This is not a warning, but a REMINDER about proper Usenet Ettiqutte.

It is NOT nescary for you, klous, to respond to every fucking message posted
to this newsgroup.

I just signed on tonight, and there was 98 message's, and 70 OF THEM WERE
FROM YOU.

That's, almost 70% percent.

For FUCKS sake this also ties in with previous disucssion's that you need to
do LESS TALKING and give other people a chance to speak thier mind. This
newsgroup is NOT a one-man show.

Failure to voluntary complying with th epolicy may force me to re-consider
my current posting policy, which is 15 post's a day, to also invlude that a
single person's total post's must be less then 30% of the total post's in
teh newsgroup. We'll see if thi s is nescary at ta later time.

On Wed, 15 Sep 2021 21:10:10 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
<jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:

>This is not a warning, but a REMINDER about proper Usenet Ettiqutte.

What is "Ettiqutte" [sic] ??????

>It is NOT nescary for you, klous, to respond to every fucking message posted
>to this newsgroup.

It is not necessary for you to be concerned about it.

>I just signed on tonight, and there was 98 message's, and 70 OF THEM WERE
>FROM YOU.
>
>That's, almost 70% percent.

SO?

>For FUCKS sake this also ties in with previous disucssion's that you need to
>do LESS TALKING and give other people a chance to speak thier mind. This
>newsgroup is NOT a one-man show.

How is this preventing you from posting?
How is this preventing anyone from posting?
Why are you so stupid, Jenny?

>Failure to voluntary complying with th epolicy may force me to re-consider
>my current posting policy, which is 15 post's a day, to also invlude that a
>single person's total post's must be less then 30% of the total post's in
>teh newsgroup. We'll see if thi s is nescary at ta later time.

I challenge you to enforce "your policy" Jenny. Personally, I know you
don't have the balls to do it. You know it, too.

On Wed, 15 Sep 2021 21:10:10 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
<jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:

>This is not a warning, but a REMINDER about proper Usenet Ettiqutte.
>
>It is NOT nescary for you, klous, to respond to every fucking message posted
>to this newsgroup.
>
>I just signed on tonight, and there was 98 message's, and 70 OF THEM WERE
>FROM YOU.
>

And this matters, why?

>That's, almost 70% percent.
>
>For FUCKS sake this also ties in with previous disucssion's that you need to
>do LESS TALKING and give other people a chance to speak thier mind. This
>newsgroup is NOT a one-man show.
>

Anyone who wants may post as much as they want in this group.
There are no limits.

>Failure to voluntary complying with th epolicy may force me to re-consider
>my current posting policy, which is 15 post's a day, to also invlude that a
>single person's total post's must be less then 30% of the total post's in
>teh newsgroup. We'll see if thi s is nescary at ta later time.
>

You have NO authority to set any limits. Especially since you
PROVED you cannot follow them. You were removed as leader, and Klaus
was voted in.
You had ample opportunity to voice any objection(s). You accepted
what happened.

KWills
alt.food.fast-food Leadership Committee President

On Thu, 16 Sep 2021 03:40:21 -0700, KlausSchadenfreude
<klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Wed, 15 Sep 2021 21:10:10 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
><jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>This is not a warning, but a REMINDER about proper Usenet Ettiqutte.
>
>What is "Ettiqutte" [sic] ??????
>
>>It is NOT nescary for you, klous, to respond to every fucking message posted
>>to this newsgroup.
>
>It is not necessary for you to be concerned about it.
>
>>I just signed on tonight, and there was 98 message's, and 70 OF THEM WERE
>>FROM YOU.
>>
>>That's, almost 70% percent.
>
>SO?
>
>>For FUCKS sake this also ties in with previous disucssion's that you need to
>>do LESS TALKING and give other people a chance to speak thier mind. This
>>newsgroup is NOT a one-man show.
>
>How is this preventing you from posting?
>How is this preventing anyone from posting?
>Why are you so stupid, Jenny?
>
>>Failure to voluntary complying with th epolicy may force me to re-consider
>>my current posting policy, which is 15 post's a day, to also invlude that a
>>single person's total post's must be less then 30% of the total post's in
>>teh newsgroup. We'll see if thi s is nescary at ta later time.
>
>I challenge you to enforce "your policy" Jenny. Personally, I know you
>don't have the balls to do it. You know it, too.

He also lacks the authority to enforce his non-existent rule.

KWills
alt.food.fast-food Leadership Committee President

On Thu, 16 Sep 2021 03:40:56 -0700, KWills <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Wed, 15 Sep 2021 21:10:10 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
><jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>This is not a warning, but a REMINDER about proper Usenet Ettiqutte.
>>
>>It is NOT nescary for you, klous, to respond to every fucking message posted
>>to this newsgroup.
>>
>>I just signed on tonight, and there was 98 message's, and 70 OF THEM WERE
>>FROM YOU.
>>
>
> And this matters, why?
>
>>That's, almost 70% percent.
>>
>>For FUCKS sake this also ties in with previous disucssion's that you need to
>>do LESS TALKING and give other people a chance to speak thier mind. This
>>newsgroup is NOT a one-man show.
>>
>
> Anyone who wants may post as much as they want in this group.
>There are no limits.

I believe this is mentioned specifically in the FAQ.

http://jerrylies.byethost22.com/a.f.f-f_FAQ.html

On Thu, 16 Sep 2021 03:44:45 -0700, KWills <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote:

>>>Failure to voluntary complying with th epolicy may force me to re-consider
>>>my current posting policy, which is 15 post's a day, to also invlude that a
>>>single person's total post's must be less then 30% of the total post's in
>>>teh newsgroup. We'll see if thi s is nescary at ta later time.

> He also lacks the authority to enforce his non-existent rule.

I think he's also typing with one hand.

