Cost of CyberCrime in the U.K. = £390million (U.S. $646Million)

Businesses have been warned that internet crime is costing Wales around £390m a year.

The revelation comes as about 400 business leaders and experts gather for a summit to tackle the growing problem.

The event, organised by e-Crime Wales, brings together the assembly government, experts and police forces.

It says cyber crime can hit unlikely victims, like Nefyn and District Golf Club in Gwynedd, which was targeted by hackers from the former Soviet Union.

Criminals from ex-Soviet bloc countries such as Latvia and Estonia set their sights on the club on the Lleyn peninsula last year.

"What they were trying to to is hack into the computer system and steal data," explained Simon Dennis, the club secretary.

"We were somewhat shocked that organised crime, which in essence is what is behind these types of attacks, would target somewhere like Nefyn and District Golf Club.

"Initially, we thought it was somewhat of a hoax, whereby groups of youngsters etc, would be trying to break in to the system.

"But once we were able to back-check and validate the addresses, we found it was [coming] from the former Soviet Union - and that's when we really took the threat quite seriously."

The golf club managed to fight off the cyber attacks, without its data being compromised.

Danger signs
But dealing with the e-criminals came at a price. The club had to hire a computer specialist to beef up its technical security, landing it with a bill of more than £10,000.

It was a classic example of what can happen in the speedy world of electronic communications, according to e-crime Wales.

“ People are aware that there are problems out there, but I don't think they ever truly believe it is going to happen to them ”
Acting Det Sgt Andrea Barnard, e-Crime Wales

"I think the issue with the internet is who is responsible for what, in terms of safety, in terms of security, in terms of ownership," argued Simon Lavin, e-Crime Wales' strategic planning manager, who put the estimated cost of cyber crime at about £390m.

"If you use the analogy of road safety, I think we've all got used to it over the last 100 or so years that the car has been around.

"In terms of the internet, that's not clear at all.

"If you went in to town on a Friday night, you wouldn't walk down a dark alley, you recognise a dark alley as being dangerous.

"In the field of e-crime people don't recognise the danger signs."

In the push to get its message over, this year's e-Crime Wales summit is attracting speakers from the FBI, Interpol, and computer giant Microsoft.

It is also an opportunity for Wales' first e-crime police team manager to offer her advice.

'Stay safe'
Acting Det Sgt Andrea Barnard of North Wales Police recently took up the post, becoming a point of contact for businesses, the police and the assembly government.

"I think people are aware that there are problems out there, but I don't think they ever truly believe it is going to happen to them," she explained.

"Therefore they don't act, they don't take measures to protect themselves from e-crime.

"I would just like businesses in north Wales to be aware that e-crime can happen to anybody.

"But having said that - for them not to be totally frightened by that. Come and seek advice.

"Come and have a chat to us and we can explain the fundamentals of e-crime and how to stay safe."

original post here

Craigslist Isn't Liable for Erotic Services Ads

By Eric Goldman

Dart v. Craigslist, Inc., 09 C 1385 (N.D. Ill. Oct. 20, 2009)

Yesterday, Judge John F. Grady of the Northern District of Illinois federal court dismissed Cook County Sheriff Dart's lawsuit against Craigslist for user-posted advertisements in Craigslist's erotic services/adult services category on 47 USC 230 grounds. This is hardly surprising, as I wrote in March that "this lawsuit is almost certainly preempted by 47 USC 230." However, it was nice to see such a clean and decisive opinion--and a little ironic, as our law enforcement officials, who are supposed to enforce the laws rather than bypass them, got schooled in the limits of their legal authority.

With respect to the 230 analysis, the court characterizes Sheriff Dart's claims as alleging that Craigslist negligently published the user-supplied ads. The court says that the Seventh Circuit implicitly said that 230 preempted such claims in the 2008 CLC v. Craigslist case. To get around this, Sheriff Dart tried a Roommates.com styled attack, arguing that Craigslist induced the users' advertisements by creating an erotic/adult services category and letting users do keyword searches. These arguments go nowhere (making this yet another case where Roommates.com is cited for the defense). An adult services category can legitimately contain postings for legal services, and the keyword search functionality was agnostic about the illegality of the search and therefore a "neutral tool" (whatever that meant from Roommates.com).

Two other interesting doctrinal notes from the opinion: * In FN 6, the court reiterates that 230 preempts a civil action to enforce a federal criminal statute. See Doe v. Bates.

* the court rejects arguments that Craigslist "arranges" meetings for prostitution, "directs" people to prostitution or "provides" contact info for prostitutes because, in all three cases, the user-supplied ad (if anything) satisfies those verbs. Similarly, Craigslist's role in "facilitating," "assisting" or "aiding and abetting" these user activities is governed by 230. I believe this is consistent with my view that 230 should preempt any claim that one party "endorses" third party online content.

Given some ambiguous language floating in Seventh Circuit 230 jurisprudence from the CLC v. Craigslist case and the old Doe v. GTE case, it wouldn't surprise me if Sheriff Dart tried an appeal. However, this opinion was solidly reasoned and completely consistent with that jurisprudence, so I wouldn't expect a different result on appeal.

original article here

Could You Be a Stalker's Next Victim?

By Claire O'Boyle

Following a shocking report into the problem of stalking, we look at how police deal with the crime and how in one woman's case, they ended years of abuse from a stranger.


It's a crime that usually hits the headlines when it's linked to A-list celebs, but falling prey to a stalker is something that never crosses most of our minds.

But recent figures show it's on the rise, with a shocking 1 million British women and 900,000 men being targeted by predatory stalkers.

The biggest problem in tackling the crime, according to experts, is that stalking is simply not taken seriously enough in the UK.

Jane Harvey from the Network for Surviving Stalking (NSS) says: "Victims of stalking often try to shrug it off until it is too late, but the main problem is that the authorities don't take it seriously."

A report carried out for NSS found 77% of victims waited until they were targeted 100 times before going to the authorities.

"That's much too long," says Jane. "It's amazing what levels of abuse people will put up with - they don't identify the abuse as stalking.

"They tell themselves that if they ignore it, things will fizzle out. But if something happens or you are contacted repeatedly in a way that causes you alarm or distress, that is stalking."

Jane says around 50% of all cases are carried out by ex-partners, but in the other half of cases, victims have never had particularly close relationships with their stalkers - and many have never even met

them. "It can often be someone known through work, or a friend of a friend," explains Jane. "In other cases it could be someone you pass in the street.

"And with the internet as huge as it is, sometimes people never set eyes on their stalker."

Jane says one of the main problems is that so many of us are brought up to be polite and kind, and rather than rebuff unwanted attention, we often let it go.

"It means sometimes we find ourselves in slightly awkward situations and don't make it clear that we're unhappy," says Jane.

"For example, with repeated text messages from someone we don't know well, we might reply politely to one or two.

"Then after that we might ignore them, when perhaps the best, although not necessarily the easiest, thing to do is say you do not want any more texts." The latest figures relating to the number of victims in the UK are terrifying.

"Victims must get the help they need," says Jane. "Until you speak to someone who has been stalked, you never fully understand how terrifying it is.

"One man I've talked to is being stalked online. The stalker seems determined to wreck his life - he spreads lies about him on forums and chat sites.

"It's extremely distressing, this man is being used as a plaything for the stalker's amusement."

According to the law, if any unwanted or abusive acts happen on two occasions, you can go to the authorities.

Despite this guidance, the police came under fire in light of the report, and one senior officer even said forces have let victims down.

However, according to Jane, the police can be fantastic in some areas, while other victims are left floundering on their own. "It sounds like a cliche, but this is another postcode lottery," she says. "But at least now, the issue is on the agenda, and the good work done by some forces can roll-out across the UK."

One victim who had a positive experience with the police was mum-of-two Alexis Bowater, whose dangerous stalker Alexander Reeve was jailed for four years last April.

"I knew from the very first email this guy wasn't right," recalls Alexis, 39.

"I was working as a news anchor on a local TV station, ITV Westcountry, and these horrible emails came in. Some were so graphic and frightening I don't want to repeat what they said. I told my boss about the first one, and we told the police almost immediately."

The menacing messages, threatening rape and violence, chipped away steadily, telling a pregnant and petrified Alexis, "I'm watching you," and, "I know where you live".

"He was clever in the way he wrote the emails," says Alexis. "You couldn't tell if he really knew anything or if he was actually watching me. Not knowing was the most frightening part."

To the news presenter's relief, the messages slowed down when she went on maternity leave to have her first child.

But when she came back and went on screen, visibly pregnant for a second time, the emails resumed and were more menacing this time.

"It was worse with my second pregnancy," she recalls. "He sent obscene, horrible messages about me, and he was threatening my unborn baby. He said he hoped my baby would die."

Alexis became increasingly anxious throughout her pregnancy as fears about her stalker's intentions grew.

"I sometimes did late shifts at work and would have to drive myself home at 11pm," she says. "I remember taking detours because I thought someone was following me.

"I noticed someone tailgating me a couple of times, but I'll never know if it was him.

"People talk about this state of hyper vigilance you get into when you're being stalked, and I'm sure I was there.

"One night when I was pregnant again, my first baby woke me in the night. My husband was away for work and I went into the baby's room to comfort him. I heard a creaking on the stairs and thought: 'It's fine, I'll just get my mobile and call for help'. But my phone was in my bedroom. I'd have to pass the stairs to get it. I decided I'd crawl through a window to escape."

Luckily, Alexis didn't need to flee. There was no one in her home that night.

But police took her fears seriously and installed an alarm at the news presenter's home.

In many cases of online stalking, tracking the culprit is an enormous task. But in Alexis's case the police found a clue at an internet cafe in Chichester, West Sussex.

Unfortunately, they couldn't trace him any further, and he stopped sending emails.

Then in May last year the messages started again and officers took eight weeks to snare him. "In those weeks towards the end, I was frantic," she says. "I knew the police were closing in on him, but would it make him more angry?"

In April, after two years of harassment and threats, 25-year old Reeve was jailed and given a lifetime restraining order.

"Putting a face to it all should have meant more, but he was just a sad man. He meant nothing to me," explains Alexis.

She says the police helped her cope with the ordeal. "They were very supportive. But it's a pity if it's not that way across the country because it's a scary thing to go through. The police did a good job in my case, so hopefully other forces can follow their example."

For support and information about stalking in the U.K., visit http://nss.org.uk.

Stalking

What you need to know -

• 18% of stalking victims have been sexually assaulted
• 12% say the stalker threatened to harm their children
• 15% say their pets have been abused by the stalker
• 67% of victims were spied on by their stalker
• 40% of stalkers got details from the victim's friends
• 27% got information from the victim's workplace or family
• 77% of victims didn't go to the police until they'd been bothered 100 times

What to do if you're stalked -

1. Show no emotion, regardless of how scared or angry you are. Never confront or agree to meet your stalker.
2. Call local police to find out which officer is running the case.
3. Tell your friends, family, neighbours and work colleagues.
4. Keep evidence like texts, emails, letters and parcels. Record anything that could be proof and keep a diary.
5. If you get calls from a stalker, in the U.K. use 1471 to track their number.
6. If you're being followed, try to stay calm. If you're driving, head for the nearest police station to get help.
7. If you ever feel in imminent danger, call 999. (or 911 in the U.S.)

original article here

Serial Bigamist, Charles "Ed" Hicks Gets Another Year

from our friends & supporters at Fight Bigamy:


Serial bigamist, online predator, Charles Edward 'Ed' Hicks received a four-year sentence with three years suspended for violating his parole according to Derek Wagner, Assistant Commonwealth's Attorney for the City of Chesapeake, VA. Hicks is also known as the Dr. Phil Bigamist.

Hicks told the Court that he had been unable to contact his parole officer because he had a stroke and somehow got to Florida where he was living on a boat. He also told the Court he had a bachelor's degree in engineering from Cal Poly and a Master's Degree from the University of Washington! (all complete fabrications!) Hicks went on to say that a TV documentary had been done about him and ruined his 'good name'!

Hicks had been writing to several women he met on online dating sites for over a year. Despite claiming he was ill and that was why he hadn't reported to his probation office since early 2008, he was well enough to travel the state of Florida, ride a bike ten miles a day, and climb the 30' mast of the sailboat where he was living.

Hicks was arrested last month in Key Largo, Florida on a warrant from Virginia for violating his parole.

Ladies....this man is an on-line predator. When he gets out of jail, he will start doing the same thing again. If you are going to pursue online dating, at a minimum Google the person's name. (Hicks was EOPC's very first PREDATOR OF THE MONTH and we are glad all this information helped in his capture and re-incarceration. GOOGLE PEOPLE YOU MEET ONLINE!! PLEASE!! and stay away from Online Dating where predators like Hicks just PARK themselves and troll for new victims.)

For more information, see the article in the Virginian-Pilot.

MY HYPNOTIST:The Big Roulette Wheel Of Internet Dating (a Story Of Spousal Abuse)

REVIEW:

"I could not put this book down once I began to read it. I found it very informative as to what could happen when you meet someone over the Internet. I just hope that someone can gain insight and knowledge from reading Paulette's book. It is easy to understand and never boring."

FROM THE BOOK: "I have met several men over the Internet, as I look for someone interesting, in the hopes of fulfilling my seemingly desperate need for companionship..."

FOR MORE INFORMATION ON THIS GREAT BOOK CLICK HERE

Thoughts About the PSYCHOPATHS Among Us (Online!)

[Dr. Robert Hare (foremost authority in psychopaths] calls them "subclinical" psychopaths. They're the charming predators who, unable to form real emotional bonds, find and use vulnerable women for sex, playing games and money (and inevitably abandon them).

[this brings to mind gridney/Yidwithlid - who posted reviews of his lunch hour liaisons on bigdoggie.net and theeroticreview.com (and now says either 'the reviews were planted by one of his Targets' or 'denies it ever happened'... despite the police finding his IP and credit card number associated with the reviews!
And Dan Jacoby who posted on sexforums (and probably elsewhere)]:

Robyn Few, a former prostitute who lobbies to decriminalize prostitution as executive director of the Sex Workers Outreach Project in San Francisco, said that on a personal level, “I hate it” that women are “being reviewed and rated like some subhuman.”

The sites represent the ultimate commodification of women, who are impersonally rated by anonymous men in much the same way they would judge a sports car or a racehorse.

SOURCE

So its a given that these cyberpaths don't think of their victims any differently! Their Targets are AnonymousTHINGS, existing only in cyberspace or for their sexual & emotional kicks. [Otherwise - victims are nothing & no one to them.]

Psychopaths can be found in legislatures, hospitals, and used-car lots. They're your neighbor, your boss, and your blind date. Because they have no conscience, they're natural predators. If you didn't have a conscience, you'd be one too.

"The con man works one-on-one," says Babiak. "They'll go after a woman, marry her, take her money (trust/ love/ sex...), then move on and marry someone else. The puppet master would manipulate somebody to get at someone else. This type is more powerful because they're hidden." Babiak says psychopaths have three motivations:

• thrill-seeking,
  
• the pathological desire to win,
  
• and the inclination to hurt people.

"They'll jump on any opportunity that allows them to do those things," he says. "If something better comes along, they'll drop you and move on."

excerpts from THIS article

Cyberstalker Had an "Emotional Void"

EOPC WOULD CALL THAT "VOID" - PROBABLE PSYCHOPATHY!
Sounds exactly like Lissa Daly!


(STAMFORD, CT) Fabricated doctors. Illegal medical procedures. Rerouted cell phone calls. Phony text messages.

Police say they have never dealt with a case quite like it.

For members of the Stamford Police Department's Special Victims Unit, the case began in June, when Deborah, a 39-year-old Stamford resident who did not want her last name used to protect her family, told police she suspected her friend of stalking her, an arrest affidavit states.

Deborah's friend, Jennifer Mardi, 36, was a trained emergency response technician who worked a short stint as a paramedic with Stamford Emergency Medical Services that ended in November 2007.

Police say Mardi wrapped up Deborah in a fictional world in which Mardi used e-mails and text messages to pose as a man who was a friend of both women. Mardi manufactured a medical drama involving the man, creating 14 fictional characters -- some with their own cell phones and e-mail addresses, all tended by Mardi -- to keep the story going, police said.

