Don't Miss

UNT cop fired after blogging from work

By Managing-Editor on January 28, 2011

By Josh Pherigo / Managing Editor –

A veteran UNT police officer has filed an appeal after he was fired in December on accusations that he violated the university’s computer-use policy.

UNT Dallas Police Coordinator Gregory J. Prickett, a 20-year member of the department, was placed on administrative leave in October while investigators looked into complaints that he had blogged and edited Wikipedia articles at work.

In a three-page complaint submitted to UNT on Oct. 1, Hugh McBryde, a long-haul truck driver from Missoula, Mont., details the escalation of an online feud between himself and a blogger he said he believed to be Prickett.

McBryde alleges Prickett used a variety of pseudonyms to harass him and defame his character after the two men quarreled on various online forums over the legality of a 2008 law enforcement raid on the Yearning for Zion Ranch in Eldorado, Texas.

McBryde’s complaint states that a blogger using the screen names “GregJackP” and “TXBluesman,” among others, began posting online statements in August, warning “Past, Present and Future employers” not to hire McBryde because “he finds 7 yr old girls sexually attractive.”

McBryde said he decided to seek the identity of the anonymous blogger after he said he felt threatened when pictures of his grown daughter were posted to an online forum.

Prickett denies the allegations and said he has filed a Dallas County lawsuit against McBryde and several others whom he said have libeled him.

“Nothing that was in Hugh McBryde’s statement was true,” Prickett said. “He is trying to ruin my life.”

With help from several others, McBryde said he was able to track the Internet Protocol address from a comment “GregJackP” left in a Wikipedia discussion on global warming. The IP address was traced to a computer in the “security shack” on the UNT Dallas Campus, McBryde said.

Prickett said he occasionally browsed the Internet and used Wikipedia during his shift, but said UNT’s computer-use policy allows for incidental Internet use if it does not affect job performance.

“I’ve gotten the best performance reviews of my career since I’ve been in Dallas,” said Prickett, who once received a commendation for performing life-saving CPR when a man collapsed on campus. “I obviously haven’t done too bad a job.”

Prickett said he was not satisfied with the way the police department handled his investigation.

“I was surprised by how poor the investigation was. They didn’t do any background checks on McBryde,” Prickett said. “From the idea of the questions they were asking, it seemed like they were really just making a case against me.”

Police officials declined to comment because the investigation is still ongoing.

Prickett said if he could go back, he would have handled the situation differently.

“If I had to do it all over again, I would have never said a word,” he said. “I probably would have just kept my mouth shut because it’s been a great job with great people.”

Prickett said he is looking forward to the results of his appeal.

Denton Attorney Richard Gladden represented former UNT student Gus Elliott in a 2005 lawsuit against Prickett and another officer.

The lawsuit, which Prickett went on to win, stemmed from an incident in 2003.

Elliot received a chipped tooth and a cut on his chin that required stitches when he became involved in an altercation with the two officers during a traffic stop, Gladden said.

During the course of the suit, Gladden said he found himself the target of a character assassination attempt by a blogger on a law enforcement forum.

Under a pseudonym, which Gladden could not recall, the person posted information about criminal convictions Gladden had received years prior and called the attorney’s credibility into question, Gladden said.

Gladden said he believes the blogger was Prickett.

“It seemed to be a kind of immature way of dealing with the situation he found himself in,” Gladden said. “It’s the whole idea of him, rather than dealing with things in court, attacking my character anonymously on the Internet.”

When asked, Prickett said he had no knowledge of the incident.

CORRECTION: This article previously stated that UNT Dallas Police Coordinator Gregory J. Prickett received an accommodation instead of a commendation. The correction has been made.

About Managing-Editor

189 Comments

Bill Medvecky

January 28, 2011 at 11:08 am

Mr. Prickett, using the handle “Texasbluesman” has spent hours and hours on the UNT computers defaming those he considers “Wrong”, at least in his little mind.

As a rent-a-cop for UNT, he has illegally received and supplied Court Evidence to his “Friends” while libeling and slandering those he disagrees with.

He fancies himself a legal “Expert”, while in truth, he’s a cowardly fraud who hides in the shadows on anonymity. (At least until we outed him for the fake he is).

He has openly posted un redacted pictures of children attempting to present them in sexually titillating situations to his audience. He has posted, on UNT computers and on their time, medical information protected under HIPAA guidelines.

Mr. Prickett claims he is suiing over these claims I just made. I’m still waiting.

One of Mr. Pricketts biggest problems is that he tries to sue people in the Dallas County Civil Courts using the worthless checks of Denton Attorney, Natalie Malonis. If he needs a loan to further the Lawsuit, I’ll be happy to advance him the funds.

The last thing in the world Mr. Prickett wants to do is to come face to face with any of his victims, he much prefers watching his rent-a-cop buddies bash in students faces on campus.
Hugh McBryde

January 28, 2011 at 5:38 pm

Why would I want to ruin Gregory Prickett’s life? Until he was linked to “TxBlueMan” I would have never even known who Greg was. I could not possibly wish to ruin Greg’s life.
Hugh McBryde

January 28, 2011 at 7:10 pm

Why would I want to ruin Gregory Prickett’s life? Until he was linked to “TxBluesMan” I would have never even known who Greg was. I could not possibly have wished to ruin Greg’s life. I did not know him.
Stephanie Marshall

January 28, 2011 at 9:27 pm

Nothing Texas Blues Man published was protected under HIPAA because he is neither a health care provider or a health insurance company worker.
As for Hugh McBryde, Mr. Prickett never made any comment regarding McBryde’s interest in 7 yr olds, this information is derived from McBryde’s own comments on Christian chat forums – see here –

http://64.119.179.84/forums/showthread.php?t=23839&page=22
K. Brister

January 28, 2011 at 11:08 pm

This is a shame. Hugh McBryde devotes his time and energy to ruining the lives of people with whom he is philosophically opposed. He did the same thing to Rev. Marty Braemer over a personal matter that did not involve Hugh even remotely. Hugh tried to have Colorado Springs Lt Maggie Santos investigated and fired because he dreamed up an improper conspiracy between Santos and a criminal defendant.

Hugh has been hunting “Texas Bluesman” for two years, and when someone passed along identifying information — Hugh made false allegations of HIPAA violations and extortion. He alleged improper use of police equipment to run background checks on Hugh and his family. He had absolutely no basis for such allegations becausr it didnt happen, and none of Hugh’s complaints were sustained. In other words, they were all unfounded and groundless.

Prickett was fired for blogging at work after 20 years of service. Even Hugh acknowledges that’s not a good reason to fire a cop after being on the job 20 years. This termination looks to be politically motivated or personal. Maybe Prickett will win his appeal and have success in his lawsuit against McBryde. The investigation should be closely scrutinized by the University.

Hugh should be charged with making a false report to peace officers. He knew there was no basis for his accusations — he was guessing and hoping, and that should never be the basis of a police report of criminal conduct. On his blog today, Hugh admits that he made up the accusations of extortion and threats because he thought it would have a greater impact.

It is shameful of this publication to give Gladden another shot at Prickett after Gladden lost his case against Prickett. That’s not news, that’s sour grapes and spite from a sore loser.
Hugh McBryde

January 29, 2011 at 7:47 am

Brister, mistake a rhetorical remark for something else. More than likely though, you do that intentionally. Try this syllogism. If blogging from work is not enough to fire a “Peace Officer,” (a phrase I note that Greg used in conversations with me, hmmmm…), then if he is fired, he was fired for something else or more than that.

Perhaps you should consider that he was blogging about something.

Perhaps you should consider it may well have been what I was complaining about.

Brister, you also seem to know something about this business, perhaps you should have come forward. The very public fight has been going on four months.

Stephanie Marshall seems to realize that TxBluesMan is Gregory Jack Prickett, formerly of the UNT Police force, for she (?) says:

“Nothing Texas Blues Man published was protected under HIPAA because he is neither a health care provider or a health insurance company worker.
As for Hugh McBryde, Mr. Prickett never made any comment regarding McBryde’s interest in 7 yr olds….”

This equates TBM with Prickett far more than the link documents my supposed interest in 7 year olds.

I complained about Sgt. Prickett with details. He was fired. The logical conclusion is that the bureaucracy that actively obstructed me, and seemed to also hate me as well while I complained, fired Sgt. Prickett because the evidence was overwhelming and generally supported my accusations.

You don’t get charged for “making a false report to peace officers,” when the report is true.

My complaint is here:

http://hughmcbryde.blogspot.com/2010/10/to-lt-west-gilbreath-unt-police-cid.html

The relevant portion of the complaint, that speaks to your claim of my “interest” in 7 year olds, something YOU have known about for a while is as follows:

“The remarks are grossly out of context. The larger discussion says that in theory I would consider a mentally, physically and spiritually mature 7 year old, if there was such a person, and I had both judicial and parental permission, but that I still almost certainly, wouldn’t be interested. This has been sliced down to the smallest quotation to make it appear that I had interest in a 7 year old, and frequently quoted at the blog. I have no such interests.

Furthermore ‘pedophilia’ is clinically defined as interest in pre-pubescent individuals, and I clearly stated the opposite consideration in the discussion quoted. Legally, if there is such a thing as ‘pedophilia,’ it has to do with illegal contact, and I stated clearly that all such considerations would have to be with judicial sanction, thus removing myself from any legal definition of pedophilia, if it exists. I do not have an interest in 7 year olds and I have not been interested in young girls since I was a young boy myself.

Slanders such as the above, have have been repeated many times in comments and in posts over the past two years at both ‘Coram non Judice’ and at ‘FLDS Texas.’ I have lost more than one job in that time frame and had prospective employers suddenly drop interest in me and cease communications with me after initial avid interest. It is not unreasonable for me to believe that ‘research’ on me may have led to a discovery of such charges and a reconsideration of me as an employee, or potential employee.”

I would still point out that a 20 year GOVERNMENT employee lost his job. I can’t whine, yell, or threaten that into happening. Government employees are augured in tighter than tics. No one at UNT would dare fire the former “peace officer” Prickett, unless they had an air tight case against him. I suspect I only scratched the surface and the heading “Blogging from Work,” when a final report is to be had, will contain sub headings.
Stephanie Marshall

January 29, 2011 at 9:30 am

McBryde thinks that sexual contact with 7 yr olds is ok, if they are menstruating. This is not the statement of a rational person.
Stephanie Marshall

January 29, 2011 at 9:48 am

There is nothing slanderous about it. McBryde states clearly in the link provided by me above that it is ok for a man to marry a menstruating 7 yr old female in his opinion. His own words, not Mr. Prickett’s.
Hugh McBryde

January 29, 2011 at 11:25 am

As you wish. It is what you want me to say, so in your mind, it’s what I said. As far as YOU are concerned. I stated repeatedly that I could not imagine that I would ever find such a person, nor did I wish to. I did say that if you brought me a physically mature, spiritually mature and mentally mature person, if she was 7 ALSO, I’d think about it and probably dismiss it out of hand because I have no interest in 7 year olds.

You twist a remark that is intellectually honest into a claim that I am interested in 7 year olds.

I’m not.

I haven’t been.

I won’t be.

This continues to be the equivalent of asking me if I’d think about living on Mars. In fact, living on Mars would be something I would actually want to do.

You have to find the Mars Rocket first, and get me a ticket. You go find the physically, spiritually, mentally mature 7 year old, and I promise, I’ll give her some thought. It will probably for about 15 seconds, the first 14 of which will be taken up by my stunned disbelief, the last second being about all the time I would need to say no to the idea.

This has been and continues to be my position that I tie the beginning of consideration of a female as marriageable to the onset of menses. It is the Biblical standard as supported by several verses, one in Corinthians, and another in Song of Songs. No one needs to marry anyone urgently after that condition begins to occur and I have zero desire to find and wed such a person.

For me, marriage requires the permission of parents. I also glean this principle from scripture. Thus after you find me my “Mar Rocket,” you’re going to have to buy me that ticket, and in the case of the aforementioned 7 year old, if and only if I actually ended up giving real consideration to the idea, based on her resemblance in ALL WAYS to an adult, I would then be compelled to ask her father for his permission.

That’s TWO tickets on a “Mars Rocket” you need to buy me.

Then, in THIS country, you’ll need a Judge’s permission.

Good luck with all of those. That’s THREE ticket’s you need to buy me on the “Mars Rocket” that doesn’t even exist yet.

Come back when you have all those things lined up, and if I say yes to it, then you may claim I have interest in a SPECIFIC 7 year old, not in “7 year olds.”

All I have been doing all along is using absurdity to illustrate the absurd.

The absurd is that you can say that prior to a certain age, a human female is not marriage material, and that after that age, she is.

You don’t believe that, I don’t believe that, only our laws reflect that value.
Stephanie Marshall

January 29, 2011 at 12:01 pm

You are clear in your post above, McBryde. You think that sex with a menstruating 7 year old is fine and it is Biblically justified. For that, you were banned from Theology On Line. Greg Prickett didn’t make that claim, an anonymous poster on his blog reported about the circumstances regarding your posts on Theology On Line and the fact that you were banned from that blog. I didn’t say here that you were interested in a 7 yr old,even though you did say you would “check her out.” I just said you think it’s ok to wed and bed a 7 yr old from a religious standpoint – because YOU SAID IT.
Bill Medvecky

January 29, 2011 at 9:31 pm

The above is a pretty good demonstration of exactly why we decided to out Mr. Prickett as “Txbluesman”.

He attracts the bigots and haters like moth’s to a flame and then stands back and cowers in the shadows.

If he had any real class, he would have been spewing his venom against the Mormon women and children of the YFZ Ranch using his real name as we do. Yes, that leaves us open to attack, but since we have nothing to hide or be ashamed of, we don’t fear being outed.

As TBM, he talked a bunch about “Integrity” on his site. The fact is, he has none and he knew that from the beginning.
Michael Fullmer

January 29, 2011 at 10:35 pm

As someone who has experienced the “integrity” of TxBluesMan first hand — having been accused of being “pro-polygamy” and “pro-pedophilia” by said sub-human for having the temerity to question the legality of the raid on YFZ ranch on 4th Amendment grounds — I have to tell you that his firing by the University seems to me evidence of more than just “blogging from work”. I believe the University’s investigation found that Pricket at minimum violated its code of ethics, at worst…who knows? As Hugh so eloquently put it, you don’t get fired from a 20 year government job for blogging from work. There’s fire behind this smoke.
Randy Stevens

January 30, 2011 at 8:16 am

I’m guessing Pickett received a “commendation”, not “an accommodation” for the CPR assist.
K. Brister

January 30, 2011 at 10:20 pm

Hugh McBryde,

You are ignoring the possibility that Prickett’s termination was improper or unjustified. He is appealing after all. Have you received notice from the UNT police department stating that any of your allegations have been sustained? No, you haven’t. Because they were not sustained.

Is it really appropriate of you to be speculating about some hypothetical wrongdoing by Prickett, without any basis, when you are a defendant in a defamation suit? Get a lawyer.

As I mentioned above, you went after an anonymous internet poster and sought to have him fired because you have a different opinion than him. That’s very troubling. And to Bill Medvecky above, it’s troubling that you are bragging about destroying a person’s livelihood because you can’t tolerate his opinion (yet you are calling him intolerant/hater/bigot). That does not reflect well on you, as you seem to think it does.
K. Brister

January 30, 2011 at 10:26 pm

Michael Fulmer,

You are complaining about someone calling you “pro-polygamy” and “pro-pedophilia”, apparently joyous over his termination because he called you a name you don’t like. Yet, you just referred to this person as “sub-human”. Have you called him any other names that he might consider offensive?

Do you see the irony here?

Question: are you supportive of the FLDS, and do you believe that they should not be prosecuted for polygamy and/or sexual assaults? I presume by the offense you have taken at the descriptive labels that you are in favor of the prosecutions, and there is no basis for the labels, right?
Hugh McBryde

January 31, 2011 at 1:56 am

Sustained? HE WAS FIRED. 20 year veteran of the UNT Police force. I take it you then concede the innocence of all the FLDS men convicted so far because they have APPEALED. Also because an Arizona court has already ruled the raid both illegal and unlawful.