Hopefully, he's only eating with the other hand.

[throws up in mouth a little bit]

On Thu, 16 Sep 2021 03:54:15 -0700, KlausSchadenfreude
<klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Thu, 16 Sep 2021 03:40:56 -0700, KWills <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 15 Sep 2021 21:10:10 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
>><jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>This is not a warning, but a REMINDER about proper Usenet Ettiqutte.
>>>
>>>It is NOT nescary for you, klous, to respond to every fucking message posted
>>>to this newsgroup.
>>>
>>>I just signed on tonight, and there was 98 message's, and 70 OF THEM WERE
>>>FROM YOU.
>>
>> And this matters, why?
>>
>>>That's, almost 70% percent.
>>>
>>>For FUCKS sake this also ties in with previous disucssion's that you need to
>>>do LESS TALKING and give other people a chance to speak thier mind. This
>>>newsgroup is NOT a one-man show.
>>
>> Anyone who wants may post as much as they want in this group.
>>There are no limits.
>
>I believe this is mentioned specifically in the FAQ.
>
>http://jerrylies.byethost22.com/a.f.f-f_FAQ.html

"Q. What is fast food?

"A. Simply put, fast food is any food that can be prepared and served
quickly and easily, and is sold in restaurants and snack bars as a
quick meal or to be taken out."

But, of course, Jenny lies while knowing his lie will be exposed.

KWills
alt.food.fast-food Leadership Committee President

On Thu, 16 Sep 2021 15:29:22 -0700, KlausSchadenfreude
<klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Thu, 16 Sep 2021 03:44:45 -0700, KWills <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>>Failure to voluntary complying with th epolicy may force me to re-consider
>>>>my current posting policy, which is 15 post's a day, to also invlude that a
>>>>single person's total post's must be less then 30% of the total post's in
>>>>teh newsgroup. We'll see if thi s is nescary at ta later time.
>
>> He also lacks the authority to enforce his non-existent rule.
>
>I think he's also typing with one hand.
>
>Hopefully, he's only eating with the other hand.
>

Ew.
Eeeeewwwww....

>[throws up in mouth a little bit]

Yep.

KWills
alt.food.fast-food Leadership Committee President

On Wed, 15 Sep 2021 21:10:10 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
<jerrysauk@hotmail.com> lied:

>I just signed on tonight, and there was 98 message's, and 70 OF THEM WERE
>FROM YOU.

Of course Jenny is lying. As usual.

NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2021 04:11:51 -0500
From: "Jerry Sauk" <jerrysauk@hotmail.com>
Newsgroups: alt.food.fast-food
Subject: PERSONAL NOTICE TO KLOUS
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2021 21:10:10 -0500

Assuming Jenny signed on September 15....

The LAST time he signed on is this message

NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2021 14:33:32 -0500
From: "Jerry Sauk" <jerrysauk@hotmail.com>
Newsgroups: alt.food.fast-food
Subject: Re: Racist Whopper Tosser Sentenced To 12 Months Probation,
Stay Away Fromm That Burger King
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2021 14:33:26 -0500

I posted FIVE messages in between those times.

Why do you have to lie EVERY time you post, Jenny? It doesn't seem to
help to ask you NOT to lie. You're incapable of posting WITHOUT lying.
This used to bother you, according to this message:

>Everybody, stop lying about yourselves, about me or anything. And let's
>stop accusing other people about lying. It's getting out of hand. If we
>all agree to stop it, then it won't be a problem at all, and we can avoid
>accusing each other of it also.
>
>So Starting NOW: No lying please!
-Jerry Sauk, 12/9/2007

But maybe you just wanted to be the ONLY one that lied?

What's the story?

On Thu, 23 Sep 2021 16:33:45 -0700, KlausSchadenfreude
<klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Wed, 15 Sep 2021 21:10:10 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
><jerrysauk@hotmail.com> lied:
>
>>I just signed on tonight, and there was 98 message's, and 70 OF THEM WERE
>>FROM YOU.
>
>Of course Jenny is lying. As usual.
>
>NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2021 04:11:51 -0500
>From: "Jerry Sauk" <jerrysauk@hotmail.com>
>Newsgroups: alt.food.fast-food
>Subject: PERSONAL NOTICE TO KLOUS
>Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2021 21:10:10 -0500
>
>Assuming Jenny signed on September 15....
>
>The LAST time he signed on is this message
>
>NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2021 14:33:32 -0500
>From: "Jerry Sauk" <jerrysauk@hotmail.com>
>Newsgroups: alt.food.fast-food
>Subject: Re: Racist Whopper Tosser Sentenced To 12 Months Probation,
>Stay Away Fromm That Burger King
>Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2021 14:33:26 -0500
>
>I posted FIVE messages in between those times.
>
>Why do you have to lie EVERY time you post, Jenny? It doesn't seem to
>help to ask you NOT to lie. You're incapable of posting WITHOUT lying.
>This used to bother you, according to this message:
>
>>Everybody, stop lying about yourselves, about me or anything. And let's
>>stop accusing other people about lying. It's getting out of hand. If we
>>all agree to stop it, then it won't be a problem at all, and we can avoid
>>accusing each other of it also.
>>
>>So Starting NOW: No lying please!
>-Jerry Sauk, 12/9/2007
>
>But maybe you just wanted to be the ONLY one that lied?
>
>What's the story?

Being honest is probably something that scares Jenny too much to
even try.

--
Bless me, Father, for I have committed an original sin.
I poked a badger with a spoon.

