Nerves

"Nerves"

It was a nerve wracking day yesterday.  

It started out with harassing texts sent to me and me having to visit the library to print a letter.  And then going to the Police Station.  But I'll get back to that.

Looking about facebook and kicking out some trolls in some of the faith based groups I admin, I got a message from a name I did not recognize.

"Please give me another chance"

Well, that caught my attention.  And wasn't too much a surprise, I've had people kicked out of the Church and Apostle facebook groups before only to have them later ask to come back, and I let them.  Why not?  Sometimes people get steamed, and then they feel better.  Forgiveness and all that.

So long as they're going to comment and post in peace, and nothing against the Church, I'm up for it.

Yet the name was unfamiliar. And I don't kick that many people out of facebook groups that I would not have recognized the name.  I assumed then that this was an fake profile being used to contact me.  

Which would only be needful if I had personally blocked them, not just booted them from a group.

So I warily asked, "At what?"

Stranger:  "Being the person I wanna be I'm cold I have no where

Nothing"

Now I'm sitting at attention.  Clearly this is not about facebook groups, but perhaps some former guest of the Liahona Home using an alt-nic to speak to me.  Which means they have no phone minutes.  

"Who's this?" I asked.

Former guest:  "This is (name withheld)

                         I'll do whatever"

Ahh.  Light dawns.  I was aware of that former guest, he had been one of the few who never paid any money.  The Church had sponsored him, but regrettably we had to have him leave before the whole two months was up.  

He had lasted, well, not very long, and was put out for stealing, drug use, and all around orneriness.  And he'd had quite a bit to say on his way out, things that were ugly and threatening.  

We always get the most grief from those who never pay.  They're the ones who always act like not supporting them any more is somehow an attack upon them, and a robbery of what they rightfully deserve.

Now I know that we've took some back, but in each case they'd left moderately peaceably.  I don't mind someone being upset at having to leave.  But violence or implied violence ties my hands.

I wrote:

"I'm sorry, but you did not conduct yourself, or leave, in a fashion that makes that possible.

I strongly suggest the ARC where you can learn to do without pot and that a hard days work over and over won't kill you.

If you graduate from that after ninety days, I'll give you such help as I can on job finding or college or MTI or the military."

Understand, had he done that, I'd have been inclined to try him here at the sober living home again.  If he had done the full ninety, and I could confirm that with people I know there.

I had offered him that when he left originally, but he had rejected that, and apparently did not remember me offering that.

He responded now with:

"What do u mean 90 days

No dean please

Please"

Well, that's kind of heart rending.  I know when later I read this exchange to Katie that at that point she had that look Jo Baer of "Little Men" had that says, "Are you sure we can't give him another try?"  And he is very young, only 20.  

But I knew that in his case that without him first doing something concrete and real toward his recovery/self-improvement that there'd be no hope of it working out, and so accepting him now would only hurt all concerned.

And yeah, I also figured that he was just shamming and that he must have simply ran out of friends willing to have him on their couch.

So I wrote:

"The Salvation Army's Adult Rehabilitation Center offers a free 90 day program.  You live on site.  No drugs or alcohol.  They give you work and food and a bed.

After 90 days, you've then some habits of sobriety and work.  And hopefully not stealing any more."

His response was rather swift.  And illuminating.

"Fxxx u dean u know what ur not a true morman ur the devils xxx hole and you'll burn in he'll for being such an angel I are"

At that point it broke off.  

I responded, "Okay, (name withheld).  I'll keep you in my prayers."

This is on top of that other ex-guest and his son still giving me grief over not being able to live here for free indefinitely.  Apparently the father of the man I won't let stay is texting another guest asking the guest to go over to Katie and ask Katie to friend him on facebook so he can tell her some things.

I suspect that I was meant to be told that he had asked that, so I could feel as threatened and concerned for her safety as I then was.  And that he, active addict and word-spinner, probably is under the impression that if he strings enough words together it means he gets his way.

I've yet to hear from either of their lawyers, though from last Thursday on both of them have assured me that they have two.  If any lawyer calls, I'm going to offer to settle out of court for triple what those two together had invested.  Let's see, three times zero is....hmmm....carry the None...well, it will come to me in time.

Then their lawyers can fight over what percent they get of that.

And both father and son are each still texting and calling me.  They know I will not answer, as I previously advised them that since they had claimed to have representation that I could only speak to their lawyers.  But they're doing that stalking thing where they're making sure that no matter how your day is going or what you're trying to do, that you'll have to be thinking of them.  

Brushing your teeth?  Helping a guest?  Reading a faith-based article that has meaning to you?  Liking a post of a friend?  Cuddling with your honey?  Eating dinner?  They'll make sure by random texting and phoning that you still must always think about them.

I'd block their phone numbers, but the collection of their harassing texts and calls will eventually, if it comes to it, be proof of why I will later need the police to trespass them officially.

Next up, this afternoon while driving a guest about so he could put in some job applications I got a call from "Corporate Counsel".  Yeah, regrettably the City of Springfield's lawyers are on my speed dial for other past business issues so when the call came in I knew it was them.

He told me that he had got the letters I had sent.  Pertaining to our request that we be treated no differently than the Salvation Army or other non-profits.  This morning I had hand delivered copies of a letter I wrote to the Chief of Police, the Police Officer in charge of the "Beat" that we're in and our Alderman.  

It was pertaining to the incident last Thursday where that son of the former guest was trying to claim residency and the police were initially inclined to give it to him.  Believing as they did that we were under normal landlord/tenant laws, which we are not.

I'm not feeling that he was really asking for "clarification" as he stated, but more looking for "reason to dismiss this without further attention".  Still, hope springs eternal.

"If I understand it, you're asking the police to put people out of your home?", he asked.  Well, there went hope.

Me discussing things with Springfield lawyers.
And reciting Psalms 23:4 to myself.

Understand, the police do routinely "put people out" if the Salvation Army or Sojourn or Helping Hands say they have a trespasser.  But instead of pointing that out I said, "No, we don't need any help putting someone out, we're just not interested in the police putting them back in.  This doesn't happen to other non-profits, we don't want it happening to us."

He filled what would have been the silence of him mulling that over with the repeated assurances that they had no desire to discriminate between any corporations and then asked, "What makes you think that the police treat the Salvation Army differently?"

Understand, that is just another question to try to make the person think that they have no legitimate case and to go away and stop bothering them.  It is manifestly unfair in that they are asking that we try and explain what is blatantly common knowledge.

And give up in frustration at having to try.  After all, he was asking for a negative, for me to name the time that the police did not tell someone that they could live on another corporation's property.  

I had no non-case number for that non-event.

So I waded in and said, "I might reverse that and ask you when the police ever tried even once to put someone into the Salvation Army against that charity's will.  Truth is, it's common knowledge that those places can have anyone leave that they need to have leave and that there is no talk of residency and rights of the trespasser then."

He answered that he was only trying to determine if there were in fact different procedures being employed by the police for different corporations.  He asked then if I knew the officer's names.

I wasn't going there.  "No, sure don't.  And like I said in the letter, I've no complaint.  It's just that we're suffering from a name recognition issue.  Any cop called to Sally Army knows who they are, but the cops don't know who we are.  If we had a big building and neon sign, this would never have come up."

There were more lawyerly talkings and assurances of seeing about this and giving proper considerations, and I thanked him and hung up.  Who knows?

But as Katie said when I related this, "They either have to treat us the same or tell us what extra papers those other places have.  And if they tell us what papers those places have that we don't, then we'll just go fill them out!"

Very true!  So I can soothe down my nerves for now.

At least till the next random text!