Kaorte.. "No one makes a video called "the truth" and posts it on YouTube like that unless they are actually telling the truth."

Yes, actually they do all the time post videos called "the truth" and then proceed to make a video full of lies. I'm not saying HE did or did not lie in his video, nor whether his actions were malicious or well-meaning, I don't know him, I wasn't there, I'm not the one maligned by lies.

But I had to address the idea that because someone puts a video up called "the truth", it doesn't lend any credence that is IS the truth or a lie.

If someone told me that a person that was taking a friend and her kids on an extended trip was a molester, I don't know what I would do. Perhaps I would look for the proof myself and take said proof to either my friend or the person. I don't think I'd run to tell anyone without proof... unless it was a trip that was about to happen within hours and I trusted the person who told me the original story a LOT. But if someone came to me and told me "This person is a convicted child molester, don't tell anyone!", I would immediately ask them why I shouldn't tell people, why they felt a need to tell ME personally and where the proof was. The first red flag to me that something is not kosher is when people start telling tales while saying "Don't tell anyone" and "Don't tell anyone I told you..."

Wyatt's taunting and use of the term "corrected" record was childish and further evidence that he's behaving maliciously. There is NO lawyer that is going to get a record corrected by his/her word to the company/division that has the wrong records posted. Especially not without the officials contacting the person affected and providing a paper trail. Plus, if it was a "public record" then no one can say "I'm the only person who saw it" as they would have no way to know how many other people have accessed public records before or after them. It's another obvious lie.

And, what I was saying before is that no one needs to "authorize" anyone to make searches of public records. I understand if someone is saying USARK as a group was not interested in looking up records. I understand she was looking up records all on her own, not FOR USARK, but a lot of people over the net seem to think that without some sort of authorization she should not have been legally able to look up records at all.

And I also understand that telling people she is the VP, while it's papered that she is patently NOT a officer is another showing of her lack of character and more lies.