Google Doesn't Answer the Phone

On my 2008 - 2009 experience with The Cyberpath Blog

The blog hosts need to be universally receptive to shutting down any blog that anonymously smears another person. It is quite different if the individuals name themselves, but - anonymous smears are the ultimate act of cowardice. Zimbio has been very good with this, Mindsay, and Wordpress have been very poor in their response. This vigilante group has tried to influence justice...anonymously, they sexually smeared my son and my daughter, and my wife anonymously on these blogs and in emails while posing as a licensed nurse ( spoofing is a cybercrime.). The group labels people with the worst label they can think of, and then proceeds to try and destroy them. The group is called EOPC, the cyberpath blog. They are "the" most dangerous people online. Each of it's four main members is evil beyond words. And, I know who they are. And I can prove what I say about them. They know it.  They make
the owner of datingpsychos.com look like a grammar school truant by comparisson. They are currently reported to Ic3.gov.  This group feels it is above the law. And while they condemn Lori Drew for her behavior, as we all should, they are Lori Drew.  They commit crimes and justify them.  They judge play judge, jury and executioner online. And justfiy crimes.. They barely qualify as vigilantes for how dispicable they really are... They have a process -. The first step is to label,  then they libel,  dehumanize,  and then they attempt to destroy. They are the arbitrators of who is, and who is not the Victim, on the internet. But, they will never attach their names to what they write. I will.. And I will do it, the next time they screw up. As they most assuredly will, as the have the condition they brand others with...they are sneaks, liars, and mindgaming gaslighters. In short, they are anti social and pathological, Malignant Narcissists. the true..   CYBERPATHS, their own invention. .
Here below is an article I have written describing my experience with them.

It is generally not advised to donate to this group
or give them any personal information....They are dangerous. If they knew wha was  good for them, they should have  stuck to their usual stolen general articles and stop labeling people. There is nothing they can tell anyone
that they don't already know. Don't get involved with anyone online - there ends their usefulness.. Avoid this "support" group and tt's pop psychology... They cannot justify their own existance. except they are thrilled to play Batman online. One of it's core members is a woman on welfare, who has a reputation as an harasser and stalker ( Search Barbara Camwell/Barbara Camwell Ness ). She is nuts.  A professional victim turned victimizer, who blames the world for all of her problems and takes  no responsibilty. And so she becomes FIGHTER online -. fixng the problems of others, when her own life is a mess. Doctor heal thyself .  She role plays psychologist, lawyer, counselor...but, she is really a personal failire who is in massive denial. If you get deeply involved with this group, they will never let you go, You will know too much about them. Thier articles are mostly bigoted nonsense, stolen from the internet. If you enjoy tea leaves and armchair pop psychology that is pretty much what you will get. Meanwhile this group hacked my gmail..and had access to it for four years..and Ive only recently become aware of it. Add that to the list of crimes described below. And more described here, my answer to their new attack on me. Note my new reponse to them, their use of hacking and censorship
they rational for starting a new fight with me...
This phenomenon, is primarily a female disease, web sites like
filthy liar, datingpsychos, and liarscheaters, are a playground for them..
but they cater to the worst in females. It is not therapy. It is undignified.
But this group is worse than all of them, as they are basically
criminals. 

On their censorhip methods.

You can't read what they write. But I have cited other ways:.  that they censor such as coordinated anonymous pleas to blog hosts, and gang attacks. While citing first amendment rights,they rob me of mine My lawyer.was redirected too.,Internet lawyers should study the implications of this article and this group
-cyberpaths.blogspot.com. The group has endorsed further attacks and instigations by colluding with their protege at Soundclick. Involving it's support team, Ally Byrd in cyberharassment.  In short, they have not stopped attacking. They recently completely destroyed my civil employment case by contaminating it so badly from the internet, that it had to be pulled. They had nothing to do with the case. They were simply showing the person they championed, how powerful they are. But in the process, they perverted jurisprudence. Read the article below to see how dangerous they are. This type of group believes they can diagnose online. No professionals would ever dare do that, it would pose a risk to their license.

They aren't even professionals, one of them is a welfare mother who lives in NY. Another, sells products on ebay. Below is an account of  my 10 month experience with them.  This article is currently being edited. I should be finished editing ny sept 10. The article is important enough to fix, but editing is slow do to legal blindness. There have been some new events. One required me to amend the information regarding the federal law that applies. It is actually the federal communications act, 1934, amended in 2006 to include internet.   This is not a defamation
issue, it is a criminal issue. They are felons  My update on their new attack is here,

The Defamers vs. The Reputation Defenders


The Defamers vs. The Reputation Defenders: (this doc is still being edited)


When will Google Answer the Phone?


