currently 3:52pm Thursday 8th January, 2009 (NYC, New York)
|
what is wrong with the citizens of nyc?
Wednesday 2 June, 2004 at 12:19AM (Nereus) :: permalink :: comments (25) :: trackbacks (2) This title is sure to raise a few eyebrows, and yes it's a gross generalization, but let me tell you just a few of the things that happened in NYC in the last 24hours, and you'll start to see why I've titled this entry in such a way.
Now if that's not bad enough, what happened next is what really pissed me off and made me wonder what the hell is wrong with people in this city. The train is still moving, this freak just shot this woman and obviously can't make an escape while the train is moving between stations, and everyone in the carriage just sits there and watches. When the train stops at the Times Square station (one of the busier stations in Manhattan), the gunman just casually walks off the train and disappears into the crowd, nobody tries to stop him, nobody yells for police, and get this - nobody helps this woman who's just been shot! Meadows gets off the train and makes her way to a token booth and collapses, blood everywhere. She finally receives help from (presumably) a MTA staff member working at the token booth. TV crews are there pretty quick and interview people who were on the train or at the station when Meadows got out. These witnesses are very quick to get themselves on TV saying they saw her get out of the train with blood all over her (she was shot in the shoulder it turns out) and describe how she stumbled across the platform and then slumped against a token booth, but did a single one of them lift a finger to help? Nope. And yet here they are on TV proudly telling their story as if to say "yeah I'm important, I saw it!", totally oblivious to how utterly devoid of compassion they appear, or that there is anything wrong with them whatsoever. I almost hope they become a victim one day and nobody helps them out. Meadows in the meantime is in hospital in stable condition. Ok next story, same day, later in the afternoon. A local TV crew are doing some filming outside a bank as background for an unrelated story when a robbery happens right in front of them. At the front of the bank is an area with ATM cash machines for people to come in and get money outside of business hours. The bank has only just closed and all the staff are still in the bank beyond where the ATM machines are. All of this is in open view of the street through big glass windows where the camera crew happen to be. A young man (looked to be mid to late 20's) is getting some cash from the machine and has just entered his PIN number when some big fat-assed bitch just walks up and bowls him out of the way and starts taking cash out of his various accounts. She is wearing a summer kind of dress and looks to be a relatively normal person and makes no attempt at disguising herself in any way. The guy repeatedly tries to stop her but she just keeps pushing him away with her big fat arms that are probably about the size of his upper thighs, meanwhile pressing buttons presumably to get cash out of his other accounts too. Meanwhile the film crew are just standing there filming the whole thing from a few feet away outside (they played it all on TV). There are other customers using the other ATM's but they don't help; in fact one guy says something to the guy but when he realizes that the guy is actually the victim and not the perpetrator, he just walks off without helping. The guy is yelling for the bank staff to help, but they just stand in the bank and watch while this ho takes all his money and then just shoves him out of the way once again and walks out of the bank and off down the road, not seeming to care that the TV crew get a clear shot of her face which has now been screened on the news along with the entire incident. Again what pisses me off is that once again nobody helps this guy out. The TV crew film her walking to the end of the block (not running, just wobbling her fat ass at a brisk pace), but don't follow her. They did manage to gather up the courage to interview the victim though a little later, and he is pissed. I mean who wouldn't be? All these people, including the bank staff, and in typical NYC style nobody lifts a finger to help. I bet if he offered them $100 they would have. To his credit, the victim stood by his own moral standards in refusing to hit a woman, but he is really pissed at the bank staff not helping. I guess he doesn't realize that the film crew who are interviewing him are the same ones who were there earlier doing jack shit when it all went down. A picture has yet to be published on their news station's website. Next story on the news tonight was about a Manhattan woman with two 4-year-old twin girls. A judge ordered custody to be given to the father of the girls, and of course news film crews were on hand to get everything on tape as the two girls were pulled screaming from their distraught mother outside their expensive Manhattan apartment building and put in the back of a big limo with their father, a smirking multi-millionaire Californian casino owner. The father apparently had been in court some time previously accused of sexually assaulting the girls, but the case was dropped due to lack of evidence. Also it was alleged that the father had expressed no desire to take custody of the girls until just recently when the mother decided to break off her affair with him. It would appear a NYC Judge has awarded custody of these two children to a man who has been in court accused of sexually molesting them and who appears to have started the custody battle just out of spite for his mistress breaking off their relationship. The fact that he has shitloads of money