Tuesday, June 21, 2005
E-mails From Man Shot Dead At Federal Courthouse In Seattle
The following are e-mails recieved by 710 KIRO's Dori Monson, from Perry Manley, the man shot dead Monday, June 20, in the Federal Courthouse in Seattle. It documents his long-time 'war' against the government, specifically with regards to child support laws and non-custodial parents. These e-mails are sorted in order of latest to earliest - note the last e-mail sent by Mr. Manley was received by Dori just minutes before the incident at the courthouse began.
++++++++++++++++++++
June 20th, 2005 (1/2 hour before the courthouse incident)
DECLARATION OF "WE THE PEOPLE"
Whereas the various State Governments of the UNITED STATES of AMERICA has committed repeated acts of war against "WE THE PEOPLE" of the United States of America; Therefore be it Resolved by the "PEOPLE" Legal Constitutional Representatives of the United States of America, that the state of war between the United States and the various State Governments which has thus been thrust upon the People of the United States is hereby formally declared; and that the President be, and he is hereby, authorized and directed to employ the entire naval and military forces of the United States and the resources of the Government to carry on war against the various State Governments; and to bring the conflict to a successful termination: all of the resources of the country are hereby pledged by the People of the United States.
The various City, County and State Governments of each of the fifty States along with their assigned and or elected executives sworn by official oath of office: Have by use of said office and in violation the oath on record committed acts of treason and tyranny against the PEOPLE of the United States.
The governments duly sworn by oath to the Constitution and the Bill of Rights deny the just liberty and freedom of 25 million citizens forced into involuntary service and peonage in violation of guaranteed protection of human rights.
"WE THE PEOPLE" of the United States of America
Signed the 19th Day of June 19, 2005
Perry L. Manley
++++++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++++++
June 3rd, 2005
OPERATION TENNESSE WALTZ:
RUBBED OFF ON WASHINGTON?
The notion of child-support has been a hot topic issue in the United States for a number of decades. The issue is not so much that a child should be supported, rather who will support a child. The question that begs an answer from the societal political authority is one of Constitutional insertion. The clash between a child's fundamental right to support and the governments demands of forced support from the "NON-CUSTODIAL" parent.
The faith in the government of the United States; the balance of "The Power" of each branch of the government collides with the will of the people who agree to submit to government imposition.
The government, if you will, sold to the highest bidder; can be traced in an FBI sting dubbed OPERATION TENNESSE WALTZ looking at indicted lawmakers, ethics of lawmakers, violation of public trust, corruption by public officials: Do public officials simply go along so they can get along?
The question for investigation comes from a law [Hobbs Act*Extortion By Force, violence, or Fear]. In order to prove a violation of Hobbs Act extortion by the wrongful use of actual or threatened force, violence, or fear. 1).Did the defendants induce or attempt to induce the victim to give up property or property rights? "Property" has been held to be "any valuable right considered as a source of wealth". 2).Did the defendants use or attempt to use the victim's reasonable fear of physical injury or economic harm in order to induce the victim's consent to give up property? "A defendant need not create the fear of injury or harm which he exploits to induce the victim to give up property". 3).Did the defendant\s conduct actually or potentially obstruct, delay, or affect interstate or foreign commerce in any (realistic) way or degree? "effect on such commerce are also sufficient, where the obtaining of property and resulting depletion of the victim's assets decreases the victim's ability to make future expenditures for items in interstate commerce".
4).Was the defendant/s actual or threatened use of force, violence, or fear wrongful? "the court concluded that union members' use of violence during the strike was not "wrongful" for purposes of Hobbs Act extortion. "Wrongful" has meaning in the Act only if it limits the statute's coverage to those instances where the detaining of the property would itself be "wrongful" because the alleged extortionist has no lawful claim to that property".
THE PROPER DISCUSSION OF: The government authority as it affects the right of a citizen to live free of government interference or intervention has been reduced to interpretation as defined by elected officials.
The National Organization for women Political Action Committee:
2004 ENDORSED CANDIDATES in WASHINGTON:
Patty Murray U.S. Senate: Rick Larson U.S. Hose 02: Jim McDermott U.S. House 07: Christine Gregoire Governor.
