Paternity Fraud In The USA


Some of may be aware that according to America Association Of Blood Banks, the people that oversee blood supplies in the medical industry, that approximately one third of children in the United States are not the biological father of a given child. Now, I am not saying that this statistic applies to all married couple, that not every wife is a cheap slore. This statistic applies over the larger population. But I am saying that you should give every child a paternity test to verify that the child is yours.

And, I would also suggest that you do not inform you wife.

See, a claim of false paternity is not only is not only wrong. A claim of false paternity is a crime:

It is kidnapping.

In committing paternity fraud, a woman abducted/stolen child from an unwilling biological father in order to ransom such a child for financial support from an innocent third party. Thus, she has prevented the government’s function of establishing the child’s true parentage.

Kidnapping in the first degree is a class A felony.

It is child trafficking.

“Trafficking in Persons” is defined as the transfer, harboring or receipt of persons, by means of threat, force or coercion, of abduction, of fraud, of deception, of the abuse of power or of a position of vulnerability or of the giving or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another person, for the purpose of exploitation.

When a woman commits paternity fraud, children are abducted from biological fathers and forcibly adopted to men through means of threat, force, coercion or fraud for the purpose of exploiting the child in order to gain financial support.

The crime of child trafficking in the 1st and 2nd degree are both class A felonies.


Coercing an innocent man into signing a paternity affidavit or birth certificate under false pretense that he is the child’s genetic father, while the mother withholds evidence to the contrary, is a fraud.

Fraud, by obtaining a signature by duress or deception is a class C felony.


Making uncertain of false claims of paternity, whether spoken verbally or written under oath, is perjury in the first degree. Whether or not a woman knows the exact truth does not matter; a woman making a claim that she does not know to be true is equivalent to making false claims.

Perjury in the first degree is a class C felony.

The Crimes By The State.


If a man is finger as the father of a child, through false paternity fraud, the man is held responsible for supporting that child. And if the man is unwilling, or unable, to supply that financial “aid”, he is labeled as a “dead beat dad”, the monies are taken from the man by force, by removing the money directly by the employer. Or worse, the state imposes a loss of a driver’s license, liens to property, bank accounts, tax returns, wages, and imprisonment.

The crimes that women commit in cases of paternity fraud have been sanctioned by the lawmakers as a means of financial support for non-genetic children. Although, I suspect that our lawmakers have failed to recognize that the state’s continued support, on the backs of innocent men, for the claimed “the best interest of the child”, has resulted in those very lawmakers into a gray area of criminality themselves.

Obstruction of Justice.

Since the state has, essentially, given a pass on paternity fraud; thus, the attorneys are suspect to agreeing to refrain from dutifully prosecuting criminal behavior (that crime being committed by the women) in order to sustain the collection of federal subsidies. Now, biological establishment of paternity is considered a necessary causality in the case of gaining these state funded, in addition to the reimbursement to the welfare system by an innocent man.

Now, how much money across the country has been collected by Child Services across the country? To be honest, I really don’t know, but it boggles my mind, but is on the order of at least a $500,000,000.00 when I gave up and felt ill.

This significant financial rewards are enough to raise the blood pressure of anyone who has been accused of paternity fraud.

Rendering Criminal Assistance.

Now, as I have said above, if a woman had made a false paternity claim, then she is guilty of committing several felonies. But, the state has all but ignored those crimes, which makes the state rendering criminal assistance. And this is all done for “the best interest of the child”.

Official Misconduct.

Just the state ignoring the paternity fraud occurring stinks of official misconduct. Since the state officials have failed to uphold their laws, have denied the men their rights, denied due process, and have denied the victims of their rights.


“It is the duty of the courts to be watchful for the Constitutional rights of the citizen and against any stealthy encroachments thereon” Boyd v. United States,116 U.S. 616, 635

“Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making, or legislation which would abrogate them” Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S.436, 491

“Silence can only be equated with fraud where there is a legal and moral duty to speak, or where an inquiry left unanswered would be intentionally misleading…” U.S. v. Tweel, 550 F.2d 297, 299. See also U.S. v. Prudden, 424 F.2d 1021,1032; Carmine v. Bowen, 64 A. 932


So, in short, paternity fraud is perpetuated by some women, and the state essential ignore the whole thing, for the most part.

And men always get the shit end of the stick.

Just saying.

