• Report: #860059

Complaint Review: R. J. Waskiewicz

  • Submitted: Tue, March 27, 2012
  • Updated: Fri, April 13, 2012

  • Reported By: Jeremy K. — Westfield Massachusetts United States of America
R. J. Waskiewicz
5 Rocky Hill Rd. Hadley, Massachusetts United States of America

R. J. Waskiewicz PEDOPHILE!!! ... DO NOT LET YOUR KIDS AROUND R. J. WASKIEWICZ!!!! Hadley, Massachusetts

*Author of original report: Just a few responses

*Author of original report: @Steve

*Author of original report: @Simon

*Author of original report: @Robert

*General Comment: RJ

*Consumer Comment: Just a few comments

*Consumer Comment: It was not a jab

*General Comment: *Jeremy is being real, Steve you aren't who you think you are

*Consumer Comment: Evidence?

*Author of original report: I'll Make You a Deal, Steve

*Consumer Comment: PROTESTER SONG 77....... just type in 472051 at this site.......

*Consumer Comment: Karl - WHO ARE YOU?

*Consumer Comment: BOUNTIFUL BREAST POEM....

*Consumer Comment: Jeremy treading on dangerous water

*Consumer Comment: Well, *one* of is certainly throwing a bit of a tantrum

*Author of original report: Get some help

*Author of original report: Oh no, the little b***h is mad now!

*Consumer Comment: Ok wait

*Consumer Comment: On a second reading, it becomes even *more* obvious that the OP got fired (or was forced to quit) for something creepy

*Consumer Comment: SPYING ON MUSLIMS POEM...

*Author of original report: @Stacey

*Consumer Comment: Personal attacks? That's all you got?

*Consumer Comment: question

*Author of original report: Wow! You're so clever!

*Consumer Comment: So in other words, he busted you for something.

What's this?
What's this?
What's this?
Is this
Ripoff Report
About you?
Ripoff Report
A business' first
line of defense
on the Internet.
If your business is
willing to make a
commitment to
customer satisfaction
Click here now..

Does your business have a bad reputation?
Fix it the right way.
Corporate Advocacy Program™

SEO Reputation Management at its best!

I worked at a grocery store in Hadley, MA, several years ago, with R. J. Waskiewicz. He was a security guard, and I am ashamed to say I worked with him in that capacity and was once friends with him. The purpose of the security guards, obviously, was to watch customers and prevent shoplifting. But when I would work with him, R.J. and I would sit up in the little dark room, and he would watch the every move of employees in the front end, obsessively spying on them. It was creepy.
 
He was also always trying to get employees fired by telling on anyone he thought he saw breaking a rule. The problem is, he was almost always wrong, and the employees would end up being exonerated, but R.J. didn't care. He kept watching people and finding reasons to turn his co-workers in, trying to get them fired, always with a big smirk on his face, like he was proud of the whole thing. [continued below]....
.....
 
Occasionally he would even download security footage of employees onto his cell phone and show it to other employees, either to embarrass them or "start" something or whatever twisted reason he came up with. Most employees in the front end considered him a nuisance and everyone hated him, feeling like we were being spied on, watched over our shoulders every second that we worked. He would also spread really awful, sexual rumors about co-workers he didn't like.
 
This went on for months, until one day, when I was working with R.J. in the security room and he took a bathroom break, I happened to notice that he had left his cell phone on his chair. I normally would never do anything like this, because I respect people's privacy, unlike R.J., but I decided to look at the pictures on his phone to see if he had any images of me or any of my friends from the front end on there that he had creepily downloaded from security footage.
 
Well, there were a couple of images of co-workers -- not of me or any of my friends, thankfully -- but that wasn't all that was on his phone, unfortunately. There were also dozens of images of little girls, some who looked as young as three or four!!!
 
R.J. had apparently not only been downloading images of co-workers from security footage onto his phone, he had also --obsessively, it seemed -- been collecting images of pre-pubescent children. I was horrified and disgusted, but I didn't know what to do. I turned the phone back off and put it back where I found it, on the chair, and went back to work. I later decided that I had to tell the store manager about what I had seen.
 
Unfortunately, the store manager was friends with R.J. and trusted him -- probably from all those times he would rat people out to him for sneezing -- and all he wanted to know was why I was in the security room and looking at R.J.'s phone. He didn't care that there was -- apparently -- a sexual predator working in his store, who got free ride to sit in a dark room all day, watching and recording little girls! Afterwards, R.J. would grin at me every time I walked by, knowing that I knew his sick secret and that there was nothing I could do about it. I thought of going to the police, but technically no crime had been committed: the little girls were all in public and fully-clothed.
 
I quit the store not long after and don't know if R.J. is still working there or not. This has greatly disturbed me ever since it happened, and I just thought members of the community -- especially parents with little girls -- should know about this obvious pedophile.
 
KEEP YOUR CHILDREN AWAY FROM R. J. WASKIEWICZ!!!!!

This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 03/27/2012 01:10 PM and is a permanent record located here: http://www.ripoffreport.com/r/R-J-Waskiewicz/Hadley-Massachusetts-01035/R-J-Waskiewicz-PEDOPHILE-DO-NOT-LET-YOUR-KIDS-AROUND-R-J-WASKIEWICZ-Hadley-860059. The posting time indicated is Arizona local time. Arizona does not observe daylight savings so the post time may be Mountain or Pacific depending on the time of year.

Ripoff Report has an exclusive license to this report. It may not be copied without the written permission of Ripoff Report.

Click Here to read other Ripoff Reports on R. J. Waskiewicz

Search for additional reports

If you would like to see more Rip-off Reports on this company/individual, search here:

Search Tips
Report & Rebuttal
Respond to this report!
What's this?
Also a victim?
What's this?
Repair Your Reputation!
What's this?
REBUTTALS & REPLIES:
9Author 16Consumer 0Employee/Owner
Updates & Rebuttals

#1 Author of original report

Just a few responses

AUTHOR: Jeremy K. - (United States of America)

Not really.  In most states that would result in you friend R.J. drawing unemployment.

I don't understand this. I'm saying someone constantly making false accusations would, in most cases, be fired, and then you respond that, no, he would be drawing unemployment. That would have to be after he got fired (or laid off). If he quit, he would not be eligible for unemployment. Of course, the employer can challenge the unemployment claim, but that's another issue. In most cases, a person constantly making false accusations to company management would be fired.
 
Are you sure the outcome was based only on the manager being friends with R.J.?  It's more likely the whole "he said, she said" scenario and unless you have physical proof of what you are accusing R.J of, the manager would be obligated by the company to NOT take sides.  This means business goes on as usual.

Yes, I'm sure that was the reason. R.J. and the store manager were close. That's why he could get away with ratting people out to the manager for sneezing -- and all the manager wanted to know was why I was in the security room and looking at R.J.'s phone, instead of investigating to see if he really had those images on his phone. The manager did not even call R.J. into his office and talk to him at all, which is one thing that is always at least done, even in "he said, she said" cases. Anyway, it's natural to assume bias when the store manager is friends with an accused employee and refuses to even investigate the accusation. That's why investigators, lawyers, judges, jurors, etc., are expected to recuse themselves if they know the person accused.
 
I'm surprised you found a company to work for that even allows their employees to have their phones on them while on the clock.  I've seen people get fired just for having their phone off and in their pocket while at work.  My current employer has a sign on the front door that state "NO CELL PHONES BEYOND THIS POINT" and they enforce it.

The only policy involving cell phones was that they could not be turned on during work. Otherwise, people would use them in the break room, outside, etc., with no problems. R.J. worked by himself, usually, or with one other person, in a closed room upstairs. Although he technically wasn't supposed to be using his cell phone -- especially to download security footage, like he was doing -- there really was no one to stop him ... and that was the problem.
 
So, the manager didn't just sit idly back.  This "test" was a reminder of the companies harassment policy and probably was the result of all of the combined complaints from you, R.J., and all the other employees.  Yeah, it may not seem like much, but that is usually the best any company can do with out "taking sides" or firing someone without proof of what they did.

The store manager had absolutely nothing to do with the harassment test. It was mandated for all employees, including management, by the company itself, and was done on an annual basis. It had absolutely nothing to do with my allegation, R.J.'s constant, crazy allegations, or anyone else's. The harassment test being taken around the time this was happening was a coincidence, nothing more, but the store manager did in fact sit idly by and ignore some behaviors R.J was engaging in that were given as examples of harassment on the test. I don't understand the point of these tests if management is just going to ignore it when certain employees engage in the forbidden behavior clearly outlined in the test.
 
Then, why did you wait "several years" to post this.

Wow. Again, I've already answered this several times. But here it is, ONCE AGAIN, cut-and-pasted from my response to @Robert, above, which was cut-and-pasted from my response to @Steve, above...
 
"It's really not any of your business why I 'waited' several years to write this complaint, but since you asked, it was because the store manager would not do anything and I discovered that the police would not do anything, either, at the time. So, I just tried to put it out of my mind for a while, knowing there was nothing I could do about it, either. Then I was in school and working fulltime. Then I had some serious health problems where I was in the hospital at length several times and almost died. As you can see, I was just a little bit distracted, and, again, I still didn't know what I could have done.
 
Then I discovered Ripoff Report recently. It may be a very popular site, but I am not online as often as most people, and I had heard of it before but thought it was only to report ripoffs in business transactions. When I finally happened to look at the site, I found you could report so much more, and I thought I'd finally found an avenue to get out what had been haunting me for years. It felt cathartic ...
 
I also refer you to @Simon, the poster immediately following you, who says the same thing as I did in my second paragraph: he reported something from years ago, too, simply because he had never heard of Ripoff Report until now, and it's as simple as that."
 
Nothing he has said here makes me believe that.  I think he just wants to know the same thing I do.  Why did you wait so long to report this?  I think he also feels that R.J. should have the chance to defend himself.

Sigh. There will be no more cutting-and-pasting. I am officially cut-and-pasted out. I refer you to the previous response for the answer to question one.

I also already responded to the second item, too, to @Steve above. Pardon the language, it is not directed at you.
 
"I am not forwarding anything to anyone. For one, why the hell would I even know his email address, I think he's a sick freak and I don't like sick freaks, like you do. And I already explained that he did not EVER give any of the many people he accused of doing the worst things -- including one person who he accused of this very thing, whose life he almost ruined -- a chance to defend themselves. What's good enough for him is good enough for everyone. He can't expect to be able to get away with treating people like that without consequences.
 
And, anyway, you've already said how easy it is for people to find the complaint -- because it shows up first in the search results -- so he should be able to figure it out on his own, or someone he knows should be able to find it and point it out to him, very easily. I filed one other complaint in this site, and the person saw it within 24 hours. Is that really the best you have for a criticism? I wrote the complaint, left my name and location so everyone involved would know who I was and accept whatever consequences that may bring, but I didn't FORWARD it to him? If I was going to show this post to R.J, it's the last thing I would do now, after all of the horrible things you have said to me. Where does it say on the Ripoff Report guidelines that you have to do that? He already has you going insane defending him, anyway. And he's a worthless fu**ing piece of s**t, he shouldn't be treated with any sort of courtesy. He'll obviously just lie and deny what happened, anyway. Yes, he's really going to admit it. What else do you think he would say? And, again, if it's so obvious that my post is a fake, then readers should be able to see that for themselves and he doesn't even have to defend himself."
 
No, I've never been involved in anything like this, but I would think that he could just deny taking those pictures and the police that you claim are also his friends would then question whether he took them or if you planted them to make him look bad.  I'm not saying that's what you did, I'm just saying that would probably be his response.

You're probably right about that. That's another reason why going to the police did not seem like a viable option. He was friends with most of the police. Hadley, MA, is a very small town with only a few cops. Since he was always calling in shoplifters and the police would respond, he was in regular contact with the police, and he knew them all on a first-name basis and would laugh and joke with them. I didn't say they were old pals that went way back. But law enforcement, in general, will usually give the benefit of the doubt to others in law enforcement -- even if it's just a security guard -- especially one they know well.
 
Exactly.  People do change.  Maybe since then he has realized the error of his ways or maybe he did take this fetish of his to the extreme and he is sitting in prison now.  Who knows?  He could even live on the other side of the world now.

I definitely hope he has not taken "this fetish of his" to the extreme. No, he is still living in Hadley. I checked before filing this complaint. Otherwise, as you said, there would have been no point, at least not for the people in the community the complaint was addressed to.
 
