Vet employee in Great Falls being stalked - Fairfax County on stalker’s side

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Deinstitutionalization is the problem. We cannot force schizophrenic people to take their meds. Their families can’t either. It’s a huge problem.

It's only a problem that you can't accept the differently abled.

This. 100%.

The issue is with those who cannot accept them. Not them themselves.

Balderdash. This isn’t about “ability.” It is about a person who is violent, destructive, trespassing and threatening.

If he is banging on a light post with a metal rod, that’s vandalism and he can be arrested.

If he is aggressively approaching vehicles while armed, that’s assault and he can be arrested.

If he’s a danger to himself he can be taken for mental observation and his camp removed.

There are plenty of avenues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Deinstitutionalization is the problem. We cannot force schizophrenic people to take their meds. Their families can’t either. It’s a huge problem.

It's only a problem that you can't accept the differently abled.

This. 100%.

The issue is with those who cannot accept them. Not them themselves.

Balderdash. This isn’t about “ability.” It is about a person who is violent, destructive, trespassing and threatening.

If he is banging on a light post with a metal rod, that’s vandalism and he can be arrested.

If he is aggressively approaching vehicles while armed, that’s assault and he can be arrested.

If he’s a danger to himself he can be taken for mental observation and his camp removed.

There are plenty of avenues.

Are you suggesting that we incarcerate anyone who commits vandalism?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Deinstitutionalization is the problem. We cannot force schizophrenic people to take their meds. Their families can’t either. It’s a huge problem.

It's only a problem that you can't accept the differently abled.

This. 100%.

The issue is with those who cannot accept them. Not them themselves.

Balderdash. This isn’t about “ability.” It is about a person who is violent, destructive, trespassing and threatening.

If he is banging on a light post with a metal rod, that’s vandalism and he can be arrested.

If he is aggressively approaching vehicles while armed, that’s assault and he can be arrested.

If he’s a danger to himself he can be taken for mental observation and his camp removed.

There are plenty of avenues.

Are you suggesting that we incarcerate anyone who commits vandalism?

First of all, that would be a great idea.

But returning to the situation at hand, “arrest” is entirely separate from “incarceration” (the “fancy word” for “locked up”).

If this individual is committing vandalism, they can be arrested and in the course of receiving due process might get the treatment they need, etc.

Another possibility is that in the process of getting arrested they commit a more serious offense like assaulting the police and then get locked up for that.

[Anonymous]

It is pretty amazing that with all the Concerned Citizens here, none has stepped up to help the woman file a restraining order which would quickly lead to a solution.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It is pretty amazing that with all the Concerned Citizens here, none has stepped up to help the woman file a restraining order which would quickly lead to a solution.

The “concerned citizens” who live in that area are simply entitled, rich, and generally horrible maga-type people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Deinstitutionalization is the problem. We cannot force schizophrenic people to take their meds. Their families can’t either. It’s a huge problem.

It's only a problem that you can't accept the differently abled.

This. 100%.

The issue is with those who cannot accept them. Not them themselves.

Balderdash. This isn’t about “ability.” It is about a person who is violent, destructive, trespassing and threatening.

If he is banging on a light post with a metal rod, that’s vandalism and he can be arrested.

If he is aggressively approaching vehicles while armed, that’s assault and he can be arrested.

If he’s a danger to himself he can be taken for mental observation and his camp removed.

There are plenty of avenues.

Are you suggesting that we incarcerate anyone who commits vandalism?

First of all, that would be a great idea.

But returning to the situation at hand, “arrest” is entirely separate from “incarceration” (the “fancy word” for “locked up”).

If this individual is committing vandalism, they can be arrested and in the course of receiving due process might get the treatment they need, etc.

Another possibility is that in the process of getting arrested they commit a more serious offense like assaulting the police and then get locked up for that.

Now you want to medicate people against their will. Also, assaulting an officer is no longer a crime.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It is pretty amazing that with all the Concerned Citizens here, none has stepped up to help the woman file a restraining order which would quickly lead to a solution.