One of the fictional characters was a doctor in whom Deborah confided her medical problems, police said. From February 2007 to April 2008, on advice from the fictional doctor, Mardi administered fluids and drew blood from Deborah 38 times, according to police, an interview with Deborah and an arrest affidavit.

Mardi began the charade to keep in close contact with Deborah, police said.

After a six-month investigation, police arrested Mardi on Dec. 5, charging her with 38 counts of unlawful use of paramedicine, 38 counts of third-degree assault and 38 counts of first-degree reckless endangerment, all related to the medical procedures. They also charged her with practicing medicine without a license and third-degree larceny, which are felonies.

"This is not something that comes up a lot, if at all during one's career," said Sgt. Gary Perna, a superviser in the Special Victims Unit who has been a police officer for 20 years. "We deal with a lot of criminal investigations, but nothing like this."

When Deborah went to the police station to file her statement, officers told her to type up the timeline of events. It took Deborah two to three weeks to complete a 10-page statement detailing the 20-month relationship, said Officer Heather Franc, an investigator.

It was a confusing case that challenged police to identify criminal actions, Franc said.

Mardi replaced their mutual friend's cell phone number with her own in Deborah's cell phone, then began sending text messages to Deborah as if she, Mardi, were the friend, police said.

Mardi convinced Deborah their friend was seriously ill with a severe calcium deficiency and couldn't speak, so text messages and e-mails were the only means of communication, police said.

"She had an emotional void that needed to be filled," Franc said of Mardi.

Police said Mardi introduced Deborah to a team of doctors, nurses, therapists and priests who were treating their "sick" friend. Not one was a real person. They all contacted Deborah through texts or e-mails; Deborah never spoke to any of them, police said.

"You kind of lose sight of what was real and what wasn't," Deborah said. "She consumed my entire days and nights with all this -- at work, text messages and e-mails, and on the computer to all hours of the night thinking someone is sick."

Mardi did not return a message left with someone who answered her cell phone. It is unknown whether she has hired a lawyer.

Deborah told police her friendship with Mardi began in 2005 at the pool outside her parents' condominium complex. The friendship quickly turned all-consuming, Deborah told police.

Deborah asked for more space and time apart from Mardi. But Mardi would find ways to be near Deborah's family by coaching her children's softball and basketball teams.

According to the arrest affidavit, the story line began after a Halloween party in October 2006, which their friend did not attend because he felt sick. Mardi told Deborah she had driven the friend to the emergency room and that he was violently ill.

Mardi became the liaison between Deborah and the man, who later told police he knew nothing of the Halloween party and was never speechless and bedridden in an out-of-state hospital.

Deborah began texting her friend for medical updates, but the messages went to Mardi, who used her experience as a paramedic and information from the Internet to pose as medical professionals.

Deborah became so concerned with the well-being of her friend that she began cooking food for him and bought him more than $1,000 worth of gifts, including clothes, blankets, video games, pornography and an mp3 player, the affidavit states.

The "sick" friend sent flowers to Deborah's office to show his appreciation, the affidavit states.

Deborah told police she befriended a doctor who was treating her "sick" friend. She told the fictional "Dr. Shorty" about her medical ailments and he diagnosed her by e-mail, saying she was dehydrated and needed fluids.

"Dr. Shorty" arranged to have Mardi deliver Deborah's medical records to him and had Mardi draw blood from Deborah, administer intravenous drips and inject vitamins, the affidavit states.

"I know she's a medic and I know it's her job," Deborah said of Mardi, who also was a licensed paramedic in New York. "I didn't feel like I was in danger at any point. It was basically a way to be with me and care for me. It was odd. It was another way for her to be close."

The ruse appears to have unraveled in June, when Deborah jumped into Mardi's car after the weather turned bad during her child's softball game. Sitting in the car, Deborah sent a text message to their "sick" friend's cell phone and heard a buzzing sound. She looked around the car and found a phone in a door compartment. The text message she had just sent appeared on the phone she found, the arrest affidavit states. She sent another text message, and it appeared on the phone again.

Deborah told police that she suspected Mardi of stalking her. Mardi later told police she paid someone to program her cell phone to intercept text messages, the affidavit states. Eventually Mardi told police she created the fictional world using new cell phones and e-mail accounts.

Deborah told police in August that Mardi's boyfriend had revealed the schemes to her, the affidavit states.

Deborah said she does not sympathize with her former friend -- she is only relieved that Mardi can no longer preoccupy her family with lies.

Mardi is slated to appear Dec. 22 in state Superior Court in Stamford. She was released on a $10,000 bond.

SOURCE

Queen's Cavalry Officer is an Internet Predator

By Mazher Mahmood

(United Kingdom)A Queen's Cavalry officer is today exposed as an internet pervert who hosts orgies in his royal barracks flat

By day Captain Tari Mundawarara proudly leads the Changing of the Guard as hundreds of tourists watch on Horse Guards parade.

But at night the soldier - who trained with Prince Harry - trawls sex sites, offering girls behind-the-scenes royal tours as bait.

Bragging that he's part of the Queen's bodyguard, seedy Mundawarara's chat-up line is: "How would you like to get ****** by a cavalryman in a royal guardroom?"

He's also prepared to INSULT the Queen - joking that she's "definitely not totally with it" - and BREACH SECURITY, giving away secret details of her movements to lure women.

But we caught the officer off-Guard after receiving a tip-off about his activities on the internet from a site user.

He had boasted to her: "I'm an attractive well built and sexy professional black male, 32 years old and good in bed. I'm open to the idea of playing with couples . . . if you're lucky I might wear my uniform."

Mundawarara sent snaps of himself in Life Guards uniform - including one on his horse - to impress her before offering her sex in the royal guardroom.

Then he asked the girl to bring along another blonde friend for a threesome. "I have not had two blondes before. I've had a brunette and a blonde," he bragged. He said he had to have his romps where he worked so he could be on call "in case the Queen comes".

He arranged a meeting with our undercover reporters, posing as swingers, in the Clarence pub in Whitehall on Wednesday after his last parade. Downing white wine, the polo-playing Zimbabwean mouthed off about his royal duties with the Household Cavalry.

"We are the Queen's bodyguards. We're going to Windsor next week because the President of India is coming," he said. "We'll pick up the Queen and whoever it is and take them to Buckingham Palace."

"She's in the Palace today and she's going to Windsor on Friday," Mundawarara added, leaking her itinerary. The disloyal guardsman then gave his verdict on his employer: "She's definitely doddery - definitely not totally with it."

He told our couple he trained to command tanks alongside Prince Harry three years ago - and said he even warned him to curb his drinking because driving a tank "is not so easy with a hangover". Mundawarara then led our reporters through the famous Horse Guards arch towards his flat in an imposing building. "You see the top floor, that's my bedroom," boasted Mundawarara. The officer took our reporters to the stables where he posed with his horse, York.

Before long they reached the front door of his flat which carried a gold plaque saying Captain The Queen's Life Guard. Inside the walls were adorned with paintings of horses and officers.

Mundawarara took our couple into his bedroom where his red tunic was on a stand beside his riding boots and near his white plumed helmet. But our reporters made their excuses and left. Later an Army spokesman told us: "We are investigating this incident. A Buckingham Palace spokesman said: "We will investigate any issues relating to the security of The Queen."

original article here

You've Got H@TE MAIL!

Remember the time when new netizens were discovering the joys of e-mail and chat? When we watched Meg Ryan in You've Got Mail log on and send messages to Tom Hanks. That was cool, way back in 1998, when that film was released. It explored the concept of what happens when the virtual world and the real world intersect at some point.

All that is old hat now. We send emails, we chat, we message, we scrap, we follow each other on Twitter, we scribble on Facebook's wall. We have SecondLife. The possibilities are endless. Your gmail inbox could be an excellent pointer. "Where are you now? I'd like to add you to my travel network”, says one mail. “XXX added you as a friend on Facebook” says another. There are join-us requests from at least three other social networking sites. And then, some blog comments that you have to moderate. So, cleaning the inbox could well take up an hour or two of your working day. All thanks to social networking. We live in an over-connected world, you see. Everyone's connected to everyone else and their cousin, thrice removed.

So, what's wrong with being connected? Nothing, except that we tend to lose perspective on who's a friend, who's not, and how much of our emotional investment needs to go into all this. Benign, harmless scraps, blog comments and messages are still tolerable. All you need to do is hit the delete button. But then, what about hate? What about those comments that hurt? What happens if there’s a sensitive person on the other end, who takes the hate personally?

Out of sheer curiosity, I log on to my Orkut account, and check out the hate communities. There are harmless "I hate to wake up early" to "I hate rain"communities. Soon, it turns ugly. And scary, if one may add. Take "Kill me, I'm fed up of my life" It had a whopping 3,000 members when one last checked. There's “Guns n Guts”, there's “I hurt myself; so you can't” with 7,000 members.

A web of distrust
One of the communities even suggests various methods to commit suicide. This community has a whopping 2,000 members at last count. Isn't this hate reflective of society itself? Surely, something's gone wrong somewhere.

According to psychologist Sonali Nag of the Promise Foundation, "Hate is a fundamental human emotion. As most other emotions, it is neither negative nor positive. It could be generated in response to something strongly repugnant to oneself and one's values. It could also be born from a sense of inadequacy. Both forms are seen on the Internet. It provides a screen to one's identity and offers a medium to express emotions with lower levels of restraint. ‘Snarking’ is an example of using the anonymity that the Internet provides to be snide and unrestrained in one's responses to someone else's postings. I would suspect that if one examined the personality of a 'snarker', one would find a sad, unfulfilled and frustrated person hiding behind his or her snarks."

There are hate communities directed at individuals and some very respected personalities at that. And then, countries. There was legal trouble when a ‘We hate India’ community was set up on a social networking site.

Omar Abdullah’s ‘alvida’
Social networking was also held responsible for the death of 16-year-old Adnan Patrawala from Mumbai, who was kidnapped and murdered by his Orkut friends. While social networking sites and blogs are excellent platforms for celebrities like an Aamir Khan or an Amitabh Bachchan to put across their points of view, they also make them vulnerable to hate comments.

You only have to check out Ram Gopal Varma's blog to see the kind of comments his posts elicit. But RGV blogs on, undeterred, responding to his readers sharply. But, then, it could get very serious.

Take the case of politician Omar Abdullah, who used the blog http://jknc.org/blog/ to air his views on Kashmir. He started his blog in mid-April, but by August, the comments and the hate got to him. His last post, titled 'Alvida' says it all. Sample this:

"Last night as I finished my last post I realised that I was filled with dread at the heap of personal abuse I was expecting when I logged on this morning and I was not wrong. We truly are a bunch of intolerant people. We want to be heard but do not have the strength to hear, we want to have an opinion but do not believe anyone else is entitled to one. So after almost 42 posts from me and more than 900 comments from all of you I am signing off and I will not be coming back."

Faceless dread
A clear case of cyber harassment. The nature of the Internet, as it is evident now, is that it is an open, free world, where everyone has the right to vent their views, or form communities without much social responsibility. The very fact that the bully is a faceless, unknown person, adds to the helplessness of the victim. Terror too, has spread its scary shadows on the Internet. Terror mails are sent from random IP addresses. As recently as September 2008, newspapers reported that a community called 'Indian Mujahideen' was banned from a social networking site, following the blasts in Delhi.

A presentation on 'Tracking terrorists in cyber space' made by J Prasanna, an Information Security Consultant, at a seminar organised by Digital Society Foundation of India, in Bangalore, acknowledges that most terrorists and spies indeed use the Internet. They use the Internet to leave a message on a website like orkut, Linkedin or a matrimonial website that looks normal. Only they understand where to look and what to read and it's difficult for others to find out. This is called a covert channel. Also, terrorists use anonymous proxy (with encryption) to transmit messages.

So, do we regulate the internet?
According to Na Vijayshankar, cyber law campaigner, the police are supposed to monitor any anti-social activities in society and can take action on their own. Vijayshankar, who is also the Chairman of the Digital Society Foundation of India, says the organisation proposes to act as a vigilante unit. He points out that his organisation even filed a PIL in connection with denigration of Gandhi on You Tube. "I personally try to keep the police informed. I strongly feel the police should maintain contact with voluntary organisations to act as cyber informers."

But does this not infringe upon freedom of expression and privacy? Agrees Na Vijayshankar, "It is a fact that sometimes privacy interests conflict with law enforcement."

However, Naavi cites a India Supreme Court judgment, which says “that the person’s ‘right to be let alone’ is not an absolute right and may be lawfully restricted for the prevention of crime, disorder or protection of health or morals or protection of rights and freedom of others.”

During the seminar on Privacy Rights and Data Protection in Cyber Space, he expressed the need for balancing the Privacy and Data Protection legislation with law enforcement and suggested that the forum would collect the opinion of experts and forward it to the government for necessary action when the Personal Data Protection Bill 2006 and ITA Amendment Act Bill would be taken up for discussion in the Parliamentary session.

“What the ITA 2000 fails to protect are cases such as 'cyber stalking' where privacy intrusion through e-mails or SMS messages creates problems for individuals. If such messages can be brought under "Obscenity" then it may be covered under Section 67 of ITA 2000. If it is indecent or threatening, it may be brought under IPC. This is essentially the protection that is available,” he points out in his presentation.

However, there is the issue of what constitutes privacy rights. When the police on a crime trail end up on a social networking site , there are commercial interests that try to block the police from accessing information which may be vital to solving the crime. Often the defense put up by the sites is that the information is protected by the ‘Privacy rights’ of someone else or that they are to be treated as ‘Intermediaries’ and should not be harassed, explains Naavi.

Which brings us back to that old question of freedom and responsibility. Particularly so, with reference to democracies, where one’s rights cannot be divorced from one’s responsibilities. Where there’s freedom, there’s responsibility. Now, if only those hate mongers understood.

Impact on children
As with all other aspects of helping children learn to live life completely, shielding them from cyber bullying is not an effective answer. An emotionally secure home environment that allows exploration and experimentation constantly backed up by support and introspection, would help them develop strong identities. A strong, self-accepting identity, would neither bully or be bullied, the psychologist explains.

The bullies and their victims

• In March 2007, high-profile technology blogger Kathy Sierra of the United States became a victim of cyber bullying. She received anonymous death threats on her blog and violent comments were made against her. Kathy was so scared that she stopped blogging. The incident triggered a movement in cyberspace, and hundreds of bloggers reported to have been victims of cyber bullying at some point in their online lives. An Anti- Cyber bullying Day was observed on March 30 that year, in protest.
• Another American citizen, Megan Meier, a 13-year-old girl committed suicide in October 2006, when personal comments on her looks and appearance got to her on a social networking site.
• Not many Indian bloggers would have forgotten the vicious personal comments and washing of dirty linen on the blogosphere, when a noted youth blog (youthcurry.blogspot.com) had a post about a management institute.
• Ironically, the Internet is also an excellent resource for parents who are worried about their children becoming targets of vicious attacks. There are websites dedicated to cyber bullying. Some of them include: http://www.cyberbullyalert.com/blog/ stopcyberbullying.org.

Stand up to a bully!
According to psychologist Sonali Nag, “It is an extension of the bullying that seems to be integral to the human predicament, be it on the school playground or between countries. The only difference between the school bully and the Internet bully, perhaps is that anonymity allows the cyber bully an easier chance of getting away. The bully is usually a coward who melts away when confronted.

Here again low self-esteem and deep feelings of inadequacy seem to characterize the bully. Interestingly though, the bullied sometimes, want the relationship with the bully to continue. For the price of being bullied, they gain the reward of being the bully's protege and of being protected by the bully. However, for those who want to be released from this form of abuse, the bullied can be empowered to stand up to a bully.

original article here

Involved With a Sociopath (or Cyberpath)?

Cyberpathy is a FORM of Sociopathy and Narcissism -- therefore this article is very pertinent to those who may be, are or ever were involved with a Cyberpath. If you have thoroughly read any of our predator stories -- you will relate to this article! - Fighter

PART I

Is there something wrong with your guy? Does he lie, cheat, steal, commit fraud, use people then discard them, have fits of rage, seem self-centered or have no conscience?

Do you feel like something is wrong with him, but you are not sure what it is? It sometimes seems like his brain just does not work right and he does outrageous things.

