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 FOUND HERE

Should Victims Embrace Docile Victimhood? Or Fight Back?

For all victims & those who tell them to "get over it" and "move on":


by writer Kathy Kracjo

I am death on people telling the victim that it's a sin to fight back. They are pressuring the victim to do the very thing that causes victims to suffer terrible shame in the aftermath of abuse -- give themselves up to it.

That shame we feel at doing so is an infallible indicator that it's wrong. No one needs a book or a preacher to tell them what's right and wrong. We KNOW that's wrong. Deep down inside we feel how wrong it is to give ourselves up to abuse. Doing so makes us feel like a worm. A doormat. We know it's lack of backbone. We sense the prostitution in it. We feel utterly degraded by it.

The only excuse for it is being subjected to overwhelming force so that we haven't the power to resist. Which is rape. Which is why we feel deeply violated by it. Whether it's sexual rape or any other kind.

So, we know that we must resist when we can. If only for the sake of our self respect.

And anyone who tells us that we shouldn't fight the aggressor might as well order us to be a self masochist who injures himself.

They are pressuring the victim to prostitute themselves to abuse. How degrading! They are pressuring the victim to do what causes a human being unbearable shame. How cruel! They are pressuring the victim to do what goes against the laws of nature, our instinct for self preservation. They are pressuring the victim to commit the worst breech of faith, the worst betrayal, there is -- treason against your very self by delivering yourself up to abuse.

That's what Joan of Arc called it -- "treason," "wretched treason." She preferred the stake.

If it would be wrong to surrender another person for abuse, why should it be right to surrender yourself to abuse?

Trying to force the victim to do that is what the narcissist does! It's bad enough to abuse someone, but when you become so sadistic that you make them bend over for it on top of it all, you have crossed the line into extreme perversity, the Sin of Sodom.

Docile victimhood is NOT a virtue, and people who think it is are devoid of moral sense. They are people who don't think about what they say any more than a parrot does. Nothing proves that easier than to just then ask them, "Well what if the abuse happenes to be sexual rape? Do you say the victim should bend over for it?"

Certainly not! These are the same folks who would say that a woman who bent over for it liked it and was a whore. They would say she must fight tooth and nail.

And that's just as stupid, because sometimes she doesn't dare fight. If she did, she'd get killed.

There are few ways that the victim of narcissistic abuse can fight back, especially when the victim is a child.

And whenever the victim does find a way to put up a resistance, there is always some holier-than-thou around to tell him or her that it's a sin.

You can't do that to people. That puts them in an impossible situation. That's what breaks minds.

Horrifying example. A kid is getting bullied at school. He periodically gets his head flushed in a toilet, while the "innocent" bystanders watch and laugh. He gets his lunch money stolen daily.

Now, would you willingly walk into a place where you know that someone is waiting for you to abuse you? Of course not. But we expect him to. So, when he skips school, he gets punished. We thus force him to present himself there daily for abuse. If he doesn't it's a sin.

So he punches the bully. Oh-oh. Now he committed another sin. He gets punished for that too, because "violence" (which force used in self defense ain't) is a sin.

So, he resorts to the last resort, the really stupid thing: he tells the counsellors about the abuse. They have "a talk" with the bully. Now the bully punishes him for that by escalating the abuse.

What is that kid going to do? We are forcing him to offer himself up for abuse like a sacrificial vicitm every single day.

Something's gotta give. He will decide to kill himself, and he may well decide to take others with him.

You can't force people to docilely submit to abuse. That's the most odious thing you can do to a human being. You are subjecting him to a slavery more odious and profound than that of the slaves, a kind of slavery we haven't seen since the macabre executions of the Middle Ages = slavery as someone else's property for the purpose of vicitimization.

Indeed, the victim isn't his own property if you deny his free will to the the extent that you deny him the right even to self preservation.

Those who think the Bible demands this had better re-read it. And study what the scholars have found and Church authorities have admitted -- how long after the events it was written, whom it was really written by, and how much it's been edited and added to since.

