Bizarre, a top pentagon official harasses a nanny on his Capitol Hill block.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The irony is that his wife is a DCUM poster. Don't ask how I know.

Do you know if she's reading this thread?

[Anonymous]

Article says, "he is a stickler for following the rules.". Except of course, the rule that you don't steal the license plates of others.

Insane, the guy needs to be fired.

[Anonymous]

PP here, I was wondering if this jerk is a Dem or a Repub. Anyone want to guess? The answer:

http://harpers.org/blog/2009/09/did-bryan-whitman-run-the-military-analysts-program/

"a single member of the core Rumsfeld team at Defense has managed to hold on to his position: the Pentagon’s chief spokesman, Bryan Whitman."

Figures.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Article says, "he is a stickler for following the rules.". Except of course, the rule that you don't steal the license plates of others.

Insane, the guy needs to be fired.

That's usually the way it is with rules-obsessed people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
What's the penalty for regular folks who steal your license plates?

Silly phrasing of a question. Second degree theft (<$1000) is s misdemeanor -- think shoplifting -- and is punishable with a fine of not more than $1000 and jail time of not more than 180 days. A first-time offender isn't generally going to see time in jail unless arrested in the act and held for arraignment before being released without bond. Diversion, as it is known, is pretty common.

Thank you for taking the time to explain this to the conspiracy crazies.

I commented earlier about this and I wasn't implying there was a conspiracy-just that this was a case where the malevolence didn't match with the legally applicable penalty. I think this guy's crimes are more disturbing than a teenager taking some eye shadows from the drugstore and its jarring to think of them being equivalent legally-no crazy conspiracy theory involved.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Article says, "he is a stickler for following the rules.". Except of course, the rule that you don't steal the license plates of others.

Insane, the guy needs to be fired.

I know quite a few rules "sticklers" that have no problem breaking lots of rules to get what they think are the "important" rules (i.e. ones that benefit them) enforced. So convinced of their own unimpeachable morality, they can't even conceive that their own rule breaking is a problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
What's the penalty for regular folks who steal your license plates?

Silly phrasing of a question. Second degree theft (<$1000) is s misdemeanor -- think shoplifting -- and is punishable with a fine of not more than $1000 and jail time of not more than 180 days. A first-time offender isn't generally going to see time in jail unless arrested in the act and held for arraignment before being released without bond. Diversion, as it is known, is pretty common.

Thank you for taking the time to explain this to the conspiracy crazies.

I commented earlier about this and I wasn't implying there was a conspiracy-just that this was a case where the malevolence didn't match with the legally applicable penalty. I think this guy's crimes are more disturbing than a teenager taking some eye shadows from the drugstore and its jarring to think of them being equivalent legally-no crazy conspiracy theory involved.

I'm with you. Let's punish misdemeanors with jail time. Finally we'll have a safe metro again, and no overcrowding in Deal or Wilson.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
What's the penalty for regular folks who steal your license plates?

Silly phrasing of a question. Second degree theft (<$1000) is s misdemeanor -- think shoplifting -- and is punishable with a fine of not more than $1000 and jail time of not more than 180 days. A first-time offender isn't generally going to see time in jail unless arrested in the act and held for arraignment before being released without bond. Diversion, as it is known, is pretty common.

Thank you for taking the time to explain this to the conspiracy crazies.

I commented earlier about this and I wasn't implying there was a conspiracy-just that this was a case where the malevolence didn't match with the legally applicable penalty. I think this guy's crimes are more disturbing than a teenager taking some eye shadows from the drugstore and its jarring to think of them being equivalent legally-no crazy conspiracy theory involved.

I'm with you. Let's punish misdemeanors with jail time. Finally we'll have a safe metro again, and no overcrowding in Deal or Wilson.

Wtf is wrong with you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
What's the penalty for regular folks who steal your license plates?

Silly phrasing of a question. Second degree theft (<$1000) is s misdemeanor -- think shoplifting -- and is punishable with a fine of not more than $1000 and jail time of not more than 180 days. A first-time offender isn't generally going to see time in jail unless arrested in the act and held for arraignment before being released without bond. Diversion, as it is known, is pretty common.

