Forest Park Forums Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > General Discussion > Soapbox
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Lt Johnsen hearing
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Lt Johnsen hearing

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 23456>
Author
Message
backman View Drop Down
Pillar
Pillar


Joined: 28/October/2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 805
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote backman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27/October/2006 at 3:35pm
I am not taking any sides on this but it is important that the facts are stated plainly and correctly.

B-Bones Said:

"But instead he [Doolin] chose to be childish and flip off Shaw with a smirk".

Neither the CUinFP or Comcast videos show anybody flipping off anybody. I believe Inspector Johnson also came to that same conclusion in his report.
backman
Back to Top
Dr. Barbie View Drop Down
Resident
Resident


Joined: 05/November/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 518
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dr. Barbie Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27/October/2006 at 4:51pm
As I heard it from people who where at that meeting it wasn't a typical "flip off" more of a one finger scratch on the side of the head while looking directly at Shaw with a smirk. 
 
But whether that happened or not is not the real issue.  In my opinion the issue is does yelling at a member of the council AFTER the meeting constitute assault. 
 
I realize that Sentry sees Harder and Johnsen as candidates for Sainthood and Calderone and Ryan and the spawn of the devil.  However, my world is not so black and white.  I don't think anyone of those people is totally evil or totallly innocent.  Perhaps that might be the starting point for review of the information we are given.
Back to Top
logic View Drop Down
Local Authority
Local Authority


Joined: 05/November/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 5290
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote logic Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27/October/2006 at 5:22pm
Originally posted by Dr. Barbie Dr. Barbie wrote:

I don't think anyone of those people is totally evil or totallly innocent.  Perhaps that might be the starting point for review of the information we are given.


BINGO! Dr Barbie, but I'd nix the (totally).
Back to Top
BBones View Drop Down
Resident
Resident
Avatar

Joined: 01/November/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 1339
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote BBones Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27/October/2006 at 9:46pm

Originally posted by Sentry Sentry wrote:

I'll ask again because the usual game of change the subject continues to be played by the Calderoneites. What would happen to you if you walked up to an elected judge sitting on the bench in a court of law and called him a F'in J'off and an A'hole after he ruled unfavorably on an issue you had before him? What would happen to you if you walked onto the floor of the Illinois house of representatives, walked up to an elected state representative after they voted on an issue that didn't go your way and you called them the above names? What would a reasonable person expect would happen?

This analogy is getting as weak as the thought of a twenty some odd year employee never breaks the rules.

But, Iíll add a little to it. What if an elected judge sitting on the bench in a court of law ruled unfavorably, without any explanation as to why, on an issue you had before him. Then, after knocking the gavel and declaring the court adjourned, called you "a Gilbert Godfreed looking, seamen slurping twerp". You, taking exception, call him a F'in J'off and an A'hole.

Who is more at fault the judge sitting on the bench in a court of law, who failed to let you know what his "Good" reason was for killing your issue and then personally insulted you? Or you for responding to the provocation of the very unprofessional bench sitter?



Edited by BBones - 27/October/2006 at 9:54pm
Back to Top
Sentry View Drop Down
Resident
Resident
Avatar

Joined: 04/November/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 1037
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Sentry Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27/October/2006 at 9:57pm
Does confronting and swearing at an elected public official, in the village council chambers because of an official action that council member took constitute disorderly conduct? If the person Shaw's anger and disorderly conduct was directed at caused that person to become alarmed and feel threatened, even if it was in the slightest manner and way, constitute assault? I love how the party line is he was out of line but he didn't threaten Doolin. How the hell does anyone other than Doolin know how Doolin felt that night? Were any of those people sitting in Doolin's chair and looking into the eyes of some angry drunk? You gotta also love the claim of an a-typical subtle slide of the middle finger theory. Just another of Shaw's lies and an attempt to somehow justify the unjustifiable actions of a fool. Harder & Johnsen saints? Not trying to make that case Dr.Barbie. I'm just pointing out the obvious. Harder & Johnsen are the victims of a small group of morally & ethically bankrupted political hacks that have found themselves caught up in lies and deceit and are willing to do whatever it takes, including but not limited to destroying the lives of good men for no reason, to preserve their ego-maniacal positions of power.       
Back to Top
Mr. Deeds View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar

