey, if he was at all surprised by the accusation. In his response, he stated, “I am, but only to an extent. Nate is a well-known dishonest person – it’s practically in his DNA. He’s done a lot of dishonest things that put the average person to task. On the other hand, I wouldn’t have thought he’d touch a child.”

We then proceeded to ask the individual about how his other friends have taken the accusation, presuming he knew. He replied saying, “Well, so far I think it’s a mix. They’re looking at it with an “innocent until proven guilty” perspective, which I understand. Meanwhile, there’s one other aside from me who believe he’s guilty.”

Finally, we asked if the fact that the accusation is coming from the child have any effect on his perception of this situation. To that question, he stated, “Well, from what I’ve seen, the victim’s story hasn’t changed an inch. The story we were given by the perpetrator was somewhat altered – which makes me look at both him and his spouse in a bad light. So, it’s worse in my eyes than others. I also come from a biased source, being an abuse survivor myself. I try not to let that factor into things, but there’s too many holes in the story I was given before I saw the article.”

Currently, Hisey is facing two charges: rape of a child and Invol. Deviate Sexual Intercourse W/Child. Both of these are Class 1 (or class A for some other states,) felonies. If convicted, he could face the potential of being imprisoned for approximately sixty years. This is, of course, presuming that no other additional charges are added onto the current ones.

Hisey denies that the event occurred. In his account, he admits to instructing the victim to close her eyes and open her mouth. However, he states that what he gave her was nothing more than a “Nutrigrain bar. Currently, Hisey is not incarcerated, being permitted to walk the streets. Though his current location is unknown, we can’t rule out the possibility that he has returned to his home, which have children present. Below is the current docket.

MdjDocketSheet

Free Article, Law Enforcement, Media, Opinions, Police, police relations, Politics, shooting, terrorism, Uncategorized

Uvalde Police: A review into their lack of action

The horrific shooting, which occurred in Uvalde Texas, has been discussed on multiple platforms. The shooting occurred when an 18 y.o. coward, Salvador Ramos, proceeded to walk into the Robb Elementary school and began to open fire on both, children and teachers. While this was a horrific event that has devastated many families, this isn’t our focal point. Instead, we are focusing on the police department and how they (didn’t) respond.

It’s standard that officers are trained for deadly situations, this includes mass shootings. In fact, law enforcement agencies run drills for such events. With that in mind, it leads to one question: Why did it take the Uvalde police 77 minutes to stop the shooter? For this, we’re going to have to review the timeline of events. In doing so, we can make a determination of exactly how long it took the Uvalde police to actually respond.

While we can say that this event took place very recently, the shooting was actually planned long before it occurred. In September of 2021, we know that the shooter requested his sister to purchase him a weapon. The reason for this is because, according to Federal law, you must be 18 years of age to buy a rifle. However, you must be 21 years of age to buy a pistol. Thankfully, in this situation, his sister declined his request.

At around March 1-3, 2022, images of weapons would be posted to the shooter’s Instagram account. On one such post, the shooter states the following, “10 more days.” To this, a user, ironically enough, asked about rather or not he had plans of shooting up a school. Around two months later, he would purchase weapons for the shooting.

The shooter’s final day

At roughly 11:00 AM, Ramos sent a Facebook message. This message was directed to a German girl that he had met online. In this message, he states that he planned to shoot his grandmother in the face. He than proceeded to carry out the act, however she called law enforcement. He than proceeds to steal her car and crashes it near Robb Elementary, the final phase of his diabolical plan.

We know that he arrived at the school at 11:28. two minutes later, a teacher made a call to 9-1-1, informing them of the urgent situation. As Ramos proceeded to the building, he had already begun to fire rounds. He entered the building at 11:33, where he would roam around the building with the intent of taking as many lives as he possibly could.

The critical time in this sequence is 11:35. This is the time police arrived on scene. Although they proceeded to the door, previously used by Ramos, it was found to be closed. This meant the police could not enter the building. Presumably through another door, the police proceed to enter. Upon doing so, they are met with gunfire which results in grazing wounds.

