Saturday, November 29, 2008

MySpace Suicide "Murderer" Convicted on 3 Counts

A mother who helped arranged a cruel internet hoax that apparently drove a 13-year-old girl to suicide has escaped conviction on charges that could have put her in prison for 20 years.
Lori Drew, 49, from Missouri, was instead convicted of only three misdemeanour offences of accessing computer without authorisation. Each is punishable by up to a year in prison and a $100,000 fine.

Prosecutors, who described the trial as the first “cyber-bullying” case, said that Ms Drew and two others, her assistant, Ashley Grills, 18, and her daughter, Sarah, 13, created a profile of a fictitious 16-year-old boy on MySpace, the social networking website, and sent flirtatious messages from him to a teenage neighbour, Megan Meier.

They named the boy Josh Evans and posted a photograph of him on his fake profile page, in which he appeared bare-chested and with tousled brown hair.

Ms Drew then had their fictitious boy “dump” the girl by saying: “The world would be a better place without you.”

Megan promptly hanged herself with a belt in her bedroom closet.
Thomas O'Brien, the chief federal prosecutor, in his closing argument, said: “Lori Drew decided to humiliate a child. The only way she could harm this pretty little girl was with a computer.

"She chose to use a computer to hurt a little girl, and for four weeks she enjoyed it.”

During the trial, it was claimed that Ms Drew wanted to hurt Megan for saying unkind things about her own teenage daughter. It was also claimed that Ms Drew knew that Megan suffered from depression, ADHD and was emotionally fragile.

Nevertheless, a federal jury in Los Angeles rejected three felony charges against Ms Drew of accessing computers without authorisation to inflict emotional harm, and the judge, George Wu, declared a mistrial on another charge of conspiracy.

The case hinged on an unprecedented interpretation of computer-fraud law.

Ms Drew was not directly charged with causing Megan's death. Instead, prosecutors indicted her under the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, which in the past has been used in hacking and trademark theft cases. Among other things, Ms Drew was charged with conspiring to violate the fine print in MySpace's terms-of-service agreement, which prohibits the use of fake names and harassment of other MySpace members.
Missouri authorities said there was no state law under which Drew could be charged. But federal prosecutors in California claimed jurisdiction because MySpace is based in Beverly Hills. After the suicide, Missouri passed a state law against cyber-harassment.

Similar federal legislation has been proposed in Washington.

Ms Drew's lawyer, Dean Steward, said: “I don't have any satisfaction in the jury's decision. I don't think these charges should have ever been brought.”

Tina Meier, the mother of the dead girl, said: "For me it's never been about vengeance. This is about justice.”

MySpace, which is a division of News Corporation, owner of The Times, said in a statement that it “respects the jury's decision and will continue to work with industry experts to raise awareness of cyber-bullying and the harm it can potentially cause.”


EOPC is disgusted at the non-conviction on felony charges and hopes that Mrs. Drew at LEAST does some jail time.

To Mrs. Meier - PLEASE sue this woman in Civil Court for "Wrongful Death" and "Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress." Remember, Civil Court was the only way the families of Ron Goldman and Nicole Brown Simpson got ANY justice at all.

And to Mrs. Drew... what we'd like to say to you is unprintable. We hope Drew's children are removed from her home and from her sociopathic influence asap. - Fighter

Lori Drew Verdict: Bad Law Threatens Us All

Friday, November 28, 2008

Steven Langley Guy: Game Playing Cyberpath

Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

Steven Langley Guy

AGE: 50-51
FROM: Croydon, Adelaide, South Australia
on Soulseek (filesharing network);
smguy2 on Beliefnet.com

Suchiiben-Chan on MySpace

This man started an Internet relationship with me, telling me he was single, despite being married and the father of two young children.

When confronted with his own negative words about his wife and kids (written to a public message board) he attempted to deny it, then vanished.

He comes across as very genteel, articulate, refined, a classical music lover and a "gentleman." But all he's really interested in is playing games with vulnerable & trusting women over the internet.

I got the whole "you're the One, my soul mate" and "I want to be with you in the future" crap and he laid mind-control, romantic lures on me heavily.

When confronted, he called me crazy, denied it, then put me on IGNORE on all chat programs, probably blocked me and vanished. Like cockroaches do when you switch the light on.

I truly pity his wife - someone ought to warn her.
busted Pictures, Images and Photos

UPDATE - Mr. Guy tried to have this removed by posing as his ex-wife and his son by saying that Mr Guy "tried to commit suicide" because of this posting. He then sent threats to EOPC - all these things came from the same IP!! LOL!!

Mr. Guy has tried to sneak on to our support group and continues to come to this board in hopes to find some way to get himself removed without apologizing to his victim and/or to find ways to blame her and make himself look like the victim.

Sound familiar??

(unfortunately, sometimes the wives have been told - the predator/ husband lies to them and the wives believe it - and turn on the victim too. Or they stick up for the cheater and say it was a mistake.... please forgive him. Gridney/ YidwithLid's wife, for example, has participated in harassing one of his victims. Goodness knows what these guys tell the wives!)

What about the victim? Do these cheaters ever go back and apologize and speak openly to them? Help the victim heal? No!! they seem to just disappear/ run away/ change nicknames or trolling sites AND blame the victim for everything. Spare us, we hear that one pretty often and we know better.

Still we believe spouses/ partners should be told. - Fighter
pervert Pictures, Images and Photos

Another victim wrote us about this sick Cyberpath:

Steven Langley Guy goes by the alias Suchiiben-Chan on myspace & preyed on my compassion and good nature by pretending to be a 15 year old child who lost both his parents & had various friends die tragically in the past few years.

As a psychic healer, I took great pity on this "child", worried that he was suicidal & spent late nights chatting to him on myspace to give him hope for the future and support over the Internet.

It was only when I said that I felt he was an "old soul" that he admitted that he was "playing" (did it for fun) about being 15 and was, in fact, a man in his late 40's...!!!

That angered me & I deleted him as a myspace "friend" (he put in the request) as I abhor dishonesty! I feel his soul is tainted in some way & that he takes great joy / satisfaction in leading women down the garden path...!

In my case, I didn't buy his "little kid" crush comments about me as I am used to getting them but I can certainly imagine someone on a dating or social website being pulled into believing that crap.

These people should not be allowed to prey on the goodness / kindness of others and maliciously mislead/hurt people. It is unacceptable behavior and should not be tolerated.