Joined: 05/November/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 3656
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Mr. Deeds Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27/October/2006 at 10:01pm
Since when do judges make rulings without writing an opinion? That's SOP in the legal profession. I wasn't at the meeting in question, so I don't know if Doolin gave his reasons for not granting the variance or not. But as the Calderonites like to always say: The VC voted on it, so you can't hold one person (usually the Mayor) responsible.
I think BBones made a weak case with that hypothetical situation. The bottom line is that Shaw made an ass of himself and was old enough to know better. In all the meetings I've been to over the years, I've NEVER seen or heard someone make a stink like that.

Maybe we should just let Shaw get away with it becase he's a R-Tard. When a "tard" does something socially unacceptable, we just go "That's Ok, he doesn't know any better". Right?



Edited by administrator - 27/October/2006 at 10:02pm
Those who can make you believe absurdities have the power to make you commit atrocities. ~Voltaire~
Back to Top
Sentry View Drop Down
Resident
Resident
Avatar

Joined: 04/November/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 1037
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Sentry Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27/October/2006 at 10:04pm
Any more rambling hypothetical's you'd like us to consider before finding you and your arguments irrelevant bones? Did you write Cathy Shaw's letter for her? Seems you have the same flair for fiction she does.
Back to Top
BBones View Drop Down
Resident
Resident
Avatar

Joined: 01/November/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 1339
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote BBones Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27/October/2006 at 10:56pm

Originally posted by Sentry Sentry wrote:

Any more rambling hypothetical's you'd like us to consider before finding you and your arguments irrelevant bones? Did you write Cathy Shaw's letter for her? Seems you have the same flair for fiction she does.

It was your "Rambling hypothetical" I expounded on. Now, back to my question, if the judge, senator, congressmen, village councilmen calls you a "Adam Carrolla looking Rump Ranger" after the official action is completed and/or after the hearing is adjourned, can you reciprocate? Or do you "take it like a man"?

I love how the Doolinites portray poor Pat as an innocent party in all this. All he had to do was explain why he was not going to second the motion and it would have been done. For some reason known only to Doolin he chose not to and then to insult Mr Shaw with the flip off.

Admin, the issue required a second. From Doolin

Oct 14th I think,.... Doolin and Johnson thread

 "I did not second the motion because Mr. Shaw's issue before the council was incomplete. I actually did him a favor by not seconding the motion. Had I seconded it, I would have had to vote NO and the issue would have failed. This would have required him to start the entire process over. Others could have seconded, but none did as it was quite obvious this issue should have never even been brought to the council at the time it was. His hearing before the plan commission on this issue was not scheduled until the following week. Why would we not wait for the site plan review before voting on whether to approve the project? Under the above scenario, he was only delayed by 2 weeks. Had the issue failed, it would have been delayed by at least a couple of months."

If only Pat would have explained this to Mr Shaw and those in attendance he would have come off like the guy who looks out for you. Instead he comes off, much like you and Sentry are tonight, as a vengeful little man that had an axe of some sort to grind with Jim Shaw.



Edited by BBones - 28/October/2006 at 10:56am
Back to Top
jailbird View Drop Down
Resident
Resident
Avatar

Joined: 02/November/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 297
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote jailbird Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28/October/2006 at 8:58am
Pat, if Jim Shaw was "drunk" and drove himself back to the police station upon being requested to do so, why wasn't he charged with a DUI or given a breathalizer test? Wouldn't Johnsen have been smart enough to do that?
Back to Top
Mr. Deeds View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar

Joined: 05/November/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 3656
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Mr. Deeds Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28/October/2006 at 10:13am
I don't understand why Doolin was the one who had to second a motion. Why wouldn't another council member be able to do it? If Doolin is the Commissioner of Public Works, why is it his responsibility to second a motion for something regarding a private property? Why couldn't Hosty or Steinbach do it?

