Cyberbullying: Ain't Just Kid Stuff!

The "new mail" sound pinged and I clicked. "I would love to watch you get punched senseless. ... You are a (expletive) failure, a typical New York failure. If I ever find any of your written nonsense on MSN or Yahoo, it will probably get ugly."

The "in-real-life" bullying I endured in middle school was so bad that I used to come home in tears, wishing that I wouldn't wake up the next morning. And yet, here I am, more than a decade and a half later, dealing with a far more virulent strain: cyberbullying.

E-mails, comments, Facebook, Twitter. If there's a way to reach people electronically, there's a way to make them cry.

My haters love to focus on my physical appearance. I have body parts I didn't even know could be called hideous - "sausage fingers" and "elephant knees," for example. But it doesn't stop there. One commenter wrote: "Julia, you are a despicable person. Ugly inside and out, with ZERO redeeming qualities. ... (D)espite your best efforts to scrub it all and land a husband ... which will NEVER happen, btw."

This represents just a fraction of the hate that has been thrown my way - as well as in the direction of my friends, family, boyfriends and employers. Why? As a columnist and as a social media user, haters feel I am fair game. They do it because they can. Because I "asked for it" by sharing anything at all.

We live in a world of more than 600 million Facebook accounts, 160 million blogs, 190 million Twitter accounts. Are we all "asking" to be cyberbullied?

The White House convened its Conference on Bullying Prevention on March 10 and launched StopBullying.gov.

"This isn't an issue that makes headlines every day, but it affects every single young person in our country," President Obama told the conference.

I would amend that statement: Cyberbullying affects all people, not just the young.

Bullying spans generations: 45-year-old bullies raise children who become 13-year-old bullies who grow up to be 28-year-old bullies. And here's my "controversial" proposition: Kids aren't the only ones who should be protected from them.

Until we agree that cyberbullying is an absolutely unacceptable way to treat other people, the cycle of harassment will continue.

The government's new website defines bullying as when someone uses strength or power to harm or intimidate those who are weaker. Online dynamics are such, however, that a handful of haters can become a mob and target anyone, regardless of age, economic status or "real-world" power.

"It goes beyond name-calling," said 37-year-old A.B., a veteran blogger who has experienced the devastating effects of motivated online bullies. The hate wormed its way insidiously into her life. She posted, "What would make you stop?" Her bullies' response: "Die."

"People are like, 'Oh, don't read it,' but how can you not stand up for yourself?"

Especially when no one else is.

One of my readers, Sara, described encountering nasty comments about herself online. "It KILLED me. I was devastated. I felt it physically; I could literally feel the blood drain from my body every time I found a new one."

Following someone around on the street while screaming insults at them would be considered at the least, crazy - and at the most, criminal harassment. So why is it accepted online?

"All of us have an obligation to think about how we're treating other people," Obama said at an MTV forum in late 2010. "What we may think is funny or cute may end up being powerfully hurtful."

We must go further. Internet companies have long brushed aside complaints about often-anonymous users who engage in personal attacks. "Not our problem," seems to be their prevailing sentiment. Individuals cower behind anonymity, and because it can be difficult, time-consuming and costly to discover true identities, they remain de-facto exempt from libel and defamation laws.

Our government should step up and enact protections for citizens of all ages. A cyber police force doesn't sound like such a bad idea.

We can't force people to like someone, but we can and should ensure that they don't hurt others.

Julia Allison is a columnist, TV personality, public speaker and former Wired cover girl. Visit SocialStudiesColumn.com

original article here

Online Crimes of Fake Soldier Go Unpunished

By the time Cari Johnson caught wind of a Lebanon (OHIO) man’s online scam, victims in California, Connecticut and Texas already had sent him laptop computers, keys to their homes, personal photos and care packages they believed were headed to American soldiers serving overseas. But the case of James E. Middleton, 47, of Ohio, demonstrates problems with cybercrime investigations, which cross multiple federal and state jurisdictions and present other dilemmas for investigators used to fighting land-based crimes. As a result, authorities have declined to pursue criminal charges against Middleton even though he admitted to scamming people. “Where did this occur? It’s not like somebody broke into your house and you can take fingerprints,” said Sgt. Jeff Mitchell of the Lebanon Police Department, which declined to charge Middleton. Confronted in January by his victims and a police investigation, Middleton said he took responsibility for his misdeeds and blamed his actions on loneliness and agoraphobia, and the companionship and calming effects he gained in relationships built over more than a year with victims nationwide. He tricked donors into believing he was three different soldiers, including a female. He has since returned some of the items or reimbursed his victims. “Maybe it’ll help somebody else to realize how something that starts out so small can go so totally out of whack,” Middleton said in an interview with the Dayton Daily News. The FBI’s Cybercrime Division is the top U.S. law enforcement agency charged with fighting online scams. Cases like Middleton’s rank far below a long list of FBI priorities topped by protecting the country from terrorists attacks, foreign intelligence operations and espionage, cyber-based attacks and high-technology crimes. “Is ( Middleton’s case) going to be something the FBI can devote its resources to? Probably not,” Washington-based FBI spokeswoman Jenny Shearer said. The inadequacy of the existing cybercrime law enforcement is the focus of continued global discussion. In January, the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime convened a meeting of international experts in Austria “with a view to examining options to strengthen existing and to propose new national and international legal or other responses to cybercrime.” In America, the FBI works with National White Collar Crime Center, a non-profit organization that tracks cybercrime rates and teaches law enforcement officials the latest techniques. The center and FBI, in partnership with the U.S. Bureau of Justice Assistance, formed the Internet Complaint Call Center about 10 years ago. “What is unique about Internet crime is that a perpetrator can live in one state and perpetrate a crime in many other states. They cross jurisdictional boundaries,” said spokesman John Everett with the National White Collar Crime Center. Criminal justice in cyberspace Lebanon police said they were unable to prosecute Middleton, in part because the victims lived in three other states. A federal postal inspector said Middleton’s alleged crimes did not involve the U.S. mail system. “It really irks me that nothing can be done,” said Johnson, who runs A Dollar to Care, a charity for soldiers and their families, from her home in Riverside. Her son, Dominic Johnson, is a military policeman with the Ohio National Guard. Middleton lives with his teenage daughter, and they share a personal computer. During an interview at his apartment, he said he had learned his lesson. “If I ever felt the want to do that, I would just get rid of my computer,” he said. Multiple false soldier identities In a case involving a California victim, Middleton acted as a fictitious female soldier, Amy Anderson. For a Texas woman, he was soldier, Michael Wolfe. For a Connecticut woman, he was soldier Jason “Thumper” Hayes. In all three cases, Middleton had the victims send him care packages, believing he would get them to their special soldier through his fake connections at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base. Middleton met his victims in chat rooms on JustinTV.com, a website where people can post videos and pictures, request and listen to music, and engage in real-time chats. Middleton said he began entering the chat rooms as fictitious soldiers to get noticed. “In my heart I knew I was wrong but I thought if I entered the room as a soldier it would be better and more people would want to talk to me,” he said in a statement to police. Jennifer Schmitz of San Antonio, Texas, said she fell in love with soldier “Wolfe” after online communications and receiving love letters actually written by Middleton during a two-year period. “This was someone I put my life on hold for,” she said in a telephone interview. Acting as Wolfe, Middleton said he encouraged Schmitz to send him care packages and wrote her love letters. When Schmitz confronted Middleton by phone, “he said actually, ‘I’m in love with you,’” she said. Middleton usually favored pretending to be “Thumper” when he communicated with Sheila O’Leary in Connecticut. However, she said Middleton pretended to be 21 different soldiers, as well as himself, during more than a year of contact. “I talked with all of them,” O’Leary said. “This was not his first time doing this.” Middleton’s third victim, a California man whom he duped to believing he was a female soldier, declined to comment. Johnson said she became aware of Middleton through friendships she built online with the victims. She said her charity has a network of more than 5,000 soldiers and military supporters. Standing up for soldiers “Ninety-five percent of my postings, everything I type, usually is centered around the military or veterans,” she said. Johnson discovered Middleton was using photos of people in uniform to bolster his fake identities. “That’s what really made my blood boil,” she said. Johnson said Middleton should have been charged with crimes, including the Stolen Valor Act, a federal law that bars individuals from falsifying their military service. The law is in limbo due to constitutional challenges in three states. Johnson said she is concerned that Middleton and others who get away with their scams will continue their alleged cybercriminal activities. ‘If they’re successful and they don’t get caught, what’s going to stop them?” Johnson said. “You can go online and pretend you are whatever or whoever you want to be.” Lebanon police said their investigation was hobbled by the advanced state of the case when Johnson notified them. “Mr. Middleton and these people pretty much had it worked out between themselves before we caught up,” Mitchell said. Middleton said he began the scam following the deaths of his mother and other relatives. He said he was driven by loneliness that fed the agoraphobia he has suffered from for 16 years. “I started out, oddly enough, as a female,” he said. “It just absolutely snowballed.” Middleton said his only military experience was when he twice failed to complete basic training at Fort Dix Army base in New Jersey. He also learned military terminology aiding him in pretending to be a soldier from family members. “I’ve had family members in almost every branch except the Coast Guard,” he added. Since these incidents, Middleton said he goes online only to check the weather and look at maps. He said he no longer visits social networking sites. “I don’t enjoy the computer anymore,” he said, adding that new medication is helping deal with his mental issues. Still Middleton said he felt he deserved to be punished. “That part I still have no answer to,” he said. “How do you morally repay someone?”

