Posts Tagged → lock
Sweet Ellen Greenberg’s last two minutes alive
On a cold winter evening in January, 2011, pretty, sweet, gentle, tiny 27-year-old Ellen Greenberg was brutally murdered, stabbed to death in her back and chest twenty times with a kitchen knife that only moments before she had been using.
In addition to the homicidal wounds, one of which severed her spinal cord and rendered her body completely limp, which meant subsequent stabs must have been done with real rage, the autopsy of her body also showed deep bruising on her legs, torso, and arms, old and new. Marks around her neck showed that she had been recently strangled. Her body showed the signs that physically abused people typically carry. Ellen had probably been physically abused for a long time.
So when Ellen was making herself a small meal in the kitchen in which she was about to be attacked, she had already packed up her personal things, including her makeup. She had locked the apartment door, including the inner latch, because she wanted to be left alone. She had made up her mind to move out of the apartment she shared with her fiance, Sam Goldberg, either going home to Harrisburg, or moving in with one of her friends. Ellen had not yet made up her mind where.
For the past fifteen minutes, Sam had been texting Ellen, asking her to unlock the inner door latch, so that he could get into the apartment. Apparently Ellen had been ignoring him, because his last text said “You have no idea.”
Apparently Sam was in a rage.
Seconds later Sam kicked in the door, which broke the inner latch, and the rest of what happened seems clearly obvious to everyone except the corrupt Philadelphia Police, the corrupt Philadelphia DA’s office, and now a formerly corrupted or confused medical examiner, Dr. Marlon Osbourne, all of whom said sweet Ellen’s death was a suicide.
The man who conducted Ellen’s autopsy, who saw the bruises and the stab wounds from behind, who saw the photo of a large clump of Ellen’s hair on the kitchen floor, who initially ruled her death a suicide, Dr. Osbourne, has now changed his official opinion to “death not by suicide,” which sounds a hell of a lot like a line from a purposefully ridiculous Monty Python skit.
In other words, Dr. Osbourne now says Ellen was murdered, to which everyone around the world who has a heart and a brain says “No sh*t, Sherlock.” We already knew this years ago. It only took a lawsuit against Dr. Osbourne by Ellen’s parents and a pending court appearance to finally elicit his honest opinion, again.
Minutes after Ellen had slumped to the floor, Sam Goldberg called his uncle and his cousin, both of whom are criminal defense lawyers who live near the apartment Ellen shared with Sam. Only after Sam spoke with his lawyer relatives did he call 911, and tell the dispatcher “She fell on a knife.”
Now that Dr. Osbourne has changed his opinion about Ellen’s death, the law demands that a real criminal investigation be conducted. There is no statute of limitations on murder. And Ellen’s personal journal can finally be released from Dr. Osbourne’s office to her parents and to whomever is going to be investigating her murder, and whomever is going to be investigating the blatant coverup.
I mean, surely someone in law enforcement wants to know how Sam’s uncle, who is both a criminal defense lawyer and a former judge, was allowed full access into the apartment right after Ellen’s death. We know that the lawyer uncle left the apartment with some of Ellen’s personal belongings, including her computer.
Other glaringly obvious questions come to mind: What did Sam’s uncle take from the apartment? Why did he take them? What did he do with them?
Why has Dr. Osbourne’s office clung to Ellen’s personal journal all these years, unwilling to release it? If no murder happened, then why not release it, right? Why say Ellen suicided herself, but then act like you know she was murdered, Dr. Osbourne? Wonder what that journal says!
Why did the Philadelphia Police behave so casually about Ellen’s death? Her blood was splattered all over her kitchen, and her battered body showed the usual signs of a homicide. Her clump of hair on the kitchen floor was from someone grabbing her hair and violently pulling it (probably to bend her over to be able to stab her in the back of her neck).
Why did the Philadelphia DA’s office send representatives to an early 2011 meeting with the Medical Examiner and the Philly police, and have them ask that Ellen’s death certificate be changed from homicide to suicide?
What is the connection between the 2011 Philadephia DA’s office and Sam’s family? Obviously both were “in the business” together, and probably knew each other. Did that relationship somehow color the medical examiner’s decision to change his office’s initial finding of homicide?
