Is he taking a break from covering-up or un-covering
Loading
318 views
Is Joey Cashing OUT????
-3
permalink
-2
permalink
Hey Queen, these rumors and innuendo will never die. One of the hardest things to do in this world is to publicly admit when you are wrong. And McDougalds and Sullivan-King have a lot of work to do before these knuckleheads stop spewing their BS about Joey Preston and the legacy of his time here. Now if you'll excuse me I'm gonna head over to the Longbranch Saloon and tell Miss Kitty what a fraud her friend marshalldillion08 is. He sounds more like some of those brokeback cowboys that come to the County Council meetings than everybody's hero from Gunsmoke. Goodaye ma'am.
SSHM, I don't have access to the employee handbook or other documents, but I know and you do too, that any administrator of a county or company of almost 1000 employees knows that he/she cannot be dating underlings. to do so is to simply open up the county to tremendous liability should the underling choose to file a lawsyuit. As to a book that clearly prohibits banging other women while married, I think I can comeup with one for you there, bud.Can you say "moral turpitude" clause?-plumbbob
PB,
Then you've answered my question: You admitted to not knowing or having access to materials to prove such an ordinance, rule, guideline, or law exists. Unless it is explicit in stating that individuals can not date other indivduals, then it would appear to fall to a case of individual judgement, i.e., the personal choice between two people, neither of which is YOU.
Anyone, even if they have half their brain tied behind their back, is well aware that people meet and date folks from their working environments. It's a practice known as "fishing from the company pier." While some folks may object to this practice, it is VERY common.
As for your book that prohibits such an activity . . . ummm, I shouldn't have to state this, but:
1.) Seperation of Church & State
2.) Not everyone is Christian (your book reaches about 1.1-1.2 billion people world-wide ... 1/6th the population of the world).
3.) "Moral turpitude," if indeed written into the contract, opens the county to a very, very sticky can of worms. If anything, you'll find where the court will side with moral relativism.
4.) Two Words: Bill Clinton
In summary:
A.) You don't know.
B.) In the absence of knowledge, you are filling the void with SUPPOSITION and INNUNENDO. Got FACTS? Didn't think so.
C.) Moral turpitude is a dangerous avenue of approach. It could cost the county quite a bit more by taking this tact.
- SSHM
3.) "Moral turpitude," if indeed written into the contract, opens the county to a very, very sticky can of worms. If anything, you'll find where the court will side with moral relativism.-sshm
Well, according to his contract that someone posted here he can be terminated involuntarily for:
Section 3 A - Grounds for termination for cause shall be the conviction of the Administrator of any crime involving personal gain to himself, any crime involving moral turpitude (as defined in South Carolina state law) or the refusal of the Administrator to perform the duties of this office.
Of course there's no definition of moral turpitude in South Carolina state law, although it's referenced quite often when mentioning regulated professions.
The dictionary at law.com says:
moral turpitude - n. gross violation of standards of moral conduct, vileness. An act involving moral turpitude is considered intentionally evil, making the act a crime. The existence of moral turpitude can bring a more severe criminal charge or penalty for a criminal defendant.
Not much help.
The contract quote does mention he has to be convicted of "..any crime involving moral turpitude...".
The two allegations that come to mind are of adultery and indecent exposure, both crimes in SC.
SECTION 16-15-60. Adultery
or fornication. [SC ST SEC 16-15-60]Any man or woman who shall be guilty of the crime of
adultery or fornication shall be liable to indictment and, on conviction, shall be severally punished by a fine of not less than one hundred dollars nor more than five hundred dollars or imprisonment for not less than six months nor more than one year or by both fine and imprisonment, at the discretion of the court. SECTION 16-15-70. "
Adultery" defined. [SC ST SEC 16-15-70]"
Adultery" is the living together and carnal intercourse with each other or habitual carnal intercourse with each other without living together of a man and woman when either is lawfully married to some other person.SECTION 16-15-130. Indecent exposure; breastfeeding.
(A)(1) It is unlawful for a person to wilfully, maliciously, and indecently expose his person in a public place, on property of others, or to the view of any person on a street or highway.
(2) This subsection does not apply to a woman who breastfeeds her own child in a public place, on property of others, to the view of any person on a street or highway, or any other place where a woman and her child are authorized to be.
(B) A person who violates the provisions of subsection (A)(1) is guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction, must be fined in the discretion of the court or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
Unless it is explicit in stating that individuals can not date other indivduals, then it would appear to fall to a case of individual judgement, i.e., the personal choice between two people, neither of which is YOU.
Anyone, even if they have half their brain tied behind their back, is well aware that people meet and date folks from their working environments. It's a practice known as "fishing from the company pier." While some folks may object to this practice, it is VERY common.