-Gary Stone


The Defamers vs. The Reputation Defenders


There is a definite trend of abuse on the Internet which is fueled by the dis inhibiting effect of the Internet itself and by anonymous technology. If you don't have to look them in the face, you feel empowered to defame without fearing consequences (such as civil remedies and court action.) What we describe here are anonymous blogers who defame, harass, abuse and commit crimes. The blogers described above violated federal laws, and play the role of Vigilante. This activity is a felony. But there are many other laws that they (above) have broken. Including: Spoofing, hacking, sexually smearing children, threatening a civil case, obstruction, defamation, libel, and violations of state privacy laws. Because they feel they are above the law, this sense of entitlement is: Supreme narcissism. In general anonymous blogers have similar strategies:


They use of IP masking technology and anonymous technology such as"anonymous re- mailers," and proxy servers, these enable would be defamers and abusers even more. The disinterest of law enforcement does the same as does the blind acceptance of this type of activity on blog hosts, such as blogger, Word press, Zimbio, and Mindsay. There are many other higher traffic sites where they gather. And they care nothing for terms of services, associated with these hosts. The group I refer to above was deleted 13 times at zimbio, for TOS violations - they kept coming back like flies. But they can do a lot of damage.


This is why lawyers are now specializing. Some are dealing with legal issues that arise from the defamations of businesses and individuals. Also services are rising up to meet an epidemic of Internet abuse.


They are partially filling a need to cope by protecting individual and group reputations. They do this by filing form letters with blog hosts as a warning to discourage flamers and anonymous. They do it by knocking negative content back into the last pages of the search engines, by building up positive content in the search engines. Lawyers are getting specialized in Internet law, and they know defamatory articles are very search able in search engines and thus they are damaging.




But,to date, despite the damages they cause, defamers exist in a: "FREE FIRE ZONE," and there are few solutions offered to stop them. Even Blog hosts ignore their own "Terms of Service (TOS) policies, in many instances, and so the defamers reign supreme. They do what they do because they are cowards, and they want to block civil remedies by staying anonymous. They do it because they feel powerful in doing it. They feel like experts. It also alleviates their sick desire to cause harm in the lives of people "they" have judged deserve it. Enter the theme of narcissism again.


The constitution does not protect for defamation. Defamation is not protected by the first amendment. It is perversion of the the intent of the founding fathers to say it does. The first amendment allows anyone defame, but - they have be willing to suffer civil remedies. Blocking civil remedies, is the criminal aspect I refer to.

The diffidence of most attorneys is obvious, they often say: "just write on them." Even the FBI has said about the above group: "if you don't like what they say, write on them, or get a lawyer."


Somehow,to others, what is on they Internet seems unreal, and therefore, so is what is said...But what is written on the Internet can be as damaging in a real sense as what is written irresponsibly in major newspapers, because increasingly,the Internet is the source for "quick news."


One of the services that protects people from Internet defamations is the service Reputation Defender. They monitor the web for individuals and businesses, and encourage the individual to ignore the negative information and start building good content that would be indexed by Google. This build up of good content buries the negative information in search engines, information that might be viewed by friends,neighbors,co-workers - or prospective customers or employers. 72 percent of employers check Google for information on candidates, as well as their credentials, and references.

when being considered for employment. Google is the 3rd reference check, and this is a new phenomenon.


But such services are somewhat lacking in several ways:



a.)The defamers can out pace your good content


by putting out twice the amount of negative content

(as did the above group, posting to every conceivable blog host, even though their story

was looking to be untrue, even to them. Their response was to crank up the volume.)


b./ The services are expensive


c.) The service does not deal natural justice to the perpetrators.


d.)The negative information doesn't go away, they are recessed deeper searches in the search engines, in it's cache's and the info is archives in various places such as archive. The offensive tumbles out if the employer searches deeply enough Employers could look beyond the typical "2 page search" in Google for negative content to compensate.


The damage is forever.


The civil remedies (lawyers and law suits) are expensive and they may not guarantee results. Although the number of law suits filed is increasing, and some analysts project there will be a steady increase,or perhaps a sudden flood of suits which could cripple the courts...something needs to be done, but what? They are few legal examples and of cases filed that were successful although there are some:


There was the case of Sue Sheff

There was a successful conclusion to her defamation law suit that resulted in 11 million dollars awarded against the other litigant Carey Bock. The case set a president. But in this case, both parties knew who who their defamers were, and could positively identify the defamer, and the defamation. Identifying anonymous posters though is a very difficult process and requires forensic expertise. (Interesting to note, is the fact that based on EOPC's blog (the vigilante's) and their smears, Sue Sheff called me a criminal at Wordpress...that hypocrisy is astounding. )


Anonymous defaming is the way for trolls ..This type of defamation is what leaves the victim helpless in terms of a civil remedy: regardless of the level of damage to a business or person. Not many would be defenders know how to approach the problem,or even appreciate it.... But such defamations are a federal crime, and so these posts are made at some risk. Defamers are not discouraged because law enforcement agencies because are doing little about it. Most probably due to priorities. The FBI has a website for filing such complaints at IC3.gov. If an individual felt that the defamers and harassers were dangerous enough, complaints can be filed there...these types of complaints put them on the map in terms of their forums and logs. It is possible that if enough complaints are registered the federal government will act.


But it would seem to me, that in addition to criminal complaints filed- Google itself should get involved. There are many ways Google could help.