A Rant On Rolling Stone, The Center For Public Integrity, NPR, And The UVA Non-Rape.

I am getting sick and tired concerning the UVA non-rape. After looking at the issue a little more deeply, while the Rolling Stone had published the article about that alleged rape in Virginia, the origin of the rolling Stones article was the fault of NPR.

Essentially, the non-rape in Virginia is probably dead and buried. And as many feminists want everyone to still believe this “Jackie” person, even considering her lies, I hope that woman goes to jail for her false rape allegations.


Why do so many people want to believe this rape had occurred? It seems to me that because there is a belief that rape is more prevalent that actually is, so many people automatically accuse the men involved without even doing an investigation. They just assumed that the woman was being honest.

When, in truth the woman was a lying SLORE that, for some reason, generally hates men or fraternities.

The fact that the false statistic that 1 of 5 female college students will be raped on campus is, as I have covered in a previous posting, total bullshit! And with Obama, our imperious leader of the USSA, has also claimed that “fact” of 1:5 women get raped in college. Do we even wonder why the woman “Jackie” is automatically believed.

Again, for the record, the rape statistics coming from the department of justice, under the FBI’s Uniform Crime Report is 26.9 rapes of 100,000 people, that is you chance of getting raped in the United States is 0.00269%. Seriously!

This 1:5 statistics are dead wrong and anyone that makes that claim is either insane, stupid, evil, or a feminist.

AGAIN! 1:5 is a claim that you will get raped on campus is 20%, whereas the actual honest statistic is more like 0.00269%.

Actually, however, there is a “rape culture” in the United States. But that rape culture is within prisons, and it is entirely isolated within the prison populations. And then a few years ago, in 2010 the Social Justice Warriors had started to co-opt the term and, for some sick and twisted reasons, had started to apply it the general population.

In my opinion, this was started by the feminists. More specifically, by feminists professors who had insisted that men are evil, and women are perfect. OK, I am paraphrasing it a bit, but the academic feminists really do believe that.

So, even though the rape culture lie had started gaining acceptance, the actual rape statistics had started dropping significantly. As with crime had started to drop over the years, the feminists had turned up the punishment to “eleven” for the crimes, of all sorts, had dropped of their own accord.

See, “The Center For Public Integrity”, along with NPR, had published a 104 page study titled “Sexual Assault On Campus”. Now, understand, that this report is extremely left-leaning, and total nonsense. The report is full of anecdotes, bad reporting, non-existent research. And, in addition, the report starts with that damnable 1:5 statistic as being valid, rather than finding actual facts.

So, the team of NPR and The Center For Public Integrity had started the ball rolling with their bad reporting and the Rolling Stone took that information and printed their article on the non-rape.

So, Rolling Stone is not entirely at fault, they did write the article, and for that, they should be punished. They should not be taken seriously, and maybe they should be hurt financially by allowing your subscription to lapse, especially if you trust their “news” reporting.

Just saying.



False rape accusation is a crime. It is a crime for an individual to claim they were raped when the falsely accused rapist did not commit an act of rape.

Now, for the remainder of this post, I will be assuming that a woman has falsely claimed that a man has raped her when he did not actually rape her. This is because it is more convenient for me to phrase it in this manner, and also that comparatively speaking, very few men make such a claim when compared to women.

The reasons for these women to make such a claim is entirely beyond my understanding. It just doesn’t make any sense to me, regardless of the woman’s attempts at justification. Hell, there are men who have never even interacted with the women but the woman has made such a claim!

Now, for some reason, some men have this strange idea that women need to be protected, that a woman would never make a false accusation of a rape. However, while that may have been partially true, that fact has been invalid since the 1960’s, when feminism reared its ugly head. Now there are some misguided male souls, MANGINAS, that are, for some reason, are pro-feminism, and some even claim that they are feminists.

The absurdity of such a claim by manginas is entirely beyond my understanding.

However, even with insufficient evidence in a court of law, men are generally convicted of rape, based solely on what the woman’s claims.

Now, in some cases, the woman gets a conscience, perhaps before the trial, during the trial, or YEARS after the fact when the man has been gang-raped in prison repeatedly for years. But, never the less, the woman could say that she was lying.

Then what?

While the man, being totally innocent (And I mean INNOCENT, not just not-guilty) is free. Or is he. While the woman tells the authorities that she had lied, the man has been ruined for the rest of his life. Every one who knows that fact will always have some doubts, nevertheless. The course of his life had been altered by the woman’s false accusation of rape.

