Gay Lover Spat? SF Police Have Bodycam Footage, Would Show if Attacker and/or Paul Pelosi Were in Underwear, Charge Implies They Knew Each Other

[westwall]

They keep winning in court.... It's all been going their way.... why mouth off in those conditions?

Going in who's favor? The fbi, proven liars many times over?

 

[Care4all]

Elder Abuse is only filed if there is a RELATIONSHIP between the two........

Nope! That depends on State Law.

In California, a relationship is not required.

California Penal Code 368 PC defines elder abuse as the physical or emotional abuse, neglect, or financial exploitation of a victim 65 years of age or older. The offense can be prosecuted as a misdemeanor or a felony, and is punishable by up to 4 years of jail or prison.

 

[westwall]

Nope! That depends on State Law.

In California, a relationship is not required.

California Penal Code 368 PC defines elder abuse as the physical or emotional abuse, neglect, or financial exploitation of a victim 65 years of age or older. The offense can be prosecuted as a misdemeanor or a felony, and is punishable by up to 4 years of jail or prison.

ABUSE! Look up the definition. A single attack is not abuse. Abuse is long term.

Sheesh you people are fucking ignorant.

 

[fncceo]

You guys sure do fantasize about gay sex, a lot, more than a normie/breeder should.

I'm just curious...

 

[Care4all]

ABUSE! Look up the definition. A single attack is not abuse. Abuse is long term.

Sheesh you people are fucking ignorant.

No westwall, look it up, I gave you the California penal code! Any physical harm any person does to someone 65 and older, is considered elder abuse in California.... at 82 there is no excuse for the Perp' to not know he's over 65.

 

[westwall]

No westwall, look it up, I gave you the California penal code! Any physical harm any person does to someone 65 and older, is considered elder abuse in California.... at 82 there is no excuse for the Perp' to not know he's over 65.

Single attacks aren't abuse. Look up the definition of abuse.

 

[Failzero]

Single attacks aren't abuse. Look up the definition of abuse.

Where were the perps clothes found in the home ?

 

[westwall]

Where were the perps clothes found in the home ?

That hasn't been reported.

 

[Failzero]

That hasn't been reported.

Will it ever ?

 

[Vrenn]

Going in who's favor? The fbi, proven liars many times over?

lYou can claim they are liars all you wish but they are running up quite a winning record right now because Rump and his Liars can't keep things straight. And even the Rump appointed Judges aren't as stupid or corrupt as Rump thought. Well, all except one, that is.

 

[abu afak]

Cite proof.

Westwall is a one-line RW Troll who posts NO info at all.
Can't post a paragraph, just typical MAGA BS that is 70% of this mb.

I might add he is a former and now Demoted Mod.
Having lost his position due to abusive handling of it's posters.
A prominent review website cites his abuses many times. (name available)

He is 100% combative to me and cannot stop giving Me Negs.
We had a blowout incl Flacalteen that stopped it for a while, but now he's back up to his abuse/grudge and I give him one-for-one in return. (but Never initiate)

Unfortunately FlaCalTeen rejected my solution/s of Mutual Ignore. Because 'ignore' is One-sided here and the other party can just continue wailing on you and your posts with feedback and responses, not as Facebook, a mutual Ignore/"Block."

Barring that we could have an agreement to Zero-feedback to each other.
But FlacalTeen will NOT agree to anything constructive.
NOTHING.
Tho I'm sure he cooled the abusive Westwall off for a while with a talk.
But now he's back and up to 10 Negs a day.
I proposed many solutions in a 'Conversation' thread still back there app a year?
But nothing.

I am here to post lots of Topical content/Meat, and I do. I'm about the meatiest poster on the board. (See, ie, Environment and Science)
Westwall is here to one-line troll and Neg what he disagrees with.
He has Never started a thread and can't post a paragraph.
Thus he uses Negs and one-liners.

I long ago gave up on even trying to speak to the RW BIGOT/personal grudge politics mod corp, namely FCT and Meister. I do not even read my conversation msgs from mod corp.
Perhaps you could weigh in on the matter in any way.
thx
I would gladly agree to any fair and effective disposition, but it's dubious for reasons/Pricks I detailed above.
`

 

[SweetSue92]

Why? The dude's 80.

So now we know who moved this to Conspiracy Theories.

 

[SweetSue92]

Single attacks aren't abuse. Look up the definition of abuse.

I looked up "child abuse" and it's intentional harm or mistreatment--doesn't have to be ongoing. However this seems to be like the hate crime charge--just something added on to say how offensive we find it. Which is fine, in cases where, say, helpless people are being abused in nursing homes and etc. But then, that's what we have judges and juries for--to mete out appropriate punishments. I'm not sure we need "hate crime" and "elder abuse" laws. Adults are adults, IMO

 

[Care4all]

Single attacks aren't abuse. Look up the definition of abuse.