On Thu, 23 Sep 2021 16:33:45 -0700, KlausSchadenfreude wrote:

> On Wed, 15 Sep 2021 21:10:10 -0500, "Jerry Sauk" <jerrysauk@hotmail.com>
> lied:
>
>>I just signed on tonight, and there was 98 message's, and 70 OF THEM
>>WERE FROM YOU.
>
> Of course Jenny is lying. As usual.
>
> NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2021 04:11:51 -0500 From: "Jerry Sauk"
> <jerrysauk@hotmail.com>
> Newsgroups: alt.food.fast-food Subject: PERSONAL NOTICE TO KLOUS Date:
> Wed, 15 Sep 2021 21:10:10 -0500
>
> Assuming Jenny signed on September 15....
>
> The LAST time he signed on is this message
>
> NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2021 14:33:32 -0500 From: "Jerry Sauk"
> <jerrysauk@hotmail.com>
> Newsgroups: alt.food.fast-food Subject: Re: Racist Whopper Tosser
> Sentenced To 12 Months Probation, Stay Away Fromm That Burger King Date:
> Mon, 13 Sep 2021 14:33:26 -0500
>
> I posted FIVE messages in between those times.
>
> Why do you have to lie EVERY time you post, Jenny? It doesn't seem to
> help to ask you NOT to lie. You're incapable of posting WITHOUT lying.
> This used to bother you, according to this message:
>
>>Everybody, stop lying about yourselves, about me or anything. And let's
>>stop accusing other people about lying. It's getting out of hand. If
>>we all agree to stop it, then it won't be a problem at all, and we can
>>avoid accusing each other of it also.
>>
>>So Starting NOW: No lying please!
> -Jerry Sauk, 12/9/2007
>
> But maybe you just wanted to be the ONLY one that lied?
>
> What's the story?

Shades of game theory, Prisoners' Dilemmas, and other higher math-like things at work.

Sauk may be an evil genius. Will have to watch that guy.

( Qvq ur pngpu ba gb ebgngvba? )

--
-v

On Mon, 27 Sep 2021 05:54:36 -0000 (UTC), vallor <vallor@cultnix.org>
wrote:

>On Thu, 23 Sep 2021 16:33:45 -0700, KlausSchadenfreude wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 15 Sep 2021 21:10:10 -0500, "Jerry Sauk" <jerrysauk@hotmail.com>
>> lied:
>>
>>>I just signed on tonight, and there was 98 message's, and 70 OF THEM
>>>WERE FROM YOU.
>>
>> Of course Jenny is lying. As usual.
>>
>> NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2021 04:11:51 -0500 From: "Jerry Sauk"
>> <jerrysauk@hotmail.com>
>> Newsgroups: alt.food.fast-food Subject: PERSONAL NOTICE TO KLOUS Date:
>> Wed, 15 Sep 2021 21:10:10 -0500
>>
>> Assuming Jenny signed on September 15....
>>
>> The LAST time he signed on is this message
>>
>> NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2021 14:33:32 -0500 From: "Jerry Sauk"
>> <jerrysauk@hotmail.com>
>> Newsgroups: alt.food.fast-food Subject: Re: Racist Whopper Tosser
>> Sentenced To 12 Months Probation, Stay Away Fromm That Burger King Date:
>> Mon, 13 Sep 2021 14:33:26 -0500
>>
>> I posted FIVE messages in between those times.
>>
>> Why do you have to lie EVERY time you post, Jenny? It doesn't seem to
>> help to ask you NOT to lie. You're incapable of posting WITHOUT lying.
>> This used to bother you, according to this message:
>>
>>>Everybody, stop lying about yourselves, about me or anything. And let's
>>>stop accusing other people about lying. It's getting out of hand. If
>>>we all agree to stop it, then it won't be a problem at all, and we can
>>>avoid accusing each other of it also.
>>>
>>>So Starting NOW: No lying please!
>> -Jerry Sauk, 12/9/2007
>>
>> But maybe you just wanted to be the ONLY one that lied?
>>
>> What's the story?
>
>Shades of game theory, Prisoners' Dilemmas, and other higher math-like things at work.
>
>Sauk may be an evil genius. Will have to watch that guy.
>

Gurer ner znal jbeqf gung pna or hfrq gb qrfpevor Wraal. Travhf
vf ABG bar bs gurz. Rivy be abg.

>( Qvq ur pngpu ba gb ebgngvba? )

Vs ur qvq, ur jbhyq yvr nobhg vg.

--
Dadass
Tuesdays 8PM
Network TV Channel

"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:7i76kgpfbfctbi68qlaksh4c6g4lc233uj@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 15 Sep 2021 21:10:10 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
> <jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>This is not a warning, but a REMINDER about proper Usenet Ettiqutte.
>
> What is "Ettiqutte" [sic] ??????
>
>>It is NOT nescary for you, klous, to respond to every fucking message
>>posted
>>to this newsgroup.
>
> It is not necessary for you to be concerned about it.
>
>>I just signed on tonight, and there was 98 message's, and 70 OF THEM WERE
>>FROM YOU.
>>
>>That's, almost 70% percent.
>
> SO?
>
>>For FUCKS sake this also ties in with previous disucssion's that you need
>>to
>>do LESS TALKING and give other people a chance to speak thier mind. This
>>newsgroup is NOT a one-man show.
>
> How is this preventing you from posting?
> How is this preventing anyone from posting?

I never said it was preventing ANYONE from posting. What you are doing is
discouraging poeple from PARTICIPATING IN DISCUSSION'S becouse all they know
is this newsgroup with your shreiking and blathering. I know this for a
FACT.