Beware! You might be dating a sociopath. What are the warning signs? What should you do?

Sociopaths are sneaky and will worm their way into your life, despite your misgivings from the beginning. Something about this man is not quite right. You can’t put your finger on it, and you hesitate, but you get sucked into him anyway. These men are charming and can put on an act that wins your sympathy and devotion.

• If you have issues of low self-esteem, they instinctively know how to approach you and suck you in.
• If you are lonely and needy you are a big target for the man with a sociopathic personality disorder.

He makes you feel special and important. He convinces you they he has been misunderstood all his life, and you are the only one who understands him now. You feel validated and needed by this man, and he sucks you in deeper and deeper over time.

Your first warning was your gut instinct, and that was the time to run away and leave this relationship behind. Unfortunately, you didn’t, and now you are stuck in the hell that is a relationship with a sociopath. We all need to pay attention to the red flags, warning signs, gut instincts. We can learn to recognize the sociopath and never get sucked into him again.

The words sociopathic, psychopathic, and antisocial personality all mean the same thing and are a true mental illness, a psychosis. The three terms are interchangeable and have only different areas of focus such as socialization or criminal behavior. We will use the word sociopath because it is the most recognizable. Psychopaths are often equated with serial murderers, and antisocial is equated with dysfunction. [But the majority of them are MUCH more subtle!] The sociopath is sometimes charming and usually looks and acts normal enough to fool us. All three terms carry the same meaning: a disorder of the personality.

The most important thing to know is that a sociopath has a brain that does not work right. In fact, he is missing a part of his brain. More specifically, he is missing one of the building blocks of his personality. This is important to understand because it explains the seriousness of this disorder and why it cannot be treated or fixed or cured.

The part of his brain that is missing shapes his conscience, and because it is missing, he does not have one. The sociopath does not feel guilt, remorse or shame like the rest of us feel when we do something bad or wrong. He is not capable of feeling guilt or shame because he is missing that piece of his personality. It also means he does not have the boundaries, restraints on his behavior or impulse control that the rest of us do so he will do things that are outrageous, things that normal personalities would never consider doing.

The bad news for you is that this personality disorder cannot be fixed. You cannot fix him, and he cannot fix himself. No therapy or drug can fix this personality disorder because a part of his brain is missing. With long-term therapy some of the symptoms might be lessened, or the sociopath might learn to live more productively in society, but it cannot be fixed. This is why the most important piece of advice for the person involved with a sociopath is to leave. Get him out of your life. Run, don’t walk, away from him and never, ever go back.

A good comparison, something to help you understand the medical implications of this disorder, is to compare it to a disease of the eye. Diseases and disorders of the eye can be treated, like glaucoma, astigmatism, nearsightedness, etc., with medicine, eyeglasses, or laser surgery. Color blindness, however, can NOT be treated, because the person is missing the color cones and rods in the eye. A doctor cannot fix what is not there to begin with. This is why the sociopath, with a part of his personality missing, cannot be fixed. No doctor or therapist can put back what wasn’t there to begin with, and the sociopath is missing an actual building block of his personality, deep within his brain.

This explains why you sometimes feel like his brain just doesn’t work right. He lies, uses you, manipulates, bleeds you dry, rages, begs forgiveness, and then does it all over again without any guilt, remorse or shame.

Are you the one who is crazy, you ask yourself? No. His brain really does not work right.

Understanding and accepting this fact will help you leave the sociopath and make your life right again with normal men and healthy relationships.

ORIGINAL

READ MORE:
Part 2
Part 3

ONLINE TARGETING & HARASSMENT

by Aidan Maconachy

(excerpts)

Most internet harassment goes on in chat rooms, messageboards and newsgroups, also via email. Internet law has tightened up since the early free wheeling days when there were very few controls in place. For example it's become a federal crime in the US to anonymously "annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass any person" via internet or other telecommunication systems. So it's on the books, if people choose to go after the bullies.
If you do become a target of harassment or defamation, stay cool. Don't react or get into a flame war with the people doing the harassing. Make a point though of keeping a record - emails, posted comments etc, along with dates, times and any identifying information that may come in handy at a later date.

Depending on the stealth method used, you might be able to acquire additional info about the source of the attack. Legitimate services such as "nslookup" and "tracert" enable users to track hosts, IP addresses and MAC addresses. There are also professional services you can enlist that use the information you provide to dig for additional info. Make sure they operate within the law, as some are little more than hackers-for-hire.

As in any ordinary case of harassment, it's important to build the case and gather the evidence. Don't release any of this material to the person you suspect is behind the abuse, until and if you are prepared to go the distance.

If you are concerned about your privacy and reputation, it may be advisable lower your profile. Often disengagement and non-reaction stops harassment because most cyber trolls and bullies get their jollies from the belief that they are ruining your life.

If there is no hidden history or baggage you are anxious to keep confidential i.e. criminal record or criminal activities, then continue to put your best foot forward.

It really comes down to the individual in the end. If you've nothing to hide - you have nothing to fear except fear itself.

This entire article can be read by clicking here

OUR VICTIMS WHO HAVE POSTED THEIR EVIDENCE
(all long but WELL WORTH A READ)
(because they have nothing to hide! their Cyberpaths do!)

Lissa Daly is a Cyberpath

The Stumbling Block

Masks of Sanity

Jason Capozello


(NOTE: What is really sad is that the Cyberpaths REFUSE to read these sites, or only come here to 'gather evidence' against their victims or apologize & own their behavior. They refuse because it conflicts with the twisted, whitewashed version of things they want to present to the world.

Wonder who is telling the truth? Ask yourself -- what do the Victims above have to gain by admitting they got sucked in & used? And what do the Cyberpaths have to lose if the truth is out there?)

Internet Harassment & Revenge is a Crime

An Connecticut woman is accused of attempting to break up a marriage via the Internet.

Police said Pilar Stofega, 34, spent hours crafting fake profiles about her ex-boyfriend's wife and posting them online for the world to see.

Waterford police said Stofega was attempting to take revenge on a man she dated eight years ago by going after his wife.

Detectives said Stofega created phony profiles of the woman on adult Web sites and included her home and work phone numbers and high school yearbook photo.

Police said the ex-boyfriend began doing some Internet searching and uncovered the fake profiles and told police that Stofega was behind it.

Channel 3 Eyewitness News reporter Katy Zachry reported that Stofega told police that
Stofega was released on $2,500 bond and is facing harassment charges.

ARTICLE

Some Take Their Hate Online

By Rob Perez

Not content with just inflicting physical or verbal abuse, domestic violence offenders are turning to the digital and electronic worlds to hound their victims.

Those who deal with restraining orders in domestic abuse cases say they are seeing a growing number of examples in which the abuser uses text messaging, public Web sites or other forms of high-tech communication to reach their targets.

Family Court Judge Michael Broderick, who presides over protective-order requests, said he is seeing more cases of abusers turning to the Internet.

He recalled one recent case in which an ex-boyfriend wrote on a public Web site that his ex-girlfriend was great in bed, wanted lots of sex and listed her home address.

The high-tech abuse is happening even though protective orders that Broderick and other judges issue prohibit any type of contact, including e-mails and text-messaging. Someone who violates a protective order is subject to a year in jail and a $1,000 fine.

Allegations of high-tech abuse show up frequently on petitions for restraining orders.

"He is writing blogs about me on MySpace without my consent," one woman wrote in her petition, which alleged that her ex-boyfriend beat her, destroyed her treasured possessions and once threw her into the shower fully clothed and turned cold water on her after she refused to shower with him.

"Some blogs also contain our 'love story.' The whole world can basically read what was going on between us."

Another woman who alleged her husband physically abused her said he sent text messages about him having sex with two girls and kept referring to her as a "fat ugly whore."

One woman said her boyfriend threatened to put on the Web a video of the couple having sex — she said he took the footage without her knowledge — if she broke up with him. She broke up with him anyway but is still worried about what he might do.

The latest text message she got from him: "It's not over til I say it's over."

Some abusers take advantage of the anonymity of the Internet.

A Makakilo woman told The Advertiser her ex-boyfriend responded to her Craigslist ad, posing as a stranger. He sent a series of e-mails seeking more information about the item she was selling, then started asking personal questions about her social life. The e-mails eventually devolved into demeaning comments about her, she said.

The woman had a restraining order against the man, and she said he was using a fake name on the Internet to circumvent the court order.

When she reported the abuse to police, she was told nothing could be done because she couldn't prove the e-mails were from him, the woman said.

Sometimes, just the threat of online abuse is enough to get a response.

Ed Flores, executive director of Ala Kuola, a nonprofit that helps people file petitions for restraining orders, said a woman recently came to his office to complete paperwork seeking an order against her boyfriend, who had been physically abusing her.

While she was at the office, her alleged abuser called on her cell phone and threatened to write about their sex history on a public Web site if she went through with the petition.

The next day, Flores said, the woman called to say she wasn't going to pursue the restraining order because of her boyfriend's threat.

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Update: DARREN ROY MACK - Sentenced to Life in Prison

Mack Gets Life Term for Killing Wife

A former pawn shop owner was sentenced to life in prison on Friday for the killing of his estranged wife and shooting of the judge who handled their bitter divorce.

Darren Mack, 46, will be eligible for parole after 36 years. Mack pleaded guilty in November to first-degree murder in the June 2006 stabbing death of his wife, Charla, and entered an Alford plea to a charge of attempted murder of Washoe Family Court Judge Chuck Weller.

Mack admitted in court that he shot Weller through a courthouse window the day he killed his wife but invoked the Alford plea, in which a defendant acknowledges there is enough evidence for a conviction without admitting guilt. Weller has recovered from his wounds.

District Judge Douglas Herndon followed the recommendations of a plea deal by sentencing Mack to life in prison with the possibility of parole after 20 years on the murder charge.

The judge upheld the recommendation of Special Prosecutor Christopher Lalli by sentencing Mack to 40 years with parole possible after 16 years for attempted murder with a deadly weapon.

The terms are to run consecutively.

In handing down the sentence, Herndon cited the heinous nature of the crimes and Mack's lack of remorse.

"The truth is Mr. Mack is guilty of these crimes, but he doesn't want to hear anything about that," the judge said.

Mack on Thursday reiterated claims that he acted in self defense when he slashed his wife's throat in the garage of his southeast Reno townhouse.

He also has argued that he was coerced by his former lawyers into the plea deal, and suggested the attorneys, prosecutors, investigators and law enforcement officers who investigated the case were corrupt.

Herndon said while he allowed Mack to go on at length, he never said what the judge hoped he'd hear: "I'm sorry."

48 Hours Reviews the Darren Mack Case (click here)


EOPC on the original story in 2006:

ALERT! DARREN ROY MACK
Online Dater, Alleged Murderer and Sniper Shooter

Reno police are investigating Internet dating sites that murder fugitive Darren Roy Mack used to contact and communicate with women. (Mack was well know to live a "swinger" life style and visit swinger-resorts for vacations; without his wife)

"There is a potential that Mr. Mack could contact and meet with someone related to a past contact," said Lt. Ron Donnelly.

Anyone Mack may have contacted via an online dating site should contact police.

Mack, 45, was charged Tuesday in a warrant with the stabbing death of his estranged wife, Charla, 39. Police also accuse Mack of setting up on a downtown building and firing a sniper shot into the chambers of Family Court Judge Chuck Weller, hitting him in the chest.

For several years Mack has been an owner of Palace Jewelry and Loan pawn shop, which has an inventory that includes firearms.

Police say Mack has a federal firearms license, and a permit to carry a concealed weapon. Both will be suspended due to his fugitive status, but police believe he has access to any type of firearm.

Mack owns and has access to a Bushmaster .223 semi-automatic rifle, which police believe was used in the sniper shooting. This weapon has not been accounted for and may be in his possession.