has nothing to do with it ...yeah right. This just stinks. Did anyone (especially the Judge) consider how the children are suffering because of this? Just to rub salt into the wound, the Judge also ordered that the mother can only visit the children if supervised by a court appointed representative, and that the cost of this would be over $1,000 a day to the mother. Wow, they really know how to screw a person here don't they. What the hell did she do wrong, other than stand up for herself and her children? addon.. I've posted some further details about this particular story here. These are just three examples of the crap that goes on here in NYC every friggin' day, and believe me, there are a number of other stories just from today alone with the same underlaying vein: total absence of morality and/or justice. Now do you understand the reason for the harsh title of this entry? trackbacks (2)
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://urbanscrawl.net/cgi-bin/mtype/mt-tb.cgi/50 Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry.  weblog : Urban Scrawl weblog : Urban Scrawl comments (25)
Jerry McHugh You need to get your facts straight on the Aylsworth vs. Marks custody case. Put yourself in Aylsworth shoes for a minute. For Marks to succeed in making her false allegations stick, Aylsworth would have to go to jail for years for the felony crime of child molestation, and remain on a sexual predator list and register as such, everywhere he lived for the rest of his life. Consider the damage done to a 4-year-old child who through the actions of her mother is caused to falsely believe that she was sexually molested by her father, when in fact she was not. You do not think that harms the child? What Marks did is just a tab more serious than 'saying bad things about the other parent'. It is as despicable as the act itself. Mark�s narcissistic and histrionic actions using the twins as props during the exchange with their father to satisfy her need for attention in this case is further evidence of her child abuse. Marks arranged for the TV camera crews to be present. That circus was not in the best interest of the children. Did anyone (especially the Judge) consider how the children are suffering because of this (the mother's actions)? I applaud Judge Goldberg for making such a legal and fair decision. False allegations of child sexual abuse are now epidemic in family courts, because 99% of the time they have no adverse consequences to the false allegator. And all too often the accusing parent succeeds in getting custody because of the cloud of suspicion put over the falsely accused, not to mention the financial and emotional stress sucked from the falsely accused in defending themselves. All of the legal resources of the state are provided to the false allegator at no cost (District Attorney). Someone accused of child molestation is presumed guilty until proven innocent, despite how our legal system is supposed to work. The falsely accused then has to spend well over $10,000, sometimes over $100,000, in attorney fees and experts just to defend himself. This case is rare in that the falsely accused had the financial resources to adequately defend himself. Otherwise he would probably be in jail right now, falsely accused. A 4-year-old child's mind warped for the rest of her life to believe she was sexually molested by her father, when in fact she was not, and her father in jail maliciously and vindictively falsely tagged as a child molester by the child's mother. That is the consequence of Ms. Mark's actions had she succeeded. Not a pretty picture. How do you deal with such a mother? Nereus Jerry, good points. Everything I wrote was based on what was reported in the local media which is probably about as reliable as saying "I read it on the internet, so it must be true." "Aylsworth wanted Marks to have an abortion" "Marks said Aylsworth told her he was going to marry her. Aylsworth said he never intended to marry Marks." "Marks denied Aylsworth any access to the twins (withheld visitation). Aylsworth paid child support (assumed very generous, because no mention of "deadbeat dad")." "Marks coached the twins to say that Aylsworth sexually molested them." "Only then did Aylsworth file for full custody citing any mother that would coach her 4-year-old children to falsely accuse their father of sexually molesting them to gain an advantage in a custody dispute was unfit to be a custodial parent..." The other possibility is Marks knew Aylsworth as a powerful and rich man who always gets what he wants (which is quite likely true, at least to her), and out of fear for losing her children, she decided to do whatever she had to do in order to stop her children being taken away from her. This of course does not make falsely accusing someone of child molestation ok and is also irresponsible if the twins were coached, but does perhaps give some understanding as to the motivation for doing so, because financially speaking he certainly is vastly more able to support the children than she is, and that probably scared the crap out of her. 