And applying a little common sense doesn't hurt either. For example, if Jesus thought defending yourself is a sin, why does scripture mention in several places that the apostles were armed? Duh, they were his bodyguards. And of course he told the three of them with him to put up their swords when he was captured -- because they were vastly outnumbered and just would have gotten killed. Interpreting that action as some sort of general prohibition again the use the use of force is absurd.

Common sense, common sense, common sense. There is nothing more dangerous than words of scripture in a mouth with its brain turned off.

Very often the victim can't fight back. At least not without that resistence resulting in greater harm to himself. But whenever he can, he has every right to. Indeed, the only morality a bully knows is a punch in the nose. It does work.

And the victims of a narcissist's abuse through character asssination have every right to accuse their accuser, to point the accusing finger right back at the narcissist to show that it's all projection. That's the victim's only defense! He or she should not be treated as though they are the attacker.

Character assassination is not nothing. It is character ASSASSINATION. I call it the abuse that keeps on abusing for the rest of that person's life. A crime in progress for the rest of that person's life, because that bad reputation pursues and continually damages the victim for the rest of their life. The victim has every right to defend himself from this ongoing abuse in whatever way he can.

SOURCE

NOTE: When other website owners find the need to participate in a smear campaign about a victim of someone else on their site -- members need to think twice. Especially support & recovery sites.

Especially when they elevate that predator to special status. How hateful.

Now ask yourself, why is it SO IMPORTANT to smear and attack someone for speaking their truth? If it really was all B.S. you'd let things stand because it would be so important. And to those who fall away because they are afraid to still be friends with the victims? Shame on you.

Innocence seldom utters outraged shrieks. Guilt does.
~ Whittaker Chambers

What is a Cyberbully?

Cyberbullying is sending or posting harmful or cruel text or images using the Internet or other digital communication devices. The stories are heart breaking. It involves Teens or Adults who:

Sending cruel, vicious, and sometimes threatening messages.

Creating web sites that have stories, cartoons, pictures, jokes ridiculing others.
Posting pictures of people online and asking others to rate them, with questions such “Who is the biggest ___ (add a derogatory term)?”

Breaking into an e-mail account and sending vicious or embarrassing material to others.

Engaging someone in IM (instant messaging), tricking that person into revealing sensitive personal information, and forwarding that information to others.

Posting your twisted version of event or smear against your victim on various sites. EXAMPLES OF POSTINGS

Taking a picture of a person in the locker room using a digital phone camera, or taking a photo and re-working (photoshopping) it and sending that picture to others.

Taking any discussion or reasonable criticism (such as the exposes here on EOPC) as an "attack" and then counterattacking by badgering that person/ place that exposed you.. by making a site about them or sending email criticizing them to others, simply as "payback" or to "defend yourself" (cyberpaths 'playing victim') EXAMPLE

Cyberbullying is emerging as one of the more challenging issues as more people embrace the Internet and other mobile communication technologies.

Cyberthreats are a related concern. A cyberthreat is online material that threatens or raises concerns about violence against others, suicide, or other self-harm.

There are two kinds:

Direct threats are actual threats to hurt someone or push them to commit suicide.

Distressing material provides clues that the person is emotionally upset and may be considering hurting someone, hurting him or herself or committing suicide.

from: http://www.cyberbully.org
(Many cyberpaths fall well into the category of cyberbully - especially when caught, about to be caught and exposed. The cyberbullying usually happens as part of a pre-emptive attack and smear campaign in an attempt to throw the honesty and credibility of their victims in a bad light - EOPC)

CYBERBULLYING CAN KILL

Being 'Anonymous' Online Changes People's Behavior

Faceless communication online or over phone often turns nice people nasty
By Diane Mapes


(excerpts)
One minute, they’re nice, normal people. The next, they’re frothing at the mouse.