Steven Langley Guy - you are an evil Internet Predator... may karma reap it's just reward. That's all I have to say.

Tuesday, November 25, 2008

Fake Military & Cyberpath - Haberman

...On Sept. 7, 2006, Rhoad appeared as the defendant in a domestic violence lawsuit -- the charge was cyberstalking -- brought by her ex-husband, Phil Haberman. He wanted an end to her e-mails, her missives to his boss, her online tracking of his whereabouts. And he wanted an end to her blog, The Rhoad Warrior, which was dedicated solely to writing about him.

They met on Match.com. The single mother, then living in Las Vegas, couldn't resist when the guy from Special Forces messaged her. The two met for dinner at Gardunos, a Mexican restaurant at The Palms hotel off the Vegas strip. They were married a month later.

But it wouldn't last. Haberman moved on even before their bitter annulment, eventually settling in Sarasota County, while Rhoad moved to San Diego.

And like many scorned lovers, she turned to the most efficient weapon in her arsenal: the Internet. She spun her side of the story to online publications like Lovefraud.com and greensickle.com, and eventually started her own blog.

Set against a brown floral background, Rhoadwarrior became a repository for her outrage. In just a few months, she imbued the website with research into ...Haberman's best-kept secrets and most-private embarrassments.

Now, nearly three years after exchanging vows and two months after the blog began, Haberman was in court, asking for her to get out of his life completely. Through the hiss of the audio recording taken during the hearing in Sarasota County, Rhoad and Haberman's voices sound equally resolute as they make their cases before Judge Robert Bennett Jr.
"She hunts me down," Haberman stated in his testimony. "She tracks me down."

"What's the purpose of this, your honor, but to harass for no apparent reason, via Internet?" he asked the judge.

"I don't write to harm him," Rhoad testified in response. "I write to expose him."

She told the court that Haberman hadn't worked with Special Forces, that he'd committed bigamy and falsely claimed he received a Purple Heart. (Haberman's lawsuit did not contest or refute the allegations in Rhoad's blog, nor did he deny any of its claims during the court hearing. He declined two requests from Creative Loafing to comment for this story.)

"The reason I posted my blog," Rhoad told the court, "is for clarification of who Phil Haberman is and to warn people of his sociopathic behavior."

Bennett didn't see it that way.

On grounds of cyberstalking, he ordered Rhoadwarrior taken down. Rhoad has refused, claiming the injunction unconstitutional. On Jan. 16, Judge Bennett responded to Rhoad's civil contempt of court with an order to return to the Sarasota courthouse on Jan. 25 or face a bench warrant for her arrest.

Bennett may have had reason to find Rhoad guilty of cyberstalking. But considering the murky and constantly evolving legal status of freedom of speech on the Internet, his ruling also challenged the First Amendment.

BREAK-UPS CAN BE HARD, but the Internet has revolutionized amorous revenge. And the judicial system is not necessarily keeping up with technology.

"[Bloggers' rights] is very much an emerging area of the law," says Gerald Weber, legal director for the Georgia branch of the ACLU. "Personal jurisdiction comes up with some frequency, and there are a lot of unsettled questions."

Many of which are coming from those -- mostly men -- who've inspired the wrath of Web-savvy exes. Sites like DontDateHimGirl.com, where former dates can review and comment anonymously on men, have gathered nationwide attention.

Tasha Joseph, a Miami Beach entrepreneur, launched the site in July 2005, describing it six months later to The New York Times as a "dating credit report." Even though the site's terms of use state contributors cannot post untrue or defamatory information, some men have claimed that comments saying they have herpes or sleep with men are not only false, but have caused them emotional and monetary damage.

Last June, Pittsburgh lawyer Todd Hollis slapped Joseph, the site's domain owner, and several DontDateHimGirl.com posters with a $50,000 defamation suit. Joseph argues that her site is protected by the 1996 Communications Decency Act, a protective measure for Web hosts distinguishing them from their users. (The law was cited in a November 2006 decision in California that found webmasters and bloggers not liable for defamatory comments written by others on their sites.) Hollis maintains that the defamatory language should provide him rights to certain damages.

Hollis' suit was dismissed and
DontDateHimGirl.com is still going strong.

First Amendment law places some limits on speech, and those same limits apply online: False allegations and direct threats aren't covered.

"Concerning the rights of one citizen to speak about another citizen, the online world doesn't have any special rules," says John Morris, a staff attorney at the D.C.-based Center for Democracy and Technology.

An ex with a Web connection can plaster information online for thousands to see. Charges against lovers (or co-workers, friends, even junior high classmates) can quickly circulate through cyberspace with the assistance of sites like MySpace.com and Blogspot, and end up in the real world.

AT THE BEGINNING OF THEIR RELATIONSHIP, Haberman and Rhoad made an attractive couple.

She, slim and doe-eyed, looked younger than her 38 years. He, almost six years her junior, showered her with compliments and seemed to glow with intelligence.

"The nice, 'good boy' kind of thing," Rhoad recalls. "He seemed clean cut -- the puppy dog eyes! -- and he traveled a lot. He sounded like he was established."

Plus, he was a soldier. According to Rhoad, he even wore a black long-sleeved Special Forces shirt to their first date.

"I'd had a streak of bad luck with men," she says. "I figured, 'Military, they do background checks and keep in shape.'" Having grown up in Phoenix, Rhoad had a thing for troops; at 16, she'd dated a Marine.

Though they had known each other less than a month, Rhoad was convinced Haberman was a good catch. She had been through a messy divorce and a string of "losers with no jobs." To care for her 13-year-old daughter, Heather, she had been balancing work as a legal aide with modeling gigs and small walk-on roles in Vegas-based flicks like Casino and Showgirls. She says she was unemployed and living on food stamps when her romance with Haberman began.

Within weeks, he and his dog had moved in, but money remained tight. Rhoad even stripped at a local club for three days. "I was working the b-shift," she recalls, "the day shift. The kind of place where you're lucky if you leave with the 20 dollars you paid out."

On Jan. 9, 2004, her last night dancing, Haberman had news. He'd just gotten orders to ship to Iraq, and wanted to know, would she marry him?

Rhoad accepted -- "It's Vegas, you know?" -- and right after their lickety-split vows the following day, he left for Fort Bragg.

Soon, however, Rhoad was accusing Haberman of cheating (in the September hearing, she accused him of proposing to four different women while still married to her). The distrust only deepened when he was deployed to Iraq in March.