Resident here. She will not file one because Fairfax County says that will give him her home address.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is pretty amazing that with all the Concerned Citizens here, none has stepped up to help the woman file a restraining order which would quickly lead to a solution.

The “concerned citizens” who live in that area are simply entitled, rich, and generally horrible maga-type people.

We are indeed rich, some entitled for sure, and I would imagine some ARE horrible, but in this case, it would be nice to get a man who claims he wants to kill people “In self defense” help before something terrible happens.

[Anonymous]

Thank goodness we eliminated in-patient mental hospitals in the 1970s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Thank goodness we eliminated in-patient mental hospitals in the 1970s.

One of the few things I disagreed with Reagan about, though I do understand why he did it. In my opinion, there should have been a tightening of criteria so husbands could not commit their wives (yes that has happened) and much more screening before commitment was possible.

Regarding this guy, he would not be able to cover his madness through a 3-day hold. You could clearly tell the social worker could see what was going on, as could the police, in the videos. The police did say he has a long rap sheet. Latest videos has him demanding we pay him “or else”, and mentions children, which I don’t like at all. He’s convinced people are hacking his phone and messing with him, which he says, gives him license to use violence in self defense. He’s now accusing people in the community with stealing his food. My guess is he ate it or its animals in the night. There’s no way the community can own up to something that’s not happening nor produce almost a billion dollars of ‘his cut of the revenue for the dark net movie we’ve cast him in for years’. He’s getting madder and madder because we won’t pony up. How long before some innocent person parking in the CVS lot or the BRIX lot gets attacked?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thank goodness we eliminated in-patient mental hospitals in the 1970s.

One of the few things I disagreed with Reagan about, though I do understand why he did it. In my opinion, there should have been a tightening of criteria so husbands could not commit their wives (yes that has happened) and much more screening before commitment was possible.

Regarding this guy, he would not be able to cover his madness through a 3-day hold. You could clearly tell the social worker could see what was going on, as could the police, in the videos. The police did say he has a long rap sheet. Latest videos has him demanding we pay him “or else”, and mentions children, which I don’t like at all. He’s convinced people are hacking his phone and messing with him, which he says, gives him license to use violence in self defense. He’s now accusing people in the community with stealing his food. My guess is he ate it or its animals in the night. There’s no way the community can own up to something that’s not happening nor produce almost a billion dollars of ‘his cut of the revenue for the dark net movie we’ve cast him in for years’. He’s getting madder and madder because we won’t pony up. How long before some innocent person parking in the CVS lot or the BRIX lot gets attacked?

Most of the unhoused near me won't go to the shelters because they say the employees steal their stuff. Sounds like these guys might be on to something.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thank goodness we eliminated in-patient mental hospitals in the 1970s.

One of the few things I disagreed with Reagan about, though I do understand why he did it. In my opinion, there should have been a tightening of criteria so husbands could not commit their wives (yes that has happened) and much more screening before commitment was possible.

Regarding this guy, he would not be able to cover his madness through a 3-day hold. You could clearly tell the social worker could see what was going on, as could the police, in the videos. The police did say he has a long rap sheet. Latest videos has him demanding we pay him “or else”, and mentions children, which I don’t like at all. He’s convinced people are hacking his phone and messing with him, which he says, gives him license to use violence in self defense. He’s now accusing people in the community with stealing his food. My guess is he ate it or its animals in the night. There’s no way the community can own up to something that’s not happening nor produce almost a billion dollars of ‘his cut of the revenue for the dark net movie we’ve cast him in for years’. He’s getting madder and madder because we won’t pony up. How long before some innocent person parking in the CVS lot or the BRIX lot gets attacked?

Most of the unhoused near me won't go to the shelters because they say the employees steal their stuff. Sounds like these guys might be on to something.