You do realize that R.J. could do exactly that to you, right?  You have no proof of the horrendous accusations you have made against him.

Not worried about it. According to @Steve, I'm "anonymously" attacking him, so I guess there's no way he can ever find me. I'm just so clever and fiendish like that.
 
What does the death of bin Laden have to do with your complaint.  My cousin was in the first tower that was hit and barely made it out alive and to be honest I think you went way over the line even bringing this up.  How can you even consider comparing the two situations?

Hmm. I admit this was not one of my better metaphors. But I'm on YOUR side here. My point was that a lot of people who were not hurt in terrible tragedies and didn't lose anyone, still like to moralize and lecture people -- including the victims and their families -- on the "proper" response to the perpetrator of the incident being brought to justice. I know two people -- one personally, one sort of well -- who lost loved ones on 9/11. So do a lot of people. It does not mean that the incident cannot be talked about or used to illustrate a point. It's JOKING about it that is completely unacceptable, and I would never do that. I was not comparing the situation in my complaint to the death of bin Laden, and I certainly wasn't comparing it to 9/11. I was trying to stick up for the victims and their loved ones, and victims in general, and condemning those who haven't lost anyone or been victimized and nonetheless feel they can judge the reactions of people who have. I am glad your cousin made it out safely.
 
Please point out the exact statement that led you to believe that.  Right now, you are the one making accusations with absolutely no proof of what you say.  And, if you think what he did was so bad, how does that make you look to do the exact same thing to him. Two wrongs don't make a right.
 
@Steve did not have to make that exact statement. He was calling me immoral and cowardly for making an accusation with no proof, but nowhere once did he say that -- if true -- R.J. was immoral and cowardly for constantly making accusations with no proof.

As far as "Two wrongs don't make right" goes, here's one of my favorite quotes, from the great civil rights pioneer, James Baldwin: "It is true that two wrongs don't make a right, as we love to point out to the people we have wronged. But one wrong doesn't make a right, either. People who have been wronged will attempt to right the wrong; they would not be people if they didn't. They can rarely afford to be scrupulous about the means they will use. They will use such means as come to hand."
 
Now you're sounding like one of the moralizers who wasn't victimized telling the victim how he's supposed to feel and react.
 
You really haven't figured that out yet?  So, why did you wait several years then?

Sigh...
 
We used to have some one like that where I currently work.  We just ignored him and eventually he got bored and found a different company to work for.

That's sad that you would ignore workplace bullying and harassment. It bothers most people a great deal, especially at the level R.J. was doing it, and interferes in their abilities to do their jobs. That's why there are laws and company policies against workplace bullying and harassment, which are not always enforced, obviously, but are starting to be enforced more after a string of high-profile suicides of people being bullied. South Hadley, MA, was the home of Phoebe Prince, a 15 year-old girl who killed herself after relentless bullying at school. This spurred the Mass. state legislature to pass an anti-bullying act, and now almost every state has one on their books.

Even if this sort of behavior doesn't bother you or your friends personally, clearly it does have horrible, traumatic effects on some people, and everyone simply deserves to be able to work in a safe, secure environment, free of hostility and harassment. No one should just have to wait until the bully gets "bored." I think you went way over the line even suggesting that. Again, why even have anti-bullying and harassment rules and laws if they aren't going to be enforced?
 
Well, sorry to hear about that.  But that statement does just solidify the point:  why did you wait several years to post this?

Sigh....
 
When the employer finds out about it, that usually results in either the application getting denied or it can result in termination of employment on the basis of you lied on the application.  The next time you fill out an application, read the part right above where you sign.  The wording will vary from one company to the next, but it will always say something like "The above statements are truthful to the best of my abilities."  Completely omitting a past employer violates that statement which IS usually frowned upon by ANY employer.  Your states unemployment office as well as your tax records shows every where you have ever worked; unless you worked "under-the-table", which is actually illegal.  And, yes, when you fill out that application, you give them permission to check your employment history.  You also give them permission to run a credit check, too.

"When the employer finds out about it..." You're assuming that the employer would find out about it at some point. But why would they, unless you tell them or they, or someone else in human resources, happens to know for some reason that you worked for a company you omitted? I have read the statement about swearing that everything you said in the application is true many times. That doesn't mean that people can't lie and get away with it, though. People lie on their job applications and resumes all the time and get away with it.

The most difficult lie to get away with, of course, would be claiming you worked or went to school somewhere you didn't, because the employer could easily just call the place listed and discover that lie. How would the employer know you were omitting a company you worked for, though? By calling every company within a fifty-mile radius and asking if they had an employee with your name and Social Security number?
 
"Your states unemployment office as well as your tax records shows every where you have ever worked..."
 
Wow. Now THAT'S a really scary statement. Private employers do not have access to potential employees' unemployment or tax records or any other confidential records! Yikes! I'm not sure what kind of Big Brotherish world you live in, but private employers are not allowed to get whatever confidential information they want on you from government sources without a waiver signed by you. (And why would anyone sign such a waiver?) And if employers DID know everywhere a potential employee worked already, what would even be the point of having job seekers fill out job applications and resumes and list their past employers in the first place? I hope the day of an employer being able to find out everything about an employee he wants without permission remains a part of your twisted imagination and never actually becomes a reality.

All of this is immaterial, anyway, as the idea of my concocting this complaint years after the fact because I got fired for doing what I said R.J. was doing and couldn't find a job even now and was hoping potential employers would see this site -- or something -- is just one of @Steve's many, ever-changing explanations of my motives that he pulled out of his a*s.

Really??  Wouldn't it have been more effective to get your story in the local paper then?  How many parents do you think run a background check on every employee at their grocery store before taking their kids with them?  Especially the security guard that they may not even know exists.
 
Hadley, MA, is a very small town and does not even have a local paper. Regardless, I have never once in my life seen anything even close to like this complaint published in any sort of newspaper. Newspapers aren't intended for readers to complain and warn people about things. That's the point of sites like Ripoff Report, so people can have an outlet to complain about things that were done to them or they saw and warn others about the perpetrators, where they might not otherwise have that outlet. It also explains the sites' popularity.

There's only one grocery store in Hadley, MA, so anyone reading this complaint who lives in or knows the area would know the one and to watch out or avoid the place altogther. It wasn't meant mostly as a warning to parents with kids shopping at that grocery store, though. I already said I didn't know if he was still working there or not. It was meant as a warning to parents with kids in Hadley and the Western Mass area as a whole. Maybe parents aren't doing "background checks" on everyone, but sites like these are extremely popular, and the information both remains on the site forever and is likely to get out to a lot more people than if it was simply run once in a local paper, that would never print it, anyway.

Oh well, thanks for questioning me like a mature adult and a decent human being, Jim, which I can tell you are. That's infinitely more than @Steve is capable of.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#2 Author of original report

@Steve

AUTHOR: Jeremy K. - (United States of America)

The idea that you were "sincere," and it wasn't a jab, when you commented on what happened to me when I was little is so incredibly stupid and such a tremendous lie and insult to everyone's intelligence, it's barely even worth responding to. But here is Steve's comment again, for anyone reading this, and you can judge for yourself...

"Look, I'm really sorry you got diddled when you were a kid. That must have been tough."

Reader, if you were the victim of childhood sexual assault, or knew someone who was, or, really, just had any basic human empathy at all, unlike Steve, would you find a comment like that "sincere"?

Nothing you've said in any of your posts has been sincere, Steve. That's why you keep changing your arguments every time you post, and when I refute them, you just invent more. (Including saying that I was a pedo, by the way, even though you accuse me of making that accusation to anyone who disagrees with me.) It's clear to me that you will just keep changing your argument, attack the person's motives, make hypocritical accusations, ignore everything the person said except one or two things, and find the worst thing that ever happened to a person and attack it if anyone disagrees with you ... all while criticizing their lack of rhetorical skills, of course.

You're pathetic. Find a new hobby.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#3 Author of original report

@Simon

AUTHOR: Jeremy K. - (United States of America)

Thank you for supporting me and my side. I am glad someone believes me and understands my motives for filing this complaint. And thank you for your kind and compassionate words. I really appreciate it.  :)
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#4 Author of original report

@Robert

AUTHOR: Jeremy K. - (United States of America)

Actually, hearsay IS a type of evidence, and I never said it was proof. You're asking for evidence, and then saying I have no proof as proof that I have no proof. It's true that hearsay evidence is not generally allowed in court, but many jurisdictions that disallow hearsay evidence in courts permit the more widespread use of hearsay in non-judicial hearings. 

According to the EEOC's decision number 84-1, for instance, "bare assertion" of sexual harassment can stand without factual support. A worker merely complaining to a friend at work is considered "sufficient to support a finding of harassment." Now, of course, you can argue that it should not be taken that far, and I certainly would. That may be evidence, but is not proof. Still, the standard of evidence and proof outside of the courtroom is much lower than inside it, where you have to prove allegations "beyond a reasonable doubt."
 
I have no way of doing that online -- again, don't have access to the photos in question, and certainly wouldn't post them if I did -- so I can only list the evidence I do have: what I saw with my own eyes; and people we both worked with who could attest both to R.J.'s behavior at work and to my telling them about this allegation way back when it happened, meaning this allegation is not something I just and only made recently.
 
I already responded, to @Steve, above, about why I am only posting this now several times, but here it is again.
 
"It's really not any of your business why I 'waited' several years to write this complaint, but since you asked, it was because the store manager would not do anything and I discovered that the police would not do anything, either, at the time. So, I just tried to put it out of my mind for a while, knowing there was nothing I could do about it, either. Then I was in school and working fulltime. Then I had some serious health problems where I was in the hospital at length several times and almost died. As you can see, I was just a little bit distracted, and, again, I still didn't know what I could have done.
 
Then I discovered Ripoff Report recently. It may be a very popular site, but I am not online as often as most people, and I had heard of it before but thought it was only to report ripoffs in business transactions. When I finally happened to look at the site, I found you could report so much more, and I thought I'd finally found an avenue to get out what had been haunting me for years. It felt cathartic ..." 
 
I also refer you to @Simon, the poster immediately following you, who says the same thing as I did in my second paragraph: he reported something from years ago, too, simply because he had never heard of Ripoff Report until now, and it's as simple as that.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#5 General Comment

RJ

AUTHOR: Tanie - (U.S.A.)

This is my first time reading this post.....I have one major question. If Jeremy and Steve keep calling one another out their names.......Why in the hell do anyone have nothing better to do but sit and argue back and forth over the internet about a guy one person doesn't even know and the other person did nothing but report to a manager their suspicions? The manager had a boss too, why not go there? 
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#6 Consumer Comment

Just a few comments

AUTHOR: Jim Martin - (USA)

Constantly accusing fellow employees of things they didn't do would annoy most employers and get the false accuser fired

Not really.  In most states that would result in you friend R.J. drawing unemployment.

I later decided that I had to tell the store manager about what I had seen.  Unfortunately, the store manager was friends with R.J. and trusted him.

Are you sure the outcome was based only on the manager being friends with R.J.?  It's more likely the whole "he said, she said" scenario and unless you have physical proof of what you are accusing R.J of, the manager would be obligated by the company to NOT take sides.  This means business goes on as usual.

I happened to notice that he had left his cell phone on his chair.

I'm surprised you found a company to work for that even allows their employees to have their phones on them while on the clock.  I've seen people get fired just for having their phone off and in their pocket while at work.  My current employer has a sign on the front door that state "NO CELL PHONES BEYOND THIS POINT" and they enforce it.

We all -- including R.J. -- actually had to take a "harassment test" during all this

So, the manager didn't just sit idly back.  This "test" was a reminder of the companies harassment policy and probably was the result of all of the combined complaints from you, R.J., and all the other employees.  Yeah, it may not seem like much, but that is usually the best any company can do with out "taking sides" or firing someone without proof of what they did.

I just thought members of the community -- especially parents with little girls -- should know about this obvious pedophile.

Then, why did you wait "several years" to post this.

Steve-O here seems to think taking pictures like that of prepubescent girls is a-okay

Nothing he has said here makes me believe that.  I think he just wants to know the same thing I do.  Why did you wait so long to report this?  I think he also feels that R.J. should have the chance to defend himself.

I would think the police would at least want to investigate and check out his phone just to be on the safe side, since there were little kids involved

No, I've never been involved in anything like this, but I would think that he could just deny taking those pictures and the police that you claim are also his friends would then question whether he took them or if you planted them to make him look bad.  I'm not saying that's what you did, I'm just saying that would probably be his response.