original article here

THOUGHTS ON CYBERPATHS - FROM PROFESSIONALS & VICTIMS

Here on EOPC, in both margins, we have quotes from victims of Cyberpaths and professionals dealing with Cyberpaths' victims as well as thoughts on the long term after-effects of their attacks. You may have read them elsewhere, you may not. We think they're important and powerful enough to include here so you can read them in their entirety - Fighter FROM VICTIMS: "The potential for damage is overwhelming. Overnight, many lives are turned inside out when it has been revealed that the person that you gave your love and your complete trust to has betrayed you. The emotional and financial scars are deep" --- Target of Julia-Bish-Judah-Hunt-McGovern "I will gain strength, become a stronger and much wiser person from this devastating experience, but it will never be over. It will be with me for the remainder of my days on Earth. I will forever be changed by this most ultimate & intimate of betrayals... They throw us away like an old pair of shoes; and like the predators they are, they quickly move on to their next victim. The magnitude of the lies cannot be imagined by anyone unless you have lived this nightmare"-- Wife #7 of Ed Hicks "Everything was a lie. [He] took away my ability to trust, and he ruined me financially"- Wife #6 of Ed Hicks "I will never trust anyone else after this. My heart is closed now and I think I don't want to get to know ANYONE else... I feel so used! A million showers won't clean my body from this snake's touch!" -- Target#1 of Nathan E.B. Thomas, Jr. "I prayed I was just overly sensitive because of my years of being in one abusive relationship after another. Even now I find it difficult to fathom how you can give so much of yourself to a person and have them so totally wipe it all away as if it never happened with no remorse & go on their merry way leaving a path of destruction & half-truths behind them. Yes, I was wrong for my part but for me it was more than just cybersex - there was some good profound dialog. I'd known him over 25 years. I thought I could trust him. I did what I did from the heart and with genuine, deep emotion - and he knew it! Now he says it was 'all a game' - that's first I have heard it was a GAME! Realizing someone you have known for so long, spent so much time talking with, did it ALL just to USE you is horrifying. The grief is no ordinary grief. After distancing himself from me, he can now tell stories, all of which are factually twisted, with the spin to make HIM look the victim. It's nothing less than soul murder." --Target #1 of Jeff Dunetz/ YidwithLid "...for the first time in our relationship, I began to cry. I realized he was a TOTAL fraud. He said he "was looking for the right girl" in his dating profile. I thought, "how could he say that when he told me I was right for him?" I had changed myself at his direction and was at the point of exhaustion... I was horrified by the fact he used the SAME EXACT language in the profile as he did online! ...he threw me away, all the while BLAMING ME for not being "good enough." How could this person call himself moral ... when he was a complete liar. -- Target of Brad Dorsky "[He] included EVERYTHING that was missing from my life, as if he could read my thoughts and make my wishes come true. I can see now he really studied me well and became "my perfect mirror." He knew exactly what to say to make me feel good; especially after being in an abusive marriage for so long with no attention from my husband. This man "love bombed" me and I didn't even know what hit me!" -- Target of Keith Clive "Being lied to is a hurtful thing. Being conned by someone you love is a devastating thing. You find that the facade .... was lies on his part; and how empty & meaningless [you were to him]. It hits below the belt and it scars you emotionally, financially... You become a laughingstock... Some say I am obsessed with this man, but in reality, I am obsessed with getting justice done. There can be no closure on this until that happens. Even then I will never trust anyone whole heartedly with my love, my life or my money again. ...all I wanted was to be loved, and he turned that into a crime that suited his needs." -- Target of William Michael Barber "While doubters may still find it dubious that on-line romance could ever take the place of a real relationship, the husbands & wives of Net-addicts are discovering that cybersex can pose a direct threat to their marriages. "...We went through it and a little while later [my cybersex partner]messaged me and said, 'If I message you again & ask you if we had sex, say no, OK?' I said, 'Sure, why?' She said her husband is very jealous and comes on-line when she's on, to make sure she isn't netsexxing." ....Pearl's husband was not as lucky. "My ex-husband, Lee, would vanish into the basement every night for hours, saying he had brought home a lot of paperwork from the office. We missed a lot of parties and family events, but I never questioned it. I felt sorry for the poor guy, working so hard to give me and the kids some extras. Then, one day when I was cleaning out the room, I found a sheet of paper under the desk with a love-letter printed on it." Pearl was even more traumatized when she turned on his PC and found a sub-directory filled with HUNDREDS of love-letters from different women, addressing her husband as "Prince Charming." "The Prince lost his castle," Pearl says sourly. "I changed the locks on him and filed for divorce." Carl Salisbury, an attorney at Killian & Salisbury in East Hanover, NJ, who specializes in electronic law, notes that cybersex-related suits are showing up increasingly in American courts. "There was a case in Maryland where a MacDonald's franchise had an email system," says Salisbury. "One of their employees was having an email affair with another employee, who was married. The manager screened their email and showed it to the married guy's wife!" When the married man sued his manager and MacDonald's for breach of privacy, the courts ruled that the manager was within his rights to view employee email. And, as the cyber-population booms ...we can expect to see more irate spouses filing for divorce with on-line infidelity as grounds. "It's inevitable that we're going to be seeing more & more divorce cases as a result of cybersex," says Salisbury. "There's such an enormous amount--and variety--of activity going on the Net and the Web, and the variety increases literally every day." -- HOW TO HAVE CYBERSEX - Gloria G. Brame "It's a trap. Your imagination fills in the blanks with exactly what you want. You don't learn more with more rounds of writing. All you do is invest more emotional energy, for which there is no payoff." -- Joe Teig, New York, NY FROM PROFESSIONALS: "We now understand that women & men are not "crazy" or "defective" when, in response to trauma, they develop PTSD symptoms, including insomnia, flashbacks, phobias, panic attacks, anxiety, depression, dissociation, a numbed toughness, amnesia, shame, guilt, self-loathing, self-mutilation and social withdrawal. - Phyllis Chesler, MD "We hear about Internet predators for children, I don't think we're hearing very much about Internet predators for middle age women at all. And that bothers me," -- SANDRA PHIPPS, FightBigamy "When [] predators are found using the Internet a common response of the Internet industry and government officials is to blame someone else, or say that nothing can be done to stop it." -- Donna M. Hughes, PhD; Univ. of Rhode Island "We must do whatever it takes to minimize or eliminate [the predator's] access to vulnerable prey as targets of opportunity. Period. For ever. Indeed, these people will thank us for it. Consider how many [cyberpaths] deliberately get themselves caught just to stop themselves." - What Makes Narcissists Tick "[APOLOGIES] are not some pious, phoney-baloney, half-hearted rendition of what you think they want to hear. Nor is it a watered-down, politically correct 'confession' that you think will buy you closure at the expense of truth... [admit] what you are doing to screw up your life. This also means admitting that you are getting payoffs for what you're doing, however sick or subtle those payoffs are. - Dr. Phil McGraw" "[Online Predators] count on our shame