Thank you for taking the time to explain this to the conspiracy crazies.

I commented earlier about this and I wasn't implying there was a conspiracy-just that this was a case where the malevolence didn't match with the legally applicable penalty. I think this guy's crimes are more disturbing than a teenager taking some eye shadows from the drugstore and its jarring to think of them being equivalent legally-no crazy conspiracy theory involved.

I'm with you. Let's punish misdemeanors with jail time. Finally we'll have a safe metro again, and no overcrowding in Deal or Wilson.

Wtf is wrong with you?

No shit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
What's the penalty for regular folks who steal your license plates?

Silly phrasing of a question. Second degree theft (<$1000) is s misdemeanor -- think shoplifting -- and is punishable with a fine of not more than $1000 and jail time of not more than 180 days. A first-time offender isn't generally going to see time in jail unless arrested in the act and held for arraignment before being released without bond. Diversion, as it is known, is pretty common.

Thank you for taking the time to explain this to the conspiracy crazies.

I commented earlier about this and I wasn't implying there was a conspiracy-just that this was a case where the malevolence didn't match with the legally applicable penalty. I think this guy's crimes are more disturbing than a teenager taking some eye shadows from the drugstore and its jarring to think of them being equivalent legally-no crazy conspiracy theory involved.

Agree. The borderline stalking and harassment of the nanny that accompanied the theft makes this a bigger deal than someone stealing license plates off of cars for kicks. Him going back to the house the day of his arraignment makes it clear he didn't intend to stop.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Am I wrong that visitor parking passes are only for a short period and not for use every single day? Of course I think his behavior is ridiculous but I didn't think someone like a nanny could use a visitor parking pass every day, presumably month after month. That's essentially what a residential parking permit is, and she is not a resident.

From the article:
"The strange series of events could be viewed as the latest example of the District’s perpetual parking wars, except residents say parking isn’t a problem on their streets and that many babysitters use the visitor passes.

That’s perfectly legal for nannies to do, said Terry Owens, a spokesman for the District’s Department of Transportation."

The nanny and her employers did nothing wrong.

I think the guy is a nut job but it is not legal to do what the nanny is doing unless she has a ROSA exemption.

http://dmv.dc.gov/service/registration-out-state-automobile-rosa-0

You are wrong. The VPP placard supercedes the need for a ROSA exemption and can be used for nannies, home health care sides, contractors, visiting guests or relatives. Hell, there's even a black market for them and car windows are routinely broken and passes stolen. There are a surprising number of. vehicles from Maryland and other awards of DC whose drivers display the placard before heading off to catch the Metro. It's also the reason so many Marylsnd and Virginia vehicles are parked all day on the blocks adjacent to USDOT in the Navy Yard.

Well, then parking enforcement doesn't know their own rules because my mother received a warning that her car would be impounded despite the fact that she had a visitor permit properly displayed. I met with my ANC rep and a rep from parking enforcement specifically to discuss this issue and was told that it was due to ROSA enforcement.

Is your mother a nanny or babysitter?

Was your mother perhaps staying overnight?

Does your mother have OUT OF STATE TAGS?

AGAIN - do you know the nanny had OUT OF STATE TAGS? Because no where in the WAPO article does it ever say the nanny does not have DC tags so where would ROSA apply to her if she has DC tags?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
What's the penalty for regular folks who steal your license plates?

Silly phrasing of a question. Second degree theft (<$1000) is s misdemeanor -- think shoplifting -- and is punishable with a fine of not more than $1000 and jail time of not more than 180 days. A first-time offender isn't generally going to see time in jail unless arrested in the act and held for arraignment before being released without bond. Diversion, as it is known, is pretty common.

Thank you for taking the time to explain this to the conspiracy crazies.

I commented earlier about this and I wasn't implying there was a conspiracy-just that this was a case where the malevolence didn't match with the legally applicable penalty. I think this guy's crimes are more disturbing than a teenager taking some eye shadows from the drugstore and its jarring to think of them being equivalent legally-no crazy conspiracy theory involved.

Agree. The borderline stalking and harassment of the nanny that accompanied the theft makes this a bigger deal than someone stealing license plates off of cars for kicks. Him going back to the house the day of his arraignment makes it clear he didn't intend to stop.

