OH THE THINGS CYBERPATHS SAY!

OH, THE THINGS CYBERPATHS SAY!

Just a few words about the reactions of online predators we have profiled or those we have helped to expose behind the scenes of this blog.


In the time this blog has been up and running - we have only heard from ONE online predator who threatened us directly with legal action. We welcomed it since we had done nothing wrong and could back up everything we had. (this is the reason for our stringent rules for exposure) Of course, this Cyberpath dropped the whole thing.

Brad Dorsky, who threatened us, seemed to think he was dealing with a bunch of vindictive teenagers on a social networking site - he thought wrong. Mr. Dorsky said he was going to his local police - we told him to please feel free as we would be happy to speak to the FBI about his contacting someone out of the country and grooming her until she was no longer a minor to talk about violent sexual acts online with her that traumatized her. (Cyberpaths love to see how far they can push you after they have brainwashed you).

Mr. Dorsky later had a friend of his write to us - wanting to know who we were, who gave us the information about them and tell us Dorsky was 'a good person.' We did not give out the name of the person who gave us the information. We are happy to post rebuttals or clarifying information.

Also, we encouraged him to seek counseling for the way he had treated his victims and even offered to help him find a counselor in their area. We never heard from him again; nor did we remove any of the postings. hhmmmm......
We have reports of cyberpaths filing restraining or cease & desist orders or DMCA Takedowns on their victims to turn it around make themselves or their families look like the hurt party. Some, we guess, have enough money to drag all their victims to court and blame them for not controlling the whole internet. Most times - they have taken doctored or 'selective' information to law enforcement to get these orders. Law enforcement is often SHOCKED when they find out they have been lied to by these seemingly 'upright citizens.'
Sheer stupidity. All to support lies.

None of the ones we know have resulted in much of anything (other than the emotional trauma) legally for the victims. All have been dropped.


- We had one cyberpath, Steven Langley Guy, write us as his EX WIFE and that "he" had tried to commit suicide because we called him 'a predator.' (why would an EX-WIFE be using his computer?? and he IS a predator)
- Then Mr. Guy wrote that he was hiring a lawyer (many of them SAY this, virtually none of them really do it!!)
- And finally - "he" wrote as the person who exposed him begging us to remove him.

ALL FROM THE SAME IP NUMBER.
These predators really think we're that stupid?

EOPC asked him for the same "proof" we ask from those who turn this information over to us. To date - NO ONE EXPOSED HERE has been able to show us any hard proof that anything we have posted here was false or fabricated. These cyberpaths and all others remain on our site.

We can see that our cyberpaths come to this blog, searching for who is here - who posted against them. Some even search all the defamation and free speech links for some loophole. (Keith Clive , Dan Jacoby, Doug Beckstead and others, come here using anonymous proxies thinking we don't notice, LOL) Oh yes, some DO even try to change their location, their IPs or use anonymous proxies. Nice try!

Dan Jacoby has been having his board-owner buddies write and threaten us and then post things about EOPC as "that horrible site" for outing his new identities. Jacoby & his proxies "Do Protest Too Much." We would guess that his exposure cut into his preying grounds. Jacoby has also made no attempt at restitution for the things he duped out of one of his victims.

To all you cyberpaths; How about expending that energy you are using on your smear campaigns & attempts to re-write history instead: on making amends & talking it out with those you harmed, or in your own offline lives -- as well as getting yourselves therapy - in short: be an honest human being who doesn't use & abuse people.

• Don't just cut them off when YOU Get caught!!
• Genuinely Apologize. (Make financial restitution where necessary)
• If your victim asks you to leave them alone -- DO SO!
• For some: Reframe the relationship and talk about what happened. Not a shouting match because the victim won't buy into your "version" of things. REALITY TALK.
• BE ACCOUNTABLE!

PROBLEM IS, Victims: CYBERPATHS REALLY DON'T CARE ABOUT ANYTHING BUT THEMSELVES. ANYTHING. YOU COULD BE HANGING FROM A ROPE AND THEY WOULD FIND A WAY TO BLAME YOU (like -- Lori Drew)
Remember - abuse happens in secret.

Beckstead is trying DESPERATELY to do damage control by posting articles his name appeared in every place he can. This pushes the posts about him down on Google. Beckstead hopes no one will scan past the first page or two -- that way he can say: "See, I'm a good guy!" All in an effort to counter the truth that he's an abusive, perverted online predator and to convince his new targets what a altruist he is.

Beckstead even went so far as to PHOTOSHOP pictures of himself to try to make himself look thinner (he's morbidly obese) and used a recent assignment to write about the war in Iraq (he was sent there to write) to tell potential prey he was "deployed" and imply he's an enlisted soldier. There's no crime in being fat but at least be honest. He's also filled his FACEBOOK account with old friends & friends-of-friends who all believe he's a nice guy and know nothing about his secret life; in attempt to clean up his image without any real apologies.

All we ask is these people submit to the same standards we have for our victims/targets: PROOF. Hard proof. (Funny how cyberpaths tend to think their 'words' are enough to rewrite truth and history) If we get this proof - we will of course retract and/or post rebuttals.