ENDORSEMENTS go to the strongest feminist candidate. Experience has thought that, between two candidates with equal records on our issues, over time women candidates will generally perform better than their records would indicate, and that we must have large numbers of feminist women, a sort of critical mass, to win when women's rights are at stake.
up dated 10/25/04
The LAW under Title 42 chapter 7 subchapter IV par D 666
*..each State must have in effect laws requiring procedures for the withholding from income of amounts payable as support, without the need for a judicial or administrative hearing.
The Secretary may waive provisions with respect to one or more political subdivisions on the basis of the effectiveness and timeliness, or in any case, shall be distributed, after deduction of any fees imposed by the State to cover the costs of collection, to whom such support is owned; and
The Non-custodial parent's social security account number or numbers, if [he] has more than one such number. Liens arise by operation of law against real and personal property for amounts of overdue support owed by a non-custodial parent, except that such rules may not require judicial notice or hearing prior to the enforcement of such a lien.
Procedures providing that the parties to an action to establish paternity are not entitled to a trial by jury.
Procedures under which bills for pregnancy, childbirth, and genetic testing are admissible as evidence without requiring third-party foundation testimony, and shall constitute prima facie evidence of amounts incurred for such services or for testing on behalf of the child. The income of a non-custodial parent shall be subject to withholding regardless of whether support payments by such parent are in arrears.
Withholding from income of amounts payable as support must be carried out in full compliance with all procedural due process requirements of the State.
THE GOVERNMENT becomes the trustee, while the child becomes the beneficiary of his own trust. Legal title to everything the child will ever own is now vested in the federal government. The government then places the trust into the hands of the parents, who are made the "guardians". The child may reside in the hands of the guardians (parents) until such time as the State claims that the parents are no longer capable to serve. The State then goes into the home and removes the "trust" from the guardians.
NO STATE SHALL make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of the law, nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
N.O.W. ENDORSEMENTS of a sort of critical mass, to win:
U.S. senator Patty Murray; "One of my priorities as a Senator--and as a mother--is to ensure that all women in this country have the opportunity to make decisions about their bodies**.I believe it is imperative that we support all women and the choices they make".
U.S. Senator Maria Cantwell: "I support a woman's right to choose**I also believe that our constitution protects a woman's right to privacy and that this constitutional right encompasses the decision of whether to terminate a pregnancy".
The high profile special interest group N.O.W. uses a renowned presents to influence the out come in the U.S. Senate and U.S. House with intent to deny the rights of 25 million ("non-custodial") parents. Men now are considered to be not, other than, unimportant, worthless, and of little or no consequence because woman by law own the child they carry to term and birth.
The woman's constitutional right to choose birth and/or abortion is not in question, the fact that requires exploration is the loss of rights inflected on men. The right to choose to be a parent for woman is not only protected by the constitution but by law. The man [father] has lost all rights to be a parent to "his" child. The child is only a responsibility reduced to a financial obligation, where elected/appointed government officials whom have the supposed power to waive the man' protected rights. The rights to benefit form the fruit of the labor, human rights to parent a child at his house where he lives, the right to be left alone, the right to privacy, the fundamental right to equal protection under the law, and to due process taken by U.S. 42 666.
The rights of a woman to choose birth or abortion can not be construed to deny or disparage the right of a man to life, liberty, property, equal protection under the law, and due process. The government can only require support of a child when custody and control of the child accompany the obligation.
By Perry L. Manley
Seattle Washington
++++++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++++++
May 9th, 2005
PRESS RELEASE: DATE LINE SEATTLE WASHINGTON May 10 2005
THE TIME IS NOW; TODAY WE MUST ACT:
I want to take this time to give credit where credit is due. Thank you B J Shea, you have been a voice in a sea of silence on the issue of NON-CUSTODIAL parents. Thank you for the air time that has shed a ray of light on the treatment of men whom want desperately to be a part of their child's life. Thank you B J, I think we can make a difference in the family courts and the government as a whole; in the treatment of the family and the concept that a child needs [requires] a mom and a dad in their development. Thank you B J for allowing a public discussion on issues that give permission to MEN who want to stand up for the right: to be a parent to their child, support their child at their house where they live, and to love their child without government interference or intervention.