“It’s mind-boggling the things people will say and even the things I will say,” says Catherine McIntyre, a 38-year-old medical billing specialist from Houston. “People who’d never say something horrible in real life will do it again and again and again online. It’s like the behavior of crowds, or those mass beatings where no one gets blamed because everyone’s at fault.”

Sheri Pineda, a 59-year-old customer service representative at the Daily Breeze in Torrance, Calif., encounters the same bad behavior in the after-hours messages left by her newspaper’s subscribers.

“It’s appalling the way people talk,” Pineda says. “They’ll rant and rave and cuss at us with extremely foul language. And I think a lot them specifically wait until we close the phones. They’re looking to let it all out and then get on with their day. And then they’re surprised when I get back to them. They’re like, ‘You actually heard that?’ and will be embarrassed.”

Hello. You have reached the split personality zone. Press 1 to melt down. Press 2 to hang up and act like a normal person again.

I, anonymous
Between out-of-control customers, vituperative online posters and road-raging drivers, it’s hard to find an individual who hasn’t succumbed to the siren song of faceless, consequence-free communication. Online boards are clogged with insults hurled by readers hiding behind deceptively mild screen names — (“I hope you rot in hell!” signed Kittyface) — and customer service reps endure blistering tirades from disembodied voices week in and week out.

These days there are a dozen ways to communicate without actually having to look somebody in the eye. As a result, not only have we developed an abrupt, abbreviated way to chat (IMHO), but our technological advances have spawned new psychological terms such as “online disinhibition effect” to explain our tendency to open up — in both good ways and bad — when we’re sitting in front of a screen.

In a February 2008 study published in the journal Psychological Reports, researchers found that out of four groups of participants, only those in the anonymous group took part in antisocial behavior — in this case defined as violating rules to obtain a reward.

“I definitely believe that anonymity affects the frequency of antisocial behavior among individuals to some extent, even when these individuals have a reasonable sense of morality — so-called ‘ordinary people,’” says study author Tatsuya Nogami of Nagoya University in Japan.

“In my personal opinion, people generally try to comply with social norms in everyday life, even when such compliance with norms and rules conflicts with their personal self-interests. However, if you can get what you want without receiving any punishment or negative evaluations from others, are you still 100 percent sure that you’ll always refrain from engaging in that kind of undesirable behavior?”

Rage against the machine
...
McIntyre, the billing specialist from Houston, says the online news forums she’s participated in over the years have led her down many a dark and dysfunctional corridor.

“People get sucked in,” she says. “You can be whoever you want, you can put out there whatever you want, and there are no consequences. I even got sucked in and was mean to people. I consider myself better than that, but I did it too, and that bothers me. I guess it’s just the dynamic.”

Rider University psychology professor John Suler wrote about this dynamic in his 2004 paper “The Online Disinhibition Effect.” In it, he describes both toxic disinhibition — angry, threatening behavior such as that seen in flame wars or cyberbullying — and benign disinhibition, in which people make overly personal revelations due to the intimate nature of the medium. (Think online daters who “fall in love” without ever meeting.)

A lot of this effect has to do with feedback — or lack thereof, says Wallace.

“The environment affects how you behave,” she says. “Any time you go to places where you’re not known — even if it’s a hotel in another city — you might be more aggressive. So when you construct an environment like the Internet or long-distance call centers with a help desk worker in Bangalore, you’re creating an environment that facilitates uncharacteristic behavior.

You’re not getting those nonverbal cues that calibrate your behavior and give you feedback if you’re going off track. Those people who do customer service for Comcast probably need double doses of Zoloft.”

Cherise Oleksak, a 35-year-old cable TV customer service representative from Fife, Wash., says dealing with people’s disinhibited side can definitely be a challenge. Some scream and rage; others get a little more, uh, personal.

“You’ll get people who will turn into perverts,” she says. ”They’ll ask you out or ask you to do (FREE) phone sex. They’ll be like, ‘Can you read those pay-per-view adult movie titles out loud to me again?’”