Mack's Silver Colored Ford Explorer with California License Plates 5POR272 has still not been located, and is listed nationally on a law enforcement fugitive database.

~~~~
At a 9 a.m. press conference, Reno police announced the murder victim found at the Fleur de Lis gated community on Wilbur May Parkway has been identified as 39-year old Charla Mack, Darren Mack's estranged wife.

The 53-year-old Judge Weller continues to recover at Washoe Medical Center in Reno. Reno police say Weller is in good condition. Police said he was alert and had spoken with his family following the shooting.

Police say suspected killer Darren Mack is still at large. He is wanted for homicide after the discovery of his wife's body at the Fleur de Lis gated community, and is a suspect in the shooting of Judge Weller.

A Chaotic Scene

The events began Monday morning at 11:15, when police received reports of shots fired in the area of the newly-opened Mills B. Lane Justice Center on High Street. A News 4 crew was in the area and witnessed a chaotic scene as people ran from the building and frantically made calls on their cell phones.

"I hid behind a pillar and everything was starting to go crazy all over the place," an unidentified witness told News 4. "Cops were running all over the place."

"We were walking downtown near the building and we heard a gun," said Raya Pyles. "We all just ducked."

Craig Compton told News 4 he heard two gunshots followed by chaos inside the Justice Center.

"We were getting in an elevator, and people started scattering up there on the third floor," Compton said. "A deputy got in front of us and somebody said 'someone got shot. We heard a pop.'"

Washoe County Undersheriff Mike Haley said Reno Family Court Judge Chuck Weller was standing near a window on the third floor when he was shot in the torso. An aide, Annie Allison of Reno, was injured by flying glass.

"We're certain the shot came from outside," Haley said. "We can't speculate now where it came from. We have to establish the height of the window. It could have come from a variety of locations to the north."

One witness reported seeing an armed man in a nearby parking garage at the time of the shooting. Authorities are still investigating the structure.

Dozens of people were evacuated from the Justice Center as police charged into the building. Others were locked down for more than five hours. Streets surrounding the Justice Center did not reopen until late Monday night.

Police Investigate Related Murder
Just hours after the shooting, detectives responded to the Fleur de Lis community in south Reno on a report of a person found dead. The body was found in the garage of one of the townhomes.

The Press reports the home where the body was found is the residence of 39-year-old Charla Mack, the estranged wife of Darren Mack.

Following notification of family, police have confirmed the body was indeed that of Charla Mack.

Police say Darren and Charla Mack were to appear before Judge Weller September 8 as part of their pending divorce case.

Court documents obtained by News 4 show Darren Mack and his wife had been in and out of court several times since February 2005 as part of their divorce proceedings. At stake was custody of the couple's three children, and more than $10,000 a month in child and spousal support. Records also show Charla Mack's attorney had filed a motion to hold Darren Mack in contempt of court and asked that he be ordered to comply with child support requirements.

Darren Mack owns Palace Jewelry and Loan in Reno. Records show Mack had just declared bankruptcy. An employee at the business declined comment Monday.

Mack had a profile for his family on his eBay Web site, which was taken down late Monday. The Web page contained photos of Mack and his family, and information on his business. Before the site was removed, it contained this statement:

"My name is Darren Mack, and I am the third generation owner of a small business in Reno, Nevada. My family has owned and operated small businesses in Nevada for 45years. I am proud of the fact that I am able to carry on the legacy left to me by my parents and grandparents. I've been around jewelry and diamonds since my dad brought me down to the store when I was 7 years old. I have a personal commitment to excellence in any endeavor I take on. I am bringing to eBay a business ethic which is unshakeable. I deal fairly, with concern to the needs of my customers, and always with integrity. And, as you can see, I am married to a lovely young lady and have three beautiful children."

Search Delays Flights at Airport
The intensive manhunt for Darren Mack caused delays at the Reno-Tahoe International Airport Monday night. At 8:30, police received a report of a possible sighting of Mack at the airport. They shut down the parking garage and underwent a car-by-car search. Heavily-armed officers could be seen questioning drivers and passengers with guns ready. Airport spokesman Brian Kulpin said Federal agents and airport police also searched flights that had not yet taken off from the airport.

"Flights were held for some time this evening, just to make sure this suspect somehow didn't make it past security checkpoints," Kulpin said. "There are a lot of procedures put in place so that doesn't happen. But in a case with this profile, we wanted to make sure we're covering all the airport... So we did hold flights at gates. There were even some aircraft that came back to gates and were searched."

Kulpin said no arrests were made at the airport Monday night. He said all airport security personnel had been given fliers with Mack's photo and description, and were asked to keep an eye out for him.

Mike Simpson, a Southwest Airlines passenger, told News 4 police quickly escorted everyone off of his flight, which had just landed.

"People immediately got on their cell phones," Simpson said. "I was one of them. We all wanted to know - I called a friend of mine who works for a radio station to see if he knew anything, and pretty much everybody said it was all word of mouth - 'They got the sniper' and all that kind of an aspect."

Earlier, the search for Mack led Sheriff's deputies to surround a home on Chipmunk Avenue in Washoe Valley. Authorities had received a tip Mack may be inside the home. Deputies searched the house but did not find Mack.

Forty-five-year-old Darren Mack is white with brown hair and brown eyes. He is five feet, eleven inches tall and between 190 and 220 pounds. He may be driving a silver Ford SUV, possibly an Explorer.

Police say he is to be considered armed and dangerous.

http://www.amw.com

Gambler Admits to Scamming Women Via Online Dating

An Atlantic City gambler admitted scamming more than 80 women through telephone and online dating services.

Patrick M. Giblin, 41, pleaded guilty to 10 counts of wire fraud in U.S. District Court in Camden.

According to the indictment, Giblin created numerous accounts with online dating services in different parts of the country, allowing him to correspond with women in those areas.

In a court appearance before Judge Robert B. Kugler, Giblin admitted he falsely told the women he was interested in beginning a romantic relationship, telling them he was about to relocate to their geographic area.

Giblin then said he needed money for travel expenses, and promised to repay the loans as soon as he got there.
He admitted spending the money at casinos in Atlantic City and Las Vegas, as well as for personal expenses.

The amount of money he obtained from the women was not immediately available. Giblin has remained in federal custody without bail since his arrest on March 3, 2005.

Each wire fraud count carries a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison and a fine of $250,000.

The Core of the Cyberpath: THE SOCIOPATH

...being alone isn't always a tragedy...I've known more than a few people in my life who made being alone seem like a little bit of heaven -- and I'll bet that you have known a few too. Run of the mill jerks and liars, two-timing cheats, verbal or physical abusers, small time con artists and that most dangerous one of all...the charming sociopath.

Oh, you've never met one? I sincerely envy you that, but just between friends, and speaking as someone who has had the misfortune to meet and all too closely observe one, let me introduce/warn you. Sociopaths are the most accomplished liar you've ever met in your life. In fact, they lie so well, that even when every instinct within you tells you they are lying through their teeth, you still can't quite make yourself accept the truth about them. They are masters of the old adage that says...if you want to get away with a lie make it such a big one that your audience/victims will believe it is true, simply because they cannot bring themselves to believe that anyone would actually tell such an outrageous lie...and think you were stupid enough to believe it! But their arrogance doesn't stop there, oh no, they lie, they cheat, they steal and they mercilessly use the very people who try to love them, or help them and they never...ever feel any guilt or remorse no matter who they hurt...unless of course it is themselves who are hurt.

Did I mention that they have no shame, an accomplished sociopath if caught outright, or even inconvenienced by any degree of disbelief will try to overbearingly dominate the situation with words, and if that doesn't work they will cry and whine and turn into a pitiful sniveling excuse for a human pleading for your mercy, with a lot of psycho-babble excuses for why it isn't their fault.

So now that I've introduced you to the lowest form of humanity, and possibly scared you half to death, or worse yet...made you snap your fingers and say, "I'll be darned that's what HE is--a freaking sociopath!" So now that I've done this to you, now what do I intend to do about it? Well I'll tell you. I intend to give you a few useful hints about things to watch out for and how to protect yourself and your family.

Sociopaths are likely to be rootless wanderers with nothing much to show for their lives. Why? For the simple reason that they are parasites. Therefore, sooner or later they always wear out their welcome and have to skip town or at the very least find a new set of victims. Of course, they always have some grandiose tale to explain their lack of home, family, possessions.... And believe me, it will be a truly convoluted tale -- starring them of course -- as the sympathetic, innocent victim of some horrible other person's treachery, deceit, thievery, evil etc. combined with lots of bad fortune and plenty of convenient reasons why they don't have any proof and why you can't talk to anyone, anywhere who can confirm any of this. And by the way, they probably won't be able to hold a "real job", because they have been in some sort of tragically disabling accident, or have an old war wound that prevents working! Let me state here for the record, I mean absolutely no offense to any veterans out there, because most sociopaths would be 4F'd in a heartbeat, so their war wounds and their war records are almost always going to be just another in a long line of lies! Anyway, whatever the excuse, even if they could find and hold a job for more than a few days, no self-respecting sociopath will work for a living ...they much prefer -- and in fact live for -- the thrill of leeching off of others like parasitic scum.

So what do you do to protect yourself against such a monster. It's really quite easy. Take nothing for granted. If you meet someone, whether it is on the internet, or at your local college campus, or at a bar or a movie or at a political rally or even in church and you decide you like them and want to get to know them better, use a reasonable amount of caution and always make sure that someone knows where you are, and who you are going to meet at all times. Don't give out too much information about yourself, and absolutely don't bring them home to meet the family until you "know" enough solid "facts" about them to trust that they are on the level and have a verifiable history. Try not to be paranoid, everyone has little secrets, and one little area that doesn't seem quite right is probably ok, but more than one should start to worry you, and if you have any real suspicions at all, either turn, walk away and never look back or visit a Web Detective Service and learn to protect yourself by investigating anyone, anywhere before it is too late! Find the facts that others want to hide. You can find missing people, including so-called long-lost relatives, court records, criminal records, vital records and more! Do it!

(thanks to OneOfSeven for this gem! - Fighter)

In Review: MORE ON COLD-HEARTED CYBERPATH: GARETH ROGER

Gareth Roger's victim sent us some chat transcripts and snippets about him which we are including here. If you meet this person online - run like heck. Our comments, as always, are in dark blue. - Fighter

Gareth's Website

Last Known Screen Name: QAZ3D

Location: United Kingdom

CHAT
Gareth: dunno whether its worth getting tickets to the big gay out

VICTIM: big gay out?

Gareth: http://www.biggayout.com
lots of gay people but baby shambles, bananarama, friankie goest o holly wood, human league,, electric six and loads more are playing (now why would he just DROP that into a chat with someone he 'loves' if not for the SHOCK VALUE? Sometimes cyberpaths drop hints about their true nature. Bisexual maybe?)

VICTIM: ahh do ya wanna go then? Just to see the bands play?

Gareth: dunno loads of half naked guys i wont be looking but you might (baiting her)

VICTIM: umm i wouldnt be looking at all!!!! besides they are gay!

Gareth: but youd end up staring at muscley half naked blokes

VICTIM:: Got my own sexy man thank you!

Gareth : Where?

VICTIM: hes talking to me on ichat right now duh... YOU! hehe

Gareth: exactly (dummy)

Gareth: theres alot of gay bands too i only want to see 4 or 5 of em.

VICTIM: wanna do that as "we" not "i"? lol you trying to tell me something babe?

Gareth: same thing (no it's not - his victim got it right. The use of "I" is telling and narcissistic)

VICTIM: Okies

Gareth: yes i mean we, but i meant "I hope I goto one of them oneday"

VICTIM: we can travel if you want, stay overnight id love to go see bands
yeah theres no reason you wont be able to go, just because I have the children.

Gareth: i know we'll see maybe next year (he's thinking about one person: GARETH!)
CHAT
VICTIM: You there?

Gareth: yea sorry window doesnt flash to tell me I have a new message. its a pain
eveythings ok, gunna finish off packing in a min nearly done (he was probably talking to someone else or watching porn)

VICTIM: sorry just didnt want you to think i was buggin ya, yeah this ichat is a pain in the ass, just checking you had a rest today cause its a hot day and stuff.

Gareth: so what are you upto? (changes the subject quickly!)

VICTIM: Not much just watching a vid, you?

Gareth: Packing still, you chatting to anyone else? (PROJECTION! and baiting!)

VICTIM: no , only you
CHAT
VICTIM: You dont seem like you wanna talk much today

Gareth: no... you always think i dont want to speak to you if im quiet, or if my phones off, Optimism, positivity (he means, believe my B.S. or else)

VICTIM: no not at all darling , i am being optimistic just sometimes you do sound a little offish i am being positive (he is being offish - he's a sociopathic predator)

VICTIM: i said last night i was feeling positive and i trust what you say im not worrying just merely wondering.

Gareth: Ok (putting her on the defensive!)
Gareth on the Victim chatting with her actual REAL LIFE friends:
Gareth: im looking for a new nickname

VICTIM: Why?

Gareth: get away from old ways (get away from all the people I have crapped on and abused)

VICTIM: yup

Gareth: stopped being found so easily (see above - looking to hide)

VICTIM: good idea

Gareth: best one i could think of is Andy

VICTIM: hehe its you and its your name

Gareth: heh type that in on google try find me

VICTIM: yup loads of results

Gareth: good idea but its taken alot

VICTIM: getting out of old ways is a good idea Andy

Gareth: yep it is .......goes for both of us

ME: yes it does

Gareth: i agree, so far i havent slipped back to all the chat groups im not going back to my old ways at all (sure you aren't - you're just looking for a new cover - they all do)

VICTIM: me either

Gareth: i know but you keep gong back to the old chat groups and people, you should dump it forget about it and leave it

VICTIM: im not going back to it Andy (yeah you would probably meet someone like HIM again - predators LIVE online)

Gareth: i know your not, but you do (putting her on the defensive AND trying to continue ISOLATING her from her friends! Typical abuser ploy)

VICTIM: i havent got any of those chat things on this computer

Gareth: i know but ypou see what i mean, move on from it for good not put it on hold

VICTIM: havent put it on hold its in the bin and thats where i want it to stay

Gareth: ok good

VICTIM: i am looking forward to you coming home and for us to have that perfectness here that was present last time you were here im focusing on that its a goal i want to reach

Gareth: :)

VICTIM: but I will keep on saying sorry until im actually forgiven (she's not the one who should be asking forgiveness but abusers LOVE to put their victims in this position!)

Gareth: you are forgiven .. i was just saying you keep going back there thats something that needs to change (no because you 2 haven't talked it out and you haven't been candid with her. You just don't "GET OVER" some things - unless you're pathological and no one means anything to you.)
Like all pathological personalities, Gareth believes he knows more than anyone.

gareth: im checking credit cards as the phone i want and the deal is a special offer and im hoping it wont end

VICTIM: itd be good if you could get it before it ends

Gareth: xxxxxxxxxxxx

Gareth: heh the funny thing was i knew more than the salesman i wass like wheres the menu then, he said there wasnt one, so i stuck my hand out and he handed it to me, went through everything found it was bottom left button heh handed it back

Gareth: hehe i sold the fone to myself (glory-hunting, aggrandizement - blatant narcissism)

Gareth: heh he also said i can walk around house while on call with bluetooth headset, the phone can be downstairs and i can be upstairs, i said not a chance bluetooth cant and isnt made to go through even a walll

VICTIM: hehe so he was trying to sell on basis of lying to someone he thought didnt know about that technology (probably just trying to do his job)

Gareth: yup

Gareth: i know theres no need to ask, but when i get this card i really dont want anything debited from it other than the phone (puts her on the defensive AGAIN)

VICTIM: your right but theres no need to ask as i dont need to use your card

Gareth: im not saying you ....no point spending on it apart from phone im saying us
in general (no you weren't - you were blame-shifting to her!)

VICTIM: so about that fone call? any chance i can have one later, sorry to push you but i like talking to you even if it is just for 5 mins

Gareth: we can have a nice long call after yes
VICTIM: i was going to ask something then thought not

Gareth: no go on

VICTIM: Hmm I don't want to be insensitive as your not feeling too good right now and I should find out on my own, I was going to ask what animation program they made XXXXX in?

Gareth: not sure

VICTIM: Everything ok?

Gareth: sorry I drifted off (because you're not important, so many other lives to screw up, people to prey on)

VICTIM: have I annoyed you? if so , sorry I shouldn't of said anything

Gareth: You haven't annoyed me, Im just thinking about tomorrow, our living together, dreading thinking whatever. (dreading having to commit to you for most than just sex)
More Gareth Putting His Victim on the Defensive & Projecting.
(He acts jealous to keep her on a string - hoping it makes him appear "caring & interested")

Gareth: you on any chat networks?, Im going to have a quick wash, go get a sandwich and drink and open more windows.

VICTIM: No im watching XXXX again im not on any chat networks dont want anything to do with them (how many times does she have to tell him that?)

Gareth: :)

Gareth: well done (yes, you have now isolated her from anyone who might show her you're a predator, a cold snake and a user)
30 mins later
VICTIM: thankyou so much for the phone call it was nice to hear your voice, If you need any support and help, i know its hard but I will help you anyway i can when you come through the door, ill make sure you get loads of hugs, and anything else you need.

Gareth: heya

Gareth: back

Gareth: I need to reboot, theres an update for a program on my computer I need to install.

NO mention whatsoever of what she said. Gareth totally ignored it. (a version of the 'silent treatment') So she made a video for him to see if she could maybe fix the situation as he'd made her feel she did something wrong (predators always make you think YOU did something wrong) -- this was maybe the 100th time she did this and he would normally treat me better after I had gone out of my way to make him happy. (if he "loved" her why would she have to jump through hoops to make him happy? Readers - ALL of our predators did this to their prey. ALL of them)

VICTIM: I have a video for you I made

VICTIM: thankyou

Gareth: grrr sexy thing (he's ASSUMING its a sex video - as that's all he really wants from her!)

VICTIM: your welcome

VICTIM: I have thought about something and want you to have something

Gareth: let me guess.... more asking me what train im going to get and what time. already told you I dont know yet. (why? If you love her you'd have made those plans by now...)

VICTIM: no

Gareth: sorry carry on

VICTIM: Its in the mail

Gareth: checking now

Gareth: aww thanks

Gareth: means a lot

VICTIM: when I said "patiently" i really meant that , train times are not an issue to me. you are! I hope that helps you in some way

Gareth: it does

Gareth: okies im lying down feel really tired and worn out you there? (heh - there she goes - calling him on his cold-heartedness and wanting some assurance and affection from him. Notice the HUGE emotional disconnect on Gareth's part. Sociopathic)
She heard nothing from him until the next afternoon, not sure when he was coming home, what train he was getting -- nothing. Everytime she asked him what time his train was he got angry at me. He probably did this on purpose knowing she'd get frustrated the more he held back. (Or he simply didn't care. at all. It's called WITHHOLDING and its yet another abuse tactic)
VICTIM: have i blown things with you

Gareth: i dunno

VICTIM: ok i understand