Like other abusers, the cyberpaths seem to have a 'script' of blame and excuses when they are exposed. Despite being miles or even countries apart, they all say basically the same things (or variations on a theme):

[the victim] is lying/ made it all up

[the victim] is psycho/ crazy

[the victim] set me up

[the victim] is obsessed with me

[the victim] wants to ruin my life/ is the abusive one

[the victim] is cyberstalking/ stalking me / my family/ my friends

I don't even know [the victim]

I have hired a lawyer to deal with this (on Kristen Rhoad, one of Phil Haberman's victims - has hired a lawyer(s) or legal representative - and it seems Mr. Haberman filed false charges and is about to get a legal spanking for abusing the system)

It never happened

[The victim] is just jealous

That was all planted, I never said that/ did that

That is false, I am the victim here!They [the victim] abused ME!!

I had to do something for relief. [The Victim] toyed with me/ tempted me.

I am sorry - I have changed (while still having online affairs)

[The victim] is just trying to ruin my life/ my happiness/ destroy my family or hurt my spouse.


And we can't go without an extra special mention to: LORI DREW - the woman that drove a 13-year old named Megan Meier to suicide. Who, after a year of the law doing NOTHING - told Megan's mother (who lives 4 doors down) and who is fighting for justice for her dead daughter to:

"GIVE IT A REST"

Mrs. Drew - you have confirmed via your lawyer's statements: that were full of "poor me" and blame-shifting to your victim (a 13 year old victim) that you are mentally disordered. You have proved your cyberpathy - because you just did precisely what every other perverted predator here does: BLAME YOUR VICTIM!
Nathan Thomas (a.k.a. "T") asked one of Targets to please not "annoy him" once she found out. He also accused one of his many overlapping wives of CAUSING the problem because she DIDN'T STAND BY HIM (i.e. believe and support his lies). You used women for free sex, room, board - even MARRIED THEM and now you don't want them to "ANNOY YOU?"

Thomas has even gone as far as to tell a wife with whom he had an allegedly BIGAMOUS MARRIAGE that "the CIA and US Government" were going to be "mad at her" for questioning him! He'd tried to convince her he was a Special Ops Agent for the U.S. Thomas took off after that on a "secret mission" (NOT) and this wife hasn't seen him since!

Sick... just sick.
Dunetz/ YidwithLid (some simple web searches showed out he'd changed his nickname from Gridney to Yidwithlid and the Sammy Benoit before going back to his real name) told Target #2 "if you love me you will leave me alone and let my wife heal" (wait! He'd told Target #2 he didn't love his wife anymore and loved only HER! So in 3 days - after getting caught - he totally changes his tune? REAL Love doesn't do that!)

Jeff Dunetz/ Yidwithlid told Target #1 "its over" and he would help get her children taken from her (which made her go to police... the rest is history). Over? What's over? It never started!

Now he makes his victims out to be some sort of attack-bots.

To this day Dunetz (like all of them) still blames Target #1 only for exposing him to his job, his family, etc and implies all the hooker postings and ads for casual sex were 'planted' or 'made up' (forensic recovery has shown us they were from HIM, not planted or made up at all!) - which we can say - she did NOT do.

She (like many of our victims) only told his wife in the hopes his wife would HELP him break his sex addiction and exploitation of women. It's too easy to believe women like this are doing it for revenge. But often, they aren't! She felt compelled to go to police to protect her children - and look what happened! A $2million a year brothel ole Dunetz/ Yidwithlid was going to for about 3-4 years - was BUSTED!
Recently Yid With Lid went so far as to send a statement that this whole thing was because Target #1 was "jealous" that he wouldn't "bang" Target #1 because she is fat & ugly and (most hysterical) he "didn't want to hurt his wife." Very third grade. Obviously, the expensive hookers, phone sex and other women were of no consequence in hurting his wife. Despite him trying to tell everyone that his victims are jealous and planting it all.

from Dunetz's own "mouth":
I have 30 years in marketing. I already twist facts for a living.from Yid's blog

______________

They all want victims to DROP it when THEY CAUSED PROFOUND TRAUMA TO THEIR TARGETS!

Victims:

Don't drop it! Your pain is not NOTHING!!

THE CYBERPATH FEELS ZERO RESPONSIBILITY TO THOSE THEY HAVE USED & ABUSED! To them you're an object, just some words on a screen - not even real!

IN FACT, THEY BLAME THE VICTIM FOR TELLING!!
To make the point about how these predators have no feelings or feel the least bit sorry for what they do to you. Think about how they belittle, smear & blow you and your trauma off.

And yes, its trauma - make no mistake.

They can see or emphasize with THEIR pain (they are such MARTYRS!) but your pain, the pain they caused? According to them, you have no right to feel bad! Only a really personality disordered individual has SUCH A LACK OF EMPATHY.

Don't listen to them anymore! Don't listen to anyone telling you they're O.K. and you're bad for being traumatized and not "forgiving & forgetting." You KNOW BETTER!

Anyone (friends, family, counselors) telling you to "Move on" or "get over it" is further abusing you because:

EMOTIONAL RAPE IS A STATIC EVENT.

It is FROZEN in the psyche of any compassionate human being. Since friends, family and clueless doctors may have never been through this sort of thing; and predators have NO REAL FEELINGS - they see it as a blip on their radar. An inconvenience. To them.

Why do you think, victims - that Cyberpaths show so much scorn for you once you find them out?