Sleeps in a tent next to the Exxon. This person is full-on delusional., Go speak with him at the Exxon yourself

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is a man who has pitched a tent over by the animal hospital at the corner of Seneca and Georgetown Pike. He is a known schizophrenic with a long documented history of violence (through police record). He has stated to police, etc. that he is there stalking an ex-girlfriend who works at the vet. The girl has tried to get a restraining order - denied by Fairfax County. The Sunoco/711 has forced him to leave the piece of land they own but he simply moved to the VDOT owned land and the county, again, doesn’t seem to care. The police, along with a social worker, had been there to speak with him but it’s gotten nowhere so far. Police of course are VERY concerned but have their hands tied by the county. They did tell the guy he needs to remove the word “slut” from his handmade sign he’s hung. Yesterday when I drove by, he was dancing half-naked. He’s been also swinging a large flat board, and has wandered over to the shopping plaza across Georgetown Pike. Great Falls Association is now on board and trying to help.

I think it’s disgraceful that a young girl has to endure this because the county is allowing him to camp and stalk her. He does have a place of residence he can go to. He’s stated that he’s specifically there to stalk her.

The attorney general of VA has been notified and they are very concerned.

Given the liberalism of Fairfax County, you would expect that people in government would be concerned for this young girl. Aren’t liberal for women? Instead, they seem to be on the side of the stalker.

Conservatives are usually against women’s rights. But they are also against the poor and unhoused. So not sure whose policies are to blame here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thank goodness we eliminated in-patient mental hospitals in the 1970s.

One of the few things I disagreed with Reagan about, though I do understand why he did it. In my opinion, there should have been a tightening of criteria so husbands could not commit their wives (yes that has happened) and much more screening before commitment was possible.

Regarding this guy, he would not be able to cover his madness through a 3-day hold. You could clearly tell the social worker could see what was going on, as could the police, in the videos. The police did say he has a long rap sheet. Latest videos has him demanding we pay him “or else”, and mentions children, which I don’t like at all. He’s convinced people are hacking his phone and messing with him, which he says, gives him license to use violence in self defense. He’s now accusing people in the community with stealing his food. My guess is he ate it or its animals in the night. There’s no way the community can own up to something that’s not happening nor produce almost a billion dollars of ‘his cut of the revenue for the dark net movie we’ve cast him in for years’. He’s getting madder and madder because we won’t pony up. How long before some innocent person parking in the CVS lot or the BRIX lot gets attacked?

Most of the unhoused near me won't go to the shelters because they say the employees steal their stuff. Sounds like these guys might be on to something.

Sleeps in a tent next to the Exxon. This person is full-on delusional., Go speak with him at the Exxon yourself

The unhoused person sleeping in a tent next to my Exxon will only speak with people possessing a PhD. He is a scholar and doesn't have time for people like me with only a BS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Deinstitutionalization is the problem. We cannot force schizophrenic people to take their meds. Their families can’t either. It’s a huge problem.

It's only a problem that you can't accept the differently abled.

This. 100%.

The issue is with those who cannot accept them. Not them themselves.

Balderdash. This isn’t about “ability.” It is about a person who is violent, destructive, trespassing and threatening.

If he is banging on a light post with a metal rod, that’s vandalism and he can be arrested.

If he is aggressively approaching vehicles while armed, that’s assault and he can be arrested.

If he’s a danger to himself he can be taken for mental observation and his camp removed.

There are plenty of avenues.

Are you suggesting that we incarcerate anyone who commits vandalism?

First of all, that would be a great idea.

But returning to the situation at hand, “arrest” is entirely separate from “incarceration” (the “fancy word” for “locked up”).

If this individual is committing vandalism, they can be arrested and in the course of receiving due process might get the treatment they need, etc.

Another possibility is that in the process of getting arrested they commit a more serious offense like assaulting the police and then get locked up for that.

Now you want to medicate people against their will. Also, assaulting an officer is no longer a crime.

Who said anything about medication?

Assault on police is a felony in VA.