This all happened several years ago.

Exactly.  People do change.  Maybe since then he has realized the error of his ways or maybe he did take this fetish of his to the extreme and he is sitting in prison now.  Who knows?  He could even live on the other side of the world now.

If I find out who you are, I will sue you for libel and defamation of character.

You do realize that R.J. could do exactly that to you, right?  You have no proof of the horrendous accusations you have made against him.

I bet you were one of the people who cried about how terrible it was when Osama bin Laden was finally killed, and condemned all of the people -- the majority of the country -- who were celebrating that glorious day. It isn't the people who celebrate the demise of sick, evil people who are "just as bad" as them, it's the cowards who defend the sick, evil people, and try to tell everyone else -- especially the victims -- they're immoral for wanting justice, or even revenge. What the victims and their families think matters most; what spoiled, self-righteous, pretentious, moralizing pseudo-intellectuals think doesn't matter at all, and I hope that horrible things happen to them so we can see how forgiving they really are, since that's what they expect everyone else to be. But then, those people are almost always the most petty, vindictive little brats -- like you, supposedly calmly condemning someone for something you you think they did, then blowing a gasket -- and actually acting shocked -- and trying to get back at them when that person gets pissed and attacks you for publicly calling them a liar, even if it means inventing insane conspiracy theories.

What does the death of bin Laden have to do with your complaint.  My cousin was in the first tower that was hit and barely made it out alive and to be honest I think you went way over the line even bringing this up.  How can you even consider comparing the two situations?

You're basically arguing that he can make all the false accusations he wants and sadistically and gleefully try to ruin people's reputations, over and over again -- but it's immoral and cowardly if someone does it to him once.  He did not EVER give the people he accused and whose lives he made miserable a chance to tell their side of the story and defend themselves, so I'm not about to give that chance to him. 

Please point out the exact statement that led you to believe that.  Right now, you are the one making accusations with absolutely no proof of what you say.  And, if you think what he did was so bad, how does that make you look to do the exact same thing to him.  Two wrongs don't make right.

Why do you think the fact that this happened several years ago and I didn't say anything until now proves your "side"?

You really haven't figured that out yet?  So, why did you wait several years then?

Honestly, though, what would you do if some jerk at work was constantly accusing people of things they didn't do -- including pedophilia -- and then you find out he is actually guilty of the worst charge?

We used to have some one like that where I currently work.  We just ignored him and eventually he got bored and found a different company to work for.

I myself was sexually abused when I was a child by a family member

Well, sorry to hear about that.  But that statement does just solidify the point:  why did you wait several years to post this?

not telling the employer that he worked in that place.
Obviously, other employers would not have any way of knowing I worked in a particular place unless I tell them about it.


When the employer finds out about it, that usually results in either the application getting denied or it can result in termination of employment on the basis of you lied on the application.  The next time you fill out an application, read the part right above where you sign.  The wording will vary from one company to the next, but it will always say something like "The above statements are truthful to the best of my abilities."  Completely omitting a past employer violates that statement which IS usually frowned upon by ANY employer.  Your states unemployment office as well as your tax records shows every where you have ever worked; unless you worked "under-the-table", which is actually illegal.  And, yes, when you fill out that application, you give them permission to check your employment history.  You also give them permission to run a credit check, too.

I was mostly only addressing parents with kids in the area.

Really??  Wouldn't it have been more effective to get your story in the local paper then?  How many parents do you think run a background check on every employee at their grocery store before taking their kids with them?  Especially the security guard that they may not even know exists.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#7 Consumer Comment

It was not a jab

AUTHOR: Steve - (USA)

Jeremy - when I said I was sorry if the OP was indeed "diddled" it was sincere; using slang for being abused is not a "jab". I have no idea what happened to the guy when he was a kid, but whatever it was, it does not justify smearing someone's name on the Internet. Given how he has acted on this thread (I believe I am now a "psychopath" as well as a "pedo"), I have no doubt that he would accuse anyone of this if he felt slighted by them in the least. I smelled BS when I first read his post, and it smells even stronger now. 

Again, maybe he was molested, maybe he was not. But none of what happened to him excuses his behavior. 
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#8 General Comment

*Jeremy is being real, Steve you aren't who you think you are

AUTHOR: SimonBenjaminNewport - (United States of America)

I am new to Ripoff Report and I was looking at the new posts, trying to see if my rebuttal for my prior complaint had been put up yet (not even sure if that's how you do it). I had no idea that people could post this type of stuff. This is, literally, the 3rd report I've read. 

Looking at the most recent reports lead me to today's and this report has Hadley, MA in it. I'm from New England so it caught my eye. Plus, the title is extremely unsettling. I wanted to see what Ripoff is okay with posting and not. All that I could picture was my ex's sister, who lied all the time and made outlandish accusations. She'd enjoy this site but wouldn't make it far.  This report, obviously, is not anything like that.  

Jeremy:
This whole thing is none of my business, but it has my attention now. I don't know you but I feel the need to back you up, even though you obviously don't need any help (lol). I'm just an outsider reading this but if someone handed me your report and asked me if this person was telling the truth, I would say you are here making an honest plea. Your details are consistent and clear, while not being too detailed (which a liar would do). Your writing conveys your zealous conviction for what you are trying to say.

It is unmasked over and again that you are the authentic person here. This report is evidentiary in how you perceived your circumstances and observed how the others around you were treated. Not only that, but the situation was dictated to you: certain circles of people made trouble and were not reprimanded for it, apparently, repeatedly. I've been in that situation before at work. "Good 'ole boys" mindframes will be a dead end unless one is a part of the system.

I am sorry you were in the hospital. I'm not pretending to understand but my guess is that it was good that you went. Otherwise, you may be dead (from what you said)...and it's obvious that you still have a great deal more to say :)

Steve:
I just found this site yesterday. I immediately started thinking about reporting a crooked auto repair company (that is across the country), that I haven't dealt with in 2 years. Why? B/c I didn't know about this site then. It's as simple as that. People get angry when someone screws them over or does something wrong and gets away with it....hence, Ripoff Report...

Without a doubt, there are fabricators that come on here and lie. I really do not think Jeremy is one of them. Why would he come on here as if this was a chance to "redeem himself from (fill in random conviction)" as you summized? Let's think about this...just say he got fired for questionable or illegal behavior...why in the world would he draw attention to that time in his life again by posting online? What other reason would he have to bring the person in question up again unless it really bothered him about what he remembers the guy did?

"I'm sorry you were diddled"...What exactly were you trying to convey about yourself other than the fact that you ran out of argument? It's one thing to blow off steam but another to take a person's, (this is my conjecture) arguably, worst memories and use them as a jabbing tool. Using tragedy/trying times that someone else reveals about themselves, and adding it to what you say to appear passionate and authentic, is transparent.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#9 Consumer Comment

Evidence?

AUTHOR: Robert - (USA)

The evidence I have to back it up is all of the people I told about what happened when it happened, all of whom believed me,

Sorry pal, that is NOT evidence, that is hearsay.  YOU telling people anything is not PROOF of your allegations.

If this happened lo those many years ago, why are you posting about it now?  Why didn't you post your allegations 2, 3, or 4 years ago?  It would appear to me that some thing RECENTLY occurred that compelled you to post your allegations now.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#10 Author of original report

I'll Make You a Deal, Steve

AUTHOR: Jeremy K. - (United States of America)

I wasn't able to respond to this right away because my computer had a major virus. Geez, Steve, you even make inanimate objects sick. I also have a job, unlike you, Steve, and actually put some thought into things I write and say, unlike you, Steve, so it takes some time. But, hey, you didn't post twenty, progressively stupider responses before I had a chance to respond this time, so that's sort of like progress! Good for you!
 
Wow. You did it again! You keep changing your idea of what "really happened." First, he caught me doing "something" but you didn't know what and I was just mad at the guy. Then you decided he caught me stealing. Then you decided -- conveniently, after I said something similar to you -- that I was the one actually looking at little girls and was fired, or "forced to quit," and couldn't find a job because of it now, even years later, so I came up with a devious plot to put the blame on my accuser on some site online that employers don't even look at, instead of simply not telling a potential employer I ever worked there or giving my side of the story to their face if they somehow "found out" about me, apparently hoping they might find stumble upon it online, and, oh yeah, they don't call the managers at places like that, anyway, and companies only confirm that you worked there and give the dates you worked, etc., etc., etc. You really need to put more thought and effort into your conspiracy theories, Steve.
 
And now here, at first, you go back to my stealing something! I thought you abandonded that theory when you came up the convoluted theory I just mentioned. Then again, I completely obliterated that "theory" piece by piece in my last post. So, I can see why you wouldn't bring up that retarded story again, but why are you going back to "theft" when you had already abandoned that theory? Again, when so much s**t comes out your mouth every time you open it, it must be tough to keep track of it all.
 
And now you've changed your theory again! This time I wrote an entire, long complaint on Ripoff Report because ... the guy bested me in an argument ... years ago!!! Wow. I didn't think you could get any more retarded than your last theory, but you've somehow managed to top yourself. I should have had more faith in you, given all of the stupidity I've read from you so far. It took me a while -- after I was finally done laughing -- to figure out even how to respond to that. I just can't get my brain to function on as low a level as yours.
  
First, did you look at this jack**s's picture? The guy is a troglodyte retard with rocks for brains. Just look at the expression on his ugly face. Ninety percent of the thoughts he has are "DUUUHHH!!!" That guy couldn't best a tree stump in an argument. Although, come to think of it, I'm sure he could still trounce you.
  
Second, how would you know what I'm like when someone bests me in an argument? I hope you're not implying that you did that!!! I completely ripped about your "argument" -- if you can really call it that -- for pages in my last two posts. You don't think it "counts," because I made some meanie comments, but life isn't a debate team, Steve. If you want adults to take you seriously, you should develop a thicker skin and a better method of arguing than "You hurt my feelings, therefore you're wrong!"

And, finally, ANYONE could rebut someone better than you could! If your "intellectual prowess" on this thread is any indication, you are incapable of making any sort of argument at all, valid or not; and your entire "debating" is deflecting by criticizing the other's person's debating; picking out one or two small pieces of the other person's argument to show how they're supposedly deflecting; and, of course, using big words and phrases you don't even know the definition of, like "intellectual prowess." (Not actually big words for most people, just for you.) You seem to be incapable of even responding to a single point rasied in a person's argument, never mind besting them in one.
 
I picked apart your entire method of debating AND every single one of the "points" -- if you can really call them that -- in your arguments. You didn't address 99% of the points I made in my arguments because you can't. That's why you keep completely changing your "theory" of why I "really" posted the complaint every time. Well, that and you're just intellectually lazy. It's much easier just to vomit some new nonsense onto the computer screen than it is to actually try to counter a long line of arguments. 
  
Whether they like what I write or not, and regardless of what they think of me personally, anyone reading this would have to admit that I at least responded to every single one of your points. And, again, unlike you, I'm a busy guy. You have responded to no point I raised in either of my posts at all ... again, because you can't.
 
And, yes, I'm not the "debating type," because of one comment I made about how I would punch you if you called me a liar to my face, when I've already written three long posts countering all of your arguments, and I'm now writing a fourth. If insults were all I wanted to do I would have ONLY written those, not included them along with my arguments tearing apart yours -- which wasn't difficult to do, by the way. 
 
And, yes, you do sometimes have to fight if someone does or says something horrible to you or someone you care about, or, in your case, if you just obnoxiously and cowardly attack people who did nothing wrong to you. If you can't back up your words with your fists if it comes to that, then don't say anything at all. Actually, since anyone would be able to easily take you in a fight -- or in an argument -- you would never be able to talk again. What a glorious day that would be!
 
I can just imagine you in a fight, too. I bet you can defend yourself about as well as you can argue. You'd try four increasingly ridiculous tactics, and get knocked on your a*s every time, all while criticizing your opponent's tactics and whining about how unfair and mean your opponent is being. People who are wrong but just refuse to lose the argument need to be beaten. It's the only way to shut them up. And, again, just like with the "personal attacks," if you don't like "threats," then stop begging for them.