Now, to explain what a grazing wound is. In short, it means that the officers were hit, but it barely went into them. Basically, it’s a very minor wound. Regardless of the fact that they outnumbered the shooter, the proceed to evacuate the school, leaving the shooter to take more lives. Within minutes, 16 additional rounds are heard from within the building. At 11:43, in what can only be an amazing display of incompetence, the Uvalde Police take to Facebook, posting that the school is under lockdown due to a shooter. They go onto to say the following, “The students and staff are safe in the building.” Since this time, the post itself was deleted but how could they have posted something so blatantly untrue?

At 11:43, the police again post to Facebook. In this post they claim to have the shooter in custody. If you have been following this case, you already know that this information is untrue, the shooter was actually fatally shot by a lone border patrol agent. While this information may seem minor, it’s important to note one major problem: Ramos was still very much alive and he was still firing his weapons inside the school.

It would be at 12:50 PM, around 77 minutes after the shooting began, that a border patrol agent, who refused to wait for backup, entered the school. This one brave man ultimately did what the Uvalde police were to incompetent to do: he eliminated the threat. How could the police have gotten so much of this wrong? Now, it’s time we review that.

What went wrong?

From reviewing the timeline of events, it is very clear that the Uvalde police were incompetent. But why? As I mentioned, law enforcement agencies typically train for this sort of event. Based on the fact that they were so quick to flee the building and stand around, it’s clear that this department on how to handle this situation. For that, I don’t blame the officers personally. To simply state this, they have no control over the training procedures. The blame in this instance would go toward the local government and the police chief. These individuals are tasked with ensuring that their officers are capable of handling events such as this.

Moving beyond that, we can hold the officers responsible for their abrupt evacuation of the building. Because of this choice, many more lives were needlessly taken. While I can understand the concept of fear, it is also important to recognize that these are men and women who signed up to run into danger, not away from it. While they stood outside, as we’ve seen, they proceeded to provide false information to the public. Stating that the individual was in custody, long before his life would be ended, is appalling! Not only did the combination of these two things make the department look bad, but it has also created a massive backlash on social media, more on that shortly.

Shortly after the threat was eliminated, the police would again state that he was in custody. Now, I don’t think I need to state the obvious, but I will. There is a fundamental difference in being fatally shot and being in custody. How so? One infers that the offender is still alive while the other one is rather obvious. By stating that he was in custody, they provided more false information in that they gave the perception that Ramos was still breathing. Now, let’s go into that social media backlash.

As a result of the horrific mishandling of this situation, the department’s Facebook page has been met with heavy critique. Reviews that slam the department’s incompetence are very common. To quote one such review, “great place to shoot kids. All the cops are cowards. 0/10 would defund.” This, and many other reviews, demonstrate just how the public feels about this department. However, the department had demonstrated exactly why the “anti-police” movement has gone into full throttle. People have every right to be upset at this department, and they absolutely should be. What this department did was unethical, and as a result of the department’s choices, many more lives were taken.

It’s clear that this law enforcement department has some serious integrity problems. It’s also clear that their training is in desperate need of an overhaul. Though they will continue to get backlash, for sometime, we do hope that they take this opportunity to review their policies and procedures. Even with much needed changes, it will not undo the events of that day. To those families, we can only offer our deepest condolences.

If you like what we do, please consider subscribing. This can be done via PayPal or Patreon, it’s as easy as clicking a button. You would not only help us continue our work, you would also help in maintaining the site. So, let’s make a difference and let’s fight the good fight together!

Business relations, Consumer Reports, Free Article, Law Enforcement, Media, Opinions, Police, police relations, Politics, predatory

OCJDC article Follow-up (Evidence gallery)

On Facebook, our platform received a message from an individual claiming to be associated with the agency, to which we previously wrote about. If you haven’t read that article, we’ll give you a quick recap into the tragic events that unfolded for a mentally disabled individual. Bear in mind, that we have learned additional details since the previous article, they will be included in this one.

To summarize the situation, a detention officer with autism was placed onto the overnight shift. Initially, he felt that it would be more suited for him, he could get better adjusted, and so on. Immediately following this switch, a night supervisor appeared to make him a target. According to the individual, she would berate him in front of the residents (children who are in Juvenile custody,) as well as in front of other officers. Eventually, due to the hostile work environment, created by his supervisor, he began reaching out to individuals who outranked her. Below are the emails, that apparently don’t exist, if we were to listen to an alleged employee of this detention center.