Robin Taylor, 42, a customer care representative from Nashville, Tenn., says she’s seen this split, as well.
...

“I guess they feel they can say whatever they want because they’re anonymous, but the funny thing is we have all their information: their name, their address, their phone number, even part of their Social Security number.

Not that I would ever retaliate, but if we ended up with some psycho (employee), it could happen.”

Going public
Interestingly enough, some folks are starting to retaliate.

Surreptitious tape recordings of outrageously bad customer behavior have started to pop up on YouTube in all their profanity-laced glory.

In 2004, comedienne Margaret Cho posted dozens of hateful e-mail messages she’d received in response to a monologue on her Web site, along with each sender’s full name and e-mail address. Shamed — and deluged with their own hate mail from Cho’s fans — some posters sent in abject letters of apology.

In the online world, abusive users hiding behind anonymous screen names are being outed, sometimes to huge public embarrassment as when Whole Foods chief executive John Mackey was unmasked as the sock puppet responsible for posting numerous attacks against competitors on a Yahoo! financial message board.

And media sites from Sacramento to Soho are stepping up their moderation of anonymous comments in an attempt to keep the incivility down to a low roar.

“When we first started with online blogs and that sort of thing, people weren’t aware of how much the environment could affect their behavior, but now people are getting much more savvy about it,” Wallace says. “But the issue that needs to be considered now is there’s no privacy. People need to recognize that they just can’t send out these blogging responses and e-mails and expect their anonymity to be preserved. It probably won’t be.

Recording devices are everywhere and Web 2.0, with its user-generated content, greatly amplifies the Net’s power to expose and publicize.

“It also archives forever.”

(full article found here)

(please see our far right column for a few of the VICTIMS of Exposed Predators and how they fought back against smear and lies from the Exposed Predators)

Chatroulette Plans Recognition Algorithm to Block Pervy Users

There's something exhilarating about meeting someone new, whether it's in a coffee shop or online. That is, until your new pal pulls a Lyndon Johnson and gets really friendly.

That sort of behavior is pretty common on Chatroulette, where users can "meet" and chat with random people with a click of a mouse. But to cut down on the parade of penises, penis recognition software is being added,TechCrunch reports.

Changes could also include a system that flags users who are consistently "nexted" -- skipped past -- presumably because they are exposing themselves or otherwise being disgusting.

TechCrunch also reports that Napster founder Shawn Fanning is working with Chatroulette's founder, Andrey Ternovskiy, in an uncompensated advisory role. It's not clear what Fanning is doing, but his credibility among social media users and investors couldn't hurt.

The story also quotes unnamed "interested investors" who advise that Ternovskiy needs to clean up his site before it is forever linked to creepiness. Only recently has it become easier to cut off offensive users; a New Yorker profile last month noted that Ternovskiy made some changes after Ashton Kutcher berated him about what his stepdaughter had seen on the site.

Chatroulette has long featured the rawest side of humanity -- copulating couples, men taking their pants off, and so on. But it also allows for a potentially rewarding (and potentially lucrative) random human connection, and that's what interests investors.

Although, come to think of it, there might also be a market for software that can quickly scan for penises and not filter them out.

original article here

Jeff Dunetz/ YidwithLid's TARGET #2: TAKING A STAND (AND A CAUTIONARY NOTE)

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Dunetz/ YidwithLid's Mountain of Lies Start to Unravel...

originally posted in February 2005

In January 2004 Yidwithlid (aka GRIDNEY) wrote an article that Target #1 gladly helped edit for him (his spelling and syntax is atrocious from what we have read on his personal website). As always, EOPC's editors comments in purple. It gets confusing - so feel free contact EOPC for clarification.

Target #1 then introduced him to an online female friend (we'll call her Target #2) that she'd just started emailing with across the country who was involved with similar issues . Target #1 asked Target #2 to help place his article in a couple more places.

