So I get multiple emails from people last night and this morning concerning allegations made by Fairy K of III Cosmetics, concerning my “Disciplinary” status within the agency I work for, and the crap said about Kenny at Knuckledraggin. First, let’s look at one of the screenshots I received.
“He got his feelbads hurt”? There was no “feelbads” involved. Since I’m a professional and understand that Internal Affairs has to investigate allegations (Fairy Grojean calls it “Asking for a statement”, but it’s an implied allegation, and the ExCon knows it will be investigated). On a side note, I guess when it comes to the “names” thing, he’s kind of like Robert Downey Jr.’s character SGT Lincoln Osiris. “I’m a Dude, playin’ a Dude, disguised as another Dude.” Let’s see, originally he was Christian Allen Hyman, then he changes it to Christian Allen Kerodin in 2003 right before he started the theft scam that got him two years in the Federal slam. He goes by “Sam” (something Holly had told me was not his real name), and when he wants to try and get someone fired from a LE job, he goes by “Courtland Grojean”. He has so many other names he uses, it’s hard to keep track of all of them, just like his domain names. From how he acts, he wishes he was black. Why do you think he had his wife go after Kenny? Because he needed her to level the “racist” charge as a black woman, not a white woman like Kerodin.
“Openly White Supremacist”? If he only knew my life, and how ridiculous that statement is, his mind would boggle, LOL. That accusation will be great in actual print, then it can be acted on appropriately.
“They never did offer a statement directly on that point”? That’s interesting. Did they offer an indirect statement? Of course they didn’t, since there are professional ethics rules and guidelines in play here. So are you saying there was an indirect statement about me to Courtland Grojean? I find it interesting that an agency that did an investigation over whether I was a NeoNazi, White Supremacist, and/or Anti Government, and ruled those allegations as “Unwarranted” would give anyone an indirect statement at all. As a matter of fact, the people that would have been the ones to give such a statement are pretty anal about not giving out info, simply because they would be concerned about being hemmed up for it and losing their job. Considering the repercussions someone in an administrative position could receive if it was found out that they gave out info, or talked about someone that had been cleared of wrongdoing…..well that’s a big deal at that level, and they wouldn’t have done it. Once again Convict, your assertions are not believable.
“But I hear Daffy got a talking to and is under considerable scrutiny these days”? See the statement above. An investigation of that type can have one of three different rulings from Internal Affairs. “Substantiated”– Substantiated means that the accusation made was true, and will probably be followed by disciplinary proceedings. “Unsubstantiated”– Unsubstantiated means that the allegation could not be proven, but it also could not be disproved. “Unwarranted”– Unwarranted means that not only was the allegation not true, but it should have never been made, and was a waste of time and resources. There was no “Talking to”, the allegation was ruled unwarranted. There was no “Scrutiny” after the investigation was done, it was an unwarranted accusation. Once again, if Scambo only knew what was going on with me, he’d be jealous. But then again, obviously he already is.
“Mandatory, routine, mental health screenings”? I don’t know about that, but I can tell you they use polygraphs. Can you pass a polygraph Scambo? I can.
American by BIRTH, Infidel by CHOICE
“Sam Kerodin, III Percent Society”