On Fri, 15 Oct 2021 14:02:33 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
<jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:7i76kgpfbfctbi68qlaksh4c6g4lc233uj@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 15 Sep 2021 21:10:10 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
>> <jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>This is not a warning, but a REMINDER about proper Usenet Ettiqutte.
>>
>> What is "Ettiqutte" [sic] ??????
>>
>>>It is NOT nescary for you, klous, to respond to every fucking message
>>>posted
>>>to this newsgroup.
>>
>> It is not necessary for you to be concerned about it.
>>
>>>I just signed on tonight, and there was 98 message's, and 70 OF THEM WERE
>>>FROM YOU.
>>>
>>>That's, almost 70% percent.
>>
>> SO?
>>
>>>For FUCKS sake this also ties in with previous disucssion's that you need
>>>to
>>>do LESS TALKING and give other people a chance to speak thier mind. This
>>>newsgroup is NOT a one-man show.
>>
>> How is this preventing you from posting?
>> How is this preventing anyone from posting?
>
>
>I never said it was preventing ANYONE from posting. What you are doing is
>discouraging poeple from PARTICIPATING IN DISCUSSION'S becouse all they know
>is this newsgroup with your shreiking and blathering. I know this for a
>FACT.

o First of all, you know NOTHING for a fact. I believe you are
ignorant on every subject there is.
o Second of all, you lied [no surprise there] about the number of
messages you discovered when you signed on.
o Third of all, thanks for admitting that my posting here *prevents*
NOBODY from posting.
o Fourth of all, my posting *discourages* NOBODY from posting.
o Fifth of all, you are lying [no surprise there] when you make this
claim, because if you HAD proof, you would provide it-- you don't
provide it, so we know you're lying-- again.

[crickets]

On Fri, 15 Oct 2021 14:02:33 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
<jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:

>"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:7i76kgpfbfctbi68qlaksh4c6g4lc233uj@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 15 Sep 2021 21:10:10 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
>> <jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>This is not a warning, but a REMINDER about proper Usenet Ettiqutte.
>>
>> What is "Ettiqutte" [sic] ??????
>>
>>>It is NOT nescary for you, klous, to respond to every fucking message
>>>posted to this newsgroup.
>>
>> It is not necessary for you to be concerned about it.
>>
>>>I just signed on tonight, and there was 98 message's, and 70 OF THEM WERE
>>>FROM YOU.
>>>
>>>That's, almost 70% percent.
>>
>> SO?
>>
>>>For FUCKS sake this also ties in with previous disucssion's that you need
>>>to
>>>do LESS TALKING and give other people a chance to speak thier mind. This
>>>newsgroup is NOT a one-man show.
>>
>> How is this preventing you from posting?
>> How is this preventing anyone from posting?
>
>
>I never said it was preventing ANYONE from posting. What you are doing is
>discouraging poeple from PARTICIPATING IN DISCUSSION'S becouse all they know
>is this newsgroup with your shreiking and blathering. I know this for a
>FACT.
>

Your pathological LYING does not equate to any fact(s) about your
lying. Other than you are lying.
Please seek professional help for your pathological lying.

--
When the world ends, there'll be no more air.
That's why it's important to pollute the air now. Before it's too
late. :)

On Sat, 16 Oct 2021 06:04:29 -0700, KWills <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Fri, 15 Oct 2021 14:02:33 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
><jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:

>>I never said it was preventing ANYONE from posting. What you are doing is
>>discouraging poeple from PARTICIPATING IN DISCUSSION'S becouse all they know
>>is this newsgroup with your shreiking and blathering. I know this for a
>>FACT.
>>
>
> Your pathological LYING does not equate to any fact(s) about your
>lying. Other than you are lying.
> Please seek professional help for your pathological lying.

What Jenny fails to consider is-- if someone as pathetic as himself
can post, nobody else would have a problem.

On 10/16/2021 7:04 AM, KWills wrote:
> Your pathological LYING does not equate to any fact(s) about your
> lying. Other than you are lying.
> Please seek professional help for your pathological lying.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF IOWA
No. 31 / 04-0202
Filed May 6, 2005

STATE OF IOWA,
Appellee,
vs.
KENT BRADLEY WILLS,
Appellant.

Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk
County, Michael D. Huppert, Judge.

Defendant appeals claiming ineffective
assistance of counsel. AFFIRMED.

Linda Del Gallo, State Appellate Defender,
and Tricia Johnston, Assistant State
Appellate Defender, for appellant.

Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Kevin
Cmelik, Assistant Attorney General, John P.
Sarcone, County Attorney, and John Judisch,
Assistant County Attorney, for appellee.

WIGGINS, Justice.

Kent Wills appeals his conviction for
second-degree burglary contending that
an attached garage is a separate occupied
structure from that of the living quarters
of the residence. In this appeal, we must
determine whether trial counsel was
ineffective for (1) failing to move for
judgment of acquittal on the basis there
was insufficient evidence to convict Wills
of second-degree burglary when he entered
an attached garage of a residence when no
persons were present in the garage, but
when persons were present in the living
quarters; and (2) failing to object to a
jury instruction based on this same
argument. Because we find there was no
legal basis for the motion for judgment
of acquittal or the objection to the jury
instruction, Wills' trial counsel was not
ineffective. Accordingly, we affirm the
judgment of the district court.

I. Background Facts and Proceedings.

Around 1 a.m., an Ankeny resident called
the local police to report that a car
alarm sounded in the resident's
neighborhood. The city dispatched a police
officer to the location. Observing nothing
unusual, the officer left the area, only
to be stopped a couple of blocks later
by a person who informed the officer he
had witnessed someone running from the
area of the car alarm. As the officer
started driving back to the area of the
car alarm, he noticed a person walking
on the sidewalk. The officer asked the
person, a minor, if he had noticed anybody
running from the area. The minor answered
that he had not. While the officer and
another officer were speaking to the minor,
another resident of the neighborhood
arrived in her car and informed the
officers that she had observed two people,
one of whom was heavy set with a blinking
light on his back pocket, walking in the
area of her neighbor's residence. She
observed the heavier-set individual, later
identified as Wills, enter her neighbor's
attached garage through an unlocked service
door. She further observed a smaller
individual standing by a van parked in
the neighbor's driveway.