(Target #2 independently confirmed to us that it was Target #1 who introduced them. EOPC conducted phone interviews with Target #2 - without Target #1 knowing - so we could be sure they were not concocting a story. Law enforcement has also confirmed the facts before telling us they had to go silent because of a "larger" investigation - which we will talk about later.)

Target #1 eventually learned that VERY shortly after introducing them, Yidwithlid initiated an online affair with Target #2

(We are unable to get permission from Target #2 to publish her IMs with Yidwithlid as she did not save most of them. She did however consent to independent interviews with us)

Target #1 - I had no idea they knew each other, outside me introducing them. Target #2 told me about 2-3 days after she helped place the article Yidwithlid wrote (supposedly at my suggestion) Yidwithlid asked Target #2 to open an IM window one day.

At the same time I was writing her, trying to get to know her better - seemed we had a lot in common. Target #2 would ask me questions about Yidwithlid and I was so dumb - I just said he was a great person. Little did I know he'd totally trashed me, made up outrageous lies about my past & present relationship to him and was starting to do his "love bombing" to her.

Target #2 ALSO came from an unhappy marriage, was disabled with a mental illness and had a background of sexual & emotional abuse so, once again was an easy target for Yidwithlid. Target #2 told us she stopped communicating with Target #1 for many weeks at Yidwithlids insistence. (Typical Cyberpath - SEPARATE YOUR TARGETS!)

(Target #2: "he told me he had taken Target #1s virginity (that's a lie readers, designed to anchor Yidwithlid's lies that Target #1 was obsessed with him. See how similar all these people are in creating a very plausible platform from which to prey on the wounded!) and she was stalking him. That he loved only ME and was just humoring her. Yidwithlid said some really nasty things about her. So I did what he said. I believed him!")

One evening, Target #2 told us she got very tired of Yidwithlids cryptic comments and finally IM'd Target #1 to ask her a question about Yidwithlid.

Target #1 - I had cc'd both of them on an article I had stumbled across that day. As I said, I didn't even KNOW they knew each other. Little did I know this triggered a series of events that finally led to the horrible truth coming out.

Target #2 and I spent a good hour just verbally avoiding saying anything about our true relationships to Yidwithlid. Finally I came right out and asked "are you having cybersex with him?" Her answer "Yes.... and more." I asked her for her phone number immediately. My whole body went cold and bile came up my throat.

Yidwithlid and I had had very intense cybersex just a few days before. It had upset me because I didn't want to but I couldn't help myself (he had her in his "thrall" readers! Like all of them)

In fact, that time J'd texted messaged me on my cell just a few minutes after I signed off from a very boring chat with him! It was BIZARRE because when I signed back on my computer at his request, it was like talking to another person!! (Dissociative fugue of a sex addict readers! Yidwithlid couldn't find anyone else online so he just decided to have a little fun with Target #1 KNOWING she was already compliant)

I had had many indications from Yidwithlid for the months prior something more was going on - here was the awful truth. But it was the tip of the iceberg. I asked him outright a few times if he was ok because he worried me. Yidwithlid was very malicious to me even saying one time:

"You want the truth? OK, if I was with you it would just be about sex. Its always been about just sex with you." - Yidwithlid

And he left (FINALLY he told the horrifying truth to this woman knowing she'd agreed to the relationship and was now brainwashed with his 'help' to say in it)

A couple days later he wrote me he'd forgotten to take his depression meds and he was truly sorry - please not to stop talking to him. (lie)I was in a total mental fog by then about right & wrong.

After 36 hours of no sleep for Target #1 or #2, here's some highlights of what came out of that all night conversation. Yidwithlid had been love bombing Target #2 for about 4-5 weeks by then.