Seriously, the man’s life has been changed forever, and will probably be worse than it could have been otherwise.

And some men are just going to move on and make, or remake, his life. But my question is Why should he let it go?

The woman has committed perjury, fraud, and probably some other crimes. But, in general, the MANGINAS in the courts will just let the woman alone.


Is a woman making a false accusation of rape ever punished after she has confessed her lies? Well, in FEW cases, a woman has been charged and arrested. However, in those cases, the women in question had made many false accusations of rape. Those particular women were, in my opinion, severely twisted.

In my opinion, after looking at this information for a few days, I think that a woman who make a false accusation of rape, should be arrested, and thrown in prison for the maximum period of time that a man could have spent in time.

With no hope of having the sentence reduced.

Woman want equality. Hell, women have had equality for decades with respect to the benefits, we need women to also have equality for their errors, also.

Just saying.

Hey, I Have Some More Articles Concerning How The Rolling Stone Has Fucked Us With That False Accusation Of Rape.


OK, I came across this on Facebook, which is amazing, since I don’t go on Facebook except every two or three days.

Rolling Stone’s UVA Rape Story Just Took Another Massive Hit

Robby Soave

Dec. 10, 2014 7:02 pm

The Washington Post just published another investigative report on the University of Virginia gang rape allegations—and whatever credibility Sabrina Rubin Erdely and Rolling Stone had left is totally obliterated.

WaPost spoke with the three friends who rescued Jackie after her alleged gang rape on September 28, 2012. The details they provided depart significantly from Jackie’s narrative as reported by Erdely. The friends told WaPost that Jackie did not appear battered or bloodied and gave a description of the attack significantly different than what was later published in Rolling Stone. They also clarified that it was Jackie who didn’t want to go to the police, not them:

The scene with her friends was pivotal in the article, as it alleged that the friends were callously apathetic about a beaten, bloodied, injured classmate reporting a brutal gang rape at the Phi Kappa Psi fraternity. The account alleged that the students worried about the effect it might have on their social status, how it might reflect on Jackie during the rest of her collegiate career, and how they suggested not reporting it. It set up the article’s theme: That U-Va. has a culture that is indifferent to rape.

“It didn’t happen that way at all,” Andy said.

Instead, the friends remember being shocked. Though they did not notice any blood or visible injuries, they said they immediately urged Jackie to speak to police and insisted that they find her help. Instead, they said, Jackie declined and asked to be taken back to her dorm room. They went with her — two of them said they spent the night — seeking to comfort Jackie in what appeared to be a moment of extreme turmoil.

Erdely portrayed Jackie’s friends as popularity-obsessed sociopaths who deterred her from reporting the assault. They say that’s not true; it was Jackie who didn’t want to report it.

That may seem damning, but it’s just the beginning. According to the friends, Jackie did name her attacker, but no one by that name attended UVA. Pictures of the attacker—the man Jackie claimed was a UVA junior who had asked her out on a date—that she provided to the friends were actually pictures of a former high school classmate who never attended UVA and “hasn’t been to Charlottesville in at least six years.” His name is not the one Jackie gave her friends. These details were all verified by WaPost.

Here’s the timeline, according to the friends:

The three friends said that Jackie soon began talking about a handsome junior from chemistry class who had a crush on her and had been asking her out on dates.

Intrigued, Jackie’s friends got his phone number from her and began exchanging text messages with the mysterious upperclassman. He then raved to them about “this super smart hot,” freshman who shared his love of the band Coheed and Cambria, according to the texts, which were provided to The Post. …

Jackie told her three friends that she accepted the upperclassman’s invitation for a dinner date on Friday Sept. 28, 2012.

Curious about Jackie’s date, the friends said that they failed to locate the student on a U-Va. database and social media. Andy, Cindy and Randall all said they never met the student in person. Before Jackie’s date, the friends said that they became suspicious that perhaps they hadn’t really been in contact with the chemistry student at all.

U-Va. officials told The Post that no student by the name Jackie provided to her friends as her date and attacker in 2012 had ever enrolled at the university. Randall provided The Post with pictures that Jackie’s purported date had sent of himself by text message in 2012.

The Post identified the person in the pictures and learned that his name does not match the one Jackie provided to friends in 2012. In an interview, the man said that he was Jackie’s high school classmate but that he “never really spoke to her.”