'New York case law comes down hard on parents who make false allegations of child sexual abuse to gain an advantage in custody disputes.' I completely understand what you mean about false allegations of child abuse though, and it's despicable. A lady I knew back in NZ had a daughter to a previous marriage. When she got remarried, the daughter really resented her new step-father. The mother and step-father are nice people and very religious. A few years later the daughter accused the step-father of sexually abusing her when she was younger. It went to court and they lost their business and mortgaged their house to the hilt trying to defend him. There was no proof that he did anything, likewise there was no proof that he didn't. It was her word against his. He went to jail. I believe he was innocent. I know of another person in NZ who accused their step-father of the same thing because there was a period years ago when the NZ govt were giving cash 'awards' to victims of child abuse. It never went to court or anything, she just did it to get the money (and that is fact) and she got it - $10,000. "Marks arranged for the TV camera crews to be present." I myself have been subject to a spiteful ex-girlfriend making crap up; in this case she tried to get me fired from my job at a telecommunications company by reporting to the police that I made a malicious threatening phone call to her. She had the police totally wrapped around her finger but fortunately I worked for the telecom company and they were able to actually pull the call out and check it out (I did call her that day and then she rang me back later and we spoke for like 15mins. Interesting that someone would initiate a phone call, talk for 15mins, and then claim the other person was making malicious threatening calls to them.. heh). It caused a lot of unneccessary stress for me at work at the time though, and had I not worked there they may not have looked into it properly and just assumed what she said was true, so I guess I was lucky there. During all this, she used that accusation to apply for (and get) a non-molestation order against me (which meant I couldn't come withing 50 feet of her or something, not that I wanted to) so I guess as a result I will always have that down in my records that there was an order against me, even though it was unfounded. Of course nothing happened to her for making these false accusations and wasting police time too. What a psycho. I was actually warned about her by her best friend's mother before we started going out, I wish I had listened. Anyway that's just to let you know I am familiar with being falsely accused of things and can sympathize. If what you said is true and that Marks admitted the accusations of child molestation were fabricated, then yes this does change things, but if not, what the Judge ruled is way over the top imho.. even shared custody would have been better (2 weeks each or something). Jerry McHUgh Thank you also for your thoughtful response. I never said that Marks admitted to coaching the twins. She did not. However, 3 court appointed experts, and the court appointed guardian/lawyer who is supposed to look out for the best interest of the twins, testified that Marks coached the twins and had other psychological problems (vindictive, narcissistic and histrionic). And Marks' behavior in front of the staged cameras arranged by her (she'll say by her mother) and her disregard for the impact on the children would seem to confirm that diagnoses. Yes, Marks had her experts to refute the court's experts too. Mr. Aylsworth is no angel. However, I believe that Ms. Marks falsely accused Mr. Aylsworth of child molestation out of vindictive spite and to deny him access to the twins after their break-up. The court records also bear this out. Marks wanted Aylsworth's money (child support) but not his presence in the twin's lives. If so, she certainly deserves what she got. In fact, I think she got off easy. It is amazing to me that these allegations of child molestation almost never arise until something doesn't go 100% the accuser's way. That is what makes them so suspect from the get-go. If a mother can put a father in jail by accusing him of child molestation, shouldn't a mother go to jail for falsely accusing a man of child molestation and for coaching and irreparably harming her children? I think Marks deserves some jail time for what she has done. If Marks was in jail for perjury (a felony) and serious child abuse (a felony), then who would be granted custody of the twins (at least while she was in jail)? One of the main points I tried to make was what happens to all of the falsely accused child molesters in custody disputes when they have no money to defend themselves? I believe most are either in jail or agree to stay away from their children, while still mandated to pay child support (or go to jail for nonpayment). Mr. Aylsworth was lucky. He had money and resources to defend himself. Most falsely accused fathers do not. What happens to them? I am sure that Judge Goldberg's final ruling will stipulate supervised visitations only as a temporary measure until the mother gets the counseling and help that she needs, and to avoid her further polluting the minds of the twins from their father. I am sure that Marks will ultimately get liberal unsupervised visitation, as she ultimately should; as soon as she can demonstrate to the court that she will behave appropriately around the children and not turn them against their father. That is all the father really asked for initially� visitation, and he was denied access to the twins by Marks via her false allegations. Only then did he file for full custody. I guess the only serious disagreement I have with your response is that you seem to minimize the consequences of a mother taking desperate actions to keep her children by making false allegations of child molestation against the father. No matter how desperate a mother is to keep her children, the warning must go out loud and clear in all courts of this land that making false allegations of child molestation to gain an advantage in a custody dispute is NEVER acceptable under any circumstances. And a mother doing so is in need of serious psychological help and is not fit to have primary custody of her children. That is what the higher courts of New York have ruled. And I think the rulings wise. Nereus