Thursday, December 30, 2010

Oh Canada! - Happy New Year

More "Seasonal" greetings. No stunt doubles.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Saturday, December 25, 2010

Happy Holidays

For what it's worth.

More →

Sphere: Related Content

Wednesday, December 22, 2010

City of Irving Police Department, Report #10-33189

Oh Greg....
I'll see your civil lawsuit, and raise you to one criminal complaint. Why do they know you so well there? Never mess with my family you towering idiot.

You see Greg, once you were discharged (retired/quit), your internal investigation file at UNT? That became "probable cause," or "reasonable suspicion."
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Tuesday, December 21, 2010

Half Right? Bad Blart (da Big Prick) Speaks

So, if he lost his job, but still is working the court case, I'm half right. In response to a letter to him titled "Loser," the content of which was one word; "Coward," the Loser Speaks:
"Mr. McBryde,

I don't normally check your blog on a regular basis anymore. I don't know where you got your information on court, but I was at the 9:00 a.m. docket call. In addition, I filed the non-served returns for Ledbetter and Medvecky, in addition to Plaintiff's 1st Amended Motion for Service by Publication. The return for Schroeder was returned by the New York County Sheriff's Office as non-served today also. I have attached a file-stamped copy of that motion for service by publication, along with a motion to reset the hearing for the Temporary Injunction until such time that service could be accomplished on the defendants (including you). Judge Tobolowsky has taken the motions under advisement.

If you wish to respond to the suit prior to being served by publication, you can execute a waiver of service and file your answer with the clerk of the 298th District Court, 600 E. Commerce St. #101, Dallas, TX 75202. I have attached a copy of such a waiver. If you chose to be a man, to stand up and answer the lawsuit, this would be the fastest and easiest way to proceed. You of course do not have to do so, you can wait until you are served by publication, but one way or another, you will be served.

I have attached a copy of the complaint, although I believe that you have already seen it.

To make it perfectly clear to you, I am not dropping the lawsuit.

I got my info verbally from court employees yesterday by phone, and they told me no one showed. You say someone did. (ASSuming the writer of this letter is the EX Sgt. Gregory J. Prickett.) My only official knowledge of this case is that it existed, and has been dropped due to non action.

Serve me and prove otherwise you yellow piece of crap who attacks young women as a substitute for manly confrontation.

My Answer to the Yellow (ex) Mall Cop of Texas:
"You're still a loser and a coward. I don't know who "" is. Never have. If you are one in the same as the UNT Prick, great. I don't have any way of knowing that and I don't open attachments from "suspects" like that.

Yellow cowards who threaten my daughter are SCUM. If you are that SCUM, PRICKett, you are the worst type of sniveling low life. You are no man. You disgrace the law. You are a creepy stalking sociopathic sadist who hides behind a badge and attacks young women to settle differences men do, face to face, honorably and publicly.

Own up. Man up. It's never too late.

You haven't ever tried to serve any of us. Barratry is a felony, but oddly, only in Texas."
I sent the letter to all three known addresses that are answered, by "TxBluesMan" (AKA Gregory Jack Prickett/Bad Blart). Bad Blart only answered from the "gmail" address that I have no way of certifying is Gregory Jack Prickett. I called Dallas County yesterday, I had them list the "defendants" in Bad Blart's lawsuit and I was in fact one of them and I said, "I'm one of those people," (if in fact I am the same Hugh McBryde). There are other "Hugh McBrydes" if only a few others, in this country. The court said no one showed. As of this publication, there is no new court date.

This is my only official knowledge so far.

I really have no reason to ask Dallas County about this matter again.

If Texas Judges set court dates for 9am, and no one shows and then they show later and the Judge allows this crap to continue, that's really new information for me. I always thought "no show" amounted to "dismissed case" or "default judgement." No show on the part of the plaintiff? Dismissed case.

So I'll grant "Bad Blart" the benefit of the doubt for the purposes of discussion only and say the case is still active. For the purposes of discussion. So I'm half right. Or two thirds.

Bad Blart, the Big Prick is still Yellow. He's still a Coward. I note he doesn't claim to be employed. I note he doesn't deny (again) being TxBluesMan of Coram Non Judice infamy. 1-2-3-4 (right) 1 wrong (again for the purposes of discussion).

That's 4-1 Bad Blart. I'm batting .800. You're still a loser.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Monday, December 20, 2010

Sgt. Gregory J. Prickett loses Job, loses Court Case (Job Loss Confirmed w/UNT admin)

I have now officially ascertained that I was a defendant in case DC-10-13278M in Dallas County Texas' "Civil Division." Also, "Sam" becomes the second UNT Police Dept. Member to confirm that he no longer works there. Greg was a "no show" in court today.

This makes it Hugh Darby McBryde 1 Billion, SGT. Gregory Jack Prickett ZERO. Game, set, match, FINIS. That means what I accused him of is in fact TRUE. TxBluesman/GregJackP and what ever other stupid alias he's using or has used, violated the LAW to SMEAR his opposition. He's a liar, a felon, a coward, a sadist and now an EX Cop.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Wednesday, December 15, 2010

Gone for Good?

That would be my thought.
Calls to UNT now get the response from his (former?) fellow officers that Sgt. Gregory J. Prickett "no longer works there (UNT).
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Thursday, December 02, 2010

You doubted me? Just read the latest.