Gareth: things dont always sort themselves out (...with a sociopath)

VICTIM: no they dont, but im trying to sort things out my end, to stop giving you a hard time but the thought is ....are you still going to fight for us ? as iam hon (no he's not - his ACTIONS not his words will say everything)

Gareth: yep (words... only words)

VICTIM: ok :)

Gareth: brb my sisters looking at my film list (no surprise - he runs away from TRUE EMOTIONS AGAIN!!)
ARGUMENT
I was getting tired and confused over why he said one thing yet did the opposite. (because he's a sociopath) One minute he would be be consistent, the next minute he had changed his mind. (sociopath) So I tried to break it off and end the relationship; he had kept me waiting for over 6 weeks due to promise after promise being broken. He'd dumped me so many times already as it was, I didn't see anything wrong in asking him to stick to at least 1 promise. (no but with a sociopath/ narcissist they have HUGE problems with accountability AND reality. They never stick to anything unless there's something in it FOR THEM)

Gareth: You just broke up with me, and i know you are back to your old self (Again putting HER on the defensive when he should be held ACCOUNTABLE)

VICTIM:: No im not

Gareth: the one i couldnt love, i loved the real you, youve changed back (it's HER fault? These guys can only 'love' one thing - THEMSELVES!! They are INCAPABLE of love)

Gareth: should i tell my dad to give it two weeks before bringing all my stuff down, i dont think you are the same XXXX, how do i know you wont leave me when i get there, should we give it a two week tester? (he probably didn't want to come down anyway - now, typical predator - he's making it all her fault. PROJECTION)

VICTIM: how do I know that you won't leave me, you have done it so many times (he will)

Gareth: if you were your old self, the loving one, it'd be fine (the one who swallowed all my BS, believed all my lies & didn't hold me accountable that is)

VICTIM: i am the same, i just cant keep going on the same way, i cant keep hoping, and praying and dreaming things are going to be the same way when i know they aren't , you get my hopes up then they you dash them. (sound familiar, readers? She hasn't realized yet he's a predator. A snark. A shark. He kills and leaves. No empathy, no remorse)

Gareth: your not the same to me (because she's starting to question your BS?)

VICTIM: im the same as i was before (just smarter & more aware something's wrong)

Gareth: I dearly hope you are, I trust you and will take your word for it. (no he won't - because he doesn't care)

Gareth: ive emailed you some questions, could you answer them for me by tonight or tommorow morning

VICTIM: ill go look now

Gareth: i think id like you to answer them now, and then again in the morning

Gareth: tell me when you are next to the laptop and in bed

Gareth: darling?

Gareth: tell me when youre here darl, in fact if you get into bed and turn on skype ill whack off for you, and show you anything my a** to my **** to licking my own ***, if you get into bed, and turn skype on. (all about SEX!! she's asking for some REAL answers about their relationships and his way of "CONFIRMING" his feelings is cybersex? Predator. ICK)

VICTIM: Im here, im sorry i was so selfish

Gareth: no your not

VICTIM: yes I am

Gareth: if you loved me and saw a future youd wait till wednesday and help me through it (oh god he's NAUSEATING!)

VICTIM: im so sorry, im such a selfish person, i know it, i cant apologise enough,

Gareth: two days, couldnt wait two days that says something (putting her on the defensive after all HE had put her through by then!!)

VICTIM: its been 6 weeks!

Gareth: now ive seen you like this, so nasty again (unreal aren't they? When you see it from a distance. How dare he continue his projection.)

VICTIM: Im not nasty , I did wait

Gareth: yes you are. (Gareth just 'shut up' -- how much more cruel can you be?)

VICTIM: fine ill wait

Gareth: well you made it *applause* you left the guy that wants to spend his life with you regardless of everything else (oh spare us Gareth. As if that was the truth)

VICTIM: my dad said to me tonight "if you dont make a decision, youll be left always wondering"

Gareth: heh yes now you will always be wondering.. whether i would of came back and if we would of stayed together for life...now you will wonder as you left me before i could get to yo

Gareth: im not giving in to selfish demands such as: leave tommorow (he wants her to give in to only HIS selfish demands)

VICTIM: i know that now

Gareth: well i know what would of happened and im trying to comprehend my future without you and i hate it

VICTIM: ive been selfish! but i cant keep on doing this (you aren't selfish - you're getting smart to this emotional rapist)

Gareth: but you made the choice, and you are back to your old nasty selfish attitude

VICTIM: no im not

VICTIM: Im sitting here waiting for you as always

Gareth: no you broke up with me (boo hoo... Martyr Man)

VICTIM: can you blame me? im always waiting, i cant do it anymore. im so confused I dont know what to do anymore (typical feelings with a predator - and he will find a way to blame her.)

Gareth: no you left me nothing to be confused about anymore you can go back to chatting to people in chat rooms and while away the hours (AGAIN he brings this up!)

VICTIM: Im not chatting to anyone

Gareth: yet, wait two days or bugger off back to the internet, it shows whats more important and your attitude (Projection - he's probably already chatting up other people and has been right along)

VICTIM: im not chatting to guys!!!

Gareth: yet (sadist)

VICTIM: im waiting for you

Gareth: No your not you left me (how old is this guy? 7 years old?)

VICTIM: gods sake

Gareth: not all things are reversible

VICTIM: I left you because I cant take it anymore, the mixed signals. the getting angry at me for no reason, the not speaking to me and broken promises. (victims always think they can talk sense to these guys - before they realize they're PATHOLOGICAL & SICK!)

Gareth: Exactly so theres no more waiting (NO ACCOUNTABILITY FOR WHAT SHE JUST SAID!)

VICTIM: for goodness sakes

Gareth: you wont listen, your back to your old self (heh - listen to WHAT? his selfish b.s.?)

VICTIM: no, im not, you just think i am, im upset

Gareth: no I know you XXXXX you used to be much more mature and nice wanting to talk at night on skype (and believing my lies)

VICTIM: i am mature (more than him, that's for sure)

Gareth: chuck it all away for the sake of another 2 days wait

Gareth: very mature

VICTIM: im sick of going around in circles, im sure others can tell you im not back to my old ways

gareth: they may, but at least before you were different towards me, you understood

VICTIM: I dont want to argue you made your choice i made mine

Gareth: my choice was to spend my life with you, your choice was not to give me the chance to do that, before youd of said 2 days no problems, cant wait to cuddle and sleep with you and walk with you and bath with you , now you leave.

(She ended up apologising and asking him for another chance, and then he told her:)

Gareth: we will have to sort all this out when I get back, we are not over but a lot has to be sorted now

(Don't you want to just SMACK Gareth? His mind games are so cruel & pathetic)
COMING TO THE END OF THE RELATIONSHIP
I spent the next year in stress Gareth would spend all his time in our bedroom and when his parents or boss would call him, he would send me out of the room and talk in secret, all his emails to his family would be secret and I was never allowed to see what the conversations were about. My children were not allowed to make any noise when he was on the phone or he would ignore me for the rest of the day and just be aloof on purpose.

I started to get rashes all over my body, I couldnt understand what it was, but I was covered head to foot in it, it was sore and itched constantly for 4 months, I went to the Doctor and he said it was Hives / allergy from stress I put all this "stress" down to losing the baby. (it was GARETH - toxic GARETH)

His "Silent Treatment" would go on for hours on end,and when I would get frustrated after the 4th hour of this, or angry he would tell me I was the crazy one for yelling at him and trying to get a rise out of him.

He never ate dinner with me and the children; instead sat in the bedroom and ate his dinner when I brought the plate up to him, after dinner he would continue working or playing "rainbow Six" or "Postal" or "Working" (hmm... wasn't he accusing HER of being ONLINE all the time? He was online because it was a 2-dimensional world and "real" people are just objects to these cyberpaths. Besides - these predators feel: why invest any more in something you can't control)

Whenever we went out it was always when the children were at my mothers, he usually slept cuddling me, but started to sleep turning to the wall and didnt want me to cuddle up to him. He said "Its because i always sleep like this" which wasnt true so that was the first sign he was starting to lose interest in me. (no it was the one behavior you finally saw - Sorry but he was NEVER interested in you; just in what he could "get" out of you - sex, affection, a place to live, food, etc)

Sex wasnt a problem whenever he wanted it -- he was loving but as soon as it was over he would get back on his computer and ignore me. (because that's all he wanted)

If I said anything whatever it was didn't matter, he would tell me "That's not what you said" I spent weeks and months thinking I was losing my memory or going nuts. (Gaslighting)

I remember sitting on the bed crying once, in deep pain over the loss of our baby and he stood over me staring blankly, all i wanted him to do was cuddle me and tell me everything was going to be ok, but instead he said "Im going out as this upsets me and i cannot stand the crying and loud noise, ill come back when you have calmed down" (narcissist)

When his boss used to come over to meet with him for a meeting he would shoo me and the children out the house and tell me to make sure the house was pristine before his boss arrived, then we had to get out the house and not come back until he phoned me. (WHAT? What a sick piece of dung he is)

Gareth always criticised me over laundry, smoking (he would hide my lighters in the freezer for some reason and blow them up outside by making a fire and making me watch) To him, his home town was amazing and living with me couldn't compare to it. I grew to feel so ashamed of my house (which is rather lovely) all because he would moan about the location and didn't like any of his work collegues or family to set foot in it. (Blame shifting, degrading)

I was so emotionally numb because during all this time he had left a few times and come back again and I needed reassurance so I asked sometimes "are you going to leave me" this was usually when he was silent or in a mood about something. I was so insecure at this point. I felt nothing was going to be consistent, no one was going to stay with me. I had lost two children already I needed some reassurance and stability. (Gareth knew that, knew she was vulnerable and worked her like a puppet)

He would go silent on me whenever i asked him things that had to do with us as a couple or our relationship. He wouldnt talk and kept his eyes on the computer, I got so frustrated because he would never telll me how he felt and would always "Sigh" or exhale loudly (abuser tactic - to belittle her & her needs)

Whenever we had guests such as my parents or friends over, he would stay in his room and not come down, he wouldnt even greet anyone. My family said it was really rude, but I tried to explain to them that it was because Gareth was shy and didn't like social gatherings. (No he was RUDE and a SOCIOPATH)

Gareth told me about the Milgram Experiment once, was totally besotted with it. I found out by looking through his files on the computer that he had hundreds of books on psychology , & the art of seduction and hypnosis, I would always ask him if he used it on me he told me he would never manipulate me that way, he used it on other people. (BINGO!)

He never got angry (no he was angry ALL the time it appears). Never hit me or showed rage (just verbal & emotional abuse) He was just silent, where he wouldnt speak at all and this really angered me after a while as he just wouldnt speak. Like talking to a brick wall. He knew I used to get so very frustrated by this, sometimes id see a smirk running across his face when he knew I was pushed into a corner. (that's SEVERE abuse - the silent treatment, withhold - its BLATANT ABUSE)

One thing I always noticed was Gareth never made eye contact with me. When your asking someone a question or talking in general you will get eye contact or they will look at your face. Its a natural thing for humans to do, but with Gareth he never made eye contact with me , not ever (TYPICAL SOCIOPATH TRAIT!! BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE OBJECTS TO THEM) I used to think "Oh thats just the way he is" but now I realise it is very disturbing and unnatural. (AND PATHOLOGICAL) He would always pick a spot and stare at it when I was talking to him. (tuning you out)

Sometimes I would wake up around 3am and on opening my eyes, would see his face over mine, staring down at me. I have no idea how long he spent doing that, but I found it uncomfortable. (Sociopaths do that a lot)

We got a dog after a few months and whenever he got home from work he would bypass me and go right to the dog and kiss and cuddle it. I would always have dinner ready on time and the house clean but he'd take his dinner and the dog to the bedroom and stay there petting it and kissing it and ignoring me all evening. If I would venture upstairs to spend time with him he would sit there and baby talk the dog. if I wanted some affection it would have to be on his terms or when he was playing a video game / doing work and wanted to show me something. (ABUSE - he was taunting you with a DOG!)

When I needed money to get the children some clothes I asked him for the money but he said he needed $500 for his parachute jumping. (BAD PRIORITIES!) If it wasn't for my mother the children would of gone without clothes.
READERS - thank GOODNESS she's no longer with this "person" (if you could even call him HUMAN!) -- EOPC

Canadian Police Befriend Facebook, Twitter Users

Canadian police forces are getting tips on how to track sexual predators and gang members by setting up fake accounts on social networking sites like Facebook and Twitter.

"They make friends that way, they make connections that way. And they get inside that world, and go from there," said Lauri Stevens, a U.S. social media consultant who has been invited this week to teach police in Ottawa, Montreal and Toronto how to make better use of such sites to fight crime.

"They're seeing what people are saying about them," Stevens added. "And in some cases there are some very sophisticated investigations going on in the world of social media."

Canadian police forces have already been using such sites to some extent. This summer, for example, Toronto police used Twitter to monitor chatter from Tamil protesters who shut down the Gardiner Expressway.

Stevens said with the right software and knowledge of how to use those tools, police can mine Facebook for leads and photographs.

In addition, she said, police can use social media to connect with the community. For example, police in Toronto have used Twitter to promote themselves and Crime Stoppers in the gay community.

Ottawa police said they plan to begin using Facebook and Twitter to send and receive crime tips.

The way police use such sites has raised concerns from critics such as privacy lawyer David Elder.

"There's a real legal and ethical issue, I guess, here, about the appropriate balance between law enforcement and privacy rights. And I'm not sure exactly where that line is," he said. "It's still being set by the courts, and by the privacy commissioner."

There are currently more than 300 million Facebook users in the world, including more than 12 million in Canada.

original article here

Facebook Safety

Are You Doing Enough?

By Joelle Halon

Keeping in touch with friends has always been important, but since the invention of the social networking site Facebook, keeping in touch with people has become of part of many PUC students' normal routines.

When keeping up with friends, it's nice to congratulate your long-lost elementary school classmates on a recent wedding. But is it necessary to share information like getting so wasted that you vomited all over yourself and passed out on the streets of Chicago? For some, this is a case of too much information, but the main issue of TMI is sharing your phone numbers, email addresses, and street addresses on Facebook and other networking sites. By doing so, you are leaving yourself open for stalking and other tragic occurrences.

Facebook's privacy states that the user chooses what information you put in your profile, including contact and personal information. This information is shared at the user's discretion.

Danny Santiago, a sophomore CIT major, stated that the fact that Facebook reports every action you make on the site should be cause for concern. Facebook is unique in that it almost mirrors the physical act of stalking with status updates.

Any bit of your information that you include is shown on your profile, which can lead to further problems.

Although many may think they're only sharing this information with your friends, Facebook has a "friends of friends" feature that allows your friends' followers to see the activity.

According to My Fox Alabama, Alabama police captured Spencer Shivers, 19, and Tyler Glass, 20, who robbed several homes of individuals who announced they were going on vacation during the month of July.

Although they were not direct friends of the victims, they found the information using the "friends of friends" feature, which displays status messages in the profile boxes.

Besides the aforementioned, cyber stalking has also increased since social networking has increased in popularity.

According to Bureau of Justice Statistics, as of January 2009, 46% of reported stalking cases were cyber stalking claims. Within this same report, women were the most likely targets of cyber stalking.

One victim, "Kathy," has been cyberstalked for the past year. Kathy shared her information online and received e-mails from an individual that contained lewd images.

Additionally, her stalker also discovered her whereabouts and places she planned to visit, wanting to meet her at these locations. As a result, she had to create a new identity in order to protect herself. She continued by stating that he used an untraceable IP address.

Classrooms, are turning to Facebook to enhance the classroom experience and communication.

English 104 instructor Miranda Morley mentions that she uses Facebook to communicate with some of her students, but mostly uses it for her writing groups.

However, there are students who are upset about professors using Facebook.

Sophomore sociology major Megan Byrne said that she had an English professor who required a Facebook and Facebook group for a class. Byrne stated that she thought it was quite ridiculous.

As Charity Wysong, a senior CGT student, states that if you want people to have that information, then you should decide who needs to have it and send those people private messages.

Furthermore, if you're planning a long-term vacation or a trip out of town, do not post this information in your status messages.

The Internet is not as safe as people think, so always air on the side of caution.

original article here

Online liars' noses don't grow, but their wordiness does, Cornell researchers find

How to spot an online fibber
REPOSTING THIS IN HONOR OF SELF-INVOLVED BLABBERS - CYBERPATHS: DOUGLAS BECKSTEAD AND NATHAN E.B. THOMAS, JR.

(ITHACA, N.Y.) How to spot an online fibber: They talk too much, use more pronouns about others and use more terms about the senses, such as "see," "hear" and "feel," than people telling the truth, according to a new study by Cornell University communication experts.

"Our study suggests that people who are lying to another person in a chat room or in instant messaging use approximately one-third more words, probably in their attempt to construct a more cohesive and detailed story in order to seem believable," says Jeff Hancock, assistant professor of communication in the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences (CALS) at Cornell.

"Perhaps more important is the finding that people being lied to also change the way they talk, even though they don't explicitly know they are being lied to," says Hancock. He found that targets of lies on the Web ask more questions and also use more words than when they are being told the truth. Hancock says that this may be another reason for the extra words: targets of deception may become skeptical and ask more questions than those receiving truthful information.

The study is published in the Proceedings of the 26th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (2004). It was first presented at the 2004 annual meeting of the Cognitive Science Society in Chicago.

Other studies have shown that liars use fewer words, but these studies examined deceptive monologues, not a conversation with a partner, and did not look at online communications, which, because they are written, give people more time to prepare their responses. Hancock's finding that liars use more pronouns about others ("he," "she," "they") than truthful communicators is consistent with other research and is probably liars' attempts to distance themselves from their deception and to deflect the focus.

Hancock's co-authors are Lauren E. Curry '04 (now at Fordham Law School) and Saurabh Goorha, M.S. '04 (now in Cornell's S.C. Johnson Graduate School of Management), and collaborator Michael T. Woodworth at Okanagan University College, British Columbia. The researchers studied 66 people and paired them up for a conversation via an instant-messaging interface on computers. Participants were asked to discuss five assigned topics about themselves; one of each pair was randomly assigned to fabricate stories in two topics and was given examples about the kinds of lies to tell. They had five minutes to prepare.

Although more research is needed to observe deceptive face-to-face conversations to see what happens when nonverbal cues, such as facial expressions, are available, Hancock says that text-based communication is becoming increasingly ubiquitous. His findings suggest that researchers might be able to develop techniques to identify online communication that appears to be deceptive.