I can tell that you're on a debate team, and probably think you're good at debating, which is how you can be so confident in your ridiculous arguments even though you completely change them every time. Most people don't like to argue in public like you do, Steve, and, again, get quite upset if you pick a fight with them in public. Most people would also be extremely embarrassed if they kept making up arguments about someone's motives, had them discredited each time, and kept doing it, anyway, but you seem to be embarrassment-proof. No wonder debate teams are among the first to be cut when schools are trying to trim expenses. People who enjoy arguing -- especially in public -- are so obnoxious, no know wants them around.
 
Actually, it sounds more like you teach debating than that you actually debate, since you clearly consider yourself the authority on the subject. The old saying is true: "Those who can, do; those who can't, teach." You can't really be a debating teacher, though. That would require having a job. 
 
I knew you wouldn't be able to resist responding without criticizing me for calling people who used the phrase "ad hominem attacks" pretentious. How can someone who thinks he's such a great intellectual be THAT predictable? Now you're just being a pretentious pseudo-intellectual *and* you think you're being clever by using my criticism of people who use the phrase to attack people against me. It's just sad and pathetic. To paraphrase you, is that really the best you can come up with? (I took out the macho posturing and made into an adult statement. "Is that the best you got???" That one's still funny. lol)
  
There are a few ways to respond if you can't actually counter the points a person makes in an argument -- in your case, you can't even counter one. Picking out what you think is the "worst" of what they said but isn't even one of their points and focusing entirely on that (i.e. my quote about punching); whining and complaing about personal attacks and accusing your opponent of trying to deflect; making your own personal attacks that have nothing to do with their argument without making any sort of argument of your own; and just completely dismissing their entire argument by calling them "crazy." You've done all of these. Congratulations on being the most pathetic debater ever.
 
No one reading my "little rants" will agree with you. It's hilarious that you think everyone looks at things the way you do, and that you can speak for everyone. That's arrogant in its own right, even if you were right, but you're failing to take into account the fact that everyone else is much smarter than you.

You think anyone telling you to s**k it or who wants to punch you in the face is having a nervous breakdown? Wow. That would mean everyone you have ever come in contact with in your life must have had a nervous breadkdown. I don't see how anyone could not find you so obnoxious that they want to punch you in the face, or at least tell you to go f**k yourself. So, go f**k yourself.
  
You don't even deserve a standard argument, anyway. Again, you know no one involved in this and nothing about what happened, and you come on here -- completely anonymously, even though you hypocritically call that cowardly when others do it -- and call me a liar. You began with the "ad hominem attacks," and I responded in kind. Especially after what I said happened to me in my life, this thing is EXTREMELY personal to me. Then you tell me I am making it up. People told me I was "just making it up" when I was little, too. And then you accuse ME of being the one doing it, when I was a victim of that sort of thing. And now you're even joking about child molestation and the horrible effects it has on people! You don't even deserve to be treated with common human decency, because you have none.
 
I used insults because I was upset over someone accusing me of doing something that hurt me badly when I was a child and f**ked up my life, and because I think you have no right to even be speaking on this subject in the first place because you know nothing about what happened. But I also addressed every single one of your arguments and tore them apart, piece by piece. You use insults because you get off on making sexual abuse victims suffering from PTSD feel even worse. Not that I would give you the satisfaction of letting you make me feel worse, but I'm positive that you ridicule sexual abuse victims every time you come in contact with one. And half of them are probably your victims.
  
How do personal attacks mean that I "cry wolf"? That doesn't even make any sense. I can't believe you would criticize someone for personally attacking you when, first, the personal attacks began with you when you involved yourself in this and publicly called me a liar; second, you deserve personal attacks, and it would be immoral NOT to personally attack you; third, it's just really easy and fun, because you leave yourself wide open for it; and fourth, holy s**t! Your thread is not only full of personal attacks but you also said the worst, most vile personal attack I've ever heard in your last post, ridiculing people for being molested as children!!!
 
"Look, I'm really sorry you got diddled when you were a kid. That must have been tough."
 
Criticizing someone for using personal attacks right in the middle, or right after, personally attacking them -- especially with a remark like that! -- is a new low in hypocrisy, even for you. Anyway, don't insults just roll off your back? You have to actually be able to experience shame for insults to affect you, and you are completely shameless.
 
Mocking someone for being sexually abused as a child is the worst thing I've ever heard, worse even than what R.J. was doing. Do you realize there's a term for people who have no sympathy, no pity whatsoever for other people, even children, and who get off on other people's suffering? It's called "psychopath." There's no cure for that, so, again, why not just go kill yourself? I'm positive that no one would miss you, and it would make many, many people -- everyone you're ever met, including your family -- very, very happy.

I bet you think women who are raped were "just asking for it," too, and ridicule them as well, while automatically believing the person they accused of raping them. It's not even a "debate." I repeat: it is because of people like you that sexual assault victims have such a difficult time coming forward ... and why their attackers end up getting away with it and going on to hurt more people. But then, that's what you want, isn't it? Your one and only interest in this complaint is to make sure a pedophile isn't detered. You really just deserve to be shot.
 
I hope you get raped. I really do. So you can know what it feels like. Then I'd like to see you joke about child molestation and sexual assault and the trauma victims go through their whole lives because of it. But then again, you may be the only person in the whole world where if someone did rape you, the experience would be a hundred times worse for the rapist.
 
And I'm really sorry your father f**ked you up the a*s and then made you suck his d**k. I'm even more sorry that it was yesterday. And that you enjoyed it. (That does explain all the s**t that comes out of your mouth, so to speak.) But that still doesn't give you the right to go around being a jack**s to everyone.
  
I remember once there was someone who I thought was being a jerk. Then I found out what happend to him when he was little and the pain and the trauma he had been through and is still dealing with. So, even if that still didn't give him the right to be mean to people, I understood at least where he was coming from and felt bad for him, so I backed off immediately and I certainly didn't even think of escalating my attacks like you did with me, and definitely not of ridiculing him for being vicitimized in the worst way possible! Then again, I'm a human being, unlike you.
 
I was completely, 100% right about you. You say that you're just here to expose scams, and the biggest scammers are people posting anonymous posts -- although I've already explained several times that I'm not anonymous here, you are -- and name the individuals. (How do you post a complaint about someone without naming them???) Then you come out with "I'm sorry you got diddled when you were a kid" and even call me a liar over saying I had a breakdown and was in the hospital several times over the abuse I suffered when I was little, and saying I almost died. 
 
And, as far as how a nervous breakdown could make me "almost die," um, have you ever heard of PTSD and suicide attempts??? That would be "almost dying." Wow. You know even less about basic psychology than you do about the proper way to debate. I didn't think you could be more ignorant of anything than that.
 
After what I went through, I would never wish attempting suicide on any, and I'm not about to start now. So, instead, I hope you commit suicide and succeed. Hey, it would be the first thing you ever succeeded at it in life! You'd be somewhat less of a complete loser. And, best of all, no one would ever have to know you or interact with you in any way ever again. This is the greatest thing you could possibly do for the world.
 
Another thing you can do -- at least in this case -- when you can't counter someone's arguments is to make inhuman remarks ridiculing them over being sexually victimized as a child and question the trauma they've suffered their whole lives because of it. I wouldn't have been surprised over your not believing me over that, too, but I have never in my entire life -- even in Internet comment sections -- heard anyone ridicule someone for being raped or molested, especially when they were children. My insults about you were not about horrible, traumatizing things that happened to you when you were a small, helpless child. Geez, do you think I was "asking for it," too? Did I lead them on at age four? And you wonder why I think you're a pedo, too. You just defend them and ridicule their victims and their pain. You're just as bad as a pedo either way.

And, for someone whining about "personal attacks," that was a pretty cheap shot about how you think I sounded like I was having a nervous breakdown in my responses. And it wasn't even clever, it was just sad. You wouldn't have even been clever enough to come up with saying it sounded like I was having a nervous breakdown and I should show this thread to my therapist if I hadn't mentioned having a breakdown previously in my post. (Not that that is a clever remark to come up with on your own, it just would be for you.) Now, again instead of making an argument, you deflect with the easiest, cheapest "ad hominem attack" of your own.
 
You're right: a person getting p**sed after someone purposely antagonizes them over extremely personal and painful things that happened to them and wanting to punch that person in the face is proof that they're not the "debating type" and it means they're having a "nervous breakdown." Real men (i.e. the opposite of you in every way) fight with words, but are capable of using their fists if they have to. And after that "diddled" comment -- mocking sexual abuse victims -- never mind punching you, most people would want to beat the living s**t out of you, regardless of who you were talking about. 
   
I was perfectly calm writing those posts. The first one I actually had fun writing before I read your second one, acccusing me of being the pedophile looking at little girls at work, in addition to making up charges about somehow who actually is one and did do that. That's hilarious how you think being "diddled" as a child doesn't give someone the right to anoymously accuse someone of something. Now you are equating accusing someone anonymously of something -- which I'm not doing, anyway -- with child molestation! Wow. When I told you to look up "false equivalency" in the dictionary, I didn't mean an antonym dictionary. And, anyway, you anonymously accused me of the same charges I originally alleged about R.J in your third post. What's your excuse then? "He started it!!!"  
 
You're ridiculing child molestation victims, dismissing child sexual assault like it doesn't even matter, laughing at the idea that it can cause trauma throughout a victim's life and that it's something that could make victims feel so much shame and guilt and anger that they try to kill themselves several times (or else you're just too f**king stupid to figure it out). Why don't you show this thread to ANY therapist, most of whom treat sexual assault victims? I hope they would diagnosis you as the psychopath you are and throw you in the mental hospital for life, where no one would ever have to listen to you again. You can critique the rhetorical skills of the hospital staff all day long, if you want.

How does saying "vile things" -- which you, of course, topped me on by a longshot with that "diddled" comment -- in response to you mean that I don't believe the things I say? Actually, it just means that I -- like most people -- hate you! And that, even while I'm countering your argument, I think you deserve "vile" comments because you're a vile, subhuman being.
 
You change your theories about me every post and pick fights with random people online -- anonymously because you're a coward -- and you believe yourself to be on some sort of moral crusade to "protect" everyone in cyberspace. Forget about breakdowns, you're bats**t insane. Maybe you can show this thread to YOUR therapist. He can help you figure out which of your personalities and which of the voices in your head is doing what. Not that it really matters, because they're all equally retarded.
    
As far as my calling you a pedo "twice," I didn't say that just because you didn't believe my story. In your third post, you accused ME of being a pedo and were so sure of it that you even told employers (imaginary employers, since I'm working and not looking for a job right now) to not hire me -- all  just because I stuck with my story and didn't agree with you, and I wrote a response to you calling me a liar that you found insulting. (Something about my "rhetorical skills," again.) So, congratulations, you've shown how "little it takes to throw this allegation out there." When you throw it out there against people, you should expect to have it thrown right back in your face.
 
You defend pedophilia in your first post, go over-the-top defending this guy, absolutely sure he must be innocent when you don't even know him, and don't know or haven't spoken to anyone else involved in the situation, and were not there when it happened. You make callous jokes about child molesation that even the raunchiest comedian wouldn't touch (well, that and because, like all of your attempts at humor, they're just not funny, either ... although when you try to make serious points you are unintentionally funny). You don't even get that child molestation is traumatizing and can cause PTSD and breakdowns, which can -- obviously -- lead to suicide attempts. You don't seem to have thought about child abuse from the victim's perspective at all, as if it doesn't even matter or they're just exagerrating their suffering. You won't back down on attacking a person and understand where they're coming from when they say they were sexually abused. Instead, you escalate, and gleefully and sadistically ridicule them for being victimized. Yeah, now where would I get the idea that you're a pedo? Go around ridiculing child sexual assault victims and defending pedophiles to people and see how they react, and what they think you are.
 
Child molesters either deny completely or minimize to themselves the harm that they are causing to the children they abuse, so they don't have to feel bad about what they are doing. This is exactly what you're doing talking about the subject of child molestation. You deny or mimimize the harm it causes to people, ridicule its victims, attack its victims for accusing someone else of doing the thing that hurt them when they saw it with their own eyes and you didn't, call them cowards when it's child molesters and people like you who attack its victims, especially anonymously, and defend its perpetrators, who are cowards. You can do all that because you don't see pedophilia and child molestation as wrong, so you can justify it when you do it yourself.
 
It's clear from many of the statements you've made that you don't just not sympathize with what happened to me, but that you don't sympathize at all with ANY victims of child sexual abuse and that you think their suffering is just a joke. And you haven't actually even denied being a pedo! Most people would be pissed. You laugh about it, because you don't think pedophilia is all that bad.
  