to keep their secrets. They know that exposing them means exposing our own failings. That's what makes them so powerful. They manipulate us into these situations then sit back & watch us squirm between protecting ourselves or blowing the whistle. The [victim often] is still emotionally connected to the [Cyberpath], thus protecting them and accusing them alternatively. Many [victim]s will not name their [cyberpath]s to counsellors or other helpers, thus protecting their identity. The hook, which the [Cyberpath] has implanted in their heart, is hard to remove. If you want something to cry about, cry for the [Cyberpath]'s new victim(s), the innocent, unmarked, un-inoculated prey. These victims are carefully chosen..." - Mary Ann Borg Cunen "Internet dating is populated, to a large degree, by criminals and married people. Estimates have gone up to 30% that online daters are married. That represents an emotional risk to our membership base. I want to eliminate those people [from] the site." - Herb Vest, CEO of True.com "How do we go from fantasy to reality? Lots of people have private fantasies that give them some sort of pleasure and maybe even trouble them, but they don't act on them. I think one of the contributory facts-- it's not the only one-- is the insidious nature of the internet itself. I think there are three things that are problematic about the Internet, or at least three things. One is the easy accessibility. You don't, in the beginning at least, have to go anywhere. You just push a button that's sitting there next to you. Secondly, there's this illusion of anonymity, which can be very disinhibiting. You feel as though you're there in the privacy of your bedroom. It's not that private, but you don't sense that at the time. And thirdly, there is a distortion of reality and fantasy to some extent. That people feel as though they're playing a game. They're making up who they are. They wonder if someone else is giving a false persona. They begin to do things that in the light of day they might never have done and then, ultimately and sadly, sometimes cross a line that they might not otherwise have crossed. Where do they get the message [the internet] is where you can go? We've created a "we versus they" mentality. And I understand that what they do is offensive. It's aggravating. It makes me angry. But we're not going to solve the problem by pushing it further underground." - Dr. Fred Berlin, Psychiatrist, Johns Hopkins University on "DATELINE NBC" "I love words. I believe in the power of words. I believe that if truthful words are spoken, written, shared, they will be heard, and they will be answered. Not with a [cyberpath]. You get sucker-punched in trying to explain something. There is no response to what is said. Words are deflected, twisted, questions answered with questions, non sequitors abound." - NarcissisticAbuse.com "This is the classic emotional rape scenario: the use of a higher emotion (such as love) to fulfill a hidden agenda... There can be no hidden agendas in real love. These features, even if identified in retrospect, can help victims understand what has happened to them, giving them a chance of real recovery. - Dr. Mike Fox, The Emotional Rape Syndrome "Powerful and sneaky people use apologies as end runs around repentance. They betray a trust; and, when they have been found out, they say they are sorry for "mistakes in judgement"... They get by only because we have lost our sense of the difference between repentance for wrong and apologies for bungling... We should not let each other get away with it. A deep and unfair hurt is not a mere faux pas. We cannot put up with everything from everyone; some things are intolerable. When someone hurts us deeply and unfairly an apology will not do the job; it only trivializes a wrong that should not be trifled with." -- - Lewis B. Smedes, "Forgive and Forget" "The [exposed Cyberpath] on the other hand, cannot rest until they have blotted out a vaguely experienced [target] who dared to oppose them, [expose them], to disagree with them or to outshine them. [The Cyberpath] can never find rest because they can NEVER FULLY wipe out the evidence that has contradicted their conviction they are unique and perfect and handled things appropriately. This archaic rage goes on and on and on." - Dr. Ernest Wolf "A favored technique [of cyberpaths] is to debilitate your identity [personally, I hate the term self-esteem] by levelling false accusations and/or questioning your honesty, fidelity, trustworthiness, your "true" motivations, your "real" character, and especially your sanity and YOUR judgement." - Cassiopaea "Text-based relationships are very deceptive. People know only the good stuff, and none of the bad. The missing pieces are filled in based on hope, not on reality."- Dr. S. King; Pacific Graduate School of Psychology in Palo Alto, CA "They are absolutely the world's best manipulators, liars, and fabricators of truth. They do so convincingly because they believe their own lies. After all their life is nothing but a lie, a sham, how can we possibly assume they know anything different." Cassiopaea "All I wanted was for him to leave me alone. Part of the hurt and damage was done because others could but would not see what was actually happening. He would always try to ingratiate himself to others - it was sickening. Usually psychopaths put on the nicest act, and you look like the harpy and bitch, and so everyone takes their side, it is a horror story, a psychopath can be very charming, and manipulative and manipulate the smartest of people." Cassiopaea "When there is a question of WHO is telling the truth? See who has to GAIN by lying or bending history. Usually the real truth teller has to expose a vulnerable part of themselves, which takes courage and honesty." - Law Professor, Fordham University "My biggest frustration and source of anger, is at those who have refused to take a stand when they see the abuse. No matter how outrageous his behavior others often stood by and inadvertently fuelled his grandiosity and denial... although denial is too mild a word for it." Cassiopaea FINAL THOUGHTS "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." -- Voltaire "In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends." -- Martin Luther King, Jr.

Can boredom Create a Cyberpath?

The below by Steve Becker talks about sociopaths and boredom. EOPC believes cyberpathy is a form of sociopath's and narcissist's acting out by preying on others via the internet. Give this a good read! - Fighter

by Steve Becker, MSW, LCSW
What’s the relationship, if any, between boredom and sociopathy?

Can we can agree, for starters, that boredom does not cause sociopathy? Otherwise most of us would be sociopaths.

Can we also agree that a low tolerance for boredom, alone, does not cause sociopathy. Otherwise again, many of us with low tolerances for boredom (not that I include myself, but God, am I bored) would be sociopaths; and this isn’t the case, either. That is, even most of us with low tolerances for boredom aren’t sociopaths.

However, research suggests that sociopaths may require higher levels of arousal to escape conditions of boredom. So apart from being prone to boredom and finding it extremely oppressive, it may be the case that sociopaths tend to resort to high arousing, high risk solutions to their boredom.

I think we edge closer to a link between boredom and sociopathy when we note that, if nothing else, boredom seems to be a medium, a highly conductive state or field, for the emergence of sociopathic behaviors.

That is, sociopaths seem to find in states of boredom fertile play for their sociopathy. As noted, they seem at risk of solving their boredom sociopathically. States of boredom tend to elicit, coax into the open the sociopath’s sociopathy.

Why? What it is about boredom that makes it perhaps especially conductive of the sociopath’s acting-out? In point of fact, it is less the properties of boredom than the properties of the sociopath that answer this question.

The sociopath is, foremost, an outrageously self-centered specimen. His exclusive interest in his own comfort, gratification and entertainment (and cold uninterest in others’) compels, along with incredulity, a morbid fascination with his interpersonal perversity.