TODAY I VOW: to a season of fasting and commitment to sit on a park bench out side THE U.S. DISTRICT COURT HOUSE SEATTLE on 7th and Stewart Seattle Washington. I vow to bring attention to the plight of 25 million U.S. citizens whom are without a face and voice in this 21st century free country. Conventional means have failed to reach the political and powerful, I "WE THE PEOPLE" peaceably assemble, and petition the Government for a redress to this grievances.
Thanks
Perry L. Manley
Seattle Wa.
++++++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++++++
April 20th, 2005
CANDLES FOR KIDS:
BRING YOUR CANDLE
WESTLAKE CENTER SEATTLE WA.
7:30 P M
FRIDAY NIGHT APRIL 22, 2005
Light a candle for the kid all a cross America who are forced by no fault of their own to live with out their father.
For more information and [ KRightsRadio ]
Perry L. Manley
++++++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++++++
April 14th, 2005
NET WORK GRIM REAPER: DAY ONE
THE GOVERNMENT LACKS THE [POWER] AND THE [AUTHORITY] TO FORCE A CITIZEN TO PAY A THIRD PARTY TO SUPPORT A CHILD.
WE MUST STOP ENABLING THE GOVERNMENT!!
WE MUST STOP PAYING TAXES!!
WE MUST STOP BEING PRODUCTIVE!!
WE MUST FORCE THE GOVERNMENT INTO COMPLIANCE!!
WE HAVE THE RIGHT AS CITIZENS, PEACEABLY TO ASSEMBLE, AND TO PETITION THE GOVERNMENTS FOR A REDRESS OF THIS GRIEVANCE.
WE ARE A FREE REPRESENTED PEOPLE:
WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO BE A PARENT TO OUR CHILDREN:
The government must know we will not let this issue slide: we will hold them responsible for their inaction: we will support our children at our house where we live.
DAY ONE:
Perry L. Manley
++++++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++++++
April 14th 2005
Perry Manley said:
Fathers are treated like animals:
Sparks said:
I've been a father for 31 years and I don't have any idea what you are talking about...
Mr Sparks:
You make a fair statement.
You my friend are very fortunate, what you may not understand is that you are not legally able to make the choice to be a father. The woman you are with granted you the privileges you enjoy.
You do not fit the demographic in the majority where fathers, [non-custodial] parents are denied the basic for life. The government will take 15% to 28% of the income for taxation and 52% paid to a third party not required actually spent on the child.
I submit; you enjoyed interaction with your child with out government intervention, you enjoyed the benefits, the obligation, the responsibility, assigned to fatherhood.
Non-custodial parents are assigned obligation and responsibility and denied the Prodigy. Equal access and custody is a given for you, try living one day with the Tag [NON-CUSTODIAL].
I would like to be more specific, however, you made a very veg reference:
Perry L. Manley
The following are e-mails recieved by 710 KIRO's Dori Monson, from Perry Manley, the man shot dead Monday, June 20, in the Federal Courthouse in Seattle. It documents his long-time 'war' against the government, specifically with regards to child support laws and non-custodial parents. These e-mails are sorted in order of latest to earliest - note the last e-mail sent by Mr. Manley was received by Dori just minutes before the incident at the courthouse began.
Other links that might be useful:
Google News Wire On Perry Manley, Courthouse Shooting
KING-5 Video of Interview with Ex-Wife (registration reqd)
Feel free to comment, but keep it clean and please, no personal attacks.
=============================================
++++++++++++++++++++
June 20th, 2005 (1/2 hour before the courthouse incident)
DECLARATION OF "WE THE PEOPLE"
Whereas the various State Governments of the UNITED STATES of AMERICA has committed repeated acts of war against "WE THE PEOPLE" of the United States of America; Therefore be it Resolved by the "PEOPLE" Legal Constitutional Representatives of the United States of America, that the state of war between the United States and the various State Governments which has thus been thrust upon the People of the United States is hereby formally declared; and that the President be, and he is hereby, authorized and directed to employ the entire naval and military forces of the United States and the resources of the Government to carry on war against the various State Governments; and to bring the conflict to a successful termination: all of the resources of the country are hereby pledged by the People of the United States.
The various City, County and State Governments of each of the fifty States along with their assigned and or elected executives sworn by official oath of office: Have by use of said office and in violation the oath on record committed acts of treason and tyranny against the PEOPLE of the United States.
The governments duly sworn by oath to the Constitution and the Bill of Rights deny the just liberty and freedom of 25 million citizens forced into involuntary service and peonage in violation of guaranteed protection of human rights.