"I'd had it with him," she says. "[But] it's supposed to be 'good or bad or otherwise,' you know?"

She stayed with him, but began investigating her husband's finances, specifically money Haberman received from the military.

Military personnel on permanent duty are eligible for basic allowance for housing (BAH) payments, which vary depending on where they live and whether they have dependents. Key West, where Haberman had a P.O. box, has high property values and thus one of the highest BAH rates in the country. Believing she deserved a part of his payments because he was living with her when he left for his service, Rhoad filed complaints with the military, according to evidence in the September hearing.

Just seven months after their wedding, Haberman filed for an annulment. In a rage, Rhoad upped her research of her now ex-husband, beginning an investigation into his military credentials and reaching out to members of the press in an attempt to get her version of his story told.

A reporter at the Dallas Observer, an alternative newsweekly, Whitley was also the co-author of Stolen Valor, a book about people who lied about their military service during Vietnam. After Rhoad contacted her, Whitley took an interest in the story and launched her own investigation into Haberman's military history. What Rhoad did to disseminate Whitley's findings would play a central role in the ongoing story of her relationship with Haberman.

Whitley tracked down Haberman's military records through Freedom of Information Act requests, and contacted his teachers, relatives and other acquaintances in Dallas. Through this investigation, which lasted nearly three months, she uncovered discrepancies in Haberman's military record.

In September 2005, the Observer published her lengthy report ("G.I. Jerk"), with a subhead deflating his Special Forces credentials ("He's about as real as Rambo"). The article piqued the interest of wounded veterans angered by Haberman's alleged lies and feminists sympathetic to Rhoad's plight, like Donna Andersen.

Andersen, a self-described victim of "cheating," (cheating? try bigamy, fraud & a serial con man) has been prolific in her own online reporting. On her site, Lovefraud.com, she posts stories about con men and criminals, all purportedly guilty of deception in their marital and romantic lives.

Two months after Whitley's article went live on dallasobserver.com, Andersen published her own account of Haberman and Rhoad's relationship.

Phil Haberman's campaign to get stories about him removed from the Internet began long before he sought an injunction against Rhoad.

Haberman left a voice mail for Lovefraud on February 22, 2006. He demanded that the True Lovefraud Story about him, originally published in November, 2005, be removed. The message was ignored.

He called back on March 27 and said Lovefraud's report that he was no longer in the military was untrue. "I'm in a new reserve unit in Florida ," Haberman said. He was asked to supply documentation of his reenlistment.

None was received.

Haberman's campaign picked up steam in June when he sent Lovefraud a scan of his new military ID. The card showed an issue date of May 30, 2006 and an expiration date of October 30, 2007. To verify Haberman's claim, Lovefraud contacted the P.O.W. Network.

...All of these websites had posted their Haberman stories before Rhoad launched her blog on July 13, 2006. All of the authors had conducted their own research and determined that Haberman's stories were half-truths, exaggerations or outright lies.

....Kristen Rhoad was prepared to present proof to the Florida court that the statements in her blog were true, and that Haberman was a fraud. She had the following with her:

  • Proof that Haberman was not currently in the Florida National Guard
  • Military documents that Haberman had forged
  • Military discharge documents, indicating "other than honorable" discharges
  • Confirmation that Haberman had received $17,000 in excess military payments
  • Proof that Haberman had taken $5,000 from another female victim
  • Proof that Haberman's wages were being garnished
  • Letter from Haberman's employer stating that he was a fraud
  • Records of civil and criminal cases against Haberman in Florida

Rhoad was never given the opportunity to present the documents into evidence.

...Rhoad said she posted information about Haberman to warn other women about him. She has heard from women thanking her for the information...

Lovefraud received the following e-mail in May, 2006:

Ha, too funny. He started IM'ing me on AOL. I KNEW he was a psycho, so I did some research and found your article. His AOL screen name is Forcreconmarine. Too funny, what a psycho; and YES, he does have a temper.

Saw it come out when I declined his offer for a home cooked meal, with his request that I wear stockings, garters and stilettos. I said, "You're looking for a prostitute buddy," and blocked him. He is still on though - constantly!!!

With the Observer story in hand, Rhoad got in touch with POWNetwork.org, a not-for-profit website that tracks prisoners of war, soldiers missing in action and a group it calls "Phonies & Wannabees." After receiving a tip about a soldier's service -- or lack thereof -- P.O.W. Network then verifies the accusation by talking to troops who served with the soldiers in question.

The website, which boasts an archive of over 60,000 documents, started researching Haberman in November 2004. "We requested military records from the St. Louis Records Center," says co-founder Mary Schantag. Haberman sent records himself, hoping to clear his name, she says, and others were tracked through military service branches. Many of the posts on the P.O.W. Network page devoted to Haberman -- links to articles, clips and blog entries -- came from Rhoad.

Soon Haberman's photo, and his sullied reputation, would become a mainstay on at least four military-themed blogs.

Then, in July 2006, another blog joined the digital discussion.

For Rhoad, setting up an online journal of her own wasn't difficult. On Blogger.com, the terms of service are defined: While bloggers are advised to steer clear of slander, the site claims no responsibility for any false statements.

A blog was the perfect medium for her message.

In the beginning, RhoadWarrior blog posts came out in long form. She ruminated about her feelings for him: "Let's get one thing straight -- I do not want Phil back in my life." She called him names: "I know Phil is a small, insignificant scumbag at the bottom of the military's list of prosecution."

She gave sweeping descriptions of Haberman's alleged wrongdoings:

According to the September testimony of North Port Police Department detective Mary Thoroman -- who made a point of saying that she had run a clean background check on Haberman -- Rhoad wrote that he had been arrested on a theft charge and dishonorably discharged twice.

...Rhoad also posted definitions of her own First Amendment rights.

"Is my blog slanderous?" she wrote. "Not even."

As evidenced in the pleading of the September hearing, Rhoad began adding other juicy tidbits about Haberman's affairs. She published updates on at least one woman she alleged Haberman had "scammed" out of $5,000, e-mails from informants stating where he might be working -- even his address and a picture of his house.

Finally, Rhoad provided a full catalog of links to other blogs lambasting her estranged ex-husband, and included the P.O.W. Network and the articles from both Whitley and Andersen.

Meanwhile, Haberman prepared his own retaliation.