How, by the way, do you know WHAT & WHAT I HAVE NOT received from UNT? I don’t need a lawyer. Texas courts have no jurisdiction with regard to me. I have received no notice. My address is posted at my blog & Greg continues to “attempt” to serve me at an obscure old address that he could have gotten ONLY from my OLD DRIVER’S LICENSE RECORD. How did he get that? My last official word on Greg’s case is that the judge hasn’t signed his motion. I’ll get a lawyer if she DOES & I receive notice. This wouldn’t be YOU Natalie? Would it? I continue to note that Bill, Michael & I all use our real names, you don’t. One more curious observation: Why can’t can’t a FORMER “Peace Officer” serve any of 5 adults whose name he KNOWS, instead, he CONSISTENTLY attempts to serve them at places they USED TO LIVE , long ago? How does he know these places? Why has he chosen to attempt service ONLY in places he can be CERTAIN we DO NOT LIVE?
K. Brister

January 31, 2011 at 10:32 am

I am using my real name. Are you going to try to get me fired? Please don’t.

There are certain procedures that have to be followed when an investigation follows a complaint made against a sworn officer. By law, if you’re the complainant, you have to be notified if your complaint is sustained. I know that you received no such notification, because I know your complaint was not sustained. You are making many assumptions about things, but you have only a little bit of information.

We’ll find out if blogging from work is sufficient grounds to terminate a 20-year veteran. Intuitively, it seems we all agree it isn’t.

About your lawsuit – I dont know anything about it other than what’s in the article that says youre being sued for defamation. Yet, here you are trying to smear the person who’s suing you. Common sense says you should watch your mouth, but I have no stake in it so I’ll keep my advice to myself.

You seem to be very “passionate” about your opinions, which seems to be the basis for your attempt to ruin the life of someone you don’t even know. It’s fascinating to observe, but I think I’ll make this my last comment before you redirect all that fury at me. I’d like to keep my job.
Havok

January 31, 2011 at 12:26 pm

@Bill Medvecky, UNT officers are not rent-a-cops. They are real police officers.
Michael Fullmer

January 31, 2011 at 12:43 pm

In response to K. Brister:

You’re saying that I’m upset with TxBluesMan because he called me names? Seriously? Asserting that someone is “pro-pedophilia” is more than name-calling, friend! It’s the kind of smear that can get someone wrongfully arrested. And I’m not “joyous” over his termination. I’m glad his hate and his smears are no longer being flung all over the Internet like an ape’s feces, but I take no pleasure in his termination. That he was terminated seems to me to be evidence of more than just “blogging from work”. That was my point, which you obviously missed.

Have I called TxBluesMan names? Sure. I call him the Caput a Palos on my blog, in a tongue-in-cheek jab at his Latinate blog name, Coram Non Judice. I also refer to him on my blog as being “pictured” when the picture in question is of a donkey in a hole. So what? This was never about name-calling. This was about slanderous allegations made by an anonymous coward against a non-anonymous individual who had done him no wrong, but rather simply had a difference of opinion WRT Constitutional support for the YFZ raid.

As for the FLDS, I am not a fan of their doctrine nor am I a fan of polygamy in general. But I will stand up against any attempt to deny them their rights under the Constitution. If we co-opt the rights of the unpopular or the “weird”, it’s only a matter of time until the rights of all are co-opted.
K. Brister

January 31, 2011 at 2:17 pm

Michael Fullmer,

As I understand it, the slanderous allegations were made by Hugh McBryde and others who accused Prickett of hosting child pornography on his work computer, disseminating protected health records in violation of State and Federal law, misuse of government equipment by doing background checks on Hugh and family, and an admittedly fabricated claim of threat by extortion.

Those allegations go well beyond name-calling on a blog. Not only did Hugh and others publish those things on their blogs, Hugh made these allegations as part of a formal written complaint delivered to the UNT police department. All of those allegations were false, and Hugh had no basis for making them. And yes, such allegations do obviously have real-life consequences.

As for the FLDS, sexually assaulting children and practicing polygamy is not just unpopular or “weird”, those acts are criminal offenses and are not protected by the Constitution.
Michael Fullmer

January 31, 2011 at 3:32 pm

K. Brister,

Seriously, is this Prickett posting under an alias? How is it you know so much about the “slanderous” allegations you accuse Hugh and others of having made? Have you been following Coram Non Judice, The Modern Pharisee, Ye Olde Journalist, Sore Toes and a Bleeding Heart, freethefldschildren, and The Vulture Lurks during the past two years? Because, I can assure you, if you had, unless you possess the kind of malevolent prejudice shown by TxBluesMan, you would realize that you have your facts backwards.

Prickett is NOT the victim here. He is a vile bully.
Bill Medvecky

January 31, 2011 at 4:53 pm

First, “Real” Policemen don’t post pictures of children trying to get their readership to drool over the, at least not the cops I know. Maybe it’s different in Texas.

Secondly, when it comes to having sex with teens and pre-teens, Texas leads the Nation, so I have to assume you boys know what you are talking about.

Let’s not forget, until the FLDS came to town, 14 year olds were fair game in Texas. ONLY after Hilderbrans Mormon Law, were they “Illegal” for the Mormons to touch. But that don’t stop the good old boys.

Matter of fact, the San Angelo Independent School District has over 300 little girls between the 6th and 12th Grades registered in school either with fat bellies or little babies, so you guys are STILL making the Ranch look like a bunch of amateurs in the baby making business.
Hugh McBryde

January 31, 2011 at 5:23 pm

K. Brister, I have no intention of calling your employer or getting you fired. You’re not posting pictures of my children, nor are you calling me a pedophile. Well, maybe a pedophile, but join the chorus of wrongful accusers. I would still want to know how you are in a position to KNOW that I have received no notice of Mr. Prickett’s firing.

The fact is, I HAVE. OFFICIALLY. FROM THE HIGHEST SOURCES AT THE UNIVERSITY. If Mr. Prickett was fired as a result of the discovery of his blogging from work, I again submit to you that it is unlikely to the extreme that Gregory Jack Prickett, after 20 years of service in a Government Job, lost that job because he “blogged from work.” Again, that is just the benign heading on the book, whose chapters reveal WHAT it is he was blogging about and that is the reason for which he was discharged. I am certain of this.

There may in fact be more reasons, such as how he came about the information he “blogged.” TxBluesMan had access.

About MY Lawsuit? I don’t have one.

Several people have shown up her posting in favor of the former Sgt Prickett, some or all of whom can be tied to the “FLDS Texas” blog. Why do they care?

You’ve nothing to fear from me Brister, provided you don’t threaten my family, or are later found to be part of a group that participated in such acts. I did not try to get Greg fired. Let’s be clear about that. What I did was contact the employer of my antagonist, TxBluesMan, and point out that TxBluesman was extorting and/or blackmailing and/or punishing me through publication of my daughter’s picture. This is akin to the cliché of a gangster driving by your house, taking pictures of your family, and then mailing them to you because you are an enemy, and pointing out that you have a “nice family.”

It’s a threat, and I took it as such.

I have long known who several of my antagonists are. I do nothing about it because it would be inappropriate at best. “Betty” (the name she uses on her posts) over at the FLDS Texas site continually claimed for a long time that I was stalking her, simply because I mentioned to her as proof that I don’t care to harm her, that I’ve known who she was for a while, and didn’t care and wasn’t going to reveal it. She then exploded into transports of tortured cries that I had stalked her, when all that I had done was simply note who she was in passing on to a different destination. As you can see, I’ve NEVER done anything to harm Betty, but she claimed for over a year that I was stalking her. Betty’s private life and identity are not relevant so I say nothing about them, other than I know who she is and say nothing about her because it’s not relevant as a simple proof that I don’t harm people vengefully, gratuitously, etc.

TxBluesMan, who is certainly Gregory Jack Prickett didn’t just attack me personally, at my job, attempting to get me fired (perhaps successfully) for several years, he extended his attacks to completely innocent family members of mine. The reason? He couldn’t get me to change my behavior by attacking me personally, so he went after someone I cared about.

That’s disgusting and low and it’s criminal.

By the way, I still maintain that my complaints were true, and if they were not, they were qualified enough that I have no liability for them. Greg does not want to meet me in court, he’s not going to win. Proving my case will involve turning his now private internal investigation (which has already resulted in his discharge) into a very public lawsuit that I predict I will win easily.

The only reasons I think he’s still doing the “lawsuit” are that he hopes to nail one of us in court as proof he was “innocent” by trying to slip “notice by publication” past us. I don’t see how he can.

That and I think he’s trying to use the lawsuit so that later perhaps, the court may be able to silence witnesses in his lawsuit (or mine) from speaking publicly. There are many things Greg simply doesn’t want known.
Havok

January 31, 2011 at 6:12 pm

Uh, yes, “real” policemen do that kind of thing. They (not all but some) also steal from evidence lockers, harass people, and abuse their power. And they do that in every state. And I don’t know what you mean by “you guys”. What’s with your anti Texas agenda? Not to mention, what is your basis for your comment about Texas leading the nation? You’re mad at a small group of people in Texas and blaming the whole state. Grow up. Not to mention, I believe it’s California that leads the country although I’m not going to present it as fact (as you do) because I don’t have concrete information in front of me.
K. Brister

January 31, 2011 at 9:23 pm

Michael Fullmer,

I am not Prickett, and I am not personally acquainted with him, but I do know something about this investigation, and I know the procedures that must be followed when a formal complaint against a sworn officer is investigated. I know that none of Hugh’s allegations were sustained.

Read Hugh’s last post: he admits that when he filed the complaint he didn’t know whether his allegations were true or false, and even now he’s just guessing or hoping that they’re true. (They’re not). Do you think Hugh is justified in having an investigation opened against Prickett based on accusations that he doesnt know to be true? There are laws about that kind of behavior. If he posted those same statements on his blog, knowing they may not be true, that is defamation, and Prickett is justified in suing Hugh for those statements.

What impact do you think it might have on a police officer when it is publicly and falsely stated that he is hosting child pornography on his government computer? Or that he is distributing stolen evidence that is protected by state and federal privacy laws? Hugh and the others knew that any record pubished by TxBluesMan was part of a public record, having been filed with the court They know the records were in the public domain and they do not contain protected health records any way. At most some documents may contain Warren Jeffs’ account of who needed funds for medical procedures These accusations were knowingly false when they were made.

You claim that Prickett is a vile bully, but you have provided nothing to support that statement. I would really like to see what all the hand-wringing is about. On the other hand, filing a false complaint against a police officer in order to shut down opinions you don’t like — that just might be considered the behavior of a bully.

Within the last couple of days, I have read portions of all of the blogs you mentioned except Coram whatever — that cannot be accessed, and I could only access cached versions of one of the others. I have no interest in reading the entire thing, some things are self evident without exhaustive research.I don’t know the whole history, but I know what I have read right here on this thread, and I know Hugh’s complaint was not sustained.
K. Brister

January 31, 2011 at 11:16 pm

Hugh McBryde,

You said that you’re certain Prickett was fired for “WHAT” he was blogging about, and not just because he was blogging from work. If that turns out to be the case, then Prickett will most certainly win his appeal. A government employee cannot be fired for exercising his constitutionally guaranteed freedom of speech, especially when he does it anonymously and in his individual capacity and not as a representative of a government body.
Hugh McBryde

February 1, 2011 at 1:05 am

You do NOT have a Constitutional right to extort or blackmail with free speech. Also, what he was blogging about may tip people off to an illegal use of his former powers as a “peace officer.”
Hugh McBryde

February 2, 2011 at 3:06 am

K,

You should know that “TxBluesMan” slammed the door shut on his blog “Coram Non Judice” almost the very moment I suggested a link between him and Gregory J. Prickett. He last posted as “TxBluesMan” over at the FLDS Texas blog about the time he posted a picture of my daughter, for no other reason but to let me know HE knew who she was and HE would publish things about her.

“TxBluesMan” then went on to publish two more pictures of my daughter, suggesting that she was involved sexually with ME, and with an Arabic man. He also gave her a name, and published very good pictures of her so that everyone would know what she looked like. Each of these more detailed publications was made after I complained to his employer that he was publishing pictures of my daughter. It was stated when “proper” requests were made to the correct authorities, they would be taken down.

I have no official knowledge of who owns/runs texasflds.wordpress.com. I suspect strongly it is Natalie Malonis in conjunction with Gregory J. Prickett.

I never spoke to Greg’s employer until AFTER “TxBluesMan” published pictures of my daughter. I stated on numerous occasions for the record that I sincerely hoped I was wrong about who Greg was in the “Bloggosphere” because I had no desire to ruin anyone’s life. I gave my strong circumstantial evidence to support the notion that Greg and TxBluesMan were one in the same, and the rest is history.

If these two persons are one in the same, as I clearly believe they are, and as I have strong and overwhelming circumstantial evidence that they are (at least, Greg would seem to be part of a team posting as TxBluesMan), then he is a vile and disgusting cowardly low life. I believe that is the correct set of technical terms for someone who would try to modify a man’s behavior, by attacking his daughter.
K. Brister

February 2, 2011 at 2:31 pm

Hugh,

You are still stating things as facts that are not true.

You have made accusations against Prickett that are untrue and are based on nothing more than your speculation. Speculation is not circumstantial evidence, and it should not form the basis for a police report alleging criminal conduct, nor should it be published on your blog as a factual statement.

You have stated as fact that TxBluesman has engaged in conduct that he has not engaged in. When you then link that to a real person and publish it and report it to a government agency, then you have exposed yourself to liability and possibly committed a criminal offense.
K. Brister

February 2, 2011 at 2:40 pm

Hugh,

One more question: If, as you claim, TxBluesman posted a picture of your daughter to let you know that he knows who she is, how is that any different than you mentioning Betty’s name and letting her know that you know who she is?
Hugh McBryde

February 3, 2011 at 5:50 am

The easiest answer is Betty is an antagonist in this matter. My daughter is not. I’m surprised that you equate the two. The only point about Betty is I don’t “out” people simply to out them. Betty’s private life is her own as far as I am concerned. I am not holding my knowledge of who she is over her head, I may have even lost the link to her Facebook Page that would let me remember.

The fact is, I care so little that I may no longer know. Betty knows I knew. I simply don’t care.
Hugh McBryde

February 3, 2011 at 5:53 am

And K, you’re going to have to contact me and tell me who you are in a verifiable way, or I simply don’t accept your assertion that you are an approximately impartial observer who doesn’t know Greg, and that you are even in a position to know the things you claim to know.

It’s OK if you don’t want to, and it’s OK for me to then think you’re full of it.
K. Brister

February 3, 2011 at 1:48 pm

Hugh,

I would consider it, but I don’t have a phone number. And I don’t trust you because of what you have done to Prickett and others. Like I said, I want to keep my job.

I did not say I’m an impartial observer. I said I am not Prickett, nor am I personally acquainted with him. I mentioned that I am familiar with this investigation. It’s fine if you don’t believe me though. This is the internet, and people can say anything they want, whether it’s true or not. Right?
Hugh McBryde

February 3, 2011 at 4:50 pm

I don’t believe you. I am who I am, you are anonymous. You’ve said you’re using your real name, but you feel nicely insulated it would seem, from contact. So I don’t believe you.

Vilifying me is a convenient way to give yourself an excuse not come forward, but you seem to know what all of Prickett’s friends know, or would want you to know. I’m not that guy.

I keep confidences, I don’t hurt people gratuitously and I don’t set out to do anything to someone else with the simple goal of hurting them. Those that know me, know this.

Please do not address me again, ghost.
K. Brister

February 3, 2011 at 6:35 pm

Hugh,

I do not believe you.
DepressedCitizen

February 3, 2011 at 10:59 pm

Jesus Christ, you children need to stop fighting and get a life already.
Hugh McBryde

February 4, 2011 at 9:11 am

Let me get this straight Depressed. When someone threatens your daughter, you collapse in the middle of the floor and start complaining that the “children” need to “stop fighting?”

