The OC Weekly is reporting here, that a Fullerton acupuncturist was busted for inserting more than just needles into a patient. In his usual uber-sophomoric way, Matt Coker describes a sexual assault perpetrated by Chan Soon Park at the New Life Acupuncture & Natural Healing Clinic, 905 S. Euclid St.
And because I am only slightly less sophomoric, I pass it along.
#1 by Tony's boy on July 18, 2012
Good one Tony we know how you hate gooks.
Replay the clip when you got the crap
Scared out of you be Roland Chi’s 80 year old grandfather that’s a FFFF classic. That was before you paid Bill Hunt to do your spying for you.
#2 by Logician on July 18, 2012
What the hell are you babbling about?
#3 by Bill Hunt's... on July 18, 2012
…coming to the FPD. Love it. Embrace it. Clean up is on the way!!
Goodrich pounding a foot beat on Valencia and Highland!
#4 by Sanity Is on July 18, 2012
Give it a rest Reality Is. Ramos, Wolfe and Cyclops are bad guys, I understand you want to defend cops but what they did does not represent law enforcement.
Just let them go and be done with it. There’s plenty of cops who actually deserve defense. These thugs aren’t those cops.
#5 by DQ on July 18, 2012
While I agree with most of what you just said, I wonder about the “good cops” part….
Where were they when Kelly Thomas was murdered? Why didn’t any of THEM (the “good cops”) speak up? The “good cops” are just as complicit in covering this up as the three amigos who killed Kelly.
I know I know — there are in fact good cops everywhere, but where? If we saw at least ONE who stepped up then I might believe it… but, sadly, no one stepped up that I have seen. Prove me wrong, I would really, seriously like to be wrong here
#6 by Fullerton Lover on July 18, 2012
A) What is sophomoric of making us aware of a man sexually assaulting unsuspecting females across the street from a Junior High School?
B) What does this man’s ethnicity have to do with anything?
#7 by karma on July 18, 2012
“gooks”??? is that you Diamond? the only person who uses that term today would be the person who thinks “sniffing glue” is current. Add that to the fact your post makes no sense and my mind goes to GD.
#8 by Greg Diamond on July 18, 2012
Nope, that was not me. Glad to know that sniffing glue isn’t current. What’s the term used nowadays for using inhalants?
#9 by Eldridge Cleaver on July 20, 2012
It’s called “huffing.” It was a huge problem until the recall. LOL!
#10 by name withheld on July 18, 2012
Can anyone make sense of this post…then again, why bother… racist.
#11 by merijoe on July 18, 2012
TBoy-Gooks? Tony is NOT the one with the problem, you lacky eggplant troll.
#12 by truthseeker on July 18, 2012
Oh the irony-what this man did remains to be seen-all allegations at this point yet mug shot business name and address all out there and the FPD has no quams about it. Yet when 6 of their officers brutally murdered an unarmed innocent man in plain view of the public and on video, they hid the names, photos, brought no charges, the grand jury wasn’t called for indictments, and they were left on duty with broken bones for up to 6 long weeks. Can anyone imagine the USA without the second amendment?
#13 by Lifesaving Service on July 18, 2012
Yesterday was a real hard one for the trolls, they were pissed, I dont blame them, high activity on here. They lost a lot, Thanks.
#14 by rebuilding fullerton on July 18, 2012
time to get to work. http://s12.postimage.org/l75we9vnx/IMG_6928.jpg
special meeting scheduled for next tuesday.
#15 by oc weekly trash report on July 18, 2012
Fullerton PD Officer Joe Wolfe Beat Himself Off
the Force in Kelly Thomas Killing
#16 by thomas kelly incident on July 18, 2012
Man charged with Thomas Kelly murder http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/8501509/man-charged-with-thomas-kelly-murderPolice allege that Thomas was “king hit” in the face by a stranger on July 7 as he walked in Kings Cross with his girlfriend.
The teenager was rushed to hospital in a critical condition with severe head injuries and died two days later when his family decided to switch off his life support.
#17 by JustUs on July 18, 2012
If New Life were a County government office this would not be news for another 8-10 years and Mr. Park would probably be a rising star on the Accupuncturist Board of Ethics.
#18 by Fred Alcazar on July 18, 2012
Lol. Too true!