The famous expression quoting one reputation defender service used was: "Google doesn't answer the phone."They could answer the phone for a start. In the same way Google developed the Mal ware report feature, (url below) they could develop a defamation report tool.... This malware report feature allows users to punch in a url on the site that contains mal ware, Google will flag it in it's indexing. The report took is here:


http://www.google.com/safebrowsing/report_badware/


But what if Google were to open up a division devoted to reporting anonymous defamers who were bent on circumventing responsible posting? A tool could be useful to report those who would use multiple anonymous technologies to attack the reputations of others, and who were using this technology to avoid consequences. It would not take much effort on the part of Google to be able to screen for violations provided the sites use pseudonyms, and make statements about character. It is easy to spot those sites that violate this federal legal principle:


"Whoever...utilizes any device or software that can be used to originate telecommunications or other types of communications that are transmitted, in whole or in part, by the Internet... without disclosing his identity and with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten,or harass any person...who receives the communications...shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than two years, or both."


( If this law means one thing it is that those who do this are felons.

(In my case, doing my own research have identified them all, and so they are now felons with names.)


If Google was involved The sites could then be shut down. Or specific articles could be tagged as potentially defamatory within in the Google index. Each instance of this type of defamation, is a separate felony.




Tools of the Trade


Anonymous abusers, and Cyber bullies can use technologies like http://www.proxyway.com to hide their IP addresses, or http://www.hidemyass.com/- they also use anonymous re mailers to open up bloging accounts .Combined with pseudonyms, these are three layers of defense.


If Google got involved by developing such features as report tools, and perhaps if they advised other log hosts such as Zimbio, Wordpress, and Mindsay to incorporate policies to discourage this type of activity - then it would decrease. And as a result there'd be less reliance on resources such as lawyers, and reputation defenders...and less of a risk that the courts being swamped by defamation law suits..


Many people have dealt with stalkers and Internet abusers and crime by employing Internet Vigilantes, but these groups are incapable of discriminating the real "victims," vs. the "victimizers," and given the level of coordination of the vigilante attacks, and experience at trolling, the supposed victimizers." -in theory -can and will be the "innocents" who are mauled in a feeding frenzy. The above group has a blood lust. If they could kill their targets, they would.


Mistakes are inevitable, probable, and the role they assume is Godlike and presumptuous. Mistakes should never occur because the model is flawed. They can't do what they do because they are not a court, they are not psychologists, and they don't do research, and could never do the required research. In short, they hold reputation and character at no premium. They are essentially corrupt individuals on a power trip. In addition,.the ethics of such groups and supposed victims advocates groups, and exposure sites - are wrong as well. They use the "ethics of utility" ( to deal with their targets. doing wrong to right their own perception of wrong. Judge, and Jury Executioner played out in cyberspace, by egoists and idiots.)


They flagrantly break the law that was signed into effect by President Bush in December of 2006..


Victims advocates groups do not name the"victim."`or themselves, but they do name their targets. They name their relatives, their children, employers, and wives. Multiple anonymous identities deny authorship. They cannot even guarantee that what they say is true, or even probably true. But they say it anyway. They feel safe in playing "Judge Judy." or Internet supermen even diagnose their targets on line. They think they approximate justice on line. They can never do that on-line. They can never do the required research accurately and they don't feel they need to....The "victims" can often be the real victimizers, but the real victim is at the mercy of their touchy feelly assessments.


As we write all of these vigilante/exposure sites continue to break federal laws.


The Vigilantes don't tolerate any criticism and will launch massive campaigns to squelch it at blog aggregators, thereby confusing the support team, pouring all kinds of pathos into their complaints. They have that down to a science. They are successful at creating illusions of massive support when it is only a few of them complaining, using different IPS and handles. If they are successful, and the victim of their attacks moves to a new locations, they cite the prior shutdown, as a reason to shut down talk back at the next location. In my case they convinced the support teams that my answer to their defamations was the instigating post. "And he was shut down by this blog host, using this url xyz. html, ". They are impostors who fax all kinds of legal sounding complaints.


I cite EOPC Vigilante's as example... ( I agreed not to use their name–although I should not have agreed, as they are criminal, but so as to avoid another massive misinformation campaign I will refrain. )


Intuitively we know that such sites would never be so courageous as to employ the"civil disobedience" arguments when seriously confronted...they'd "walk the walk only so far," while posting their high minded rational for felonious activity. If federal laws had teeth they'd fold. In many cases these Internet vigilantes are worse than their targets. From the nightmarish experiences I have had with one group the subject a blog I had at Word press, and at Blogger, this is definitely the case.


There are many variants of such websites that manifest opportunism by enabling defamers One example is DatingPsychos.A website run by a 28 year old computer geek from California who calls himself "J Dog" Those disgruntled in their relationships can defame their former lovers with impunity, JDog provides a "Tabula Raza," on which the enraged can vent their spleens to get even with former lovers. Virtually all of the information that site is defamatory, made anonymously ( and is therefore felonious,) and to remove it, Jdog pretends to be too busy to do it for free, instead he resorts to extortion.


(There is an error made in Jdog's age, he is older now, he has also been identified. I have issues with him, resulting from residual issues with EOPC and the Brits involved, see here: http://thetoylanders.blogspot.com/ this son of gun may very well be sued, and he might set might set a president)


(A lovely fellow? Not! The Internet Vigilantes use him to propagate defamations in Google because his site ranks high. That is until I identified several of them through J dog,and now Jdog is their target. J dog is the more likable of the two,in that he is obvious, and makes no pretense at being anything other than an opportunist. But the vigilantes make pretense of high mindlessness hypocrisy of the group that defamed me was astounding. And the individuals who defamed me for the sake of an actual narcissist, are sicker than the I can see these people driving people to suicide, and celebrating it. That is precisely how low they are really are.)