I already said that what he was doing wasn't technically illegal, but you defended it, anyway. You don't see anything wrong with taking procative pictures of prepubescent girls -- or even with child molestation, based on your "diddled" comment. The idea of sexual predators preying on children just one big joke to you.
 
But maybe I'm wrong. You might not be a child molester after all. Even a little girl could fight you off and kick the s**t out of you. And best you in an argument, too. I bet it happens to you all the time.
 
As for my "cowardly" posting this complaint anonymously, YOU are the one posting anonymously! Did you miss where I explained that? I DID leave my name myself, idiot. I used my real first name and last initial -- no last names on Ripoff Report, as it says everywhere on this site -- and my real hometown. R.J. and all of the people we worked with know who I am, and so do people in the community. YOU are just some random, completely anonymous person with just a first name, no location listed, and no one involved in this or anyone else on this site knows who you are unless you tell them. You could be a freaking computer for all anyone knows. Wait, never mind. All spam, including those weird posts about "Muslim poems" that keep showing up, are much more insightful than anything you have written.
 
Did you read the Ripoff Report guidelines? Of course not. You can't read. But did you have someone read them to you? "No last names." "We will never reveal your identity." The whole point of the site is to be able to anonymously complain about people, so weirdo stalker freaks like you don't retaliate and try to rape them and molest their children. But I didn't post my complaint anonymously, anyway. YOU POST YOUR COMPLAINTS ANONYMOUSLY!!
 
If you really think that this post is a fake, well, R.J. knows where to find me. You are just some p**sy hiding behind your anonymity, and then accusing others who aren't doing that of being cowards. If you're so brave and honorable, then why don't YOU -- like I have done, even though you think I haven't -- reveal your identity and location? You don't even have to list your last name. I dare you to list just your last initial and the city or town you live in. If you're not a coward and you're so sure that I'm making all this up, then what do you have to hide? If you don't reveal your identity and location, then you are the coward anonymously attacking people, not to mention a tremendous hypocrite.      
 
If my post was so obviously a fake, then why would R.J. even need to rebut it, and why would you feel the need to rebut it, literally like two seconds after it was posted? If it's so obvious I'm lying, then anyone should be able to see it, and they don't need any help from you or anyone else. So, that isn't why you felt the need to "prove" my posts were wrong. It's because A) you're just a pr**k who likes arguing and couldn't get into law school and flunked off the debate team, and has no job or friends, so he's gotta argue somewhere; and B) the topic of pedophilia just hit too close to home. You've been accused of that before -- of course the accusations were accurate, but you had to deny them and they still haunt you. You want to keep other pedophiles from being exposed like you were. 
  
I am not forwarding anything to anyone. For one, why the hell would I even know his email address, I think he's a sick freak and I don't like sick freaks, like you do. And I already explained that he did not EVER give any of the many people he accused of doing the worst things -- including one person who he accused of this very thing, whose life he almost ruined -- a chance to defend themselves. What's good enough for him is good enough for everyone. He can't expect to be able to get away with treating people like that without consequences.
 
And, anyway, you've already said how easy it is for people to find the complaint -- because it shows up first in the search results -- so he should be able to figure it out on his own, or someone he knows should be able to find it and point it out to him, very easily. I filed one other complaint in this site, and the person saw it within 24 hours. Is that really the best you have for a criticism? I wrote the complaint, left my name and location so everyone involved would know who I was and accept whatever consequences that may bring, but I didn't FORWARD it to him? If I was going to show this post to R.J, it's the last thing I would do now, after all of the horrible things you have said to me. Where does it say on the Ripoff Report guidelines that you have to do that? He already has you going insane defending him, anyway. And he's a worthless fu**ing piece of s**t, he shouldn't be treated with any sort of courtesy. He'll obviously just lie and deny what happened, anyway. Yes, he's really going to admit it. What else do you think he would say? And, again, if it's so obvious that my post is a fake, then readers should be able to see that for themselves and he doesn't even have to defend himself. The son of a b**ch can get cancer and die a slow, horrible death. Then I'll print out the complaint and stick it to his grave, and he can read it then.
 
Yes, you're right: NOT posting an anonymous complaint on Ripoff Report about one of the biggest pieces of s**t on the planet is immoral and cowardly, but spreading malicious lies about innocent people, over and over again just for fun, and *actually* anonymously attacking someone who didn't do anything wrong online (that would be you attacking me) for everyone to see, and ridiculing them for being sexually victimized as a child (!!!) isn't. You have the most f**ked-up, backwards, wrong, view of ethics, morality and honor I have ever heard.
  
I'm not "smearing someone's name on the Internet with no evidence to back it up." YOU are smearing me on the Internet with no evidence to back it up, and you keep changing your insane theories as to why you think I faked this complaint.
 
As far as "evidence to back it up," I obviously don't have access to the offensive pictures he took years ago, and I would imagine he deleted them a long time ago. Even if I DID have access to them, I am not about to post pics of prebuscent girls online. (Although I'm sure you would love that; it's probably why you're so insistent on my providing evidence online.) That still wouldn't prove anything, anyway, because anyone could have taken those pictures. The evidence I have to back it up is all of the people I told about what happened when it happened, all of whom believed me, and people we worked with in that store who could tell you exactly what R.J. was like and the horrible things he was always doing to people. That's certainly a lot more evidence than R.J. had for all of the horrible things he accused people of doing, and more than you have that I'm making all this up, i.e. none. Again, even without the pedophilia, I probably would have filed a complaint on here against him, anyway, just because he was such a colossal a**hole.
 
I haven't talked to any of the people who could back me up in years, though -- although I'm sure they would back me up if they really had to -- and I doubt they would want to write in and be called a liar and otherwise attacked by some p***k who didn't even know them or R.J. and wasn't there but has half-a-dozen different theories that he is certain happened instead. And they definitely don't want to have their rhetorical skills criticized. There's no getting over that devastating of an attack. I'm still recovering myself.
 
If not, what evidence do you have whatsoever that I am lying? Weird conspiracy theories about my motives that you constantly change? Deflecting in every one of of your responses by criticizing the way I argue instead of actually trying to answer even a single point I made in my arguments? Hell, you're going on my word for this entirely that there even is an "R.J. Waskiewicz," that I worked in a grocery store with him, and on everything else. If you think I'm making up certain parts, whose to say I'm not making up everything, including the places and people involved? Oh God, here comes your next ridiculous conspiracy theory...
 
How would you know that one of the biggest scams on Ripoff Report is people posting false complaints? And how do you know what percentage of complaints are accurate and which are fakes? What source do you have on that? Your a*s? Someone posting something anonymously doesn't necessarily mean their report is fake, any more than someone listing their name means the post is real.
 
If your "intellectual prowess" and analytical skills based on what you've written on here are any indication, you suck balls at determining which reports are real and which are fake, and even more so at explaining people's motives for posting reports. Ripoff Report says right in its FAQ that they have no way of determining which reports are real and which aren't, so they never take sides. But you're so much smarter than everyone else, so you can instantly gauge the genuineness of each report, of course.
 
There are millions of reports on this site, many, many of them posted by "Anonymous" -- again, unlike me -- so if that gets your panties in such a knotted bunch, does that mean that I'm right about you? That you just sit there every hour of your day at your computer, responding to strangers' complaints and publicly calling them liars when you don't have the slightest clue what really happened, and try to engage them in your sophisticated, stimulating "debates"? No wonder you hypocritically post your rebuttals anonymously! There must be hundreds of people who would love to kick your a*s!
 
So, it millions of people post complaints on here, naming the person they're complaing about (again, not sure how you could complain about someone without naming them) and only use first names and locations -- like, um, you're required to do on this site, and, um, you did, except without your location -- or just choose "Anonymous" as their name, then why the hell are you bothering me then? Again, it's because the thing the person is accused of in this post affects you personally, having been accused of it yourself. 
 
Even if you do think a lot of complaints are scams, it isn't your job to say so unless you know the people involved or have firsthand knowledge of what happened. It's up to the person who the complaint is about or someone else involved to respond. You responded practically the second I posted my complaint, which defeats your criticism of me that I didn't show it to him first. When did I get a chance before you jumped up my a*s about it? If someone put up a fake complaint about me, and some random guy I don't even know was on there responding, I would tell him to go f**k himself. I can defend myself.
 
Actually, the BIGGEST scam on here is cowards like you anononymously attacking people who post complaints and trying to make other people think they're liars when you have no idea. THEY leave their name and location, you just leave a name, confident they will not be able to locate you to retaliate, which is the only reason you post your garbage in the first place, because you're a coward and you know you would get the s**t beaten out of you by angry people who really were victimized and are now being called a liar by some loser for all the world to see. Coming on here, completely anonymously -- even more anonymously than most people -- and attacking people for attacking people anonymously. Wow! That's some gall! It's beyond cowardice, actually. It's being a pathetic little p**sy.
 
And I have no idea what you're babbling about when you say posters name the person they're complaing about so that it will come up first in the Google search results. Um, Ripoff Report is a very popular website with millions of users. That's why it shows up at or around number one pretty much no matter who you write a complaint about. I don't work for Google. I don't control site rankings. Actually, people going to the page a lot makes it rank higher, so you're contributing to making it number one every time you post a rebuttal. And remember: most people aren't going to bother reading a long thread like this. Only a few people will actually take the time to click on it and even less to read the whole thing, including your comments. (They're so lucky that they're spared from having to read those; I wish I was.) But every single person will see "R.J. Waskiewicz -- Pedophile. Keep Your Kids Away from R.J. Waskiewicz!!!" even if they don't click on it at all. And it will be there ... forever. That's more than enough for me.
 
That is bulls**t that you are on here because you are trying to help people! YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHO IS TELLING THE TRUTH AND WHO ISN'T UNLESS YOU KNOW THE PEOPLE INVOLVED AND WERE THERE WHEN IT HAPPENED! Otherwise there is -- or should be -- doubt , and I have no idea why  you would want to possibly take the side of someone accused of something horrible; tell a person you don't know who did nothing wrong to you -- and a victim of the kind of thing the person he accused did, as well as a witness to his victimizing others, time and time again -- that he's making the whole thing up; or even say anything at all, unless you were sure. 
  
You've never helped anyone in your life, or cared about anyone other than yourself. If you want to "help" people so badly why not do something useful like helping out a food bank or donating to charity or take up a *real* cause? Because this one is personal to you. You were accused of pedophilia yourself, so you freak out whenever someone else is. There are a million others ways to help people, so why that?
 
And you're not on this site to try to "protect" people, either. You're just some troll trying desperately to prove how smart you are by "exposing" people because you flunked out of high school, have failed at eveything you've tried since birth, and your parents are ashamed of you, and that they ever even had you. You're an embarrassment to your family. You have no friends. You have no job. You can't even argue and debate well. You have absololutely nothing going for you, and things are never going to get better.
   
Clearly someone posted a complaint about you at some point -- a true one, no doubt -- and probably about you also looking at little girls and warning people about you, so now you're mad. People don't go on moral crusades -- like the one you're on trying to make the world safe for people rightfully accused of disgusting things -- unless it's something that affects them personally. No wonder you won't reveal your identity. Everyone would find out about you. People could even do a background check and discover just what a sick freak you are.

Moral crusaders of any kind are always the most insufferable, arrogant, irrational, self-righteous people, and are much more immoral than anyone they are "fighting."

But, since you think you're such a moral, ethical, honorable person (I can't believe I said that with a straight face and without throwing up) then I'll make you a deal. I'm going to give you the opportunity to make all of this right.
 
I would like you to either A) stop responding to this thread AND get off Ripoff Report forever; or B) apologize to me and say that you believe me that everything in my complaint happened exactly the way I said it did ... with NO other comments. If you do post any response that is not an apology and taking back all that you said about me making up the things in my complaint, I will re-post this complaint on one popular online public forum for every word you write.
 
If you're really trying to protect people like you say you are, then you wouldn't want this to get a hundred times worse than it is now. Remember: most people are extremely protective of children and think of pedophiles as the lowest scum on the face of the earth. Everything I said is true, but if you really think I'm lying and you really think you're trying to protect people, then the last thing you should want is for this to be spread all over the Internet, instead of just this one site. And he'll have you to thank for that if it happens, because I never would have even thought of doing anything like that in a million years, until you forced my hand, by calling me a liar and a pedo and now ridiculing me over being the victim of child molestation, all anonymously like a coward while acusing me of doing the same thing when I'm not. So, thanks, Steve. I never would have been able to do it without you.
 