The officers eventually let the minor leave
even though they found a large amount of
coins, a flashlight, and an electronic
pocket organizer in his pockets. After
releasing the minor, the police officers
drove to the residence where the neighbor
observed the two suspicious people and
woke the owner. The owner, his wife,
and two daughters were in the residence
sleeping at the time. After a search
of his vehicles, the owner discovered
change and an electronic pocket organizer
were missing from the vehicles. The
owner's daughter reported a diamond ring
and some change were missing from her
vehicle. The officers then contacted
the minor's parents, who informed the
officers the minor was with Wills. After
the officers questioned the minor again,
he admitted his involvement in the theft
and implicated Wills in the burglary.
Although Wills denied involvement in the
burglary, the officers arrested him.

The State filed a trial information
charging Wills with second-degree
burglary. The State later amended the
information to include two additional
charges of burglary in the third degree
and using a juvenile to commit an
indictable offense.

The jury returned a verdict finding Wills
guilty of the crimes of burglary in the
second degree, burglary in the third
degree, and using a juvenile to commit
an indictable offense. Wills appeals his
conviction for second-degree burglary
claiming ineffective assistance of
counsel.

II. Scope of Review.

Claims of ineffective assistance of counsel
are derived from the Sixth Amendment of the
United States Constitution. Strickland v.
Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 684-86, 104 S.
Ct. 2052, 2063-64, 80 L. Ed. 2d 674, 691-93
(1984). Our review for a claim involving
violations of the Constitution is de novo.
State v. Fintel, 689 N.W.2d 95, 100
(Iowa 2004). We normally preserve
ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims
for postconviction relief actions. State
v. Carter, 602 N.W. 2d 818, 820 (Iowa 1999).
However, we will address such claims on
direct appeal when the record is sufficient
to permit a ruling. State v. Artzer,
609 N.W.2d 526, 531 (Iowa 2000). The
appellate record in the present case is
sufficient to allow us to address Wills'
ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims
on direct appeal.

In order for a defendant to succeed on a
claim of ineffective assistance of counsel,
the defendant must prove: (1) counsel
failed to perform an essential duty and
(2) prejudice resulted. Id. Prejudice
results when "there is a reasonable
probability that, but for the counsel's
unprofessional errors, the result of the
proceeding would have been different."
State v. Hopkins, 576 N.W.2d 374, 378
(Iowa 1998) (quoting Strickland, 466
U.S. at 694, 104 S. Ct. at 2068,
80 L. Ed. 2d at 698). Wills' arguments
also raise issues of statutory
interpretation, which we review for
correction of errors at law. State v.
Wolford Corp., 689 N.W.2d 471, 473 (Iowa 2004).

III. Analysis.

To find Wills guilty of burglary in the
second degree, the State had to prove
Wills perpetrated a burglary "in or
upon an occupied structure in which one
or more persons are present . . . ." Iowa
Code § 713.5(2) (2003) (emphasis added).

In this appeal, Wills first contends his
trial counsel was ineffective for failing
to move for a judgment of acquittal on
the basis there was insufficient evidence
to support a finding that at the time Wills
entered the garage, there were persons
present in or upon the occupied structure.
Wills concedes the garage was an occupied
structure, but argues the living quarters
and the attached garage are separate and
independent occupied structures; therefore,
the jury could not have found there were
people present in the attached garage
at the time of the burglary.

The Code defines an "occupied structure" as:

[A]ny building, structure, appurtenances
to buildings and structures, land, water
or air vehicle, or similar place adapted
for overnight accommodation of persons,
or occupied by persons for the purpose of
carrying on business or other activity
therein, or for the storage or safekeeping
of anything of value. Such a structure
is an "occupied structure" whether or not
a person is actually present.

Id. § 702.12.

Wills relies on State v. Smothers, 590
N.W.2d 721 (Iowa 1999), to argue the
garage and the living quarters are separate
and independent occupied structures. In
Smothers, two separate and distinct
businesses connected by interior fire doors
were operated in the same structure.
590 N.W.2d at 723. We held the defendant
committed two burglaries by entering each
business because "[t]he facility's
construction history and physical make-up
demonstrate that the portions are
independent working units which constitute
'[a] combination of materials to form a
construction for occupancy [or] use.'" Id.
Smothers is not at odds with the present
case because the living quarters and the
garage are not separate or independent
units of the residence.

Our review of the record reveals the garage
in question was a three-car attached garage
separated from the living quarters by a
door. The same roof covered the garage as
the rest of the residence. The living
quarters surrounded the garage on two sides.
It was structurally no different from any
other room in the residence.

The garage was a functional part of the
residence. On the night of the incident,
the door was unlocked. The owner of the
residence used two stalls in the garage to
park the family vehicles. The owner used
the third stall for his motorcycle. As
such, the garage and the living quarters
are a single "structure" or "building"
functioning as an integral part of the
family residence. Thus, the residence
including the garage is a single
"occupied structure" under section 702.12.
See, e.g., People v. Ingram, 48 Cal. Rptr.
2d 256 (Ct. App.1995) (holding defendant's
entry into an attached garage constituted
first-degree burglary because the garage
was attached to the house; therefore,
burglary of the garage was burglary of
an inhabited dwelling house); People v.
Cunningham, 637 N.E.2d 1247, 1252 (Ill.
App. Ct. 1994) (holding "ordinarily an
attached garage is a 'dwelling' because
it is part of the structure in which
the owner or occupant lives");
State v. Lara, 587 P.2d 52, 53
(N.M. Ct. App. 1978) (holding "burglary
of the [attached] garage was burglary of
the dwelling house because the garage was
a part of the structure used as living
quarters"); People v. Green, 141 A.D.2d
760, 761 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988) (holding
"[s]ince the garage in the present case
was structurally part of a building
which was used for overnight lodging of
various persons, it must be considered
as part of a dwelling"); White v. State,
630 S.W. 2d 340, 342 (Tex. Ct. App. 1982)
(holding an attached garage under the
same roof as the home would be considered
a habitation within the purview of the
penal code because the garage is a
structure appurtenant to and connected
to the house); State v. Murbach, 843 P.
2d 551, 553 (Wash. Ct. App 1993)
(holding the definition of a dwelling
under Washington's burglary statute
included an attached garage).

