Hey F*ck stick. This is David Evans. Lets clear up some $hit now that you can see that I am who I am on Janets email, Not my own @ epix. My wife does not write on your site or any other. I welcome the day a court demands proof. Whomever { Blonde} is pretending to be her is doing it for their own reasons.Janet has done nothing to you or your posters. I care little how you feel about her. Politics is a bitch. She has big shoulders. You want to continue the Bull****,OK But I have a better idea. Youcan come over or send some of your pukes to my house and we can settle this in person if you have the guts. If your the Jerkoff with the 98 green Volvo with the Sassy11 plates, We know who you are as do theFeds have your Letters and the city police detectives aretaking care of it. I use my name when I post. I have been band from DD and so has a pal of mine who goes by peewee. I don't need to post on your site. This is what you would have received so post it. Have an angry day and grow the f*ck up. DavidEvans 2331N. Wash. Ave. Scranton570/815/4141
Then a letter from me on this topic. Here's the letter and his response.
Dear Mr. Evans,
I saw that you took the time to write the site administrator of a local political Website a message from your wife's e-mail account. I'd like to ask a few follow up questions if you'd be so kind.
1) Given your wife's position in city government and as a public figure, do you think it's appropriate to send anyone an e-mail from her account?
2) You mentioned that you were banned from DohertyDeceit.com. What for? Given the nature of some of the posts on that site, I find it hard to believe you could have said anything that would get you banned.
3) Does your wife approve of your expletive filled rants? Shouldn't you be sure to point out that you're not speaking on her behalf in any way as an elected official?
As a citizen of the City of Scranton, I find myself quite concerned that the spouses of our elected officials are so cavalier about what they say in e-mails and on message boards. It's hard for me to take your wife seriously with your words in mind. At some point I would think it would be prudent of her to ask you to exorcise better judgment.
Thank you for your time
Art Gordon, Scranton
#1 Yes , It proved to you pukes who I am. I have a mind and won't sit by any longer an read these lies and not respond to cowards like you that won't sign names. If Mr. Fanucci and Mr. Gatelli allow it shame on them. I responded ,,,,, It's over until one of you pukes comes to my home in person.
#2 Won't say because you will twist answer.
#3 She does not. I watch the email closely. Your mail after this note will be bounced and never be able to read. I don't speak for my wife. You and the otherpukes seem too though.
Glad you are so concerned. I used her email so you pukes would have the IP and would use whomever to prove that Janet does not write on that site. Guess you are not able with all of your wisdom. My email is band. This one has never been used on that site. The IP will prove it. Go for it. Check it out. She has never written an word. Please don't take anything seriously. From your post,,,, You are probably as educated as I, and I went to Abington. Your post are DUMB as are most of the pukes that post there. Your Admindoesn't seem to bright either. I never received a sparklit email unless it went to junk mail andI deleted it. Either way, It don't mean a thing. Bye.David Evans
In case anyone questions the source you can PM me and I'll forward you a copy of the e-mail and it's source code for verification. He sent his reply from Counilwoman Janet Evans' personal e-mail account. The admin here will be able to verify that the exchange is authentic.
OMG a poster at DD who actually wants the truth about an issue!!! Don't worry the attack on the poster has begun, no way is the truth going to get out on this issue at DD if they have anything to say about it! LOL LOL
Is it true that David Evans is reading and editing Janet's email? Many posters here say the post from Dave Evans is either fictitious or has been tampered with, but can anyone here actually disprove it?
Other than numerous posted opinions above, is there any proof he didn't sent the email in question? Did anyone come right out and ASK the man? and has he said, "No, I didn't send it."
Is it true that David Evans is reading and editing Janet's email? To be perfectly honest, I do. And I feel I have a darned good reason to ask. I've sent e-mails to all the Council members on a number of occasions and have received no replies to any of them from Janet Evans. Sherri and Bob McGoff might send me packing with a half hearted reply, but they didn't ignore me. I was just wondering if my emails were one of the ones being 'buffered' on the verizon account.
I am not one for confrontation so I avoided posting my question here. I rather thought I might be able to get a cohesive reply to my post, but apparently not. Thank you 3blindrats for making my first posting experience here a memorable one.
Wow ... well anyone who wants a copy ... I will forward it ... it's simple just ask and ye shall receive ...
