I would like to speak to the question of why we are still kicking Johne around. I had the opportunity to hear him speak at a conference on how FRA paperwork functioned. After the lecture I crossed paths with him in the common area and approached him to say that I enjoyed his lecture and learned a lot and thank you. His response was condescending and dismissive if not downright rude. I was a small player in the preservation world as I am today. There is no merit in belittling small players and common folk. I was particularly struck by his lofty and vitriolic demeaner. This was 30 years ago, and I still remember it. He sowed his oats and now he is paying a price. He deserves all he gets because he is a petty little man with an unearned ego.

After a lengthy life of being a bullied nerd, I can attest:

1) Bullies love "kicking people when they're down."

2) Some victims love ganging up as part of a "mob" to get kicking revenge on a bully in the rare instance when they're the ones down.

After a decade of that crap in my youth, I find both repulsive.

The question: Which are you?

The question is "Was jer a "bullyer" or "bullyee"?"

He liked to play the "bullyee" role in public but I reference an unsolicited message I was forwarded that he sent to someone who asked a question about work on the Loco that shall not be named. You decide.

Oh hell, I'd wager that damn near everyone involved in the various discussions about John and Wasatch RR Contractors has been threatened with litigation. I received a very condescending message with the tone of a parent scolding a preteen that basically said "some people say mean things on the Internet. Just because it's on the Internet, it doesn't mean it's true. By the way, if you tell anyone about this, I'll sue you."

This is useful for the same reasons emphasized by Mr. Anderson in his now deleted thread. Lying to the federal government has consequences, even when the lies are about antique railroad equipment. Lying on your Form 4 or cab-mounted inspection cards would carry similar penalties and would be as heavily scrutinized as invoicing to the NPS for a coach restoration. Discussing the consequences of such actions, including prison time, is a good warning. John wasn’t the only bad actor out there, and for the same reason people were placed in the stocks in the town square in colonial America, his fate is a warning to those thinking they can act similarly and escape consequences.

My suggestion:

Feel free to throw rotten produce and eggs at the guy in the stocks.

This forum is, however, at its own discretion, not obligated to provide you said projectiles.

Here's how I see it as I never saw the thread being discussed, and I'm only assuming what that thread contained from reading this thread:

Probably relevant to preservation: "This guy did X, Y and Z, and this is why he went to prison for doing so, so don't do these things on your own operation as they're all wrong and illegal..."

NOT so relevant to preservation: "Wow, I hope some guys come up to him in the prison shower and do this to him..."

If it's the first type of post, I think we should be able to read that. The second? Nope.

Sometimes the behavior he displayed has been called SMS. Short Man Syndrome

Isn't there a professional credential required to do FRA-qualified boiler work? Is that credential ever revoked because of shoddy work?

If you mean an R stamp (from NBIC) or an S stamp (from ASME), no, but they will want to see the qualifications of any welders doing work on the boiler (to confirm that they have passed a welding test as required by one of those organizations), and they have the power to red tag any equipment that they see shoddy work of any sort on.

Hmmm.....

So, I'd like to pose a couple of questions:

After Mr. Rimmasch completes the sentence that was imposed upon him by our judicial system, is there anyone viewing this forum that would give John a chance to redeem himself? If you were in a position to help him get back up on his feet after he does his required time, would you do so?

Mr. Rimmasch will have a number of significant challenges to overcome after he gets out of prison. The likelihood that he will be able to create a new business for himself immediately after getting out of prison is not likely due to the plain terms of his sentence.

John will be under the Court's supervision for three years after his release. The requirement that he not take on any debt until all the restitution is repaid means that any business entity that John might try to create will be devoid of the ability to raise cash and thus will not likely be able to take on significant contracts of any type. Given the fact that many documents needed for FRA compliance would expose himself to potential violations of his probation if they prove to be false, I cannot imagine any scenario where John would ever entertain an idea to sign one of those documents until his probation period is completely over.

In short, I don't see a pathway where a new Wasatch organization will rise immediately after John's release. So, that leads me back to my questions above....