"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1c3qkgdsrbr5dqoeaim1t1pffpmnusnei1@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 15 Sep 2021 21:10:10 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
> <jerrysauk@hotmail.com> lied:
>
>>I just signed on tonight, and there was 98 message's, and 70 OF THEM WERE
>>FROM YOU.
>
> Of course Jenny is lying. As usual.
>
> NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2021 04:11:51 -0500
> From: "Jerry Sauk" <jerrysauk@hotmail.com>
> Newsgroups: alt.food.fast-food
> Subject: PERSONAL NOTICE TO KLOUS
> Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2021 21:10:10 -0500
>
> Assuming Jenny signed on September 15....
>
> The LAST time he signed on is this message
>
> NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2021 14:33:32 -0500
> From: "Jerry Sauk" <jerrysauk@hotmail.com>
> Newsgroups: alt.food.fast-food
> Subject: Re: Racist Whopper Tosser Sentenced To 12 Months Probation,
> Stay Away Fromm That Burger King
> Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2021 14:33:26 -0500
>
> I posted FIVE messages in between those times.
>
> Why do you have to lie EVERY time you post, Jenny? It doesn't seem to
> help to ask you NOT to lie. You're incapable of posting WITHOUT lying.
> This used to bother you, according to this message:
>
>>Everybody, stop lying about yourselves, about me or anything. And let's
>>stop accusing other people about lying. It's getting out of hand. If we
>>all agree to stop it, then it won't be a problem at all, and we can avoid
>>accusing each other of it also.
>>
>>So Starting NOW: No lying please!
> -Jerry Sauk, 12/9/2007
>
> But maybe you just wanted to be the ONLY one that lied?
>
> What's the story?

i want NOBODY lying in this newsgroup. Theis is a group about FACT'S AND
LOGIC.

On Mon, 1 Nov 2021 14:30:57 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
<jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:1c3qkgdsrbr5dqoeaim1t1pffpmnusnei1@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 15 Sep 2021 21:10:10 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
>> <jerrysauk@hotmail.com> lied:
>>
>>>I just signed on tonight, and there was 98 message's, and 70 OF THEM WERE
>>>FROM YOU.
>>
>> Of course Jenny is lying. As usual.
>>
>> NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2021 04:11:51 -0500
>> From: "Jerry Sauk" <jerrysauk@hotmail.com>
>> Newsgroups: alt.food.fast-food
>> Subject: PERSONAL NOTICE TO KLOUS
>> Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2021 21:10:10 -0500
>>
>> Assuming Jenny signed on September 15....
>>
>> The LAST time he signed on is this message
>>
>> NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2021 14:33:32 -0500
>> From: "Jerry Sauk" <jerrysauk@hotmail.com>
>> Newsgroups: alt.food.fast-food
>> Subject: Re: Racist Whopper Tosser Sentenced To 12 Months Probation,
>> Stay Away Fromm That Burger King
>> Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2021 14:33:26 -0500
>>
>> I posted FIVE messages in between those times.
>
>
>
[crickets.wav] (© 2021 All Rights Reserved)
>
>
>
>> Why do you have to lie EVERY time you post, Jenny? It doesn't seem to
>> help to ask you NOT to lie. You're incapable of posting WITHOUT lying.
>> This used to bother you, according to this message:

>>>Everybody, stop lying about yourselves, about me or anything. And let's
>>>stop accusing other people about lying. It's getting out of hand. If we
>>>all agree to stop it, then it won't be a problem at all, and we can avoid
>>>accusing each other of it also.
>>>
>>>So Starting NOW: No lying please!
>> -Jerry Sauk, 12/9/2007
>>
>> But maybe you just wanted to be the ONLY one that lied?
>>
>> What's the story?
>
>
>i want NOBODY lying in this newsgroup.

Yet you constantly lie. So your statement is a lie, since you
obviously WANT to lie.

>Theis is a group about FACT'S AND
>LOGIC.

Why don't you try using one or both? Everyone else is.

On Mon, 1 Nov 2021 14:30:57 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
<jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:1c3qkgdsrbr5dqoeaim1t1pffpmnusnei1@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 15 Sep 2021 21:10:10 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
>> <jerrysauk@hotmail.com> lied:
>>
>>>I just signed on tonight, and there was 98 message's, and 70 OF THEM WERE
>>>FROM YOU.
>>
>> Of course Jenny is lying. As usual.
>>
>> NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2021 04:11:51 -0500
>> From: "Jerry Sauk" <jerrysauk@hotmail.com>
>> Newsgroups: alt.food.fast-food
>> Subject: PERSONAL NOTICE TO KLOUS
>> Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2021 21:10:10 -0500
>>
>> Assuming Jenny signed on September 15....
>>
>> The LAST time he signed on is this message
>>
>> NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2021 14:33:32 -0500
>> From: "Jerry Sauk" <jerrysauk@hotmail.com>
>> Newsgroups: alt.food.fast-food
>> Subject: Re: Racist Whopper Tosser Sentenced To 12 Months Probation,
>> Stay Away Fromm That Burger King
>> Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2021 14:33:26 -0500
>>
>> I posted FIVE messages in between those times.
>>
>> Why do you have to lie EVERY time you post, Jenny? It doesn't seem to
>> help to ask you NOT to lie. You're incapable of posting WITHOUT lying.
>> This used to bother you, according to this message:
>>
>>>Everybody, stop lying about yourselves, about me or anything. And let's
>>>stop accusing other people about lying. It's getting out of hand. If we
>>>all agree to stop it, then it won't be a problem at all, and we can avoid
>>>accusing each other of it also.
>>>
>>>So Starting NOW: No lying please!
>> -Jerry Sauk, 12/9/2007
>>
>> But maybe you just wanted to be the ONLY one that lied?
>>
>> What's the story?
>
>
>i want NOBODY lying in this newsgroup. Theis is a group about FACT'S AND
>LOGIC.

