Tag Archives: War on Corruption

Free Article, Gaming News, Media, Politics, Uncategorized

Firelake Grand Casino: illegal retaliation?

Editorial Notation:

The following article is written based on information provided by the victim, witnesses, and phone recordings. We have also been made aware that another security officer, who had been sharing this very story to co-workers, was reportedly written up for doing so.

When making any form of complaint an employee should feel safe, regardless of their gender identities. The concept of being retaliated on simply for being a Male victim isn’t unheard of, this is especially true in sexual harassment cases. While we have been able to make contact with some current employees, the Citizens of Potawatomi Nation tribe has ignored all requests for contact. Regardless of their silence, we have chosen to move forward with this article because we have enough witness accounts, including the victim, to feel comfortable in publishing this information. It is important to note that we will not be revealing names. This is because of the retaliatory of the Firelake Grand Casino and its associated Tribe.

Events leading up to the claim

According to provided employment records, our victim began working for this Casino in early December of 2022. It would be around three weeks later that he would come into contact with a housekeeper, the individual of which the complaint would ultimately be filed against. According to both, witnesses and the victim, nothing appeared to be off. Overall, the conversations appeared to be normal and work friendly. This would not last very long, however.

The victim states that it began with her asking, “are you trying to flirt with me?” she allegedly followed up with, “people are telling me that shy guys tend talk to people they want to flirt with but are afraid of being rejected.” It was at this point, our victim informed the unknown woman that he was married. In most cases this would have been the end of the ordeal. In this instance, it appeared to be a challenge for the young woman. Following this conversation, we are told by witnesses and the victim, the conversations began to divert into the realm of ‘unprofessional.’

According to sources, initially the comments were in regard to the victim leaving his wife for her. As the weeks continued, so did her comments. According to one source, they had overheard her make a statement about how the victim’s wife was a piece of work. We spoke to our victim in regard to this. He confirmed that such a comment had been made shortly before he decided to file the report. he continued to inform us that the comments were so frequent he was beginning to despise going to work, contrary to him loving his job.

The complaint and aftermath

“She began asking about his location when he was off work,” according to a witness. This would prompt the first of two complaints. With the other security officer, he made the first complaint to the third shift supervisor. The response he got was, “Ignore it. Policy says we can’t tell her anything anyway.” The comments themselves were completely disregarded. By the following day, another inappropriate comment would be made. This time the victim took the complaint to their Human Resources department. What unfolded, as a result of this, is nothing short of illegal.

Upon learning of the second complaint, the third shift supervisor had the victim meet with him. He was informed that the young woman was to have no contact with him; she continued having contact regardless. He was then reprimanded for bringing their HR department into the situation. “Because of you, they’re watching everybody closely now. We now have attention that wasn’t needed and could have been avoided if you had just listened to me.” According to the victim, he was then lectured about having ‘thicker skin.’

The following weeks would consist of various forms of retaliation from two of his three supervisors. Whenever trying to speak with the supervisors, they responded with, “what do you want?” The victim states that this only began after the report went to HR. The retaliation did not cease with just hostile words. According to sources, mobile phones were permitted at their postings if the facility was closed. Regardless of this supervisor approved activity, our victim found himself on the receiving end of a write-up. The reason: using his mobile device while on post.

Two days following the write-up, would mark the end of the victim’s employment. On Friday, 24/04/2023, the victim would be suspended pending an investigation. As of the writing of this article, no explanation as to why this suspension, or the investigation, have ever been explained. The end result of the investigation was the victim’s termination. Our reference for the reason comes directly from the call’s recording.

Within the recording, the victim is informed that he would be terminated due to ‘threats’ he allegedly made. No individual that we have spoken to could substantiate what these threats were, including the victim. The victim is heard contesting the accusation, stating that he had not made any threats. There is silence for approximately thirty seconds before the victim states that they altered the meaning of something he told a co-worker. We contacted that co-worker who confirmed that no threat was made within the conversation. Regardless of this, the victim was terminated by this tribe.

Everything we have seen, everybody we have spoken to, have confirmed that the events we covered were not only unethical, but also illegal. The hostility from the supervisors, the write-up on approved activities, the termination after an investigation; none of this would have occurred if the sexual harassment report had not been filed. It is clear that this company, and the Tribe who owns it, retaliated against this individual. As the situation currently is, the victim has no legal course of action. This is purely due to the fact that it is nearly impossible to file a case against a tribal nation.

children, CPS, Free Article, Law Enforcement, Media, Opinions, Police, predatory, Uncategorized

Accused Predator: An update on his case

Editorial Notation

The below updates are based upon statements provided to WoC. The statements were given by individuals who are either directly involved with the case or were former friends of the accused. We are presenting the information as it was presented to our platform.