BECAUSE NOW YOU KNOW THE TRUTH and TRUTH is the one thing they can't handle.

There's a huge difference between obsession and JUSTICE.

After THESE CYBERPATHS' START, ENCOURAGE and LEAD ON THE VICTIM and then toss them away like trash - traumatizing them; the only thing for victims to do is TELL. Telling is the first step towards HEALING!

(of course there's the predators who start outright SMEAR CAMPAIGNS against those who have found them out, exposed them or questioned them. Doing this is as unoriginal as the "scorned woman" accusation and we don't buy it either.)

And if your predator says they have "changed - turned over a new leaf" - "please leave me alone to get on with my life"? HOW DARE THEY!

If they have really changed? They will take the time - how ever long that takes (days, months, years) to talk things through with you - admit & acknowledge what they did and make amends.

If they tell you "my therapist says I can't talk to you" - therapy has not caught up with this sort of interpersonal exploitation. That would be fine if you went into the online relationship knowing the truth IN THE FIRST PLACE. But you didn't.

They used you like an object, a thing, something they click off like the computer itself - and you deserve better. Besides, they are only using therapy as a COVER.

If they say "it will hurt/ upset my partner if I talk to you" find out exactly what they told their partner about you. Did they paint you as the bad one to get their a** out of the doghouse? Probably! If they say that they are still lying - to you, to their partner and themselves.

HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE!

(there are cyberpaths, such as Clive, Doug Beckstead and Dorsky that have tried to erase their tracks and rewrite history but don't know much about web archives and data retrieval! NOTHING ever really disappears on the web.)

Charles Ed Hicks said, IN COURT - IN FRONT OF A JUDGE, after 2 of his ex wives testified against him and hard proof of his fraud and bigamy was entered into the record that it was "False, ALL FALSE" Rumor has it - he's writing a book to 'set the record straight.' Maybe O.J.'s publisher is interested? LOL

Did we mention after a year in jail for Bigamy, Hicks was recently tossed out by another woman in Charleston, S.C. and is back online using the name CHARLES HICKS or CHARLES GREENE? Trolling for his next victim? And he's currently a WANTED FUGITIVE so beware!

Do you think they learn? change? NO! They just play on their next victim's compassion and willingness to believe in them.

Also the winner, by 98%, of the lines married predators (those that admit they are married) give to their victims:

My [spouse] is cold to me/ the marriage is dead/ won't have sex with me/ its over ...but I am staying because of the kids/ money and I don't love [my spouse] anymore... our marriage is only on paper....

YAWN!
It's so predictable that it's sad. Truly sad. As sad as the fact that to these predators, victims are merely objects to use.

And as we have said many many times - please at least Google or search on the person you are chatting with's name and nickname(s) and read EVERY PAGE OF ENTRIES THAT COMES UP. If they are pressing you for a meeting - we have links to background check agencies on the right and for a small fee you can find out everything you need to know.

If anyone tells you "if you do a check on me then you don't trust me/ love me" - DO THE CHECK ASAP! If you find them on a site warning you - BELIEVE IT. If they tell you "don't speak to so and so, they will lie about me or my relationship with them" or "she's a scorned woman" - SPEAK TO THAT OTHER PERSON ASAP AND GET THE TRUTH!!!!!

REMEMBER: People who are honest have nothing to hide.

MORE: VERBAL ATTACKS OF THE SOCIOPATH

The Online Disinhibition Effect

In light of the Megan Meier Suicide Case, the Nikki Catsouras Crash Photos harassment and much of the rage & bullying that exposed cyberpaths do to their victims and anyone else who might speak the truth about them - this article might give some insight into what drives these predators.

The Lori Drews, the Doug Becksteads, the Charles Ed Hicks', the Jeff Dunetzs, the Dan Jacobys, the Beatrice Acevedos and all those we have exposed, will be exposed - or are out there right now feeling anonymous or omnipotent behind a keyboard.


It's well known that people say and do things in cyberspace that they wouldn't ordinarily say or do in the face-to-face world. They loosen up, feel more uninhibited, express themselves more openly. Researchers call this the "disinhibition effect." It's a double-edged sword. Sometimes people share very personal things about themselves. They reveal secret emotions, fears, wishes. Or they show unusual acts of kindness and generosity.

On the other hand, the disinhibition effect may not be so benign. Out spills rude language and harsh criticisms, anger, hatred, even threats. They can start their own website where what they think or feel reigns supreme. Or people explore the dark underworld of the internet, places of pornography and violence, places they would never visit in the real world. On the positive side, the disinhibition indicates an attempt to understand and explore oneself, to work through problems and find new ways of being. And sometimes it is simply a blind catharsis, an acting out of unsavory needs and wishes without any personal growth at all.
What causes this online disinhibition? What is it about cyberspace that loosens the psychological barriers that block the release of these inner feelings and needs? Several factors are at play. For some people, one or two of them produces the lion's share of the disinhibition effect. In most cases, though, these factors interact with each other, supplement each other, resulting in a more complex, amplified effect.