I’d suggest that among the last things the sociopath wants to face, besides extreme pain, is boredom. The sociopath wants to feel entertained, stimulated and comfortable; boredom provides none of these. Moreover, and consistent with his pathological narcissism, the sociopath feels he shouldn’t have to be bored. He feels absolutely entitled to relief from his boredom.

Now we might still say, big deal?…doesn’t this still describe many of us who aren’t sociopaths, yet for whom boredom makes our skin crawl?

What I think distinguishes the sociopath in all this isn’t his entitled claim to relief from states of boredom or even, by itself, his arguable gravitation to higher risk, higher arousing solutions to his boredom. Rather, I think it’s his entitled claim to relief from states of boredom with virtual utter disregard for how he achieves his relief.

In other words, for the sociopath, basically whatever it takes to solve his boredom, at whatever expense to whomever, is a go. Where the non-sociopath itching for escape from his boredom is chastened by a sense of accountability to others—by the implicit social contract to respect others’ boundaries—the sociopath is undeterred by, and abrogates, such social contracts. They are a joke to him.

Intellectually, he is aware of them and, when expedient, may play-act them. But he regards them, truthfully, as utterly controvertible anytime he finds it convenient to controvert them. Furthermore he harbors, secretly when not transparently, contempt for anyone dumb enough to be bound by such contracts. Certainly he isn’t.

And so the bored sociopath is dangerously poised to exploit. Unburdened (if not stimulated) by the prospect of his exploitation, he finds countless opportunities to gratify himself at others’ expense. He can rob someone, or cheat someone, or cheat a hundred people, or get plastered and drive maniacally; he can scare someone, or lie audaciously with convincing sincerity; and in so doing he can ignore the wreckage he wreaks because what matters, what only matters, is the satisfaction in it for him.

The sociopath’s deranged self-centeredness protects him from the scourge of regret. Where regret may torture the normal person, keep him up at night, awaken him to troubled memories, reflection, and perhaps even a rethinking of his priorities, not so for the sociopath.

At most, regret has a superficial effect on him; he might regret, if anything, the inconvenience of his present situation; but not, it’s safe to say, the dignity, security and trust he robbed from the victims across his life.

(My use of “he” in this post is not meant to suggest that males have a patent on the behaviors and attitudes discussed.)

Hundreds of Victims of Romance Scams

Almost 400 Canadians complained they were victims of international ripoff schemes involving "romance" last year, according to the Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre.

Victims reported losing almost $3.5 million, with more than a third of the money lost by victims between the ages of 40 and 49. One octogenarian victim reported losing $20,000.

"It's the kind of scam that's not reported," said Cpl. Louis Robertson of the fraud centre.

Robertson said 586 people complained to the fraud centre that they had been approached in a romance scheme, with 390 reporting they lost money.

The corporal said that likely reflects only a tiny portion of actual victims, perhaps as few as five per cent of people swindled by Internet romancers.

He said that given the nature of the crime, many feel too embarrassed to come forward.

original article here

Case Highlights 'Spoofing' and Other Electronic Stalking

By Nathan Gorenstein

The e-mailed threat was stark. "How would you like it if your sister went missing?" The next message was an insult. "Whore," the writer said, and taunted, "You called the cops but they can't do anything."

Todd Hart, 26, had reason to believe his boast was accurate.

The victim, an ex-girlfriend he threatened for weeks last June, had called police about earlier disturbing e-mails. They immediately asked for copies.

Problem was, the e-mails had all disappeared. Twenty minutes after the woman opened each electronic message, it somehow automatically deleted itself from her computer's in-box.

So a police officer sat down at the woman's computer to see the next threat himself.

By July, the FBI was knocking at the door of Hart, a former SEPTA employee now being held in jail. On Monday, he will be sentenced in U.S. District Court for a string of electronic attacks on the woman, her friends, and her family. He pleaded guilty in November.

"For about a month, when all the harassment was going on, I would sit in my room and pray to God that it would stop," the 24-year-old woman, who lives in California, wrote in a victim's statement. Her name is redacted from sentencing documents.

In the course of a few hours one evening last year, prosecutors believe, Hart dispatched a sewer repairman, a pizza deliverer, and an electrician to her father's house.

After a short relationship - initiated on an online dating site - Hart reacted with fury when the woman announced she was moving from Philadelphia to take an internship at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories in California.

First, he threatened suicide. Then came the stalking.

The self-deleting e-mails were an unusual touch: Even the experienced federal prosecutor in Philadelphia had not encountered it before.

Hart also used a second tactic, called "spoofing," to make harassing calls that recipients could not trace to his telephone number.

Using "SpoofCard.com," one of many Internet services that permit callers to hide their phone number and even change the sound of their voice, Hart made calls warning the woman that she had 10 days to leave California "or else." In another call, he said, "You're going to [obscenity] die."

Thanks to modern electronics, that wasn't all.

Using passwords obtained while they lived together, Hart canceled a doctor's appointment, changed the passwords on the woman's e-mail and Facebook accounts, took control of her bank accounts, and deleted her application to take the Medical College Admission Test.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael Levy is asking for a sentence of at least 57 months, a year above the federal guidelines. "To say that this defendant has serious emotional problems when it comes to dealing with women is an understatement," he has told the judge.

He also offers some advice: Completely revise a password whenever you believe it is compromised. And be careful with whom you share a password.

Hart's attorney, federal public defender Mark T. Wilson, did not return messages seeking comment.

Hart pleaded guilty to stalking and unauthorized use of a computer. Such crimes are usually prosecuted in state court, but he is facing a federal judge because the victim worked at a federal institution, Livermore, whose internal police force the woman had initially contacted.

Among other scientific work, Lawrence Livermore is the nation's top nuclear-weapons research lab, though the woman, a biology and premed major, was not employed in that research.

Hart has previous convictions for forgery, and in 2003 he was convicted in Burlington County "for almost identical" stalking charges, Levy said. In 2005, he was convicted for sneaking into a women's bathroom at Immaculata College and videotaping students as they used the toilet. He initially received probation, but within 18 months he was in violation and served time in jail, according to court documents. He is in Chester County Jail for again violating his probation.

When FBI agents searched his Philadelphia apartment, they discovered a telescopelike object called a "peephole reverser."

"The agents tested it and determined that it enabled a viewer to look into an apartment through the peephole," according to court documents.

"The Federal Bureau of Prisons does have counseling programs," Levy said in an interview, "and he clearly needs counseling. I don't know if he would be cured."

Levy, who has wide experience handling computer crime, said it was the first case he had handled involving self-deleting e-mails.

No one from the mail service Hart used, BigString in Red Bank, N.J., returned calls or messages seeking comment.

The company is in financial trouble, according to corporate records, but at least a half-dozen other firms offer such services, according to their websites. Various technology is used. BigString promises that once the recipient clicks on the message sent through its servers, the mail will "self-destruct" within a specified time period.

On its website, the firm adds, "The mail, while looking like every other mail, will print nothing when the receiver clicks print on the computer and show nothing if the receiver tries to save the text or image."

The second technique Hart used is more common. Spoofing has been controversial enough that Congress last year made it illegal to hide the origin of a telephone call "unless a legitimate business reason exists," according to pending Federal Communications Commission regulations.

Meir Cohen, president of SpoofCard.com, said that despite the firm's name, its intent is to provide legitimate services. As an example, he cited an on-call physician who may use a personal cell phone to contact a patient but wants return calls to go to his office or answering service first. The doctor can have one of those numbers appear on the patient's telephone instead.

"The vast majority of our customers use it as a tool to protect their privacy," Cohen said. "A large portion of customers are really women who want to protect their privacy and don't want [stalkers] to have their numbers."

Cohen, who was familiar with the Hart case, said, "My heart goes out to the victim."