"WE THE PEOPLE" of the United States of America
Signed the 19th Day of June 19, 2005
Perry L. Manley
++++++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++++++
June 3rd, 2005
OPERATION TENNESSE WALTZ:
RUBBED OFF ON WASHINGTON?
The notion of child-support has been a hot topic issue in the United States for a number of decades. The issue is not so much that a child should be supported, rather who will support a child. The question that begs an answer from the societal political authority is one of Constitutional insertion. The clash between a child's fundamental right to support and the governments demands of forced support from the "NON-CUSTODIAL" parent.
The faith in the government of the United States; the balance of "The Power" of each branch of the government collides with the will of the people who agree to submit to government imposition.
The government, if you will, sold to the highest bidder; can be traced in an FBI sting dubbed OPERATION TENNESSE WALTZ looking at indicted lawmakers, ethics of lawmakers, violation of public trust, corruption by public officials: Do public officials simply go along so they can get along?
The question for investigation comes from a law [Hobbs Act*Extortion By Force, violence, or Fear]. In order to prove a violation of Hobbs Act extortion by the wrongful use of actual or threatened force, violence, or fear. 1).Did the defendants induce or attempt to induce the victim to give up property or property rights? "Property" has been held to be "any valuable right considered as a source of wealth". 2).Did the defendants use or attempt to use the victim's reasonable fear of physical injury or economic harm in order to induce the victim's consent to give up property? "A defendant need not create the fear of injury or harm which he exploits to induce the victim to give up property". 3).Did the defendant\s conduct actually or potentially obstruct, delay, or affect interstate or foreign commerce in any (realistic) way or degree? "effect on such commerce are also sufficient, where the obtaining of property and resulting depletion of the victim's assets decreases the victim's ability to make future expenditures for items in interstate commerce".
4).Was the defendant/s actual or threatened use of force, violence, or fear wrongful? "the court concluded that union members' use of violence during the strike was not "wrongful" for purposes of Hobbs Act extortion. "Wrongful" has meaning in the Act only if it limits the statute's coverage to those instances where the detaining of the property would itself be "wrongful" because the alleged extortionist has no lawful claim to that property".
THE PROPER DISCUSSION OF: The government authority as it affects the right of a citizen to live free of government interference or intervention has been reduced to interpretation as defined by elected officials.
The National Organization for women Political Action Committee:
2004 ENDORSED CANDIDATES in WASHINGTON:
Patty Murray U.S. Senate: Rick Larson U.S. Hose 02: Jim McDermott U.S. House 07: Christine Gregoire Governor.
ENDORSEMENTS go to the strongest feminist candidate. Experience has thought that, between two candidates with equal records on our issues, over time women candidates will generally perform better than their records would indicate, and that we must have large numbers of feminist women, a sort of critical mass, to win when women's rights are at stake.
up dated 10/25/04
The LAW under Title 42 chapter 7 subchapter IV par D 666
*..each State must have in effect laws requiring procedures for the withholding from income of amounts payable as support, without the need for a judicial or administrative hearing.
The Secretary may waive provisions with respect to one or more political subdivisions on the basis of the effectiveness and timeliness, or in any case, shall be distributed, after deduction of any fees imposed by the State to cover the costs of collection, to whom such support is owned; and
The Non-custodial parent's social security account number or numbers, if [he] has more than one such number. Liens arise by operation of law against real and personal property for amounts of overdue support owed by a non-custodial parent, except that such rules may not require judicial notice or hearing prior to the enforcement of such a lien.
Procedures providing that the parties to an action to establish paternity are not entitled to a trial by jury.
Procedures under which bills for pregnancy, childbirth, and genetic testing are admissible as evidence without requiring third-party foundation testimony, and shall constitute prima facie evidence of amounts incurred for such services or for testing on behalf of the child. The income of a non-custodial parent shall be subject to withholding regardless of whether support payments by such parent are in arrears.
Withholding from income of amounts payable as support must be carried out in full compliance with all procedural due process requirements of the State.
THE GOVERNMENT becomes the trustee, while the child becomes the beneficiary of his own trust. Legal title to everything the child will ever own is now vested in the federal government. The government then places the trust into the hands of the parents, who are made the "guardians". The child may reside in the hands of the guardians (parents) until such time as the State claims that the parents are no longer capable to serve. The State then goes into the home and removes the "trust" from the guardians.