Internet vigilantes presume to distinguish :”victim” from “victimizer” when this is hard to do in court. They do it without research, and they are unable to do the required research, therefore, their behavior is malicious, and contemptuous of law, and civility. The attacks of the vigilantes in my case were a feeding frenzy, a public lynching, where not even my children were spared.


They sexually attacked my children, and me. Smeared my wife. Smeared all of my family at Mindsay, Zimbio and Blog catalog, and many other blog aggregators. And they rationalized all of it.


They engaged in hackery, theft, made threats,etc. They supported veiled threats to my person. Made their own threats. , It was a nightmare that lasted six months, until some legal authorities got involved. The group that smeared me has stolen their way into the blog aggregators with pretty pictures and the look of officialdom. It has assumed the self appointed position of Internet police. They conduct trials on-line. and assassinate character, and they are doing it still,unlawfully with impunity, protecting themselves from prosecution in their anonymity.


They impersonated licensed professionals in this state: a former director of nurses, in my case , and smeared me and my child on-line in the nurses name. The woman who complained to the vigilantes to spare herself being labeled psycho of the century, knew of my legal issues with a former employer and was in possession of legal documents that i sent her in trust, which she said she'd erased, along with emails I sent that she agreed to erase from our relationship in 2007. She lied in saying she'd erased all of this, and forwarded all of my personal info to the vigilantes.


They impersonated the nurse with an agenda, a diabolical agenda, to get me to write on her, so as to get me sued - the words they put in her mouth were puerile. So hideously evil, they hoped I would write on the exchange. .


I almost fell for it, until I realized that a professional would never say what they had her saying. They threatened to block justice in civil employment case, unrelated to either the sociopath they championed, or themselves – and discussed the merits of the pending case on line. The vile conception of the real sociopathic personality herself, They engaged in hackery ( they put key loggers on my computer and spy ware. They are guilty of theft and many more hideous activities....(sexual smears of children is child abuse, my kids did see those comments. They sent the lawyer involved in the civil employment case links to their articles, in an effort to prejudice opinion of their client. They encouraged their "client" to go to the group where we met, and, defame me to everyone there. (she did, and she was ejected from the group.)






The vigilantes continued to attack me, even when they eventually realized they were advocating for two sociopaths from Scotland. Whom I'd initially reported to them, thinking myself that the vigilantes were a simple support group. I had no intent to publish the report using names of photos, I wanted validation, as at the time I was foolish enough to doubt myself. The Scottish criminals were using my report of them for welfare fraud as another motive to attack me. The woman in question, has a pathology hitting on married men, with a long history of same. Something of a sexual manipulator, and user. Her use of me caused serious damage to many.) Even when they saw here lies tumble town with the evidence I supplied, the pressed on in their defamations ignoring these proofs. Welfare fraud was virtually proved for example, but they claimed she was cleared, despite the fact that the woman would not sign a release for the results of the investigation. They said I hit on her, seduced her, made her do things, but it was proved to be quite the opposite. They ignored her frank sex harassment on line months before by saying this : "what did you do to deserve that." It seemed the more I disproved what the woman said, the more zealous they were in spreading their story, they went to twelve log hosts, and saturated Google with 5 pages of negative content. The woman's testimony was being destroyed, and I'd wager that even she wanted her story taken down at some point, and a few of these vigilantes resisted.


It was as though the volume of their lies would eventually win the day, but as some of them were being identified, they were forced to remove the content, and they did it without a word of apology.


If they blogged using a Civil Disobedience argument, they would boldly post their names, and so when they invoke the concept, they are hypocrites. Very often the vigilante provides emails and addresses, phone of the people they target, exposing their victims to potential violence. They do it to impress their “clients” and exact their revenge, a dangerous level of exposure for their targets.


One vigilante group member who pretends not to be part of the group, a counselor, who specializes in abusive relationships- applauds such sites - or so the most pernicious leader of one vigilante group would have us believe. ( The counselor herself was commenting out side of her anonymous identity, She does this often, she will write as a vigilante, and comment on how wonderful her own vigilante article is as the professional who names herself. That she participated in the mayhem warrants the removal of her license. Since her participation violates her ethics code. )


Yet, If a counselor believes in J dog, or in vigilantes - that their law breaking is in anyway an answer,then we have to wonder about the counselor's thought process. Actually there is no wonder, she's nuts.


Vigilante sites and J dog, are breaking laws. Utility doesn't apply here. You don't fight what you think is abuse with abuse. You fight it with the law, and as was pointed out earlier, it is impossible to tell who the real abuser is...especially if the abuse is Internet based. By logic, it isn't possible to know discriminate real abusers from the abused, any more than it is possible to truly know somebody from emails and chats.


But regarding law suits as remedies...two years ago a MS, an owner of a school referral service in Florida, successfully sued CB, a destitute mother, for 11 million dollars for Internet defamation. She described her life leading up to the trial as a nightmare, in a CNN When for all of the negative information that was available on the Internet regarding her...she said she felt isolated her own house,afraid to go out, wondering what neighbors think...and so on. This is certainly understandable, because this is the kind of damage the Internet can do...the Internet has real World effects.