I dont guess anyone ever thought of the possibility that, if in fact there is/was a relationship with a subordinate, and it went sour, a lawsuit of 'sexual harrasment' could be brought against Joey and hence the county? While, yes it is relatively common for people to date within the workplace (although many places have set forth in their HR manuals' a no-no for work as a mating pool'), I should hope that a man with the responsibility that Joey Preston has would have the sense to keep his pants zipped around subordinates and thereby protect the people he was hired to represent?
Just a thought....
The contract quote does mention he has to be convicted of "..any crime involving moral turpitude...".-stringcheese
Did you catch that kids . . . ?
He HAS to be CONVICTED. Which means he HAS to BE CHARGED. Which means you HAVE to HAVE PROOF.
Since none of the above has occured (no conviction, no charges, and no proof [video - who has that super-secret tape, hmmm ... oh that's right ... it DOES NOT EXIST]), JRP stays.
It's really that PAINFULLY SIMPLE.
Stupid clearly ... CLEARLY does not hurt enough.
- SSHM
Alas, our Constitution, Bill of Rights, and legal rulings since 1770ish have all had that nasty and inconvenient issue of "innocent until proven guilty" and convictions.
Till then, unless you are a godless Commie and OsamaBinLaden lover (and generally disreputable sort who is mean, nasty and would have dirty underwear to shame your mama if you had a wreck and were taken to the emergency room where it would get out somehow that you had undies with torn spots and bad elastic...), you should theoretically approve our historical beliefs??????
String: You certainly seem to love wallowing in this morals line. Like was once said of a preacher. If you listen often enough you'll find out what he/she really does. Me think's you protest too much.
What is painfully clear is that Joey had an attorney, who was subsequently hired by the county and has billed millions of dollars against the county in the proceeding years, write him a contract that requires a legal conviction, isntead of inappropriate behavior, to get him fired. That's good tactics, but it speaks volumes about the man's character,or stunning lack of it, more than anything else. And as I said, there is a book that speaks to the issue of screwing around on your wife.I guess one of Joey's landmark accomplishments was producing a moral atmosphere within his administration and among his followers that condones,if not encourages, such conduct.
Did you catch that kids . . . ?He HAS to be CONVICTED. Which means he HAS to BE CHARGED. Which means you HAVE to HAVE PROOF.Since none of the above has occured (no conviction, no charges, and no proof [video - who has that super-secret tape, hmmm ... oh that's right ... it DOES NOT EXIST]), JRP stays.It's really that PAINFULLY SIMPLE.Stupid clearly ... CLEARLY does not hurt enough.- SSHM-sshm
String: You certainly seem to love wallowing in this morals line. Like was once said of a preacher. If you listen often enough you'll find out what he/she really does. Me think's you protest too much.-republikin
Huh?
How many times have I mentioned it?
What is painfully clear is that Joey had an attorney, who was subsequently hired by the county and has billed millions of dollars against the county in the proceeding years, write him a contract that requires a legal conviction, isntead of inappropriate behavior, to get him fired. That's good tactics, but it speaks volumes about the man's character,or stunning lack of it, more than anything else. And as I said, there is a book that speaks to the issue of screwing around on your wife.I guess one of Joey's landmark accomplishments was producing a moral atmosphere within his administration and among his followers that condones,if not encourages, such conduct.-plumbbob
So wait ... let me get this straight: You have an issue with the County Administrator because he is SMART? Oh good grief!! So he is able to think three to five moves ahead - this is a crime or a demonstration of poor character how? If anything, it demonstrates that many here need to learn how to play chess and not checkers.
PB: How does it show a "stunning lack of character?" What you call a "stunning lack of character" is, at its core, a very basic element of survival (e.g., guarantee of employment). If you could make arrangements to guarantee employment via sound contract negotiations, would you not take the same actions as well? I know I would.
Again . . . about your book . . .
As for your book that prohibits such an activity . . . ummm, I shouldn't have to state this, but:
1.) Seperation of Church & State
2.) Not everyone is Christian (your book reaches about 1.1-1.2 billion people world-wide ... 1/6th the population of the world).
3.) "Moral turpitude," if indeed written into the contract, opens the county to a very, very sticky can of worms. If anything, you'll find where the court will side with moral relativism.
4.) Two Words: Bill Clinton
For many of us ... we can seperate the message from the messenger. We suggest you grow up and do the same.
- SSHM
Truly amazing, have not read this forum in months ..... nothings changed.
We'll see you again in 6 months then.
"String: You certainly seem to love wallowing in this morals line. Like was once said of a preacher. If you listen often enough you'll find out what he/she really does. Me think's you protest too much. -republikin"
But you keep saying you are leaving and then hanging around, so I don't know how true your adage is.