~~~~~
The study was supported in part by the Department of Communication at Cornell and a federal Hatch Grant.

Related World Wide Web sites: The following sites provide additional information on this news release. Some might not be part of the Cornell University community, and Cornell has no control over their content or availability.

Jeff Hancock

(Sounds a LOT like Ed Hicks, Dan Jacoby and Gareth Rodger, too!)

How Married, Middle-Class Predators Prey on Others

This story talks about vulnerable teenagers - but all you'd have to do is replace 'teenagers' with disabled or divorced or lonely or vulnerable ADULTS - and the modus operandi and result would be the same - EOPC

By Mark Williams-Thomas

Somewhere out there, as you read this, a man sits hunched over his computer, his brow furrowed in concentration as he taps away at his keyboard.

But he's not booking cinema tickets or tracing his family tree or doing any of the things that have made the internet such a valuable tool of modern life.

No, the sickening truth is that he's pretending to be a 13-year-old girl and he's in one of those internet chatrooms so beloved of our teenagers.

Using modern text-speak to pass muster as a teenager, he taps out an innocent-sounding question, the sort one teenage girl might ask another.

'Hve u gt a boyfriend - lol?' 'No,' replies the very real 12-year-old, giggling as she types.

Back comes the reply: 'Wd u like one?' The trap is about to be set.

The man, of course, is a paedophile; one of the most feared and loathed figures in today's society. But the girl, sitting at her computer in the comfort and supposed safety of her own bedroom. . . well, she could be my daughter, your daughter or anyone's daughter.

As a father, I know it's important not to overstate the danger our girls are in but, as a former policeman and professional child protection consultant, I also know the paedophile threat is out there. It's very real, it's very nasty indeed and the connection between those internet chats and images of paedophilia are all too common.

I've spent the past 18 months shadowing the officers of Scotland Yard's Paedophile Unit and, despite being a former detective with more than 12 years of experience in child protection, I've been horrified by what I've seen.

It's not just the appalling nature of the photographic images that so alarms me; it's the number of them. Barely a decade ago, we thought it was bad enough that there were a few thousand of these images being passed around paedophile rings. Now there are literally millions.

It's become not just a worldwide problem, but a worldwide business, too, with organised crime gangs increasingly keen to muscle in on the lucrative trade for this truly disgusting material.

What you have to remember is that for each and every one of those images, a child has been coerced, assaulted and badly hurt. Many will have been raped and, in a few tragic cases, the victim may even have been killed. That's the reality of modern paedophilia.

Despite the horrific nature of these crimes, the problem seems to get worse every year.

As Detective Chief Inspector Nick Stevens, who heads the unit, puts it, he could have three times the staff he has and still be struggling to cope with the demand for their services.

The big question, of course, is who is looking at these appalling images and then going on, in far too many cases, to plan and commit their own assaults on children?

What my time at the Paedophile Unit has revealed is that the days when a lazy stereotype of a paedophile - a male, middle-aged loner, often still living with his parents - are long over.

Yes, child protection officers do still come across the sad and dangerous individuals who could be described in that way, but increasingly they are arresting a new breed of paedophile.

Often married and with children themselves, they can be well-educated and highly successful in their field.

Passing them in the street - and it could easily be your street - you wouldn't give them a second glance. But despite often having no criminal record, they pose every bit as serious a threat to our children as the more readily identifiable 'dirty old men' of the past.

'In the past couple of years we've arrested magistrates, lawyers, company directors, police officers, people in the media,' DCI Stevens tells me. Chillingly, it seems paedophiles and offenders really do now come from all walks of life.
Webcam

Take Andrew Lintern, for instance, one of the men I saw being arrested, who had travelled to London from Hertfordshire in the hope of having sex with a 13-year-old girl.

He was 55, married, highly qualified as a scientist working in IT, professional and, it later emerged, an Oxford graduate.

And yet when officers from the Paedophile Unit raided his home, they found nearly 20,000 indecent images, including video-clips of a 17-month-old baby being assaulted.

Lintern later confessed that the man assaulting the baby in the videoclips was, in fact, himself - an admission that no doubt contributed to him being ordered to be detained indefinitely when he came before Southwark Crown Court earlier this year.

What's brought about this change in both the number of paedophile and the backgrounds they come from, of course, is the internet.

Twenty years ago, a predatory paedophile would have had to loiter around parks, funfairs and swimming pools to gain access to children, where his suspicious behaviour - in full public view - would often have raised the alarm before he could cause any real harm.

But computers and the internet have brought an end to all that. Now a paedophile can be chatting to a vulnerable young teenager - even watching her on a webcam - after just a few clicks of his mouse.

The internet has become famous for bringing people together - relatives, old school friends, prospective husbands and wives - but it also has a dark side, and it doesn't come much darker than bringing a paedophile and his victim together.

That's what happened when Andrew Lintern logged onto an internet chatroom pretending to be a nine-year-old girl and began a conversation with 'Jessie', whom he believed was a 13-year old-girl.

Only, just as the nine-year-old girl wasn't who she said she was, nor was Jessie. In fact, she was John Taylor, a middle-aged detective and a Covert Internet Investigator (CII) with the Paedophile Unit.

'Thousands in the UK have looked at child pornography'
To catch the new breed of paedophile, you see, has required a new form of policing and Scotland Yard's Paedophile Unit has led the world with its pro-active approach.

Since 2005, it's been using officers posing as young girls in internet chatrooms and on social networking sites to draw these paedophiles out into the open.

The idea is not to entrap them (which would be against the law), but simply to communicate with them long enough for them to break the law, either by engaging in sexual grooming, sending indecent images to a minor or by encouraging them to commit an indecent act.

Often, it is the investigation which follows the suspect's arrest on one of these charges that unearths evidence of even more serious crimes.

Such is the burden of proof that Paedophile Unit investigators are able to assemble that, more often than not, the defendants plead guilty.

Having worked alongside them for so many months, I am hugely impressed with their professional commitment and their determination to secure a conviction on the most serious charge they can.

After the excitement of a successful arrest, this, they say, is where the real work begins.

As one of the detectives told me: 'You've got to get their mobile phones examined, their computers examined, their cameras examined and look at every single image. Multiply that by the number of prisoners and it's a phenomenal amount of work.'

It's a meticulous and time-consuming approach, but it works.

Take Dean Hardy, a Kent businessman who, following a tip off from Europol, the European law enforcement agency, had been arrested for downloading child pornography from the internet.

Convinced but, as yet, unable to prove Hardy had also been assaulting children, his home was searched and a camera memory stick found which revealed pictures of an adult male's hand abusing a young Asian girl.

Proving the hand in the picture was Hardy's required something that had never been done before - a side-by-side photographic comparison and enough points of proven similarity to convince the Crown Prosecution Service, in the first instance, to take the higher charge of sexual assault to court and, in due course, for a jury to find him guilty.

In the end, however, the level of evidence so painstakingly assembled by the Paedophile Unit detectives was so great that Hardy pleaded guilty. He was sentenced to six years in prison earlier this year.

So how many paedophiles are there out there, trawling the net for underage girls? The truth is that not even Nick Stevens, head of the Paedophile Unit, knows. 'I believe there are thousands of people in the UK who have looked at child pornography.' What he doesn't know is what proportion go on and try to make contact online with a child and then meet them.

All I can add, having watched the Paedophile Unit at work and worked myself in the same field, is that we under-estimate the scale of the problem at our peril. The internet has opened a door, and I believe that many men have already stepped through it and more will follow.

The statistic that keeps coming back to me is that of 300 men arrested by the Paedophile Unit since 2005, most had no previous convictions.

To put it another way, if John Taylor hadn't pretended to be 'Jessie', Andrew Lintern, a man we now know had been abusing children for a decade, would still be out there.

What can be done about this growing evil? Well, a number of things. Scotland Yard's Paedophile Unit has led the world with its approach to catching paedophiles, and I'd like to see other enforcement agencies around the world following their example. But I'd also like police forces everywhere to remember that this is a crime with a victim as well as a perpetrator.

If we're clever and fortunate, we can send that perpetrator to prison for a very long time, but there's a danger that we forget the often terrifying ordeal his victims may have experienced. They need our help and, at the moment, they're not always getting it.

I'd also like to see internet service providers and those hosting chatrooms and social networking sites to be held responsible for the content they carry. Some sites need to closed down entirely; others need to be far more effectively moderated.

original article here

IN REVIEW: Predator of The Month - April 2008 - Gareth Rodger

As always, EOPC's comments are in dark blue.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

His victim tells her story:

Gareth and I met on the internet, through a friend. I had been through a particularly abusive childhood and I had at this time just started sorting through most of my issues with a therapist.

I didn't know at the time I was still damaged but I believed I'd met someone in Gareth who appeared to be the complete opposite of abusive. How wrong I was........

I had just a couple of years previous come out of a marriage with an abusive ex-husband. We had lost a child due to my womb rupturing in the last month of my pregnancy, and I really wanted to make some new friends and gain some confidence back in my life and start moving forward. (Typical - predator gets a woman who's been abused & trying to recover, sweeps in like a 'white knight', love bombs her when she needs a sympathetic ear... sound familiar?)

Everything was a whirlwind romance to begin with, Gareth paid great attention to me, listened to what i had to say, showered me in compliments, told me I was his soulmate and never left my side. I felt this was what I truly needed after a few years bad luck, I was insecure, unsure, untrusting and looking for my "Mr Right." (We got it - he loved bombed you.)
Gareth had books lining his shelves, on Psychology, NLP, Hypnosis, Art Of Seduction, literature and weapons. (red flag - psychopath?) He seemed so intelligent and mastered in the ways of the mind, I felt he could help me confront some of my issues from my past. (He could help himself to her emotionally, physically & spiritually through manipulation, NLP, mind-control & coercion)

He once sent me a picture of him holding a gun to a picture of my head, he said it was a joke. (WARNING!)

After a couple of weeks I started to get to know Gareth more. He still lived with his parents, but was a loner and spent most of his time in his bedroom on the computer. (WARNING!) He asked to meet me to which I agreed to and we had our first date.

The first night of his visit he told me he loved me. (HUGE RED FLAG! First Night?? Readers that rarely happens... believe us these creatures don't know what love is)

Once back home he started to take longer to reply to my emails, or ask me who I had been talking to. He would ask me if I loved only him, then went right back to being aloof once he got the answer. (narcissistic)

I used to ask him questions all the time to which I would only get a "Yep" reply or "Ok" , nothing more than that. However when HE wanted to talk he expected me to answer immediately. (manipulation & NLP)

After a few weeks his parents invited me down to their home. As soon as his parents left for work Gareth asked me to go up to their bedroom, he wanted to have sex on their bed, which I refused to because it was despicable and he had his own bed. (WARNING!) However he wouldnt take no for an answer and decided to leave his own stain on their bed, saying "Well they will see it but they won't know what it is." (PSYCHOPATHIC behavior!)
He also (not with me) went through his mother's lingerie drawers to find sex toys and porn dvds and he watched them when they were not in the house. (his MOTHER'S???)

His parents seemed very different, very reserved to how my family are with each other, they didn't show any signs of affection with each other and spoke in a very "matter of fact way." It was strange , and something almost robotic in their behaviour. (Sociopathic, unemotional parenting?)

Nonetheless I shook this feeling off as "everyone is different." I truly believed they liked me and I wanted to make a good impression, Gareth had not told them I had children from my previous relationship, once they found out however they changed towards me.They didn't want anything to do with me. This caused a lot of stress in his family which was blamed on me. (blame-shifting and guilting the victim? because of their own screwed up ethics and morals?)

His mother used to scream at him and get down on her knees, hysterically crying, grabbing his legs and begging him not to go see me. This was a daily occurrence. She threatened to leave Gareth's father if he took one step out the door to come down in the car to visit me. (Wonder if she'd done that with any other of Gareth's girlfriends? Sounds like Gareth's mom is pathological! And if Gareth had any sense he'd have gotten out a long time before!)

His mother did in fact pack a bag and leave and stayed a few nights at a hotel. Gareth had to go running back to his family to sort it all out. His mother spent the entire weekend screaming and throwing out things of mine I had left there in Gareth's care. (Pathological family... and the victim's just come out of an abusive marriage so she doesn't see this drama for the massive red flag it was!)

Every week his mother would throw a massive tantrum and stress Gareth out even more. I telephoned her once as she wanted to speak to me. She made me feel guilty and said to me "If you and my son stay together you will be tearing a family apart, do you want that?" I told her "You cannot manipulate your son" she said very flatly "I can and I will!" she then hung up on me. (Mom just said it all, didn't she? And in turn, her son will now manipulate this victim.)

Gareth was due to come and see me one weekend, so I called that very morning to see what time he was coming over and found out he had gone on a holiday trip 200 miles away with his grandparents.
I was so shocked and hurt. I spent the next few weeks completely stressed out and anxious. Because of the loss of my third child with my abusive ex- husband I was very concerned about this pregnancy and knew stress could aggravate my condition.

I was so worried about this baby and spent so much of the pregnancy in denial and stress which wasnt good for my children or me. I was concentrating so much on Gareth that I ignored my children most of the time because he would send such mixed signals, and do the Pull me - push me action daily. (passive-aggressive behaviors of a pathological!)

I went into early labour a few weeks later as my womb ruptured again and the baby was born. She was in an incubator for 5 weeks trying to get strong. I would spend all my nights and days by her bedside willing her to live and praying to God. I spent hours by her side. Andy phoned me at the hospital and instead of asking me how our baby was -- he wanted to know who I had spoken to on the computer. Gareth accused me of going off with another man. (Typical - trying to blame-shift & project as HE probably had another victim on HIS string by then) I was so confused at this point, so many things were going through my mind, like: "why is he asking all these stupid questions," "what about the baby," "how is my tummy healing after the c-section," ... and all he wanted to talk about was what I had done to him. How I hurt him by talking to a friend online which had been a week before i went into labour. (me me me me me me me me! And why would he care if he'd ended the relationship?)

I had to beg him to come over and see us. I apologised for 2 hours on the phone profusely. I was in a wheelchair outside apologising instead of being upstairs with our baby which I should of been doing. Gareth said "well, I'll think about it. Youve hurt me so much by talking to this man and I know you would of done something with him if i hadnt of phoned you. You would of gone home and been intimate with this man." (Again, putting his victim on the defensive when he didn't want a relationship or the baby. Mind-f**king manipulation)

After 2 hours of me begging him and apologising for something I hadn't even done (Cyberpaths/ pathologicals love putting their victims in the defensive position) and assuring him this "friend" meant nothing to me, Gareth said he would drive over the next morning.

When he went to see our baby he just stood there and stared at her. There was no emotion there whatsoever. I begged him to put his hand in and touch her hand, but he just wouldn't do it. He kept his distance and saw her only a few times and not for very long. (because everything and everyone is an OBJECT to him. He's more comfortable either having sex or online because he can OBJECTIFY everything & everyone)

The first night he was there, Gareth and I were given a room in the hospital to stay in near to where the baby was sleeping. I was so sore from the C-Section as I had a lot of extensive surgery done on my ruptured womb. Gareth knew I was in pain but insisted we be intimate. (all about him, all about using sex to get back in control of his victim... no matter how much pain she was in physically or emotionally)

I asked him if he would consider moving in together so we could raise our baby. Gareth said he would have to think about it. I was elated and excited and I really thought things would work out. (Magical thinking - Predator's got her mind so twisted she can't even see the manipulation for what it is)

Gareth went back to University and came over in the fifth week after I'd had the baby. I asked him again if he had thought about moving in, and he said I should stop asking him as "it was getitng on his nerves and stressing him out." Gareth said he was still thinking about it. (He had no intention of helping her or moving in. Just wanted to play games and get sex out of her.) He just made me more stressed out as I didn't know where the children or I stood. (Way off balance - just the way he wanted it!)
We were just going out the door of our room the next morning when we saw the nurse running towards us telling us to come quickly. The baby had died. I rushed to the baby unit and fell on the floor crying. Through my tears I looked up at Gareth's face, and it is something I'll never forget. He had no emotion, just a blank stare. (psychopath - the snake like, empty-soul stare, Reptilian Gaze)

An hour later that same day after I spent some time washing and dressing the baby so the coroner could come and collect her, Gareth came to me and said "I'll move in with you." (Wow! What timing. No baby so now he'll move in??)