And I have no doubt she was feeling that way,however. she was successfully sued for 468,000 one year later,defending essentially the same allegations brought against her by CB ,e.g., that there were abuses occurring in schools MS was referring to children to...


But it seems that after the first legal remedy CB still has issues with MS and vice versa, proving one point, that it even with law suits, it's possible the abuser would win: And it is at least it is difficult to determine where the problem is in a court. But regardless of the outcome, MS was afforded a luxury, she knew who her accuser....but what is to be done when the accusers are anonymous, and they function only because they can break federal laws to escape defamation and civil action?


I will quote one individual who wrote me about her experiences with the anonymous vigilante group. (Ms, had an issue with this individual too, and characterized her as illiterate and sociopathic, she did not impress me that way.)


" By defending myself, I was letting the harassers know that these things bothered me and this gave them more power. I met with a Violence Against Women counselor fall and she expressed that I should remove all instances referring to the harassment from the web. My past employers have also been contacted by these people to try and validate their claims by"outing" my so-called harassment of them (many officials said that they are doing it to themselves to create afalse-sense of importance and victim-complex). I refuse to empower these types by "fueling their fires". I contacted my local Stalking Unit of the Los Angeles police department, perhaps there is a unit in your area similar to this. The problem being: there are no truly enabled technology departments to combat this type of stalking."


Anonymous defamations, harassments and slurs engender impotent rage and a sense of hopelessness for which the only remedy -it appears - is noble transcendence such as is expressed here. But one can transcend and change the world too - through activism. Wanton libel needs to be recognized and punished. Given the number of friends and relatives who review these defamations, and potential employers - again, employers check Google,- passive acceptance is difficult because the damage is potentially severe.


My perception of my experience showed me how humans can behave worse than animals. There was something sinister and satanic about the behavior.


What they did was so vile, the incredulity of their actions that becomes their defense (e,g, “nobody could do anything that bad, and so they could not have done it.” But – they did do it. These vigilantes appear one way (experts on Internet abuse, qualified to use diagnostic terms, educated, do gooders) but they have shown me they are something else:. liars, cheats, and bigots with a criminal bent.


The are actually afflicted with Cyberpathy and they are Internet addicts. Addicted to their power and reflected image. They are self important.


They seduce members, people the immediately label irresponsible “victims.” robbing them of locus of control “you are helpless victimized.” The main members are leftist women, those who have a penchant for blame shifting to men. They project their own problems onto new members as if their experience must be identical to their own. And this is done on no input from the other side, and no research, its a touchy feelly distinction the make: “I identify with this person so I will not apply critical thought to their testimony.”


They have an agenda to suck information and money from people. They cloak all that they do in official sounding psychobabble. They diagnose illegally on line, and yet none is qualified. They cannot do what the truly qualified cannot do, on line – diagnose..


As it is difficult enough for the qualified to do in person. They encapsulate with labels. Not just one but many - socially ostracizing labels.


They use techniques the Nazi's used in the 30's. Smears. The Stalinist did the same against dissidents, sending millions to the Gulags. (In Russia people were employed to accuse others of disloyalty, as there was quota established by Stalin that so many needed to be sent to the gulags per month in order to maintain a chain of fear from the top down. This is how Stalin maintained control. The vigilantes see themselves as the standard bearers for the Internet culture, and so so it is they who apply the scarlet letter to whom ever they please. This is their narcissism projected into cyberspace.


And this process is a power trip for the evil they have incarnated cyberspace. It's an evil called “fighter” The core members of this group are sick. It's main weapon is “The Label” And that application leads to the process of dehumanization, that justifies all of their actions.


In the 1950's people were labeled communists, and the social effect was disastrous. It lead to personal destruction for the wrongly accused. The process has an historical precedent. These are techniques the vigilantes use to dehumanize, as, the labels they chose to apply makes them

feel justified to do anything they want to do to their target.


Cyberpath, sociopath, sex addict, paranoid, psychotic, schizoid, schizotypal, dissociative, ranting raving malignant narcissist, narcissist, voyeur, stalker, harasser. predator These were some of the labels they used on me, but there were many more used, in fact they were running out of diagnosis. The person applying most, is a welfare mother in NY.

A complete fruitcake. The problem was, that as the story unfolded, hard evidence was disproving all of the testimony of their supposed victim. In fact, her whole story was falling apart. What was especially revelatory is the fact that they didn't research anything she said. Not one thing she said was true.


Here, is a typical type of statements they made to justify these labels:


“She was faithful to her first husband for 7 years before she married him”


Let's look at that statement. How do they know if it is true or untrue?

But this statement was deception. She was involved with a married man twice her age, when she was a teenager, and when she convinced him to leave his wife and marry her, she cheated on him with the married boss.


I have recently re-read their documents and found 125 false statements. And most could have easily been checked. For example they said

“Gary Stone has no copyrighted works anywhere in the world”

They never checked the copyright office. There are well over 30 there since 1982.

They said “we did a quick check and found she was not guilty of welfare fraud”

They could not do a quick check and verify that, the welfare department has the results of the welfare fraud investigation locked up in DSS. Nobody can get those results without signed release or subpoena. In fact, I challenged them to have her sign a release, if I'd filed a false report, proving her innocence. They grew silent. The woman would not sign a release.)