Target #2 told us that Yidwithlid told Target #2 the following over the 5 weeks of their chatting. Remember Yidwithlid knew Target #1 in person but had never met Target #2 (does any of this sound familiar to you?):

• they were "soulmates,"
• Target #2 was Yidwithlids one and only
• he didn't love his wife at all
• He & Target #2 were 'twin souls'
• that Target #1 'lost her virginity to him' and that was why she been stalking him for years (remember Yidwithlid made first contact with Target #1 - and when we asked Target #1 she said no, she'd broken up with a long term boyfriend/ fiance in high school back then who'd taken her virginity and Yidwithlid was well aware of that fact!)
• Yidwithlid had offered to buy a video camera for Target #2 to make him 'personal movies'
• offered Target #2 money to help her out and pay for them to take trips together
• called Target #2 sometimes 3-4 times a day to talk and/or have phone sex (from a cell phone his job was paying for; see the cheaters 'how to' book!)
• he would be online with Target #2 while NOT EVEN BOTHERING to block Target #1 - willfully ignoring her ( both of them said Yidwithlid would put up a "WORKING" message - like all of them: working on more TARGETS or watching porn to fill his dialogue with targets)
• that he hated porn (remember the past posts about his penchant for PORN - and later - loads of porn sites are traced to his IP and credit card!!)
• had given Target #2 his business phone, his cell number and a variety of ways to contact him
• that he was just being nice to Target #1 and "never loved [Target #1], never!!"
• Yidwithlid had set up a meeting with a client not far from Target #2 so she could come meet him to start a physical affair, and stay at his hotel on Yidwithlids employer's dime
• he LOVED Target #2 and was IN LOVE with her (repeatedly)
• had planned more trips (around business meetings paid for by his employer at the time) for himself & Target #2 so their "love could go on forever"
• had specifically told Target #2 NOT to communicate with Target #1 ("if you tell [Target #1] she will be jealous and ruin our happiness")

Target #1: During our conversation (which went on all night and into the next day) Target #2 and I both realized Yidwithlid weaving a tapestry of lies and conceit, the details of which are perplexing, often silly and horribly painful. It was now painfully evident that Yidwithlid was a deeply sick person.

Where the lies ended and the truth started, its doubtful even he knew. Some lies were exactly the same, some were polar opposites, some were anchored in partial truths, some were real WTF moments. And in the interest of pleasing someone I cared for - I went along with it all. I was horrified and wanted to die.

It was finally clear to me what I had known in college, and what he worked so hard to dispel that he was not "into" me. In fact, Target #2 and I compared some dates and times:

• Yidwithlid told had 'broken down' and 'admitted' he was IN LOVE with Target #2 the day before he had last had cybersex with me. (independently verified by EOPC with Target #2)
• Yidwithlid was too cowardly to tell me truth himself - though I had asked him point blank a few times.
• Yidwithlid wouldn't admit I'd introduced him to Target#2- tried to tell everyone he met Target #2 via his website - but even Target #2 said "no, she [Target #1] introduced us!" (independently verified by EOPC with Target #2)
• Yidwithlid had steadfastly refused to give me his phone number, supposedly for fear his wife or my ex-husband would find out; even as a friend knowing I was taking abuse because of Yidwithlid. My ex-husband already HAD it and had given it to me 18 months prior! I had it but I NEVER used it or violated this information. I was waiting for him to stop all the nonsense but got sucked into it because of my lack of ego. I had no intention and never have had, of hurting his wife, family or kids.
  
• Also, later law enforcement showed me it was all online anyway - and anyone could have found it by surfing on "gridney" and then using zabasearch on his real name.

Now Yidwithlid's sickness and dysfunction was plain as day; mine was harder to get at. My therapists have explained to me I had been brainwashed and reeled in with the obsession Yidwithlid'd seductively planted in my brain that somehow I could help him and that he 'needed' me.

Readers, Cyberpaths relish doing this to their victims - even when caught they plant their 'hooks' deep and the Targets turn themselves inside out to remove them. Targets often spend weeks, months and years trying to figure out what happened - Cyberpaths just tell selective truth to their partners and counselors and tell everyone else to "move on" & "get over it" to avoid further scrutiny!