#19 by Council Agenda Requests on July 18, 2012
Quirk-Silva requested limiting public comments to 30 minutes also be added to an upcoming agenda.
http://fullertonstories.com/new-council-says-yes-to-fireworks-no-to-senior-housing-project/
#20 by JustUs on July 18, 2012
Public comments are a vital part of any official government meeting. Requesting to limit them to 30 minutes is an attack on free speech and the community’s desire to be heard and engaged in government business funded by their tax dollars.
As an elected public official Quirk should be ashamed of herself. She wants to put a gag on the mouths of those who put her into office. Maybe she has the power to shut her students up in the classroom – but she should NOT have the power to shut the adult taxpayers up in an official public city meeting that make rules impacting the lives of all Fullertonians.
#21 by Anonymous on July 18, 2012
That’s not what she said. She asked for input into the format because we have a new council. You’re misquoting her.
Please view the video for yourself. All council members provided input as requested and the item was agendized for the next meeting.
#22 by Anonymous on July 18, 2012
The way I see it, asking for input on the 30 minute format is the same as saying she wants this new format, or why would she ask? And please explain what a new council has to do with limiting a persons right to speak?
#23 by Anonymous on July 18, 2012
Queen-Silva needs to go along with anyone on the council that supports this.
Its bad enough people are limited to 3 mins.
#24 by JustUs on July 18, 2012
Exactly. Why would Quirk want the 30-minute maximum format reviewed if she didn’t want it approved and implemented.
This spin by some of these commenters is 4th grade stuff. At least be somewhat sophisticated in your reasoning and conclusions.
#25 by Anonymous on July 18, 2012
To set the record straight . . .
The mayor asked for input on revising the CURRENT maximum 30 minute speaking period, including proposals to expand the 30 minute cap. All members commented and as I recall no one favored cutting people off.
Watch the video, then comment please. Don’t be ridiculous.
#26 by John Doe on July 18, 2012
Current 30 minutes..are you on crack?
#27 by Christian on July 18, 2012
thats the official policy
#28 by Anonymous on July 18, 2012
Are you on poop?
#29 by karma on July 18, 2012
The article linked to Fullerton Stories reads…
“Quirk-Silva requested limiting public comments to 30 minutes also be added to an upcoming agenda.”
So pardon me for misunderstanding, but it does not read like you have presented her intent. So YOU don’t be ridiculous, it is not outside the realm of possibility Silva would ask for that format.
side bar- I still thinks she has no shame.
#30 by Anonymous on July 18, 2012
That doesn’t make any sense. How am I being ridiculous by correcting a misquote?
#31 by JustUs on July 18, 2012
Exactly, Karma.
Our eyes don’t lie and our reading comprehension is at least 5th grade level.
Besides, I have watched public comments @ Fullerton council meetings go on for 2 hours or more. So how could a 30-minute cap be in place as Mr. Anonymous contends?
Hey, if it ain’t broken don’t fix it.
Citizens of Fullerton should have a right to voice their opinions on the manner in which they are governed even if the comments extend into the wee morning hours.
If the council members don’t like to listen to the public – then don’t become council members. Move to a monarchy and run for ‘King’.
#32 by Anonymous on July 18, 2012
WTF JU? Seriously, WTF? You have to be kidding me.
#33 by JustUs on July 18, 2012
What don’t you understand, Mr. Anonymous?
I’d be happy to clarify any misunderstanding.
Your incredulous response doesn’t stir any emotion in me. You’re just wasting your time.
#34 by Anonymous on July 18, 2012
OK, last attempt.
1) I don’t want an emotional response from you.
2) Your eyes don’t lie about what? You watched the video or read bad reporting?
3) I’m glad you’ve watched comments go for 2 hours. If you had seen last night’s council meeting, you’d understand what they were discussing around changing the public comment rule. Please do so. Your guess is as good as anyone else’s as to why the current rule is ignored.
4) The council agrees with you and the comments last night indicate as such.
5) I’m well aware I’m wasting my time.
6) I have absolutely no idea why you’re making this personal. I’m correcting a misquote and inviting you to watch the tape yourself. That’s not exactly something to pick a fight over.
#35 by JustUs on July 18, 2012
Why are you so intent on the Council spinning it’s wheels on stupid stuff when there’s nothing broken about the public comments format? It’s working just fine. No one’s complaining except for you. If there is a 30-minute cap in place it’s not even being recognized by the people who implemented it. What the hell’s wrong with you.