With his security clearance could he also be stalking the nanny at her home, would he have access to her personal info? I hope the police watched him and the nanny to make sure she is safe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
What's the penalty for regular folks who steal your license plates?

Silly phrasing of a question. Second degree theft (<$1000) is s misdemeanor -- think shoplifting -- and is punishable with a fine of not more than $1000 and jail time of not more than 180 days. A first-time offender isn't generally going to see time in jail unless arrested in the act and held for arraignment before being released without bond. Diversion, as it is known, is pretty common.

Thank you for taking the time to explain this to the conspiracy crazies.

I commented earlier about this and I wasn't implying there was a conspiracy-just that this was a case where the malevolence didn't match with the legally applicable penalty. I think this guy's crimes are more disturbing than a teenager taking some eye shadows from the drugstore and its jarring to think of them being equivalent legally-no crazy conspiracy theory involved.

Agree. The borderline stalking and harassment of the nanny that accompanied the theft makes this a bigger deal than someone stealing license plates off of cars for kicks. Him going back to the house the day of his arraignment makes it clear he didn't intend to stop.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Am I wrong that visitor parking passes are only for a short period and not for use every single day? Of course I think his behavior is ridiculous but I didn't think someone like a nanny could use a visitor parking pass every day, presumably month after month. That's essentially what a residential parking permit is, and she is not a resident.

From the article:
"The strange series of events could be viewed as the latest example of the District’s perpetual parking wars, except residents say parking isn’t a problem on their streets and that many babysitters use the visitor passes.

That’s perfectly legal for nannies to do, said Terry Owens, a spokesman for the District’s Department of Transportation."

The nanny and her employers did nothing wrong.

I think the guy is a nut job but it is not legal to do what the nanny is doing unless she has a ROSA exemption.

http://dmv.dc.gov/service/registration-out-state-automobile-rosa-0

You are wrong. The VPP placard supercedes the need for a ROSA exemption and can be used for nannies, home health care sides, contractors, visiting guests or relatives. Hell, there's even a black market for them and car windows are routinely broken and passes stolen. There are a surprising number of. vehicles from Maryland and other awards of DC whose drivers display the placard before heading off to catch the Metro. It's also the reason so many Marylsnd and Virginia vehicles are parked all day on the blocks adjacent to USDOT in the Navy Yard.

Well, then parking enforcement doesn't know their own rules because my mother received a warning that her car would be impounded despite the fact that she had a visitor permit properly displayed. I met with my ANC rep and a rep from parking enforcement specifically to discuss this issue and was told that it was due to ROSA enforcement.

Why does DPW dysfunction surprise you? Our neighborhood PCO has said that there's nothing she can do if a daily commuter vehicle has a valid VPP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
What's the penalty for regular folks who steal your license plates?

Silly phrasing of a question. Second degree theft (<$1000) is s misdemeanor -- think shoplifting -- and is punishable with a fine of not more than $1000 and jail time of not more than 180 days. A first-time offender isn't generally going to see time in jail unless arrested in the act and held for arraignment before being released without bond. Diversion, as it is known, is pretty common.

Thank you for taking the time to explain this to the conspiracy crazies.

I commented earlier about this and I wasn't implying there was a conspiracy-just that this was a case where the malevolence didn't match with the legally applicable penalty. I think this guy's crimes are more disturbing than a teenager taking some eye shadows from the drugstore and its jarring to think of them being equivalent legally-no crazy conspiracy theory involved.

Agree. The borderline stalking and harassment of the nanny that accompanied the theft makes this a bigger deal than someone stealing license plates off of cars for kicks. Him going back to the house the day of his arraignment makes it clear he didn't intend to stop.

With his security clearance could he also be stalking the nanny at her home, would he have access to her personal info? I hope the police watched him and the nanny to make sure she is safe.

Let's not go overboard. He went off the rails in this one instance but is a long-time neighborhood resident with a wife and young children. He never followed, stalked or threatened anyone, even if his actions were bizarre and inexcusable. Parking around the corner from your house on the Hill is nothing out of the ordinary, but then again I might have looked for a different spot on that particular day.