__________________
I want everyone to stop and think about one thing ... Joe Pilchesky is not a lawyer ... he's just a guy playing a lawyer on the internet. Please don't trust your legal needs to this man.
paraphrased xray something or other ::: ... I think you're safe with most of the 'regulars' on this board as they've built a level of trust over time but in any event if you receive any messages that trouble you or seem threatening in any way, consult Joe. I think Mr. Pilchesky's words of warning are well-founded and everyone would do well to heed them. They simply can't be trusted. Similarly, it's wise to delete all suspicious email, as it may have emanated from a vile source. :::
And what about this guy -- apparently being an inquisitive first-time poster, doesn't win any warm and fuzzy prizes, no matter how politely you pose the question. All you get is criticized, stomped upon and then they call you suspicious ... and vile yet.
I guess it's safe to assume that guy's email was considered suspicious by dave and ultimately deleted before anyone had a chance to see it. ... the poor bastard ...
RE: Is it true that David Evans is reading and editing Janet's email? It's not like Janet Evans is not available any other way. We all know where she is once a week. Go to her and give her a copy of your email. Ask if she got it. If her husband is peeking in on his wife's emails from an account where the public sends emails, shame on him. And, shame on her for letting him do it, if he is doing it. Nothing stops anyone from changing their email, even if it's to stop a family member from snooping. Dave has a little history of being contrary, outside of any email issues. He's her biggest and heaviest baggage.
Just how long will it take for that post to either be edited or deleted??
Well we knew it wouldn't take long for Grassy Knoll to get the boot from across the hall ... he had the nerve to question anything that Janet Evans did ... or in this case what Dave Evand admittedly did ... Dave is quite proud of the fact that he sent out those emails ... and nothing Joe Pilchesky can say will change that fact ... I have said that if anyone wants a copy ... just email me and I will forward a copy of said emails to them ... but to date ... I have had no requests for the emails ... I guess the DD gang can't handle truth! Joey states that Grassy Knoll has posted no proof ... but he/she tried ... Joey wouldn't allow the proof to be posted ... Yeah that ligitmizes your site ... all you all want is to spread rumor and innuendo ... you have little to do with your little sad pathetic lives ... which is probably why you all (lump lump lump) are such angry hate filled creatures. I pitty you all!
RE: Is it true that David Evans is reading and editing Janet's email?
Grassy Knoll wrote:
By edit I mean delete.
Proof? How about Dave Evans' own writings and email on another website. Verified by Dave and admitted to. I'd post the link but it will probably be deleted. I won't even post the link without permission. For Christ's sake he listed his cell number and the site admin verified by calling it!
Dave made this happen. He wanted to prove that he was , in fact, the man behind the e-mails he wrote. Well he proved it. May I post the link?
There will be no links posted here to a message board that is absent any responsible administration or credible content, to say nothing of a site where the poster's IP addresses are handed out like candy upon request. The lawsuits I just won over the PSP and DA was all about refusing to surrender IP addresses and violating our constitutional rights. We protect the posters IP addresses here, at all costs. See Pilchesky vs. PSP/DA. Settled.
As an Administrator of a message board that enjoys and benefits from substantial local traffic and loyalty to my posters to protect them, let me give you some advice. Things that come to you via email may have been tampered with numerous times before you got it. I could get an email from anyone, copy it, edit it, paste it, resend it to another person and create havoc like you've never seen before. They can't be verified. I don't care if the guy puts his fingerprints on it. Fact that his phone number is on it means nothing. Thousands of people have my personal cell number. I've sent thousands of emails out. They can be copied onto Notepad, edited as desired, pasted back into the body of the email and forwarded to another thousand people. Here's what I think, you're being set up, like those pervs who are set up by cops pretending to be 14 year olds. You're not posting that stuff here. Period. You know how I'd know for sure that Dave Evans said anything to anyone? By hearing him say it. That's it in this business. A year ago I called Sue Henry to ask to be a guest on WILK. She confronted me with a letter she claimed I'd sent to her that was threatening and nasty, except I didn't send it. It took a day or so for me to prove it was not me. Right up until that time, she believed I was the author of the letter. She held that against me without ever meeting me. We get along famously now, but someone had tried to sabotage me long before I got there, and it worked until she heard from me personally.
In closing, what Dave Evans says is said as a private person. He's not an elected official. While it may be interesting, it's as inappropriate for the purpose of this board as what Joe Gatelli, Donna Doherty or Diane Mellow may have to say in private matters. Who cares if Joe Gatelli and Donna Doherty are reading emails? Evans is extremely protective of his wife. If he's disqualifying emails for inappropriate content, he's doing what he's supposed to be doing. If my wife was a councilwoman, she'd never have her feeling subjected to hostile and degrading emails. I'd make sure of it. The job is tough enough without being bombarded with personal attacks. If I found out Dave Evans wasn't protecting her, I'd have no use for him and I'd feel sorry for Janet.
Grassy, you're done. You had your chance to legitimize your claims and you failed to do it. That's because you can't. A lot to do over nothing. Go back to your board and fillet your goldfish. We fillet sharks here.