They said I hit on this woman in a group where we met and lured her into chat.

No, I had no chat account anywhere, never used chat. The woman wanted me in chat and took two weeks to get me there, as I resisted.

This woman has a history of hitting on 7 married men. Her own brother called my wife, saying “she destroys families, the family can't control her, she goes after married men.


The woman was the predator and still is.... But the female predator does not suit the politics of this group, as one of it's main members is a predator and a stalker, and virtually all of the members are female. I could go on with the false statements but there's little point. The woman's story began to collapse, and the blogs were taken down, but if I did not fight them for 10 months, their “diagnoses, and smears” would still be on line saturating six pages of Google.



The group slings mud to see what sticks. They don't spare even the wives and children of their targets. They especially love sexual smears. And for the shear number of instances of this type of abuse they have revealed their abject perversion. In short, they are scum. The people they target are saintly by comparison. They are so sick, they need to attract to the sick to them. And they do.


If they succeed in gaining unquestioned acceptance, their power could be used to political advantage. They could label political candidates and thereby influence elections. Or, they could generate cyberhits on character for renumeration. Or, they will target someone who reports a story for to them for the simple reason that they need to have a story for that month. The core members of the group are getting even with the world, for the blame they have shifted to the world for the mess in their own personal lives. Indeed some of their targets are people with whom they have had personal relationships.


But for Google's lack of involvement - none of this would have happened to me and they would have been shut down much earlier...if legal authorities really understood what they have done, they would be shut down and prosecuted. For those who might be tempted to use vigilantes ...Do not get sucked in.


This group is Dangerous


They could just as easily turn on the people they advocate for...The core people themselves have pointed the finger outward, having become conscious of their own disease, and deviation from the from they truth. The awareness is so intolerable to them, they seek information about the pathology of others to deflect their own awareness away from their own vileness. They validate one another in their own corruption. It's always “someone else.” to blame. Somebody made them do it. And that somebody is their own invention - The Cyberpath. And the Cyberpath is what they are.


This mythical critter who assumes responsibility for all of their behavior. Once they label someone, anything they do is rationalized...and they will do anything, and justify it. - even to the point of hiring a sociopathic "legal authority" (Not authorities really, the vigilantes use that term to describe cheap private investigators who will work their story, regardless, if enough money is put in their pockets..) These agents are as pathological as they are...these types bilk people for money making false promises of legal merit in cases against The Cyberpath.. The "legal" people they used on me are really a bunch of creeps, who wanted me to hire them to go after the vigilantes. This proved that they have no more loyalty to them than Jdog did the datingpsychos.com owner.


.J dog sold the identity of one of the vigilantes for money.


When Jdog is the most morally evolved of all ... that is not saying anything.; .We've been from the original creeps to their advocates, through jerks like J dog, and the sham "legal authorities."


The vile aggregate with the vile.


The private eyes threatened me in the morning for writing this article based on a phone call from one of the original abusers. This was a call I predicted he'd make to the private eyes associate. So I cleared the article through him so as to make a general account of my experience and what I had learned. This weirdo who hired the private eyes had been stalking this website looking for trouble. The idea was to preempt him. so they would find no excuse to republish their defamations after taking them down.



The call was made by the same individual who conceived of the sexual smear of my daughter. " he's at it again." he said to the private eye. Well, no - he wasn't. And what was "he" at before? Except exposing his vile lies and answering them, disproving them, while he and his former wife and the vigilantes were busy attempting to shut down my answers to them at many blog hosts and aggregators and blog hosts.


That bastard is headed to hell, dragging those around him with him. In fact - it would not phase me not one bit to republish the whole spiel with new evidence exposing more of the vigilantes. I couldn't care less now. My articles were simply answers to their defamations. But I will leave it alone - if they do - with this caveat: I will be monitoring them, and I will expose their names and all of their tricks everywhere on the Internet, if they do this to anyone else. I have filed my report at ic3.gov, and in the event another victim wants to call me as a witness at the DOJ or the FBI, I will testify.


And I will also join any class action civil suit filed against them.


This the ex patriot American Brit who was reported for welfare fraud, and for being illegal is one of the main culprits in this. His actions with eopc were vendetta. He was trying to win favors with his former wife, trying to impress her. This illegal creep was trying to use criminal charges to shore up a civil suit which he conceived a year ago. His approach has been criminal in itself . He argued my emails to him and his former wife were harassing. They were responses to crimes they were committing, When they instigated, they'd get an email. One they could easily block. Then they'd count the emails. And say “see there he sent an email”


This jerk has hacked my email, my on line accounts. He has removed prices from sales items, intruded into my computer, stalked my websites, attacked a civil employment case. He has stolen all of my financial information, copyrighted works and personal email legal documents, and subsequently used the latter to sabotage a legal case that he has nothing to do with.. In short he's a crook, despised his former wife's family for his abandonment of her, his ill temper, unpleasantness and non support.


But as for the emails, They were actually enjoying them. They celebrated them. They counted them. They instigated them They pulled other covert tricks to incite them, including the above, but in addition, they stole files. modified them. and maintained malicious scripts on their website which included 4 level five scripts capable stealing passwords. Her husband is a hacker. They intruded on my computer attacked it.