Fullerton is under siege by a ‘culture of corruption’ that needs to get addressed forthwith. That is where the PROBLEM is. You’ve got cops and their supervisors acting like gestapo agents and high ranking city officials protecting them.
What’s more important to you? (1) Fixing a public comments format where no problem exists or (2) Fingering and punishing the lowlife scoundrels who enabled Kelly’s murder?
Pick one.
#36 by Anonymous on July 18, 2012
OK, this is my last attempt. Really.
1) I’m not advocating for or against the rule change. Go back and read the posts. I’m just correcting a misquote. You’re getting angry over absolutely nothing.
2) I’m very much in favor of tackling more important items first. I agree this is not on my list of things to do.
Please stop being an ass now.
#37 by Greg Diamond on July 18, 2012
Nice try, Anonymous! Some people just don’t like facts.
#38 by Fred Alcazar on July 18, 2012
If true, she will lose that 4-1. Bad call.
#39 by karma on July 18, 2012
I agree JU, but SSSSSSilva is not capable of shame. I am not sure she even knows what the word means, based on her past behaviors as a councilwoman.
#40 by JustUs on July 18, 2012
I’m pretty good at reading people and judging character.
From the first time I saw her and listened to her speak I didn’t like her. And it had nothing to do with her opinion. It was the way she presented it. She comes across very guarded and dissects practically every word before it leaves her mouth. Everything seems to be pre-fabricated or constructed in advance – and when the facts change her opinion remains the same.
The faster she leaves the council the better IMO.
#41 by OC Officials Offer Up Another Reason for Keeping Letter Secret on July 18, 2012
http://voiceofoc.org/countywide/county_government/article_da8ccc8a-d0e7-11e1-ae38-0019bb2963f4.html
#42 by SherBear on July 18, 2012
For those not around back then or simply don’t remember: Jones, Bankhead and McKinley put in the 30 minute comment rule, making anyone left wishing to speak wait till the end of the meeting. Sharon was on vacation (out if the country) when thus took place. I ran into her at the Marketplace soon after her returned and she was stunned when I told her, even saying that was taking away our right to speak. She didn’t enforce it when she became Mayor but it is still a valid rule. It doesn’t need to be voted on other than to remove it. I hope that’s what she’ll do.
#43 by SherBear on July 18, 2012
*The 30 minute rule was put in last fall.
#44 by JustUs on July 18, 2012
“She didn’t enforce it when she became Mayor but it is still a valid rule”
Did Jones enforce it when he was mayor? I don’t think so.
Would any of the current members enforce it? Very doubtful.
So what good is it if it’s not being enforced?
Hell, let dead dogs lie.
Why not address something more important like the ‘culture of corruption’ and starting punishing people who enabled the murder of Kelly Thomas and tried to cover up accountability after the fact?
Why waste time on more nonsense?
#45 by Anonymous on July 18, 2012
SHE ASKED FOR INPUT TO CHANGE THE DAMN RULE. CALM THE FUCK DOWN.
#46 by JustUs on July 18, 2012
Didn’t you read the article, cowboy?
Here:
““Quirk-Silva requested limiting public comments to 30 minutes also be added to an upcoming agenda.”
Now take some time to digest that. I know it’s complicated.
Why change something that appears to be working fine?
I’m very calm.
You’re the one who seems to be having a nervous breakdown.
Take some kava-kava.
#47 by Anonymous on July 18, 2012
Yes, and I asked the author to correct the misquote.
#48 by JustUs on July 18, 2012
Good for you. If the facts change I reserve the right to change my opinion.
However, if the current program does NOT recognize the current 30 minute cap just leave it alone. There are WAY more important matters to address than a stupid 30-minute cap that is not even being recognized by the council that approved it.
#49 by Anonymous on July 18, 2012
Also, you’re being an ass. If you’re happy with bad reporting, fine. I watched the meeting. No idea why you’re being so obstinate.
#50 by JustUs on July 18, 2012
“Also, you’re being an ass. If you’re happy with bad reporting, fine. I watched the meeting. No idea why you’re being so obstinate”
Why would I believe you over a newspaper report? What makes you so special, Mr. Ass?
If your car is working perfectly fine would you try to fix it??? Maybe you would…..but normal people don’t.
#51 by Anonymous on July 18, 2012
Fine, don’t believe me. Watch it yourself. It’s the very last part of the meeting. Maybe ten minutes, maybe less.