That’s the most cowardly over simplistic approach to a fight I know of, and the tragedy is it usually functions as a rhetorical trump card that almost everyone buys into.

The only reason it takes two to fight is that the assailant needs someone to hit. The bully needs a victim. Dimwits who show up after the first two punches fly and declare “why don’t you children quit fighting” are only slightly less of a problem than the bully themselves, for the open the door to the bully getting (incrementally), everything they want from their victim.

Ever wonder why nations attack one another, acquire something, and then quickly want to negotiate a settlement? They’ve got part of what they want, and if they keep up their aggressive behavior in increments, eventually, they will have it all.

And you’re the enabler.
Stephanie Marshall

February 4, 2011 at 5:30 pm

Someone threatened McBryde’s daughter ? No one did anything of the sort !

A threat was NEVER made.
A photo of Hugh’s daughter was posted on a blog – and that photo was available on MySpace.
It was simply posted on a blog.
If posting a photo of someone from My Space is “threatening” them, what exactly was it that McBryde did to Ron in Houston? Didn’t Hugh post Ron’s photo? Was that a threat ?
Hugh is such a liar and a drama queen.
Stephanie Marshall

February 4, 2011 at 5:35 pm

“TxBluesMan” then went on to publish two more pictures of my daughter, suggesting that she was involved sexually with ME..”

No one EVER made any assertion that Hugh was involved in an incestual relationship with his stepdaughter, that NEVER happened.
What a liar Hugh is.
DepressedCitizen

February 4, 2011 at 5:46 pm

Mr. McBryde, your whats wrong with Americans today. You lie to yourself by perpetuating your petty personal disputes to the level of international affairs. Just because your in your own personal power struggle against a fellow citizen doesn’t justify your over protective investment in your daughters safety. Just because Mr. Prickett(allegedly) immaturely posted a picture of your daughter on the internet doesn’t give you the right to ruin the mans life.

You are both immature little children who instead calmly resolving or ignoring a personal dispute, have exaggerated your own emotional entanglement, to the point of a surreal modern day Shakespearean tragic comedy. Grown up. There is no one to blame but yourself.
The Pessimist

February 5, 2011 at 10:20 pm

It’s just a small-town Montana BOY who wants his 15 minutes of fame and you idiots brought it to him.

Also, quit bitching on the NT Daily site. Do you realize how much of a low-life that makes you?
Hugh McBryde

February 6, 2011 at 10:04 pm

Too rich:

“Also, quit bitching on the NT Daily site. Do you realize how much of a low-life that makes you?”

I think that speaks for itself, and it’s author.
Betty

February 9, 2011 at 11:25 am

I am the “Betty” that Hugh “outed”. He is not being honest about his contact with me; he likes to insult me by saying I am so unimportant that it’s not worth remembering. But he contacted me multiple times, on facebook and by my real email address, neither of which were ever given to him. I had to block him in multiple places to stop him from contacting me off list. He was on a mission to find out the real identities of anyone who opposed him on a public newspaper blog that had a policy against trying to do that very thing. He told people there he knew my real identity.

He thinks I am an “antagonist” merely because I disagree with him. In his twisted thinking, if I am not in agreement with him, then I am a sinner and can be treated with whatever malice Hugh choses to dish out. I have not given personal information, real names, threats implicit or explicit. I have not searched for him or his family nor have I posted pictures about him or his family.

He has a long, long history of conflict both in person and online. The story about the Colorado City policewoman is true; Hugh tried to destroy the career of a total stranger because he imagined a conspiracy from several thousand miles away. He guessed wrong about TBM’s identity for months, constantly changing his guesses, and attacking other people in the process (because he was sure that person was TBM). He got thrown out of his church for writing a letter with a threat to the congregation in it and then, for reasons which escape me, posted that letter to his blog to show his “innocence”. If I had received that letter, I would have contacted the police and made sure they had a copy! The story above about him hounding a minister online and libeling him is also true, I have seen some of those posts. He’s been banned from numerous online communities for just this sort of behavior.

I did not approve of TexasBluesMan posting a picture of Hugh’s “daughter” and I told him so. (She’s not actually any kin to Hugh, BTW, from his own admission and it’s unclear to me from what he has said that he was ever legally married to her mother, so I’m not sure she’s even his step daughter. But no matter, Hugh feels protective of her and that’s all that matters. TBM should have respected that. Should he get fired for not doing so? I don’t think so.) However, Hugh and Bill posted personal family pictures of Ron Law Houston, Natalie Malonis and others. Hugh posted a personal picture of some of the policemen in the investigation of Prickett on his blog because he thought there was a conspiracy to find Prickett innocent and he somehow thought threatening that policeman’s privacy would help his cause! Hugh has absolutely no higher moral ground to stand on in accusing someone else on that score!
Betty

February 9, 2011 at 11:30 am

And Hugh lashes out at an innocent bystander because they think this argument is childish. How typical.

The mature thing to do in a fight, Hugh, is AVOID it. “DepressedCitizen” is correct; you are acting like a poorly raised three year old, and I’m crazy to even answer you! My only reason for doing so is that my name came up here, and I feel a sense of injustice about the treatment of Sgt Prickett.
CAJim

February 9, 2011 at 2:12 pm

Betty, I vouch for your accuracy except you stated that he went after a ‘Colorado City’ policewoman[Lt. Santos] who is with Colorado Springs, CO. I think this correction was a understandable misquote. Now I’m wondering if your either this female attorney or Briquette? HMmmmm….
Betty

February 9, 2011 at 3:01 pm

Thanks, CAJim. You are correct. I meant Colorado Springs, CO.
CAJim

February 9, 2011 at 3:37 pm

OK, then Betty, I’ll say that you are neither and anyone whom says otherwise is a LIAR!
Hugh McBryde

February 10, 2011 at 11:08 pm

Um, Betty, I’ve never “outed” you. Point to one place, anywhere, that I have revealed your identity. or threatened to. I have in fact promised not to. You don’t deserve it, even if you are a drama queen.

I suppose it’s ok to attack a girl I call my daughter because she is my step daughter, or because there is a possibility (in your mind) that I might not have legally married her mother? I don’t see how that makes a hoots worth of difference. My daughter would be an even more distant and innocent bystander the more you remove her from my orbit (in your mind).

Maggie Santos is the CSPD officer that EMPLOYED Rozita Swinton. That’s a fact. Internal affairs at CSPD says she maintained a close relationship right up until the day Rozita phoned in her phony phone call alleging to be an abused teen polygynous “wife.” That, is news, not “outing.”
CAJim

February 11, 2011 at 10:24 am

Baloney Hugh, by Lt.Santos employment you infer babysitting as ‘EMPLOYED’, kind of guilding the lily on that bogus description. By contacting CSPD you were attempting to discover/expose whom else to investigation and/or dismissal? Rozita Swinton and Lt. Santos were not in a ‘close relationship from 1995 to 2008 and CSPD never said that, ONLY you did amongst other outrageous claims of a lesbian triste which you have no proof about but posted on your blog, anyway. You are a foul fool Hugh. Lastly, the bogus claim that Rozita Swinton was the bogus caller from the YFZ Ranch raid is not a charge that has even been formally brought after a formal investigation was made and the results are with the TEXAS AG Abbott who has enacted no further actions, yet you won’t end your unfounded claims over two years hence. Now you crow over having gotten some UNT officer releaved of his job and have nothing to show for your claims with the Colorado Springs PD or Rozita Swinton. Not much luck or proof against Lt.Santos or Swinton has lead to your attack upon this UNT officer. So Rozita has been and contiunes to be maligned by you, two CSPD officers and an internal affairs inquiry has been made and a UNT officer that saw a wrong and acted has fallen prey to your personal vendetta.
Hugh McBryde

February 11, 2011 at 10:40 am

CAJim, you either know nothing, and are spouting, or you need to tell us how you know. There are a lot of anonymous people here claiming to know quite a lot, many of whom are connected with the blog FLDS Texas.

Hmmmm.

I’m amazed that so many people know so much, with absolute certainty and have relationships sufficient with Santos, Swinton, Prickett and Bluesman, so much so that they can call my “BS,” yet none of these people know each other. Wowie Zowie.
CAJim

February 11, 2011 at 11:14 am

I know that you here are mischaracterizing the truth and need to state the facts plainly and devoid of your twisted take on events.

By “EMPLOYED” do you mean babysitting? Do you have proof of any other employment?

By posting,”she[Maggie Santos] maintained a close relationship right up until the day Rozita phoned in her phony call….” as a fact provided from internal affairs CSPD is a mistatement. You and CSPD internal affairs can not prove of any ongoing ‘close relationship’ nor a ‘phony call’ because neither have any basis in fact or truth that you can provide, your attempt to project ‘close relationship’ onto the internal affairs is in error, if I am wrong you need you prove your calim after all you state it as a fact, above. Are you affraid here of reposting your lies from the past concerning Lt. Santos and Rozita Swinton as being sexual relationship?

The Texas Rangers conducted an investigation about the call from the YFZ Ranch and the formal report was given to Texas AG Abbott, no further action was taken because the charge would be a misemeanor, if even proven, against a Colorado citizen, so no charge will ever be formally brought but you don’t accept that fact and continue here to smear Rozita Swinton and by association try to draw Lt. Maggie Santos into a questionable position. For your belated edification Rozita Swinton can no longer be charged with any related YFZ Ranch call from Colorado in 2008 by accepting her sentence and performing her probation on a unrelated charge. Her attorney stated that she would never be charged and today it would constitute double jeopardy.

The truth here, in your hands Hugh, appears to be a casualty of facts or evidence/proof.
Hugh McBryde

February 11, 2011 at 11:58 am

CAJim,

I don’t know why you’re clouding an article about former peace officer Prickett with discussions about Maggie Santos and Rozita Swinton. I am sure you are one of those who maintains I’m a crackpot, and Prickett is not in any way related to, nor did he know anything about TxBluesMan, until I came along and told him. Why all of those at FLDS Texas are fascinated with this, I’ll (cough) never know.

Additionally, I spoke with Lt. Maggie Santos. She responded to the inquiry about “employing” Rozita Swinton stating that she in fact DID employ her. When an officer of CSPD, who is stated to have a long standing well known relationship with Rozita Swinton BY HER OWN INTERNAL AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT (a relationship that was ongoing at the time of Rozita’s call), it’s interesting. I spoke with the internal affairs department, I spoke with Maggie Santos.

When Lt. Santos is involved in internet sex sting operations that cross state borders (which has to involve the FBI), that’s interesting.

When said sting operations employ voice talent to mimic little children. That’s interesting.

When Rozita successfully impersonates a young person so as to induce Law Enforcement to raid the ranch. That’s VERY interesting.

When I have interviewed personally FBI agents and CSPD officers that stated for the record that there was a back channel communications system involving hand carried notes and off the record phone calls back and forth between Texasd and Colorado Springs, predating the “discovery” of Rozita’s “discovery” and arrest.

That’s no longer interesting, that’s NEWS. The fact that I am the only one that called all those people and the only one who wrote stories on all of that, that’s news too, but it doesn’t get printed elsewhere, because the news is no longer news, it’s largely a collection of re-written press releases from Government agencies.
CAJim

February 11, 2011 at 1:20 pm

Hugh you really are a hopeless conspiracy theorist and your fable of employment, namely ‘EMPLOYED’, is only babysitting. You have no proof of a work relationship beyond babysitting. I see you have chosen to withold your innuendos of a lesbian relationship is there still no facts to assert this lie? Yet, now you provide more smear material that infers some internet sex sting with the FBI involved and still no proofs/facts/evidence beyond your own dimwitted circumstantial details of a pet theory. You see it as a record? You say a back channel with the FBI exists? Your details printed on the blogosphere is NEWS? (Yawn), oh sorry says who? YOU, Hugh just YOU and no local newpaper, magazine or press corp they must have missed your brilliant research as frought with liabilities and unfit to publish.

Sad to read proof here that the wild-eyed imaginings of a possessed poster has caused a UNT officer his job and this perpetrator is continuing his quest of smearing other victims, again. Care to espouse your claims of a Texas Ranger and Texas AG cover-up and seizure of Rozita’s computer to withold evidence or is that yet anther pet theory gone astray? Still no real proof or facts to match the wild-eyed claims?

Well Hugh at least you can notch your pistol handle with one prey and with luck maybe someone else will fall victim to your slime.
CAJim

February 11, 2011 at 1:55 pm

OK everyone reading this and scratching their heads go to website,’VermontPolygamy’ an see the past/current State of Vermont registered poygamy legalization lobbyist and his views.

Know a UNT officer lost his employment of 20 years over a complaint filed by this Hugh McBryde.

Just the Truth & Just the Facts.
Hugh McBryde

February 11, 2011 at 2:43 pm

Ok, I see you’re losing Jim, since you’ve switched arguments (actually smears) and gone to another attack. I’m just taking Maggie Santos at her word that she “employed” Rozita Swinton. Argue with her.
CAJim

February 11, 2011 at 3:03 pm

Yadda, Yadda, Yadda….BooHoo, Hugh. Got any proof that Maggie employed Rozita as a mimic for the FBI. I guess your bucket of slime stands in your eyes only Hugh the reality and truth withstand your empty pet theories. I note you didn’t want to proclaim any lesbian affairs or Texas AG/Ranger cover-up(s) this time. I guess the only person here you really fooled is the one who read your report and didn’t realize the wild-eyed imagings of an unproven claimant need to be closely investigated before they are believed or granted any credence.

Say how’s that posted search of yours going at ‘VermontPolygamy’ for another polygamy wife, probably no interest, Huh? Why don’t you try taking down your picture?

Come on UNT administrators do the right thing and investigate this claimant for frauds and baseless theories.
Betty

February 11, 2011 at 6:11 pm

If any one is interested, I have a file of posts and emails from the time period that Hugh was net “stalking” me. You can go to the texasflds wordpress site and ask to contact me, leave a real email address on your post and request that the admin give me your email address. I will be happy to contact you. Your email will not be posted or shared in any other way. It might make interesting reading.
Betty

February 11, 2011 at 6:19 pm

Funny, no body in the news industry seemed to think Santos employing Swinton was news, no matter how Hugh tried to convince them otherwise. And apparently, no one in Internal Affairs in Colorado Springs was impressed with that tidbit of news about this particular target of Hugh’s conspiracy theories, either, cause she’s still employed last I checked. So, rave on about your “facts”.

I very clearly stated above that it was not ethical to post the young lady’s picture, regardless of her relationship to you.
Stephanie Marshall

February 11, 2011 at 9:55 pm

Hugh has still not retracted his lies – he states that his stepdaughter was threatened or attacked when her picture was re – posted from her MySpace account to another blog. Not that I approve of placing her picture on another blog without her consent – but it is not a threat nor is it an attack to do so. Her picture was freely available on the internet.
Then Hugh stated that someone suggested that he had an incestuous relationship with his stepdaughter. That NEVER happened. No one EVER made that claim.Hugh is a liar.
If posting pictures of others without their permission on a blog is a threat or an attack, Hugh sure has threatened and attacked many people – like Ron, the lawyer from Houston – as well as Greg Prickett’s supervisors. There is no objective evidence that Lt. Santos coached Rozita Swinton to make her phone call regarding the YFZ Ranch, but that did not stop Hugh from creating a fantasy conspiracy theory and attempting to destroy Lt. Santos reputation – Hugh contacted Lt. Santos’ supervisors and reported her for a bogus investigation and tried to get her fired. He has a long history of engaging in this type of harassment and I only hope that someone does the same thing to him, so that he can get a taste of his own medicine.
Hugh McBryde

February 12, 2011 at 12:58 am

I see, Baghdad Bob mated with Sybil, and you are all their children.
Stephanie Marshall

February 12, 2011 at 7:06 am

You have no intelligent response to anything I have posted, Hugh.
As a point of information – when 6 – 7 yr old girls who are menstruating have intercourse or become pregnant, a significant percentage of them die from bleeding after intercourse or die in childbirth due to the fact that they bleed to death. This happens quite frequently in Yemen when very young girls are married if they start menstruating at an early age. You need to reconsider and retract your past statement regarding early potential marriage for menstruating girls. It is just plain dangerous in addition to being ridiculous.
Hugh McBryde

February 12, 2011 at 10:24 am

You have neither correctly characterized said, or how I responded. Go back and read. I rather suspect you do what all of Prickett’s sycophants or alter egos do here, as well as elsewhere. Like a dog you keep piling up dirt on top of what you don’t want anyone else to see, and that would be my explanation.