Though redacted from the above image, the unedited version shows that this email was sent to a Major (yes they apparently use military rankings.) We asked about the response email to which we have been informed that one was never given, as far as he knew, it had been ignored. This leads us to email number two.

Upon not receiving any form of feedback, he proceeded to go up the ranking system. The above email was sent to the detention center chief, whom we mentioned in the previous article. Again, there was no response. He presumed that it was ignored for a second time. With that, he went outside of their ranking system.

On 4-26-2022, he proceeded to send this email to the HR manager. The date is important to mention, as it plays a critical role into a potentially illegal termination. Though there was no immediate response, on 5-1-2022, he had gotten a phone call from the detention center chief. The Chief requested a meeting between him, HR, and the employee. Here’s what we now know took place during this meeting.

Initially, they discussed his concerns and problems. However, near the end of this discussion, they took an abrupt change. According to the former employee, they proceeded to gaslight him, asking him if he may had done something that would have warranted the treatment he had received. Now, we as a platform, wish to go on record and say this: “THIS IS NOT OKAY! ABUSE IS NEVER ACCEPTABLE REGARDLESS OF WHY IT HAD TAKEN PLACE!”

From this point, he learned that an officer filed a complaint against him. The reason? He made her uncomfortable. Alright, so we’re going to interject right here. If you know an individual with autism, then you already know how difficult social situations can be. In other words, it’s not surprising that he would make somebody uncomfortable. What is shocking is the fact that she, right after he began sending emails off, felt the need to report him. We can speculate as to why. However, we’ll refrain from doing so.

So, as we stated, this horrible excuse of a meeting had taken place on 5-1-2022. Again, this date is important. By the time this meeting even took place, the former employee informs us that he had placed an application with the county jail. He informs us that this was done due to the lack of response from those to whom he sent emails. In short, he felt as though he had no support.

It’s important that we mention that apparently all county-based agencies utilize the same emailing system. This, as with the dates, is also important to note as you are about to learn.

On 5-5-2022, the former employee received this email via his county inbox; it came from the county jail. Now, if you read the previous article, 5-5-2022 is a very critical date. Within three hours of seeing this email, the detention chief pulled this man from his post, escorted him out of the facility, and terminated his employment as they stood in a parking lot. Yes, you read that correctly. The man couldn’t even give the former employee the respect of terminating him in his office; he had to walk him outside, in public. Furthermore, according to the employee, the weather wasn’t exactly sunny, as it had been raining for most of that day.

While their employees may claim that these emails do not exist, we do have the unedited versions of these. We know the names of who received them, we know the email addresses to which they were sent. This timeline, in our opinion, shows a clear indication that a man was purposefully targeted by his supervisor. When he attempted to report it, he was purposefully ignored until he proceeded with placing job applications. At this point, they did a gaslighting, under the guise of a meeting. They not only justified the abuse he was alleging, but they also went as far as to target a social issue that directly stemmed from his condition. Finally, when another agency contacted him, in retaliation OCJDC terminated him on the spot.

The termination not only makes it look bad for this man, who may now fail at obtaining this potential job, it was also illegal. In the United States, there are retaliation laws. Even if the State is a “Right to work,” or “At will” State, they can only fire you for legal reasons, a classification that retaliation does not fall into. Given the above timeline, the dates that we’ve seen on the emails, and the fact he did lose his job, retaliation does appear to be the reason for the end result. We are assisting him in acquiring an attorney. This form of injustice simply cannot be allowed to stand.

Business relations, children, Consumer Reports, Consumer reports, Free Article, Law Enforcement, Media, Opinions, Police, police relations, Politics, Uncategorized

Did OCJDC retaliate against former officer?

This is an article that we have been contemplating for sometime. When the, now former, officer initially contacted us, we weren’t completely convinced that he was being targeted. However, since that time of initial contact, we can no longer deny that possibility. We are not confirming that he was targeted, though it does now seem plausible. Instead, we will simply provide the timeline that was presented to us. It is important to note that he provided this timeline live. This means that as they were unfolding, he presented them to our platform in hopes that we would present them at the appropriate time. That time has come.