Of course, if you're really only interested in "winning" the debate with me and not really trying to protect and help people at all, I guess you won't really care if this complaint is spread all over the Internet. But it's all up to you. His fate is in your hands. Now we'll see what your motives and priorities really are. 
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#11 Consumer Comment

PROTESTER SONG 77....... just type in 472051 at this site.......

AUTHOR: Karl - (USA)

in order to see if it is available in the consumer comments section at Ripoff Report #472051.

Thank You

***NATIONWIDE CD ALERT: Make sure to type in 453956 at this site and read Jim's Ripoff Report for important information if you have money invested in a CD at any of the big banks in America, like Wells Fargo.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#12 Consumer Comment

Karl - WHO ARE YOU?

AUTHOR: Steve - (USA)

So I never searched on the report numbers you claim contain poetry, as it seemed like just an obvious way to get people to read your reports. But for the hell of it I did type one in this time, and lo and behold, it was indeed a complaint about Bountiful Breasts, and you did indeed have a silly poem there! So while you do spam, I gotta give you credit for actually taking the time to make up on-topic poems.

But what is your deal? I mean, you aren't rude or anything, but you are very... "dedicated," shall we say. 

Anyway, how about an on-topic poem for RJ and Jeremy here? 
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#13 Consumer Comment

BOUNTIFUL BREAST POEM....

AUTHOR: Karl - (USA)

is available at this website.

Just type in 617614 at this site and it appears in the consumer comments section at Ripoff Report #617614.

Thank You

***NATIONWIDE BANK ALERT: Make sure to stay at this site and type in the following and read the Ripoff Reports from people all over America for important information if you have a bank account or a mortgage in the USA-

CHASE
BANK OF AMERICA
WELLS FARGO
CITIBANK
US BANK
ONE WEST BANK
WACHOVIA
FIFTH THIRD
MERRILL LYNCH
GMAC
INDYMAC
LITTON LOAN
MORGAN STANLEY
GOLDMAN SACHS
JP MORGAN
LEHMAN
HAMP
BANK
MORTGAGE
US GOVERNMENT
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#14 Consumer Comment

Jeremy treading on dangerous water

AUTHOR: voiceofreason - (United States of America)

Jeremy, you do realize that this man can sue the hell out of you for making these allegations, if you can't prove them, right? Maybe even criminal harassment charges.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#15 Consumer Comment

Well, *one* of is certainly throwing a bit of a tantrum

AUTHOR: Steve - (USA)

Well I have to say, you've now rebutted your own post better than I ever could. After all, you have now accused me of being a pedo *twice*, simply because I do not believe your story. So congratulations; you have shown how little it takes to throw this allegation out there, so people that stumble upon your little rants will quickly see that your accusations against RJ should be taken with a grain (or two) of salt. Heck, maybe you didn't steal anything; it seems quite possible that you posted these accusations just because he bested you in an argument.  

And if your intellectual prowess on this thread is any indication, I am certainly not surprised that you consider people who point out ad hominem attacks are "whiney, arrogant, spoiled pseudo-intellectuals". I mean, I'm betting you aren't really the debating team type (unless "I would punch you so hard in the face your whole family would feel it" is considered a valid argument these days).

And how did you almost die in the hospital if you were there for a nervous breakdown? To be honest, you sound like you are on the verge of a nervous breakdown right now; perhaps you should show your therapist this thread. 

See, the reason I am on this site is to help people who have been scammed, and one of the BIGGEST scams on here is people who post attacks on people who they name (so that Google will find it), while never leaving their name themselves. Since you have put HIS name on here (and the name of your boss), why not leave your own, if you truly believe what you say (given your vile replies to being questioned, I suspect that you do not).  More importantly, forward this to the guy so he can defend himself. Otherwise you are indeed being cowardly.

Listen, I'm sorry you were diddled when you were a child, and I'd imagine that would be tough. But it does not give you the right to smear someone's name on the Internet with no evidence to back it up. Again, given the personal attacks from you just in this thread, it seems you like to cry wolf often.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#16 Author of original report

Get some help

AUTHOR: Jeremy K. - (United States of America)

Yes, once again you figured out my evil scheme. Only now it's completely different from the first evil scheme you figured out, so I guess you've outsmarted yourself. (Probably not too difficult to do.) First I was just trying to make a guy look bad because I was mad that he caught me doing some mysterious thing you couldn't even name, now I wrote it to make myself look better because I'm having trouble finding a job after getting fired for doing one of the things I accused the guy of doing! (And conveniently the very one I implied that you do, causing your temper tantrum in the first place.) That is all of it, right? I have trouble following your twisted logic. I don't have the lifelong experience speaking retard that you do.
 
Wow.  What tangled conspiracy theory are you going to come up with next???
 
Have you ever heard of Ockham's Razor? Of course not, you're a retard. But it means the simplest explanation is usually the correct one. Here the simplest explanation would obviously be: workplace bully abuses his power to make everyone's life miserable by spreading all sorts of malicious lies, including that a male co-worker liked to look at little girls, and showing pictures of co-workers he took around the store to embarrass them; guy working with him finds his phone unattended and discovers many sick pictures of little girls, but discovers he can't do anything about it because he technically didn't break the law and he and the store manager are friends, anyway; guy quits there, feels bad about not having been able to do anything for a while, worrying about what the sick freak might do, but goes on with his life and has many major distractions and serious problems over next few years; then, he finally discovers Ripoffreport.com and thinks it would be the perfect place to finally expose this guy and warn parents in the area about him, which he would have done at the time if he had known about the site.
 
But you come up with this explanation: security guard "busted" guy for "something" you're not sure of; guy gets fired, then forgets about it for several years and then all of a sudden randomly gets pissed again and tries to get "revenge." No, wait! Security guard busted guy for "theft," but the rest of it is still true. No, wait! Security guy busted guy for doing one of the things he claimed the security guy was doing, THAT'S why he got fired (or "forced to quit," you're not sure) and now he's not only mad and trying to get "revenge," he needs to put up this complaint because he is having trouble getting hired anywhere because employers keep calling that one manager from that one place he worked at several years ago and finding out his dirty little secrets, so he has to create an elaborate story on a site employers don't even look at in evaluating job prospects to counter those allegations instead of, I don't know, not telling the prospective employers that he worked at that place in the first place; or, if they did find out somehow, telling them outright his side of the story, since that would generally seem more professional than writing a blog about it online that he hopes the employer will find so he will be exonerated -- or, no, wait, maybe the guy is actually *directing* prospective employers to the site ... again, instead of simply not telling the employer that he worked in that place or telling his side of the story outright. And he makes sure to write in his response to some random, cowardly jackass who calls him a liar all sorts of choice words that no employer would ever want to see.
 
I think I've got that right. It's hard to keep up with your elaborate, paranoid theories. If that is what you're saying happened, it doesn't sound at all like the simplest -- or even a plausible -- explanation. It is brilliant in its stupidity, though, I'll give you that.
 
I'm not even sure where to begin with all that's wrong with your "theory." Let's see...
 
1. Why would I not simply leave this company off my list of employers on a resume or job application if I did something so creepy that I got fired or was "forced to quit" for it, especially knowing -- as you think I do -- what they are saying about me there. Obviously, other employers would not have any way of knowing I worked in a particular place unless I tell them about it. Simply not telling them I worked there in the first place seems like a much simpler and more common sense way of making sure creepy allegations don't follow me around than telling them and then concocting an elaborate scheme to make sure they believe me and not them in case the store manager rats me out.
 
2. I already said -- as you pointed out, "several times" -- that THIS HAPPENED SEVERAL YEARS AGO!!! If someone did something so creepy that no employer would hire them for several years I think they would be in jail, not applying for more jobs and posting things on Ripoff Report. Or, at the very least, they would have had to register as a sex offender, and that's what would be keeping them from getting jobs and what they would be concerning themselves with, not petty "revenge" and posting complaints about the person who supposedly "busted" them years after the fact to fool employers.
 
3. If I DID get fired from the company I was working at for doing something "creepy," first it would have to be REALLY creepy. The workers were unionized at that company and it was next to impossible to fire even the worst employees. There were even a couple of instances of sexual assault. (No, not by R.J.; he can't do all of the perverted things, but I'm sure he got off watching them and recording them on the screens in his dark little voyeur room.) No one was fired even then. Basically the only way you could get fired would be if you stole something, so you should have stuck with your "theft" theory. But if someone did something REALLY creepy -- and, again, it would have to be sexual assault or worse -- getting fired and not being able to find a new job would be the least of their problems. 
   
4. Since when do employers go enitirely on the basis of the word of one former manager from one former employer when they decide to hire someone, especially one from several years ago? 
 
5. Prospective employers generally don't even talk to managers from the places a prospective employee worked at in lower-level jobs like mine. (I was working at a grocery store, remember.) 
 
6. Even if they DID for some bizarre reason call the grocery store I worked at several years ago to find out what they think of me, they would not even get the store manager on the phone. I worked for a large grocery store chain, and there were over a hundred employees in that store alone. You think the store manager even bothers with things like that with that many employees, in an industry with one of the highest turnover rates? Unlike you, he's got stuff to do. They'd get someone from personnel to deal with that, and they don't even know any of the workers in the store. I guess they must have stamped my file with a big red "Perv." I'm sure you're used to that.
 
7. It's company policy when someone from another company calls asking about a former employee considering hiring them -- as it is with many companies, especially large corporations -- to only confirm that the person worked for the company and give the dates they worked. They don't even say if the employee quit or was fired, never mind tell them about all the super-creepy things the employee did while he was working there. This is because many employers have been sued for giving negative evaluations, so a lot of companies -- including the one I worked at -- had it as a policy not say anything positive or negative about them, even if they are asked. Obviously, they are going to avoid saying something really awful about an ex-employee then, especially if it's not something they can even prove.
 
8. A person trying to find a job with "creepy" allegations in their past -- or even a registed sex offender -- probably wouldn't have a difficult time of it. I hear in the news all the time about registered sex offenders who did something terrible to a child where he works because no one bothered to do a background check, which is a huge scandal in itself. There are many, many employers who do not do background checks, and still more who do not do them well. And this isn't even something that would show up in a background check, if I was just something I got fired over at one job. Employers who don't even bother to do background checks probably aren't interviewing the store manager from one of the places a prospective employee worked at several years ago, either. 
 
9. The fact that so many employers don't do background checks -- or do them well -- even in jobs that involve kids is a major reason why I posted this complaint in the first place. While a prospective employer at a job I was interviewing for would not see this complaint unless I told them about it and, according to you, that I was fired from an employer several years ago for "creepy" reasons, someone interviewing R.J. very well might see this complaint. It comes up right at the top in the Google search results. That seems like a more likely reason for me to post this complaint, to make sure both parents and prospective employers in jobs involving kids can know about this guy and what he's into. I actually wasn't even thinking of employers R.J. might interview with, though. Like I said in complaint, I was mostly only addressing parents with kids in the area. So, thank you for pointing out that people with creepy allegations from past jobs following them around will have a hard time finding work. If it keeps him away from kids at work, too, then I've accomplished much more than I ever set out to. So, again, thank you. You've made me feel even better about what I did, even more sure that I did the right thing, and you sure have put a smile on my face.
 
10. If this complaint was all just an elaborate scheme to fool prospective employers, they would have to be *extremely* stupid and gullible if you think they will fall for my plot if even YOU could figure it out. Good Lord, they would have to have only one working brain cell, and it would have to be out taking a s**t!
 
In my first post, I focused heavily at first on on "how the guy would allegedly make up stuff about people, accuse them of things they did not do, etc." because I wanted to paint a picture of just what a contemptible sleazeball the guy is. That's the sort of thing good writers do, which is why you couldn't figure it out. Although his "sexual proclivities" were the main reason for the post, obviously, I probably would have written one about him, anyway, just based on how he treated people at work. He's sick even without the pedophilia.
 
Yes, I mentioned that he would spread "really awful, sexual rumors about co-workers he didn't like," because that was one of the nasty things the b*****d did that I wanted to complain about. I also wanted to show what a complete hypocrite he was when I revealed later that he was the one who actually was engaging in "awful, sexual" activities. It's called foreshadowing. Look it up. I feel like I'm talking to a fourth grader, except my nephew is in the fourth grade and he's much smarter than you.
 
