Gabriel's adventure with the RCMP
From:
To:
Date:
Tue, Jun 30, 2015, 8:12 PM
Subject:
Gabriel's adventure with the RCMP
Desiree: Like I said: the "authorities" ain't gonna do shit for ya! The office called me after she spoke with Gabriel and she told me that they were just responding to a call about potential child endangerment, but after reviewing your claims, then stopping by the apartment and speaking with Gabriel, they didn't consider it credible. They've entered a record of you submitting a frivolous claim - so the next time you call they'll see that and take you with a grain of salt. Has anything EVER gone right for you? Tell me, if you're so concerned about Gabriel's safety and well being then why haven't you just called him? Or would that have been to complicated for you to think of? Fox
From:
To:
Date:
Tue, Jun 30, 2015, 8:46 PM
Subject:
Re: Gabriel's adventure with the RCMP
Richard, When you said, "Or would that have been to complicated for you to think of?" I believe you meant to use the word, "too." You really should use a dictionary. That sort of poor grammar common amongst the lowest echelon of society makes it difficult to take you seriously. Not that anyone does anyway. As you well know, Gabriel's phone does not receive calls while in Canada. Again, nice try. I chose to only pursue a wellness check this time, and as such no "frivolous claim" exists. To the contrary, I actually had a very nice chat with the RCMP, and they indicated they would be keeping an eye on you. I thanked them for checking in on Gabriel for me. Have a "nice" day. ~Desiree
From:
To:
Date:
Tue, Jun 30, 2015, 9:20 PM
Subject:
Re: Gabriel's adventure with the RCMP
You are correct: it should have been "too", not "to". Also, I should have said "officer", not "office". Those were typos - not due to a lack of knowledge or understanding of the English language. A dictionary would not have helped. But thank you for the input. Regarding reaching Gabriel by phone: you know I have a land line, which you are able to call him on; you also know my mobile number; you also have his email address. So your claim is frivolous. Regarding the frivolous claim - you're incorrect. You've used police resources to perform a completely unnecessary task, based on false claims. They most certainly entered it as a frivolous report. The police don't allocate resources to do "wellness checks". I'd point out to you that the RCMP is the agency that administers PALs - they know everything about me. They knew, before they came by, that there are multiple handguns and rifles in the home because all firearms have to be registered in Canada. There's nothing for them to "keep an eye on" as you say. Fox
From:
To:
Date:
Tue, Jun 30, 2015, 9:42 PM
Subject:
Re: Gabriel's adventure with the RCMP
One more thing: Constable Smith provided me the case/report #. It's 2015-29196. As soon as I get a copy of the report I'll be sure to share it on your web site. As far as I know, case numbers are not assigned for "wellness checks". But I guess we'll find out EXACTLY what you claimed when I receive the report, right?
From:
To:
Date:
Tue, Jul 07, 2015, 7:54 PM
Subject:
Re: Gabriel's adventure with the RCMP
I received a letter from the Ministry of Children and Family Development today, wherein they say your claim was that you had no idea of the whereabouts of Gabriel. Fox
From:
To:
Date:
Sun, Jul 12, 2015, 4:19 PM
Subject:
Re: Gabriel's adventure with the RCMP
According to the attached letter, which I received from Children and Family Development (the equivalent of Child Protective Services), which is dated the same day you contacted the "authorities" falsely claiming that you had no knowledge of the whereabouts of your son, you claimed...exactly that! Therefore, your claim to the "authorities" was not only frivolous, but plainly false. In the course of taking your report they had asked you whether you had made any attempt to contact your allegedly "missing" child - to which you would have responded that you have been unable to contact him. That would have been a lie. You made no such attempt. Therefore, you are, once again, wrong! How is it that you can be wrong so much of the time? How is it even possible? And why do you lie about things that are so easy for me to verify? Don't you know, by now, that I'm going to rub it in your face? Then post it on the internet? What's wrong with you? Fox P.S. Both the RCMP and the Child and Family Development worker referred to me as "Patrick Fox", which means you must have told them that is my name. Which means you acknowledge that is my name and you only refer to me as Richard Riess in your correspondence with me because you believe it will annoy me. Isn't that kind of stupid and petty? I mean, why don't you focus on things of actual substance - is it that you can't actually find any fault in me?
From:
To:
Date:
Tue, Jul 14, 2015, 7:51 AM
Subject:
Re: Gabriel's adventure with the RCMP
So no retort, huh? Not surprising. You make up bullshit to try to save face, I provide proof to the contrary, you scamper away with your tail between your legs. Same as always, I guess.