Sometime ago, we covered a case involving Nathain Hisey. The 23 yo man was originally accused of sexually assaulting a young child, while residing in Berwick Pennsylvania. However, to say that this case has grown would be an understatement. Since that time, it seems that Hisey has kept himself busy in a not so good sort of way.

When the case initially began, Hisey really didn’t have much to be concerned about, after all, it was just an allegation. Since that time, things have apparently taken a much darker turn. To begin with, he is now facing an accusation involving an adult woman. According to sources, her assault occurred long after the case involving the child began. Because of this, it has added an additional layer of complexity to an already complicated situation.

With a downward spiral of dwindling support, Hisey has quickly found himself to be alone. Although every person who once called him ‘friend,’ had turned their backs, he did have his wife. Naturally, rather it be love or denial, she fully supported and believed in his innocence. This belief didn’t come without a cost, however. Due to her support, the children had been removed and placed with family outside of the home. It has since been revealed that at least one of these children suffer from an extreme case of night terrors, often being heard screaming, “no daddy! Don’t do it.” For this reason, it is speculated that his children could very well be additional victims of this accused deviant.

Within the past few months, Nathain’s wife has not only left, but has also filed for divorce. Though the reason is not what you would care to believe. Allegedly, the only reason she terminated her support was due to walking in on Nathain, who was actively having an affair. With no friends, or even family who supports him, Hisey now finds himself alone in a situation to which there is no escape.

At this point in time, it is highly unlikely that he will avoid prison. Currently, he sits in protective custody in a cell, located at a local correctional facility. While it is unclear as to rather or not he has additional victims, it is clear that at least two have spoken against him. Sadly, this is a case in which nobody wins. The victims will have to face each day remembering what was done to them. His soon to be ex-wife will never forget the betrayal that her loyalty was rewarded with, and their children will be without either parent. As if this wasn’t enough, we still have the many friends and additional family members who will have to struggle as they come to terms with the man they thought they knew.

children, Free Article, Law Enforcement, Media, Opinions, predatory, Uncategorized

Did an accused child predator walk free?

Recently, we covered a case from Berwick, PA. in which Nathain Hisey, at the accusation of a 6yo child, was facing serious charges. Since that time, a lot has apparently happened. For instance, he was initially evicted from his home, as a result of the accusation. However, because he refused to stay away from the home, which his family still resided in, they too have met the same fate. However, the stream of bad luck, didn’t seem to end there.

During the case, he was not only evicted, but he also lost his job, lost friends, and the list of losses just seems to go on. Was this right? To be honest, the eviction should had waited for a final verdict. At this point, he has no conviction, and for our platform, that is all that matters. Of course, as you may already be aware, the court of public opinion can be a vicious one. On the flip side to this coin, the accusation was from a very young child, and that matters.

According to the court documents, and those who know him, the assault was conducted orally. Unfortunately for the family, as well as the victim, this sort of assault can be very difficult to prove. But there are other elements to this. According to sources involved with the case, the child was able to give detail description of the assailant’s genital region, including a mole that he allegedly has in the area. So how did this man simply walk? The simple answer: the case may not actually be over.

According to the docket, which we’ve included at the bottom of this article, the case status says closed. However, the disposition of the case states, “Held for Court.” This sounds a bit contradictory. But don’t worry, we’re going to explain what it very well could mean in this case. At that point, this docket will make a lot more sense.

Initially, there is a police investigation, that should be a bit obvious. However, this investigation may still be ongoing even while the initial court proceedings occur. Within the docket there are four key areas that one would want to observe to fully understand what’s happening. Bear in mind, however, it can still be confusing. These areas are as follows: Disposition, Disposition date, Processing status, and Case status. It is important to understand, before we proceed, that the below information is only pertaining to this docket. Other states may have different methods, terms, and so on, that are used. It is also important to note that this information is based on the terms as we know them, though none of the WoC team live in this specific state.

Disposition

The disposition is the easiest part to comprehend. To put it in simple terms, this shows the current ruling made by the court. It can say innocent, dismissed, guilty, held for court, or it could have something else written in there. If the individual is innocent, guilty, or dismissed, the case is over. However, with a dismissed status, it could potentially be reopened in the future. But that’s not what this docket says. Instead, it reads “held for court.” At this point, you want to observe the disposition date. This tells you when that decision was made, this is critical information if you’re wanting to follow a case and know what’s going on at that time.

Processing Status

This status is important as well. Unlike the disposition, this one can be a bit tricky to understand. To simplify this, we’ll just explain it. In a court proceeding, evidence, statements, etc. are submitted. Once this everything has been turned into the court, you may see something like “completed,” as is the case of the docket below. Without understanding this, it looks like the case is completed. The easiest way to comprehend this is through the term, ‘processing.’ The term process simply means, ‘to present.’ If you’re done presenting information, then it’s marked as completed.