If Shaw is smart enough to run a large drinking establishment and build a new house, why wasn't he smart enough to know the rules and procedures? Didn't he make some sort of mistake when Doc Ryans was building something behind their building a while back? You'd think he'd be familiar with he processes by now.

Could it be that he was looking for special treatment and got upset when they wouldn't bend the rules for him again?

As someone who decides to build new construction in town, is it Shaw's responsibility to know the procedures, or is it Doolin's job to coach every developer? Are the rules and procedures published, or does every developer have to go to Doolin for an explanation?

If Doolin supposedly had this long running vendetta against Shaw, why wouldn't Shaw have gotten his ducks lined up before he spoke at the council meeting?

Those who can make you believe absurdities have the power to make you commit atrocities. ~Voltaire~
Back to Top
BBones View Drop Down
Resident
Resident
Avatar

Joined: 01/November/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 1339
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote BBones Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28/October/2006 at 11:11am
Hosty made the motion, Gillian was not there, the Mayor can not second a motion and TS rarely does on things she is not sure on, .... who's left?  The real estate expert that has an axe to grind with Shaw.
 
I think it is responsible government to explain why they do and don't do certain things.  One should not assume the constituents know all they need to know when asking for things in front of the Council.
 
It is every Commissioner's responsibility to second a motion they have knowledge of.  If Pat explained himself and told those in attendance he was not seconding the motion so Shaw's issue could be heard by the Plan Commission none of this would have come about.
Back to Top
Mr. Deeds View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar

Joined: 05/November/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 3656
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Mr. Deeds Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28/October/2006 at 12:51pm
Why would Hosty make a motion for something that wasn't brought before the Plan Commission yet? Isn't that unusual for a commissioner who has been in office as long as he has?

So in essence, isn't Hosty to blame for making a motion before the rest of the council got the information they needed? Had Hosty not made the motion to begin with, Doolin would not have been blamed for not seconding it.

Why is it Ok for Steinbach to not second a motion before the facts were on hand, and not Doolin? If Doolin did second the motion, would it have gone any better? Did Shaw ask for an explanation before he left the floor?

I disagree that it should not be assumed that Shaw should have been better prepared. He had previous issues regarding permits and such didn't he? Why would any council member assume that someone building a large new construction home in town wouldn't know the standard operating procedures? Are you implying that Shaw was in way over his head from the beginning? Seems to me he's been down that road before and should have been more familiar with the procedures. Don''t most people check these things before going before a village council?

Does Shaw live in FoPa? I thought you had to be a registered voter here to be a constituent? Didn't someone say he does business here but doesn't live in town?





Those who can make you believe absurdities have the power to make you commit atrocities. ~Voltaire~
Back to Top
somebody View Drop Down
SG1
SG1
Avatar

Joined: 04/November/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 131
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote somebody Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28/October/2006 at 1:21pm

Does all this banter really matter? Let the FP F & P Commission do their jobs and move to the Federal Court. We won't have to listen to characters called Sentry, Justaparker, Jailbird, Dr. Barbie or Bbones. They will be called by their God-given names and be sworn to testify under oath.



Edited by somebody - 28/October/2006 at 1:26pm
Back to Top
somebody View Drop Down
SG1
SG1
Avatar

Joined: 04/November/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 131
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote somebody Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28/October/2006 at 1:49pm

Johnsen is paid on administrative leave for a long period of time. Calderone writes a letter to the Forest Park Review and says that appropriate discipline has been given to Johnsen.

Johnsen returns to work. Johnsen then testifies that he believes Calderone is crooked. Ryan then moves to fire Johnsen.

Priceless!