#52 by SherBear on July 18, 2012
Jones did enforce it. How can any of us forget when time was call before **** was to speak and she starting screaming she was done, giving up her house and giving the keys to the city and promised to leave the city the first of the upcoming month. Pretty extreme response for not getting to speak and told to wait till the end of the meeting but the point is, Jones did enforce it.
(The person never moved btw)
#53 by Greg Diamond on July 18, 2012
Thanks for clarifying SherBear. Someone hose off JustUs and take away his copy of Fullerton Stories.
#54 by Anonymous on July 18, 2012
Ouch! You are one feral hog.
#55 by Shimon Mendel on July 18, 2012
I get annoyed when people hijack a posting and start talking about something completely different.
However, I’m glad this one got hijacked.
#56 by JustUs on July 18, 2012
I’ll write something relevant.
In the future if Mr. Park, the accused accupuncturist, should ever run for a future council seat against the likes of the three stooges I would volunteer my time to help campaign for Mr. Park and elect him to office. And I don’t even live in Fullerton.
The campaign slogan would be “Vote for the Higher Moral Ground”.
#57 by merijoe on July 18, 2012
According to the (Ralph) Brown Act Open meetings CA code 54950-63
http://www.santabarbaraca.gov/Documents/Boards_and_Commissions_General_Info/01_Advisory_Group_Information/A_User's_Guide_to_the_Ralph_M_Brown_Act.pdf
At a council meeting – allowances enable people to participate.
So if you have 20 people who want to speak at 3 mins each, that’s way over her desired 30 minutes
Plus, is her requested 30 minutes for TOTAL public comments, period?
What if you have 10 people who want to speak on something and another 10 who want to speak on something else? too bad, so sad for some?
I wonder if she’s trying to hone down public comments from 3 to 1 minute each.
She kind of rushed the PC last night and wouldn’t allow anymore after closing the PC quickly.
#58 by Greg Diamond on July 18, 2012
Read SherBear’s comment above. Fullerton Stories either misreported it or its report was misunderstood by JustUs, that’s all. She’s not trying to limit comments.
#59 by JustUs on July 18, 2012
“Read SherBear’s comment above. Fullerton Stories either misreported it or its report was misunderstood by JustUs, that’s all. She’s not trying to limit comments”
I didn’t misunderstand nothing, Greg Diamond.
This is what Jennifer Karmarkar at the Fullerton Stories published:
“Quirk-Silva requested limiting public comments to 30 minutes also be added to an upcoming agenda”
Take it up with her. The article has not been edited so I will assume it’s true.
You owe me an apology.
#60 by Anonymous on July 18, 2012
“Quirk-Silva suggested the council agendize discussion on the how they handle public comments. She said several formats have been tried in the past, including 30 minute limit, but that more input is needed from all members of the council.”
Fixed.
http://fullertonstories.com/new-council-says-yes-to-fireworks-no-to-senior-housing-project/
Next time, please don’t make it personal.
#61 by Greg Diamond on July 20, 2012
Please review the meaning of the word “or.” You owe me a ginger ale.
#62 by The Fullerton Shadow on July 20, 2012
Actually, she is just grandstanding. As Mayor she can just modify speaking protocol. This absolutely does NOT need to be agendized. But she wants to appear like she is proactive on something anything, even though she doesn’t have a clue what to do without somebody telling her.
I expect that right about now your gal is feeling run over by a steam roller.
On a side note, wasn’t Quirky the one who limited speakers to one minute each at one point? I don’t recall her asking to agendize that.
I think I may have to write a post.
#63 by JustUs on July 18, 2012
“I wonder if she’s trying to hone down public comments from 3 to 1 minute each.
She kind of rushed the PC last night and wouldn’t allow anymore after closing the PC quickly”
Naturally she glossed over the specifics. That’s normally what politicians do when they’re trying to hide intent. Be suspicious. Trust none of them. Especially the ones who claim to be trustworthy.
#64 by for the benifit of all on July 18, 2012
it seems a lot of people are just repeating what the people before them were saying. Since everyone has to hear himself talk on every issue reducing public comments down to a minute might be a good idea. Many of the public comments are very interesting for the first minute and then they just ramble on to fill up the other two. Some people say… oh, I still have more time…. lets see.. um.