The man said that he was never a U-Va. student and is not a member of any fraternity. Additionally, the man said that he had not visited Charlottesville in at least six years and that he was in another state participating in an athletic event during the weekend of Sept. 28, 2012.

If the friends’ narrative is accurate, it seems doubtful that “Drew” exists at all, and is instead the product of some kind of catfishing situation. Compare that with Rolling Stone editor Sean Woods’ initial claim that “I’m satisfied that [the perpetrators] exist and are real. We knew who they were.”

One of the friends, “Randall,” also told WaPost that Erdely lied when she wrote that he declined to be interviewed because of “loyalty to his own frat.” Randall said he would have gladly given an interview but was never contacted.

The friends quoted in the latest article still say Jackie’s changed behavior that first semester is evidence of some trauma she sustained. That may be true, although it is difficult to say what, exactly, that might have entailed. There is not a shred of evidence to suggest such a trauma bears any resemblance to the incredible story told by Rolling Stone.

Lest anyone think that this debacle is solely the fault of someone who falsely claimed rape, keep in mind that these fraudulent charges were put forth by a national magazine that made no effort to verify them, and ignored every red flag in its haste to publish the story of the century—even when Jackie refused to name her attackers and attempted to withdraw her story. Whatever the truth is—whatever the excellent reporters at WaPost manage to uncover next—the fact remains that Rolling Stone and Erdely should have known better.

The degree to which everyone involved in this travesty of journalism failed at their jobs is almost unbelievable. But unlike the story of a gang rape at UVA, we now have incontrovertible proof of it.

Author of Rolling Stone article on alleged U-Va. rape didn’t talk to accused perpetrators

Supporters fill the McIntire Amphitheatre at the University of Virginia in Charlottesville during a rally on Nov. 20, after the publication of a Rolling Stone article laying out rape allegations. (Ryan M. Kelly/AP)

By Paul Farhi

December 1

The writer of a blockbuster Rolling Stone magazine story about an alleged gang rape at a University of Virginia fraternity has said that she was unable to contact or interview the men who supposedly perpetrated the crime.

In interviews with The Washington Post and last week, writer Sabrina Rubin Erdely declined to answer repeated questions about the men’s response to an allegation by a female student named Jackie that they had sexually assaulted her at a U-Va. fraternity party in 2012.

However, in a podcast interview with Slate, Erdely indicated that she was unable to locate the fraternity brothers in the course of her reporting to get their side of the story.

“I reached out to [the accused] in multiple ways,” Erdely said in the Slate interview. “They were kind of hard to get in touch with because [the fraternity’s] contact page was pretty outdated. But I wound up speaking . . . I wound up getting in touch with their local president, who sent me an e-mail, and then I talked with their sort of, their national guy, who’s kind of their national crisis manager. They were both helpful in their own way, I guess.”

Sean Woods, who edited the Rolling Stone story, said in an interview that Erdely did not talk to the alleged assailants. “We did not talk to them. We could not reach them,” he said in an interview.

Tommy Reid, right, president of the University of Virginia’s Inter-Fraternity Council, speaks Nov. 24 about the alleged sexual assault at a news conference last month. (Steve Helber/AP)

However, he said, “we verified their existence,” in part by talking to Jackie’s friends. “I’m satisfied that these guys exist and are real. We knew who they were.”

News organizations typically seek comment from those accused of criminal acts or from their attorneys as a matter of fairness and balance, as well as to confirm that the individuals exist.

Erdely’s Nov. 19 article, which touched off a criminal investigation and an outraged reaction among the school’s students, faculty and alumni, included no such response and gave no indication that she had met or seen the men, who Jackie said were still on campus.

The nine men who Jackie said participated in the gang rape were not identified by name in the Rolling Stone story. But the article contained clues to their identities, including their affiliation with the Phi Kappa Psi fraternity at U-Va. and their attendance at a party at the frat in September 2012. “Drew,” the frat brother who allegedly lured Jackie to the darkened room at the fraternity in which the assault took place, was described in the most detail in the article. Erdely said that he was an attractive U-Va. junior and a lifeguard at a university pool.

No one has been arrested for the alleged crime. The university has turned the matter over to the Charlottesville police, who have launched an investigation.

Erdely declined to address specific questions about her reporting when contacted on Sunday and Monday.