At this time I was so upset but I had hope too, because we could be together and get through this terrible time together. (yeah right... he wasn't done sucking her dry emotionally or using her sexually!)

Two weeks before the funeral his mom and dad, who still didn't know their son was moving in with me, called him as they knew he was staying with me. They told him they were going on a family holiday to Hawaii. They said if he didn't go he would upset them and his brother.

Gareth told me he was going to go on the 3 week holiday , said he needed the time to get emotionally sorted as the death of the baby had broken him and he wanted to be with his parents so he could have some support. He said he didn't know if he would make it back in time for the funeral but he would try. (OMG! What a cold-blooded snake!)

Just to point out, I saw Gareth cry only ONCE over the baby. I think he was crying more over himself than for his daughter. (He was crying over himself - and even then it was crocodile tears)

I cried and begged him not to go as I knew he would miss the funeral and I so needed his support and love to get me through this, and I thought he would need my love and support too. (He was incapable of loving anything. He's barely human that he would even THINK of going with his parents. But since the victim's just an object to him and he was only using her for sex and an "emotional blood source" he had no problems just doing what HE wanted to do.)

In the end I had to put the funeral forward another few weeks so he could make it. (The victim changes a child's FUNERAL so the father could GO ON VACATION? Sick sick sick. And she's so messed up by his b.s. she can't even see what he's done isn't normal!)

He phoned me collect call from Hawaii, sent me photos, emails telling me what wonderful time he was having, how beautiful it was and how life was great. (MASSIVE RED FLAG - how hurtful and disgusting!) He didn't mention the baby at all nor did he sound upset. He told me he had thought about things so much on vacation and decided that he wanted to live with me 100%. (Why not, he's got the victim so messed up she's begging to have him around when he's treating her like complete crap) Gareth then told his parents who again went into a red rage and threatened to cut him off financially.

I had to pay over $1000 for the collect calls from Hawaii and my mother had to pay the phone bill for me as I couldn't afford it and would be cut off. (user!!)
When he got home from the vacation we spent a few nights talking, however he kept putting off the day he was to come back to my house and we could start our lives together. He made all sorts of excuses as to why he had to stay a few extra days.

MORE TO COME!! WHAT A SICK BOY!! Wonder how many other girlfriends he had online & off during all this? - Fighter

MySpace: A Place for Stalking

Media mogul and grumpy old man Rupert Murdoch has developed a "personal antipathy to the Internet," biographer Michael Wolff writes. Murdoch even thinks MySpace, which he himself paid $580 million for, is kind of a criminal piece of garbage:

In 2005, not long after News Corp. bought MySpace, when it still seemed like a brilliant purchase... I congratulated him on the acquisition. "Now," he said, "we're in the stalking business."

Later in his Vanity Fair column, Wolff recounts how Murdoch asked the founders of Google "Why don't you read newspapers?", gave "a walleyed stare" during all conversations about Web news and tried to beat Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg to death with his cane.

Kidding; even after buying MySpace, Murdoch was over the moon for Zuckerberg. He invited the founder to speak at a News Corp. executive retreat, huddled with him throughout dinner — sparking obvious jealousy in MySpace co-founder Chris DeWolfe — and soon declared people were "all going to Facebook at the moment" rather than MySpace. All this according to Julia Angwin's Stealing MySpace.

The point is, Rupert Murdoch has always kind of hated on MySpace, cruelly, in public.

original article here

October is National Cyber Security Awareness Month

October marks the sixth annual National Cybersecurity Awareness Month sponsored by the Department of Homeland Security. The theme for National Cybersecurity Awareness Month 2009 is “Our Shared Responsibility” to reinforce the message that all computer users, not just industry and government, have a responsibility to practice good “cyber hygiene” and to protect themselves and their families at home, at work and at school.

Americans can follow a few simple steps to keep themselves safe online. By doing so, you will not only keep your personal assets and information secure but you will also help to improve the overall security of cyberspace.

It is Our Shared Responsibility to stay safe online.

SOURCE

Dangerous Cyberstalker & Predator Finally Arrested

James Ecret was arrested Saturday night. He was on the ferry to Tahlequah (Vashon Island - Washington State) from Pt. Defiance docked.

Detectives Say He's Stalking His Ex On The Web, And That's Just The Start.

King County detectives stressed urgency in findingthis week's top fugitive, James Ecret.

He's a convicted felon accused of sticking a knife into his ex-girlfriend's door with a terrifying note that read, "I decide how the saga ends."

Ecret's ex says he's been harassing her for the past several weeks, and has also threatened officers that he won't go down without a fight.

Detectives say he's been convicted in the past of violating a no contact order, which is a felony, and his new threats have cops extremely concerned.

Sgt. John Urquhart with the King County Sheriff's Office paints a picture of just how serious the situation is.

"When you're sitting at a computer, typing away, threatening someone, or stalking them.. that's one thing," he said. "But, when you show up at somebody's house, leave a threatening note tacked to the door with a knife - that really gives us pause - somebody we want to find, and it certainly scares the heck out of this poor woman, who just wants to get away from this guy, and move on with her life."

Ecret has a $100,000 warrant for his arrest for cyberstalking, harassment, and vandalism.

Here are the details on James Ecret:

* Age: 49
* Ht: 5'10"
* Wt: 185 lbs
* Hair: Brown
* Eyes: Brown

Ecret has been convicted of harassment and cyberstalking before.

He has several protection orders against him by a number of different women.

INSIDE THE ABUSIVE MIND

"..the narcissistic abuser often picks energetic, loving, successful, passionate people. They seek out in others, what they lack, then begin the process of appropriating what the other has for themselves. In this sense they are true emotional vampires, robbing their victims of their personality, they energy, their passion for life - metaphorically killing them.

Their preferred method though, in the end, is to have the victim self-destruct, allowing them to walk away in triumph seeking sympathy for what they've had to endure with this 'crazy person'." - Sandra Brown, MA

(edited slightly for cyberpaths)
Abusive people (such as cyberpaths) typically think they are unique, so different from other people that they don't have to follow the same rules as everyone else. But actually, abusers have a lot in common with one another and share a great many thinking patterns and behaviors.

These may include:

Success Fantasies: The abuser believes in fantasies of being rich, famous, or extremely successful in other terms if only other people weren't holding him back. They're blocking the way makes the abuser feel justified in getting back at them, including through abuse. The abuser also puts other people down as a way of building himself up. Beckstead - prime example!

Blaming: The abuser shifts responsibility for actions to others, which allows the abuser to be angry at the other person for "causing" the behavior. Cyberpath example: "If you wouldn't "tempt me" I wouldn't beg you for intimate photos, cybersex or send you dirty pictures.."

Redefining: The abuser redefines the situation so that the problem lies not with the abuser but with others or the outside world. Cyberpath example: My wife/ partner doesn't love me; won't have sex with me; makes me feel bad - anyway... so I need to turn to you (and net porn) for relief. My boss stresses me out... so I take it out on you (victim) at the computer.

Making Fools of Others: The abuser combines tactics to manipulate others. The tactics include lying, upsetting the other person just to watch her reactions, and provoking a fight between or among others. The Cyberpath may try to charm the person he wants to manipulate, pretending a great deal of interest in and concern for that person in order to get on her good side. (love bombing, coercion, manipulation, brainwashing, anchoring lies)

Assuming: Abusive people often assume they know what others are thinking or feeling. Their assumption allows them to justify their behavior because they "know" what the other person would think or do in a given situation. Cyberpath example: "I knew you'd be mad because I didn't come online when you asked, so I figured I might as well stay away for a week..."

Emotional Dependence: Abusive individuals are usually very emotionally dependent on their partner. The result of their inner rage at being dependent means that the abuser acts in controlling ways to exert power and to deny their own weakness. (If they are having net affairs they may take out their rage on the new victim rather than the spouse - knowing the person they are cheating with has no one to tell without revealing the net affair!)

One major symptom is strong jealousy and possessive actions, normally sexual in nature. Another sign of dependence is the effect of what happens when the abused person leaves the relationship because of the abuse. It is common for the abuser to make extraordinary attempts to persuade them to return.

Lying: The abuser manipulates by lying to control information. The abuser may also use lying to keep other people, including the victim, off-balance psychologically. For example: The abuser tries to appear truthful when actually lying, or tries to look deceitful when actually telling the truth.

Rigid Application of Traditional Sex Attitudes: Abusive persons tend to have more inflexible beliefs about roles and functions of the opposite sex. The man may expect the woman to over fulfill all the household and mothering chores and to be very submissive and subservient.

Drama and Excitement: Abusive people have trouble experiencing close, satisfying relationships. They substitute drama and excitement (sex? playing games with people's heads & emotions?) for closeness. Abusive people find it exciting to watch others become angry, get into fights, or fall into a general uproar. Often, they'll use a combination of tactics to set up an exciting situation.
Closed Channel: The abusive person does not tell much about personal details and real feelings. The abuser is not open to new information about himself either, such as someone else's thoughts about them personally. The abuser is secretive, close-minded and self-righteous. Abusers believe they are right in all situations.

Ownership: The abuser typically is very possessive. Moreover, the abuser believes that anything that is wanted should be owned, and that the abuser can do as wanted with anything that is his. The same attitude applies to people. It justifies controlling others' behavior, physically hurting them, smearing their character, stalking, hacking their computers and taking things that belong to them.

Poor Anger Management: Individuals who have experienced a violent and abusive childhood are more likely to grow up and become spouse abusers or abused people themselves. A person who sees violence, even verbal or emotional violence, as the primary method for settling differences as a child is not going to have very many alternate ways available to channel anger. A person without an everyday outlet for anger risks exploding toward the people closest to them.

Minimizing: The abuser ducks responsibility for abusive actions by trying to make them seem less important than they are. Cyberpath example: "Everything I said online wasn't that bad", or "You took what I said the wrong way."

Fragmentation: The abuser usually keeps the abusive behavior separate from the rest of his life. The separation is physical; for example, the abuser will seduce and malign people online but not in real life.

The separation is also psychological; for example, it is not uncommon for an abuser to attend church Sunday morning and abuse his victim Sunday night. The abuser sees no inconsistency in this behavior and feels justified in it.

Above the Rules: As mentioned earlier, abusers generally believe they are better than other people and so don't have to follow the rules that ordinary people do. That attitude is typical of convicted criminals, too. Each inmate usually believes that while all the other inmates are criminals, he is not. An abuser shows above-the-rules thinking in saying, "I don't need counseling. Nobody knows as much about my life as I do. I can handle my life without help from anybody." (they usually only go to counseling when caught, as a way to say - "I straightened my life out - its ok now", then go RIGHT BACK TO COVERTLY ABUSING)

Self-glorification: The abuser usually thinks of himself as strong, superior, independent, self-sufficient, and very virile. When anyone says or does anything that doesn't fit this glorified self-image, the abuser takes it as an insult.

Inability to express feelings with words: This type of person is rarely capable of true intimacy and may feel very threatened by the prospect of being open and vulnerable. Particularly when frustrated, the abusive person expects instant gratification from their partner who is expected to "read" their mind and "know" what their mate wants. When the mate doesn't know what is expected the partner may interpret this as meaning they do not really love them. Therefore with an abusive individual, rejection = violence (verbal, physical, emotional). (if they do genuinely express themselves its generally a sarcastic remark, a putdown or anger)

Vagueness: Thinking and speaking vaguely or selectively skewing facts lets the abuser avoid responsibility. Cyberpath Example: "I'm working, I can't chat right now." (Working on OTHER VICTIMS??)

ORIGINAL ARTICLE FROM THIS GREAT SITE

DEALING WITH YOUR OUTRAGE - WHEN YOU FIND OUT YOU'VE BEEN USED

When a narcissistic type (most cyberpaths & predators are NARCISSISTIC and/ or SOCIOPATHIC!) launches one of his surprise attacks, a normal person's first reaction is to assume it's a misunderstanding and try to resolve it. That's her first mistake. She does this because she assumes she is dealing with a normal human being, who must have felt offended by something.

But a narcissist evades and discourages your attempts to find out why he's mad.

Typically he does this with a reply that is a reply to something other than what you said. So, to an observer who entered at your question it would seem that you are like two actors saying lines from the scripts of different plays. In fact, that is essentially what's happening. Remember, the narcissist has the personality of a little child, who does not distinguish between reality and fantasy. So, his off-the-wall reply IS a line from a script, the fiction about this incident that he is imagining.

This is how the verbal exchange typically plays out. You ask why he's mad. He has no answer that he dares acknowledge, so the question is a threat to his delusions. At all costs, he must protect them. So, he annihilates your question by acting as though you never asked it. You get a comeback that replies to something other than what you said.

That's his way of crossing out your words and revising them. Typically his non-answer hurls an incitatory insult, hurtful flippant comment or wild accusation. It's bait to draw you off the scent.

His favorite wild accusation is that YOU are always hurling wild accusations at him. Before you know it, this living, breathing Projection Machine is acting out a fictitious script in which YOU are the one who got mad, YOU are the one "flying into one of your rages" over nothing.

And he is doing his best to make it so. He is trying to outrage you. Moreover, outraging you will really make him feel grand about how mightily he vaunted himself on you.

Victims typically report that the narcissist twists everything so fast and furiously that it makes their heads spin. CLICK HERE FOR A GREAT EXAMPLE

Sanity will get no further with him on these points than it did on the first point. For, he ain't all there. He's off in his own little world, simultaneously writing the play and acting out the part of the hero in it.
If you contradict these lies (by telling the truth), he will do whatever is necessary to cram them down your throat. (sounds like Beckstead, Thomas & Gridney/ YidwithLid, Gash, Jacoby, Capers, Hicks)

Like a three-year-old, volume is his weapon of choice: He will scream to yell you down and silence you. Or post lies & smear about you all over the web. If that doesn't work, he'll probably get physical. (if he stalks you he will find a way to make it look like YOU are the stalker! Including reporting YOU to the police)

Also, narcissists relentlessly block communication by yanking a conversation bewilderingly off track every which way at once. They say it's "not a good idea" that you two talk. Maybe their girlfriend, wife or boss (or THERAPIST!) doesn't want you talking anymore to each other. Convenient way to duck out of the truth and a real apology.

They LOVE when THEY'VE involved you in infidelity - they BLAME you for the whole thing, say you "KNEW WHAT YOU WERE GETTING INTO" or "IT WAS JUST A GAME AND SHE KNEW IT" and then say their counselor, pastor, rabbi, priest says that "you have to stop speaking to her." Makes it really easy for them, don't it?

So, rarely can you say afterwards what a rage or an argument was even about. Usually it's some vague rendition of you just being the way you are. And the narcissist says he doesn't have to put up with that. Its HIS story - or it's NO STORY!!

You can't even just try to smooth it over with some form of appeasement. You try to take down postings about them, say you're sorry too, offer to talk - but NOOOOOOO! That's about as effective as it was with Adolf Hitler. His eyes light up at that — vroom! — he just shifts into high gear and runs you over. In other words, he just gets madder.

Because you gave an inch, he takes a mile.

He acts like he's the one who is outraged, but that's part of the farce produced by his Magical Thinking Machine. You are the one subjected to outrage.

This is a willful and wanton outrage. Their aim is to outrage you, to break you down into burning outraged tears. That's victory for the bully.

The reason all this outrages you is because it is an outrage. Especially in trying to cram his lies about you down your throat. That's extreme perversity — making someone bend over for it.