You Don't Know Me (anonymity)
As you move around the internet, most of the people you encounter can't easily tell who you are. System operators and some technologically savvy, motivated users may be able to detect your e-mail or internet address, but for the most part people only know what you tell them about yourself. If you wish, you can keep your identity hidden. As the word "anonymous" indicates, you can have no name - at least not your real name. That anonymity works wonders for the disinhibition effect. When people have the opportunity to separate their actions from their real world and identity, they feel less vulnerable about opening up. Whatever they say or do can't be directly linked to the rest of their lives. They don't have to own their behavior by acknowledging it within the full context of who they "really" are. When acting out hostile feelings, the person doesn't have to take responsibility for those actions. In fact, people might even convince themselves that those behaviors "aren't me at all." In psychology this is called "dissociation."

You Can't See Me (invisibility)
In many online environments other people cannot see you. As you browse through web sites, message boards, and even some chat rooms, people may not even know you are there at all - with the possible exception of web masters and other users who have access to software tools that can detect traffic through the site, assuming they have the inclination to keep an eye on you, one of maybe hundreds or thousands of users. Invisibility gives people the courage to go places and do things that they otherwise wouldn't.

This power to be concealed overlaps with anonymity, because anonymity is the concealment of identity. But there are some important differences. In text communication such as e-mail, chat, and instant messaging, others may know a great deal about who you are. However, they still can't see or hear you - and you can't see or hear them. Even with everyone's identity visible, the opportunity to be PHYSICALLY invisible amplifies the disinhibition effect. You don't have to worry about how you look or sound when you say (type) something. You don't have to worry about how others look or sound when you say something. Seeing a frown, a shaking head, a sigh, a bored expression, and many other subtle and not so subtle signs of disapproval or indifference can slam the breaks on what people are willing to express. In psychoanalysis, the analyst sits behind the patient in order remain a physically ambiguous figure, without revealing any body language or facial expression, so that the patient has free range to discuss whatever he or she wants, without feeling inhibited by how the analyst is physically reacting. In everyday relationships, people sometimes avert their eyes when discussing something personal and emotional. It's easier not to look into the other's face. Text communication offers a built-in opportunity to keep one's eyes averted.

See You Later (asynchronicity)
In e-mail and message boards, communication is asynchronous. People don't interact with each other in real time. Others may take minutes, hours, days, or even months to reply to something you say. Not having to deal with someone's immediate reaction can be disinhibiting. In real life, it would be like saying something to someone, magically suspending time before that person can reply, and then returning to the conversation when you're willing and able to hear the response. Immediate, real-time feedback from others tends to have a very powerful effect on the ongoing flow of how much people reveal about themselves. In e-mail and message boards, where there are delays in that feedback, people's train of thought may progress more steadily and quickly towards deeper expressions of what they are thinking and feeling. Some people may even experience asynchronicous communication as "running away" after posting a message that is personal, emotional, or hostile. It feels safe putting it “out there” where it can be left behind. In some cases, as Kali Munro, an online psychotherapist, aptly describes it, the person may be participating in an "emotional hit and run."
It's All in My Head (solipsistic introjection)
Absent face2face cues combined with text communication can have an interesting effect on people. Sometimes they feel that their mind has merged with the mind of the online companion. Reading another person's message might be experienced as a voice within one's head, as if that person magically has been inserted or "introjected" into one's psyche. Of course, we may not know what the other person's voice actually sounds like, so in our head we assign a voice to that companion. In fact, consciously or unconsciously, we may even assign a visual image to what we think that person looks like and how that person behaves. The online companion now becomes a character within our intrapsychic world, a character that is shaped partly by how the person actually presents him or herself via text communication, but also by our expectations, wishes, and needs. Because the person may even remind us of other people we know, we fill in the image of that character with memories of those other acquaintances.

As the character now becomes more elaborate and "real" within our minds, we may start to think, perhaps without being fully aware of it, that the typed-text conversation is all taking place within our heads, as if it's a dialogue between us and this character in our imagination - even as if we are authors typing out a play or a novel. Actually, even when it doesn't involve online relationships, many people carry on these kinds of conversations in their imagination throughout the day. People fantasize about flirting, arguing with a boss, or very honestly confronting a friend about what they feel. In their imagination, where it's safe, people feel free to say and do all sorts of things that they wouldn't in reality. At that moment, reality IS one's imagination. Online text communication can become the psychological tapestry in which a person's mind weaves these fantasy role plays, usually unconsciously and with considerable disinhibition. All of cyberspace is a stage and we are merely players.

When reading another's message, it's also possible that you "hear" that person's words using your own voice. We may be subvocalizing as we read, thereby projecting the sound of our voice into the other person's message. Perhaps unconsciously, it feels as if I am talking to/with myself. When we talk to ourselves, we are willing to say all sorts of things that we wouldn't say to others!

It's Just a Game (dissociation)
If we combine solipsistic introjection with the escapability of cyberspace, we get a slightly different force that magnifies disinhibition. People may feel that the imaginary characters they "created" exist in a different space, that one's online persona along with the online others live in an make-believe dimension, separate and apart from the demands and...

responsibilities of the real world. They split or "dissociate" online fiction from offline fact.

Emily Finch, an author and criminal lawyer studying identity theft in cyberspace, has suggested that some people see their online life as a kind of game with rules and norms that don't apply to everyday living (pers. comm., 2002). Once they turn off the computer and return to their daily routine, they believe they can leave that game and their game-identity behind. Why should they be held responsible for what happens in that make-believe play world that has nothing to do with reality? After all, it isn't that different than blasting away at your pals in a shoot-em up video game... or so some people might think, perhaps unconsciously.

