197

It seems that the behaviour I described in post 195 about this recent calling for the cops suggests the involvement of the corruption guy rather than a mere  discrimination like the previous examples. It is hard to see that a cop would unnecessarily invoke that discussion of  crime or not crime and direct his attention toward the person like that second cop did if the motive is discrimination. If it involves a violent action or an insult toward the discriminated person then the trade off with the psychological inconvenience of directing the attention toward the latter might be convincing but just for the sake of arguing like that for a cop, it does not seem so. The only explanation that seems to fit good here is that that action was intended to add another layer of protection and service for the corruption guy whom I would hardly expect to have let things go without making a contact to pull the police to his direction after seeing me contacting it regarding the matter if he was involved. The first cop might have not been involved or was also seeking serving this guy but after seeing his level was achieved, he wanted to upgrade to that sought by his comrade. Both scenarios also fit the time order of the events with the second cop arriving less than a minute after the first, because the first cop might have been dispatched before receiving the communication related to serving this corruption guy or that the second cop was sent merely for adding support to that purpose. I have twice before called for the cops to come in this city and in both cases only one cop in one car were sent and it does not seem that they are inclined to send two cops and in separate cars for no reason (The part I mentioned suggesting more than one cop is a special occurrence resulted from me continuing communication and complaining about their own behaviour toward me).    

196

Continuing from the preceding post

Earlier that day I was flipping through TV channels and saw the remainder of a show where two guys were walking through tall grass or the like and had to be careful to avoid rattle snakes and this guy knows what I watch on TV even though I do not have a cable (I have known this for years and some of my reactions should have been enough to suggest that sooner to the corruption guy whenever he is not toying with the world and taking things to his desire playing around). It seems like when I  later went to do my yard it occurred to this guy, and you know that I am accepted like a toy to him according to this modern day slavery by corruption, the desire to make me experience a smaller version of that so he arranged for what I described in the preceding post. 

I have before seen or passed near snakes while mowing the yard but it was connected to the yard being mowed and never looked as artificially created situation like that of yesterday.

I probably also better mention previously seeing what seemed to be this same snake in the middle of the street, also like it was put there, across from that same neighbor and my house as I was coming from shopping in what sounded like another episode of cooperating action with this guy before I started to turn my cell phone off in order to avoid being tracked and enable synchronized action like that. So it seems like this time they decided to bring things closer. 

195

I was going back to my garage to add gas and continue mowing my backyard when I found a snake about 4 feet in length and thickness of about 1/2 to 3/4 inch, inches away from my garage opining. It seems like it was put there by one of the neighbors and probably for this corruption guy using accommodation from a new neighbor that is more dedicated and/or put there for the service of this guy. From the timing (at the moment I was coming back to my garage) and the location (the body of the snake had just or not yet been totally on the paved path from the side of that relatively new neighbor) and the body position of the animal, things fit good with that it was thrown from the side of that new neighbor there just while I am about to return. That is also a good way to avoid a security camera I have in front of my garage. I have other things fitting the big picture that that snake did not come by itself but was thrown there. 

I called the cops on that neighbor whom I think controls the snake and now I want to talk about my experience with cops here in general.
One time in Knoxville, the big city near this one (Lenoir City), I called the cops complaining about a neighbor who repeatedly crosses into the yard of the house where I was living to pull down the trashcan and they argued back against me that I did not have a "no trespass" sign, despite the action I just described. 
Here, one time I called them about how an adjacent neighbor guy parks his car on my side intentionally trying to agitate me despite that there is an ample space on the portion of the street in front of his own home and I got informed that I do not own the street. Later that cop came back to tell me or argue against me using the excuse given to him by that guy which was that he parks on my side in order to avoid his car getting accidentally hit by one of the neighbors across without any support for that claim. The situation ended with this cop threatening or warning me that if something, which I did not hear correctly what, happens again "we gonna have a problem" (or something like that). I have this bad habit of nodding my head without noticing even though I did not understand what was said but that was probably for accusing him of being biased (This story continues but the most interesting part of it was other cops laughing when showing them pictures of other cars that came to park on the side of my home supporting that guy after recognizing that one of those cars belongs to another cop the know).
This time, the first cop who came asked me if I have a proof or I saw that neighbor throwing or putting the snake in my yard and I said no. He then said that he by himself or with the other cop who came by another car probably less than a minute later, will go to ask that neighbor and if that neighbor admits the guilt then it is a crime. After they came back, the second cop came first to me and informed me that that neighbor did not admit throwing any snake. However, despite how I did not show any insistence on them to act for my side without proof or even argue back against the denial of that neighbor, this second cop on his own volunteered telling me that even if they threw a snake into my yard it is not a crime. Then the first cop came back to support this second one as if he himself did not say what he said a few minuets ago, let alone how it can directly be seen wrong. We are not yet dealing with a court and still at the level of cops dealing with the matter and he argued the question of intention and suggested a scenario of someone finding a snake on the street and throwing it away to my yard.

194

Lets make it very clear. This system here is very far from showing itself as honestly tries to equally enforces the law on everybody and gives no privileged treatment to some, or even anywhere close to sufficiently counter indications to the otherwise.  

193

Even without that in the preceding post, being the target of the challenge is by itself a very strong reason to make one assume no responsibility of the actions of its opposing side. 

192

After all the talk I did, I did not want to be seen as always discontent and revolting so I let myself follow others who took me to here like a fish pulled out of its water with a net. Otherwise, I wouldn't go along one inch with this guy making the system and the world here his toy for even a fraction of what was done. It is beyond outrageous, unthinkable, and making one speechless. 

191

I have just spent over 20 minutes just trying to log in to my computer  while it was doing "updating" that felt endless and I do not know how long it would have taken hadn't I turned off the internet. Then I spent an additional 40 minutes to write this. I do not know if this was the result of interference by this guy or that Microsoft may need to be sued for hijacking people's computers like this.

190

Related to post 187, I was focusing on the defensive aspect of my side when I said that I cant, even with the limited domain of only its interface, sufficiently see that absent judge claim against me. Otherwise it is a huge understatement. No one in this guy's place acting seriously to resolve the issue more than toying around and showing off would like to take such a risk of suggesting to the opposing side anywhere close to this a probability that the court and/or its judges are holding themselves in such position for the case of the latter. I continue to struggle in whether this absent judge claim was done for the guy or was the guy required to accept it (still talking at the level of merely its interface).      

189

Again, it seems like this guy wanted to treat me like a toy of his and impose his will on me not merely through being affected by his malicious action but also to the level of forcing me to do some action in order to get rid off that effect. I wanted to log in to my Ameritrade account and after entering the user name and password, this time I got a security question which kept refusing my answer even though I kept entering the correct one. I cannot at this moment answer if that game was played with the help of Ameritrade or my Internet provider Charter. I had to call to gain back my access to my account and for that I had to close all the windows on which I was working. And if that is not enough, I was made to choose the new security question and answers twice which also sounds like the result of a malicious interference by this guy. 

Do you know how it feels, even for once, having this guy disables your access and treats you like a toy just because he wanted to do that,  let alone the number of times this guy has been doing this to me.

And here it goes more than an entire hour of my time just because this guy felt like not letting me have it.