Around mid April of 2022, the contacting officer had been switched to night-shift. At this point, according to him, things went from going very well to very poorly. Withing two weeks of this switch, he made his initial contact with us. At this time he had made a complaint regarding his supervisor. In his complaint he had noted that specific officers were treated very well while others were treated poorly. He followed this up with complaints of derogatory statements that had been made specifically at his expense. At this point, WoC noted it for potential reference but made no indication of interest.

On 5-3-2022 the officer made contact with our platform. In this contact he noted that the abuse had only gotten worst. As a result, he had filed an informal complaint against the supervisor, which was discussed in a meeting. The meeting consisted of an HR representative, detention chief Bruce Henley, and himself. During this meeting, he had learned that one of the night officers, who were on the “favorites” list with the supervisor, made a claim against him. The unknown officer made sexual harassment allegations and overall discomfort around the officer.

We proceeded to follow this claim through with questions, as this is a serious accusation. He provided us Facebook conversations between him and the officer, some which were taken on the day she filed the complaint. Needless to say, we are comfortable with our belief that her claim was knowingly false. It is, at this point, that we began compiling his information as it was clear to us that he was, in fact, being targeted.

Following this meeting, the officer was placed back onto the swing shift (3-11pm.) He noted that he couldn’t shake the feeling that something was about to happen, he would be proven correct.

On 5-5-2022 WoC once again heard from the officer. This time, he had been escorted outside of the facility and terminated. He explains that no reason or explanation was given for this action. However, when we look at this timeline of events, the reason becomes apparent: retaliation. This man, who simply wished to perform his job, had not only become the victim of verbal abuse, he was terminated for reporting it. Though we hate to see this sort of thing happen, it’s far more common than one may realize. For people such as this former officer, we will happily stand with them while ensuring that deeds like this don’t go unnoticed. As it currently stands, we have not heard anything from the detention center. If we do, we will add it to this article.

Business relations, Free Article, Law Enforcement, Media, Opinions, Police, police relations, terrorism, Uncategorized

Trucker strike: The Government fiasco

If there is one thing that can be said, it’s this: The trucker strike has, without a doubt, created an uproar. That uproar stems primarily from a government who absolutely refuses to listen. It’s no big secret that the government, both Canadian and American, have exploited the Covid situation for their own monetary gain, that’s obvious to anybody who has been watching. With the passing of mandate after mandate, it has finally boiled down to the working class, or in this instance, the truckers, conducting a protest. What are they protesting, exactly? The government’s mandate to force people into injecting a “vaccine” into their bodies.

The vaccine has been a hot debate since the time of its release. One side claiming that it works, though the government has since contradicted this claim, while the other side stands by the fact that the vaccine’s long-term effects cannot possibly be known. This, to any rational person, would be a legitimate concern. Afterall, the vaccine was developed, tested, and distributed in a very short time. Concerns such as the one listed should be taken into account, but they’re not. Instead, the Canadian and American governments are trying to get people vaccinated, even if it means by force. Naturally, the very backbone of our nations, the truckers, have finally had enough.

The Protest and its fiasco

As thousands of semis continue to block various border crossings, and cities, they stand by their original goal: To stop the forced vaccine mandate. Meanwhile, the Candian, and of course American, governments have taken to conducting a smear campaign against these individuals. Why would they do such a thing, you ask? Good question. One that mainstream media should be asking, but simply aren’t.

The truckers are being labeled as “racist,” among many other things. In essence, they’re saying that if you stand against tyranny, they’re going to mark you as something you’re most likely not. This is the first sign of a weak minded individual. For those who follow the political arena, chances are you already aware of how weak minded that collective truly is. But their campaign of terror doesn’t end with a simple nasty label; it goes into actual threats against individuals who are simply utilizing what should had been their protected right to protest.

The Candian government has made it very clear that if the truckers do not terminate in the performance of their rights, they face various consequences. This includes a $100,000 fine, termination of their livelihood, permanent loss of their commercial license, and up to one year in prison. This is on top of the millions of dollars that the government has already stolen from them via GoFundMe and Give Send Go, both which are American based companies. The tyranny doesn’t seem to end with just targeting the truckers, sadly.

Canadians who post to social media groups, specifically in support of these drivers, are also being targeted. Upon making such posts, many of them are reporting that the police will appear at their door with a brochure. The information on this brochure is about peaceful protest. So supporting a group that is doing that, peacefully protesting, now requires the police to harass any citizen who’s vocal about that support?