NO STATE SHALL make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of the law, nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
N.O.W. ENDORSEMENTS of a sort of critical mass, to win:
U.S. senator Patty Murray; "One of my priorities as a Senator--and as a mother--is to ensure that all women in this country have the opportunity to make decisions about their bodies**.I believe it is imperative that we support all women and the choices they make".
U.S. Senator Maria Cantwell: "I support a woman's right to choose**I also believe that our constitution protects a woman's right to privacy and that this constitutional right encompasses the decision of whether to terminate a pregnancy".
The high profile special interest group N.O.W. uses a renowned presents to influence the out come in the U.S. Senate and U.S. House with intent to deny the rights of 25 million ("non-custodial") parents. Men now are considered to be not, other than, unimportant, worthless, and of little or no consequence because woman by law own the child they carry to term and birth.
The woman's constitutional right to choose birth and/or abortion is not in question, the fact that requires exploration is the loss of rights inflected on men. The right to choose to be a parent for woman is not only protected by the constitution but by law. The man [father] has lost all rights to be a parent to "his" child. The child is only a responsibility reduced to a financial obligation, where elected/appointed government officials whom have the supposed power to waive the man' protected rights. The rights to benefit form the fruit of the labor, human rights to parent a child at his house where he lives, the right to be left alone, the right to privacy, the fundamental right to equal protection under the law, and to due process taken by U.S. 42 666.
The rights of a woman to choose birth or abortion can not be construed to deny or disparage the right of a man to life, liberty, property, equal protection under the law, and due process. The government can only require support of a child when custody and control of the child accompany the obligation.
By Perry L. Manley
Seattle Washington
++++++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++++++
May 9th, 2005
PRESS RELEASE: DATE LINE SEATTLE WASHINGTON May 10 2005
THE TIME IS NOW; TODAY WE MUST ACT:
I want to take this time to give credit where credit is due. Thank you B J Shea, you have been a voice in a sea of silence on the issue of NON-CUSTODIAL parents. Thank you for the air time that has shed a ray of light on the treatment of men whom want desperately to be a part of their child's life. Thank you B J, I think we can make a difference in the family courts and the government as a whole; in the treatment of the family and the concept that a child needs [requires] a mom and a dad in their development. Thank you B J for allowing a public discussion on issues that give permission to MEN who want to stand up for the right: to be a parent to their child, support their child at their house where they live, and to love their child without government interference or intervention.
TODAY I VOW: to a season of fasting and commitment to sit on a park bench out side THE U.S. DISTRICT COURT HOUSE SEATTLE on 7th and Stewart Seattle Washington. I vow to bring attention to the plight of 25 million U.S. citizens whom are without a face and voice in this 21st century free country. Conventional means have failed to reach the political and powerful, I "WE THE PEOPLE" peaceably assemble, and petition the Government for a redress to this grievances.
Thanks
Perry L. Manley
Seattle Wa.
++++++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++++++
April 20th, 2005
CANDLES FOR KIDS:
BRING YOUR CANDLE
WESTLAKE CENTER SEATTLE WA.
7:30 P M
FRIDAY NIGHT APRIL 22, 2005
Light a candle for the kid all a cross America who are forced by no fault of their own to live with out their father.
For more information and [ KRightsRadio ]
Perry L. Manley
++++++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++++++
April 14th, 2005
NET WORK GRIM REAPER: DAY ONE
THE GOVERNMENT LACKS THE [POWER] AND THE [AUTHORITY] TO FORCE A CITIZEN TO PAY A THIRD PARTY TO SUPPORT A CHILD.
WE MUST STOP ENABLING THE GOVERNMENT!!
WE MUST STOP PAYING TAXES!!
WE MUST STOP BEING PRODUCTIVE!!
WE MUST FORCE THE GOVERNMENT INTO COMPLIANCE!!
WE HAVE THE RIGHT AS CITIZENS, PEACEABLY TO ASSEMBLE, AND TO PETITION THE GOVERNMENTS FOR A REDRESS OF THIS GRIEVANCE.
WE ARE A FREE REPRESENTED PEOPLE:
WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO BE A PARENT TO OUR CHILDREN:
The government must know we will not let this issue slide: we will hold them responsible for their inaction: we will support our children at our house where we live.