__________________
I want everyone to stop and think about one thing ... Joe Pilchesky is not a lawyer ... he's just a guy playing a lawyer on the internet. Please don't trust your legal needs to this man.
Interesting. The "goldfish filleting" thread is the second most read thread on the home page at dd.com. The only one with more reads? The Minora thread that's been up for 10 days longer.
Joe can spin it, attack it, edit it, NOT read it. By the looks of things an awful lot of dd.com readers found the subject interesting enough to read. For Janet, Dave, and Joe that can't be good.
I don't care about the member numbers ... and I don't care about how many views we get ... I'm not doing it to try and beat his site ... I post here to have a voice ... that's it ... that is the only reason we are here!
__________________
I want everyone to stop and think about one thing ... Joe Pilchesky is not a lawyer ... he's just a guy playing a lawyer on the internet. Please don't trust your legal needs to this man.
Girl's right Lus - our point is that despite what Joe does or says, there are plenty of people interested in dirt about Janet. Even funnier is the small number of people who defend her. Funnier than that is the defense - which basically amounts to "so what, she did nothing wrong." It's a very telling thread in many ways.
Dave Evans has no class he will be the down fall of janet he is rude in public he speaks mean to people etc. This guy has a meal ticket and he will go hungry. The only chance janet evans has in politics is without him .
Hey legion, I like your posts, but I hope you are being sarcastic with that Al Sharpton poster. He is the biggest racist alive, he fights for the rights of himself and no one else.
__________________
Just when you thought it was safe to open your mind......
I'm not sure that the Rev. Sharpton is the biggest racist alive...afterall, we have other racists to consider, such as David Duke and our very own AntiSemiticMovements.
__________________
Free Speech does't require a multi-paragrah disclaimer Mr. Pilchesky.
Taylor Thanks for the comment. I want Al to become President so he can come to town to help Sam Patilla because it seems like his case is a race card issue . He is always claming he will go to a civil rights attorney.So why not bring the looser Al Sharpton to town
I do believe that he said he was going bring Al Sharpton to town to help him with his problems with the police patrolling in front of his home ... I remember him saying this at a Council Meeting.
__________________
I want everyone to stop and think about one thing ... Joe Pilchesky is not a lawyer ... he's just a guy playing a lawyer on the internet. Please don't trust your legal needs to this man.
Quote | Reply RE: Is it true that David Evans is reading and editing Janet's email? --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
::: If in fact you did send Mrs. Evans an email in good faith that required an answer and received no reply, I'd suggest that you continue to resend it. Simply go to your "Sent Mail" file and forward it. Add "Second Request" (or whatever number is appropriate) to your original subject heading; this would clearly designate that you had sent it before along with the date on which it had originally been sent. Hopefully this will expedite a response. If you send it repeatedly and still receive no reply, I'd suggest that you ask her personally. If you desire absolute assurance that only she and she alone will receive your message, then either talk to her personally or hand deliver a note to her. Otherwise, there is no absolute guarantee, no security is absolute, and neither is an email service.
I believe she had previously complained about security problems with her email account on the city site, so she changed it. Also, although this is speculative, as has been already suggested, it would neither be unreasonable nor uncommon to have her email screened to separate the legitimate emails that require a reply from purely prank, hate or viral email. If someone sends email of this type or any type of a threatening nature they forfeit any right or expectation of privacy.
Assuming you possess reasonably good powers of observation, you probably already know that this administration and its supporters are often of a particularly vile nature when facing opposition and/or criticism.Jealousy has a way of breeding hatred. Her reputation for standing for the people and telling them the truth is second to none, especially in the milieu of this city government. You say you've emailed other council members and have gotten replies, even if half-hearted ones. Forget them, if you want the truth, ask her. :::
Jumpin' Jesus - what is it they don't get over there?? I don't think it's the fact that this guy didn't get a reply from Miss Clairol - even I can see the concern lies with the fact that it doesn't seem she even had the opportunity toread the e-mail in question. If Evans didn't get to read the first e-mailSSS, whether it was multipletransmission of the same e-mail, or three individual e-mails,isn't thepoint. It's the fact that Dave deleted the e-mails --I love how they skirt the issues.
"If in fact you did send Mrs. Evans an e-mail in good faith..."
F*ck you, Comic Book Guy! Who appointed you Doubting Thomas? The point isn't whether or not an e-mail was sent to her "in good faith", the point is: IS DAVE READING AND SCREENING HER E-MAIL ACCOUNT, THE ONE USED TO CONDUCT HER COUNCIL RELATED BUSINESS?