They have probably been lying about so much stuff in their lives they will blame everyone around them and "shut down" all inquiries into the house of sand their lives are built on.

Yes, EOPC has had demands and threats to remove postings from Cyberpaths. Unless we have hard and verified information that the posts were NOT TRUE, they stay up!

Now REMEMBER - Target #1 had tried a few times to discontinue with Yidwithlid with the nagging thought that in the 2 years prior that Yidwithlid was no longer interested in her - Yidwithlid would come back and BOMB Target #1 with how much she meant to him and “please don't stop talking to me."

REMEMBER the first posts about him? Their chats? Yidwithlid'd told Target #1 he wasn't demonstrative ('I was too laid back & too macho to tell you how I felt'- was approximately how he put their earlier and current 'relationship'). Yet here Yidwithlid was telling a woman he had never met in person that he "LOVED her, never loved his wife", made plans to see her, sent Target #2 all his emails & phone numbers and basically chased her like a hungry lion.

(EOPC note: Target #2 has admitted that she was registered with sites like AdultFriendFinder and JDate - despite being married at that time. She doesn't see anything wrong with because she said her "husband gave her permission." )

In one chat we read, Target #1 was hurt but STILL trying to be Yidwithlids 'friend' -- she told Target #2 to go ahead and be with him because obviously she couldn't help him & after 26 years and she just wanted him to be happy.
Readers - think about this - does that sound like an obsessed stalker? Do any of the victims we have worked with, as accused by their predators, sound like stalkers?

We are amazed that cyberpaths so CONSISTENTLY refuse accountability for what they have done and not only DENY but pin the lion's share of blame and responsibility on their Targets!! (remember Nathan Thomas asked HIS victim 'not to cause him trouble & annoy him')

Yidwithlid had been setting this up for some time - by turning around his seduction and manipulation of Target #1 by saying things to her like "if you want to" and "its up to you"... REMEMBER? and sorry but:

TRUE jealous stalkers and lovesick women don't tell rivals to 'go ahead and be with' the object of their affection!!

But there's more! as Yidwithlid turns this whole thing around on both Targets.... almost. (and then he will blame them, play the hurt party and cut off all contact because they know the truth - and Cyberpaths MUST destroy anyone who calls them out completely and fully. Usually by terrorizing them and destroying their credibility and character! Has this been done to you, readers?)

Target #1 - I was finally sure. Everything was a cruel, horrible, twisted LIE. From day ONE! Yidwithlid never had any intent but to toy with me and then paint me to be a pathetic old woman. Even telling Target #2 that I had lost my virginity to him? That was a lie. And he told it to make ME look FIXATED on him.

And this despite his PROTESTING whenever I called him on his 'manipulations." (Beware - anyone who SWEARS he is telling the truth to you? Or needs to say its TRUE - has SOMETHING TO HIDE!) But I still didn't realize he was a player... I thought I was just being tossed aside for something better... and I was ready to just take it.

Yidwithlid shot himself in the foot first. When this Online Predator found out his Targets had talked, like most online players Yidwithlid first spent several days trying to call both women and smooth it out.

Target #1 - Yidwithlid was spinning the facts, times, dates and other things like crazy. He IM'd Target #2 telling her to lay low for a couple weeks.

From Target #2 interviews: "He said to me he'd told his clergyman he'd "Fallen in love with another woman." And that once he could schmooze his wife, he'd be in touch and we'd pick up where we left off. "

This kept Target#2 reeled in because she wasn't sure WHO was telling the truth - Yidwithlid is slick, ain't he?

Target #1: Of course he said NOTHING about me because I never really existed as a real human being anyway. Even Target #2 said "where's the explanation for you?" (Psychological sadist.)

Target#2 said she couldn't get a straight answer out of him.

Once truly exposed Yidwithlid told Target #2 "If you love ME, you will LEAVE me alone." (WTH??)

Target #1: Target #2 said the whole reason she'd finally contacted me was to figure out the Word Salad and cryptic comments!!

