Recent Posts

Popular Posts

Desiree Capuano & James Pendleton
250 E. Placita Lago Del Mago
Sahuarita, AZ     85629
Tel: 520-288-8200
Back to Mailbox Back to mailbox
Newer Message Newer message
Older Message Older message
Re: G*****'s adventure with the RCMP
From: Patrick <>
To: Desiree Capuano <>
Date: Tue, Jun 30 2015 9:20:05 pm
You are correct: it should have been "too", not "to".  Also, I should 
have said "officer", not "office".  Those were typos - not due to a lack 
of knowledge or understanding of the English language.  A dictionary 
would not have helped.  But thank you for the input.

Regarding reaching G***** by phone: you know I have a land line, which 
you are able to call him on; you also know my mobile number; you also 
have his email address.  So your claim is frivolous.

Regarding the frivolous claim - you're incorrect.  You've used police 
resources to perform a completely unnecessary task, based on false 
claims.  They most certainly entered it as a frivolous report.  The 
police don't allocate resources to do "wellness checks".

I'd point out to you that the RCMP is the agency that administers PALs - 
they know everything about me.  They knew, before they came by, that 
there are multiple handguns and rifles in the home because all firearms 
have to be registered in Canada.  There's nothing for them to "keep an 
eye on" as you say.


On 06/30/2015 08:46 PM, Desiree Capuano wrote:
Richard, When you said, "Or would that have been to complicated for you to think of?" I believe you meant to use the word, "too." You really should use a dictionary. That sort of poor grammar common amongst the lowest echelon of society makes it difficult to take you seriously. Not that anyone does anyway. As you well know, G*****'s phone does not receive calls while in Canada. Again, nice try. I chose to only pursue a wellness check this time, and as such no "frivolous claim" exists. To the contrary, I actually had a very nice chat with the RCMP, and they indicated they would be keeping an eye on you. I thanked them for checking in on G***** for me. Have a "nice" day. ~Desiree On Tuesday, June 30, 2015, Patrick > wrote:
Desiree: Like I said: the "authorities" ain't gonna do shit for ya! The office called me after she spoke with G***** and she told me that they were just responding to a call about potential child endangerment, but after reviewing your claims, then stopping by the apartment and speaking with G*****, they didn't consider it credible. They've entered a record of you submitting a frivolous claim - so the next time you call they'll see that and take you with a grain of salt. Has anything EVER gone right for you? Tell me, if you're so concerned about G*****'s safety and well being then why haven't you just called him? Or would that have been to complicated for you to think of? Patrick