And, if you have any respect for Truth, his willful and wanton contempt for it is another outrage.
So, don't let anybody send you on a guilt trip over this. First, you did nothing to provoke it except get caught in his cross hairs.

Second, don't let any airhead who just mouths whatever nonsense blows in the wind today tell you that you shouldn't be angry or to "just let it go."

It is absurd to regard feelings as wrong or sinful. If a person gets burnt, there's something wrong with him if he doesn't feel burnt. Feelings are not a matter of choice, an act of the will. We can lie about them. We can deny/repress them. But we can't change them.

Know your anger. Because it's dangerous to repress it. Doing so just banishes it to the subconscious where it still motivates your behavior like an unseen puppet master.

Know your anger, so you can deal with it appropriately and temper it with reason and good judgment.

ORIGINAL
~~~~

Sandra Brown, MA (The Institute for Healing Relational Harm & Psychopath Education) says:

He sees himself as right, the victim, or the only one that knows anything at all. He sees you as the re-victimizer of him, wonderful and yet horrible, needed and yet hated, smart yet dependent on him, in need of his brilliance, faulty without him, as pathological as he is... and the list goes on.

Pathology is the inability to change and sustain change, grow in any meaningful way, or develop insight about how one's behavior effects other. If he can't change he projects his inability on you and makes it YOUR fault or YOUR inability to change that is the problem in the relationship. He acts as if he should not be asked to change or he has changed when he hasn't. He makes you 'think' that you asked for something huge and wrong for him to change OR that what needs changing is only you and nothing in him.

If he can't grow in any meaningful way, he projects his non-growth onto the relationship and suggests it's the relationship stagnation you are really experiencing. If you could only GROW to accept him in all his pathology, then the relationship would thrive. If he can't develop insight about how his behavior effects others, he projects his undeveloped insight on you and says these are your traits. And you simply don't understand 'what you are doing to him.' All his anger is yours, all his deviancy is yours, you are just as sick as he is which is why you are a great match, all his lying is yours, all his manipulations are yours.

That's because in pathology they are MASTER PROJECTORS. It is in fact, one of the 'symptoms' of pathology. They take all their pathological attributes and say they are YOURS.

The Master Projection he uses causes similar symptoms as people who have been held captive, thrust into cults, or held prisoner in other people's belief systems. These are intensely programmed beliefs that are not 'removed' simply because you break up. Lingering effects means that specialized treatment is required.

Just for today, allow the possibility that none of what he said is really about you. See if all those attributes aren't really HIS...

Florida Woman Arrested for Cyberstalking + Harassment

by CRISTELA GUERRA

A Naples, Florida (U.S.) teacher has been arrested and charged with stalking her ex-husband’s wife Thursday as the woman dropped off her stepson at school.

The victim — who was described as shaken and very upset, according to the Lee County Sheriff’s Office report — said Haley Bright Marotto, 32, had been following her for about 15 minutes.

She said she was scared because she had received several physical threats of violence via cell phone and in person from the suspect.

The victim said she initially saw Marotto standing outside and then later saw her parked next to her own vehicle in the lot of Heights Elementary.

Later, the victim said the suspect followed her around while she drove for several minutes, even into the parking lot of a 7-Eleven convenience store.

The victim finally pulled into a sheriff’s sub-station for help, where Marotto was arrested and charged with harassing and cyberstalking.

original article here

"Annoying" someone via the Internet is now a Federal crime?

Annoying someone via the Internet is now a federal crime.

It's no joke. In 2006, President Bush signed into law a prohibition on posting annoying Web messages or sending annoying e-mail messages without disclosing your true identity.

In other words, it's OK to flame someone on a mailing list or in a blog as long as you do it under your real name. Thank Congress for small favors, I guess.

This ridiculous prohibition, which would likely imperil much of Usenet, is buried in the so-called Violence Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act. Criminal penalties include stiff fines and two years in prison.

"The use of the word 'annoy' is particularly problematic," says Marv Johnson, legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union. "What's annoying to one person may not be annoying to someone else."

Buried deep in the new law is Sec. 113, an innocuously titled bit called "Preventing Cyberstalking." It rewrites existing telephone harassment law to prohibit anyone from using the Internet "without disclosing his identity and with intent to annoy."

To grease the rails for this idea, Sen. Arlen Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican, and the section's other sponsors slipped it into an unrelated, must-pass bill to fund the Department of Justice. The plan: to make it politically infeasible for politicians to oppose the measure.

The tactic worked. The bill cleared the House of Representatives by voice vote, and the Senate unanimously approved it Dec. 16, 2005.

There's an interesting side note. An earlier version that the House approved in September had radically different wording. It was reasonable by comparison, and criminalized only using an "interactive computer service" to cause someone "substantial emotional harm."

That kind of prohibition might make sense. But why should merely annoying someone be illegal?

There are perfectly legitimate reasons to set up a Web site or write something incendiary without telling everyone exactly who you are.

Think about it: A woman fired by a manager who demanded sexual favors wants to blog about it without divulging her full name. An aspiring pundit hopes to set up the next Suck.com. A frustrated citizen wants to send e-mail describing corruption in local government without worrying about reprisals.

In each of those three cases, someone's probably going to be annoyed. That's enough to make the action a crime. (The Justice Department won't file charges in every case, of course, but trusting prosecutorial discretion is hardly reassuring.)

Clinton Fein, a San Francisco resident who runs the Annoy.com site, says a feature permitting visitors to send obnoxious and profane postcards through e-mail could be imperiled.

"Who decides what's annoying? That's the ultimate question," Fein said. He added: "If you send an annoying message via the United States Post Office, do you have to reveal your identity?"

Fein once sued to overturn part of the Communications Decency Act that outlawed transmitting indecent material "with intent to annoy." But the courts ruled the law applied only to obscene material, so Annoy.com didn't have to worry.

"I'm certainly not going to close the site down," Fein said on Friday. "I would fight it on First Amendment grounds."

He's right. Our esteemed politicians can't seem to grasp this simple point, but the First Amendment protects our right to write something that annoys someone else.

It even shields our right to do it anonymously. U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas defended this principle magnificently in a 1995 case involving an Ohio woman who was punished for distributing anonymous political pamphlets.

If President Bush truly believed in the principle of limited government (it is in his official bio), he'd have realized that the law he signed cannot be squared with the Constitution he'd sworn to uphold.

And then he'd repeat what President Clinton did a decade ago when he felt compelled to sign a massive telecommunications law. Clinton realized that the section of the law punishing abortion-related material on the Internet was unconstitutional, and he directed the Justice Department not to enforce it.

Bush had the chance to show his respect for what he calls Americans' personal freedoms. Now we'll see if the new president rises to the occasion.

It's illegal to annoy

A 2006 federal law states that when you annoy someone on the Internet, you must disclose your identity. Here's the relevant language.

"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.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

We felt this is going to be VERY hard if not impossible to enforce under Constitutional rights. And in the 2 years since it was signed - we were proved right.

Also the person who says they are being harassed - would have to legally disclose their relationship to the harasser during any discovery period and why the alleged harasser is doing it. (Most of our exposed cyberpaths? That's the LAST thing they want -- UNLESS they can twist history in their favor; which they can't - unless they are completely delusional)

Another good reason to always surf on a person's name or nickname before getting involved with them and saving ALL chats with them once it goes over the boundaries of simple conversation (i.e. 'love', cybersex or emotional affairs)

Cyberpaths would be out of luck! - Fighter

Technorati Tags: cyberharassment, online,free speech, abuse, federal crime, Justice Department, annoy, threaten

Spying on Partner's Email ILLEGAL

Spying on lover's e-mail? Monitoring may be illegal
Austin police have charged two recently with activity.

By Tony Plohetski

Shawn Macleod wanted to know where his estranged wife was going on the Internet and what she was writing in e-mails, investigators said, so he secretly installed a program called SpyRecon on her computer that sent him electronic logs with the sites she had visited and messages she had sent.

His spying resulted in a four-year prison sentence.

Software programs created to monitor computer activity have grown in popularity in recent years as parents have sought ways to prevent children from accessing adult Web sites or e-mailing possible predators and as businesses have tried to curtail the time employees spend on the Internet when they are at work.

Others, too, have found a use for the software: Scorned lovers can track where their spouses or partners go online, whom they are e-mailing and what they are saying — all possibly in violation of the law.

Austin police considered Macleod's actions tantamount to illegal wiretapping and charged him with unlawful interception of electronic communication, a second-degree felony that can carry a 20-year sentence. Macleod pleaded guilty in May.

"It's pretty alarming," said Macleod's attorney, Johnny Urrutia.

Urrutia said he would be surprised if his client knew that what he was doing was against the law.

Doug Fowler, president of SpectorSoft Corp., which manufactures an Internet monitoring program called eBlaster, said law enforcement agencies nationwide have in recent months sought company records during criminal investigations, hoping the documents would show who installed the software on victims' computers.

In New York this year, a sheriff's deputy was found guilty of eavesdropping after investigators said he spied on the computer activity of a neighbor he thought posed a threat to young girls in their neighborhood.

The deputy was sentenced to five years of probation.

In California, a man was indicted on federal charges in 2005, accused of manufacturing, advertising and sending a program called Lovespy.

In that case, victims received an electronic greeting card that, when opened, would record e-mail messages and the Web sites they visited.

Austin police in recent months have charged two men, including Macleod, with the crime. The second case, filed last month, is pending.

Detective Darin Webster, who works in the department's high-tech crime division, said investigators also have looked into several other cases that didn't result in charges because the evidence had been destroyed or they couldn't conclusively determine who had installed the spyware.

"The problem itself isn't the software," Webster said. "The problem is how the software is being used. ... And in the cases I've seen, there are warnings on there that it may be against the law. In Texas, it is."

State law says it is illegal to intentionally intercept spoken or electronic communication.

The law grants some exceptions, such as to switchboard operators who might hear part of a conversation while doing their job.

The law doesn't address certain questions about computer spyware, such as whether it is legal to install the equipment on a jointly owned computer without the consent of the second owner.

Employers typically have workers sign waivers acknowledging that they know the company computers are monitored.

Parents, as guardians of their minor children, are allowed to monitor their children's activities.

According to court records, Macleod's estranged wife, Kristy, reported to police in August 2005 that she suspected he was monitoring her computer use.

A detective using a fake name sent Kristy Macleod an e-mail offering to buy the couple's pool table.

A few days later, Shawn Macleod confronted Kristy Macleod about the e-mail, according to a probable cause affidavit.

Detectives searched the computer and found SpyRecon software on it, according to the affidavit.

Kristy Macleod could not be reached for comment. Company officials for SpyRecon did not respond to an interview request.

In an online advertisement, the company asks, "Have you ever needed to secretly read the e-mail of your child or spouse?"

In the second case Austin police filed, investigators said Alexis Lugo, 29, installed eBlaster software on his ex-girlfriend's computer.

An affidavit in that case said Kara Winebright called Austin police and reported that she thought Lugo had hacked into her computer and changed the password on some of her accounts.

Winebright said she had broken up with Lugo and later had discovered some unusual activity on her account with eHarmony, a dating Web site. She checked her other online accounts and found similar problems.

Police searched her computer and found the eBlaster software.

Ordinary anti-spy software might not detect such programs, but checking to see which programs and files have been downloaded to hard drives should reveal them, said Fowler, the manufacturer of eBlaster.

Fowler said his company intended for the software to be used only by parents or businesses, not by spying spouses or partners. The company marketed the product that way several years ago but stopped, he said.

"We ultimately decided that it wasn't a market we wanted to participate in," Fowler said. "There are certainly those who buy the software for this kind of thing. But we don't encourage it."

SOURCE

Online dating is about game theory — not looks

Flawed business model behind Web site for the hot misses the point
By Helen A.S. Popkin

Since when do über hotties need a specialized online dating service? If evolutionary psychology and People magazine teach us anything, it’s this: When it comes to hooking up, the only thing the most attractive of the species need do is walk outside.

Hence the intrinsically flawed business model behind HotEnough.org, a matchmaking Web site exclusively for “fit, good-looking people.” Access to this database of desirability is granted to those ranked 8 or higher by HotEnough.org’s current members — those symmetrical few who themselves land on the high end of the Bo Derek periodic table. Only then are you allowed to pay $9.95 a month for the privilege of e-hitting on the site’s 1,000 or so members.

Whatever.

Do I read bitter? I assure you it’s only because I’m generally filled with black and hate. There’s no special loathing reserved for the attractive insecure, and certainly the Internet has been nothing but great to me. EBay tchatzkahs, dogs, and yes, even eligible (and handsome) bachelors, I find whatever I want in six clicks or less.

Strategy is the key to my success - honed from an embarrassing amount of years lurking on bulletin boards and social networking sites. As more people post their personals, online dating has gone from just trying to hook up to deeply layered game theory. Niche sites like HotEnough.org may seem like a tempting, time-saving filter - eliminating the risk of dating, or Heaven forbid, falling for, a genetic inferior. But like so many other things on the InterWeb, it’s an illusion.

HotEnough.org is going to fail, and not because it caters to a niche crowd. Hey, I read “The LongTail: Why the Future of Business is Selling More” by Chris Anderson (OK, I just read the Amazon review). This millennium, it’s all about serving niches. Certainly, there are plenty of successful specialized, online dating sites outside of the big catch-alls like eHarmony and Match.com, JDate, FarmersOnly.com, Gothic Match and Green Friends.

HotEnough.org is going to fail because Darwin says so. Any skin-deep beauty seeking love on the Internet is guaranteed damaged down to the bone. Yeah, yeah, they’re soooooooo busy, they “just don’t have time” to meet attractive equals offline. Guess what? Making movies is a major time suck, yet Johnny Depp sure didn’t meet Winona Rider, Kate Moss or Vanessa Paradis in cyberspace.

Non-psychotic pretty people don’t seek peer validation from exclusive dating sites.

They’re busy adopting third world orphans and designing clothing lines for H&M.

Meanwhile, for us above-average-to-ugly people, the Internet is a viable and respectable place to find love or something like it. It’s what Al Gore intended. Unlike those out-of-touch few who doubt the Internet’s ability to help you find a real world mate, I totally buy the empirical proof. Heck, I am the empirical proof. The Internet provided me with at least two decent relationships and countless ego-boosting flirtations. (Seeking peer validation is perfectly acceptable for us 7s and under.)

The Internet helped me hook up with an OK guy who we’ll call Boy Millionaire. Charming and hilarious, Boy Millionaire looked great on paper (I saw his tax return). He also came with a complete leather-bound set of emotional issues — just like I like ‘em. Alas, it was not to be. After four and a half months, I ended it via e-mail. (Don’t judge me — it’s what he preferred.) Still, it counts as successful. Our brief infatuation excised me forever from an offline icky gum-on-your-shoe relationship that I previously failed to end on my own. Is there nothing the Internet can’t do?

I found my current gentleman friend on Friendster - a broke-ass Brooklyn artist of the conceptual variety. For Art Boy, I deviated from my usual e-flirting strategy and contacted him first. There was no way of knowing if he was “hot enough” or what, because instead of a photo, Art Boy posted an illustration of himself as a cartoon. I really like cartoons. Three or four years later, we’re still together, which counts as successful, too, I guess. Of course, Art Boy came with his own beautifully engraved bound volume set of issues. But hey, that’s me. There are probably plenty of well-adjusted potential mates to be found online … if that’s what you’re into.

To be fair, finding what, or who, you want online is made easier or harder by your geographical location. Many national online dating sites feature a smorgasbord of eligible lovelies in New York City. Change your search location to say, Tampa, Fla., however, and it’s humanity at low tide.

Of course, there are plenty of online losers within the New York City tri-state area. You just have to know the signs. For example, anyone who lists “9/11” as their “most humbling experience” is a poseur. Same goes for anyone claiming “Confederacy of Dunces” as their favorite book. Fine, if that’s your favorite book. Hey, it could happen. But if you list it in your profile, you’re trying too hard to look too cool.

Whether you’re creating your online profile, or scanning through those of others, online dating is a tricky business at best. Hot or not, online dating isn’t about you. It’s about who you want to be, and who you want Imaginary You to date. Just like offline dating. Except in the real world, you can’t use Photoshop.

CLICK HERE FOR ORIGINAL ARTICLE