Target #2: After repeatedly assuring me he didn't love his wife & hadn't for years now he said "please go away and let my wife heal." Go away? Heal?

I realized he meant stop telling my wife the truth!! so I can tell her more LIES! I was furious and I was going to rip this guy's life wide open for using me like I was a cheap hooker.

(Readers, while telling is one thing - harassment is another. And we do not condone HARASSMENT - EOPC)

Target #1: I felt really stupid, dirty and used. A therapist told me it was emotional rape and put me on sedation. That pretty much summed it up.

When Yidwithlid realized he'd been almost completely exposed, Yidwithlid IM'd Target #1 threatening to tell her ex husband they'd had a physical actual affair and assured Target #1 he was a 'good liar' Yidwithlid also threatened Target #1 with the removal of her kids. She was terrified and still in deep shock.

Yidwithlid stupidly ASSUMED the attacks were from HER! ASSUMED!

(This IM has been verified and is on file with law enforcement - Target #1 has an Order of Protection because of this IM)
~~~~~

Yidwithlid: Let me make this clear. You got me back its done !!! (got me back? is this high school? no this is adults here)

Next there is a call, email letter anthing to me my office or anyone in my family or anyone about me from you or ANYONE I will swear out an order of protection with the police.

And you better believe that the copy of it I send to [your ex-husband] will have some of the prose you sent to [my wife] ..Plus some added tidbits of my own. (Yidwithlid says 'prose' implying that he already painted Target #1 as a liar)

Fedex goes to [your neighborhood]

Target #1: I read that (Yidwithlid had emailed the same paragraph he just typed to her moments before IMing her)

Yidwithlid: nothing on the web either - I will assume its from yo (paranoia on the Cyberpaths' part is classic - there was NOTHING 'on the web' that Target #1 had put or was aware of)

Target #1: [my ex-husband] knows everything

Target #1: you cant hurt me anymore

Target #1: what on the web

Target #1: what are you talking about

Yidwithlid: I am a great embellisher (no s**t)

Target #1: huh? you are sick

Yidwithlid: [your ex-husband] might find that it was physical

Yidwithlid: its over (what's over Yidwithlid? YOUR GAMES???)

Target #1: he already thinks that, so what

Yidwithlid: Ill give him proof

Target #1: so what... you can't do anything to me Yidwithlid

Target #1: that hasn't already been done

Target #1: my therapist knows

Target #1: everyone knows (good - she told him that she hadn't keep his 'secret' - the online predator is exposed!!)

Target #1: I just hope as your friend you get help

Yidwithlid: I will see to it your children are taken away

Yidwithlid: I am on more durgs than I willever understand (he'd supposedly FINALLY gone to a shrink because the truth was coming out faster than he could obfuscate it - probably the psychiatrist medicated him for anxiety.... LOL. Ironic because Target #1, if you remember, was on medication because of him just 4 months into the relationship!)

Yidwithlid: my friend ? lol

Target #1: I pray they work

(Yidwithlid cuts the conversation off here and leaves - remember how Nathan Thomas just LEFT his Victim dangling? And Brad Dorsky accused his Victim of being a 'player' too, then LEFT? Suddenly - the Internet Predator has NO WORDS when BUSTED!)

Target #1 made a decision to turn all information over to his wife. She tells us it was only fair no matter how embarrassing it was to her (Target #1) personally.

(Target #1: "he needed help and I hoped she'd intervene to save him and their marriage. By then I was immaterial anyway.")

Target #2 said she was going to find out where his family was, that Yidwithlid told her about some of his clients and his boss and that anyone she could find was going to find out.

This of course, fueled his anger (he was lying to both everyone and needed a CLEAR FIELD to continue to lie) and Yidwithlid lied even more making Target#1 out to be a stalker and HIMSELF the victim - and continues to say it's a conspiracy to this day!

TO BE CONTINUED READERS..... this gets 'better'!

UPDATE: CLICK HERE