I again almost fell off my chair laughing when you said I "slipped up a bit" when I wrote "feeling like we were being spied on, watched over our shoulders every second that we worked". (Thanks for the bold letters, by the way; without that added emphasis I would have had no idea what I was talking about.) I worked as a security guard, often with R.J., like I said. Before that I had worked in the front end for a while, then I worked in the bakeshop, in the grocery department. I was always moving around. That's why I said "I didn't even USUALLY work in the front end, where he was constantly accusing employees of doing weird things they didn't do and never actually ended up being disciplined for." I never said I NEVER worked where people were being targeted, just that I personally do not know of anything he said about me.
 
Even though I was not still working in the front end when he started with all his s**t, I did fill in sometimes on register if they were short. I did say that I "decided to look at the pictures on his phone to see if he had any images of me or any of my friends from the front end on there that he had creepily downloaded from security footage," and that there were pictures of co-workers, but "not of me or any of my friends, thankfully." So, yes, I did work in the front end a little bit, and I knew what he was doing, so I did worry and look over my shoulder sometimes. I worried much more for my friends who worked full-time in the front end, though.
 
As far as claiming that I was the one looking at little girls, first, you said yourself you don't even think there is anything wrong with looking at little girls, and, together with your over-the-top defense of someone accused of pedophilia, it would seem that you not only like looking at little girls but like everyone else who does, too. People don't get THAT offended over this sort of thing unless it affects them personally. And, since you didn't know any of the people involved in this and don't -- as much as you arrogantly and stupidly insist you do -- have even the slightest clue what happened (or about anything else) then I guess a fellow pedophile being attacked is what you set you off.
 
Don't worry, I know something that will definitely help. I've always thought pedophiles should just commit suicide. You won't have to worry about anyone attacking you and your friends for your perversity (you probably call it an "alternate lifestyle") if you just shoot yourself. Do R.J. and all the kids he comes in contact with a favor and take him with you.
 
But if anyone by chance did think I was looking at little girls, I think I know why: you must have stopped by, and I must have been seen talking to you. I'll make sure not to talk to any more little mama's boy pussies in the future just to be on the safe side.

Why does my story that I saw pictures in his phone "reek of BS" to you? Did you ever think it's not BS you're smelling but rather the s**t that's always coming out of your mouth? You could try industrial-strentgh Listerine, or, better yet, just knowing your role and shutting your mouth.
 
And, finally, why were you re-reading my complaint in the first place, poring over every little detail of it, apparently; and responding to me several times before I even got a chance to respond to you once; and why did you even read it in and feel the need to post a reply to it in the first place? I don't read complaints posted by and about people I don't even know, and I don't know too many people who do. Well, I'm sure you were attracted to the word "Pedophile" in my complaint because you're attracted to little girls and thought the guy I was complaining about would finally found be your kindred spirit, or maybe your partner in really sick sex crimes. You were thinking "That could be me, someday!"

But the reading and re-reading my words and writing to me over and over:  are you obsessed with me? Are you also a stalker in addition to a pedophile? When I find out who you are -- which will probably be from coming home to find you broken into my house and wearing my clothes -- I am going to have to get a restraining order against you. Get some help, you sick, obsessed, pedophile stalker freak.
 

For anyone reading this, this complaint is REAL. Steve-O doesn't even know me, the person accused or anyone else involved in the situation. He just likes to defend pedophiles, and almost definitely is one, just like R.J. Waskiewicz.
 
Now of course if I am wrong, then R.J (and Steve) have nothing to worry about. But if I am right (and I am), then here is a message for employers out there, especially those in Massachusetts: 

IF R.J. WASKIEWICZ APPLIES FOR A JOB AND CLAIMS THAT ANY OF THE ACCUSATIONS IN THIS COMPLAINT ARE NOT TRUE, JUST LIKE SOME RANDOM IDIOT NAMED "STEVE," WHO DOESN'T EVEN KNOW R.J. OR ME OR ANYONE INVOLVED IN THIS SITUATION AT ALL HAS DONE IN MY RESPONSE TO THIS COMPLAINT, REST ASSURED THAT THIS REPORT AGAINST R.J. IS GENUINE, THAT R.J.'S DENIALS AND HIS BEST FRIEND STEVE'S ABSURD, CONVOLUTED, UNINTENTIONALLY HILARIOUS, PARANOID, CONSPIRACY THEORY BRAIN FARTS ABOUT WHAT REALLY HAPPENED ARE TOTALLY FAKE. HIRE R.J. WASKIEWICZ AT YOUR OWN PERIL, ESPECIALLY IF THE JOB INVOLVES KIDS. JUST IGNORE STEVE. HE THRIVES ON ATTENTION AND TALKING TO HEAR HIMSELF AND IF YOU JUST IGNORE HIM, HE'LL GO AWAY AFTER A WHILE. IF HE DOESN'T, THOUGH, AT LEAST YOU'LL GET A GOOD LAUGH OUT OF HIM TRYING SO  DESPERATELY TO SOUND INTELLIGENT AND BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY. AND NOT THAT YOU OR ANYONE ELSE ACTUALLY WOULD IN THE FIRST PLACE, BUT DON'T HIRE STEVE, EITHER, BECAUSE HE'S A PEDO, TOO. HAVE A NICE DAY.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#17 Author of original report

Oh no, the little b***h is mad now!

AUTHOR: Jeremy K. - (United States of America)

I almost fell off my chair laughing when I read your two responses. First, you don't even give me a chance to respond to your first rebuttal before writing another one. Unlike you, apparently, I'm a busy guy and wasn't finished writing my response to your first post, but I guess if someone's as full of s**t as you are, you can only hold it in for so long. Then I finally go to post my response, and I see there's another, even more ridiclous one from you already waiting for me. You're probably going to have ten more, progressively stupider rebuttals posted before I'm even done posting this one.
 
This is just really sad and pathetic. I picture you as sitting at home in your mother's basement, on the computer from morning till night -- probably mostly in Internet comments sections, trying to get someone, *anyone* to take you seriously. You should  consider maybe getting a job or something, or at least going outside once in a while. Just don't talk to anyone, because I feel bad for anyone you might run into.
 
Well, all of the retarded things you said need addressing, not just half of them, so I'm going to go ahead and post my original response to your first steaming horse turd of a rebuttal below, then I'll respond to your second worthless piece of s**t one in a separate post right after it. Enjoy!

Anonymously accusing someone for the whole world to see is immoral and cowardly??? Wow. You accused me -- who you don't even know -- of making up terrible accusations about someone -- who you also don't even know -- and of doing something wrong that he "busted" me for, and filing this report just to get "revenge" for whatever it is you imagined I did. That's not only immoral and cowardly, it's arrogant and moronic and completely insane.
 
I KNOW that what I said happened whether some random jackass on the Internet is convinced or not because I was THERE. You don't have the slightest clue what happened, but your idea of justice, apparently, is: accuser, guilty of something I made up until proven innocent; accused, innocent, doesn't need to be proved at all.
 
And we're on a first-name basis here, a**hole. It's ALL anonymous! You only listed your first name and didn't even list a location like Stacey and I did. Then you attack someone -- who, again, you don't even know -- telling him -- and anyone else reading it -- that he's a liar, with no evidence whatsoever to back up your charge, knowing that you're protected by your anononymity. That is easily the most dishonest and cowardly thing I've ever heard. Well, other than everything R.J. did, of course.
 
I actually used my real first name and last initial and real hometown. R.J. knows who I am, and so do all of the people from that store -- you know, the ones actually involved in this situation, and not just some arrogant, snot-nosed little b**tch who feels entitled to pick fights with random people online because his parents raised him wrong.
 
So, I am not accusing anyone of anything anonymously. If I wanted to do that, I would have chosen "Anonymous" as my user name and not freaking used my real name and last initital and real hometown. I guess you're going to tell me I'm not using my real identity after all, which you can verify about as much as you can your theory that I filed this report because I was just mad for getting "busted" several years ago, over "something."
 
As far as my "rhetorical skills" go (wow, are you really that pretentious?) I was actually mostly just trying to piss you off -- and it seems to have worked marvelously. So, I guess my rhetorical skills are pretty good after all. Congratulations, though, on not using the phrase "ad hominem attack," the standard phrase that whiney, arrogant, spoiled pseudo-intellectuals use when someone rightly criticizes them. If you don't like "personal attacks," then don't personally attack people by calling them liars. You're lucky that's all I did. If I find out who you are, I will sue you for libel and defamation of character. A lot of people would do a lot worse than that.
 
I also was not attempting to "deflect" with my personal attacks on you. I made all my points just fine. I do think that you started whining and b**tching about my attacking you in an attempt to deflect, though, since you really do not have even a semi-intelligent argument, and are incapable of making one. More words of advice: if you don't like personal attacks, stop begging for them.
 
Your "rhetorical skills" apparently involve self-righteous, and unintentionally hilarious, anger and macho posturing ("Is that all you got???" HAHAHA), hypocritical accusations, and cutting-and-pasting blocks of text to show me what I wrote, in case I forgot. You could really use an introductory rhetoric class, and maybe one on logic and reasoning, too. One on ethics and morals wouldn't hurt, either. Maybe you'd side with the good guys, instead of pedophiles and terrorists now, apparently.
 
I have no idea what Gitmo has to do with all this -- then again, I have no idea what YOU have to do with all this -- but that's a ridiculous comparison, anyway. There is a ton of information on Gitmo that one can easily look up to make an informed opinion. There is zero information that can be looked up on this situation, so you can't make an informed opinion at all. But I guess having absolutely no idea what you are talking about isn't the sort of thing that deters you from picking fights with random people online.
 
I bet you were one of the people who cried about how terrible it was when Osama bin Laden was finally killed, and condemned all of the people -- the majority of the country -- who were celebrating that glorious day. It isn't the people who celebrate the demise of sick, evil people who are "just as bad" as them, it's the cowards who defend the sick, evil people, and try to tell everyone else -- especially the victims -- they're immoral for wanting justice, or even revenge. What the victims and their families think matters most; what spoiled, self-righteous, pretentious, moralizing pseudo-intellectuals think doesn't matter at all, and I hope that horrible things happen to them so we can see how forgiving they really are, since that's what they expect everyone else to be. But then, those people are almost always the most petty, vindictive little brats -- like you, supposedly calmly condemning someone for something you you think they did, then blowing a gasket -- and actually acting shocked -- and trying to get back at them when that person gets pissed and attacks you for publicly calling them a liar, even if it means inventing insane conspiracy theories.
 

It's sad. I think I can speak for a lot of people that if you called me a liar to my face -- especially about something really personal like this -- that I would punch you so hard in the face your whole family would feel it. I realize you're too cowardly to actually say something like that to someone's face -- accusing people anonymously online, and then hypocritically accusing other people of doing the same when they aren't is more your style -- but you really do need to be careful. If you don't get your head on straight, I promise that one day someone is going to hand it to you.
 
And did you miss this?
 
"It's funny that you should say that I'm making up these accusations, because I also mentioned how R.J. liked to spread 'really awful, sexual rumors' about other employees, just for s**ts and giggles. Well, one of the rumors he spread about this one poor guy -- again, no, not me -- was ... that he liked to look at little girls. It was one of the first bizarre, b.s. accusations he made, it completely ruined the guy's reputation, and I'm ashamed to say that I and some other employees believed it at first, because the guy did seem a little 'weird.' So, even if I was wrong about R.J. -- and I'm NOT, I saw the f**king photos on his phone -- that never stopped R.J. before, so why should it stop anyone else?"
 
He was ALWAYS accusing innocent people of doing horrible things -- including this horrible thing, that he was the one actually doing! -- abusing his power as the head security guard. THAT is cowardly. And it's as immoral as you can get, even without the pedophilia. Again, even if I was wrong about R.J. -- and I'm NOT, I saw the f**king photos on his phone -- one false accusation about one person wouldn't even compare to many of them about many different people. Especially if that one person was the one making all those many false accusations about everyone. That's called false equivalency. Look it up.
 
You're basically arguing that he can make all the false accusations he wants and sadistically and gleefully try to ruin people's reputations, over and over again -- but it's immoral and cowardly if someone does it to him once. He did not EVER give the people he accused and whose lives he made miserable a chance to tell their side of the story and defend themselves, so I'm not about to give that chance to him.
 
And, because of his position and influence as an authority figure in the store, people actually believed his lies at first and it practically destroyed an innocent young man's life. It's too bad he's not here to tell his side of the story, but I'm sure you'd just call him a liar, too. Anything to defend the scum of the earth, and act like you're more enlightened and moral than everyone else because of it. And since you're so obsessed with defending him, then why does he even need to defend himself? He can't read, anyway.
 