That also makes a lie out of what you just said.
Hugh McBryde

February 12, 2011 at 3:53 pm

“charactorized what I said,” is what I meant to say. I have to figure out this touch pad that highlights and deletes before I see it happening.
Stephanie Marshall

February 12, 2011 at 6:49 pm

I read your statements. They are unacceptable. I am neither TBM’s sycophant nor am I his alter ego. Anyone who thinks that marriage or sex with a menstruating 7 yr old is potentially OK for ANYONE under ANY circumstances is SICK. You’re also a LIAR – no one EVER suggested that you had an incestuous relationship with your daughter. You’re sick. As for posting photos on your blog in an attempt to intimidate people, you have done that FAR MORE OFTEN than TBM ever did. Hypocrite.
Hugh McBryde

February 13, 2011 at 1:31 am

But you see Stephanie, I did not say that, so you’re lying.
Hugh McBryde

February 13, 2011 at 1:48 am

Stephanie, what I’ve said is that if you bring me a 7 year old who is in all other ways an adult, I’ll give, as a consideration for your “find,” consideration to her as a potential bride.

The point is really very simple. We’re talking the number of angels that can fit on the head of a pin. We’re talking MARS Rocket. There is no such person. You’re FIXATION on the details as REAL finds you missing the point. It’s RHETORICAL and a near statistical impossibility.

There is no BIBLICAL age standard for marriage. I am a religious person. A Christian. To be intellectually honest I MUST say to you that age is not a factor.

It is true though that age is highly correlated to physical, spiritual, sexual and mental maturity. Hence the use of a 7 year old, to make the point in part that there is no such person and that fixation on age has it’s problems. There are people who are ready for marriage at 16. That’s the larger point. Texas says they’re not and then turns around and marries them off anyway. It’s MASSIVE hypocrisy.

And yes. It was suggested on the blog FLDS Texas that my step daughter was quite possibly my consort, or that of a Muslim man. Nothing of the sort is remotely true.

Your strident assertions that I am interested in promoting sex with 7 year olds are simple sensationalism. I’m glad your’re finally getting around to inserting the qualifier “potentially.” Next you ought to admit just how many 7 year olds had the “potential” as I described this totally non existent person. In all the years that have passed since I posted that, no one has come forward with even an example of a 7 year old that might fit the bill. I kinda get to rest my case there.

And yes, I think sycophant is appropriate. As far as I am concerned the core posters at FLDS Texas comprise less than 10 people, and you’re one of them. The fact that these people have as many voices as “Legion” doesn’t change my belief that there are really only a few people over there trying to sound like a crowd. That’s been Prickett’s MO all along.
Stephanie Marshall

February 13, 2011 at 7:37 am

There are MANY more regular posters on FLDS Texas than 10. LOL! I only post occasionally. I am a retiree who follows that blog.

NO ONE suggested that you have had incestuous relations with your stepdaughter. It was POSTULATED that a woman in a photo posted on the FLDS Texas blog was someone’s polygamous wife in hijab, namely the wife of the man in the photo with her, and the poster indicated that he/she did not know who the young woman in the photo was when that statement was made.
The posters were NOT AWARE that she was your stepdaughter at the time her photo was posted. When it became public knowledge that the photo was one of your stepdaughter, several posters asked that the photo be removed. NO ONE used the term incest, and it was NOT TBM who made that statement.

Those are the FACTS regarding the matter. You SPIN the facts in an attempt to trash TBM and anyone else who disagrees with you. You’ve posted pictures of people without their permission on your blog and said some pretty nasty things about them – like Scott Reib for example. What about TBM’s supervisors and how you badmouthed them ? What about your treatment of Ron in Houston with regard to his photo ? Is this an example of your Biblically based Christian value system ?

So if you think that a 7 year old girl is not capable of being a wife and mother, why not make a CLEAR and UNEQUIVOCAL statement to that effect now – that it is NOT acceptable for ANYONE to marry at age 7 and THAT IT NEVER will be, under ANY CIRCUMSTANCES SINCE IT IS UNSAFE FOR THE MOTHER AND THE CHILD ?

Why not state that you think 16 is a more appropriate age ? Why did you say that age 7 COULD potentially be appropriate and that you would like to “check her out ?” What training do you have that makes you an “expert” in deciding these matters? You’re a truck driver, and before that, you were in car finance.

Just retract your statement that a 7 yr old COULD potentially be an appropriate wife and mother. There is no age given in the Bible for marriage, and girls in the era when the Bible was written were probably about 16 when they started having their period, not 12-13 as they are today. 100 years ago the average age a girl was when she started menstruating was about 16. It is thought that young women frequently died giving birth or immediately after birth in the times that the Bible was written. Infant mortality was very high too.

McBryde, I don’t expect you to develop any kind of insight regarding your behavior. You attack people and make up stories about them. Suggesting that TBM or another poster accused you of incest is an example – your treatment of Lt. Santos is another example of how you trash people, and your treatment of Scott Reib is yet another example of how you attempt to trash people who disagree with you or don’t share your viewpoints.

Have you apologized yet to any of these people ?
Shouldn’t you have apologized ?
Isn’t that the Christian thing to do ?
CAJim

February 13, 2011 at 10:23 am

Stephanie your efforts are laudible but misspent on someone whom obviously brandishs his thought process and insults in advance of proof or any real evidence. Reference yet another blogosphere cave where Hugh and his cohorts provide their diatribes and rumor theories, namely “Ye Olde Journalist”. Note at the bottom when you read that there are usually no comments(as in none). The right hand column of this blog gives the regular writers who number a half dozen or so. Then by comparison view ‘FLDS Texas’ blog which has a site couinter over 600,000 posts, Discussion #45+ which are normally renumbered after postings exceed 500 and an archive of court documents, direct source materials and other public record data that has been assembled for readers viewing and self education.

Hugh and friends on the other hand provide few documents, little courtroom evidence and no hard data where the reader can verify the faked conclusions. Hugh is responding here at ‘NTDaily’ because he suspects this UNT campus connects to a much larger conspiracy, involving the Texas Rangers and AGs office who orchestrated the ‘Hoax’ call from the YFZ Ranch and lead to the ensuing rescue/raid and 12 Grand Jury indictments(with seven(7) guilty verdicts. When you read the half-baked attacks at “Ye Olde Journalist”, a cute tongue-in-cheek to yellow journalism, be sure to first click on the article titles, then the blog software will post reference articles at the bottom of the article chosen. These ‘yellow journalist’ have been quite busy since 2010 launching unfounded tirades, baseless theories and guess what?

UNT campus is one of their latest ‘Meccas of Evil’, especially with the removal action of a campus officer. Someone in UNT administration needs to check out this groups rantings, postings and targeting of evils of their own choosing. Bill Medvecky and Michael Fullmer who have both posted comments here are contributors to this brand of yellow journalism at “Ye Olde Journalist”.
CAJim

February 13, 2011 at 11:15 am

Hugh before you post any response, please, provide prima facie evidence, third party source or a major news article. Lose this,”I know what I know” mentality and don’t reference any “Ye Olde Journalist” reporting as legitimate when it is not to anyone but your crack staff of writers.
Please, provide specific proof of any YFZ Ranch ‘Hoax’ caller and that persons ties to any branch of Law Enforcement beyond babysitting. It’s over two year hence from the raid/rescue in Eldorado and you have no eye-witness, conspirator or any other maladroit to prove the caller was bogus. When do you plan to provide this proof of a ‘Hoax’ conspiracy or any chargeable offenses by any associated Law Enforcement authorities?
Work it

February 13, 2011 at 1:30 pm

So hugh

We’ve seen quite a bit about you revealed.

You were a wife beater (domcumented on your site)

Were banned from Church property (documented on your site)

Banned from the UNT campus (documented on your site)

Banned from about every website you ever joined (admitted on your website)

Lost jobs from your crazy harassment activities ( documented on your site)

Dont believe there is such a thing as pedophilia, and would consider a 7 year year old as a bride if she “met” your criteria..

And people listen to you?

Srsly?
Work it

February 13, 2011 at 1:37 pm

So …. Hugh

We’ve seen quite a bit about you revealed.

You were a wife beater (domcumented on your site)

Were banned from Church property (documented on your site)

Banned from the UNT campus (documented on your site)

Banned from about every website you ever joined (admitted on your website)

Lost jobs from your crazy harassment activities ( documented on your site)

Dont believe there is such a thing as pedophilia, and would consider a 7 year year old as a bride if she “met” your criteria..

And people listen to you?

Srsly?
Hugh McBryde

February 13, 2011 at 8:51 pm

Work it. How does any of what you just said document anything other than:

A.) I am a fallible human being, I repent of my foibles as often as I find them out. At least most of the time. I never beat my wife, that is a lie. The incident you refer to I have also referred to in other places, of my own volition. I am 56. It was nearly half a lifetime ago. It was nevertheless wrong. I don’t cover up. It was brief. It hadn’t happened before, it hasn’t happened since.

B.) That I am truthful. The vast majority of what you know about me that is negative, you truthfully reveal that I told to you.

C.) You fail entirely to notice that the 7 year old in question doesn’t exist, which is a large part of the point.

CAJim; You’re welcome to contact the various parties as I did and ask them yourself. I functioned as a reporter, I researched a story. I talked to the primary sources. They told me what I told you here and on my blog. They corroborated each other as well. In all I talked to Colorado Springs FBI Agent Steve A. Smith, CSPD Lt. Sean Mandell, CSPD Internal affairs in the person of Lt. Kirk Wilson and Lt. Magdalena Santos. If you wish to have documentary evidence, you can refer to the arrest warrant of Rozita Swinton in Colorado Springs, in which Lt. Santos name appears as well which gives printed verification of their relationship, but doesn’t quite flesh it out.

What we’re talking about here is similar to me being a reporter and asking Bill Clinton if he and Monica Lewinsky really did it, and he said to me that he did. You’re the sort of loon that doubts the story, and demands proof after I’ve extracted a confession by simply asking a question.

As to the “conspiracy” angle? I am not a “conspiracy theorist.” Conspiracies exist, that’s why they are often against the law. Actual conspiracy and conspiracy theory differ. You might research the difference. Tarring someone who suggests a conspiracy might exist based on the strong circumstantial evidence I uncovered, is simply dishonest, but it does work since most equivocate “Conspiracy Theorist” with someone who discovers a real conspiracy. It’s not against the law to jaywalk on the moon.

Why?

No one does it.

It is against the law to engage in criminal conspiracy. People are charged successfully with it all the time.

Why?

People do it.
Work it

February 14, 2011 at 7:17 am

Hmmm

I read the link, it wasnt one “incident” as you infer, and it was for an extended period of 6 years, which makes this behavior last more than 10% of your life.

Was it hitting, shoving, yelling, all of the above, some of the above? It doesnt matter, you have been proven to be a domestic violent person on your own volition.

That you carry this type of behavior online is a sign of continued problems.

Look at the stack of bannings and warnings you have acquired. You just dont get it.

And that last little troll for wives on vermontpolygamy.blogspot, is that for real or are you just joking?

Because while it really looks like a joke, it fits into your plans better than OJ’s glove.
CAJim

February 14, 2011 at 8:32 am

Hugh your posted conspiracy theory, in part, on ‘Grits For Breakfast’ back on Thursday, 14 Jan., 2010 article, named ‘The Convenient failure to prosecute instigator of Great Eldorado Polygamist Round Up’, you wrote “Rozita is a little girl imitator employed by (Lt.) Maggie Santos who needs people like her.[Babysitter or do you have other employment facts] Maggie has FBI contacts that are regularly used and active. Rozita has information that is alleged to be highly accurate about inner workings and appearance of the YFZ Ranch. Is it too far that documented connection that someone at the FBI gave details to Rozita through an intermediary (Maggie) and said “give these numbers a call and do your thing”
[Sorry but your conspiracy theory just lept from Earth to Mars with this baseless accusation. Who is your quotation taken from, no reference to any said FBI provider is given and yes the connection is not valid if you lack any bona fides evidence]

My problem with you spreading this ‘reporting’ around seems frought with speculation and innuendos. Hugh you fail to connect the dots with real concrete proofs but yet you repeat this storyline thinking others will agree with your bogus conclusion. The facts today are that Rozita Swinton was never charged, arrested or booked concerning the YFZ Ranch incident. Rozita Swinton was arrested and booked on a Colorado based case and plead a settlement and was required to receive psychological care and given probation, this was for a misdemeanor charge. This arreest was on 16 April, 2008 and from then to now, over 2.5+years hence you have printed no contraction of this unproven theory, you have not added new evidence and yet you repeat this conjecture repeatedly. This is not reporting but rather crass rumormongering.

Hugh on your blog you stated many additional assertions as facts, such as Rozita Swinton is a lesbian, Rozita’s relationship with Lt. Santos was sexual and Lt, Santos somehow was guilty of using her influence at CSPD to protect and free Rozita Swinton of any wrong doing. Do you now deny these claims or can you ever provide proofs/evidence that is valid in a courtroom.

You think getting Officer Prickett into your complaint is any different than this ‘witch hunt’ you have conducted on Rozita Swinton? You published her photo and later retracted it. You have printed baseless claims that you repeat and never recant or prove. You are still claiming you have a valid conspiracy but it’s been over 2.5 years and you still can’t connect-the-dots but you “Know what you know”. What about fairness and balanced reporting for Rozita Swinton or Lt. Santos? Have you no shame?
Hugh McBryde

February 14, 2011 at 8:34 am

Work it, this article is still about a UNT Police Officer of 20 years standing, who lost his job because he did some things at work that he shouldn’t have. It’s not about a law abiding citizen that has odd values you don’t like, that stays entirely within the law.

Maybe UNT’s police force DID investigate me, despite Sgt. Prickett’s complaint that they did not.

I pass every background check I am subjected to because I am not a violator of the law.

While I may hold weird ideas and people don’t like those ideas and people disassociate themselves from me and you may find it amusing to make fun of my sincere attempts to live out and realize my lifestyle choices, I didn’t do what Sgt. Prickett did.

I am entitled to free speech and the expression of my ideas.

You might think those ideas are weird and my attempts to realize my choice of lifestyle quite funny and pathetic.

I still didn’t get fired from a 20 year government job, something that is nearly impossible to accomplish, particularly at a teaching institution.

Sgt. Prickett did get fired from that job.

That’s a lot of smoke. You might want to ask him about the fire.
Hugh McBryde

February 14, 2011 at 8:49 am

CAJim, you can keep claiming that I am a conspiracy theorist, but I am not. I have gone as far with a strong circumstantial case as I can go with my limited research tools and personal resources. It’s something that deserves further scrutiny. I have always said, at the Bottom Line, that essentially in SOME cases, the smoke is no indication of fire at the place I suspect it to be. It’s just smoke.

But as I say, usually, when there is that much smoke there is a fire. One is always well advised to check up on that possibility as if it were real.

The Police would NEVER arrest anyone if they did not follow such trails themselves.

The fact is I am the only one to have investigated this angle. If the rest of the media is content to let the narrative be “Child Molestation by Old Men! (thanks Rozita, now go away, you’re inconvenient),” then I certainly cannot make them drink at the watering hole. I’ve led them to it. That’s all I can do.

This article, as I mentioned above, is still about Sgt. Prickett. Not me. Thanks for giving me a forum in which to publicize my ideas, but it’s still an article about Sgt. Prickett.

What follows is RHETORICAL:

Sgt. Prickett seems to have been fired for “Blogging at work.”

20 year Government employees don’t get fired for “Blogging at work.”