“I could address many of [the questions] individually . . . but by dwelling on this, you’re getting sidetracked,” she wrote in an e-mail response to The Post’s inquiry. “As I’ve already told you, the gang-rape scene that leads the story is the alarming account that Jackie — a person whom I found to be credible — told to me, told her friends, and importantly, what she told the UVA administration, which chose not to act on her allegations in any way — i.e., the overarching point of the article. THAT is the story: the culture that greeted her and so many other UVA women I interviewed, who came forward with allegations, only to be met with indifference.”

The University of Virginia held a special meeting on Tuesday to discuss recent allegations of sexual assault that have rocked the campus. University President Teresa Sullivan said any systemic problems “must be rooted out.” (AP)

She added, “I think I did my due diligence in reporting this story; RS’s excellent editors, fact-checkers, and lawyers all agreed.”

Woods said that the men were not named in the story because “we were telling Jackie’s story. It’s her story.”

In her article, Erdely quoted the fraternity’s chapter president and a spokesman for Phi Kappa Psi’s national chapter. Both expressed shock at the allegations when informed of them by university administrators but said that they had no direct knowledge of them and were seeking to substantiate them.

There have been no arrests in the case, and no alleged assailants have been publicly identified.

In her interview with The Post, Erdely said that she “corroborated every aspect of the story that I could.” She said that she did not identify any of the alleged attackers in the article “by Jackie’s request. She asked me not to name the individuals because she’s so fearful of them. That was something we agreed on. She was nervous about naming the frat, too. I told her, ‘If we’re trying to shine a light on this, we have to name the fraternity.’ ”

Erdely declined to say whether she knows the names of the alleged perpetrators, including “Drew.”

“I can’t answer that,” she said. “This was a topic that made Jackie extremely uncomfortable.”


Lessons of Rolling Stone’s UVA Catastrophe: We Can’t Prevent Rape If We’re Deluded About It

Robby Soave

Dec. 9, 2014 9:10 am

UVA Karen Blaha / Wikimedia Commons

Suppose Jackie’s story was not so incredible. Suppose that premeditated, ritualistic gang rape was a plausible occurrence at the average college. Suppose that one in every five—or four, or three—female students found themselves in serious danger of assault the moment they set foot outside their dorm rooms. Suppose that America’s campuses really did rival Somalia in terms of the violence faced by young women.

Would it be enough to merely place a moratorium on Greek activity, form a task force, and defend the actions of administrators who failed to report rape to the police, as University of Virginia President Teresa Sullivan has done (arguably in violation of the Constitution)?

Of course not.

On the other hand, suppose the details of Jackie’s story were exaggerated, or in doubt. Suppose that premeditated, ritualistic gang rape was highly implausible. Suppose that cherry-picked statistics from a few unrepresentative studies were clearly masking an extraordinary decline in rape rates nationwide over the past few decades. Suppose the best available evidence suggested that campuses were, on the whole, safer for women than other environments. Suppose that campus sexual assaults were largely the work of a few sociopaths and nearly always the result of alcohol-induced incapacitation.

Wouldn’t the supposed solution to the campus rape crisis look markedly different?

In a major magazine story that succeeds on all the levels Rolling Stone’s failed, Slate’s Emily Yoffe argues persuasively that we live in the latter world. Confusion about the prevalence of rape and its proximate causes—confusion that Rolling Stone has only worsened—has driven governments and universities to greatly mishandle sexual assault by mandating solutions that wrongly evaluate the scope of the problem while needlessly violating civil liberties, from due process to freedom of association.

Yoffe quickly cuts through the hyperbole about surging assault rates and discovers that college campuses aren’t nearly as dangerous as we have let ourselves believe:

Being young does make people more vulnerable to serious violent crime, including sexual assault; according to government statistics those aged 18 to 24 have the highest rates of such victimization. But most studies don’t compare the victimization rates of students to nonstudents of the same age. One recent paper that does make that comparison, “Violence Against College Women” by Callie Marie Rennison and Lynn Addington, compares the crime experienced by college students and their peers who are not in college, using data from the National Crime Victimization Survey. What the researchers found was the opposite of what Gillibrand says about the dangers of campuses: “Non-student females are victims of violence at rates 1.7 times greater than are college females,” the authors wrote, and this greater victimization holds true for sex crimes: “Even if the definition of violence were limited to sexual assaults, these crimes are more pervasive for young adult women who are not in college.”