Why, then, do you do little other than lie? I really do want to
know.

--
Aspire to inspire before you expire.

On Mon, 01 Nov 2021 15:31:02 -0700, KlausSchadenfreude
<klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Mon, 1 Nov 2021 14:30:57 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
><jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:1c3qkgdsrbr5dqoeaim1t1pffpmnusnei1@4ax.com...
>>> On Wed, 15 Sep 2021 21:10:10 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
>>> <jerrysauk@hotmail.com> lied:
>>>
>>>>I just signed on tonight, and there was 98 message's, and 70 OF THEM WERE
>>>>FROM YOU.
>>>
>>> Of course Jenny is lying. As usual.
>>>
>>> NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2021 04:11:51 -0500
>>> From: "Jerry Sauk" <jerrysauk@hotmail.com>
>>> Newsgroups: alt.food.fast-food
>>> Subject: PERSONAL NOTICE TO KLOUS
>>> Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2021 21:10:10 -0500
>>>
>>> Assuming Jenny signed on September 15....
>>>
>>> The LAST time he signed on is this message
>>>
>>> NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2021 14:33:32 -0500
>>> From: "Jerry Sauk" <jerrysauk@hotmail.com>
>>> Newsgroups: alt.food.fast-food
>>> Subject: Re: Racist Whopper Tosser Sentenced To 12 Months Probation,
>>> Stay Away Fromm That Burger King
>>> Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2021 14:33:26 -0500
>>>
>>> I posted FIVE messages in between those times.
>>
>>
>>
> [crickets.wav] (© 2021 All Rights Reserved)
>>
>>
>>
>>> Why do you have to lie EVERY time you post, Jenny? It doesn't seem to
>>> help to ask you NOT to lie. You're incapable of posting WITHOUT lying.
>>> This used to bother you, according to this message:
>
>>>>Everybody, stop lying about yourselves, about me or anything. And let's
>>>>stop accusing other people about lying. It's getting out of hand. If we
>>>>all agree to stop it, then it won't be a problem at all, and we can avoid
>>>>accusing each other of it also.
>>>>
>>>>So Starting NOW: No lying please!
>>> -Jerry Sauk, 12/9/2007
>>>
>>> But maybe you just wanted to be the ONLY one that lied?
>>>
>>> What's the story?
>>
>>
>>i want NOBODY lying in this newsgroup.
>
>Yet you constantly lie. So your statement is a lie, since you
>obviously WANT to lie.
>
>
>>Theis is a group about FACT'S AND
>>LOGIC.
>
>Why don't you try using one or both? Everyone else is.

Both cause Jenny so much fear and anxiety, he actually can't use
either.

--
Dadass
Tuesdays 8PM
Network TV Channel

"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:34almg5rj85u7q1qam60qgujqfbpv5iqb4@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 15 Oct 2021 14:02:33 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
> <jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in
>>message
>>news:7i76kgpfbfctbi68qlaksh4c6g4lc233uj@4ax.com...
>>> On Wed, 15 Sep 2021 21:10:10 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
>>> <jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>This is not a warning, but a REMINDER about proper Usenet Ettiqutte.
>>>
>>> What is "Ettiqutte" [sic] ??????
>>>
>>>>It is NOT nescary for you, klous, to respond to every fucking message
>>>>posted
>>>>to this newsgroup.
>>>
>>> It is not necessary for you to be concerned about it.
>>>
>>>>I just signed on tonight, and there was 98 message's, and 70 OF THEM
>>>>WERE
>>>>FROM YOU.
>>>>
>>>>That's, almost 70% percent.
>>>
>>> SO?
>>>
>>>>For FUCKS sake this also ties in with previous disucssion's that you
>>>>need
>>>>to
>>>>do LESS TALKING and give other people a chance to speak thier mind.
>>>>This
>>>>newsgroup is NOT a one-man show.
>>>
>>> How is this preventing you from posting?
>>> How is this preventing anyone from posting?
>>
>>
>>I never said it was preventing ANYONE from posting. What you are doing is
>>discouraging poeple from PARTICIPATING IN DISCUSSION'S becouse all they
>>know
>>is this newsgroup with your shreiking and blathering. I know this for a
>>FACT.
>
>
> o First of all, you know NOTHING for a fact. I believe you are
> ignorant on every subject there is.

That simply is not true. it's one of your many, LIE'S.

> o Second of all, you lied [no surprise there] about the number of
> messages you discovered when you signed on.

No I did NOT. I said there was 70 Message's, which was the EXACT AMOUNT
that was in my newsfeed when I signed on that day.

> o Fourth of all, my posting *discourages* NOBODY from posting.