Now while some people will say that this isn’t a peaceful protest, I must point out a few things. Aside from blocking a few roads, there has been no violence, no looting, no rioting, no destruction of property, nor burning of buildings. I can’t say the same about some other recent protests. So yes, this is indeed a peaceful protest. One that shouldn’t be treated in the manner to which the government seems to be taking it.

This isn’t about rather or not you agree with the protest. This is about the fundamental right of making your grievance known without fear of retaliation. When the government is able to silence people, simply for expressing their opinions and issues, there’s a problem. This is a problem that doesn’t just exist in Canada. Recently, in America, we’ve been seeing our own government hastily make similar moves toward silencing citizens, specifically the working class. This is an issue that people need to be aware of. People need to understand this one simple fact: Your best interest in contrast to that of the government, are completely different.

If you support War on Corruption and what it does, please consider contributing, it goes a long way toward helping the platform stay afloat. This can be done via the website directly or through Patreon.

Basic Level, Gold Membership, Law Enforcement, Media, Opinions, Police, police relations, shooting, Uncategorized

Daunte Wright: What went wrong?

The shooting of Daunte Wright can only be described as a sad tragedy. What should had been a simple traffic stop quickly escalated into a situation that would leave one man dead and an officer facing charges. What happened on the day Daunte was shot? Here’s what we currently know.

On 04/11/2021,  Wright was pulled over for having an expired tag. During this time, officers had discovered an active warrant for Wright. For this reason, they proceeded to make an arrest. However, the situation was about to take a turn for the worst.

As officers attempted to cuff Wright, he began to resist, pulling himself out of the arms of officer Potter. She proceeded to reach for a taser, only to accidently retrieve her service weapon. With Wright in his vehicle, attempting to flee, Potter yells, “taser, taser.” This was to notify other officers, as well as Wright, that the use of a less than lethal weapon was about to commence.

Upon yelling this, Potter fires one round, fatally shooting Wright in the chest. At this point, we can hear Potter say, “Oh my God, I just shot him.” Wright’s vehicle drives for several blocks before crashing into the back of another vehicle. What went wrong? Let’s review that aspect.

What went wrong?

Things initially started out as a very standard traffic stop. However, things begin to quickly go wrong once officers begin to make an arrest. So how could things go so seriously wrong in such a short time? For this, we have to look at the actions of officer Potter.

Most departments have a standard policy regarding their tasers and service weapons. In general, the two are to be kept separated. This is to prevent exactly what happened in the Wright situation. Potter’s department’s policy was: Service weapons were to be placed on the “dominant” side of the officer. The taser was to be placed on the officer’s “weak” side. However, from the context of the video, we know that officer Potter may had been in violation of this policy.

If she had placed her taser in the location, as described by her department’s policy, Duane may had very well survived this encounter. Evidence of the potential violation comes in the fact that she had intended to reach for the taser, only to grab her pistol instead.

The other aspect of where “things went wrong,” actually began with Duane Wright. If he had not resisted, over a gross misdemeanor warrant, just as stated above, he very well could had survived this encounter. Although this is true, this does not excuse the fact that officer Potter used lethal force in a situation that did not require it.

Every department has as “use of force” policy. This policy outlines what type of force can be used as well as when it can be used. A man trying to escape is a justified reason for pulling a taser. It is not a justified reason for pulling a service weapon, even if that was done by mistake. Furthermore, officer Potter, a veteran of 20+ years, should had known better than to allow such a mistake to occur. Furthermore, she should had immediately realized that the weapon she pulled was not a taser.

There are fundamental differences between a taser and a service pistol. The weight of each weapon is different. To expand beyond that, the visual difference should had been an indicator. Tasers, as used by law enforcement, are yellow and black. The weapon Potter was holding clearly did not have this color scheme. So, what happens now?

As we all know, officer potter, and the police chief, have resigned. For Potter, the situation has taken more of a legal turn. The day after her resignation, she was arrested. Potter currently sits in the county jail, where she faces charges of negligent manslaughter. I have no doubt that she will be convicted. In this situation, the bodycam photage, speaks for itself.

Potter was careless, and had accidently discharged a weapon that she had not intended. Because of this careless act, a young man is now dead. This situation should serve as a warning, not only to the public, but to other law enforcement officers: If you’re careless, you may create a situation to which there is no return.