On Aug. 23, 2006, he filed for a temporary restraining order against Rhoad. Accusing her of domestic violence, Haberman claimed she had been "cyberstalking" him through e-mails and her blog.

"At the annulment hearing," he alleged in his petition, "[Rhoad] said afterwards to me that 'This is not over and never will be. You WILL PAY for what you did to me. Mark my words.'"

He continued with anecdotes about Rhoad's planned attacks on him, as relayed from her daughter to a friend of Haberman's. Citing numerous sustained injuries to his morale, he snapped back with character slams of his own.

"I have genuine fear of Kristen and what she will do," he wrote. "She has the ability to manipulate and connive people to doing what she wants by eliciting sympathy out of others. All it will take is for someone to read her blog, click the links, and decide they want to come to my house and take care of me the way she wishes to have done."
(readers, does this sound familiar?? How many times have we heard this baloney? - Fighter)

Haberman knew what he wanted; his petition ended with several requests. Along with a halt on Rhoad's direct communication with him, he pleaded for an end to his ex-wife's online scavenger hunt.
"I am also asking for an injunction to be issued ordering her blog, and any collaborations she has had with other internet sites to be removed from the internet. These should include greensickle, the Dallas Observer, Lovefraud, POW Network, Veriseal, MySpace and Blogspot."

The hearing was scheduled for early September, to be presided over by 12th Circuit Judge Robert Bennett Jr. in Sarasota County.

HABERMAN'S REQUEST TO SHUT DOWN RHOAD'S BLOG stumps some legal experts weighing in on the case.

"Normally, people don't do it this way," says University of Florida law professor Lyrissa Lidsky, former associate dean of UF's law school and a First Amendment expert.

The problem, she explains, is that in this case, an "injunction" -- or court-ordered halt of an activity or behavior -- serves as a form of "prior restraint," in effect stopping Rhoad from continuing her writing in the future.

While protective orders are routine in stalking cases to prevent victims from being confronted by their harassers, those restrictions do not typically limit speech.
"If the speech is legal, if it's truthful," says Morris of the Center for Democracy and Technology, "then I'm skeptical that it ought to be taken down."

The best chance Haberman would have for getting Rhoad's blog removed, Lidsky says, would be to prove it full of lies or threats of violence.

"If Rhoad's stories are false," she says, "Haberman has a right to sue her for defamation."

But, she says, taking a blog off the Web in this situation, based on anything but its accuracy or its threatening nature, would likely be a violation of the First Amendment.

ON THE MORNING OF SEPT. 7, Rhoad, Haberman and his primary witness, North Port Police detective Thoroman, appeared in Courtroom J before Bennett. Haberman was asked to testify first in the civil hearing.

He made two points. The first was that Rhoad had left voicemails in 2004 stating she would seek revenge. Second, he was eager to prove that Rhoad's e-mails, the stories on LoveFraud and the P.O.W. Network, and her blog had combined to cause him harm. (Under Florida's cyberstalking statute, to cause someone "substantial emotional distress" through online communication without serving a "legitimate purpose" is illegal.)

"Anything and everything that she can do," he testified to the judge, "in order to cause me emotional duress, emotional stress, anything -- it's what she's doing."

"Under freedom of speech, your honor, the First Amendment gives me the right to post on the Internet, true allegations. True!" said Rhoad.

"Is he in danger of being found that he is a fraud and a con artist?" she asked.

"That is a civil side of the law," Thoroman responded. "And that is not my jurisdiction."

Bennett asked her directly.

"And your purpose for posting all this over the Internet is what, exactly?"

"To alert the women who have been his victims like me," she answered. She wanted "to warn people of who Phil Haberman is."

The judge wasn't impressed.

"I think, Ms. Rhoad," he said, "you're a menace. I think you're absolutely motivated by revenge and a desire to destroy this man. Your allegations may be true; the First Amendment protects you to the extent that you don't use it to harm others. [But] the First Amendment is not an absolute guarantee. None of the Bill of Rights is absolute."

Rhoad reports that she was stunned. But the judge had more to say.

"We can't use our free speech to set out and accomplish the destruction of a person's reputation," he said.

His decision was succinct but ambitious.

"Respondent shall remove, or cause to be removed, all blogs, e-mails or other Web-based communications to petitioner or third parties that refer to petitioner and which are posted, or caused to be posted, by respondent."

Reading his order to the defendant, Bennett acknowledged its pitfalls. "I don't know how you go about doing that," he said. "But that's going to be required. You are to have absolutely no contact with this gentleman, directly or indirectly. If this injunction is violated further I can sentence you to six months in county jail, and don't think that I will not do it."

The audio recording of the trial ends with Haberman verifying that all related pages would have to be taken off the Web.

BENNETT DECLINED CL'S INVITATION to comment on the ramifications of shutting down Rhoad's blog; exactly how one follows such a ruling remains difficult to determine. Because the allegations on the blog were not proven true or false -- and thus not liable for defamation -- applying the ruling to the blog is a challenge.

Cyberstalking charges are typically grounded in some form of direct communication, such as e-mail. Yet in this case, a blog was treated with the same parameters as an e-mail -- whether it arrived in an inbox or sat in cyberspace didn't matter.

"Harassing e-mails are really different than a blog," says Morris, "and I think would be treated differently from a constitutional perspective. If one person is harassing from e-mail, throwing toilet paper on the house, if you have an action like that it can certainly be enjoined."

Lidsky says blogging should not count as cyberstalking at all.

"It seems farfetched that blogging could be a form of domestic violence," says Lidsky. "From what I understand, the cyberstalking statute is designed for, well, stalking-like activities: 500 phone calls a day, that kind of constant harassment. But telling your story on a blog? That doesn't seem like domestic violence to me, but then again," she says with a laugh, "I'm only a First Amendment specialist."

While Lidsky says that blogging does count as communication, as it has a definite audience, "I don't think that's what the statute was designed to address," she says.

"If a blog could now be enjoined under cyberstalking, during any heated divorce, that could have a lot of implications for free speech. What's the difference between this and a memoir?"

Finally, the injunction is only valid throughout the state. But "[Rhoad] doesn't have the technical means to keep her blog out of Florida," says Lidsky. "In foreign countries, some bigger organizations have managed to block content from going to certain places. For her to keep her blog out of Florida, she'd have to shut down her blog everywhere."