So a single rape of a child is not sexual child abuse because it didn't happen more than once?

come on westwall, stop your silly excuses for being wrong on this....

 

[Meathead]

Westwall is a one-line RW Troll who posts NO info at all.
Can't post a paragraph, just typical MAGA BS that is 70% of this mb.

I might add he is a former and now Demoted Mod.
Having lost his position due to abusive handling of it's posters.
A prominent review website cites his abuses many times. (name available)

He is 100% combative to me and cannot stop giving Me Negs.
We had a blowout incl Flacalteen that stopped it for a while, but now he's back up to his abuse/grudge and I give him one-for-one in return. (but Never initiate)

Unfortunately FlaCalTeen rejected my solution/s of Mutual Ignore. Because 'ignore' is One-sided here and the other party can just continue wailing on you and your posts with feedback and responses, not as Facebook, a mutual Ignore/"Block."

Barring that we could have an agreement to Zero-feedback to each other.
But FlacalTeen will NOT agree to anything constructive.
NOTHING.
Tho I'm sure he cooled the abusive Westwall off for a while with a talk.
But now he's back and up to 10 Negs a day.
I proposed many solutions in a 'Conversation' thread still back there app a year?
But nothing.

I am here to post lots of Topical content/Meat, and I do. I'm about the meatiest poster on the board. (See, ie, Environment and Science)
Westwall is here to one-line troll and Neg what he disagrees with.
He has Never started a thread and can't post a paragraph.
Thus he uses Negs and one-liners.

I long ago gave up on even trying to speak to the RW BIGOT/personal grudge politics mod corp, namely FCT and Meister. I do not even read my conversation msgs from mod corp.
Perhaps you could weigh in on the matter in any way.
thx
I would gladly agree to any fair and effective disposition, but it's dubious for reasons/Pricks I detailed above.
`

Man up fffs!

 

[westwall]

So a single rape of a child is not sexual child abuse because it didn't happen more than once?

come on westwall, stop your silly excuses for being wrong on this....

No, IT IS RAPE! Stop being a fucking retard. Elder abuse is a charge levied against people who KNOW the victim.

Child abuse is a charge levied against people who KNOW THE VICTIM!

You don't see child rapists charged with child abuse unless they are FAMILY. Or FAMILY FRIENDS, thus meeting the criteria of KNOWING THE VICTIM.

 

[gtopa1]

There seemed to have been a 'passenger' in the car with Pelosi when he wrecked earlier this year. I wonder if that dude looked like a lady.

I wonder if it was DePape???

Greg

 

[sparky]

One wonders how many gay domestics the SF police field in a day.......~S~

 

[citygator]

You guys are utter morons.

 

[gtopa1]

Cite proof.

Here is the statute IN FULL as it seems to me:

"368. (a) The Legislature finds and declares that elders, adults whose physical or mental disabilities or other limitations restrict their ability to carry out normal activities or to protect their rights, and adults admitted as inpatients to a 24-hour health facility deserve special consideration and protection.

(b) (1) A person who knows or reasonably should know that a person is an elder or dependent adult and who, under circumstances or conditions likely to produce great bodily harm or death, willfully causes or permits any elder or dependent adult to suffer, or inflicts thereon unjustifiable physical pain or mental suffering, or having the care or custody of any elder or dependent adult, willfully causes or permits the person or health of the elder or dependent adult to be injured, or willfully causes or permits the elder or dependent adult to be placed in a situation in which his or her person or health is endangered, is punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, or by a fine not to exceed six thousand dollars ($6,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment, or by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or four years.

(2) If, in the commission of an offense described in paragraph (1), the victim suffers great bodily injury, as defined in Section 12022.7, the defendant shall receive an additional term in the state prison as follows:

(A) Three years if the victim is under 70 years of age.

(B) Five years if the victim is 70 years of age or older.

(3) If, in the commission of an offense described in paragraph (1), the defendant proximately causes the death of the victim, the defendant shall receive an additional term in the state prison as follows:

(A) Five years if the victim is under 70 years of age.

(B) Seven years if the victim is 70 years of age or older.

(c) A person who knows or reasonably should know that a person is an elder or dependent adult and who, under circumstances or conditions other than those likely to produce great bodily harm or death, willfully causes or permits any elder or dependent adult to suffer, or inflicts thereon unjustifiable physical pain or mental suffering, or having the care or custody of any elder or dependent adult, willfully causes or permits the person or health of the elder or dependent adult to be injured or willfully causes or permits the elder or dependent adult to be placed in a situation in which his or her person or health may be endangered, is guilty of a misdemeanor. A second or subsequent violation of this subdivision is punishable by a fine not to exceed two thousand dollars ($2,000), or by imprisonment in a county jail not to exceed one year, or by both that fine and imprisonment.