Business relations, Free Article, internet safety, Law Enforcement, Media, Opinions, Police, police relations, predatory, shooting, terrorism, Uncategorized

America’s war on itself

Recent events have done nothing more than demonstrate the problem that has been ignored for many years. While many of us have known that this day would arrive, the vast majority sat in the comfort of their own homes, completely ignorant of what was about to come. Today, we’re going to review the rapid progression on the “war” against the American people. This is a war brought fourth by corporations and our very own government.

Election fiasco

It should be obvious that the vast majority believe the election was rigged. While our platform has always been critical of Trump, we were even more critical of the idea of having “mail-in” votes. The concept of mailing in your vote simply left to many variables for things to go wrong. While I’m not willing to blatantly state that the election was rigged, I am willing to entertain the idea that it is very likely. Even with that aside, even with my criticism of Donald Trump, I believe, without doubt, that he is being completely railroaded by Nancy Pelosi and her “goons.”

In recent months, we saw the first impeachment process against Trump. Let’s face the reality about that process, it was a bogus situation with nothing less than ill intent. Of course, this wasn’t the last attempt to destroy the now former president. In recent weeks, in a highly controversial and potentially illegal move, we witnessed a second impeachment. This process was based on the grounds that Trump incited a riot at the capital. But did he? Well, the tweets that they are using say nothing about condoning a riot. In fact, the term didn’t even appear in the tweets; the fact is, we simply could not find any tweet to which President Trump encouraged a riot. But what about the riot itself?

Mainstream media has really bitten into this one. We know things were stolen from the capital. We know that people were killed during this riot. But what many people don’t know is how this group successfully bypassed heavily armed Security, law enforcement, and even Secret Service agents to get into this building. For that, you only have to search for videos, which are being spread all over the internet. What we see in these videos are the police opening barricades to allow the protestors in. Police are seen talking with the protestors, interacting with these “dangerous” thugs. What I’m saying here should be clear: they got in because the police literally opened the doors for them. Because of these videos, some people are lead to believe that this was actually a bait to justify impeachment.

The second impeachment is highly questionable, at best. While it would still have to go court, even with the votes already being cast, Trump will no longer be in office when this happens. This would make him the first President to ever be impeached after already being removed from his position. Of course, the second impeachment is also a first. Meanwhile, as a result of this, tensions are quickly reaching a boiling point. I no longer believe that the possibility of civil war, I now wonder when it will happen.

Further tension arose with the questionable removal of Trump from social media. While many people are surprised and shocked by this, they really shouldn’t be. For years, Facebook has taken a stance to shutdown independent media platforms, or anybody who spoke against their supported political figure; Twitter is known to do the same, though not as extreme as Facebook. The basic point is: they’ve been censoring people for years now, with no accountability, and it’s not going to stop just because of who the person is. For those who are absolutely outraged by this, questions regarding our constitutional rights arise. Can a company do this? Well, that’s tricky. Technically, they are private companies. However, as I’ve said many times before, a company who is on the stock market falls into the category of being “public domain.”

Rather or not they can do this doesn’t mean they won’t. As our own government continues to put the nails into the coffin of our democracy, at the expense of the American people, we can expect to see many more reactions. The capital riot is just the start of what could very well become an outright war. While the government has the ability to prevent this, I don’t believe they will. If anything, I believe this is exactly what they’ve been wanting to happen. After all, anybody who’s observant can see that this tension has been slowly boiling for many years now.

Business relations, Free Article, Law Enforcement, Media, Opinions, Police, police relations

Are retailers violating the HIPAA ACT?

With the COVID situation running rampant, it shouldn’t be a surprise that your medical information is now being forced to be presented to employers. Failing to do so is met with consequences, loss of employment, or even suspension without pay. However, some employers, such as Dollar Tree, have taken this a step further. They not only ask for your medical information, they are accused of asking for information pertaining to related to the employee. With this accusation, a member of our team applied, got the job, and tested this theory out. This article is going to present information provided to us by a former employee and the results of what we learned first hand.

HIPAA

The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability (HIPAA) Act was designed in 1996 with the purpose of protecting sensitive medical information. With this act, doctors are forbidden from divulging information of any patient without having prior written consent. However, the act expands beyond that aspect. With the HIPAA Act, patients have control of their medical information, they can choose who to provide this information to, and it limits what medical information an employer can obtain; this last portion is where our article is primarily focused.