Having posed that question, and answered it in rhetorical fashion, this leaves us with a new question. One not so rhetorical in nature:

“What was it that Sgt. Prickett Blogged?”

This also leads to another question as well:

“Did Sgt. Prickett use University and Law Enforcement resources (possibly in an illegal way) to create his blogging posts?”

Frankly, just his uses of a very old address, PO Box 10485, Bozeman MT to attempt to serve me suggest Sgt. Prickett pulled my drivers license record BEFORE I “outed” him.

It works like this.

I had not changed my DL address record as I was moving all over the country.

Shame on me.

Nevertheless it was the only place where that mailing address survived.

In August of last year it was changed to the address of the school where I obtained my CDL.

Greg didn’t file his lawsuit until after I had again changed it.

Why did he attempt to have me served at PO Box 10485, Bozeman MT?

Could it possibly be that Sgt. Prickett was investigating ME and others in connection with topics TxBluesMan blogged on and that’s a ton of smoke coming from under Sgt. Prickett’s badge. Or the badge he used to have.
CAJim

February 14, 2011 at 9:09 am

Well spit it out Hugh say “I do/don’t have conclusive evidence of any crime or conspiracy that would be reported on a major newswire, accepted into evidence at trial or proof born conspiracy that would command national coverage” Which is it Hugh, either you do and you are to be commended for your dogged reportage or you don’t and you will continue to rumormonger, print innuendos and unfounded guesses as facts. Do you have any press credentials, journalism degree(s) or major newsprint/newsrvice experience?

“No”, well that was all the point I was trying to make here.
Work it

February 14, 2011 at 1:04 pm

Hugh

The article is quite questionable, and doesnt answer any of the hard answers you are so convinced that you know of, regardless that so many guesses of yours prove false.

So this MESSAGE BOARD is about YOU, and the exposure of what a lying sack you are.

Too bad the NTtimes bought into your lies, they need to run another article telling all about you, its one that is truly stranger than fiction.

So, was it just shoving your wife and yelling in front of the kids for 6 years? Or was it really 10 years?
Betty

February 14, 2011 at 1:31 pm

Your basic premise that the only place he could have gotten your address was an illegal look up of your old driver’s license is seriously flawed. Clinging to a flawed premise and then wandering off into the brush is one of the reasons people accuse you of being a conspiracy theorist. I just typed into google “hugh mcbryde montana” (from your own blog, dude, for someone who is frothing about invasion of privacy, you sure do share a lot of information about yourself) and got not only your old address but a list of your relatives. And all in a matter of minutes.

Maybe the subject matter of the blogging was not the problem, but the total amount of time spent on it. Here’s a thought….maybe the real reason has absolutely nothing to do with Huge McEgo. Maybe there are other issues about this officer of which we know nothing at all; in fact, it’s almost certain that there are things we don’t know that might bear on the subject. Stunning, I realize, and hard for a narcissist to accept that the sum does not turn around him, but the world is full of nearly limitless possibilities!
Hugh McBryde

February 14, 2011 at 3:20 pm

Betty, when someone thrusts themselves into the public spotlight, making accusations and investigating others as TBM did, they don’t have an expansive set of rights with regard to privacy. Period. You don’t have one either, but MY standards are a bit high, which is why YOU have always remained safely anonymous. I’ve been true to my word now, haven’t I Betty? Even in the face of your nearly two years worth of hysterical shouting about it.

For the LAST TIME Betty, I’m not looking down your shirt. I never did. I don’t WANT to. Stop yelling for Eye Contact, no one is looking. They haven’t looked since High School.
Hugh McBryde

February 14, 2011 at 3:26 pm

CAJim, “you ignorant nut.* ” you don’t arrest people on just “conclusive evidence.”

* Apologies to SNL..
Michael Fullmer

February 14, 2011 at 4:08 pm

My goodness. I see that the intellectual level of the FLDS Texas crowd hasn’t improved one iota.

The article in question, the point of this comment thread, reports that a police officer lost his job. The facts are laid out for all to read. What Hugh has to do with the firing of said officer is that he reported the intimidation tactics of said officer to UNT authorities.

This, in the twisted minds of the FLDS Texas lynch mob, makes it open season to hijack the thread for ad hominem attacks on Hugh and, by extension, anyone else who is of the opinion that TxBluesMan is a sub-human fraud.

You’re unable to dispute the facts of the article, so you attack, attack, attack. You’re so predictable.

Unfortunately for you, FLDS Texas folk, you can’t ban me from this thread. You can’t delete my comments. I get to speak my piece. Sucks to be you.
Work it

February 14, 2011 at 8:17 pm

So tell us fullmer how the folks at Sybase think of you queer internet habits?
CAJim

February 14, 2011 at 9:36 pm

You just can’t bring yourself to say it,Huh, Hugh? No conclusive evidence
Let me help, “EMPLOYED” means babysitter and not SCPD employee, internet sting special child mimic or any other bogus FBI claim you can’t substantiate or prove.

Careful, Crafty Czarrion the last time you posted out on an open blog, with a free exchange, you lost so many flight feathers, you and Hugh both had to walk home. Warning you can’t use your ‘Delete’ or ‘Edit’ button here.
Why not give us some of your Latin, that establishes your level of intellectual intimidation, ” Eres Caputo Rizzotto “.
Hugh McBryde

February 14, 2011 at 9:39 pm

Work it; after nearly three years, you haven’t figured out that people who go out there with their real names and people who don’t hide who and what they do, aren’t people that scare off?

As soon as I said “Prickett,” Blues closed his blog. Go figure.
CAJim

February 15, 2011 at 2:18 am

Mr. Fulmer ad hominem attrack and lynch mob from my perspective is simply to ask for some proof, bona fides evidence or other proofs. Nothing has been provided but what is portrayed as ‘strong cicumstantial evidence’ like the FBI may have planted highly accurate information about the YFZ Ranch/FLDS Church into the hands of a internet sex sting mimic through an Colorado Springs PD officer. I harbor no lynching mentality other than to see the proof/truth. I ask the question from a ‘reporter’ of ‘strong circumstantial’ theory to present the lines to connect-the-dots? Is that an ad hominem attact or an insistance upon facts devoid of innuendo or your brand of ‘Yellow Journalism’. I have asked for the facts about “EMPLOYED” of Rozita Swinton by Lt. Maggie Santos other than as a babysitter. You characterize this as an unfair attack? I have read your articles posted on ‘Ye Olde Journalist’ and respect your views as being even more unsubstatiated than Hughs. However, you choose to describe Officer Prickett, you are a coarser and worse form of any cyber bullying. If this constitutes an attack I will defend myself with quotes from your own words, which has proved to be a silencing effect on Hugh McBryde. Both of you are exposed here for your own faultlines and show no shame for your actions, except to attack/criticize others.
Work it

February 15, 2011 at 4:44 am

Hugh

So how has it worked for you using your real name with all the crazy stuff you post?

Driving a truck, is that a leg up for you? At least it gives you the opportunity to meet those roadside polygamy short time rental girls at truck stops.

In your mind, you can count them as wives.
Hugh McBryde

February 15, 2011 at 6:52 pm

Work it, funny, my mind doesn’t go where yours does, nor do I do what apparently you would.
K. Brister

February 16, 2011 at 2:04 am

You people are nuts.

Hugh, you have now made it abundantly clear that you filed a complaint against Prickett in order to get him fired because you think you are entitled to free speech but he is not. You did this with nothing more than a hope that he did something wrong.

None of your accusations were sustained in the investigation. Zero. Zilch. Nada. Prickett did not reasearch you or do background checks using government computers. Not sustained. Prickett did not threaten or stalk your daughter, nor did he extort you. Not sustained. Prickett did not release protected or privileged documents. Not sustained. Prickett did not make the comments that you attributed to him. Not sustained. Prickett does not operate the website you claim he owns and did not post the pictures you claimed or provide the name of your daughter. Not sustained.

Prickett was terminated for blogging from work. Read the article.
Hugh McBryde

February 16, 2011 at 4:08 am

K. Of course Sgt. Prickett is entitled to free speech. He may in the process reveal he is doing something else. For instance: Does it abridge my right of free speech to admit to a crime?

No.

Might I expect that in the process of doing so I might pay another price?

I would, I don’t know about you.

Once again, Sgt. Prickett, a 20 year employee of UNT would never have been terminated for merely blogging at work. Even if he was, that was an infraction of the rules of the University, not an abridging of his right to free speech. He had and still has all the right in the world to speak freely, but not on the University’s dime.

K., you’re a fake and a liar.

You don’t know a thing about Sgt. Prickett’s investigation or you’re not who you say you are. One or the other.

Next, you continue to use a word. “Sustained.” Apparently the investigation is still “ongoing,” so while an accusation may not have been “sustained,” it may not have been “denied” either.

As far as READING the article? You may consider me to have been a primary source for the article and thus you may also consider me to know a bit about it that isn’t in it. I have a more “full” picture, so to speak.

Sgt. Prickett is TxBluesMan, or at least one of the facilitators/persons wrapped up in the offering and presentation of TxBluesMan as he/she/it/they appeared on the internet in association with the blog “Coram non Judice” (in “WordPress” form and “Blogger”) and on “FLDS Texas.”

His defense was always simple: “I’m not the guy,” and relatively easy to prove.

I for instance would have stood up, pointed my finger straight at the nose of Lt. West Gilbreath and defied him to prove it. Then I would have planted my lawyers card on him (he does/did have one at the time) and told him to put up or shut up, but that I was going back to work.

You paint a picture of a wrongfully accused Greg Prickett, who nevertheless was doing something similar to what I accused him of, just not what I accused him of and not harming or having to do with me in any way.

Bull.

It’s him. You know it, I know it, and he knows it.

The only question left would be who, if anyone else, is involved in the cyber identity of “TxBluesMan.” I’ve always suspected that he/she/they could have been a committee.
K. Brister

February 16, 2011 at 5:33 am

Hugh,

From your comments, it is clear that you have made a public information request for the investigation file and were denied. You do not know a thing about what Prickett was terminated for, and you do not know the disposition of the allegations you made. You are still hoping that your accusations were true. Not everyone commenting is as uninformed as you.

Prickett’s defense is “I didn’t do the things that Hugh McBryde accused me of doing.” Your witch hunt for TxBluesman is irrelevant at this point.
Work it

February 16, 2011 at 7:27 am

Hugh McBryde says:
February 15, 2011 at 6:52 pm

“Work it, funny, my mind doesn’t go where yours does, nor do I do what apparently you would.”

+++

Excuse me? Your mind is all over the nasty place – and documented by you, in fact.

What a train wreck!
Hugh McBryde

February 16, 2011 at 8:56 am

Never once have I suggested “rental girls” are the equivalent of wives. You did. I keep only to those I am husband to and “rental girls” don’t qualify. Polygyny is not promiscuity or whoring. It is lifelong commitment.
CAJim

February 16, 2011 at 10:44 am

Well, the comment that polygny is a lifelong commitment isn’t true as practiced by the fundy LDS or have you forgotten about reassignments, release or preeminence? Preeminence for your edification, Hugh, was taught by Joseph Smith, Jr. which establishes that anyones plural wife if offered to wed with a higher/exalted church member had the right to chasnge priesthood husbands. Joseph Smyth, Jr. married abouit 10 plural wives in his lifetime that were already betrothed. That’s how Warren S. Jeffs justifies marrying whichever of his father Rulons wives, like Naomi, that he chooses. The rumors about Warren and Naomi being involved with one another preceded Rulons demise, so lifelong commitment by fundy LDS doesn’t hold up. You do recall that Seth Jeffs, while delivering money and messages to the then fugitive brother Warren, was arrested with another FLDS member who explained his presence to police as being a paid male prostitute of Seth Jeffs. I guess you mean a ‘lifelong semi-committment’.
Work it

February 16, 2011 at 8:17 pm

Hugh,

It was pointed out to me, that you detail on your own blog, that you considered your ex wife as still your wife, until years later when she remarried, and only thne did you “release” her.

Thats not only jacked up and majorly creepy, it backs up what I said. If you can just consider someone your wife regardless of the law, you’ve stepped over the edge my man.

But talking to you is like peeing on a brick wall in the rain, you were all wet to begin with.

Rant on.
Hugh McBryde

February 16, 2011 at 8:45 pm

CAJim, I am not any brand or variation of LDS/Mormon. I don’t care what they believe as long as they are allowed to believe it. Freedom of Religion, you know. Beyond that, the vast majority of marriages within the FLDS pass muster from my point of view, in terms of outward appearances. In that I am not FLDS/Mormon (etc), I don’t believe in “Celestial Marriage” either.

Yes “Work it,” I stick to my beliefs. I did not regard my wife’s civil divorce as valid in the eyes of God. Since I don’t do anything but TALK about that, it has no effect on my ex (unless she wants/wanted it to) and it clearly had no effect on her behavior. I choose to divorce her for the only reason valid in scripture, which is adultery. Since I (an of course virtually no one else) believed her to still be married to me, I waited until she “married” another man, and considered that to be evidence of a sexual relationship and thus adultery and then I wrote her a letter saying “now you are divorced.”

Almost everyone regards that as you do, “creepy” or delusional on my part or as some bizarre form of stalking. I just stuck to my guns that’s all. For believers, the only cause for divorce is the adultery of the wife, the only LEGITIMATE cause, that is. It works for me and almost no one else. Most others when they are kind view it as a form of denial. I really don’t care. It’s over with. I did what I thought was right. I didn’t hurt anyone in the process.

This smacks of Betty’s stalking complaint. I leave my wife entirely alone after the civil divorce. I did not it regard as valid before God, but before God felt compelled to honor in terms of the behavior it asked of me. You talk about how weird that is, I’m thinking your into thought control Big Brother.

You have to understand that I don’t believe in confronting the state with force, so since I don’t (there could be minor exceptions, like defending my literal home), so the whole business about my “divorce” is an exercise in sticking to my guns, verbally and in thought, that’s all.

Still, this is an article about why a 20 year veteran of the UNT Police force got fired for “Blogging at Work.” I insist that what he was blogging about led to the discovery of compromising items the University could not ignore. Exactly what is open to discussion.

I continue to say it was his use of his position and power as a “peace officer” to investigate “enemies.” That, and his threatening my daughter, to threaten me, which is inappropriate to say the least for a “peace officer.”

You continue to attack me, you are anonymous trolls, you got bubkis.
K. Brister

February 16, 2011 at 8:59 pm

I know better than to enter this very off-topic conversation, but …

Hugh, your wife did not commit adultery by remarrying after she divorced you to escape a physically violent marriage. That is incredibly insulting to your ex-wife and to rational, thinking people in general. If you think that, that’s your business, but keep it to yourself. To discuss your ex-wife publicly in that manner is so far outside the bounds of decency and honor.

You did not leave your wife entirely alone after the civil divorce. You made public matters that are very private and are between a husband and wife and should remain in private. I doubt that you asked her permission before you aired your dirty laundry for the entire world to see. Do you really think it’s leaving your ex-wife alone when years later you continue publicly humiliating your her, discussing her very private business and accusing her of adultery? Where is your filter, man?
K. Brister

February 16, 2011 at 9:06 pm

Hugh said:

‘I continue to say it was his use of his position and power as a “peace officer” to investigate “enemies.” That, and his threatening my daughter, to threaten me, which is inappropriate to say the least for a “peace officer.”’
..

You are 100% wrong. His termination had nothing to do with your or your accusations. Ask Gilbreath, or have you been warned to quit calling?