That is flagrantly false. Steve has stated MULTIPLE time's that yo uare
the reason he left the group. <crickets>

On Sun, 14 Nov 2021 15:50:11 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"
<jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:34almg5rj85u7q1qam60qgujqfbpv5iqb4@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 15 Oct 2021 14:02:33 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
>> <jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in
>>>message
>>>news:7i76kgpfbfctbi68qlaksh4c6g4lc233uj@4ax.com...
>>>> On Wed, 15 Sep 2021 21:10:10 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
>>>> <jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>This is not a warning, but a REMINDER about proper Usenet Ettiqutte.
>>>>
>>>> What is "Ettiqutte" [sic] ??????
>>>>
>>>>>It is NOT nescary for you, klous, to respond to every fucking message
>>>>>posted
>>>>>to this newsgroup.
>>>>
>>>> It is not necessary for you to be concerned about it.
>>>>
>>>>>I just signed on tonight, and there was 98 message's, and 70 OF THEM
>>>>>WERE
>>>>>FROM YOU.
>>>>>
>>>>>That's, almost 70% percent.
>>>>
>>>> SO?
>>>>
>>>>>For FUCKS sake this also ties in with previous disucssion's that you
>>>>>need
>>>>>to
>>>>>do LESS TALKING and give other people a chance to speak thier mind.
>>>>>This
>>>>>newsgroup is NOT a one-man show.
>>>>
>>>> How is this preventing you from posting?
>>>> How is this preventing anyone from posting?
>>>
>>>
>>>I never said it was preventing ANYONE from posting. What you are doing is
>>>discouraging poeple from PARTICIPATING IN DISCUSSION'S becouse all they
>>>know
>>>is this newsgroup with your shreiking and blathering. I know this for a
>>>FACT.
>>
>>
>> o First of all, you know NOTHING for a fact. I believe you are
>> ignorant on every subject there is.
>
>That simply is not true. it's one of your many, LIE'S.

Proven true time and again.

http://jerrylies.byethost22.com/

>
>
>> o Second of all, you lied [no surprise there] about the number of
>> messages you discovered when you signed on.
>
>No I did NOT. I said there was 70 Message's, which was the EXACT AMOUNT
>that was in my newsfeed when I signed on that day.

A lie/

>
>> o Fourth of all, my posting *discourages* NOBODY from posting.
>
> That is flagrantly false. Steve has stated MULTIPLE time's that yo uare
>the reason he left the group. <crickets>

====== BEGIN STANDARD JENNY RESPONSE =========

[ x ] Provide the Message ID proving your claim
[ x ] You are lying, as usual
[ ] Typical racist Jenny response
[ ] Incorrect-- this has already been explained to you
[ ] Repeat your statement using standard, American English, please
[ ] Yes, it *is* private property
[ ] Yes, salt and pepper *are* ingredients
[ ] No, the sauce contains no alcohol
[ ] You have zero authority anywhere on Usenet

======= END STANDARD JENNY RESPONSE ==========

On Sun, 14 Nov 2021 15:50:11 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"
<jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:34almg5rj85u7q1qam60qgujqfbpv5iqb4@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 15 Oct 2021 14:02:33 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
>> <jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in
>>>message news:7i76kgpfbfctbi68qlaksh4c6g4lc233uj@4ax.com...
>>>> On Wed, 15 Sep 2021 21:10:10 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
>>>> <jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>This is not a warning, but a REMINDER about proper Usenet Ettiqutte.
>>>>
>>>> What is "Ettiqutte" [sic] ??????
>>>>
>>>>>It is NOT nescary for you, klous, to respond to every fucking message
>>>>>posted
>>>>>to this newsgroup.
>>>>
>>>> It is not necessary for you to be concerned about it.
>>>>
>>>>>I just signed on tonight, and there was 98 message's, and 70 OF THEM
>>>>>WERE
>>>>>FROM YOU.
>>>>>
>>>>>That's, almost 70% percent.
>>>>
>>>> SO?
>>>>
>>>>>For FUCKS sake this also ties in with previous disucssion's that you
>>>>>need
>>>>>to
>>>>>do LESS TALKING and give other people a chance to speak thier mind.
>>>>>This
>>>>>newsgroup is NOT a one-man show.
>>>>

FIX YOUR ATTRIBUTIONS, STUPID!

>>>> How is this preventing you from posting?
>>>> How is this preventing anyone from posting?
>>>
>>>
>>>I never said it was preventing ANYONE from posting. What you are doing is
>>>discouraging poeple from PARTICIPATING IN DISCUSSION'S becouse all they
>>>know
>>>is this newsgroup with your shreiking and blathering. I know this for a
>>>FACT.
>>
>>
>> o First of all, you know NOTHING for a fact. I believe you are
>> ignorant on every subject there is.
>
>That simply is not true. it's one of your many, LIE'S.
>

Prove that Klaus does not hold such a belief. If, as you claim,
his stating he holds this belief is a lie, you will present the valid,
verifiable, credible evidence. If you're lying, you will offer nothing
but more LIES. If you don't run away from my challenge.
And we all KNOW you'll run away since you actually HATE truth and
honesty.

>
>> o Second of all, you lied [no surprise there] about the number of
>> messages you discovered when you signed on.
>
>No I did NOT. I said there was 70 Message's, which was the EXACT AMOUNT
>that was in my newsfeed when I signed on that day.
>

Prove it. See above.

>> o Fourth of all, my posting *discourages* NOBODY from posting.
>
> That is flagrantly false. Steve has stated MULTIPLE time's that yo uare
>the reason he left the group. <crickets>

LIAR. But post the MID and/or archive link to one, one is all I
ask, post where Steve made such a claim.
If you're lying, and you are, you will not offer either since you
can't offer what does not exist.

[Cue the Gasbag running away in FEAR of truth and honesty.]

--
Dadass
Tuesdays 8PM
Network TV Channel

On Mon, 15 Nov 2021 01:31:08 -0800, KWills <a@b.see> wrote:

>>No I did NOT. I said there was 70 Message's, which was the EXACT AMOUNT
>>that was in my newsfeed when I signed on that day.
>>
>
> Prove it. See above.

He won't, of course.

I don't know HOW he will explain that he replied to some of those 70
messages BEFORE he logged on to download them, but there it is.

[chuckle]