#65 by JustUs on July 18, 2012
Since everyone has to hear himself talk on every issue reducing public comments down to a minute might be a good idea.
“Oh, really? Why not just allow them to talk until it’s clear that they oppose the Council’s consensus and just cut the microphone off? 3 minutes is very little time to communicate an opinion. 1 minute is absurd. By the time you introduce yourself and declare your home town about a sixth of your time is over.
“Many of the public comments are very interesting for the first minute and then they just ramble on to fill up the other two. Some people say… oh, I still have more time…. lets see.. um”
What you find interesting I might not find interesting and vice versa. So we should dictate how long people can speak based on your personal predilections?
#66 by JustUs on July 18, 2012
If I lived in Fullerton and Ms. Quirk ran for reelection and Mr. Park decided to enter the race and run against her in a two-person race -I would vote for Mr. Park. I would. And I would make no apology for it either.
#67 by grace o'malley on July 18, 2012
To DQ #5 comment. From what I have been told by people who work “inside” the cops they have a code of not reporting on each other. The understanding is if you “rat” on a fellow cop you will get slow or “oops” when you ask for “backup” or help. potentially leaving the cop who reported being outgunned and left where he could get killed by the bad guys. So cops have this code that keeps them from stopping them from using common sense and they kill poor guys like Kelly.
#68 by Momof4js on July 18, 2012
Grace,
If what you are reporting is accurate – then this is a serious matter. Even if an officier wanted to come forward and address issues with other officiers, they couldn’t or they’d face compromising their employment or losing their life?! Makes me feel real secure with FPD! Now a days, and most certainly after your comment, our family will continue to be reserved about calling upon the assistance of FPD. Sadly, since Kelly’s death, we look upon every FP officer with suspicion and concern.
#69 by Dan on July 18, 2012
LOL This sounds a lot like a scene from “Code of Silence”.
There is a scene in that movie where Cusack (Played by Chuck Norris) calls for backup but his fellow officers don’t come to his aid because he broke the “Code of Silence”.
I can assure you this does not happen in real life for multiple legal and logistical reasons, for this to actually work you would have to get almost every officer on the force and dispatchers (including supervisors) to agree not to respond to backup an officer and hope that none of those officers contacts the feds also all calls for service are recorded and logged so if you have an officer screaming for help on the radio and no one responds, the city or county just opened themselves up to a massive law suit and the people involved could very likely face federal conspiracy charges.
What actually happens is the officer will start to face a ton of write-ups and disciplinary actions for minor stuff ranging from speeding, slow response times, excessive force, etc. The union will pretty much turn their back on the officer and not provide any support.
Keep in mind it is not illegal for a union to “strongly encourage” you to join them just like it is not illegal for them to refuse to represent you.
Officers in this predicament will usually resign out of fear of getting fired and losing benefits. OTOH if they choose to stay, they will be fired for minor infractions and again the union will not represent them in any way.
#70 by Momof4js on July 19, 2012
Dan, thank you for adding clarification. It’s really helpful. What a horrendous job.
#71 by Larry and Emil on July 19, 2012
cici, wolfe, ramos its 8 AM go out and look for jobs you unemployrd bums
#72 by Rich on July 20, 2012
(EXECUTE) ___ DIRTY COP TERRORISTS with “police powers”
FRIDAY. JULY 20- 2012
#73 by Kim Kardashian on July 20, 2012
Once again, Rich, take your meds!
#74 by rich on July 21, 2012
EXECUTE, lying, falsifying, fabricating, overtime-abusing , drugged up dirty cop terrorists with “police powers.”
#75 by Kim Kardashian on July 21, 2012
Change your meds, Rich.
#76 by grace o'malley on July 20, 2012
To #67 momof4js; I think I struck a nerve #67! Dan. If this “code” is not true then how come 6 cops killed Kelly and not one of the sworn officers to protect and serve stopped and said “ok we have him undercontol” lets get ahold of our selves. No it didn’t happen; they watched as Ramos put on gloves and said “these fists are going to…” Cops are afraid of their union and breaking there “code” to each other. Public sector unions are owning their members into gangster mentality; if members don’t “tow” the code there union will not provide legal counsel to an accused cop. And other cops will not show up when called in for “backup.” Maybe cops shouldn’t be unionized and just contract employees to our city?
#77 by grace o'malley on July 20, 2012
P.S. Dan the feds are already here in town.