When she's not on the set working as an extra for TV movies ("It's good when it's good," she says of her day job), the aspiring starlet is still updating her blog, in violation of Bennett's decision. Other sites have continued to publish stories on the case -- LoveFraud wrote an account of the trial -- and the P.O.W. Network's Haberman page is still up, complete with Rhoad's posts.

Haberman hasn't given up fighting, either. In late October, he filed a motion for contempt of court with the state attorney, who rejected his case, referring him back to the 12th Circuit judge.

"As of today," Haberman wrote a few weeks later in his request for an emergency hearing to deal with Rhoad's violations, "there have been roughly 75 violations of the court order, which bars both direct and indirect contact with the plaintiff."

Half a week later, 12th Circuit Judge Lee Haworth denied the motion.

But with Judge Bennett's decision on the books, one can't help but wonder whether Rhoad shouldn't stop posting. She can't completely remove Phil Haberman from the Internet, but is it worth it to keep writing?

"I did think about doing that," she says, "but people keep e-mailing me: 'Thank you for posting your blog.' I realize it can look vindictive, my keeping a tab on him. But if people are aware of what's out there, I don't see the real harm."

People like Haberman rarely get arrested or prosecuted. I hear horror stories all the time of predators getting away with victimizing people. They run up credit cards and leave the victims with the debts. They falsely accuse their ex-spouses of being unfit parents and win full custody of children. They bleed their victims of assets, and then harass them through the courts, when the victims can’t afford to defend themselves.

Then the victims get no justice from the legal system.

Victims are frustrated. They’ve been had, and they know the predator is going to do it again. They at least want to warn others about the person who conned them, hoping to save someone else from the devastation they suffered.

I’ve seen that exposing con artists works. People have contacted both Rhoad and Lovefraud, expressing gratitude for the warnings about Haberman. They avoided becoming victims.

To me, posting the truth about a predator on the Internet is more than legitimate. It’s a public service.

(We, FightBigamy and other sites have also been threatened by cyber-conmen like Haberman... and none of us have removed these stories. Nor will we. We do not negotiate with con men & terrorists. - Fighter)

Creative Loafing (CL)

Saturday, November 22, 2008

Lori Drew, Murderer - MySpace Suicide Trial Begins

A Missouri woman knew her 13-year-old neighbor was depressed and suicidal when she sent cruel Internet messages to the teenager, her former assistant testified. The girl killed herself after being told the world would be better off without her.

Ashley Grills, 20, told jurors Thursday she helped Lori Drew set up a fake MySpace profile of a 16-year-old boy to lure Megan Meier into an online relationship. Testifying for the prosecution under a grant of immunity, Grills also said she sent the last message from the fictitious "Josh Evans" to Megan in October 2006 on the day the girl hanged herself.
Meier - Grills
Megan Meier (left)/ Ashley Grills (right)

When she learned of Megan's death, Grills said Drew told her, "`We could have pushed her overboard because she was suicidal and depressed.'"

Testimony was to resume Friday in the case against Drew, who has pleaded not guilty to one count of conspiracy and three counts of accessing computers without authorization. Each count carries a potential sentence of five years in prison.

Prosecutors say Drew, 49, her then-13-year-old daughter, Sarah, and Grills created the MySpace alias in September 2006 to befriend Megan to find out if she was spreading rumors about Sarah.

The case is believed to be the nation's first cyberbullying trial. Its results could set a legal precedent for dealing with the issue of online harassment.

Defense attorney Dean Steward told jurors that Drew did not violate the Computer Use and Fraud Act — used in the past to address computer hacking — and reminded them that she was not facing charges dealing with the suicide. Steward has repeatedly asked U.S. District Judge George Wu to exclude testimony about Megan's suicide and twice sought a mistrial.

Grills, who helped Drew with her coupon magazine business, testified that she told Drew they might get in trouble for the scheme, but that Drew replied, "It was fine and people do it all the time."

Grills said Drew thought the MySpace account was a funny idea and was present about half of the time when Grills and Sarah sent messages to Megan.

Grills said she remembered at least one time when Drew sat down and typed messages on the computer. She also testified that Drew wanted to print the conversations between "Josh" and Megan, lure the teen to a mall and reveal who the fake boy really was.

To finally end the hoax, Grills said she devised a scenario in which "Josh" would move away so Megan would lose interest in him. When Megan persisted, the tactics changed.

"We decided to be mean to her so she would leave him alone," Grills said.
lori drew
She testified that she sent the final message to Megan saying the world would be better off without her. Prosecutors did not ask if Drew was in the room when that message was sent, but Grills said she believed the message contributed to her death.

Grills said that a short time after finding out that Megan committed suicide, Drew and her husband ordered her to close the MySpace account.

The case is being prosecuted in Los Angeles because MySpace computer servers are based in the area.




















Friday, November 21, 2008

Internet 'Sex Gang' Off to Jail

Two brothers who led an internet sex gang which made millions by exploiting trafficked women have been jailed.
Hooker Street Pictures, Images and Photos
The gang, which smuggled hundreds of Asian women into Britain to work as prostitutes, made at least £3.2m during its five-year span.

The women were charged up to £30,000 by the gang to repay their travel "debts".

Bordee Pitayatankul, 33, from Surrey, was jailed for 15 months. His brother Pongpoj, 31, from Paddington, was given 18 months at Southwark Crown Court.

Seven other members of the gang were also jailed.

It cannot be right in this day and age that women coming to this country should be, in effect, sold off like slaves

Gang members admitted to various offences including conspiring to launder money and plotting to control prostitution between 1 January 2005 and 21 April 2008.

Up to 70 women - some as young as 18 - worked from at least 20 brothels across London, including Bayswater, Kensington and Paddington, often going with dozens of customers a week to raise the money they were told they owed the gang.

The Oriental Gems website set up by the gang featured the women accompanied by a photo gallery showing them naked or semi-naked.

It also listed their sexual specialities with prices ranging from £150 for one hour to £1,500 for an overnight stay.

Passing sentence, Judge Christopher Hardy said: "It cannot be right in this day and age that women coming to this country should be, in effect, sold off like slaves to work in this or any other trade for free until their debt is expunged.

"Oriental Gems was exploiting on a grand scale both in the number of females on its books, or, more accurately, its website and the turnover in cash generated."

Police estimate that the business was making a "conservative" £800,000 a year at one stage, with the gang pocketing a minimum of £3.2m.