We're Equals (neutralizing of status)
While online a person's status in the in-person world may not be known to others and it may not have as much impact as it does in the in-person world. If people can't see you or your surroundings, they don't know if you are the president of a major corporation sitting in your expensive office, or some "ordinary" person lounging around at home in front of the computer. Even if people do know something about your offline status and power, that elevated position may have little bearing on your online presence and influence. In most cases, everyone on the internet has an equal opportunity to voice him or herself. Everyone - regardless of status, wealth, race, gender, etc. - starts off on a level playing field. Although one's status in the outside world ultimately may have some impact on one's powers in cyberspace, what mostly determines your influence on others is your skill in communicating (including writing skills), your persistence, the quality of your ideas, and your technical know-how.

People are reluctant to say what they really think as they stand before an authority figure. A fear of disapproval and punishment from on high dampens the spirit. But online, in what feels like a peer relationship - with the appearances of "authority" minimized - people are much more willing to speak out or misbehave. There are those online that turn every disagreement into an "attack" and they can pick & choose what they want to hear and see and tune out anything that doesn't agree with their philosophy or way of thinking.

Interaction Effects
Of course, the online disinhibition effect is not the only factor that determines how much people open up or act out in cyberspace. The strength of underlying feelings, needs, and drive level has a big influence on how people behave. Personalities also vary greatly in the strength of defense mechanisms and tendencies towards inhibition or expression. People with histrionic styles tend to be very open and emotional. Compulsive people are more restrained. The online disinhibition effect will interact with these personality variables, in some cases resulting in a small deviation from the person's baseline (offline) behavior, while in other cases causing dramatic changes.

About the Author:John Suler, Ph.D. is Professor of Psychology at Rider University. This article comes from his online hypertext book The Psychology of Cyberspace which describes his ongoing research on how individuals and groups behave in cyberspace. His work has been reported by national and international media, including The New York Times, The Washington Post, the BBC, and CNN.

DO THEY EVER ADMIT THEY LIED OR TWISTED THE FACTS?

"The NPD (Narcissistic Personality Disorder) illusion of superiority is a facet of a generalized disdain for reality. These individuals feel unconstrained by rules, customs, limits, and discipline.

Their world is filled with self-fiction in which conflicts are dismissed, failures redeemed, and self-pride is effortlessly maintained. They easily devise plausible reasons to justify self-centered and inconsiderate behavior. Their memories of past relationships are often illusory and changing.

If rationalizations and self-deception fail, individuals with NPD are vulnerable to dejection, shame, and a sense of emptiness. Then they have little recourse other than fantasy. They have an uninhibited imagination and engage in self-glorifying fantasies. What is unmanageable through fantasy is repressed and kept from awareness.

As they consistently devalue others, they do not question the correctness of their own beliefs; they assume that others are wrong.

The characteristic difficulties of individuals with NPD almost all stem from their lack of solid contact with reality. If the false image of self becomes substantive enough, their thinking will become peculiar and deviant. Then their defensive maneuvers become increasingly transparent to others (Millon & Davis, 1996, pp. 405-423).

Sharon C. Ekleberry, Dual Diagnosis and the Narcissistic Personality Disorder.

DO THEY EVER ADMIT THEY ARE LYING OR TWISTED THE FACTS?

from this site

(EOPC believes Cyberpathy is probably an expression of Destructive Narcissism and/or Sociopathy)

We work to try to understand the essence of the narcissist. When I was trying to explain the N to a friend, she understood an N as someone not "able to face the pain of imagining they did something wrong". I wasn't sure about this so did a quick internet search on narcissists and admitting wrong and accepting fault, and got these quotes:

- The narcissist sometimes notices that something is wrong with him and with his life -- but he never admits it.

- ... the narcissist is incapable of admitting that something is wrong with THEM

- They will never admit fault, they will never say they are sorry. If something goes wrong, they will play the victim. They will concoct conspiracy theories against them that do not exist.  They will always blame others.
- Remember they will never admit they are wrong, they will never debase themselves with an real apology. They will never laugh at themselves.

"[I suspect my husband is a narcissist]... He tries to place blame on anyone and everyone but himself."

- Narcissists ...live for themselves, they think they can do no wrong and will not admit to wrongdoing [re: traits common to 6 year olds and adult narcissists]  They often fabricate 'facts' to suit them and have a persecution complex when caught.


- [For the narcissist] to admit to one failing, to acknowledge a mistake, even a simple human error of judgment, would be to open the door to the deep internal lack within. ... Such feelings of worthlessness are like an ocean being held back by a fragile dyke. The illusion of perfection, maintained by projecting faults onto someone else, is a barrier to be constantly tended, mended and shored up. To admit any feelings of deficiency would be the equivalent of poking a hole in the dyke, an event to be feared as a total disaster.

Narcissists blame all problems on the "all-bad." It's never the narcissist's fault; it's always someone else's.

The last paragraph speaks truly from a narcissist's perspective. It's the victim's fault.