DAY ONE:
Perry L. Manley
++++++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++++++
April 14th 2005
Perry Manley said:
Fathers are treated like animals:
Sparks said:
I've been a father for 31 years and I don't have any idea what you are talking about...
Mr Sparks:
You make a fair statement.
You my friend are very fortunate, what you may not understand is that you are not legally able to make the choice to be a father. The woman you are with granted you the privileges you enjoy.
You do not fit the demographic in the majority where fathers, [non-custodial] parents are denied the basic for life. The government will take 15% to 28% of the income for taxation and 52% paid to a third party not required actually spent on the child.
I submit; you enjoyed interaction with your child with out government intervention, you enjoyed the benefits, the obligation, the responsibility, assigned to fatherhood.
Non-custodial parents are assigned obligation and responsibility and denied the Prodigy. Equal access and custody is a given for you, try living one day with the Tag [NON-CUSTODIAL].
I would like to be more specific, however, you made a very veg reference:
Perry L. Manley
Comments:
<< Home
I have a certain amount of empathy for fathers in divorce. They do regularly get the 'short end' of the deal. Divorce court is still a bastian of sexism. Mothers still get overwhelming preference on child issues, few mothers pay child support, many use the recipt of support as an excuse not to be employed or better themselves (while their ex-husbands have to work two and three jobs to make the payments). Other women use the courts simply as a legal way to batter their ex-husbands for years after divorce. And after being milked for exhorbitant support payments many fathers simply don't have the resources to fight back.
In Perry's case, however, from his writings, it is pretty clear that his angst propelled him out of the realm of reality. What I see as a tragedy here is, if he was known to the security forces at the courthouse as suffering from some mental problems, how did he get in? And knowing the background of his plight, why the need always to shoot these folks in the head? I don't want to second guess the marshalls, as I am sure they were doing exactly as trained, but wouldn't a shot to the knee probably be just as effective?
May God bless Perry's soul and may he find peace for his torment.
In Perry's case, however, from his writings, it is pretty clear that his angst propelled him out of the realm of reality. What I see as a tragedy here is, if he was known to the security forces at the courthouse as suffering from some mental problems, how did he get in? And knowing the background of his plight, why the need always to shoot these folks in the head? I don't want to second guess the marshalls, as I am sure they were doing exactly as trained, but wouldn't a shot to the knee probably be just as effective?
May God bless Perry's soul and may he find peace for his torment.
# posted by 
: 3:09 PM
: 3:09 PM
I also have empathy for him. I hope he was a good husband as much as he probably cared for his children and sharing his life with them.
I have to note the callous remark his ex-wife made on the 10 o'clock news last night (06/20). As if she had just witnessed the squashing of a bug that had pestered her for some time. Like, "Oh, well!!"
No sense of sadness that her children now have no father or at the very least, that the life of a fellow human being was snuffed out, whatever the circumstances.
Makes me question her character or at least her heart. Makes me wonder if he did have a point as to possible cruelty he may have endured. Would like to have more details on each of them and see what conditions in lives led up to such a tragic end.
I have to note the callous remark his ex-wife made on the 10 o'clock news last night (06/20). As if she had just witnessed the squashing of a bug that had pestered her for some time. Like, "Oh, well!!"
No sense of sadness that her children now have no father or at the very least, that the life of a fellow human being was snuffed out, whatever the circumstances.
Makes me question her character or at least her heart. Makes me wonder if he did have a point as to possible cruelty he may have endured. Would like to have more details on each of them and see what conditions in lives led up to such a tragic end.
# posted by : 6:10 PM
: 6:10 PM
Perry Manley was harmless. There was no need to shoot him.
The federal employees all knew him, knew he was only talk, so maybe that's why the Seattle cops were called.
Who wanted him dead?
The federal employees all knew him, knew he was only talk, so maybe that's why the Seattle cops were called.
Who wanted him dead?
# posted by : 11:54 PM
: 11:54 PM
I knew Perry when he was married.... there is more to the story than has been told. The ex-wife you think is so callous was put thur hell and back by a person who exibited the kind of unstableness that led to his end. Please take it easy from the cheap seats. I wish that it could have been different for him.
Post a Comment
# posted by : 8:14 PM
: 8:14 PM << Home