Although officers have seized £179,000 they are yet to trace huge "assets" thought to be hidden abroad.
what is the world coming to Pictures, Images and Photos

The judge said authorities should decide whether those convicted should be deported.

Confiscation hearings will be held next year.


I have used prostitutes several times, usually from websites, as otherwise I would not have had sex for years.

These girls are all far more gorgeous (and youthful) than any woman I could go out with and offer a stupendous sexual experience - with none of the payback that I have had with girlfriends in the past.
Men Who Sleep with Prostitutes

Readers, does/ did your Cyberpath see you this way? As free sex? Was he someone like Yidwithlid who saw prostitutes on his lunch hours and tried to further supplement his marriage with online sex with real (and vulnerable) women?

Or Dan Jacoby who turned his online 'support group' female friends into free porn shows and emotional toys to feed his out of control libido?

Or John Gash who used the net to find women all over the world for a free place to stay and free sex anywhere he went - while lying about love to every one of them.

Online you are NOTHING BUT AN OBJECT TO THESE MEN. And for many: a way to supplement a huge internet porn & sex habit. And you can be conveniently dumped with a click of a mouse!

Tuesday, November 18, 2008

Mississippi Hospice Director Goes to Trial for Cyberstalking & Threats

Sound familiar? Exposed medical director then CYBERSTALKS & THREATENS the people who turned him in!! Sounds like Yidwithlid, Jacoby to name a few. Attack those who tell the truth. It's almost a fait-accompli that a guilty party will attack those who tell the truth about them! At least this guy's being brought trial over these cyberthreats, though of course, he has a lame 'excuse.' - Fighter

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

Esther Lee Evans was suffering from diabetes and breathing problems before she died in a north Mississippi hospice in 2006, and her family had no reason to think her death was anything but natural.

So her daughters were stunned when authorities told them they were investigating Evans’ death and numerous others at the Sanctuary Hospice House in Tupelo.

“It was like somebody playing a bad prank on you,” said Evans’ daughter, Rebecca Dillard. “It was unbelievable. It just tore us apart.”

The hospice’s clinical director — charged with 11 counts of administering narcotics without a license — had been scheduled for trial Monday in Lee County Circuit Court, but a judge postponed it until next year.

Dr. Paul White, the facility’s medical director, and Marilyn Lehman, the clinical director, were charged in a 33-count indictment in April. White has pleaded guilty.

Lehman’s trial was postponed until February because her lawyer, Ronald Michael, had a scheduling conflict. Michael did not respond to messages this week, but has said Lehman is innocent.

Authorities, however, say the doctor allowed Lehman to determine doses and administer narcotics and then backdated the orders she had written.

Evans, 88, was admitted to the hospice in September 2006 suffering from diabetes and smoking related breathing problems. She had not been in the facility long when a nurse gave her medication to “help her relax,” Dillard said. The next day she couldn’t function. In a few days, she was dead.

The hospice’s attorney has repeatedly said that Evans’ death is not surprising or suspicious because she was terminally ill just like other hospice patients. The attorney, L.F. “Sandy” Sams, is emphatic that hospice employees did not hasten patients’ deaths.

Mississippi Attorney General Jim Hood was not convinced.

Hood, whose office handled the investigation, has said some patients were “prematurely dying” because they were given such massive doses of morphine that “it was like a poison on the body.”

Hood would not comment this week because of the pending trial. He has told The Associated Press in the past that a grand jury was presented with several options, including that the hospice deaths were deliberate. They settled on misdemeanor charges of neglect, practicing medicine without a license and aiding and abetting.

It’s not clear if White will testify against his former employee. He struck a deal with prosecutors in June and pleaded guilty to six counts of aiding and abetting the practice of medicine without a license and one felony count of cyberstalking on the day his trial was to begin. He was sentenced to two years of probation and agreed to cooperate with prosecutors.

The cyberstalking charge was for sending obscene computer messages to people he thought caused the investigation, and included a threat to “disembowel” the facility’s former chaplain.

He blamed the messages on sleeping pills and alcohol.

Still, the relatives of some people who died at the hospice are angry that Lehman and White were not charged with more serious crimes. Some of them believe White and Lehman are directly responsible for the deaths of their loved ones. That allegation has been repeated in at least one federal lawsuit.

“This has devastated us. It has torn our family apart,” Dillard said. “You just stop and think if it was your mother or your dad. How you would feel? Do you understand what I’m saying. It’s just like a horror story that came off television or something.”

Other people who lost loved ones in the facility were angry, too, but for different reasons.

Relatives of several people whose loved ones were named as victims in the indictment were outraged, saying the hospice provided excellent care. And accusations of euthanasia polarized the community.
stalker Pictures, Images and Photos

The nonprofit hospice opened in 2005 as a pilot project to provide affordable care to rural areas and was intended as a model for other communities. Millions have been donated to the facility and some of the most prominent people in north Mississippi have worked on its behalf.

Dozens of people packed the courtroom for White’s trial, with several people standing because they refused to sit among the families of the alleged victims.

Monday, November 17, 2008

Story of Internet Invasion of Privacy

Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

By Emanuella Grinberg -- Court TV

When Katie Jones bought the domain name katie.com in 1996, she relished the opportunity to own a name-dot-com site at a time when such common names were being quickly swallowed up.

Jones, an online chat room moderator then based in London, used the site to post pictures of her son, her resume, a blog and links to her business, ukchat.com.

But she could not have foreseen the nuisance the site would become, when, in 2000, book publisher Penguin Group used the domain name as the title for a teen's tale of sexual molestation at the hands of a man she met in an Internet chat room.

The book, "Katie.com," chronicled the plight of Katherine Tarbox, a 13-year-old from Connecticut who struck up an online relationship with a man she believed was 23. He turned out to be a 40-year-old registered sex offender, and when she met him in a Houston hotel a couple of months later while in town for a swim meet, he molested her.

With the book's release to critical and commercial success, Jones -- the real katie.com -- began receiving millions of e-mails a week to her katie@katie.com inbox. Most messages detailed personal experiences of sexual abuse, while others praised her bravery for sharing "her" story and helping others. Friends wrote to ask Jones if the story had really happened to her.

Still more e-mails contained what Jones calls "abusive" and "disturbing" remarks and threats. Others contained links to pornographic material.

Four years later, Jones still receives such correspondence, she says. "Every time the media resurrects her story, I get untold amounts of spam," said Jones, who still owns and maintains katie.com, but has a new personal e-mail address.