While this act doesn’t necessarily pertain to employers, there are aspects of it that do. For instance, under the HIPPA Act, an employee is not required to divulge their medical files, or even diagnosis and treatment. While we are currently in a pandemic, this changes nothing as the HIPPA Act simply does not address situations such as this. An employer asking an employee the results of a Covid test could be taken as a violation as, once again, a patient is not required to give the employee their diagnosis or treatment information. This brings us to the retail industry, who seem to ask their employees for this very piece of vital information.

Retails intrusive questions

With the information we had obtained from a source, our platform decided to go “inside” and find out for ourselves. For this, a member of our team applied at a local “Dollar Tree.” This location was selected because it was the company that we had gotten the complaint about. Like magic, the application was approved and we had our feet in the door. At this point, the investigation commenced.

The first night was uneventful. No questions were asked, just the typical “pre-opening” work. Shelves were stocked, boxes were stored, that sort of thing. Our new insider had begun to question rather or not the accusations were, in fact, even true. After working for hours, we had initially thought the investigation was a fluke. This conclusion didn’t last long, however. Prior to the insider’s employment, we had already established that if they did ask any of the questions, they were to answer at least one of them with “yes.”

The reason behind this was simply to see what the store would do in this situation. We already had established that answering “no” gave you the “right” to work, we wanted the other end of the spectrum. On night two, our insider reports that they arrived at the store. Upon entering, they were immediately stopped and asked some questions. Because this was being recorded, we are providing the very questions that were asked. We are also providing the response given by our insider.

The questions

Q: Have you been around anybody who has tested positive for Covid?

A: If I had been, there is no way that I could possibly know, so I’m going to say no. It is important to note that the employer is marked with (Q) while our insider is marked with (A.)

Q: In the past 24 hours, have you been around anybody who has been tested for Covid?

A: Yes.

Q: Wait, you’ve been around somebody who got tested for Covid?

A: Yeah.

Q: Do you know the results of their tests? (Highlighted as this question potentially violates HIPPA.)

A: No, I don’t know their tests results. Why?

Q: Because that means you can’t come into work.

A: What do you mean I can’t come to work, why not?

Q: Because you’re putting the entire store at risk.

A: Uh, okay, that makes no sense but whatever.

It’s important to note a few things within these questions. The first is the redundancy of the first question. If this had not been our insider, but another employee, they would already be at a high risk of exposure, they’re working retail. The second thing to note is what HIPAA says about asking for test results: they aren’t permitted to know what a diagnosis or treatment is. If the test were to be a positive, the employer is not permitted to know this as the patient would be diagnosed with Covid. Branching beyond that, the employer is also not permitted to know what the treatment plan for the said diagnosis is. Essentially, asking this question is a legal situation in the making. With a good attorney, this company could face a rather hefty penalty.

While all of the questions are intrusive, the specific question asking for test results, especially regarding those not employed with the company, is the smoking gun for any “litigation-happy” disgruntled employee. Expanding beyond the questions, we are left with one unanswered question: why the inconsistency?  On the first night of employment, our insider received no questions prior to their shift. However, on the second night, they were questioned. If the employers policy regarding “safety” was so serious, wouldn’t they be asking these intrusive questions prior to every shift?

While this subject, especially now, remains highly controversial, it is one that should be discussed. The question asking, “how far is to far?” is simply not asked enough. In this year alone, we have seen some of the worst violations to our rights than at any point in America’s history. Our right to religious freedom being a primary example. During this time, we saw ministers being arrested simply for refusing to cease with the practice of their religious freedoms, in the way that their religions required. But the violations didn’t start, nor did they end, there. For now, we will simply ask this one question: Will Americans ever say “enough is enough?”

 

Editorial Statement

Due to the backlash on Twitter, we are clarifying that this article is purely opinion. We are asking a question, noted by the title, and are simply responding with our thoughts. While the companies may not be violating HIPAA, by requesting information of people, who are not employed with them, we can at least establish that the privacy of those individuals have been violated.

Cyber, Free Article, internet safety, Law Enforcement, Media, Opinions, police relations, predatory, terrorism, Uncategorized

Another Facebook purge?