Back to Top
piehead View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar

Joined: 05/November/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 11750
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote piehead Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28/October/2006 at 8:34pm
Gillian, who frequents Doc Ryan's, wasn't at the council meeting and that was Shaw's mistake!  His buddy couldn't second the motion.  Oh my.  What a shame.
Back to Top
Mr. Deeds View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar

Joined: 05/November/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 3656
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Mr. Deeds Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28/October/2006 at 9:43pm
Originally posted by somebody somebody wrote:



Not to get too far off topic, but in the case referenced above, does Ron Serpico have to pay that 1 million himself, or is he covered by Melrose Park's insurance?
Hypothetically, if Johnsen or Harder won a similar case against our Mayor, would the Mayor be covered by our insurance or have to fork over his own personal assets?


Those who can make you believe absurdities have the power to make you commit atrocities. ~Voltaire~
Back to Top
jailbird View Drop Down
Resident
Resident
Avatar

Joined: 02/November/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 297
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote jailbird Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29/October/2006 at 11:48am
Again I ask...Why didn't Johnsen give shaw a DUI and/or a breathalizer test if he was obviously drunk?? He drove back to the station upon request. Wouldn't it be the obvious thing to test his alcohol level?? Sentry, why do you only answer the questions you want to answer?? Is that because you can't answer this one?
Back to Top
JeanVelJean View Drop Down
SG1
SG1
Avatar

Joined: 02/November/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 1364
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote JeanVelJean Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29/October/2006 at 12:07pm

I bet Johnsen never observed Shaw driving. Then there's that thing about probable cause and......never mind.

"Nobody cares" Chaz Palmentari in the movie, A Bronx Tale.
Back to Top
Sentry View Drop Down
Resident
Resident
Avatar

Joined: 04/November/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 1037
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Sentry Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29/October/2006 at 5:07pm
Johnsen would not be the person arresting Shaw. As I understand it, Johnsen never had any contact with Shaw that night. I believe that someone named Harrison arrested him since he is being sued by Shaw as well. I guess you would have to ask Harrison why he didn't test for it. If Shaw was drunk, would that be important to this situation? And why?
Back to Top
Sentry View Drop Down
Resident
Resident
Avatar

Joined: 04/November/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 1037
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Sentry Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29/October/2006 at 5:15pm
To the genius Bbones. According to the rules of order at council meetings, discussion on issues can only be had if there is a motion and a second. If there is no second, then there is no discussion. When would Doolin have explained his reasoning if there was no opportunity for discussion. Perhaps if Shaw would have just walked up to Doolin after the meeting and simply said, can you please explain why you did what you did?, instead of you F'in this and A-Hole that we would be talking about something else wouldn't we? Not the almighty Shaw though. He acted according to Cathy Shaw, "out of line and childish", in other words disorderly, got called on it and started this mess rather than taking responsibility for his actions.   
Back to Top
guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30/October/2006 at 8:23pm
Sentry, I am new to this board, but enough is enough!!!   Shaw went up to Calderone after the meeting to ask what happened... Doolin took the opportunity of Shaw being in close range and while shaw was talking to Calderone,  Doolin smirked & flipped him off... enough with the quote from shaw's wife -  her letter was well written!  you have no idea what you are talking about!
Back to Top
logic View Drop Down
Local Authority
Local Authority


Joined: 05/November/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 5290
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote logic Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30/October/2006 at 9:32pm
Originally posted by archer archer wrote:

   Shaw went up to Calderone after the meeting to ask what happened...
Your post raises even more questions. Didn't know Mr Shaw was going up to speak with the Mayor about the outcome.  Did Mr Shaw believe the variance was a done deal?
Back to Top
Mr. Deeds View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar

Joined: 05/November/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 3656
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Mr. Deeds Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30/October/2006 at 10:24pm
Oy, that could explain Shaw flying off the handle at Doolin over a simple gesture, whether it was perceived or actually happened. My how the plot thickens. Say it ain't so.
Logic, you are an evil genius.


Those who can make you believe absurdities have the power to make you commit atrocities. ~Voltaire~
Back to Top
somebody View Drop Down
SG1
SG1
Avatar

Joined: 04/November/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 131
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote somebody Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30/October/2006 at 10:33pm

Johnsen is paid on administrative leave for a long period of time. Calderone writes a letter to the Forest Park Review and says that appropriate discipline has been given to Johnsen.