"I have the utmost respect for Katie Tarbox for writing the story, I just wish it hadn't affected me," Jones said. "I don't want to sound bitter. I just wish it was not a part of my life."

Shortly after the book's release, Jones removed personal content from her site, and it now serves solely as an open letter to the book's publisher.

"It's completely unfair that you feel that you can use my domain name for your own purposes without consulting me. I feel that my domain name has now been irrevocably associated with this book," the letter reads. "I feel it is very important that I, and everyone else out there with a domain name, have the right to protect our good name, property, and right to privacy."
Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

But does she?

When Jones complained to the publisher that her privacy had been violated, she said she received a long letter in response, telling her, as she puts it, to "bugger off." In June 2001 paperback editions of "Katie.com" hit the shelves with a note from the book's publisher, Plume, on the copyright page regarding Jones' site.

It reads: "The publishers wish to make clear that the author of Katie.com and the events described in Katie.com have no connection whatsoever with the Web site found at the domain name address www.katie.com, or with the e-mail address katie@katie.com."

That's probably the best Jones can hope for, according to Internet and domain law experts.
"It's a pretty big stretch for her to claim any ownership rights, since on the Internet those rights are only extended for commercial use," Internet law specialist John Dozier of the Virginia firm Dozier Internet Law.

"The name has to have an inherent distinction in the marketplace so that in the eyes of the public, it has achieved such notoriety that by just stating the name, people automatically associate it with that," Dozier said.

But a recent Supreme Court ruling that domain name holders have certain property rights theoretically could be applied to Jones' circumstances, says Internet law attorney Jay Hollander, principal of the New York firm Hollander and Company.

In 1998, the owner of the domain name sex.com sued an ex-con who had forged a letter to domain registrar Network Solutions, getting them to transfer ownership of the domain name sex.com to him. The original owner, Gary Kremen, also filed suit against Network Solutions for allowing the transaction to go through.

In 2003, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Kremen had a property right to the stolen domain and that Network Solutions was potentially liable for giving it away without proper authorization.

The decision effectively put domain names on the same footing as ordinary, tangible property.
Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

"This ruling could perhaps extend to Jones' circumstances if she could establish that the value of her Web site was diminished by its association with the novel," says Hollander, quick to add that it would take a persistent, vigorous counsel to mount the claim.

He also points to Jones' job as an Internet chat room moderator as a factor that could add substance to her claim. "Even though it's a personal fight, Jones has a commercial reputation. There could be the concern that her commercial reputation was damaged by its association with the book."

But Jones says she gave up the fight long ago for lack of time and resources.

"All I ever wanted was them to admit that what they'd done was wrong. Kids learn that it's not safe to give out their name and address to strangers, the publisher needs to learn it's not right to give out domain names in such a way," Jones said.


Sunday, November 16, 2008


Gareth (Gary) John Davies
Age: 43-44

Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

British Citizen but possesses an Indiana Drivers License.

ONLINE ACTIVITIES: Gary usually hangs out on Pogo and other multi player card and cribbage type sites and meets people there.

This British man is currently known to be in the Montreal, Canada area. (as of Nov. 2008)

He has an expired U.S. visitor's visa from 5 years ago. He is a compulsive liar (possible Psychopath) and trolls for women in the online dating and other sites. He speaks with a British accent.

He has a warrants for domestic abuse, identity theft and is being looked for in Illinois, Indiana, Arizona and Europe as well.

Gary is a bigamist with a wife in Germany, a wife in England, and who knows how many in the United States. He is a Contract Tile and Granite floor type worker.

Because of his theft of one of his victim's Social Security number, he was able to get contract jobs laying tile.

Within 2 months of meeting a woman in Arizona, he had asked her to marry him, persuaded her to buy him a truck and then he went off to Vegas with stolen credit cards he applied for online in her name, and gambled a hefty 10 grand worth of money away. As well as purchasing a 2000 bracelet for another woman while in Vegas.

He has tons of tattoos over his whole body, has very rotten teeth and he is great at telling lies!

Gary has caused so much trouble. One victim is now fighting with the I.R.S. over income he made using her Social Security number. He also is very violent and controlling. He likes to say he was in the S.A.S. (special forces in Britain) and tells stories of killing an Irish Man and jumping from planes as a parachute person.


He can be charming as hell and can tell lies with the best of them. People all over the States have small claim suits against him for tile and granite jobs he was paid on that weren't completed.

He likes Ford Mustangs, the Taz cartoon Character, playing games online, Iron Maiden (he also says he was a body guard for the lead singer at one time) he drinks, smokes, and is horrible in bed.

Please help spread the word on this sociopath. He is ruining lives across North America and needs to be stopped!

Submitted by one of our readers

Tuesday, November 11, 2008

Man Arrested on Suspicion of Cyberstalking

A 39-year old Michigan man has been arrested on suspicion of stalking a local woman he met on line.
myspace stalker Pictures, Images and Photos

Ventura County sheriff's deputies say George Costales had been sending the woman unwanted emails for the past year.

Investigators say the woman had blocked Costales from her MySpace account "at least five different times." Then last week, deputies say Costales announced he was selling his business and moving to California to be with her, "because he loved her."

When Costales arrived at the woman's front door her boyfriend recognized him from "photos he had posted online."

Investigators said they used the Internet to lure Costales back to the woman's house, where he was arrested on suspicion of felony stalking.

Costales is being held at Ventura County Jail in lieu of $500,000 bail.

Monday, November 10, 2008

Professor Killed When RCMP Ignored Reports of Online Threats

The RCMP apologized to the family of John McKendy on Thursday after admitting it had been warned by a relative three days prior to his murder that his son-in-law was a threat.

Assistant Commissioner Darrell LaFosse, the RCMP's commander of J Division in New Brunswick, Canada told a news conference that an independent review will be launched of the force's handling of the case that led to the slaying of the popular 59-year-old university professor.

A spokesman for the force repeatedly told reporters over the past week that family members hadn't approached the Mounties before the murder with concerns over anyone's safety.

"I have since realized that this is not the case," LaFosse said.

"I have personally apologized to the family on behalf of the RCMP in New Brunswick and I am here today to publicly offer my apology for us saying they did not raise concerns. They did," said LaFosse.

"We were investigating those concerns. Any perception they did not make us aware that there were concerns is false. I offer my apology to them for us saying otherwise."

The assistant commissioner said the force received a complaint from an undisclosed family member on Oct. 27, three days before McKendy was killed in his Douglas home.