Rennison, an associate professor at the School of Public Affairs at the University of Colorado Denver, recognized in an interview that her study goes against a lot of received wisdom. “Maybe that’s not a really popular thing to say,” she said, adding, “I hate the notion that people think sending kids off to college is sending them to be victimized.”

We see this fear manifest itself all the time. After reading Yoffe’s story, I instantly thought of Reason’s Lenore Skenazy, who warns that many parents—as well as the state—have become myopic about the relative dangers their kids face. Skenazy has covered cases where police arrested parents for letting their children play outside by themselves, or wait in the car while mom grabbed groceries. Unrealistic fears about predators waiting around every corner to snatch and abuse kids have prompted the enactment of paranoid laws; these are bad for society and minimize child and parental autonomy, but do little to make children safer.

Consider Skenazy’s video for Reason TV. She discovered that concerns about sex offenders abusing kids on Halloween are entirely misplaced, and laws that force registered sex offenders to turn off their lights or report to a facility during Halloween hours are cruel and needless. In most respects, kids are no less safe on Halloween. In fact, the one great danger to trick-and-treaters is being hit by a car. Skenazy’s research suggests that taking the cops off sex offender patrol and putting them on crossing guard duty would be a far more effective use of police resources.

It’s not that children face no danger; rather, certain dangers are exaggerated in people’s minds (predators) and others minimized (car accidents). And so the policy designed to make children safer ends up focusing on the wrong thing.

It’s the same with rape. Culture does not cause rape. Tasteless jokes do not cause rape. Fraternities are not universal rape factories. Rape is not occurring more frequently. Whatever happened to Jackie, it wasn’t a Silence of the Lambs sort of ordeal as reported by Rolling Stone.

Which is not to say that nothing happened to Jackie, or that rape never happens, or that it has no cause or cultural enablers, or that all frats behave perfectly all the time. Of course rape happens, and it’s a serious matter deserving of everyone’s attention. The police should vigorously investigate accusations and prosecute offenders. Policies can and should be changed to diminish it. But this can only be done if people have a good sense of the scope of the actual problem.

And at the end of the day, obliterating that scope is perhaps the most costly consequence of Rolling Stone’s disastrous abandonment of journalistic principles. The article’s defenders cling—wrongly—to the notion that the world is brimming with Drews, and as such, all Jackies should automatically be believed without question. But some of the article’s critics, who are right about its significant flaws, will nevertheless draw the incorrect conclusion that all accusers are liars. Neither outcome is good for addressing actual sexual assault.

The ubiquity of misleading statistics about rape and absurd policies designed to deter it—including, most notably, affirmative consent policies that make neo-Victorian requirements of students who want to have sex—betray a great deal of societal confusion on this issue. Rolling Stone has worsened the matter, and it’s going to take lot more articles like Yoffe’s to undo the damage.

So, it seems to me that the Rolling Stone isn’t really a good source of information. They have committed some serious journalistic errors. But, one thing is that the Rolling Stone is trying to backpedal, and that is good for the men’s movement, as a whole. Perhaps this will remember this case in the future if you hear of a man that is falsely accused of rape.

In my opinion, if I am ever on a jury for a rape case where the victim is a female, I will try to say proudly, NOT GUILTY… unless the man actually admits it. In general, I believe that every male-initiated rape is a false accusation of rape.

Just saying.

Yet Again “Sugar And Spice And Everything Nice” Is So Full Of Bullshit.


I have gathered news articles concerning three women in the Fargo/Moorhead area that who have not been nice people.

Fargo woman accused of ramming car repeatedly in road rage episode, then punching cop

By Emily Welker on Dec 9, 2014 at 9:13 p.m.

FARGO – A Fargo woman is accused of using her car to repeatedly ram a car ahead of her in an apparent road rage incident that continued with her chasing a couple into their yard.

Michelle Joline Hellerud, 33, is also charged with simple assault on a peace officer. A Fargo police officer pulled Hellerud unconscious from her car and took her to the emergency room, where she allegedly punched him in the face, breaking his glasses, according to court documents filed Monday in Cass County District Court.

Police were dispatched about 9 p.m. Friday to the Woodland Drive and Elm Street area of north Fargo on an apparent road rage incident, documents state. Hellerud’s car had already rear-ended the other one twice, dispatchers told police.