(d) A person who is not a caretaker who violates any provision of law proscribing theft, embezzlement, forgery, or fraud, or who violates Section 530.5 proscribing identity theft, with respect to the property or personal identifying information of an elder or a dependent adult, and who knows or reasonably should know that the victim is an elder or a dependent adult, is punishable as follows:

(1) By a fine not exceeding two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500), or by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, or by both that fine and imprisonment, or by a fine not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000), or by imprisonment pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170 for two, three, or four years, or by both that fine and imprisonment, when the moneys, labor, goods, services, or real or personal property taken or obtained is of a value exceeding nine hundred fifty dollars ($950).

(2) By a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000), by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, or by both that fine and imprisonment, when the moneys, labor, goods, services, or real or personal property taken or obtained is of a value not exceeding nine hundred fifty dollars ($950).

(e) A caretaker of an elder or a dependent adult who violates any provision of law proscribing theft, embezzlement, forgery, or fraud, or who violates Section 530.5 proscribing identity theft, with respect to the property or personal identifying information of that elder or dependent adult, is punishable as follows:

(1) By a fine not exceeding two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500), or by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, or by both that fine and imprisonment, or by a fine not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000), or by imprisonment pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170 for two, three, or four years, or by both that fine and imprisonment, when the moneys, labor, goods, services, or real or personal property taken or obtained is of a value exceeding nine hundred fifty dollars ($950).

(2) By a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000), by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, or by both that fine and imprisonment, when the moneys, labor, goods, services, or real or personal property taken or obtained is of a value not exceeding nine hundred fifty dollars ($950).

(f) A person who commits the false imprisonment of an elder or a dependent adult by the use of violence, menace, fraud, or deceit is punishable by imprisonment pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170 for two, three, or four years.

(g) As used in this section, “elder” means a person who is 65 years of age or older.

(h) As used in this section, “dependent adult” means a person, regardless of whether the person lives independently, who is between the ages of 18 and 64, who has physical or mental limitations which restrict his or her ability to carry out normal activities or to protect his or her rights, including, but not limited to, persons who have physical or developmental disabilities or whose physical or mental abilities have diminished because of age. “Dependent adult” includes a person between the ages of 18 and 64 who is admitted as an inpatient to a 24-hour health facility, as defined in Sections 1250, 1250.2, and 1250.3 of the Health and Safety Code.

(i) As used in this section, “caretaker” means a person who has the care, custody, or control of, or who stands in a position of trust with, an elder or a dependent adult.

(j) Nothing in this section shall preclude prosecution under both this section and Section 187 or 12022.7 or any other provision of law. However, a person shall not receive an additional term of imprisonment under both paragraphs (2) and (3) of subdivision (b) for a single offense, nor shall a person receive an additional term of imprisonment under both Section 12022.7 and paragraph (2) or (3) of subdivision (b) for a single offense.

(k) In any case in which a person is convicted of violating these provisions, the court may require him or her to receive appropriate counseling as a condition of probation. A defendant ordered to be placed in a counseling program shall be responsible for paying the expense of his or her participation in the counseling program as determined by the court. The court shall take into consideration the ability of the defendant to pay, and no defendant shall be denied probation because of his or her inability to pay.

(l) Upon conviction for a violation of subdivision (b), (c), (d), (e), or (f), the sentencing court shall also consider issuing an order restraining the defendant from any contact with the victim, which may be valid for up to 10 years, as determined by the court. It is the intent of the Legislature that the length of any restraining order be based upon the seriousness of the facts before the court, the probability of future violations, and the safety of the victim and his or her immediate family. This protective order may be issued by the court whether the defendant is sentenced to state prison or county jail, or if imposition of sentence is suspended and the defendant is placed on probation."

"b1) A person who knows or reasonably should know that a person is an elder or dependent adult and who, under circumstances or conditions likely to produce great bodily harm or death, "

"Who KNOWS or reasonably SHOULD KNOW".....................so DePape KNEW or SHOULD HAVE KNOWN........that Pelosi was over 65!!!! Did DePape check out Pelosi's Driver's License for age?

(i) As used in this section, “caretaker” means a person who has the care, custody, or control of, or who stands in a position of trust with, an elder or a dependent adult. Self evident.

These are more telling:

Examples of elder abuse crimes

• not feeding an 80-year-old parent who cannot care for himself.
• a caretaker ridiculing an elder patient for being wheelchair-bound.
• a person using fraud to convince a 90-year-old neighbor to make him the sole beneficiary in the elder’s will.

EACH is a "relationship" situation.

Greg

PS: Penal Code 368 PC - California "Elder Abuse" Criminal Laws