Why do you think the fact that this happened several years ago and I didn't say anything until now proves your "side"? I only mentioned that "several times" to ask why you think I would get "busted" for something and then sit there festering for years before finally getting "revenge." That doesn't make any sense, especially since I already said I went to the store manager, talked to a cop about it, and voluntarily quit later.
 
It's really not any of your business why I "waited" several years to write this complaint, but since you asked, it was because the store manager would not do anything and I discovered that the police would not do anything, either, at the time. So, I just tried to put it out of my mind for a while, knowing there was nothing I could do about it, either. Then I was in school and working fulltime. Then I had some serious health problems where I was in the hospital at length several times and almost died. As you can see, I was just a little bit distracted, and, again, I still didn't know what I could have done.
 
Then I discovered Ripoff Report recently. It may be a very popular site, but I am not online as often as most people, and I had heard of it before but thought it was only to report ripoffs in business transactions. When I finally happened to look at the site, I found you could report so much more, and I thought I'd finally found an avenue to get out what had been haunting me for years. It felt cathartic ... that is, until you came along.
 
Honestly, though, what would you do if some jerk at work was constantly accusing people of things they didn't do -- including pedophilia -- and then you find out he is actually guilty of the worst charge? And it threatens little kids? And then no one will do anything, and you feel like you would be partly responsible if the guy hurts a child? I myself was sexually abused when I was a child by a family member, and I know other people who were abused as children, too. I've had to struggle throughtout my life with trust issues, social interaction, anger, shame. That is why I was in the hospital, because I finally had breakdowns over it. I don't want anyone else to have to go through that, too.
 
It seems like you just automatically believe anyone who's accused of doing something horrible and assume their victims are lying. It's because of people like you that sexual assault victims have such a difficult time reporting what happened to them, and their assailants go free. Trust me, I know that is true.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#18 Consumer Comment

Ok wait

AUTHOR: Stacey - (U.S.A.)

What does spying on a muslim poem have anything to do with these report KARL?  Moron - get a job!
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#19 Consumer Comment

On a second reading, it becomes even *more* obvious that the OP got fired (or was forced to quit) for something creepy

AUTHOR: Steve - (USA)

In your latest post you say, "I felt guilty for a long time over not being able to do anything about this, which is why I'm writing on here now. At least I can warn people with kids about him." Yet in your first post you focus a little too much on how the guy would allegedly make up stuff about people, accuse them of things they did not do, etc. Irrelevant if you are warning people about his sexual proclivities, but VERY relevant if you are finding it hard to get a job because you were fired from one due to something creepy. The reason why I think it was something creepy that got you fired (and not, say, simple theft) is that you went out of your way to say he would "spread really awful, sexual rumors about co-workers he didn't like".

    And you slipped up a bit when you said most people had the "feeling like we were being spied on, watched over our shoulders every second that we worked". So much for the story that you were not one of the targets, but just a friend of his looking out for others. Makes one wonder if you are being truthful when you say that the "one poor guy" accused of looking at little girls is not you. 

  Of course, most prospective employers would try to follow up with your manager to see if what you say is true, but oh, wait - he is friends with RJ, and thus won't back you up. How convenient. 

  Finally, the whole thing about you looking into his phone just reeks of BS. 

  Now of course if I am wrong, then you have nothing to worry about. But if I am right (and I am), then here is a message for employers out there, especially those in Massachusetts: 

  IF SOMEONE APPLIES FOR A JOB AND CLAIMS THAT ANY ACCUSATIONS BY A PREVIOUS EMPLOYER (WHICH IS A GROCERY STORE) OF IMPROPRIETY ARE SIMPLY DUE TO RJ WASKIEWICZ MAKING THINGS UP AND/OR GARY DENNO (THE MANAGER) BEING CLUELESS, REST ASSURED THAT THIS REPORT AGAINST RJ IS POSTED BY THAT APPLICANT, AND IS TOTALLY FAKE. HIRE HIM AT YOUR OWN PERIL. 
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#20 Consumer Comment

SPYING ON MUSLIMS POEM...

AUTHOR: Karl - (USA)

is available at this website.

Just type in 646259 at this site and it appears as 'Consumer Comment #197' at Ripoff Report #646259.

Thank You

***NATIONWIDE BANK ALERT: Make sure to stay at this site and type in- BANK, and read the Ripoff Reports from people all over America for important information if you have a bank account or a mortgage in the USA.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#21 Author of original report

@Stacey

AUTHOR: Jeremy K. - (United States of America)

I agree with you that it should be considered child pornography. They were fully-clothed, but many of the pictures were *just* of the little girls' backsides and legs. Steve-O here seems to think taking pictures like that of prepubescent girls is a-okay, but I and you and most normal people think it's REALLY sick.
 
After I went to the store manager and he wouldn't do anything, and actually got pissed at me instead of him, because he was friends with R.J., I did go to a cop I know in my own town, and he told me what I wrote in my complaint above: that the girls were in public and fully-clothed, so technically, however sick it was, it wasn't a crime. 
 
And, as a longtime security guard, R.J. was friends with most of the police in the small town where we worked, and, after being rebuffed by the store manager and then told that it was no use by a cop friend, I knew it was futile to go to the police, especially since they would be just as protective of R.J. as the store manager was.
 
I would think the police would at least want to investigate and check out his phone just to be on the safe side, since there were little kids involved. It reminds me of the Penn State fiasco, although thankfully not nearly as bad as that. Authorities covering for their friends, or just being too apathetic, to do their jobs. It was sick.
 
This all happened several years ago. I felt guilty for a long time over not being able to do anything about this, which is why I'm writing on here now. At least I can warn people with kids about him. Thank you, Stacey, for your concern.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#22 Consumer Comment

Personal attacks? That's all you got?

AUTHOR: Steve - (USA)

Ah, the old "you defended someone I accused of being X, you must be X too!" bit:

"Are you a spokesman for NAMBLA, defending one of your own?"

"R.J. Waskiewicz is a pedophile and all-around pervert and sick freak who projects his own disgusting behavior onto other people. Is that what you're doing, too?"

"Or is it just that you like looking at little girls, just like your hero, R.J.? Probably the second one, since you said it's okay. I really hope you -- and R.J. -- don't have any young daughters and that you're never around little girls at all."

Nice try, but you may want to be a bit original with your tactics. Let me guess - anyone who is against Gitmo must be a terrorist as well, and "hates freedom," right?

And, predictably, we have the usual personal attacks in an attempt to deflect:

"Only able to pull so many thoughts out of your a*s at once? That's too bad. Hey, if you pull your whole head out of your a*s next time you won't even have to worry about it."

"They really need to stop letting random a**holes who don't even know any of the people involved respond to complaints...."

But enough about your impressive rhetorical skills.

Riddle me this: you have mentioned several times now that this was all a while ago. Why file a report now? What happened to cause you to revisit your problems with this guy?

And finally, you should let this guy know about this report so that he can at least respond. Anonymously putting accusations of pedophilia for the whole world to see is not only immoral, but cowardly as well. The man has a right to defend himself here.



Respond to this report!
What's this?

#23 Consumer Comment

question

AUTHOR: Stacey - (U.S.A.)

Did you file a report with your local Police Department?? If he had photos of young pre pubescent girls that is CHILD PORNOGRAPHY!
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#24 Author of original report

Wow! You're so clever!

AUTHOR: Jeremy K. - (United States of America)

Some random idiot who wasn't even there and knows none of the people involved has it all figured out. Why would you want to write in defending some guy who you don't even know, especially one being accused of pedophilia? Are you a spokesman for NAMBLA, defending one of your own?
 
Did you even read my complaint? I said "I thought of going to the police, but technically no crime had been committed: the little girls were all in public and fully-clothed." I KNOW what he did was "creepy, but not illegal." That's why I'm writing about it on here and not in a police report. (Well, that and because it happened several years ago, if you missed that, too.)

It's still really sick, though, and the guy is obviously a pedophile, even if not -- YET, as far as I know -- a "sex offender." (That was the only category that came close to describing this, which is why I chose it.) Almost all of the pictures were of little -- really little -- girls, and many of them were taken of the girls' backsides, when they were bending down to pick up something or whatever they were doing. A couple were JUST of little girls' legs and butts and feet. (Apparently R.J has a foot fetish on top of his little girl fetish.) And, actually, I remember one particularly sick image was of a little girl climbing on a bench with her butt in the air, and her underwear was visible. If that's not kiddie porn -- which sure as hell IS illegal! -- then it's d**n close to it, and freaking sick either way.

Did you also not read that I didn't even usually work in the front end, where he was constantly accusing employees of doing weird things they didn't do and never actually ended up being disciplined for? ("He was a security guard, and I am ashamed to say I worked with him in that capacity and was once friends with him.") I worked as a security guard myself, often with him. And wouldn't a guy who works in security know how to do things without being found out? And did you also miss that this happened "several years ago"? Why would I only be trying to get "revenge" now? And that I said I "quit the store," not got fired, which is usually what happens if you get "busted"? 

So, what exactly is this thing he "caught" me doing and "busted" me for that I was supposedly upset enough about to make up terrible accusations about someone -- or, in other words, pull an R.J.? You're so smart, figuring out my devious plot; why don't you know what I was "busted" for then? Only able to pull so many thoughts out of your a*s at once? That's too bad. Hey, if you pull your whole head out of your a*s next time you won't even have to worry about it.
 
R.J.  was ALWAYS accusing people of doing things, and they were always exonerated later. Constantly accusing fellow employees of things they didn't do would annoy most employers and get the false accuser fired, which is why I think the only reason he was even kept on was because he was friends with the store manager -- Gary Denno -- who was a major d**k himself. Even if he HAD been right any of those times -- or "caught" me doing some crazy thing the voices in his head told him I was doing -- did you miss the part about how he would download the store's security footage onto his cell phone and show it to other employees? That right there is voyeuristic and sick and violated the company's own harassment policy.

We all -- including R.J. -- actually had to take a "harassment test" during all this, and one of the questions asked what you should do if you if someone writes something bad to or about you. The correct answer was "Show it to a manager"; one of the wrong answers given was "Copy it and show it to other employees." In the explanation for the answer, it said that doing the second one would be considered harassment. He was the security guard and already had whatever "bad" things he thought people were doing on tape in the security room to show to a manager if he felt like he had to. Instead of just doing that, he would download it onto his phone and show it to other employees, knowing full well that was harassment, whether the person was "guilty" or not.

And no one was ever doing the things he said they were doing! He was a freaking nutcase. That's why no one was ever disciplined for anything -- including me, since, um, I was one of the few he never even accused of anything -- and why people started to hate him. That alone would be enough for a complaint without his freaking pedophilia on top of it.

It's funny that you should say that I'm making up these accusations, because I also mentioned how R.J. liked to spread "really awful, sexual rumors" about other employees, just for s**ts and giggles. Well, one of the rumors he spread about this one poor guy -- again, no, not me -- was ... that he liked to look at little girls. It was one of the first bizarre, b.s. accusations he made, it completely ruined the guy's reputation, and I'm ashamed to say that I and some other employees believed it at first, because the guy did seem a little "weird." So, even if I was wrong about R.J. -- and I'm NOT, I saw the f**king photos on his phone -- that never stopped R.J. before, so why should it stop anyone else?

So, I think it's "pretty obvious what's happening here." R.J. Waskiewicz is a pedophile and all-around pervert and sick freak who projects his own disgusting behavior onto other people. Is that what you're doing, too? Did you get "busted" doing something and falsely accuse the person who "caught" you? Don't be so cynical; not everyone is a liar. Or is it just that you like looking at little girls, just like your hero, R.J.? Probably the second one, since you said it's okay. I really hope you -- and R.J. -- don't have any young daughters and that you're never around little girls at all.

They really need to stop letting random a**holes who don't even know any of the people involved respond to complaints....
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#25 Consumer Comment

So in other words, he busted you for something.

AUTHOR: Steve - (USA)

Pretty obvious what is going on here; he caught you, and now you are mad. Heck, even if he DID have pictures of girls that were in the store, it is not a sexual offense. Creepy, sure, but not illegal. 
Respond to this report!
What's this?
Report & Rebuttal
Respond to this report!
What's this?
Also a victim?
What's this?
Repair Your Reputation!
What's this?
X