What undid the woman's story was her own arrogance and criminality. She hacked my Google email and saw no emails from her there, so she then felt confident in all of her lies. But she forgot that about another computer which she believed to be irretrievably damaged. The hard drive was still good. So in January of 2009 her lies were being disproved one by one with hard evidence..

And once I got to Google, they could not shut me down, as, Google will not get involved.

They ended up exposing not only themselves, but they exposed the anonymous vigilantes as fools and bigots who researched none of their story. The vigilantes were tricked by this woman, as I was.


Even her own husband, this trickster that I mentioned earlier said I was played by her:

“You should have learned from her history”


But as I am concerned she and the group and those who who championed this nut case are simply evil people. The idea that there are evil people is obvious. This is what the evil people do. They quietly incite, and then skew the picture, they manipulate others. But, the emails were not felonious, because they were not anonymous. . His activity was.

The emails were in response to his criminal activity- his sex smears of my kids, his vile concept to contaminate civil employment case, his theft and hacker, stealing files, his uses of malware - his libel. Nearly all are real crimes.


His motive is my report of him for welfare fraud, and the fact that with that report, I mentioned the possibility he could be illegal in the UK. As for welfare, he's as guilty as hell. According to his own wife, he's a life long drug addict, and an irresponsible father who put his wife and child on welfare because he has one other child to support by another marriage. Per his wife, he was five years arrears in support, probably more, and encouraged his wife to cheat the system twice, as well as perjure herself in divorce court - telling the judge, she didn't know where he was, forcing the British government to raise his child.


Two years before the divorce, they colluded so his wife would say the same thing to the child support agency, so that he would not have to pay for his child's support. Per his wife, he was “probably” in the UK. That was reported, as it was told to me. And both were reported because they callously involved me and my family. And because they stole all of my personal and financial information, personal emails and copyrighted works.


And - it was all investigated on my report. So this is his clever way of getting even. But he's dug his own hole a little wider, and a little deeper. As his instigations and hers, have been reported. There's lots more information I could still send, and I have every reason to send it, as the fruity female is still taunting me at sound click with some of most perverse recordings Ive ever heard. These recordings are so sick, it is a puzzlement to me, as why she isn't embarrassed by them. But has her husband said, “she's not all there.”



Having no real case, he thought he'd fabricate a criminal case but he was led on by shysters. My blogs on this pair were step wise responses to her criminal activity on line. Answers to felonious defamation, and aggressive destructive plotting. The major problem started when I was sexually harassed by her at soundclick.com in April of 2008, this was done after she and the former husband stole my financial information and copyrighted works. She and he were living with the woman's mother, he was employed, she was not, and she drew full government support, compromising her own mother.


I have enough info on that pair to bury them forever in civil and criminal charges, and it might well come to that pending key information..and if they continue to aggravate this situation.. But this article is a generic article where nobody is named. He knew he could set off the other more hot headed private eye. This Scottish imbecile isn't aware that his chain is being jerked too by the private eyes.


That same hot head "legal authority" wanted money in the afternoon, to go after the vigilantes. And perhaps even the original creeps if there was enough money involved. They wanted me to quickly send them 1500.00 retainer I am glad I didn't, as I seriously believe I would have been financing a weekend toot, or worse, the case against myself – this may have been the plan manipulated by the two Scots..


I'd been alternately bullied and solicited by these private eye guys. They got the vigilantes blogs on me down, but I suppose they really wanted them down, as three of the anonymous vigilantes were positively identified by me..and now I have a fourth. And while I do not want to waste any more of my life on these people, I will file charges if they resurrect their attacks. One thing is certain though, I am lending my evidence against them, if they are caught doing this again, and the victim needs my support. The original creeps.. the vigilantes, and J dog, are all liars, and thieves. It's as though they have no choice but to lie, to cover the last lie, and the one before that. Their whole lives are lies. And with each passing day, they corrupt themselves more.


The experience I had warrants a little social commentary here because it is these types of people who are responsible for most social ills..


There are so many people like this. And so many people enabling them - that society is coming unglued.


They have been so busy divesting people of autonomy, encouraging people to give up and blame their lives on external Boogie men - encouraging the people they enable to see them as the solution. These are the people who fail to see the connection to society as a whole. They precipitate such things as economic disasters and the social pathologies, by creating politics that reinforce their own deviant lifestyles. Women in some ways are the worst culprits because they have the emotional tools to manipulate leniency. . Somebody made the criminal do it. Welfare dependency, etc. creating social confusion that they can hide in, they are the VICTIMS. But but they really are is skilled victimizers playing the victim role for it's mileage, to escape consequences. There may be equal opportunity for women in the workplace now, but – there aren't equal opportunity punishments for crimes. And the reason I'd expect relates to some biological protectionism.


I suppose the female vigilantes have ignored the fact of 4 billion dollars of welfare fraud in Britain. Much of it due to false claims by woman. They ignore the female role in pornography, romance scams, drug dealing, prostitution, etc. And this is simply because THEY are female, and therefore, these facts are ignored. The men make them do it.

s

These are the types that steal from welfare, or create psychos dramas in work places by throwing histrionic fits to get their way, or by hitting on people they work with. The administrations caters to to these displays, because they don't know how else to cope, except to appease. And this is how this type advances itself. . They a-moralists. who define morals as they go along, they make exceptions of themselves. They are the “special cases.” They do what they do, for the greater good.


