Sounds like the perfect way to frame an Aspie teen boy to me

Post Reply New Topic

To frame him?

If I had pictures of myself and others doing illegal things, why would I want to "frame" someone else with them? If the pictures were of such an incriminating nature, why keep them at all?

See, this story won't stand up under logical analysis.


Also, I'm not stupid.

No, I'm just dumping raw data. And asking: What exactly did you mean?

1.everyone gets harmed by being forced to be accountable for their own actions that are set up by conspiracies to frame them.
2.That if you get framed then you should be punished for the thing that you didn't do.

It may not be logical or analytically sound but it is entirely truthful and documented.
edit: I guess that reality "won't stand up under logical analysis".

edit:Maybe you're not stupid, but the people at CVS certainly were.
I agree the story is stupid, but I didn't make up the stupid story.

ValSmith: did these dirty drug kids stash their photos on your person without you knowing, to be found by the authorities, or did you accept them willingly?

And if you weren't at the party, how do you know what went on? If it was all documented in the incriminating photos, that seems pretty darned convenient ...

I didn't accept them because they were obviously not the pictures I gave them to process. Even the photo technician acknowledged that they were obviously not mine until he was told not to speak to me anymore. I'm sure he knew all the people in the pictures. The photo incident, if it seems at all logically inconsistent that is probably because it lacks chronological information.

What is documented is the names and numbers of involved CVS employees and how they responded over the course of a month regarding their "24 hour" picture service...
... and my unusual and effective proof that the employees were stealing drugs, which was taken seriously enough that CVS stopped defending them on merit status and had an audit, and IF they used my proof then they certainly knew who stole how much of what.

Hmmm. If they were dopey enough to give me dirty pictures of themselves doing drugs, perhaps they were so arrogant about still getting away with stealing drugs that they were too stupid to think of how illegal it would be to take and develop dirty pictures of themselves doing drugs, nor that I would be angry at them, but instead they simply wanted to brag about how much fun they were having getting away with what they were doing in spite of the fact that I had previously reported it. NA-Na NA-NA-Na!

So if the whole store was on it's own drugs, I suppose the manager who threatened me because she had pictures of her own employees having a sex and drug party which were obviously NOT possibly mine must have seen me as a threat to her own supply of drugs.
What else could she have been thinking?

If you're innocent of any wrongdoing, you should be able to prove it. Or have all your avenues of self-vindication been cut off by the sexy dirty drug people?

The problem I see with such an article as that one is that proving you're innocent doesn't matter for your reputation. And reputation is a lot more important than truth, especially with jobs. There are jobs you're automatically excluded from if you were at one time facing charges.

They don't ask for whether you were guilty or whether the charges were a a huge misunderstanding. Who'd care about that besides the ones who think the truth is important? It's too much to ask of many employers to care about that.

If it gets public that you were accused of a crime and can prove you didn't do anything, the association will remain. To the public you'll keep being the guy who was accused of whatever crime - not the guy who easily proved he did nothing.

when i was at school the entire class would wait until the teacher left the room and then do all sorts of things such as writing rude mesages on the blackboard or hiding the teachers items, when the teacher came back everyone would say it was me because i was the 'school freak' and even though i did everything i could to prove my innocence it wasn't enough.

sometimes the innocent suffer, you can't always prove wha's right.

You were the only school-freak? Must have been rough.

Did they ever try to frame you with pictures of people doing drugs?

You were the only school-freak? Must have been rough.

Did they ever try to frame you with pictures of people doing drugs?[/quote]

no, but they once put a box of cigarettes in my school bag and told the teacher to look there. the teachers also treated me like dirt so it wouldn't suprise me if they belived me but still treat me like the villain.

Didn't the teacher know you were a non-smoker?

Or are you a smoker?

they knew i was a non-smoker but they didn't care, if there was a way to get me in trouble they'd do it.

This incident happened a few years ago and ended in a stalemate.
No one dared to get the police involved so I never had to self-vindicate.

So you were eventually vindicated? Could you somehow prove your innocence?

I'm sorry, but I still don't buy it. I get the feeling there is -or was- a lot more to the story than you've told me. Something about the whole situation seems odd.

:facepalm: it is called innocent until proven guilty.