An officer called to the scene reported seeing two vehicles speeding along, with Hellerud’s car nearly touching the car in front of it. As he approached, dispatchers informed him Hellerud had driven up into someone’s yard to continue rear-ending the lead car, court documents state.

After the officer pulled them over, he noticed Hellerud had passed out behind the wheel of her car. He got her out of the car, made sure she had a pulse, and then called an ambulance. The officer noted that Hellerud smelled of alcohol, court documents state.

The officer, Samuel Bollman, followed the ambulance to the emergency room and went inside with Hellerud. When he tried to copy her driver’s license information, she swatted his notebook out of his hands, court documents state. They struggled, with Bollman trying to restrain her and Hellerud allegedly trying to bite him.

As she went for his right hand, he released Hellerud’s right arm, and she punched him in the face, breaking his glasses. Bollman then handcuffed her, court documents state.

Hellerud was charged with one count of aggravated assault, one count of reckless endangerment and one count of simple assault on a peace officer, all Class C felonies.

Her next court appearance is set for Jan. 14.{}

Downtown Fargo hotel owner says woman tried to scam free room by planting used syringe in bed

By Emily Welker on Dec 9, 2014 at 9:58 p.m.

FARGO – The owner of a downtown hotel recently reported he was the victim of an attempted scam when a guest tried to demand a free room for the night after saying she found a syringe in her bed, according to a search warrant filed Friday in Cass County District Court.

The search warrant states that Fargo police were dispatched to the Scandia Hotel at 717 4th St. N. on Dec. 2 after hotel staff called to report suspicious activity.

Staff members told police one of the guests turned in a used hypodermic syringe the previous day and sought financial reimbursement for the room.

Staff told police they recalled stripping the bed before the hotel rented the room out and felt it was impossible for the guest to have discovered the syringe there.

Doug Halverson, owner of the Scandia Hotel, said Tuesday he’s been the victim of guests using cooked-up complaints to score free services and rooms several times before.

He said the woman did not express concerns about her safety when she presented the syringe.

“All she wanted was a free night,” he said.

Halverson said he called police when the woman reported the syringe and asked them to search the hotel for drugs.

“I like to get those people in trouble,” said Halverson, who added that he’s invited police and their drug-sniffing dogs to some of his other properties when he receives complaints about possible drug use on the premises. “It’s bothersome.”

The hotel owner said the drug dog got a hit for narcotics near the room where the syringe was discovered. However, police did not seize anything from the room when they conducted their search.

No one has been charged criminally in connection with the incident.{}

LIVE STREAM at 12:30: Fargo police seek two people linked to Nov. 26 assault in downtown apartment

By Forum News Service on Dec 10, 2014 at 10:07 p.m.

LIVE STREAM: At 12:30, will host the live stream news conference as Fargo police discuss this case.

FARGO – Police here are looking for two people of interest in a case of a 54-year-old male being physically assaulted.

At 12:30 p.m. Nov. 26, authorities were called to an apartment building in the 50 block of Broadway on what was initially an unknown medical situation.

Emergency personnel arrived at the location and found an unconscious 54-year-old male lying on the floor of an unlocked apartment. The victim had serious injuries that appeared to be related to a physical assault. Police say the victim was new to the Fargo area and appeared to have no permanent address.

One of the people of interest is 27-year-old Samantha Lynn Rebold, who police located Wednesday.

The pair who police are still looking for are 42-year-old Angel Aguilera Jaimez and 44-year-old Clayton Lee Lockwood Jr.{}

So, you see, women perpetrate crimes just as men do, and with the same frequencies. The feminists claim that women are as capable as men, but will deny that women commit crimes. So what is it? If women are equal to men, then they must admit that women are just as evil as men.

Just saying.

Lets Talk About False Rape Accusations.


As I have said before with respect to The Rolling Stones reporting that a particular woman at UVA (The University of Virginia) had claimed she was gang raped. Now, as I have said, The Rolling Stones has retracted their article. And as I have said before, this woman, “Jackie”, had probably made a false claim of rape in that incident.

So, how can we tell that that woman had lied?

Well, the primary reason for which I based that opinion that the woman was lying was that the first claim she had made was NOT calling the police. In general, if a woman claimed that she had been raped, but they did not immediately contact the police, she was almost certainly lying about the alleged rape. And I stand by what I have said.

Now, I will first state that I think that any rapist should be castrated, shove a bottle up his ass, kill him, and then really hurt him. However, I still believe that false accusations of rape are probably worse than a rapist.