This article is very different from anything we’ve written in the past. While our normal policy is to not write anything to which we are directly related, we have been forced to make an exception. Over the past month, I have uploaded three YouTube videos. The videos not only explain the apparent attack on the “War on Corruption” platform, it goes to detail the progressive censorship of my own account. Though I had hoped for a resolution, Facebook has adamantly refused to address any message I’ve sent to them. In fact, they’ve only increased the various forms of censorship to my account and my platform.

Censorship: Phase I

In the beginning, what Facebook had done was nothing more than a slight annoyance. With no explanation, not even a noted policy violation, I had found that my account had been blocked from commenting or replying to political pages. This means that I could not interact with any political figure, this immediately caught my attention. At this point and time, I was still able to comment, reply, and even post to other pages, groups, etc. At this time, I was oblivious to just how far Facebook would take this censorship.

Censorship: Phase II

After about a week of dealing with the original block, Facebook apparently decided that it was time to do additional blocks. Upon trying to post a comment to a group, which I had been able to do the previous day, I found that I had been restricted from doing so. As with the original block, no reason was given explaining why my account had been restricted. The censorship wouldn’t end here. If it did, this article wouldn’t exist. Within twenty-four hours of this new restriction, I was restricted from commenting and replying to all pages and groups. However, at this point and time, I was still able to post on the “WoC” page, though commenting and replying had now been restricted.

Censorship: Phase III

For the next few weeks, I progressively became agitated over the restriction. On top of running this media platform, I compose and sell music online. At this point and time, this had remained untouched by the nefarious goons of Facebook. However, War on Corruption had now been completely restricted from me. I could no longer post, comment, reply, or even send private messages from the platform’s page. It was, at this point that we decided to begin the process of removing WoC from Facebook completely. During this period, Facebook added yet another new restriction. Not only was I unable to post, comment, reply, or send PM’s, I now could no longer join or leave groups. Worst yet, Facebook wasn’t even finished playing this illegal form of censorship.

Censorship: Phase IV

With this, we are now up to date with the current situation. At this point, Facebook has removed my ability to post, comment, and reply from my personal profile. Furthermore, the page I have, to which I promote my side gig of music, has also been slammed by the social media giant. This means that, on two different platforms, Facebook has not only censored me, but they’ve even cut a form of my income: music. But it doesn’t end there. Out of our team of seven, five of us have been targeted in this exact same manner, all without reason or explanation. Though all of us have tried to appeal it, the results are the same. The appeal process itself has been restricted from all of us.

This means that while we have the option to appeal, should we attempt to do so it will fail to go through; Facebook will never even know that we’ve tried to fight it. As of now, our platform is being operated by two individuals of our team, the only two who have not been targeted with this illegal act. Meanwhile, I continue my search for a civil rights attorney. Not only for our team, but for the various other platforms, and individuals, targeted by Facebook.

Conclusion

With much discussion, we do have a lead into what instigated the censorship: I was critical of a specific political figure, one that Facebook supports. With their censorship, they’ve not only shown how far they will go to stop anybody who opposes their political views, they have demonstrated how far they will go to silence any journalist who speaks against those to which they support.

We aren’t writing this article to bring awareness to what is happening to our platform, we are writing this to warn other journalists, and truth seekers, of what Facebook is willing to do to silence them. We have full expectation that Facebook will shut us down. Since the time of the initial restriction, we have watched as our platform stats spiraled into oblivion. With this, we have absolutely no doubt that, much like our team, our platform is being shadow banned by the site.

During what many call the “purge,” Facebook wiped out over a dozen media platforms from their site. Among them: “Freedom Though Project,” who had well over a million followers. The habitual pattern of Facebook is to target independent media, why not? They can’t buy us off unlike the corporate giants of the media world. While Facebook continues to hold its position of being a “private” company, this is factually untrue. Facebook had ceased being a private company when they entered the public domain, the Stock Market. While this has many financial benefits for the site, it has a lot of legal disadvantages. Among them, violating constitutional rights.

Though we have no expectation of the platform surviving this, on Facebook at least, we have begun moving to other sites. Below, are links to our new locations. We hope to see you there just as we hope that Facebook will cease this unjust activity.

MeWe

Rumble

Flote

Minds

Parler