Johnsen returns to work. Johnsen then testifies that he believes Calderone is crooked. Ryan then moves to fire Johnsen.

Priceless!

Back to Top
Mr. Deeds View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar

Joined: 05/November/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 3656
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Mr. Deeds Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30/October/2006 at 10:53pm
How do you spell deja vu?
I could swear I read this somewhere before.

Those who can make you believe absurdities have the power to make you commit atrocities. ~Voltaire~
Back to Top
logic View Drop Down
Local Authority
Local Authority


Joined: 05/November/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 5290
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote logic Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30/October/2006 at 11:09pm
Everything that's been written/posted about the incident was Mr Shaw approached Mr Doolin.  According to archer, Mr Shaw was on his way to "what's up?" the Mayor when supposedly taunted by Mr Doolin. Wonder what the next version of events is going to be?




Edited by logic - 30/October/2006 at 11:16pm
Back to Top
Shaw View Drop Down
Tourist
Tourist


Joined: 29/October/2006
Status: Offline
Points: 9
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Shaw Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31/October/2006 at 6:18am
THE LAST FEW POSTS JUST GOES TO SHOW SOME OF YOU DO NOT KNOW WHAT YOUR TALKING ABOUT. IT HAS ALWAYS HAS BEEN STATED THAT AFTER THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED I WENT UP TO THE MAYOR AND ASKED WHAT I WAS TO DO NOW. HE TOLD ME I WOULD HAVE TO WAIT TILL THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING. AT THIS POINT I TURNED TO LEAVE AND SEE DOOLIN, WHO IS MAYBE 6 TO 8 FEET AWAY FROM ME. HE THAN DOES HIS THING AND I DO MINE AND I LEAVE THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS.
OF COURSE I THOUGHT THE VARIANCE WOULD PASS{SEE MY FIRST POST} WE WERE ONLY TALKING ABOUT 6 INCHES.I REALIZE THAT IS ALOT TO SOME OF YOU GUYS.
Back to Top
piehead View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar

Joined: 05/November/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 11750
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote piehead Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31/October/2006 at 8:31am
6"!  That monstrosity you built is practically lot line to lot line (although according to the paper it was 2 24' lots combined so that would total 48' feet not 49'6").  Still don't know how you got away with that.  Wasn't it supposed to be 5' from the lot line on both sides?  I realize that you got away with it and it's too late now.  Kinda like your addition at Doc's.
 
P.S. NO NEED TO YELL AT EVERYONE.  Unless, of course, that is just how you always get your point across.


Edited by piehead - 31/October/2006 at 9:40am
Back to Top
logic View Drop Down
Local Authority
Local Authority


Joined: 05/November/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 5290
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote logic Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31/October/2006 at 8:49am
Just asking questions, Mr Shaw, just asking questions.
Back to Top
videoguy View Drop Down
Local Authority
Local Authority
Avatar

Joined: 02/November/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 2863
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote videoguy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31/October/2006 at 12:11pm
Originally posted by administrator administrator wrote:


Since when do judges make rulings without writing an opinion?


I guess you've never been to Traffic Court.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 23456>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 10.03
Copyright ©2001-2011 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.047 seconds.
A.Lange & Sohne Langematik Tourbillon Replica Watches ,and it must be a dream replica watches. Brand, style, visibility, features are absolutely assiduous, they not only added to their own sort of power in the rolex replica sale, and certainly can bear, "handed down" in the name. Now here is a fantastic choice for you, if you heard of Langematik Tourbillon rolex replica sale , this article will be much helpful to you. The function of a breitling replica sale is no longer confined to more of a symbol used to reflect personal taste. For men, the rolex replica uk is a symbol of their status; the contrary, a woman wearing a replica watches in addition to at the time, the greatest use is decorative, fashion Langematik Tourbillon breitling replica sale , elegance, style, simplicity, there is a pressing vulgarity temperament.