If the two of you have a conflict, they'll tweak the facts as much and as often as they have to to make it all your fault. (And if you EXPOSE the Narcissistic Cyberpath? Expect the SAME treatment as well as a full-tilt hate & smear-campaign!)

"His perverse way of turning everything into my fault and his blaming left me battered and exhausted."

Narcissists
Externalization of Blame -- The child cannot allow the bad feelings of being at fault for anything. He/ she/ they/ YOU are the problem!

He avoids feeling vulnerable by blaming others. The fragile self esteem cannot be punctured by taking responsibility for behavior. His script is "Do not expose me to those intolerable feelings inside. I can't handle it."

For making a change (whether great or small) implies that the narcissist has been two things they "cannot stand": imperfect (something is actually wrong with "them") and at fault ("they" actually were wrong, weak, or inferior somehow).

It can't be THEIR fault - THEY are perfect.

The narcissist says in effect, "Something doesn't feel right. I'm too special to be the cause, therefore it must be your fault."

EOPC is loaded with examples of this, here's our sampling:
(scroll over content to find embedded links)

BRAD DORSKY - According to him his victim supposedly 'led him on.' Dorsky not only tried to rage at his victim, he sent a "friend" to EOPC to find out who exposed him.

Obviously, DORSKY thought we were a bunch of barely legal kids on a social networking site; his favorite sort of target!

Dorsky said the relationship was 'consensual.' This is a common one! A relationship can not possibly be consentual when the victim does not know the truthful facts to make an appropriate decision.

• Lying to her
• Telling her she's the only one
• Playing mind games with her
• Moving in on her when she & her husband/ partner/ family are having a hard time
• Moving in when she's vulnerable
• Having a 'hidden agenda'

...does not make for consensual.
It does make for predatory exploitation!

CHARLES "ED" HICKS aka CHARLES GREENE - This guy's a piece of work. Said in court, to a judge, after 2 of his 7 known wives were questioned and hard, clear legal documentation was researched and presented by an Assistant D.A.: "It's false, all false." Guess that orange jumpsuit should have been a straightjacket.

Has recently gone back on dating sites under various nicknames using CHARLES HICKS or CHARLES GREENE to try to defuse people googling ED HICKS and finding out he's the 'Dr. Phil Bigamist.'

Tells people he's retired from a government job (he was fired and his security clearance revoked).

Additionally is not always honest about his criminal record on the numerous dating sites he's on now. This includes his using new names or versions of names on the dating sites.

On the Dating Sites he states his age as 56 LOL! (Shaves off about 9+ years)

(Here's the best one EOPC's heard!) Rumor has it that HICKS tells new prey he is shopping for a publisher for his book where he will tell the truth (he means his version of it a.k.a. complete fiction) and show how two of his wives 'set him up just to get on T.V. (EOPC is sure they had a great time telling the world how naive & used they were by Mr. Hicks) and have lied about him as well as them being 'mean' to his children (a.k.a. feeding, clothing, housing and taking care of his kids during their marriages while these kids sponged everything they could off them and various girlfriends of Mr. Hicks' simultaneously - just like Daddy!).

Additionally he says he plans to 'take legal action" against the producers of "Dr. Phil" and the WE show VERY BAD MEN who profiled him and showed him a bad light and ruined his good name!

Good luck with that, Mr. Hicks... Maybe now that O.J.'s in jail Hicks can help keep on looking for that illusive "real killer."

WILLIAM MICHAEL BARBER - back in jail after leaving the State in which he was incarcerated without permission and found having a false Social Security Card & Number and falsified identity papers on him. (After his wives and victims repeatedly told probation officers he would do it again and he was let out of jail early anyway!)..

BARBER was also profiled on the WE show VERY BAD MEN. He was released October 2007 so be careful! Spread the word about this serial predator! Don't you think these people would be thrilled they are so famous?

Jeff Dunetz/ YIDWITHLID - Where to begin with this one?
1. EOPC ran his expose for the third time in June 2007. This time he became of aware of it and he attacked one of his victims as the sole person causing him "public embarrassment." He gave no acknowledgment that his real name and location were not used by us on this site, at this same victim's request.

No mention that his new nickname and website are now linked to yet another 'false personna and location' made up by him.

No thank you for the consideration one of the victims he decided to bully showed his family. Typical of the backwards reactions of pathological persons!


2. Sammy Benoit/ Jeff Dunetz/ Yidwithlid blames just one person for all the postings about him despite her trying to get them taken down in March of 2007. (Now which one of EOPC's victims really controls the internet? All our Cyberpaths swear its THEIR victim!)

Note: SHE WAS NOT THE PERSON WHO HAD POSTED HIM IN THE FIRST PLACE.

All Cyberpaths have this "because THEY say it's so - has to be REALITY!" trait... please re-read the paragraph at the top of this article for our take on this pervasive trait of Cyberpaths

IF she (or anyone) had done something that heinous and he has hard proof -- Why isn't she in jail or doing community service? Why hasn't he sued her? (Our guess? Because then the REAL TRUTH about him and his escapades would come out!)
3. Dunetz swears it was 'consensual', but also neglects to mention that none of his targets knew they:

• had online casual sex partner-wanted ads since 2000 (he started up with the first victim we know of in 2002)
• downloaded one of his victims AOL buddy list and sent filthy messages to all the females on it - all of them on file with NYPDCI and the FBI
• was seeing sexual escorts at brothels (two brothels are now closed in part to him threatening this same victim, her going to the police and the police finding out that he was posting online about his exploits at this brothel. [By the way, Yidwithlid -- this Madam is BACK IN BUSINESS! But you probably know that already] Good going, Jeff Dunetz / YidwithLid!)
• the police reverse traced his computer to be full of porn and his credit cards traced back to phone sex lines from 1999/ 2000.  He got rid of that computer as soon as possible and has had a series of laptops since then.