SpoofCard.com cooperates with law enforcement, he said, and "we will hand over records if we are subpoenaed."

original article here

HOW TO HANDLE ONLINE HARASSMENT

FROM WHOA

You must clearly tell the harasser to stop
Generally speaking, it is unwise to communicate with a harasser. However, as soon as you determine that you are truly being harassed by someone, you must very clearly tell that person to stop. Simply say something like "Do not contact me in any way in the future" and leave it there. You do not need to explain why, just state that you do not want the person to contact you. Sometimes it is helpful to copy this message to the abuse department of the harasser's ISP. Keep a record of this message for your records. Do not respond to any further messages of any sort from the harasser. Don't have anyone else contact the harasser on your behalf.

It is common for the harasser to claim that you are harassing him or her, but if you aren't contacting the person, it is clear that you aren't the harasser.

Save everything
One of the first impulses many harassment victims have is to just delete any communications they've received, and that's a bad idea. It's important to save absolutely every communication you have with the harasser - email, chat logs, ICQ histories, anything. If the harasser has created a web site about you, save copies of it to your local system and have someone you trust who would testify in court for you if necessary to do the same. If you receive any phone calls from the harasser, have them traced immediately (your local phone company can tell you how to do that). If you receive any kind of postal mail or other offline communications, save them (with envelopes, boxes, etc.). Do not destroy any evidence - and do not handle it more than absolutely necessary or permit anyone else to do so. Immediately turn the evidence over to the police. Place envelopes, letters, etc. in plastic bags to protect any possible fingerprints.

Complain to the appropriate parties
It can at times be a little difficult for people to determine who the appropriate party is. If you're harassed in a chat room, contact whoever runs the server you were using. If you're harassed on any kind of instant messaging service, read the terms of service and harassment policies they've provided and use any contact address given there. If someone has created a web site to harass you, complain to the server where the site is hosted. If you're being harassed via email, complain to the sender's ISP and any email service (like Hotmail) used to send the messages. Figuring out who to complain to is one of the areas in which WHOA's volunteers can definitely help you.

Cease & desists also can be sent to them and you can go to the police (and their police) and demand a report be filed on them.

Determine your desired result
What do you want to have happen? You need to think about that. Be realistic. It's reasonable to expect that you can get the harasser to stop contacting you. It is reasonable to expect that you can increase your safety online and offline and that of your family.

It is not realistic to expect an apology from the harasser or any kind of "payback" or revenge. If you want to file a lawsuit because of something the harasser said or you believe they said about you, find a lawyer who will take the suit, but realize that you'll probably have to pay a lot of legal costs and may not ever get any kind of satisfaction.

Take our advice
You have to be willing to take the advice given to you, or you're wasting your time and ours. If we suggest that you change your email address, there's a good reason for it, even if it is a hassle. If we suggest that you not visit a particular chat room again, there's a good reason for it.

MORE AT WHOA

WHY DO CYBERPATHS PREY ON OTHERS?

(This is merely an attempt to answer the question "WHY did they do this?" This explanation is speculative & by no means final or complete. - EOPC)

excerpted from: "Why Do People Abuse?"


Understanding Abuse
People have difficulty understanding the motives of people who are involved in abuse. Why people choose to abuse other people is a common question.

Abuse situations must be lived in and experienced before their internal logic makes any sense. However, we can try to do our best to understand.

Why Do Cyberpaths Abuse?
The first question, "Why do people abuse other people?" has multiple answers. Some people internalized a particular relationship dynamic, namely the complementary roles of "abuser" and "victim". They are familiar with and fully understand the terror of being the helpless victim from their own childhood experience. The opposite of being a victim is not simply opting out of abuse; it is instead, to be abusive. Given the choice between being the out-of-control victim, or the in-control abuser, some of these people grow up to prefer the role of the abuser.

As they become adults, they simply turn this relationship dynamic around and start acting out the "abuser" side of the relationship dynamic. By choosing to be the aggressor and abuser, they may get their first sense of taking control over their own destiny and not being at the mercy of others. And the anonymity and disinhibition the internet provides feeds that.

Besides, online - others are only objects, not real people.


Still other people who abuse end up abusing because they have an empathy deficit, either because of some sort of brain damage, or because their innate empathic abilities never developed properly.

Such abusers cannot or will not relate to other people as people, choosing instead to treat them as objects. In effect, they confuse people for things. They treat people as though they were there solely for their convenience and do not otherwise have an independent, important life. Far too easy to do online!

Abusers who treat people in this manner are very likely psychologically ill, incurably so. They may have an antisocial, sociopathic or narcissistic personality disorder, and they may have anger or impulse control issues and addition (internet, sex, love & drama) issues on top of that!

Such cyberpaths may abuse via the net because of the benefits they receive from doing so, for instance, sexual or financial gratification, or the simple allure of power over other people's lives.

SOURCE

The Online Predator's Profile

- You know how people are forever telling you to go with your instinct? It's true; you should. If you think an online friend is lying to you, he (or she) most likely is.

- If he seems too good to be true, then obviously and most likely that is the situation. He may present himself as the perfect match to what you are looking for, only someone you wish you could be with. He could share similiarites, make you seem like you're his priority, and seem "perfect" in countless ways. Another precaution to take when you find yourself in a relationship with someone online.

- One who seems they could never betray you, seems trustworthy, and one who would never let you down, is one who is probably very likely to break your trust easily. In fact, the whole time, an online predator is continuously breaking your trust by ensuring you how "trustworthy" he may be, luring you into the fake comforts of the predator.

- In reality, the online predator is insecure, although he may not seem to be in his relationship with you. He can make you look up to him, giving himself a benefit of self-confidence.

- As an obvious point, he may tell you things and plans he has for you, that appears to be a perfect dream to you, but in all truth, he is planning something rather unhealthy or not exactly something you would feel comfort in, even though he makes you think that it is.

- He will lead you to believe that his reputation stands strong in his home area as a well human being. Making you think that he is safe, and well loved and known by many, and is respected by all who knows him, thus making you feel safer in continuing a relationship with him. In reality, the perpetrator, is generally exactly opposite of the person he leads you to believe he is, usually one without such honor, and lacking great reputation among his friends, family, etc.

- He will attack others and belittle many others, but with you as an exception. The person could guide you to believing your "current local boyfriend/spouse", friends, family etc. aren't good enough for you, and make you believe his thoughts as well, sometimes turning you away from those people. He will also slam his spouse/ partner and say she "drove him to the internet" because she doesn't love him/ no sex, etc. And by him denigrating others, he starts to become superior and a higher priority in your life, as he very well planned to.

- It is unlikely that the person has many long-term friends. Especially since the fact that he dedicates so much of his time to luring, tricking, and lying to you (and others). Additionally, a lot of his time is spent shoring up his "belief ceiling" that he's a good guy, a good father/ partner, altruistic or whatever he wants everyone to believe (as well as convincing himself). Which also proves that point that his reputation isn't as great as he claims it to be, leaving him with fewer friends. Most predators don't mind this however; many are accustomed to isolation.

- An online predator cleverly plans things, many times with every little detail mapped and sorted out, making sure he successfully gets you to believing his stories, and him, damaging you as well, for his own benefits and satisfaction, though you don't realize it.

- A predator knows his activities are something he needs to keep discreet, so his online activities are carefully hidden, not revealing what is he doing. He keeps himself a secret and you become part of that secret.

- The person appears to be charming, someone who any person would want to be in a relationship with. He could be the typical "Mr. Right" and fill in every blank that you have wanted in a partner. But obviously, him being "perfect" means he can lure and manipulate his victims with more ease, and getting them to stay because of his "charm".

- The predator makes careful selections in the choice of his victims - usually profiling victims who appear to be in need of a self-esteem boost, certain weaknesses (lonely, divorced, disabled, abused, recovering), etc. and tried his best to comfort you in giving you the "confidence" you need. He scouts out these certain weaknesses from complaining about certain things to him, or straight out telling him. He can work in very smooth ways.