Case status

In this docket, case status is not talking about the court proceedings, but rather the investigation. Once the investigation is complete, it’s marked as closed. At this point, all of the evidence would have been submitted and, from there, the courts will decide rather or not they can proceed with litigation. To figure out if the court has decided to move forward, you have to look at the ‘Disposition’ status. In the docket, the status reads, ‘Held for court,’ with the date 9/27/2022. This means that following that specific court date, Nahtain Hisey was incarcerated until further litigation; the case is not closed but appears to be going into the criminal court system.

In our title, we asked a simple question: Did an accused child predator walk free? The answer seems to be no. This conclusion, regardless of the closed case status, is made by the fact that the disposition of both charges read, ‘held for court.’ This is a strong indicator that there is enough evidence that the court has decided to proceed with further litigation. To help you better understand, we have included that docket as well.

document

MdjCourtSummary

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, Consumer Reports, Consumer reports, Free Article, Media, Opinions, Uncategorized

Independent “media” platform spreads false information

It goes to say that journalism has always been a challenging game to play. Providing accurate information, changing mistakes, being threatened, you name it and it happens. When you’re a freelance, or independent journalist, the stakes are even higher. In most cases there are no big companies to have your back. You have to distribute, write, and build your platform from the ground up. If you’re lucky, you’ll get a small team to help you. With all of the challenges that come with this field, one would think that being factual is a top priority. Afterall, it’s your platform’s image and reputation on the line. For the platform we’re about to cover, these things don’t appear to matter.

Freedom Public Press is a rather questionable platform, at best. Though it was founded in February of 2019, it only maintains roughly 508 followers. There is a reason for this. According to their Facebook reviews, they stand at a 1.5 rating, something that is extremely low for a media platform. But how is it that this independent journalist came to fail in this way? The answer to this very question is exactly what we’re here to discuss.

It’s Lead, and only team member, Shara Michelle, has made many calculated mistakes over the years. Though we have all made many mistakes, our platform included, we were able to bounce back. However, unlike her, we have always upheld one critical key: To provide truthful information to be best of our ability and to correct information that we get wrong. Furthermore, we have also been known to take in the suggestions of our followers. Though this information about our own platform seems trivial, it’s actually going to play into one of the things that has lead herself to stagnate in the virtual world.

Opposing views

As a journalist, the ability to accept opposing views is almost a critical trait to have. It doesn’t mean you can’t debate the view; it does mean that you allow the view to be spoken in a public platform. Freedom Public Press, on the other hand, has never understood the concept. Instead, their solution to any opposing view is to simply remove the comment. Not only does this eliminate transparency, but it also brings forth a lack of trust from those who may follow the platform. For any person who wishes to do freelance journalism, especially in written articles, this is a guaranteed way of ending your career. A truth that is openly displayed by their follower count.

Presenting information

The spreading of information is exactly what we do in this trade. Though this is often a passion, it is one that can be destructive for a platform if they’re not careful. Regardless of the subject matter, a good journalist can present information without a personal bias. Though we have opinions on many of the things that we write about, we try to maintain an objective outlook. This means that we need to be able to write without our personal bias or emotions being involved.

For Freedom Public Press, this has never been done. In fact, the platform has a prolonged history of simply fabricating information for its viewers to read. Naturally, this tactic has brought it a lot more harm than good. In one recent post, for instance, the platform is quoted to have said the following:

Does Meko Haze- Always use criminals to do his dirty work so they get the harassment charge? Stay tuned

Freedom Public Press: January 14, 2022

Although we have not found anything that would substantiate a question of this sort, we did find something else of interest. As it turned out, the lead “journalist” Shara Michelle, appears to have a personal vendetta dating back years. More disturbingly, what we found, was that this wasn’t the first time she had openly targeted, or spread outright slanderous information, about journalist, “Meko Haze.” Naturally, her post created a backlash of opposition, which she promptly deleted.

Outside of this, it appears that the entire platform was created solely for one individual case: Jamie Johnson, whom we have previously covered on this platform. Outside of that, it appears that they either share information from other platforms or share links to their YouTube videos, which we have no intention of promoting here due to their already questionable reputation. Outside of these things, we didn’t find much on the platform of notable worth.

Summary

If the intent of Freedom Public Press was to gain followers, it’s abundantly clear that it has failed. With emotional rants, outright slander and false information, and so on, the platform made many mistakes that stunted its growth. When mistakes were made, they didn’t do the responsible thing: retract the information and correct it. Instead, Shara stuck to her guns, as one may say, and effectively brought her own platform down. Deleting criticism is never good, though she has classified much of that as “excessive trolling.” When we viewed the comments that were remaining, yes, we did find trolling. However, we also found people calling her out.