That's the beauty of Dave Evans thread on DD: the more they try and defend and deflect, the worse they look. They've officially stepped into the realm of herding cats*.
(*) Note to Gramna...housecats are almost impossible to herd...errrrr....I mean it's impossible to get a single cat to do something it doesn't want to, let alone a bunch of them...so trying to explain away the Evans thing is like trying to do the impossible. Get it? By the way, I really do hope you appreciate these little explanations I provide for you every once in a while. My mom taught me to respect my elders, even when they are mean and vindictive.
-- Edited by Agamemnon at 11:18, 2007-09-04
__________________
Free Speech does't require a multi-paragrah disclaimer Mr. Pilchesky.
Paul ... trying to make them understand why it's wrong for Dave to screen and delet her mail is never never never going to happen ... because the queen can do no wrong ... she is a true (gag) servant to the people ... all (gag gag ... choke) of the people ... with the exception of you, Art and I. You never got a response ... and well Art and I are not even able to send mail to her via email as our IP's have been blocked by her devoted (gag ... gasp ... choke) husband Dave!
__________________
I want everyone to stop and think about one thing ... Joe Pilchesky is not a lawyer ... he's just a guy playing a lawyer on the internet. Please don't trust your legal needs to this man.
RE: Is it true that David Evans is reading and editing Janet's email? I don't read any proof here that Mr. Evans is doing any of the things suggested. (they wouldn't have the proof as the emails were not sent to them they were sent to me ... I have the proof ... just email me at counterpoint1963@aol.com and I will be more than happy to forward the email to you ... will that be proof enough??? Oh and Mr. Evans is bragging around town that he sent them ... just ask him he's quite proud of the fact that he did indeed send the emails) The possibility of any official or their representative doing anything is available. The what ifs are endless. Fortunately for both sides, what if doesn't hold water when holding someone accountable for a certain alleged action.
The law holds that emails provided by an official website domain are under scrutiny of that official entity. However, any personal content of the email has not been held to be available for public scrutiny. If an email is sent from that domain regarding official business, that email can be used in a court of law to document communications. Personal emails cannot. (political activities are subject to other laws)
It appears as though Ms. Evans is not using the scrantonpa.gov email domain, and as such citizens are thereby forewarned that their communications are not protected nor available to the public.(I think that the publiccan expect that the emails will however be made available to Mrs. Evans ... don't you ... after all it is her email address)Mr. Pilchesky makes a very good point in that other officials have their secretaries review emails, and in that regard, those secretaries can take it upon themselves to delete emails prior to the official reading it or even knowing about it. It would be up to the official to take appropriate action if that were discovered, not the individual nor the government. If your issue is sensitive, or confidential, face to face communications is the best choice. (Another point that everyone is seeming to miss ... I did not ... I repeat I did not email Dave Evans ... he sent the first email to me ... using his wife's email address ... I don't think that even she would approve of that!)Even with restricted delivery certified mail, anyone could actually open the letter, and should the intended receiver suffer adverse consquences because of that, the receiver would still have an appropriate defense stating that they never received it. That's one reason why lawsuits are inititated with personal service by the sheriff.
Whoever allegedly (I didn't allegedly post it ... I posted it!)posted that alleged communication between the alleged 'parties' without permission,(Dave Evans gave permission ... in fact he just about begged to have it posted ... if you came hereand read the email, or you asked forit to be forwarded to you ... well thenyou could see that ... or are you lacking comprehension skills?)could be subject to defamation claims, (Nobody has defamed Mr. or Mrs. Evans ... unless you count Mr. Evans defaming himself by sending it in the first place!) since the alleged malicious content is being attached to Ms. Evans either directly or indirectly and apparently is being used to malign her reputation as a public official. (Maligning reputations ... now that's a hello pot this is kettle moment for you now isn't it ... as DD malign's reputations several hundred times a day of every public official in Lackawanna county! ... and again ... it's not an alleged email ... it's a factual email ... it's factual that he wrote it ... brags about writing it ... sent it ... accused me of being someone I am not ... and going as far as putting up this persons licence plate number ...He asked that it be posted ... and I obliged ... that's the facts ... you need to get it straight as I do believe that I would win in a court of law! Oh anddon't forget the veiled threat that was in that email ... nice ... well anyway I just had to reply to your stupidity!)
__________________
I want everyone to stop and think about one thing ... Joe Pilchesky is not a lawyer ... he's just a guy playing a lawyer on the internet. Please don't trust your legal needs to this man.
Oh I do not think she will bring it up ... I think someone will have to mention it ...
__________________
I want everyone to stop and think about one thing ... Joe Pilchesky is not a lawyer ... he's just a guy playing a lawyer on the internet. Please don't trust your legal needs to this man.