That reminds me, something the article leaves out is the fact that you harassed various University employees by calling them repeatedly after being asked to stop and calling them at their homes even. You called head of UNT Dallas to the point that you were given a verbal trespass warning and security was increased because of your insanity. This is not the first time you’ve been warned about harassment or been given trespass warnings, is it? There’s a pathology there, Hugh. Think about your pattern of behavior over the years and the results in each case.
CAJim

February 16, 2011 at 11:00 pm

It is self explanatory Hugh for you to state that Fundamental LDS(Mormon) practice of polygamy for you generally,”Pass muster from your point of view”.
Polygamy is a lawful practice in Texas nor in any other State in America. You may think you have the option to approve or grant your positively in your opinion but that does not negate the law. The ‘Freedom of Religion’ in America has a limiting precedent in the landmark case in 1878 of Reynolds vs. US. This ruling has withstood any serious challenges from that time until now. Basically, as you stated everyone is free to believe whatever they choose in spiritual matters, however, no one can break an existing statute and use their religion as the rightful reason to break any law. No modern developed Nation has repealed their bigamy law(s) and your work as a Lobbyist has not repealed any bigamy law(s), either. Polygamy of itself is not the only problem spawn by this institution it leads to an imbalance in gender pairing, supply/demand market for females, younger female brides and a means to jettison competing males. The known consequences are sex trafficking, minor females are coerced to wed, age of consent violations rise and male youths are shunned/ostracised by their polygamist members. The present hearing in Canada over the lawfulness of polygamy laws has revealed that over 25 teen wives have been illegally taken/married form the US, and a similar number of Canadian teen wives is believed to have been sent into the US. I would assume, Hugh, you wouldn’t raise any concerns over these trafficked wives, would you?
Hugh McBryde

February 16, 2011 at 11:42 pm

No, it’s not self explanatory, you have distorted what I said, yet once again. The reader is advised to read what I said, not what YOU said I said. This is not an article about my beliefs, FLDS beliefs and how you distort both of them, particularly mine.

I am not FLDS or LDS anyway.

This is an article about how former peace officer and Sgt. Gregory J. Prickett used his time at work to do things he shouldn’t, and got fired for it.

Since all of you are reading from the same script, it’s hard to believe this isn’t just one person (other than Betty), and that one person is Gregory J. Prickett. The yellow ex mall cop of Texas.
Hugh McBryde

February 16, 2011 at 11:46 pm

K. this is still an article about Gregory J. Prickett, who by the way, participated in knocking a student’s teeth out over a traffic beef he was shown to have lied about, leading to the student NOT being convicted of the traffic offense in question. I shoved someone a few times 26 years ago.

Fear me.
K. Brister

February 16, 2011 at 11:51 pm

“yellow ex mall cop”

Hugh, maybe you’ve been on the internet too long if you think that’s persuasive or an appropriate way to communicate with people. Get out and interact with real people. Look for the good in people, find common ground, build bridges, let your anger go. You’re a Christian, right? What’s the message? I’m pretty sure there’s no directive to collect enemies and bring tremendous harm and distress to people you don’t like.
Greg Prickett

February 17, 2011 at 12:38 am

Hugh,

Here are the facts about the Gus Elliott case.

In 2004, a 19-year old student was stopped for a traffic violation and was determined to have been drinking alcohol, including the use a field breath test which showed the presence of alcohol. Elliott admitted during his deposition that he had been drinking alcohol all night and had lied about it at the time of the arrest. When he failed the field sobriety tests, he refused to comply with instructions and then turned, taking a posture as if he were going to fight or to flee. Since he would not comply, it was necessary to restrain him, during which time Officer Linnell suffered a laceration over his right eye, for which he later received medical treatment. During the course of taking him into custody after this, Elliott suffered a chipped tooth and a lacerated chin. Elliott made a plea deal to avoid going to trial for DWI, and plead “no contest” to another charge, paid $871 in fines/costs and served 12 months “deferred adjudication” probation.

He then sued and asked for $250,000 in damages. The case went to trial in 2008. After the DPS Crime Lab broke down the video to 30-fps, you could clearly see Elliott begin to turn away from the other officer and myself before we ever moved. The jury came back with a verdict that we had not violated Elliott’s rights nor used excessive force.

Even more telling was that at the conclusion of the trial, but before it went to the jury, Elliott’s attorney dropped one of the claims that he had made against me, apparently realizing that he had not proven his case.

This is my first post on this thread, and although much of your information is incorrect, I don’t intend to go through a point by point rebuttal or debate over it.
CAJim

February 17, 2011 at 2:59 am

Hugh, I am not trying to distort your statement in any way. Your comment about ‘pass muster’ in your view leaves out that your view does not abide by the law. Now does it? You are a registered lobbyist in Vermont for the legalization of polygamy. You have empathy and sympathy for practicing FLDS polygamists. The polygyny as practiced by the FLDS Church, of which you are not a member, is led to the recent series of guilty verdicts in the Eldorado, Texas area. Your commentaries and blogging is self explanatory and is overwelmingly in favor of the FLDS Church’s practice of polygamy as a religious freedom. You take other Bill of Rights positions that, also, are in support of this group. You primarily view these concerns as serious US Costitutional violations, including religious freedom, and not a continuing series of organized crime activities that came from the Hildale, Utah and Colorado City, Arizona areas and was been brought to the greater Eldorado, Texas region.

Hugh if you are a reporter and post your blog articles as news, then filing your complaint with the University of North Texas is both a personal problem and a blog news story you have reported. Doesn’t this seem somewhat as a conflict as a unbiased journalist?
Hugh McBryde

February 17, 2011 at 5:20 am

Greg;

We can clear things up a great deal if you answer the following, this of course assumes that you are Gregory Jack Prickett, the subject of the above article:

1.) How did you obtain the address PO Box 10485, Bozeman, MT?

The next several questions all are to be answered assuming a date of July 2010 or BEFORE.

2.) Were you associated in any way with the blogging identity “TxBluesMan” who posted at all or one of the following blogs: “Grits for Breakfast,” “Modern Pharisee,” “Coram non Judice (blogger version),” “Coram non Judice (wordpress version),” any of the blogs of Brooke Adams of the Salt Lake Tribune, or the wordpress blog “FLDS Texas?”

3.) Did you know who I was prior to (or during) July of 2010?

4.) Had you ever communicated with me (on or before July 31st of 2010)?

5.) Did you ever contribute to articles on the FLDS, and/or YFZ and/or Warren Jeffs at Wikipedia (this assumes that simply posting material written by others would be a “contribution”)?

Since you have now weighed in on the topic Greg, no other discussions are relevant unless you can and do answer the above questions, and in particular the last 4, with “yes,” or “no.”

I may have follow up questions.
Stephanie Marshall

February 17, 2011 at 7:04 am

You shoved someone a few times, McBryde ? You physically abused your wife. She filed a restraining order. That’s serious.
Work it

February 17, 2011 at 7:22 am

So Hugh had one “incident”, then posts on his blog that the shoving was “over a period of six years”, then it was “a few times”….

Talking to Hugh is like talking to Lindsay Lohan, or Warren Jeffs…

But without all the Bling, Babes and cash!
Work it

February 17, 2011 at 7:25 am

So the question is, Hugh, are you still abusing your wife?

Or do you have a wife!? I heard its one of those live together or not together depending on the weather arrangements, so likely not a wife, unless you have a creative mind like you do.

I suppose she is currently committing adultery against her ex husband, at least in your mind, thats how it works, right?
K. Brister

February 17, 2011 at 8:59 am

Hugh,

Why did you lie about the Gus Elliott case? Did you do any fact-checking or were you just trying to damage Prickett’s reputation without regard to the truth?

There are laws about that, you know. You might want to reconsider whether you need a lawyer.
Hugh McBryde

February 17, 2011 at 10:32 am

None of you in the cyber chorus matter, let Prickett answer.
Michael Fullmer

February 17, 2011 at 10:48 am

Work it: “So tell us fullmer how the folks at Sybase think of you queer internet habits?”

And the point is proved. You people know nothing other than to attack, threaten, and intimidate openly identified people from behind the cover of anonymity. I’m the guy who had issues with the 4th Amendment violation related to using one flimsy warrant to search an entire community, remember? I don’t approve of polygamy, don’t approve of pedophilia, and am not a fan of any LDS doctrine, FLDS or mainstream. Period.

But now I have to “defend” whether Sybase approves of my “queer” internet habits because some anonymous troll says so? “Work it” is either stamp (the world’s stupidest human being) or Prickett hiding, as per usual, behind a pseudonym in order to attack with impunity.

Either way, you, sir, are a tool.
CAJim

February 17, 2011 at 11:08 am

Uh, Hugh are you asking us ot telling us to be silent or leave you alone. In case it has not become obvious to you yet, your brand of ‘reporting’ and personal complaints tends to gather an incensed crowd. By the bye who is going to exploit what is commented here from “Ye Olde Journalist” will it be you or will you hide behind one of your henchmen buddies to write the ‘yellow journalist’ article(s). Cute game you play here Hugh, whatever someone says can’t be used in a court of law but will more likely be spread across the internet as more warped reporting from you(but not as an unbiased observer but as an unannounced vendetta taker).

This websites motto is ‘Speak Your Mind’ and not shut up and answer Hugh’s questions. Who’s trying to hijack this comments section now.
CAJim

February 17, 2011 at 11:23 am

Mr. Fullmer you are the blogger at ‘The Vulture Lurks’? Care to share here with us whom you selected on your blog as your ‘Wiener of the Year’ in 2009 and 2010? Please share with us your complete rationalization and justification for naming both of those awards. I would love for everyone here to learn how cybe-bullying works from a real pro-blogger. Your comment about someone being ‘The world’s stupidest human being’, is this going to be the bases for yet another of your blog awards or has someone just been nominated for ‘Wiener of the Year’? By the way who chooses and votes for this award your cohort writers from ‘Ye Olde Journalist’?
Hugh McBryde

February 17, 2011 at 11:35 am

And still, nothing matters but Prickett’s answer, or non answer.
Michael Fullmer

February 17, 2011 at 11:38 am

CAJim,

I owe neither you nor anyone else justification for anything. Everything I’ve written on TVL was done fully in the open. My mug, my name, my city of residence are all right there front-and-center for the whole world to see. TxBluesMan posted all manner of vile accusations, innuendo, and slander WHILE COMPLETELY ANONYMOUS, a nuance you Pickett defenders seem unable to grasp.

Please get a clue soonest.
CAJim

February 17, 2011 at 11:40 am

Uh, Fullmer are you a reporter, too? You just posted that the YFZ Ranch Raid that a ‘…..flimsy to search an entire community…” is erroroneous. The YFZ Ranch was served three duly authorized search warrants and a hearing of facts concerning those search warrants was later conducted and all of the seized evidence was allowed into evidence. A federal search warrant was issued at the YFZ Ranch bringing the total ‘flimsy’ count to four (4) search warrants. If you read the published reports prior to this incident you will discover that the local Eldorado Justice of the Peace met several times with David Allred and other FLDS members who all repeatedly represented that the ranch population was no more than 150+/- total residents, after the YFZ rescue transpired over 550+ residents were found to be in resaidence there.
You decry a ‘community’ was searched when really from then to now Schleicher County has the ole ‘Red Cheek Ranch’, renamed YFZ Ranch in 2004, down as a ranch homestead and not a approved community development. If your going to be a credible ‘reporter’ for ‘Ye Olde Journalist’ you better get your facts on record correctly or others my view you as a hack journalist.
Michael Fullmer

February 17, 2011 at 11:46 am

My blog is strictly opinion and commentary. I’ve never considered myself to be a reporter. That said, I believe you’re incorrect regarding the “warrants”. The sequence in which they were issued and the “dates” of issue have already been identified by Toes and others as being sketchy.

Again…..so what? You’re completely avoiding my point. As could have been anticipated.
CAJim

February 17, 2011 at 11:46 am

Well now everyone can get a flavor of your blogger integrity and truthful representations here Mr. Fullmer and Hugh McBryde. Anyone interested to check out ‘Ye Olde Journalist’ or ‘The Vulture Lurks’ or ‘Modern Pharisee’ will see buckets of slime evidence to back up my questions. What a wienie!
Michael Fullmer

February 17, 2011 at 11:54 am

CAJim,

WHAT are you talking about? I expressed opinion on my blog related to available information in the May 2008 time frame (re: the 4th Amendment issue) when the post I mentioned was written. I was called a pedophile by TxBluesMan. And…I’M the one who can’t be trusted?!?!?!?

Logic called. It misses you.
CAJim

February 17, 2011 at 11:56 am

Heah, Hugh one of your fellow writers at ‘Ye Olde Journalist’ says he’s an opinion or commentary columnist, yet the articles posted appear in a typical reporting format and no ‘private opinion’ disclaimers are posted. Why Fullmer would you post under a blogger banner that clearly stated ‘Journalist’?
I believe your Wiener of the year was “TexasBluesMan”/TBM? You can hide or you can run but you can’t do both with me here.

Fullmer there were four (4) search warrants presented to Bishop Merril Jessop over the course of ten days. ‘Toes’ isn’t anymore of a reliable fact source than you are.
Michael Fullmer

February 17, 2011 at 12:05 pm

Again….point missed.

Ye Olde Journalist invited me (and others) to post there. You’d have to ask Scotty why we were chosen, but, in my case, I believe it was to serve the purpose of a frying pan to the head of people like, well, you.

You don’t like my treatment of the facts regarding the warrants? Again, you’re looking at a post from May ’08 using facts I wasn’t aware of when I wrote it? What, exactly, would make me “trustworthy” in your eyes? To retract it? To commit hari kari? The correct answer is: none of the above. You don’t really care if I’m trustworthy or not. You’re just trying to draw attention away from the slimeball that is Gregory Prickett, and my 4th amendment post is the convenient hook on which to hang your allegations.
CAJim

February 17, 2011 at 12:07 pm

Come on Fullmer let’s get the facts straight:

1.) Flimsy or four(4), 3 Texas warrants were later affirmed by 51st District Court.

2.) ‘Community’ or ranchstead.

3,) ‘Ye Olde Journalist’ is a current events news blogsite or a column/opinion blogsite(devoid of any declarative disclaimer).
Michael Fullmer

February 17, 2011 at 12:10 pm

And yet, Prickett is still a dirtbag.

Vulture 1, Moron 0.
CAJim

February 17, 2011 at 12:31 pm

Correction, again, Fullmer the ‘Ye Olde Journalist’ blogsite lists in it’s right column both Bill Medvecky and ‘Vulture’ as ‘Staff’. If you now claim you paricipate soley by invitation, then which is it ‘Staff’ or ‘Visitor’.
So you here assert that you are not a journalist nor a staff member at “Ye Olde Journalist’ but the blogsite reflects otherwise. Also, I know who staff member ‘Cheyenne’ is but who is ‘Ruth’, she never publishes any articles at this blog?

What you have represented here does not ring true at “Ye Olde Journalist” and the ‘Yellow Journalism’ that’s posted there are slime reports, plain and simple.
Michael Fullmer

February 17, 2011 at 12:34 pm

I didn’t claim “visitor” status. I’m clearly staff, dumbass. What’s your point?!?!? Got any more nits to pick? Holy criminy but you’re obtuse.
CAJim

February 17, 2011 at 12:41 pm

Contrary to what you may try to attack me for here Mr. Fullmer, I am trying to demonstrate that the facts and truth are not contained 100% within Hugh’s complaint, nor is/are the reason(s) for Officer Prickett’s dismissal fully vetted, yet the crack ‘Staff’ from “Ye Olde Journalist”(including you) will spin here what it means and your truthfulness and integrity is doubtful when questioned.

Now walk back to your Vulture cave and report in to your handlers.
Work it

February 17, 2011 at 12:47 pm

Hang in there, Vulture, the child molesters at the FLDS are thankful you’re there for them! Hugh too! And Im sure that excon Medvecky thinks your cute as well!