Even more bizarre was the decision by then – PA AG Josh Shapiro to let stand the suicide ruling just a couple years ago, despite lots of new evidence that said otherwise. Shapiro also had a personal relationship with Sam’s family, and a political relationship, too.
Just so, so many tangled relationships in this whodunit murder, and not enough transparency about them!
Justice for Ellen demands that some outside professional outfit conduct the subsequent investigation into who murdered her. Who can do it? Josh Shapiro is now the governor, and he oversees the PA State Police. That means he could influence any investigation they would do. The FBI is completely corrupt, infiltrated, politicized, and untrustworthy, so they are out.
I don’t know who can investigate who murdered sweet Ellen Greenberg, but at this point, there is so much physical and circumstantial evidence out in public already that all we really need is an outdoor court room with split rail seating, a horse, a rope, and a tree.
I volunteer to slap the horse in the ass.
“X” /Twitter still staffed by communists
Elon Musk might own X (formerly Twitter), and he might believe in free speech, and he might have tried to eliminate those former staff who are most visibly anti-conservative and anti free speech, but he is still failing. Every time I get onto X/Twitter, my account is unfairly hamstrung in some way or another, some of my posts are flagged for mysterious reasons and causes, and eventually my account is either locked or shadowbanned.
The latest just occurred tonight without any warning. And of course there is no recourse, no appeal process.
Apparently my account is now flagged as a source of “spam.” It is a ridiculous claim, because I hardly use X at all. And when I do I post my own unique content, repost a few other essays or memes I like, maybe put a new joshfirst.com blog post there, make a few salty comments along with all the other salty commenters there. For spam to occur, something has to be done a lot, and all I do is post my blog essay and then hit the re-post button a few hours or days later. This is both allowed by X and is done by virtually all content creators.
What I do is what X/ Twitter was created to allow.
My X censorshp experience is shared by many conservatives, whose sole violation on X is posting while conservative. As we all know well, liberals/ socialists/ woke/ communists cannot withstand competition in the marketplace of ideas, because their ideas are bad and hurt people. Vast majority of people reject hurtful leftist ideology and policies. So the left always have to artificially censor and suppress their opponents.
Thank God we have TruthSocial to rely on for actual free speech.
First X made me go through ten “Arkose challenges”, which is a deliberate waste of time and a form of harassment
My account met zero of the conditions X says will trigger an account lock or flag. This is just targeted harassment because the account is politically conservative
Twitter staff are attacking conservatives again
We all thought that Elon Musk had brought great change to Twitter. More openness, more transparency, more fairness, more balance, less hostility to inconvenient facts that some people in power don’t like, less censorship.
Well, that honeymoon has ended as conservative Twitter accounts are being shut down this week in a brazenly partisan and double standard bloodbath. My own Twitter account, which I don’t use much, was locked without warning (see screenshot below) for supposedly violating the Twitter rules against “abusive behavior.”
What abusive behavior? When, against whom, under what circumstances?
And why lock an account without any warning?
Turns out my succinct, well-earned, and fair response on Twitter to an abusive leftist was misconstrued as “abusive behavior.” And bang, just like that, my account was locked. Oh, I was given the option of eventually re-opening it, if I delete the tweet I wrote back to someone who was abusing me. But I am not going to go through Twitter’s version of Mao’s re-education camp, and so my tweet will remain. I have nothing to be ashamed of, and the tweet is mild in comparison to the things the person it was aimed at was writing at the same time.
Commentator Dan Bongino is constantly harping on the liberal hypocrisy thing. He is constantly pointing out that liberals don’t care about being caught as brazen hypocrites. Rather, Bongino says, liberals like the raw, unadulterated, unlimited power they feel when they get to act unfairly and treat other people unfairly. He points out that when liberals hold themselves to zero standard, and then hold people like Josh First to an impossibly high standard, liberals don’t see a fairness problem. They see and really enjoy the raw exercise of power and hierarchy, the ability to simply crush someone’s free speech rights because of a made-up fake violation of some subjective rule that is never applied to one side of a debate and that is always mis-applied to the other side of the debate.