- Of course this person will seem to be amazing and a perfect match for you. They can change themselves to be exactly what you need, and want, thus making you long for them. Anything you like - they like, anything you need - they have, anything you want - they they can get. It may just seem like mere coincidences, and just make you believe this is the perfect partner for you, but remember, they already aren't being their true selves, so they can mold themselves into anything that will suit you perfectly, regardless of their truth. They are 'mirroring' you.

- The person behind the computer may seem to have plenty of self discipline and control over any actions, but in reality, has a major lacking in self control and confidence. The only place they seem to find that control is in this relationship he has created with his victim. And that's a reason why he does so much to keep this relationship active and alive, because it's one of the few things he can take over with. It seems as if he is creating a "fake life" for himself, which is better than his life in reality. In his fake life, he can be anything great that he wants to be, and trick his victim into thinking he is superior and perfect, and forming a relationship with someone that he probably couldn't in reality, as his own self.

(JUST ONE OR TWO OF THESE CHARACTERISTICS IS ENOUGH TO MAKE HIM A PREDATOR!)

original article here

The Four Psychological Stages Of Those Abused by Cyberpaths

Stage One ~ DENIAL
The victim refuses to admit even to herself, that she has been 'had' or that there is a problem in her online relationship/friendship. She may call each incident an accident. She offers excuses & rationalizations and each time she is played or insulted firmly believes it will never happen again.

Stage Two ~ GUILT
Victim now acknowledges there is a problem, but considers herself responsible for it. She deserves to be used and lied to, she feels because she has defects in her character and is not living up to her predators's expectations.

Stage Three ~ ENLIGHTENMENT
The woman no longer assumes responsibility for her cyberpaths's abusive treatment, recognizing that no one deserves to be treated badly, used, played or lied to. She is still committed to her online relationship though and stays with her cyberpath hoping they can work things out. During this period she often questions the predator and hopes for "straight answers" because things are starting to not jive or make sense.

Stage Four ~ RESPONSIBILITY
Accepting the fact that her cyberpath will not, or can not, stop his predatory & manipulative behavior, the victim decides she will no longer submit to it and starts a new life.

Often involves "telling" and no more secret keeping - by which she can achieve validation that she is not alone or stupid.

ORIGINAL ARTICLE HERE

SPYING - for those being cheated on

By: Dr. Robert Huizenga

Should you spy on your cheating husband or wife? You believe you see signs of a cheating spouse. The need to know whether your spouse is cheating and EXACTLY what kind of cheating is taking place is often strong. There are a number of reasons why the drive to spy is powerful. Here are seven:

1. Trust is a big reason, not of your partner, but yourself. Probably for some time you have sensed something is different or questioned the change of behavior in your partner. Perhaps you confronted your cheating husband or cheating wife and it was met with denial. This created a huge dilemma for you because a part of you was screaming, Hey, this doesn’t fit! I don’t believe it! To deny this part of you, which KNOWS the truth, creates a tremendous internal turmoil. If the truth as you suspect it is confirmed, you can take a deep breath and at least know that you can trust yourself.

You are NOT CRAZY! Spying is a way to confirm your suspicions and trust more fully your gut feelings.

2. Spying on cheating husbands or cheating wives often helps the person feel connected to the partner who seems to be steadily moving away. It is a way of maintaining contact and having some sort of connection to this stranger who once was well known. Isnt it like the game of hide-and-seek we used to play as children? Sometimes there, sometimes gone. At least it is a game, and a game is at least some contact, some involvement. You miss the connection and try to find someway to maintain the ties.

3. Spying on a cheating spouse may be an honest attempt to bring resolution to the relationship. You want to know the truth. You sense something does not fit. You suspect there is a breach of something. You want to know what you are up against. You are not willing to stand pat and wait. You are a person of action. You want some sort of movement. You want to get on with the relationship. You want to get on with your life. You know that it is difficult maintaining your sanity when there might be this huge elephant that no one is talking about. You want to know the truth, face the truth, deal with the truth and be free.

4. Cheating husbands or cheating wives often, unfortunately, lead to the demise of marital relationships. If you strongly suspect this to be true for your situation you will want to protect yourself legally. If there is betrayal, lying and deception regarding a third party, other forms of deception may exist financially or in other areas of the relationship. Having evidence does have some impact in some court systems. Whether you need to protect yourself legally depends on the kind of affair facing you and the character of your spouse. If your spouse is someone who can't say no, doesn't want to say no or is acting outraged, please make sure to take protective steps.

5. You may want to protect yourself medically if you suspect you have a cheating husband or wife. You might be concerned about sexually transmitted diseases. Your health may be at stake. And, of course, you need to know. Shame, guilt or self-absorption may be so powerful in your partner that it gets in the way of responsibly informing you of the medical dangers when another partner is sexually brought into your relationship.

6. Seeing signs of a cheating spouse often mean secrets. Secrets are work! There is not much written about the impact of a secret in a relationship, but believe me, in over two decades of working with strained relationships day in and day out, keeping a secret has a powerful impact. It is the proverbial elephant sitting in the room that no one dare talk about. People take extraordinary measures to tip toe around it, but it IS there.

Emotionally, you cant miss it. Secrets are a drain. If the secret persists, its impact is felt in subtle but insidious ways. People become physically ill, sometimes seriously so. People become depressed. People start doing crazy things. Children start acting out, stop achieving, become listless or exhibit a host of other symptoms. Children, or the next generation, often carry the emotional load. You want to spy because you dont want to live with a secret. You want to discover the truth. You want to feel the freeing power of the exposed secret and the opportunity it offers for healing, resolution, a rich relationship and a productive life.

7. Some of us like drama. Soap opera scenarios and adrenaline based lives are a hallmark of our society. We get juiced or pumped up entering into emotional relational triangles that offer intrigue. Without adrenaline, life seems boring or mundane. Perhaps an unspoken reason for an affair may be to fan the fire? Or, you may spy on your cheating spouse to keep the sense of being alive a part of your life.

Internet Con Man Dupes Mothers into Abusing Their Kids

By JEFF KAROUB

(MICHIGAN, USA) In real life, Steven Demink didn't have children, a college degree or a lasting career. Online, prosecutors say, he presented himself as Dalton St. Clair, an attractive single father and psychologist — a fantasy image authorities say the Michigan man used to persuade mothers across the country to commit unspeakable acts on their children.

Demink, 41, of Redford Township, preyed on single mothers for more than a year, prosecutors say, convincing them to sexually assault their children as a form of therapy. After pleading guilty Monday to six charges related to the sexual exploitation of children, Demink faces 15 years to life in prison when he is sentenced in June.

Demink's alter-ego was a single father of a 14-year-old girl, prosecutors said, and he posted pictures of male models as his headshots. In some cases, court documents say, Demink promised the women a date if they followed through with his directions.

Since authorities arrested him in October, seven children were rescued and at least three mothers have been arrested. Prosecutors say all of the children are now safe.

Authorities say Demink chatted with mothers from New Hampshire, Florida, Idaho and elsewhere, persuading them to engage in sexual acts with their children and send images via e-mail or through a live web stream. The children ranged in age from 3 to 15.

Demink told U.S. District Judge Gerald Rosen that before his arrest, he worked as a car salesman for about six months and before that for about five years at a local bank. He said he completed a U.S. Customs and Border Protection training program in 2002 and worked for the Immigration and Naturalization Service for about a year. He attended college for about two years but did not earn a degree, he said.

As part of his plea agreement with prosecutors, seven charges against Demink were dropped.