Being a Vulture, you have a lot of friends in and out of prison you can sit there and keep an eye on.
CAJim

February 17, 2011 at 12:48 pm

So you now admit you are a ‘Staff’ member and not a ‘Journalist’ but the blogsite that posts your tripe proclaims you as such on the blog banner. I would guess that you do know who Ruth is but will attempt here to refuse to acknowledge a fellow ‘Staff’ member? It is true that Bill Medvecky is a convicted felon and your fellow staff member. Correct?
CAJim

February 17, 2011 at 1:47 pm

“Prickett is NOT the victim here. He is a vile bully” is a quote from Michael Fullmer who now owns up to the fact that this is only his opinion and he is not a journalist but is a ‘Staff’ member at “Ye Olde Journalist” blogsite with numerous posted articles that do victimize Officer Prickett. His articles are mostly ‘No Comments’ because it represents the most crass brand of ‘Yellow Journalism’. The University of North Texas code of ethics is stated by Michael Fullmer as having, at a minimum been violated by Officer Prickett, typically he sites no section of the ethical code nor his specific violation. mere smear and nor proof is the hallmark of ‘Yellow Journalism’.
Michael Fullmer has commented here,” If we co-opt the rights of the unpopular or the ‘weird’, it’s only a matter of time until the rights of all are co-opted”. I respectfully submit that he is that dreaded co-opter.
Hugh McBryde

February 17, 2011 at 2:52 pm

And still, no rwsponse from Prickett. I can see his lap dogs (or alter egos?) are busy piling posts on top of the unanswered questions that the Yellow Rental Cop of Texas will not answer….
CAJim

February 17, 2011 at 3:11 pm

Hugh I asked you, before you listed your questions, if your personal complaint filed with UNT and your reporting of this event on your blog isn’t an obvious conflict of interest as a journalist reporting unbiased facts and/or views?

Still no response from you, first things first. Oh, Vulture now states that he is not a reporter but just an opinion columnist expressing his own views. The “Ye Olde Journalist” blogsite lists you as a “Staffer”, I know I am being obtuse to ask this but are you a staff member? Who is going to report on the comments made here, you or another of your crack ‘Staff’ members at “Yell Olde Journalist”?
Hugh McBryde

February 17, 2011 at 3:32 pm

CAJim, This isn’t about you (unless you ARE Prickett). Dude, Prickett spoke. You just don’t MATTER. Let Greg answer. YOU ARE NOBODY and YOU DON’T COUNT.
CAJim

February 17, 2011 at 4:10 pm

Spoken like the TRUE reporter and claimant that you are, Hugh! Polygamy and Pedophile Support Group (PPSG) that you have complained about being called such a supporter in your formal UNT complaint has been shown by my postings to be, at least partially correct. You are a registered lobbyist in Vermont to legalize polygamy, you continue to support all seven (7) convicted sexual assault FLDS members and as you have posted here in these comments that the practice of polygamy FLDS members for you,”…pass muster…”. Convicted FLDS member, namely Mr. Mack has plead guilty to both polygamy and sexual assault.
You are a hypocrite to complain about being described a polygamy supporter when in fact you are just such a person by your actions and written statements on several blogsites and commentary sections, such as this one.
CAJim

February 17, 2011 at 4:29 pm

CORRECTION : Above.”Convicted FLDS member, namely Mr.Emack, Michael G. has plead guilty to both polygamy and aggravated sexual assault”.
Michael Fullmer

February 17, 2011 at 5:46 pm

CAJim,

Your obsession with “journalism” is quite touching. You might be surprised to know the The Vulture Lurks existed for over three years before I was invited to join the staff of Ye Olde Journalist. And as a result of that invite I changed……absolutely nothing. I self-censor some of the salty language in deference to Scotty, but nothing of the content. You don’t like my content? Tough shinola. I stand by what I write.

You think “journalism” means something in the 21st century? Grow up, son! With Fox News serving as the organs of propaganda for Neocons and the rest of Big Media as the organs of propaganda for the corporatists, you want to hold me to some idealized standard of “journalism”? HAHAHAHAHA!
CAJim

February 17, 2011 at 6:33 pm

No, not really but your buddy Hugh McBryde fancies himself here as a ‘reporter’, you strike me as not much beyond ‘retorter’. Before I complain about you to your main blogging network at “Networked Blogs”, that spreads your flawed journalism all over their blog system as though it was a news article(s), instead of opinionated tripe. Your registered Topics with this network are: Politics, Scripture and Polygamy, which one of thes categories reflects your diatribe articles best? I would say none reflects your chosen topic of police abuse, police investigations and police crimes. I am thinking that the folks at “Networked Blogs” have no idea that your anti-Law Enforcement agenda is what your articles topic the majority of the time.
Of course, this could be viewed as unfair treatment by me but your blog Master is even more out spoken on Law Enforcement than you and Hugh put together.
CAJim

February 17, 2011 at 6:50 pm

Mr. Fullmer, please, stop with the ad hominem attacks and just answer from your earlier post comment which UNT Code of Ethics was broken and how by Officer Prickett?
Michael Fullmer

February 17, 2011 at 6:55 pm

You. Are. Nutso. Absolutely nutso.

#1: My blog, The Vulture Lurks, is NOT listed in “Networked Blogs”.

#2: As I mentioned before, Ye Olde Journalist, an EXISTING blog, invited me to be a staff journalist. I’m cool with that. I don’t speak for YOJ, nor does YOJ speak for me. You got an issue with it? I’m sooooooooooo sorry. No, really I’m not.

#3: If by “anti-law enforcement” you mean standing against “cops who shoot innocents” and “prosecutors who couldn’t give a rat’s ass if you did it or not so long as they get a win”, then I guess I qualify. Does that make you pro-law enforcement if you support those things? I’m fairly certain, since you defend Prickett, that you do.

I’m done with you. You’re a poster child for arrested development masquerading as a seeker of truth.
CAJim

February 17, 2011 at 7:24 pm

AWAY…..Away….away….back to your black cave of information dressed up as bons fide press releases on the “Networked Blogs”. For your information Mr. in total denial your “Ye Olde Journalist” had rotaing postings of not only your NWA diatribe on a Seattle Peace Officer but it was followed by a CNN article and then an AP News release. So here state I am not a ‘reporter’ and/or ‘journalist’ but your article is being cycled along with these other major news sources as though they are from reliable news mediums, which in your case is a bogus ASSumption. You are a ‘Staff’ member at “Ye Olde Journalist” but I guess you don’t relize how your article(s) are being interposed with legitimate hews coverages or maybe your mistaken.

Like Hugh McBryde it is only fair to ask you as well for any Press Credentials, Journalism Degrees or Major Press Publication experience that gives your articles an inkling of notewothiness?

Oh, I am very much interested in the Truth/Evidence/Proof but you, Hugh McBryde and Bill Medvecky from “Yell Olde Journalist” don’t provde me with anything of substance or real factual significance. If your going to walk back from here, I would suggest you dress warmly and stay bundled up.
Michael Fullmer

February 17, 2011 at 7:30 pm

Okay, Mr. “I police the media”, what are YOUR credentials? Oh, wait………you’re anonymous!!!!!!

Dick.
Stephanie Marshall

February 17, 2011 at 7:32 pm

I love this statement by McBryde : YOU ARE NOBODY and YOU DON’T COUNT.

It could be said in fact that he was speaking of himself.
CAJim

February 17, 2011 at 7:44 pm

Your “Ye Olde Journalist” article was being interspersed with AP News and Yahoo News articles verses CNN.

Too late now boyz the blogsites and tactics have all been placed into the light for everyone to view and decide for themselves.

Hugh’s already reposted Officer Prickett’s one comment here and his list of interrogative questions on his ‘Modern Pharisee’ blogsite, talk about no account and nobody cares. He has to have ‘delete’ and ‘edit’ buttons to make his viewpoint valid, otherwise out on a open forum, like this one, he ends up walking away and disgruntled. Right, Vulture?
Michael Fullmer

February 17, 2011 at 7:47 pm

*Yawn*

Go away child. Yer boring me.
CAJim

February 17, 2011 at 8:01 pm

“If we co-opt the rights of the unpopular or the ‘weird’, it’s only a matter of time until the rights of all are co-opted”. Michael Fullmer,”Ye Olde Journalist”.
Stephanie Marshall

February 17, 2011 at 8:23 pm

“If we co-opt the rights of the unpopular or the ‘weird’, it’s only a matter of time until the rights of all are co-opted”

Does that statement apply to men who think that 7 yr olds are potential marriage material ?
CAJim

February 17, 2011 at 8:30 pm

My co-opter reference would be:

“Law(?) and Order(?!?!?!?)-Caput Penitus Calus” by Michael Fullmer, “Ye Olde Journalist”, dated Saturday, 30 October, 2010

“Prickett is NOT the victim here. He is a vile bully”. Michael Fullmer @ The Vulture Lurks.
Hugh McBryde

February 17, 2011 at 9:39 pm

I refer to the fact that we don’t know who “CAJim” is, and thus, he/she/it/they = nobody. Nothing.

If Prickett will not answer the questions, all of them, then he stands indicted.

BTW, I’ve already said I’m a nobody, so you don’t get to pile on.
Editor-in-chief

February 17, 2011 at 10:03 pm

The Daily is glad to offer readers the opportunity to post comments that express opinion, add information, or further discuss topics presented in the articles we feature.

However, the comment section is not a forum to debate personal disputes. Anyone posting personal attacks or comments unrelated to the content of the article will be blocked from commenting.

We welcome both positive and negative feedback from readers and will continue to manage the comment boards in a way that best serves our function to provide reliable news and information to the UNT community.
K. Brister

February 18, 2011 at 8:50 am

Hugh,

Note that Prickett said he will not engage in a point by point debate. Your approach is not exactly welcoming either. I doubt he’s going to enter this melee.

A good way to get answers to your questions will be through the discovery process in Prickett’s defamation suit against you. Hey, if you can prove the truth of everything you’ve said about Prickett, you’re home free. Oh wait — maybe you should have known the answers to those questions before you stated your speculations as fact.
CAJim

February 18, 2011 at 9:09 am

Since Michael Fullmer has stated here that Officer Prickett at a minimum has violated the UNT Code of Ethics, can anyone point me to this code or where such an accusation of a supposed violation originates? I am aware that the Texas Municipal Workers Association on campus has such a code but I don’t believe that UNT Officers pledge this conduct by oaths.

To the Editor-in-Chief I have read you comment and will endeavor to observe you remarks. Does NTDaily claim any copyright to what is posted here because Officer Pricketts sole comment above, concerning the case of Gus Elliot, has been transposed in it’s entirety to a blog of Hugh McBryde, named ‘Modern Pharisee, along with his published litany of questions at 5:20AM, yesterday?
CAJim

February 18, 2011 at 9:23 am

I think that any discussion of ethics on this campus over the complkaint filed by Hugh mcBryde needs to be evaluated as to the comments made here by Hugh mcBryde that he is a ‘reporter’ and along with his fellow ‘Staff’ members is writing blog articles about himself as a said/same complainant. Seems like he here doesn’t see the obvious journalistic conflict of interest of being both ‘claimant’ and ‘reporter’. I wonder if this isn’t some kind of a stunt to generate blogosphere interest in a manufactured news hype? It certainly has been exploited on the blogs by “Ye Olde Journalist” as some major event.
Hugh McBryde

February 18, 2011 at 10:36 am

Brister, if was not in any way associated with the “Coram Non Judice” persona, all my “yes-no” questions would be answered with “no” and cause no harm to Greg, and in fact would greatly aid his cause. Only the address question would be tough for him.

This article & comment section is about Greg. Let him answer for all to see since he has felt the need now to comment. Your OPINIONS about me or Greg no longer matter since he is here & felt it appropriate to comment. Let him answer.
Hugh McBryde

February 18, 2011 at 10:45 am

I meant to say ” if Greg…”
CAJim

February 18, 2011 at 10:57 am

Is there some kind of an ulterior motive here by “Ye Olde Journalist” Staffers to hype their blog traffic, their article,”Sgt. Gregory “Greg” Jack Prickett Hates Capt. Hook, So He Tries To Be a Man in Tights” dated 11/16/2010 and doesn’t touch upon any of the complaint issues in any way.

Hugh transposing your comment questions from this site, along with Prickett’s comment response to your blog site, is yet another attempt to syphon off NTDaily posters to your ‘Modern Pharisee’ blog?
Hugh McBryde

February 18, 2011 at 11:45 am

Try as you may CAJim, but this is still about Greg. Let him answer. He has endorsed this venue.
CAJim

February 18, 2011 at 12:28 pm

Hugh you posted here that any non-response from Prickett translates that he is indicted. Indicted of what??? Are you his judge and jury, too?? Are you both ‘reporter’ and ‘journalist’?

I think that it is now obvious that there has been a hidden agenda behind your complaint with UNT, all along the way. The number of “Ye Olde Journalist” articles by your cohort ‘Staff’ reporters stands witness to other and undisclosed motive(s). The way Bill Medvecky and Michael Fullmer alighted on this ‘Speak Your Mind’ comment section points up that an orchestrated effort is afoot to make your case, spread your tripe and mask the real motives unobserved by posters here until I connected the relationships as ‘Staffers’. Now you are trapped and don’t dare proclaim your innocence but choose to ignore the obvious.

Editor-in-Chief there’s another story here equally as interesting on what motives beyond feigned tresspasses in order to launch an attack. The ‘Capt. Hook’ article referenced above attacked the UNT attorney and Pricketts boss with published photos and blatant attempt to ridicule and intimidate. Is this journalism, ethical or warranted?
Work it

February 18, 2011 at 12:34 pm

You cant rewrite the article, sorry Hugh.

Your name is all over it, and sadly, NT Times failed to perform due diligence on your background.

To any interested, its well documented.
K. Brister

February 18, 2011 at 8:27 pm

Hugh,

No one is preventing Prickett from responding, but what part of “I will not engage in a point by point debate” do you not understand?

It doesn’t appear that Prickett’s comments were designed to answer your questions. It appears that he was correcting your continued slanderous statements about him so that his reputation is not further damaged. If you keep slandering him, maybe you’ll provoke more comments from him — how else can he deal with the lies being told about him, even while a defamation lawsuit is pending? I wouldn’t count on Prickett responding to your mostly irrelevant demands for answers, not in this forum anyway. Prickett seems to subscribe to the wisdom that parties to litigation should keep their mouths shut outside the courtroom.

Out of curiosity, how do you think it might affect a police officer’s reputation and ability to work in law enforcement when you publish false statements that he committed violent acts, and also wrongly state that the person convicted was somehow exonerated?

You run around saying whatever pops into your head, with no regard for its truth or falsity, and with apparently no consciousness of the damage that you continue to do. Or perhaps the damage that you do is exactly the purpose? In any event, what you’re continuing to do is not only legally prohibited, it’s morally reprehensible. I have no idea why you are so certain Prickett is bluffing about the lawsuit. I have never known a person to go through the time and expense of filing a lawsuit and requesting citation by publication when said person is merely bluffing. Maybe you’re right, but I’m not seeing it. In any event, what you’re doing is wrong, and if I were in Prickett’s shoes, I would make sure you got hailed into court and were held accountable or die trying.
Hugh McBryde

February 18, 2011 at 9:05 pm

I’m not interested in debating any of you, or discussing my character, or lack thereof. As noted, I’m “all over” this article. Greg responded in this thread to the article, and to me.

It’s really painfully simple. He is not harmed at all by answering the “yes-no” questions I asked if the answer is “no” to all of them, which essentially, the answer would be, if he were not “TxBluesMan” of “Coram Non Judice/FLDS Texas” infamy.

But he will not answer those questions. He has addressed me in public for all to see but he will not answer. Could it be that one or all of the “yes-no” questions I asked would be answered “yes?”

I can see why he would not answer under those circumstances, since it would essentially prove my point.

At this time, as I also noted, the only difficult question for Greg, even if he can answer “no” to all the “yes-no” questions would be how he came about the address “PO Box 10485, Bozeman MT” and why he decided to use it.

I really don’t care about what the rest of you care about, since Greg has chosen to respond here. It’s “Serve” (I served), “Return” (Greg Returned) and now we’re into “Volley.”

If he answers one of those “yes-no” questions with “yes,” then it’s “Game – Set – Match” and he knows it. That’s probably the most likely explanation for his failure to answer questions that if I have falsely accused him, he would be eager to answer, and could easily answer with “no.”
single mom

February 18, 2011 at 9:10 pm

interesting article and thank you for the read.
Work it

February 18, 2011 at 9:19 pm

You cant rewrite the article, sorry Hugh.