Lets just hope like hell those 3 court appointed experts got it right about the accusations being false. You are quite right though, making false allegations of child molestation is REALLY bad and there should be some sort of penalty against people who make those accusations falsely.. in this case there certainly was a penalty - it cost her the children. Nereus One thing I just discussed with my g/f: In clearing him of any charges in relation to the accustion of child molestation, it was a case of innocent unless proven guilty. In the case of awarding him custody, it was assumed she was guilty of falsely accusing him of child molestation. What happened to innocent until proven guilty? That's a clear contradiction imho. Give her a lie detector test maybe... Jerry McHugh Good idea. I agree. Bridget Marks should take a lie detector test. Has anyone asked her to? I will bet you $10 that she is unwilling to take one, and will cite every excuse in the world to avoid one. jimbob just here to repeat about the marks case. get you freekin facts straight l...jeeeeez... and you're almost 30 .....p.s. when you write "fark" I just cant stand it. poop. love jimbob Jessie Apathy: the stories you recounted are certainly frustrating, when one looks for signs of compassion and humanity in our communities. I view myself as a helpful sort of person, but there have been occasions when I have looked the other way - although certainly not comparable to someone being shot like the girl on the train. My point is that I think what makes people hesitate is the concern that they are interfering in the lives of others. I guess everyone has their own indicator of when it's okay to step in. Fred McErvie For more information on False Allegations of Sex Abuse and the damage that they cause to children, check out the following web sites: a-team.org , abuse-excuse.com Rickey Varvil New Yorkers Boy: Tracy Rickey...chances are high you will be accused some day too. Whether you have kids or not it don't matter, if someone says it, you did it. The abuse and poison this mother has imposed on these children is wrong. This father, no matter how imperfect he is does not deserve to have his life taken away over Bridget Mark's jealousy and anger. I am grateful to Judge Goldberg for having no tolerance for this abuse. Thank goodness this father had the financial means to save his own life. So many men don't. Without money, to hire the appropriate support, there is no way to prove your innocence. Law inforcement does not investigate to find the truth (this is a fact), they believe the lying mother and the child she has convinced to lie. smart1one 7-05-04 9:25pm eastern. Mr. Aylsworth resides in Malibu, California! The trial testimony reflects his satisfaction with the infrequent visits that 3000 miles alows. It is only after the molestation charge that Aylsworth developed a keen interest in full custody. If you wish to speculate on motives, financial seems off the list as Tracy Another sucker bites the dust! None of us are immune from false accusations. Who's next? Nereus hmm. I just read this article dated 4th July from ABC news which states the temporary stay order didn't happen, although Marks has the girls for a one-week visit with mandatory 24-hour supervision. No surprise that in the past single parents have run off with their children to South America when this kind of justice is dealt out. Have a read of this story for a good impartial rundown of events. leslie that's a great comment smart1one. you seem to be quite familiar with the bridget marks case. i wonder how indeed you are so intimately acquainted with such information. perhaps then you can answer this question, why do you think during the trial court hearing ms. marks' fiancée (whom you are careful to point out is not exactly an "elevator man") testified he did not believe the children were molested? and also, could you please explain why the nanny to whom the children first reported the molestation allegation so mysteriously disappeared at the time of the trial? Hm. what could the significance of these events be? it has to be more than the obvious fact that they are arrogant entitled people who can't control their personal problems. leave a comment
 
|
 current weblog entries weblog archives syndication (atom/rss) weather forecasts related utilities online games psychic mind reader the bad day cure internet security webmaster resources password generator gisborne surf, nz goat island bay session las vegas 2005 bbc world headlines cnn world headlines michelle malkin usgs earthquakes daily rotten news national geographic time world headlines time photoessays urban scrawl site info urban scrawl site map contact the author linkage list  random quote: I would never do crack... I would never do a drug named after a part of my own ass, okay? -Denis Leary     |
|
| |
Tuesday afternoon, Manhattan, northbound W train between 34th and 42nd Street stations. A mid afternoon on a week day in the middle of Manhattan of course means there are plenty of people riding the train. Safety in numbers, right? Wrong. Model and aspiring actress Monica Meadows, 22, (pictured) was one of the many passengers riding on this subway train when a complete stranger sitting accross from her stood up and shot her. No reason, no provocation, a total stranger.
Erin
June 2, 2004 8:53 PM [link]
Nereus,
Nice reporting skeelz - I was laughing my ass off [at your choice of words]... "some big fat-assed bitch just walks up", "her big fat arms that are probably about the size of his upper thighs", "not running, just wobbling her fat ass at a brisk pace"... hmmm, perhaps a relative of Cartmen (aka Fat Ass)?
As my best-friend Bruce told me when I first moved here "Welcome to the North".