Liberals/ Leftists are at the top of the hierarchy, and people like Josh First are at the bottom of the hierarchy.
Hierarchy and power, that is what the Josh First Twitter account lock is about. Talk about abusive behavior! Absolute power corrupts absolutely, and I am now the powerless victim of a power-crazed corrupt absolutist tyrant, some person who works at Twitter named Ella Irwin. Apparently she has been going after the accounts of other conservatives, too, including activist Michael Knowles and congresswoman Marjorie T. Green.
Here’s the thing about this latest censorship of conservative voices at Twitter: The people doing it are unfair, mean, abusive, bullies, censorious, against free speech, against ideas that scare them, and tyrannical. Any and all of these characteristics are negative. You would not normally choose to be around or subject to individual people who have these sorts of negative traits and broken personalities. And yet here we are again, pushed back into sharing digital space with people from Silicon Valley, California, where the overwhelming majority of people in control of the digital town square are just pure bad crap like Ella Irwin.
And take note: Not one Democrat Party person or official objects to this. Which means that the Democrat Party people have the same intention for governing America as their allies govern Twitter, FaceBook, etc. They all believe in using massive coercive force against people who disagree with them.
Twitter gives us a view into the souls of the people who oppose us. No wonder they want to take away our guns! Then we would be completely helpless against them. Give these people a huge swastika to wear proudly, because that is what they are.
My Day in Court…is Your Day in Court
This morning I joined mayoral candidate Nevin Mindlin and a contingent of other supporters and watchers in Dauphin County court. Judge Bernie Coates presided.
At issue was the contention that Mindlin had failed to name a three-person committee to replace him, in case he dies or is incapacitated before the election, and thus is now disqualified from running for office in the first place. Attorney Ron Katzman presented the charge on behalf of a nameless voter who must be very proud indeed to serve as a political stooge seeking to disenfranchise tens of thousands of voters.
Katzman made the argument that all rules that possibly could be followed must be followed, even if they are counter-intuitive and determined to not apply by the official elections staff. It sounded to me like Katzman was arguing that potential candidates for office really need to pay an attorney to carefully scrutinize the rules, so the already-onerous requirements are met. Mindlin said as much from the witness stand.
Attorney Herschel Lock represented Mindlin and made the argument that the law is vague, Mindlin followed all the clear requirements, he followed the advice of election officials, the rules and past legal holdings allow for his candidate papers to be amended, if needed, and Lock concluded by asking what sort of a voting system do Americans want: One that needs lawyers, or one that simply needs a few papers filled out?
My takeaway from the two-hour proceeding is that Pennsylvania’s election rules and forms are ridiculously onerous, and that the majority of these rules and forms serve no purpose other than to make it easier to disqualify someone for not dotting an i or crossing a t. As though dotting an i or crossing a t is what running for office is about…
Is it in the public’s interests to make it difficult to run for office? My answer, and I suspect yours, is that No, it should not be difficult to run for office. If you are crazy enough to put your name out in the public domain, and to subject yourself, your family, and your business to that kind of destructive scrutiny, then it should be easy. After all, finding candidates for office is at the core of our representative democracy. Procedurally, it should be easy to run, not hard.
Mindlin had his day in court, and I hope that he prevails, because his day is my day and it is your day, too. Freedom for Mindlin means freedom for all citizens.
It makes sense that he will win. But who ever said that politics makes sense? After all, Mindlin’s candidacy is being challenged on the flimsiest of grounds because his opponent, Eric Papenfuse, cannot stand up to him on substantive issues of ideas, trust, and job qualifications. Because of the apparent RICO violations involved with all of the Harrisburg City bond shenanigans, a strong mayor like Mindlin is a potential threat to the bipartisan parasite that feasted away on the taxpayers here. If Mindlin becomes mayor, people might actually go to jail. And because people might go to jail, and thereby expose even more alleged law breakers, who knows what kind of backroom political pressures are being exerted at the judicial level.
It is my hope that Judge Coates does what a good judge is supposed to do and what other Pennsylvania judges have been doing in recent years: Let the man run for office.