Oh, you doubted me did you? You thought I was spinning a wild yarn of male bovine manure reading too much into the details of yesterdays arraignment of Warren Jeffs? Just read how the local rag immediately characterized Warren's arrival in Texas. I mean, they LEAD with the verbal version of the negative photo op, as if it means anything:
The San Angelo Standard-Times - "Warren Jeffs, the leader of the polygamy sanctioning Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, walked into the Tom Green County courthouse for an arraignment with a gray sweater tucked into the chains that surrounded his waist, covering the top of the bright orange jumpsuit."
If you're BLIND you're going to get the message. If photos don't make that big an impression on you, you're going to get the message. If you read a text version or a print only version or some reprinted version of the story emailed to you without a picture.

You're going to get the message.

Warren was in a gray sweater (sweatshirt) and a BRIGHT ORANGE jumpsuit. About the only thing left to the imagination is WHO wears BRIGHT ORANGE?

Most of us reading the article know it's a PRISON INMATE.

You're supposed to look at Warren and think of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.

Not like Khalid wants you to see him, but as a criminal. And we all know that criminals are unshaven, disheveled and have just been rousted out of bed.

Granted, Khalid is guilty, he confessed. In addition Khalid does not have the rights of a US Citizen, because he's not one (Warren is). If you want to know the remaining stereotype that no racial group or gender will ever give up it's "good looking" vs "bad looking." We want to believe that the disheveled and slovenly in appearance look that way because it's a reflection of their true moral character. When we go out in public, we put on our best for the most part. If he ever goes to trial, Khalid will try to appear as he wants to be seen, so will Warren but neither man is how they appear at their best or worst. They are what they are.

An American, like Warren, is entitled to be pure as the driven snow in front of the law, until it is proven otherwise. We need to remember that, and not what the Government/Media complex wants us to believe.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Wednesday, December 01, 2010

Cost is NOT a factor, including your freedoms....

The Three Piggies and Warren
Does Government not care what rights or treasure of yours it takes to expand it's power? Does a former drill instructor make a really bad therapist?

The money, while it is probably a prodigous amount, is not important to the State of Texas.  Texas thinks it's probably some amount YOU would think is inappropriate, considering the lack of prosecutorial success (vs Warren) elsewhere.

How do we know it's too much?

They'd tell you if it was cheap.  (Either that, or they don't know, which ought to bother you as well.  Strickland says he doesn't know.)

It doesn't matter to Texas, they got their desired photo op. Not Warren as depicted in the last post, but Warren in prison sweats and prison orange with what looks like a bit of a 50+ five o'clock shadow, in irons, flanked by fat pigs dressed in their best.


You think I meant something pejorative?

Those guys aren't a bit porky looking to you?

Considering Mr. Jeffs is more or less a cardiologists ideal by comparison, Texas did need to "weight" (sorry, no, not really) the photo op in their favor.  I've been driving through Texas a lot recently and they are the most cliché bound bureaucracy I know of. "Don't Mess with Texas" one Government billboard preaches, and yet another declares; "the Eyes of Texas are upon You."

So when it comes to whether or not Texas will spend infinite amounts of Tax Payer $$$ to get a picture of Warren looking his worst with a three overweight cowboy wannabes flanking him like he was going to shoot his way out of the "joint," or be rescued by "King Willie, the Thug," gangster style, they spare no expense.
The San Angelo Standard-Times - "Jerry Strickland, spokesman for the Attorney General’s Office, said they flew Jeffs into San Angelo from Utah at 9 p.m. Tuesday night and then drove him to Big Lake.

'Attorney General Abbott and his office his prosecutors have been handling the prosecution of cases related to the YFZ ranch,' Strickland said, as he walked into the courtroom Wednesday morning. '... Today 7 of 12 men have been convicted of sexually assaulting children. This case stems from that action.'

When asked about costs related to trying Jeffs in Texas, Strickland said he doesn’t have specific numbers, but that cost is not a factor.

'What I do know is, Attorney General Abbott is committed to protecting children in this state,' Strickland said. 'You cant’ put a price tag on protecting children and because of that, this case will be handled with prosecutors (from) the AG’s (attorney general’s) office.' "
The great difficulty is that they are not just spending your tax dollars (and with the "co-mingling" of Federal and State money that is Revenue Sharing, yes, it's yours too), they're spending your freedom as well.

Texas wanted to make this "statement" as you see above, and Texas wanted their picture. Now they've got it. In the process they ran roughshod over Warren's right to a "speedy trial" (it doesn't matter if he didn't want it before, he wants it now) and they got to treat him like a fugitive. No one in Texas wanted a Dapper Warren Jeffs showing up in wing tips and business suit, with stylish coiffure, fatherly appearance, etc, walking through the front door and surrendering to authorities, they wanted to fly him out and drag him around much like Achilles is supposed to have done with Hector after defeating him in battle.

Well, there you go Texas. And America? There went your money, though granted, it was mostly Texas dollars (except they won't account for it), and there went your freedom, with Warren. You have to decide: Does the prosecution of a man for crimes Texas probably can't prove warrant the setting aside of the rights your founding fathers insisted on having for each citizen PRIOR to signing our Constitution in favor of the rights of the State to extradite?

I think you know my answer. What's yours?
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Warren Jeffs in Texas

Personally, I think they should have fought it out to the US Supreme court, but I don't really know how such a process might work, or if it is available to Warren. I agree with his attorneys that this effectively ends any attempt to prosecute Mr. Jeffs in Utah, it's just that you won't hear that said in the upcoming stories about his trial in Texas.
The Salt Lake Tribune - "(Warren Jeffs') first court hearing is scheduled for 11 a.m. (today), a spokesman for the Texas Attorney General’s Office said."
That's in ten minutes.
More →

Sphere: Related Content