Comment

Comment by J.R. on May 5, 2011 at 9:21am

Patricia, if the signs were on Sleiman Properties, there were no guidelines for placement and that is private property, not city property. Signs could be placed all over the shopping center areas where there was open ground to stick them in.  I put signs up on three Sleiman Properties for Marco Rubio and FairTax, could put them anywhere, and placed them where I thought they'd most likely be seen and read. No one removed them until after the election. Also, on Hodges Blvd. and Beach Blvd., signs were posted along the side of the street and some in the median strips, including Audrey Moran's... and nobody removed them. 

Mr. Hemmerly is on the Jacksonville Planning Commission and removing his friend's opposing candidate's campaign signs is not a part of his job description.  He had no authority or permission to do so.  Apparently, the city only removes signs that are a safety hazzard, and they have city workers who would do that job... and city workers would haul off the offending sign(s), not dump them.  Mr. Hemmerly had no right whatsoever to remove any signs but his own or those of a candidate on whose election campaign he was working and had been given authority to do so. Hemmerly knew what he was doing and he did it purposfully.  Evidently JSO agrees, since they have to have probable cause to get a warrant for someone's arrest.

By veiled, I meant implied.  I didn't see Rhonda's post stating, outright, that litigation (lawsuit) was coming if Hemmerly lost his job. If Hemmerly loses his job, it will only be because of his own actions, not the actions or writings of someone on this blog. And, it's not slander or libel, when the information written about is factual. Those signs belonged only to Matt Schellenberg and he did not authorize anyone to remove them. He would have zero reason to authorize that, unless the election was over.

With Rhonda's logic, we could all do a "public service" and remove all of Jack Webb's and Alvin Brown's signs. Hemmerly had no more authority than we do to remove and dump any candidates' signs. And, what he was witnessed doing was no "public service."  If Rhonda actually threatened us, then she could conceivably have a legal problem, herself, for threatening us online with a lawsuit in order to coerce or extort us into not writing anything negative about Tony Hemmerly.  I notice she immediately decided to absent herself from this website after I informed her she needed to check out the FL and federal statutes on computer crime.  Threatening, intimidating, bullying, coercing, or extorting online is a computer crime, on both state and federal levels. Extortion doesn't have to involve extorting money, it can be extorting a person to do, or not do, something they would not voluntarily choose to do or not do, of their own volition. She knew she was out of bounds, she just didn't know how far.

Comment by Patricia M. McBride on May 5, 2011 at 9:05am

No, Kerry, I think she was aiming the litigation thing at us for discussing this issue.  We still live in a country where things like this can be discussed, don't we?  Last time I checked we did. 

Comment by Kerry Kelley on May 5, 2011 at 8:32am

I wonder if Rhonda is planning of sueing the State's Attorney and the Florida Inspectors General?

Comment by Kerry Kelley on May 5, 2011 at 8:27am

Maybe Rhonda should get a real job like most of us.  Then she might be less likely to endorse the actions of a campaign that is eroding public confidence in the political process and politicians.

Comment by JL Gawlik on May 5, 2011 at 8:23am

LOL! J.R. That is so true. Thank you for pointing that out Patricia. Again, concerning Jack Webb, Strange Rhonda and Mr. Hemmerly ...

ACTIONS SPEAK A LOT LOUDER THAN WORDS.

Mr. Hemmerly should also consider his children, they learn by listening and watching their parents.

Comment by Patricia M. McBride on May 5, 2011 at 8:05am

JR, it was more than a veiled threat.  Ms. Rhonda posted a blog saying litigation was coming should this fellow have any problems like losing his job.  She claims the signs were improperly placed and apparently this man was doing a "public service" of some sort by removing them.  The problem I have with that personally is that he dumped the signs near a retention pond which is not the action of someone acting in an above board way.  You can see her post headed "Tread with Care".  Ms. Rhonda has said litigation will follow.  I guess I wonder if Mr. Webb and his friends are such upstanding citizens why someone didn't call the other camp and explain that some signs needed to be removed, because they were improperly placed and make an explanation?  Now I am not saying they were not placed properly, and certainly have a bit of heart burn over the fact that the man who removed them is a friend of the apponent and a city employee who certainly should have known what the proper procedure was for disposal and certainly where the signs were dumped indicates something other than a "public service" or the appearance of everything being above board.

Comment by J.R. on May 4, 2011 at 11:33pm

Patricia & JL:  I think "Rhonda" was here to deliver a veiled threat. Then she got a little testy, when things didn't go as planned.  Must not have expected to get nailed so fast. Trolls are all alike. That's why we call them all trolls. Funny thing about trolls, though, they're like zits. They're aggravating when you have them, they're hard to get rid of, and you're really glad when they're gone.

JL, Rhonda didn't have a position. That was her biggest problem, other than her disposition. She just had a purpose.

Comment by JL Gawlik on May 4, 2011 at 8:24pm

Re: 

Comment by Rhonda Strange Murray 2 hours ago

What projectionists! I can only shake my head and laugh. Funny how extremists for the left and the right are so hard to tell apart sometimes... I won't disturb your narrow little group anymore.

 

But yet Rhonda, you are not clarifying your accusations or position... WHY?

Comment by Patricia M. McBride on May 4, 2011 at 6:05pm

Oh gee, you may have left, and I had one other thing to say.  Gosh!  We might have had a few new people that came on this blog and said oh gee, maybe this was exaggerated.  After seeing the Jack Webb troll thought it wise to come in and threaten us, they won't wonder any more.  Now they know there is validity in what is posted here.  Otherwise someone wouldn't have come to check and warn us to be careful what we said (don't worry Rhonda, we know Jack is an attorney and if he loses, cause he can't even imagine that, he will be looking for someone to blame.)!!!!

Comment by J.R. on May 4, 2011 at 6:03pm

Rhonda, actually we're not surprised at anything you can't tell apart. What a novelty... a name-calling troll.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• …
• 6
• Next ›
• Page