But, in my opinion, False rape have become a common occurrence. And, of course, I blame it on the feminists. According to the feminists, only 2% of rape accusations are false. But if you think about that bullshit statistic, it makes absolutely no sense at all.

That 2% statistic is not just an erroneous number. It is an outright lie. There is a bunch of evidence that false rape accusations are more common than any false accusations of any other crimes. The accurate statistic has been properly estimated that false accusations of rape is approximately 45%.{}


  • People working in the criminal justice system report that, in light of their own experience, false rape accusations are much higher.{}
  • Rape claims are made for a wider variety of reasons than false accusations of other crimes. That is because a false rape accusation requires no actual physical evidence. Thus, false rapes can be tossed around for whatever reason the woman wants. A girl/woman gets a bad grade in a class, the girl/woman claims that the male teacher/professor raped her. No evidence needed other than her say so.
  • False rape accusations are rarely punished, removing the deterrent to falsely accuse. Really, how many woman who had made false accusations have been punished when the woman’s lies had been discovered? Really. Tell me! A woman can freely make a false rape accusation and if she is found out that there was no rape, she isn’t punished. At all! So, what is the disincentive for a woman making a false accusation of rape? Additionally, while the woman MAY admit that the rape had never occurred, the man’s life had probably been ruined for the rest of his life.
  • There are many studies that have concluded that false accusations of rape are significantly higher than false accusations of other crimes.
  • The higher the rate of rape underreporting, the higher the rate of false rape reports will be.{}
  • In the American Universities, female students are systemically taught that sex is rape when it is not, essentially being taught to make false rape accusations. I suggest that you look at the policies of the following Universities concerning females, rape, etc.
  • The American community opposed to acknowledging the problem of false rape accusations while supporting the faulty 2% figure has an ideological agenda that is notoriously bigoted and anti-male.
  • False rape accusations are the dark side of female nature and socialization.


Just saying.


A False Rape Accusation?


In 2012, a college freshman at the University of Virginia (UVA), “Jackie”, had claimed that she had been raped. Not only that, the woman had claimed that she had been gang-raped by SEVEN men.

The alleged rape had been covered by CNN, PBS, and The Rolling Stones. As a result of the alleged rape, the fraternities at UVA had been shut down, and had penalized the fraternities.

However, there was a bit of a problem in that at the urgent prompting of “Jackie”, the men that she had accused of raping “Jackie” had NEVER been contacted to get their side of the story. That makes it clear that “Jackie” didn’t want them to get the other side of the story. So, what really happened in that alleged rape? This is, of course, there was a legitimate rape.

Since the story that came out in November 2014, The Rolling Stones had detracted their original article, as there were some questions concerning that their trust in “Jackies” veracity.

The shit had hit the fan, in my opinion.

Here are some of the “facts”:

  • The man that “Jackie” named as the primary rapist was NOT a member of the fraternity where “Jackie” claimed that the rape had occurred.
  • There was no frat party on the night that “Jackie” had claimed raped. Not only that, there was no such frat party the entire weekend.
  • “Jackie” herself is now unsure whether the man who, allegedly, lured her into the room where the, alleged, rape occurred was a member of that fraternity in question. It turns out that the alleged primary rapist belongs to a completely different fraternity.
  • “Jackie” had claimed that she had met the alleged primary rapist at the UVA pool in Fall 2012. However, NONE of the fraternity members worked at the UVA poll in Fall of 2012.
  • A friend of “Jackie’s” had later told The Rolling Stones that “he found Jackie that night a mile from the school’s fraternities.” She also related that “Jackie” did not appear to be injured, despite “jackie” claimed that she was grabbed from behind by a large man who fell on her and had crashed with her by a low glass table that night. “Jackie” had appeared uninjured despite emerging from this non-existent party.
  • “Jackie” had NEVER gone to the hospital, and had NEVER reported the alleged incident to the police.
  • “Jackie” did not want the newspaper to contact the men that she had accused of the alleged rape to get their side of the story.

Well, we do not what really happened with respect to the events with “Jackie” in 2012. However, in my opinion and observation, this sounds to me that it is yet another false rape accusation. Given a few of the facts that I had related above, “Jackie” sounds untrustworthy, and it seems to me that, for some reason, she has a hard-on for fraternities or for men, in general. It sounds to me that “Jackie” is a feminist.

Just saying.