Your name is all over it, and sadly, NT Times failed to perform due diligence on your background.

To any interested, its rather well documented.
Hugh McBryde

February 18, 2011 at 11:51 pm

Work it, it’s still about Gregory Prickett and it doesn’t matter if a background investigation found I was a serial killer. He can’t answer, apparently because he is “TxBluesMan,” who DID publish pictures of my daughter at “FLDS Texas.”
CAJim

February 19, 2011 at 1:40 am

So, Hugh what specifically constitutes he’s stands indicted?

Indicted by whom? Indicted for what charge?

Fullmer your comment about Prickett at a minimum making some code of ethics violation does not seem to exist here at the UNT campus, maybe your imagination or empty claim rings true with you and Hugh but not at UNT.
Hugh McBryde

February 19, 2011 at 4:07 am

CAJim, he stands indicted as “TxBluesMan” of “FLDS Texas” & “Coram non Judice,” the blogger who published pictures of my daughter.
Hugh McBryde

February 19, 2011 at 4:07 am

CAJim, he stands indicted as “TxBluesMan” of “FLDS Texas” & “Coram non Judice,” the blogger who published pictures of my daughter.
Work it

February 19, 2011 at 6:24 am

Yet once again you are making wild accusations. You are not a serial killer, or at least I dont think so, but you ARE a serial conspiracy theorist.

How did that work for you when you tried to out TBM last year or so by posting the info on some innocent guy on your site?

I was told this anon guy was upset and called your home and possibly your work, right about the time you “got fired”… isnt that right? Well perhaps I’m reading between the lines, its the way it was explained to me.

And then you got notices by your Church warning you to keep off its grounds under threat of police action, and also warned to stay off campus of the UNT by the LE there, after harrassing the honchos at their homes in the evening on the phone etc?

Now this poor paper is subjected to your never ending cornucopia of crapola.
CAJim

February 19, 2011 at 7:23 am

Hugh you have no valid authority to proclaim ‘indictment’ of anyone at anytime. Your a ‘Hero of Zero’ conspiracies but master of many spawn by your blog but never fully investigated of completed because the evidence and facts don’t align with your unproven premise(s). Your claims that Officer Prickett is involved with the blogsite ‘FLDS Texas’ as an owner or moderator is baseless and yet another accusation you have espoused. I note here that when you began your hunt for ‘TexasBluesMan’ you fancied him to be a unnamed Texas Ranger, staff member of the Texas AG or FBI agent but now your real quest to find a conspiracy that will oveturn the YFZ Ranch Raid has resulted in Officer Prickett being trapped in your vigilante dragnet. Seems like you are posting now on this comments section without any support from your fellow ‘Staff’ from “Ye Olde Journalist”. I have noted that they have been busy pulling down previously posted articles about UNT administration staff, like Lt. West Gilbeath and campus attorney Reynaldo Stowers. You seem to have been abandoned and left here to defend yourself alone?
Hugh McBryde

February 19, 2011 at 9:59 am

I’m a loon, I’m a conspiracy theorist, I’m the Queen of England. Gregory J. Prickett has endorsed this venue, and furthermore, he has endorsed it for the purposes of talking to me.

The questions I have asked, all of the “yes-no” questions, harm him not at all to answer, if the answer is in fact “no,” to all of them.

But he will not answer them.

If the answer is no, Gregory J. Prickett should be eager to answer them as they would be effortlessly and enthusiastically answered with “no,” and it would further greatly his cause as the inappropriate target of my ire.

If he were to answer “no” and the answer to “yes” to any one of these questions, he’s got more problems than he has now.

I rather suspect the answer is “yes” to most or all of the “yes-no” questions and for that reason it is in Greg’s best interest not to respond.

The only real problem question for Greg if the answers are all “no,” and really no, is the one about my Bozeman address. He has no credible available explanation for choosing that address since the records I suspect he accessed to attempt to serve me with something would not have shown that address in September of 2010, when we first made contact.
Work it

February 19, 2011 at 1:30 pm

Talk to the hand
CAJim

February 19, 2011 at 1:59 pm

You seem to be a ‘Lost Bouy’ adrift without any support from the ‘Staff’.
Your complaint to the UNT admisistration states,’…we found a UNT based IP from a ‘GregJackP’. Who was the ‘we’ you and who else or did ‘Toes’ find something after months of investigation and share it with you, constituting your ‘we found’? Hugh during the time in your complaint you were working in a car dealership in finance arena in the State of Maine. I recall your sharing about how bad the business was, staff was contracting and vehicle sales were depressed, yet your complaint states that your row over the internet may have played some primary role in your dismissal? Is that when you decided to reek you complaint on Officer Prickett?
Hugh McBryde

February 19, 2011 at 2:38 pm

CAJim; Like I said, what you want and even indeed you yourself, are irrelevant at this point. Let Greg contend for Greg.
CAJim

February 19, 2011 at 2:40 pm

In the complaint against Officer Prickett, Mr. McBryde states that he was labelled and called a ‘PPSG’ or Polygamy and Pedophile Supporter. He continues to actively support the innocence of all twelve Schleicher County Grand Jury indictees, even though seven (7) have been found guilty. His blogsite has a motto of himself under his “Modern Pharisee” banner that clearly states his belief in polygyny and he is/was a registered lobbyist in the State of Maine in 2010 to legalize polygamy there. The readers here be the judge if this constitutes a supporter or unwarranted labelling.

I think it’s fair to call Mr. McBryde an active and known supporter of convicted pedophiles and polygamists. Seems to me to be a fair and valid conclusion based upon clear proofs.
Hugh McBryde

February 19, 2011 at 4:01 pm

CAJim, it still doesn’t matter. You don’t matter. My character, good or bad, doesn’t matter. If wat all of you cyber ghosts lined up is true, Greg should have already answered “no” to all the “yes or no” questions. He hasn’t. What you’re TRYING to do is cover up that CLEAR evidence that I am right about Greg with irrelevant remarks. For all we know, you are Greg. This is his “MO” after all.
CAJim

February 20, 2011 at 8:56 am

We’ll the simple truth laid out here for everyone to view is you have many hidden agendas and your complaint to UNT is dishonest and warped from saying it truthfully. You have been asked here to tell your facts and correct mistatements and you have refused. So look to see who is ‘indicted’ by their own double-standards and tried to have his fellow ‘Staffers’ post comments in support of your lame brained reasonings yet no one has supported your take on the truth here at ‘NTDaily’ but your now unmasked cohort buddies Bill Medvecky and Michael (Vulture) Fullmer.

If your true evidence is so ‘CLEAR'(and by the way you tend to capitalize words when you lack proofs)where is the proof that Greg Prickett is ‘TexasBluesMan’ or are we all supposed to believe it by now because you have repeated ad nauseum?

Where’s your facts/proof that Greg Prickett moderates or owns ‘FLDS Texas’ blogsite?
Hugh McBryde

February 20, 2011 at 10:21 am

For the purposes of this diiscussion, I’ll stipulate to almost anything you like. Greg still hasn’t answered. I called him. That WAS his post. He IS In this conversation. Let him answer.
Betty

February 20, 2011 at 11:22 am

He’s not interested in debating any of us. But He Just Can’t STOP. LOL.
Betty

February 20, 2011 at 2:03 pm

Hugh, No one is impressed with your “calling him out”. It’s not the OK Corral.

Has it occurred to you that some of the folks who are talking to you here, folks you dismiss as being “unimportant” actually know for sure that some of your claims are false?
Hugh McBryde

February 20, 2011 at 5:31 pm

Betty, I’m not responding anyone, I’m refusing to respond, at least to the substance of what they say. I’m not debating you. What I’m doing is making sure you don’t cover up with your irrelevant posts, the fact that Greg Prickett cannot and will not answer questions that a man who was NOT TxBluesMan would be jumping to answer.

Betty, you know Former UNT Sgt. Gregory J. Prickett is TxBluesMan of Coram non Judice and FLDS Texas. What’s the point in denying it?
CAJim

February 21, 2011 at 2:02 am

Greg Prickett does not own and has never moderated the ‘FLDS Texas’ blog and the complaint against Prickett claims he is ‘TexasBluesMan’ and provides no proof.

The UNT complaint against Officer Prickett contains many assumptions and ssertions that are unproven and no additional proof has been offered here and was unknown until the complaint was filed.
Hugh McBryde

February 21, 2011 at 5:53 am

I have never claimed he “owned” or “moderated” the FLDS Texas blog, and you strangely continue to omit the fact that I have associated him with the “Coram non Judice” blog, which I do say he owned and moderated. He posts at FLDS Texas, or rather, he did. The blog post in question, the one where he depicted my daughter, was authored by TxBluesMan, who is Gregory J. Prickett.

Greg has only to answer the “yes-no” questions I posed, with no, and he should be EAGER to do that if he is not “TxBluesMan” of Coram non Judice and FLDS Texas. in associating him with FLDS Texas, I am not claiming he owns or moderates FLDS Texas, I am saying he posts there, and I am saying he was allowed to author a blog post at that blog that depicted my daughter. His name was on the post as it’s author, and I have saved it in it’s original form.

Have Greg answer the questions. His failure to do so means he is in some form of jeopardy because he must answer at least one (if not all of them) with “yes.”

Which means I am right.

Which means he is the blogger in question, and the poster in question.
Hugh McBryde

February 21, 2011 at 5:59 am

Since those original questions have been buried by copious irrelevant posts by the assembled “opposition,” here they are again, the questions Greg cannot afford to answer honestly (or dishonestly) in public, in front of witnesses.

Greg:

1.) How did you obtain the address PO Box 10485, Bozeman, MT?

The next several questions all are to be answered assuming a date of July 2010 or BEFORE.

2.) Were you associated in any way with the blogging identity ‘TxBluesMan’ who posted at all or one of the following blogs: ‘Grits for Breakfast,’ ‘Modern Pharisee,’ ‘Coram non Judice (blogger version),’ ‘Coram non Judice (wordpress version),’ any of the blogs of Brooke Adams of the Salt Lake Tribune, or the wordpress blog ‘FLDS Texas?’

3.) Did you know who I was prior to (or during) July of 2010?

4.) Had you ever communicated with me (on or before July 31st of 2010)?

5.) Did you ever contribute to articles on the FLDS, and/or YFZ and/or Warren Jeffs at Wikipedia (this assumes that simply posting material written by others would be a ‘contribution’)?
student

February 21, 2011 at 9:44 am

good God man get a job
me too

February 21, 2011 at 10:38 am

The weather is nice out. Get some fresh air.
Hugh McBryde

February 21, 2011 at 11:10 am

I have one, I assume you speak to the many faces of Greg. He doesn’t have a job.
CAJim

February 21, 2011 at 11:36 am

After feigning your innocence of wanting Greg Prickett fired. Commenting here that you harbored no desire to see him released after 20 years of service, you demonstrate the truer color of your vengeful ploy. So your complaint not only attributed in part that your internet dispute may have lead to your loss of employment in Maine(most likely owing more to the car industry collapse), your professed missed/interview to new employment and now you crow that you have employment and Greg Prickett doesn’t.

If you don’t plan to be a truck driver for the rest of your life, do you plan to make Greg Pricketts complaint an exhibit to your employment history?

How come your fellow ‘Staff’ has not responded anymore here, removed their more outrageous blog articles and have stopped posting their inflammatory articles about the UNT Administration?
student

February 21, 2011 at 12:31 pm

no. quit being a loser and posting on a college newspaper of a school you have no affliation with. jesus are you like twelve?
Hugh McBryde

February 21, 2011 at 12:45 pm

CAJim, if you cannot answer the question “Is Greg Prickett TxBluesMan (in whole or part)_” why do you bother? If you can, please, by all means, share with us.
K. Brister

February 21, 2011 at 3:54 pm

Hugh,

What you don’t seem to realize is it doesn’t matter if Prickett is TxBluesman or not. I know that is all you care about, but this is not about you.

Whether or not Prickett is TxBluesman, you have slandered Prickett, and you filed a complaint against Prickett making allegations that are false and unfounded. What the hell difference does it make if he is TxBluesman or not?

You havefalsely accused Prickett of extortion, stalking, stealing evidence, improperly using government equipment, and possessing child pornography. You have accused him of making comments on a website that he did not make. You have accused him of posting pictures that he did not post and naming your daughter which he did not do. You have attributed to him everything that happens on FLDS Texas website, including every comment that you don’t like.

What you’re not grasping is that all of these things you’ve accused him of were not committed by TxBluesman either — they are false accusations, period. So it doesn’t matter whether Prickett is TxBluesman or not because the accusations are false and now you have tied them to Prickett. If you had kept your conspiratorial nose to yourself and just attacked the anonymous TxBluesman, there would be no cause of action for defamation even though your accusations are untrue. But since you have tied it to a real person, you’re in trouble.

Quit demanding that Prickett answer your silly irrelevant questions. You’re not entitled. This is not your forum, this is not about you. His refusal to answer is not an indictment of anything and it is not indicative of any kind of admission and nothing can be inferred from his silence, no matter how you wish that were true. His refusal to engage with you simply shows that he is smarter than you and can control himself better than you.

The answers to your questions don’t matter in any event, but you should have had the answers before you went and published your false accusations as fact and damaged a real person’s livelihood.
CAJim

February 21, 2011 at 3:58 pm

Whether Prickett is or is not ‘TexasBluesMan’, ‘BluesSonner’ or ‘PolygynyBuster’ means little to me but,of course, I would know that before I brought a formal claim or repeated it on the internet with ‘no proof’ to back up my claim. I would think that an honest reporter and unbiased journalist would get his facts straight before he states them on the internet or reports on his own private actions as somehow newsworthy. Did you have Rozita Swinton’s permission before you published her photos and later had to retract them? OOoPpie, such high and might tones you struck in your complaint that your step-daughter was trepassed against, yet no apology or job loss when you published private photos from Rozita, who has never been charged with any ‘hoax’ calls here in Texas. Feeling just a tad hypocritical, Hugh?

Latest News

Swipe cards with caution this holiday season
Dalton LaFerney / Senior Staff Writer The holidays...
- Posted 16 mins ago
- 0
Former NSA head speaks at Hyatt
Rhiannon Saegert / Senior Staff Writer Former National Security Agency...
- Posted 28 mins ago
- 0
Power surge: elections favor Republican party
Dalton LaFerney / Senior Staff Writer The balance of power...
- Posted 31 mins ago
- 0
Students share on-campus parking troubles
Hannah Lauritzen / Intern Writer A simple Twitter search of “UNT...
- Posted 32 mins ago
- 0
Students Yell Like Hell for Homecoming
Photo Story by: Byron Thompson – Senior Staff Photographer Two...
- Posted 33 mins ago
- 0
Gaming company supports Denton with app
John Hoang / Intern Writer Little d, a Chihuahua sporting...
- Posted 34 mins ago
- 0
Student studies technology’s toll on children
Kayleigh Bywater / Intern Writer It was a normal, sunny...
- Posted 38 mins ago
- 0

Recent Posts
Popular
Comments

Swipe cards with caution this holiday season
Dalton LaFerney / Senior Staff Writer The...
- November 5, 2014
- 0
Former NSA head speaks at Hyatt
Rhiannon Saegert / Senior Staff Writer Former National Security...
- November 5, 2014
- 0
Power surge: elections favor Republican party
Dalton LaFerney / Senior Staff Writer The balance of...
- November 5, 2014
- 0

UNT cop fired after blogging from work
By Josh Pherigo / Managing Editor – A veteran...
- January 28, 2011
- 189
Republicans focus too much on abortion
OPINION During the 2010 elections, Republicans primarily focused on...
- March 30, 2011
- 104
UNT students march for marijuana legalization
By Adam Blaylock / Senior Staff Writer – Student...
- October 25, 2010
- 100

Ben Thompson says:

Hey Mike, I really like how you just took e...
Chris says:

To BC and the author, Neither one of you h...
Linda Sue says:

Glad yall got a W- But You ladies still ...

UNT cop fired after blogging from work

About Managing-Editor

189 Comments

Latest News

Recent Posts

Popular

Comments