The simple fact is this: when a platform destroys its own image, the trolls are going to come. That’s just a given. It is the job of any administrator to make a determination between who the trolls are, removing them, and who is simply being critical. In this aspect, she failed to do that, marking everybody into the troll category; this doesn’t work in the long term, it is only a temporary solution that will eventually backfire. For her, that is exactly what happened. Once this sort of backfire occurs, it’s virtually game over unless you rebrand yourself and learn from your mistakes. However, because her reputation is equally destroyed, she would have a very difficult time in doing that.

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.

Business relations, children, Consumer Reports, Consumer reports, Cyber, Free Article, internet safety, Law Enforcement, Media, Opinions, predatory

Man defends children from predator: Facebook’s response is appalling

It’s an all to common trend that we see online. Child predators who utilize social media as a means of targeting children. What is equally disturbing is how the social media giant, Facebook (Meta,) responds to those who defend against these individuals. For one Facebook user, however, the situation went further than just the social media site. The predator showed up at his house, unexpectedly and uninvited. So how does Facebook relate to a predator showing up to a man’s home? Before we get into that, let’s first go into the events that unfolded prior to the man’s account being “restricted” by the platform.

“Something felt off to me…”

According to the family, the registered sex offender, Lonnie Green had befriended the youngest adult sister. Though there is not much information as to how they met, the family did implicate Facebook as the method. At this time, neither the sister nor family, were aware of the fact that the man had just been placed onto the sex registry just months before. Though he was actively around children, he at no point, disclosed this information. However, that did not prevent the family from eventually finding out.

“When I met him, I don’t know if it was my law enforcement training, but something felt very off with this man.” The primary source informed us. He goes on to tell us that initially he began watching Lonnie, whom he repeatedly caught staring at his young nieces. “It was pretty screwed up, I would watch him as he’s watching them, he would see me and immediately divert his eyes to the horses.” Upon doing the background check on him, it was discovered that Lonnie had omitted some information about himself. That information was the fact that just a few months prior, he had been placed onto the Oklahoma sex offender’s registry for sexual acts with a minor under the age of 12.

Needing to alert his family, who was still oblivious to this information, he made a post onto Facebook. However, months later, that post has now gotten his account restricted. Why? According to Facebook, speaking out against a convicted pedophile, who is actively placing himself around small children, is considered “hate speech.” Meanwhile, the predator is allowed to maintain an active account, in complete violation of Facebook’s own terms of service. Why is this? Good question let’s discuss that very subject.

Facebook: The double standards

This situation isn’t the first of its kind, when it comes to Facebook. In fact, it happens more than what people may be aware. According to Facebook’s own policy, which we’ve posted below, a person who is on the registry is not allowed to have an account, and yet we see that happen on a near daily basis. When these accounts are reported, it seems that Facebook has taken the stance of punishing the individuals who report these accounts. But it goes beyond that. They have also apparently taken the position of restricting accounts who try to alert others of a predator’s presence. Let’s ignore the fact that this man now has access to countless children. Afterall, Facebook does. We can even ignore the fact that this predator utilized Facebook to befriend a mother, gain access into her real life, giving himself access to her children, and then proceeded to gain access to other children within a family. Again, Facebook clearly is ignoring this fact also. But why?

It’s no secret that there are a few progressives who wish to make pedophilia a recognized sexual orientation. Given the extreme views that Facebook has already demonstrated, it’s not to farfetched to believe that just maybe, Facebook shares in this ideology. After all, they’re apparently classifying it as hate speech to speak out against these people. Meanwhile, Facebook’s very own policy clearly states:

Convicted sex offenders aren’t allowed to use Facebook. If you’ve seen an account that may belong to a convicted sex offender, please report it to us.Make sure you provide one of the following types of information with your report:

http://www.facebook.com/help/210081519032737/?helpref=uf_share

Regardless of this policy, Facebook continues to create a dangerous and hostile environment within its platform. While the site consistently violates its own policies, it’s not a problem that has gone unnoticed. In fact, because of Facebook’s lack of responsibility toward its users, independent social media sites are on the uprise.

What happened in this situation is appalling, at best. The fact that speaking out against a predator, who is actively trying to gain access to children, as hate speech simply cannot go unnoticed, nor should it be ignored. While the individual only got restricted for a day, that isn’t the point here. The message that Facebooks conveyed in this action, matter. Worst, it’s as we’ve already stated, this isn’t an isolated event. The bottom line is this: From outer appearance, it looks as if Facebook is willfully protecting child predators at the expense of your right to protect your family.