In one case, Demink started online chats with an Oregon woman about the sexual development of her 8-year-old autistic son, according to the plea agreement. He told her to engage in sexually explicit conduct with her son as a way to teach him about sex, prosecutors say, and she did so while Demink watched on a web camera.

"Demink intimated to these women that the result of the therapy would be healthier children," the document said.

Federal agents were tipped off to his operation by the Teton County Sheriff's Office in Idaho, said Khaalid Walls, a spokesman for the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Office of Homeland Security Investigations. The mother of a woman who had been chatting with him called sheriff's officials in late 2009.

A Teton County Sheriff's Office report from December 2009 said the Idaho woman met "Daltonst28" on an online dating site called singleparentmeet.com. She told police she performed sex acts on her young son as directed by her online male friend.

The woman's mother, Eileen Schwab of Idaho, said she knows little of how Demink convinced her daughter to follow his orders. She said her daughter was "depressed and lonesome" after her divorce.

"I don't know how he wrangled her in," Schwab said. "She could have turned off the computer and gone the other way. He must have had a power over her."

Her daughter pleaded guilty last May to lewd conduct with a child under 16 and is currently in prison.

Another mother who was arrested was from New Hampshire and pleaded guilty in December to producing child pornography, which carries a possible sentenced of 15 to 30 years in prison. She is scheduled to be sentenced in March. A message was left seeking comment from Larry Dash, a federal defender representing her.

A woman from Lee County, Fla., also has pleaded not guilty to five counts and was being held without bond in Florida. She faces a May trial in federal court in Fort Myers, federal defender Martin DerOvanesian said.

Prosecutors say Demink also is linked to four other mothers in Indiana, Georgia, Illinois and Oregon but has not been charged with crimes related to those communications. Assistant U.S. Attorney Kevin Mulcahy said those cases can be considered during sentencing.

We are not naming the women to protect the identity of the children.

Demink's attorney, Timothy Dinan, said his client "has expressed a lot of remorse" for what he did and has taken responsibility by pleading guilty. Dinan said Demink's parents, who declined to be interviewed, are praying for their son as well as the victims and their families.

"It's a shame he couldn't ask for help," Dinan said.

IS IT LEGAL TO EXPOSE THESE PREDATORS?

Written by the Fighter Team
(originally published December 02, 2005)

Here's the question - is it LEGAL to expose a cheater or abuser online? We remind you that this piece contains our personal OPINIONS only and was written for the purpose of consideration and discussion.
In short, it appears the current answer is YES. But this could change in the near future.

Most of these type of sites have rules for exposing the people listed. The current interpretation seems to say if you have proof to back up what you say, and it is truthful, it is not libel or slander or defamation. But remember, laws can be changed with enough pressure.

One site that exposes cheating men recently had a group attempt to launch a lawsuit against them. Guess what happened? Other than whining & moaning about how the cheaters and their families were harmed? Not much. The cheaters' website was looking for advertisers and money to help support their "cause." (Their site & cause are now BOTH defunct) Besides, now there are so many other choices of sites available to expose people, both men and women! (Additionally, the men trying to launch a lawsuit all admitted to affairs, cheating and lying to others online... but were angry about their families being harmed. -- Sounds like Dorksy, gridney/ Yidwithlid, Beckstead, etc. Maybe they should have thought of that before they went online to prey on innocent, vulnerable women and then treat them and smear these victims when they were caught in the lies & game playing. In short, they had NO SUIT!)

This same site had a man named Todd Hollis attempt to sue them for defamation. It got to court and rather than "having his day," the suit was tossed out by the judge before it even got that far.

According to judge R. Stanton Wettick, the "Defendant’s Web site is accessible to anyone connected to the Internet anywhere in the world. Under plaintiff’s argument, defendant could be hauled into court in any state for any controversy. This result would be inconsistent with the Supreme Court’s understanding of the requirements of due process."

Exposure sites have very specific terms of use - honesty is a must and the legal onus is on the poster. Site owners and posters believe the men are angry they have been caught and exposed. (these cheaters & abusers always deny what they did, play the victim, say their family is being hurt or that the victim(s) 'knew what they were doing' or were psychos, scorned, etc. Always! It's a red flag that the person smearing them is attempting to defame his victim(s) so no one will listen to the REAL STORY)

Recently we were asked if most of these abusers and cheaters feel ashamed, sorry or sad about what they have done. Answer: "Not that we have seen!! In fact, it seems that they usually become indignant, angry and lash out at the person(s) that exposed the truth about them. They only "feel sorry" to try to rope the victim into saying nothing about them and to stop the tide of truth from exposing all the rest of their evil deeds."

Sad? Yes they are. Sad they got caught. And some of them do clean up their act for a few weeks, months or even years - but usually go RIGHT BACK to it and are sneakier about it next time.

If you consider that many of these people fall into a destructive sociopathic and narcissistic pattern you will find that many of them will go to therapy or even make long, carefully-crafted confessions to their partners. They even keep tweaking their stories until they find one that works. Here's one beaut that one of our predators tells to this day, that is the exact opposite of really happened, is pure slander and leaves out a lot of pertinent facts to make them (the Cyberpath) appear the victim:

You were an old girlfriend of Yidwithlid from an upstate NY college. You used the internet to track him down after 30 years, which wasn’t too hard because he’s a published writer.

You had cyber-sex with him and then got him to agree to meet up with you. When he did meet up with you, to his horror, he saw that his ex-girlfriend from college had ballooned into a 275 lb fat pig with poor hygiene and he didn’t want to bang you.

He politely excused himself by saying he couldn’t do this to his wife. You then began stalking him and his family, driving by his house, sending letters to his wife, his parents, his in-laws, his rabbi, the police, anyone with whom you thought you could slander his good name. His poor wife was left with no choice but to report you to the police after you threatened to harm her children.

Sound familiar porkchop?

Or there's the old "she's a scorned crazy woman" that this guy uses. Or this Cyberpath who says the victim who exposed him is "mentally unbalanced." Or this guy who has sworn for the last few years it's "all lies" and he's "writing a book to tell the truth" and "suing everyone." Don't buy it!

Once they find themselves "CURED" (We use that term loosely because deep down they justify everything and see NOTHING wrong with their behaviors) they will, step by step, go right back to their predatory ways either online or off. Being an online cheater is an addiction and takes a lot of honesty and giving up personal time to break an addiction or not trade it for something equally addicting and destructive.

The worst part is these cheaters and abusers usually accuse their wounded targets of harassing both them and/or their partners/ families and even stalking them. This is nothing more than a preemptive strike.

It common for internet predators, abusers and cheaters to enlist their local police in harassing their victims by showing the police carefully selected instant messages and emails to support their claims and need to cut down the once "beloved' target." This move sometimes makes their victims back down but usually the retributive attack can't be backed up.

• Be careful, the law regarding internet communications is still new so ask yourself:
• Are you exposing them to be mean or get revenge?
• Or are you doing it to warn others and possibly stop the cyberpath from destroying themselves and their families?
• Are you being vindictive or shedding real light on the situation?

When you point the finger at someone there are always three fingers pointing back at you. Your stories may help some potential victim see the patterns of behavior displayed by these people and avoid a lot of heartache. They may be cathartic as well. Telling is well known in psychiatric & medical communities as healing for victims.

As it stands, these communications are considered like any internet bulletin board posting as long as it doesn't contain telephone numbers or other information someone could use for identity theft. The exposure site owners say it is a matter of opinion.

In many cases, the cheater's spouse, therapist or partner may even stand up for the cheater/ abuser. These people do "seem" so contrite. They tell them to NEVER speak to their victim(s) again. Is that right? Maybe not. It doesn't offer an outlet for the cathartic anger and venting these exposure sites allow. It doesn't allow for healing on either side. It shows no empathy towards the victim.