The complaint concerned threatening emails and other communication from Nicholas Wade Baker, McKendy's 27-year-old son-in-law, to an undisclosed member of the family.

Police believe McKendy was killed by Baker, who was found dead in a rental car outside a Moncton hotel on Saturday.

McKendy's daughter Laura, who was married to Baker, was also injured in the attack.

News of the emails surfaced Monday when one of McKendy's colleagues at St. Thomas University in Fredericton told reporters about them.

Sociology professor Sylvia Hale, a friend of McKendy's who also teaches at St. Thomas University, said earlier this week the McKendy family had received threatening emails from Baker leading up to the murder and had alerted the RCMP.

LaFosse said the warning from the family member was relayed to an investigator but "was not immediately placed on the RCMP file into the investigation."

"The RCMP media person was unaware of this additional information at the time he gave the interviews," LaFosse said.

Insp. Mike O'Malley, District 2 commanding officer, said it was felt at the time the complaint was made that there was not sufficient evidence to proceed with a criminal investigation.

"Nevertheless, the family's concerns were noted and were added to supplement the ongoing investigation," he said.

Police had been seeking Baker since Oct. 3 on charges of fraud, vehicle theft, and credit card theft.

The stolen vehicle and credit card belonged to Michael McKendy, John's brother. The vehicle was later recovered in Bangor, Maine.

Michael McKendy declined comment on the latest developments Thursday, saying: "We may or may not comment in the future."

John McKendy was a Quaker, and is being remembered as a tireless advocate of social justice and non-violence. A memorial service was held at a Fredericton church Wednesday.

The RCMP issued a formal apology to the family for creating the perception "they did not bring forward concerns to the police."

LaFosse said, in addition to the apology, the entire file on Baker leading up to the murder would also be reviewed to see if it was properly handled by police. An RCMP officer from Prince Edward Island will head the investigation.

Several unanswered questions remain, such as how Baker managed to cross back into Canada despite an alert issued to police agencies and border officials that he was wanted in connection with the stolen vehicle and credit card.

O'Malley said they believed Baker was somewhere in the southern United States, far from the McKendy family, when the email threats were reported. Police said the card was used in Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina.

Hale said Thursday she was pleased the RCMP apologized to the family and would review the case.

But she said the police should have taken the email threats more seriously, and the standard protocol for dealing with situations of domestic violence must also be reassessed.

She said the police's response in this case is part of "a very widespread pattern of police non-response to these types of situations."

"The reality is that there was a plethora of emails in the last few weeks that showed very significant harassment," she said.

"By just not treating it serious and not responding, they just didn't take it seriously enough.

"What you want them to do is learn from it and say, 'This was a totally inadequate response to this family's situation.'"‚"

LaFosse said the review would begin shortly and the findings would be made public.


Sunday, November 02, 2008

Internet Harrasser Identified in Federal Lawsuit

Two female students at Yale Law School who say anonymous, defamatory comments were made about them on the Internet identified one of the defendants yesterday in their federal lawsuit.


The women filed new documents in US District Court naming Mathew C. Ryan of Austin, Texas. Through subpoenas to Internet service providers, the women have learned the identities of several other defendants but are trying to resolve their claims against those people before deciding whether to name them, according to court papers.

The move threatens to expose law students and
renews debate about whether anonymous Internet scribes should be identified - and held legally responsible - for malicious postings.
The case is not unprecedented, but it is a reminder that anonymous postings on the freewheeling Internet can be traced, legal analysts say.
"A lot of people don't really think about that," said Daniel Solove, a professor at George Washington University Law School. "I do think it's going to have an effect on what people say. It's one of the most prominent cases of its type."

The women's lawsuit, filed last year, charges that they were defamed by repeated postings they considered sexually harassing and threatening.

The postings were made to AutoAdmit, an Internet discussion board about colleges and law schools that draws 800,000 to 1 million visitors per month, according to court papers.

The women say Ryan made sexually charged slurs about them on the Web, including a false claim that one of the them had a sexually transmitted disease. The lawsuit also says Ryan encouraged further attacks on the other woman and used anti-Semitic language.

A telephone message and e-mail seeking comment were left for Ryan yesterday.

Ryan attended the University of Texas, according to Mark Lemley, attorney for the Yale students. Most of the other defendants are law students, he said.

Posts by other defendants included remarks about one plaintiff's breasts and a claim that women with the same first names "should be raped." Some postings discussed the women's family backgrounds and supposed sexual exploits while invoking racially and sexually charged slurs.

Some people who posted the Web items threatened to rape one of the women and attempted to start rumors that one of the women had died or committed suicide, according to the lawsuit.

The anonymous posters also started a website devoted to "rating" female law students from around the country. Some participants in the contest sent photos of one of the women without her permission, according to the lawsuit.
The judge overseeing the women's lawsuit has agreed to let them proceed under pseudonyms because of their fears of further harassment. No trial date has been set.

The lawsuit sparked a countersuit from a University of Pennsylvania law graduate who lost a lucrative job offer after he was linked to websites that crudely discussed the female law students.

Anthony Ciolli's libel lawsuit charges that the Yale students sued him although they knew he did not control the message boards at either AutoAdmit.com, where he was an editor, or at a now-defunct site that ranked the looks of top women law students.

The women dropped Ciolli as a defendant in November.

In sworn affidavits, the women say the stress caused their work to suffer at school and on the job and one took a leave of absence from school.

Their classmates and job supervisors were aware of the salacious postings, they said.


The person accused of writing the rape comment fought a subpoena to have his Internet provider disclose his identity. In a motion filed under his online name, "John Doe 21," he argued that the rape remark did not specifically harm or threaten either woman since millions of women share their first names.

He calls the online postings "unsavory but legally innocuous" -
and argues that his free-speech rights outweigh the women's right to seek redress.

"Few courts have considered this question, but it is becoming a crucial one, particularly in light of the increasing number of cases where those who have been criticized on the Internet seek to use the machinery of the courts to unmask, intimidate, and silence their online critics," he wrote earlier this year.
A judge, however, ruled in June that the women had shown enough evidence to support a libel case.


NOTE: Please be aware if you enter “Matthew C. Ryan” and “Austin, Texas” into Google, links to Matthew C. Ryan and his firm come up first. This is NOT the same Matthew C. Ryan mentioned in this article. They are two separate and different persons.