-----------------------

1. Did any of his targets know this?
2. Did he tell any of his targets he was lying and it was 'just a game' to him?
3. Did his targets know he was playing with their emotions, trust & using them for freebies?
4. Did we mention he's tried to erase it all and say it never existed or was planted? (His excuse is that its "hurting his wife" - since he was doing this since 1999; according to police - why didn't he think about that the years PRIOR to victimizing these women?)
5. And what do these targets have to do with HIS sex addiction?

Sound familiar?

Again -

A relationship cannot possibly be consentual when the victim does not know the truthful facts to make an appropriate decision.

• Lying,
• telling her she's the only one and you've never done this before,
• playing mind games with her,
• moving in quickly on her when she & her husband/ partner are separating,
• not supporting her when her husband/partner finds out about their online affair and abuses her worse,
• knowing she's mentally & emotionally vulnerable,
• as well as having a 'hidden agenda' does not make for consensual.

It makes for predatory exploitation.

According to these predators their victims aren't allowed be hurt, complain or look for support either. And they just deny, deny, deny. How's that for 'nice guys'?


DOUG BECKSTEAD - an "investigator" from the Air Force Base which Beckstead's associated wrote us and subsequently one of his victims trying to find out who she was, get her to phone them, etc etc. How much should we bet that it was one of Beckstead's buddies trying to be sure which of his online victims blew the whistle on his online predation so Beckstead could attack her?

Beckstead came here and ALSO tried to say it was "all a game" and his victims "knew what they were getting into." Incredible gall, but familiar. Again, Beckstead neglects to factor in that:

• Lying,
• telling her she's the only one,
• playing mind games with her, moving in on her when she & her husband are having problems,
• lying to other targets about your numerous online affairs & porn addiction,
• while knowing she's emotionally vulnerable,
• as well as having a 'hidden agenda'

DOES NOT MAKE FOR CONSENSUAL.
IT DOES MAKE FOR PREDATORY EXPLOITATION.

Again:
A relationship cannot possibly be consentual when the victim does not know the truthful facts to make an appropriate decision.

Guess what! Beckstead was mentioned in the same Air Force Base's newspaper so - he must have been looking to clean up his image before they added to his overblown ego. Rumor has it he's got another victim 'on the hook' already. Watch out, he likes to portray those used-up sources of his as MENTALLY ILL - when in fact these cyberpaths appear to be the ones with 'mental issues.'

He's even tried to tell people that her exposure of him only HELPED HIM... and hurt his victims! LOL - too much protesting, huh? Don't we already know what he's telling his latest victim?

All the stuff he's posted (and continues to post) all over the web - trying to drown out the truth and glorify his 'reputation' when he's really a predator!

JULIA BISH-JUDAH-HUNT-McGOVERN? Just look at her interview. That says it all about how 'innocent' she considers herself after meeting men online and marrying them without even meeting them in person, among other things.

Completely nuts and a serial predator!

PHIL HABERMAN - click here for an update on this story. Haberman continues to use the legal system against ANYONE who has his number and speaks out about it.


UPDATE: LORI DREW - the real "Josh Evans" and Tormentor of the Late Megan Meier - who not only sued the Meiers for a destroyed foosball table but when she ran into the Meiers told them to "give it a rest" about her CAUSING Megan's suicide. Sick beyond belief. Convicted on 3 misdemeanor counts, may face civil action.


DAN JACOBY - turns to his "old standby" of smearing his victim, saying she's 'crazy' and doesn't have the "love of God in her heart." Of course he owes his victim money for things she bought him (he told her he was divorced and broke - NOT!).

Jacoby? Mr. Nice Guy? 1. Well turns out this predator took webshots of his victims during chat sessions without telling them and threatens to post them online if they expose him. Then he changed and scrubbed everything and went to the police to say his victim was "harassing" him. Why would you need to do that Dan, if you were HONEST?

Guess what? These women LOVED you and you can't do anything wrong if you love someone. The scumbag liar? is YOU! Besides what kind of sicko-perv picks on vulnerable women trying to recover from prescription drugs??


The two things all our predators seem to universally hate:

1. being called an abuser
2. being called a PREDATOR

Ouch!! -- yet their victims are not allowed to feel hurt or pain? That's the cyberpath's sociopathic self - the real self with no empathy - coming out.

Do you think that when these predators behind a keyboard find out they are wrong about their assumptions they apology to us or their victims? go ahead and guess!

The "scorned woman" defense. The "they are lying/ making it all up/ obsessed with me/ stalkers/ just jealous/ never happened" defense. The "she had it coming" excuse!

You name it - you'll hear it with these people. Unfortunately sometimes their families or friends still believe them. Until its too late and they are caught doing it again.