Is there anyone willing to give John a second chance and a fresh start when he gets out of prison, or is the intention to convict the man for life?

I'd like to think that the preservation comunity could find some compassion for a person who served their time. However, I expect that we will find many more Inspector Javerts instead of the kindly priest who helped Jean Valjean redeem his soul.

Sad, but true.....

Someone will. As I have said before, John has charisma. When he turns on the charm, he could sell brass knuckles to Mother Theresa.

Sounds like he should have went into politics, where one is rarely held accountable for subpar work. The trick is to pilfer 50 cents out of everybody's pocket, which nobody notices and then show up with hedge clipper sized scissors and a giant novelty check for some really conspicuous new building which the media will cover without any question as to where the money came from.

As for a "second chance", a second chance to do what?

Shortly after my time in the financial operations of the Department of Corrections; I had a staff vacancy come up. One of the candidates was clearly overqualified. The job was for a fiscal specialist-generally staffed by inexperienced or somebody without a financially oriented degree.

One of the applicants was a fellow in his early to mid 30's, wearing a sharp suit with shined shoes and a "power tie". If this guy was dressing for the job he wanted, he looked like his ambition was in the executive level.

His resume said he had been a financial analyst at a bank. After that, I noticed something. It said "accountant, Department of Corrections". That's when it became sort of obvious something was really awry.

Knowing I could not ask about convictions or incarceration, I simply said "you know, I used to work in DOC, I knew all the accountants, I don't remember your name". Sometimes in an interview, a long uncomfortable silence will shake the tree.

At that point, he said "actually, I was an inmate. I was convicted of homicide in the death of my son-he died of shaken baby syndrome."

Now the guy was clearly qualified to do daily cash reconciliations with prior bank experience.

There were a couple of things that made me pass on this candidate. The first was the arguable misrepresentation of his experience. Inmates may be assigned to certain fiscal operations, but they are not accountants. Second was his passive voice in acknowledging that he killed his son. Both of those things made me uncomfortable about his ability to deal with his responsibility. The final thing was that the position in this group had two new parents in it; my best specialist basically made her desk into a shrine to her toddler. I knew that this could present issues with "group dynamics".

Now back to JR. We have no idea whether or not he can actually do good work and bill properly. We know that he hasn't in the past.

Unlike journal entries, which can be fixed relatively easily; bad welds can't. I can't kill anybody with a ledger; but a boiler going kaboom is a different matter.

Incarceration changes people; but not always for the better. The arrogance cited here doesn't bode well for an inmate, they attract trouble. Conflicts can get you killed and your sentence extended, even if you are the badass you imagine.

Even if he had the skills to do good work, he'll be several years away from it when and if he emerges.

There are places that specialize in hiring convicted individuals, mostly because they know that their work is unpleasant and or not particularly aspirational.

I wouldn't want to be getting the first fire up in an engine he repaired, sorry.

If you had a locomotive, would you take a chance on having it screwed up?

A second chance might mean a chance at something else. Life doesn't have a replay button.

Firstly let's hope for John's sake that his landing in prison will be the cause of his taking a serious look at himself and changing his " ways".

Secondly, let's hope for his and his family's sake that when he gets out he'll be a changed man.

Thirdly as a practicing Christian I am obligated to grant him forgiveness if he asks for it and states that he is forthwith leading a life based upon honesty in all areas.

Lastly, I would hope he'll find honest work and fulfillment in a field far from steam locomotives.

Honestly though I would not bet against Mr. Anderson's opinion that he will find a place within the rail preservation field quickly upon his release.

Hope springs eternal. Ross Rowland

Someone will. As I have said before, John has charisma. When he turns on the charm, he could sell brass knuckles to Mother Theresa.[/quote

The analogy I have both heard and used for many years for these types of people is "He could sell sand to the Arabs and snow to the Eskimos, and leave them thinking it was their idea."

Oddly enough, I have used exactly that expression to describe the long-ago successes of another participant in this thread.................