The rule “don't get involved with married men, or don't hit on people you work with” don't matter to them, because it doesn't suit their interests. Every year they cost companies millions. And they cost governments millions more, from welfare deceptions, they cost the courts, and other social systems


But it is “they” who are corrupt. And they defend with female guile or hysteria's or histrionics. They have an extraordinary sense of entitlement.


They are part of are the real reason for the economic woes we have now. Catering to their hysteria's in work environs, companies have to cope with the aftermaths of their numerous affairs, the defection of a coworker, or the termination of this sick individual. Courts have to deal with their hysterical law suits or threats of same. The female I spoke of, will usually go after males in a work environment, the one who is in a position of power, to them this means instant success, Her tool is seduction. They care not one wit for the wife and children of the employee. And usually because of these types, somebody is fired. Then somebody has to be replaced. . Dealing with the traumas they impart to families – or, to their own children, to whom they pass on no moral values. Is an assured social cost


Yes, woman can be predators, they can be psychos, and they can be sociopaths, stalkers. Their numbers are simply underreported. And in the case of this bigoted group, the female sociopath, doesn't exist.


Yet history is replete with evidence of that. And they are getting away with it, because they know how to play the victim role, the blame shifting of some woman is down to a science. Perfected, and very effective. The educated female predator is the most dangerous type there is and this woman is in this category. Highly intelligent, and a professional victim since the age of 21.


But the main members of the group I cite here are as histrionic and successful at playing sexual politics as she she is..


They are hypocrites on surreal power trip.


But if nothing else is proved it should be that there should be no trust on the Internet or in what appear to be Internet authorities, or in individuals.. And that is sad, because they spoil it for the good people on line and the conscious.


While this victim that I quoted (above) does not want to confront the cowardly and felonious Internet vigilantes who have targeted her...I feel it it is more my style to deal with it using the pen. And by making reasoned appeals to authorities and Internet providers. The puerile abuses I have suffered at the hands of several individuals and an Internet vigilante group, masquerading as advocates, needs to be addressed legally and in writing...hopefully the necessary technologies and policies will be employed by Google and blog because the best answer is with Google, and other blog hosts. The blog host to respond immediately (MindSay.com is the most lax, Zimbio the best.) to this phenomenon. And Google needs to answer the phone.




I do believe the Karmic debt will be paid. But I will not be paying it. They will. May the right win out, and the wrong suffer proportionate to their offenses..

I mentioned in my prelude up top that this group sabotaged a civil case to please this woman. They did it in three ways


A summary of how the Scottish woman, her former husband, and the vigilantes destroyed my civil case is here, I have left out other facts. For example, mentioning their opinion of the case on various forums, and posting to Jdog's site, that I was a frivolous law suit filer.It was the NY welfare mother who made that statement, but, naturally her opinion was more competent tnan the EEOC or the MCAD, both of whim cleared the case for court. The emotion this act generates in me is not one I can put words to...it is not a word for the emotions the engender. Because there is not a word, to describe what it feels like to be in the presence of evil. I can't wrap my mind around the scale of the evil involved. And, I don't know what else I can do about it. It is very difficult to live with it. But I want the reader to know and understand, and allow for the possibility, that what I am describing, is, in fact, an encouter with the demonic. I believe it is manifest in the woman, her husband and this group, and I hoping some day others will see it.

  1. contacted my lawyer anonymously

  2. threatened to contact the witnesses and admin anonymously

  3. wrote five articles that smeared me and broadcast them all over the Internet

  4. maximized search criteria on one page so that the company lawyer would see it, knowing full well he was searching the Internet

  5. Posed as witnesses, a director of nurses and threatened the case

  6. made an anonymous call to Boston and claimed I was willing to settle the case, mentioning details only the woman could know (passed to her vigilantes) this made it mandatory she be deposed as a witness. And since she targeted the case to begin with, my lawyer said she would lie. I asked my lawyer to pull the case, as it was no longer a civil employment case, it was to corrupted by this woman - who was an ex post facto affair, and by her vigilante's. This is the first time Justice has been affected by anonymously freaks operating as evil avatars in cyberspace. The whole incident was reported to Ic3.gov and to British authorities. So, I suppose now you see, how dangerous these people are, and how dangerous they will become if people simply accept them. Somebody needs to say: NO! Because of their interference and because of the necessity to deal with this matter in a legal way, so that I could continue to function as a nurse, I have withdrawn from the nursing field completely. They not only damaged the justice system, they destroyed my career.

This Article (below describes my experience with them. it is the article they hate. It orginally did not name anyone except the EOPC group Now it does, They are the "watchers" need to be watched. And, they are watching everyone .   There is one other
article that gauls them at the hub called The Malignant Power of Anonymous Defamation.
It describes how the mechanics of Google
can be used by criminals like this, to ruin a persons life. Barbara Ness was involved with Elaine Smith's sex harassment at Soundclick
and at facebook, their goal is dominion at facebook, they is no depth to which they]
won't sink to prevent others from knowing
what they really are. Look forward to more
information coming out by early/ mid summer 2012. They'd like you to think, I'm the only one with an issue.