Do we see a pattern here? As it says above: IT'S NEVER THEIR FAULT. MUST BE THE INVISIBLE PERSON OR THEIR VICTIM! NEVER THEM!

By the way, any Cyberpath who wants to write a full and accurate confession as well as an open, honest apology to any of the victims they have hurt, caused emotional & mental trauma, forced into counseling, caused rifts in their families, raged at, used and abused... we would be more than happy to publish it for you and see to it your victims get a copy of your healing words as well.

ARE YOU A CYBERBULLY? - TAKE THE QUIZ

Often our cyberpaths, once found out and/or exposed turn into a cyberbully to silence their victims. We have had threats of lawsuits against victims. (No predator really wants their lies or cover-up exposed!)

Other predators have threatened their victims' families, children, friends, jobs, reputations. Two even started hate sites about their victims, blaming them for everything. Both were even so childish as to think she was US!! (They only see their exposes and not the slew of the rest of them!!)

Our very first exposed predator, Charles 'Ed' Hicks still claims its "all false" and is back online doing the same all over again as well as being WANTED for jumping probation! In fact he tells new potential victims he's suing his ex-wives, Very Bad Men, Dr. Phil and the court system in Virginia for their supposedly false accusations and writing a 'tell-all' book with the 'truth!' LOL. Don't hold your breath, readers.

Of course there's the old "SHE'S JUST A SCORNED WOMAN" or "HE'S A JILTED LOVER" excuses in cyber affairs. Real life affairs use them too when the predator wants to play victim and make everyone feel sorry for him - including new targets. It's a joke. (Our advice? The minute you hear that 'scorned woman' defense? Make it your business to contact this 'scorned woman' or 'jilted man'! Someone with no secrets or destructive agenda wouldn't care if you spoke to their ex! Same applies to women predators.)

So let's find out - did your online love or cyber-friend turn into a cyberbully? Or were they a cyberbully all along?
from: DEATH BY 1000 PAPERCUTS:

Cyber-harassment, cyber-stalking, cyber-group bully, cyber-Gossip: all of these categories fall under the tactics of a cyber-bully.

Here is a quiz, take it and see it you’re a cyber-bully or if you've ever pulled some other cyber-bullying tactics during your time on-line.

Have you ever done this?

1.Signed on with someone else’s nic and password to get information.
While this does not seem like cyber-bullying if this information was to be used for ill-will, then, yes, it is cyber-bullying.

2. Sent an email or online greeting card from someone else’s account.
Again, some may claim that this is not cyber-bullying, if the email or online greeting is used to stalk or harass someone, then it falls under cyber-bullying.

3. Forwarded a private IM or email without permission.
This could be construed as a “grey” area. After all, it’s merely passing on a private email or IM and some would argue as fairly innocuous.

It boils down to intent.

Was the private conversation/email sent to someone or others with the intent to spread gossip or do harm? While most likely the victim may never know their communication has been forwarded to others, this is still harmful to that person. This is not direct cyber-bullying, more like back-stabbing cyber-bullying tactics.

4. Hacked into someone’s PC, website or blog
Not only is this cyber-bullying but also cyber-stalking and illegal. A 33-yr-old man in Florida was just sentenced to prison for 110 years after being convicted of hacking into MySpace teenaged girl’s PC’s. He threatened to harm to them or their families if they didn’t send him lewd photos.

5. Sent a virus or Trojan Horse?
This is malicious behavior with intent to do harm.

6. Posted rude, nasty or vicious (miscontrued) comments about someone online
Back to intent. Some blogs or forums can get heated and contentious but if someone’s intent is to solely post rude, nasty or vicious comments about another poster then this is cyber-bullying and cyber-gossiping.

7. Teased or frightened someone during IM chats
Teasing that goes over the line, that is meant to chip away someone’s self-esteem. The victim cries foul, the perpetrator claims “teasing.” Boo! (Not that kind of fright) Frightening someone can mean making threats to do harm.

8. Joined in a clique on a blog, website or chatroom that enjoyed driving other posters offsite
Not often talked about are the “community” blogs or chatrooms where “like-minded” posters form cliques. Part of their activities are to single out other posters for the sole purpose of driving the target off the site. This is often done in the guise of “for the good of the blog or chatroom.”

9. Accused someone of a crime online without proof
The person who is unfairly accused of committing a crime online usually has nowhere to turn. The accusers are for the most part, anonymous, the “accusation” gets spread without proof.

10. Followed someone across the Web
Kept track of other online posters, following them from blog to blog, chatroom to chatroom, site to stie. This is a form of soft-core Cyber-stalking. Not the same as showing up at their door but enough to creep anyone out. (Cyberpaths do this to see if any of their victims are "talking about them" to anyone else and then raging on as "being the victim" themselves!)

(many of our victims feel that they need to find out if their cyberpath is "doing it again" or "harming anyone else." EOPC does NOT consider that cyberstalking but accountability as well as compulsory in order to stop these predators from throwing one life away to start destroying another)
Did you answer "yes" to any of these?

Only you know the answer to that question. If you did, maybe it was a one-time occurrence. Only you know the answer to that one, too.

If you were guilty of any of these actions, you should think about changing your behavior.

Unless you want to be a cyber-bully.

ORIGINAL ARTICLE FOUND HERE