Counselors for internet addiction say the cheaters should come clean with their partner AND all their victims. They also suggest trying to reframe the relationship into something more productive and honest for both people. Cutting off the victim is cruel and allows the abuser to then bend their stories without reproach, launch a smear campaign against their victims, run away from any responsibility and lie to everyone even more... including themselves. 12-Step addicts know that you must make direct amends.

Of course, some hide behind the step that says "unless to do so would cause more harm." In this case the cheater convinces themselves it would harm the victim even more. Baloney. The truth is not only a great leveler but also a great healer. In fact, new programs for restorative justice bring some prison inmates together with their victims which has been proven to be very healing for both of them.

So, think about it: if you internet predators, cheaters and abusers truly want to mend your ways then trying to erase what you did online by creating new identities and blocking victims isn't the solution, is it?

Now back to the lawsuit mentioned above. The owner of the site that was threatened with a lawsuit says:

"Most of them say that the [person] who posted [the profile] is crazy, that something is wrong with [the poster]; and that they're [the abuser/ cheater] saints."

Domestic Violence advocates say this is classic and typical abuser-speak. It's never the cheater or abuser, it's always the person who found them out! Sort of a no-good-deed-goes-unpunished moment. Unlike the public posting of the locations of known, convicted sex-offenders, this does seem to be more problematic in terms of fairness.

The another site sheds more light on the process:

"I don't want to ruin someone's life.... But, I can't control if you are player and a bunch of women post things about you. That is just a karma thing."

In one case, City of Kirkland v. Sheehan, Bill Sheehan, a man in Washington State says he put up a website in an effort to make the police more publicly accountable. He published information about local police officers from the City of Kirkland and other municipalities in Washington including their names, addresses, dates of birth, phone numbers, spouses' names and more. The police officers claimed this required them to enhance their personal and job security measures as well as expend funds in response to the listings. The case also alleges the site caused stress to both them and their families. This allegation is similar to the one made by the group attempting to shut down the cheating man site.

The ruling on the case held that the First Amendment protected the site:

"[I]n the absence of a credible specific threat of harm, the publication of lawfully obtained addresses and telephone numbers, while certainly unwelcome to those who had desired a greater degree of anonymity, is traditionally viewed as having the ability to promote political speech. Publication may arguably expose wrongdoers and/or facilitate peaceful picketing of homes or worksites and render other communication possible."

As for the cheating man site? A former U.S. attorney Scott Christie was quoted in the New Jersey Star Ledger,

"Yes, it's all legal. If I were the owners of this site, I wouldn't be concerned. They're providing an outlet for people to express their opinion. It's much like hosting a bulletin board for people with a common interest,. People are giving their opinion about other people — they're entitled to it under the First Amendment."

And this from Canada.com:

According to a privacy lawyer from Halifax, (snip)

"If the person's reputation is in Canada, and they are in Canada, and likely the person who posted the information is in Canada, there's more than enough connection for Canadian defamation law to apply," says David T.S. Fraser, chair of the privacy practice group at McInnes Cooper. But he hastens to add the statements aren't considered defamatory if they're true.

"If you're a slug," says Mr. Fraser, "it's only appropriate people know you're a slug."

And think about this: The people who post the pictures/profiles on any site are making an "allegation" — nothing more. Many of them aren't offering evidence that is irrefutable and verifiable other than their account. With sites that do, they make sure they have evidence. But what are the reasons for doing this? Is it a warning, catharsis, revenge or a credible threat? That's something the poster needs to ask themselves before they get into a very sticky legal situation.

In an article on FindLaw, writer Anita Ramasastry brought up some current cases involving exposure sites, digital information and their interesting findings. One case stated that the First Amendment does not protect all personally identifiable information in every context, even those published online. In a 6-5 decision (close), in Planned Parenthood of the Columbia/Willamette, Inc., et al., v. American Coalition of Life Activists, et al. an en banc panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld an injunction against a web site that did publish personal information of abortion doctors.

This particular case involved a website called the "Nuremberg Files." It published the addresses, photographs, addresses and other personal information of physicians and others who either provided or supported abortion services. The website also had strike throughs on the names of those who had been murdered and grayed out the names of those who had been wounded. The majority in this close decision held that the "pattern" in which the posters appeared — coupled with the fact that other abortion providers had been killed — transformed the posters into something of a symbolic threat. As such, the information was not protected by the First Amendment.

One owner of a website about cheating, abusive men says this about their site:

The Terms of Agreement and Privacy Policy are currently being re-revised and there are some terms that a woman needs to agree to before she can add a man to the database. All this basically comes down to two issues - Freedom of Speech and the First Amendment and the issue of a private person's right to privacy.

However, in a sense, aren't search engines such as Google merely large databases of information which also include personally identifying information of millions of humans?! If Google can do it, why shouldn't smaller websites such as mine be able to do it without legal reprecussions?So, okay, we have people who are exposing the misdeeds of others in a cyberspace court of public opinion. Of course this pisses off the cheaters because they want a higher threshold standard of guilt/proof or because they disagree with the concept of outting anyone publicly for what they feel should be a private matter. However, here's our personal look at another beneficial perspective of the people making these claims.

If someone posted our pictures/profiles in a database and we learned of it but it wasn't true, then we probably wouldn't waste time even rebutting it. Why? Because if we're innocent, then the burden is not on us to prove such, at least not under American jurisprudence — legal or moral. And we don't use and abuse people online or off - so we are not afraid of scrutiny. Misinformation and slander is easily proved and then we'd ask the site administrator to remove it. Threats such as being "out to get you" or "you're done" or "I will not hesitate to kill you if I see you" - are illegal and should be reported immediately to the FBI nearest where the threatener lives. (CLICK HERE for U.S. Offices)

In short - its a catharsis the victims won't get anywhere else. What are the victims of these men and women to do with their anger, pain and hurt? Suck it up and allow the abuser to move on to another victim? Tell or not tell his spouse, partner or family? Stew in their feelings?

One exposure site owner says:

It is better than going out and slashing his tires. It makes the victims feel better and gives them a way to express their bitterness and hurt."

In light of precedents like these, it's extremely likely that any law that simply tried to ban cheating men/ women sites, information aggregators like Zabasearch or "digital dossiers," would be struck down as contrary to the First Amendment. But could a more narrowly written law constitutionally restrict such sites and dossiers and be on the books soon? Some feel yes, such a law would be desirable. Some feel no, that the internet should not be restricted in such a manner as long as it does not pose a threat, symbolic or otherwise, to the persons posted as long as the information is true and proveable.

Perhaps if you are a guilty party, rather than trying to cut down the person(s) exposing you it would be better to call a qualified internet addiction counselor to stop your abusing ways. You would be doing everyone, including yourself, a favor.

Then, see what you can do to get the posting removed without a counterattack. Just talking to the person(s) you suspect posted it and working on amends honestly seems better than a Judge Judy or Jerry Springer hate-fest.

Ramasastry says in her article "... legislators should consider regulating how densely information can be collected online - regulating, that is, how thick our digital dossiers really can be. Doubtless, any attempt to do this will raise First Amendment objections. But this is one issue where privacy and the First Amendment truly clash - and the First Amendment cannot win every time."

And to the victims of these cheaters, liars, internet predators and abusers, remember: NOTHING beats sunshine and fresh air to disinfect abuse! Tell, but do not do it to endanger the person you are angry at or their families in the process. The laws are still being worked out. These sorts of internet exposures won't go away. Think of the National Enquirer and Globe articles that have caused ugly lawsuits.

Write your representatives and tell them your concerns or feelings about internet privacy.

And if you have been cheated on? Vent but exercise caution in posting anyone's personal information.

DISCLAIMER: We are not lawyers and this article is our personal opinion. It should not be construed as legal advice, in part or in whole, in way, shape or form.

OUR ARTICLE CAN BE FOUND HERE