Tuesday, July 31, 2012

Research Volunteers Were Actually a Predator's Targets.

(U.K.) A 'calculating sexual predator' posed as a gynaecological researcher to lure young women to his flat and sexually assault them.

Student Liam Ryan, 21, posted an ad on the Gumtree website calling for female volunteers to take part in 'global medical research', in exchange for £500. More than 200 women, mainly cash-strapped students, responded to Ryan's online advert, but only three - including a 19-year-old - agreed to be examined. The women were promised £500 for undergoing an invasive internal examination at Ryan's flat in a tower block in Birmingham. But when the former business management student failed to hand over the cash, the police were informed.

Ryan pleaded guilty to two charges of assault by penetration and three charges of engaging in sexual activity without consent at Birmingham Crown Court on Thursday. He was jailed for four and a half years, ordered to sign the Sex Offenders' Register for life and was made the subject of a ten-year sex offender prevention order.

Detective Constable Susan Mabbett of West Midlands Police said after the sentencing: 'Liam Ryan is a calculating sexual predator who deliberately targeted vulnerable women via the internet. If it had not been for the courage of these women who contacted us, I have no doubt that he would have continued to offend. I commend their strength of character which has resulted in this man being jailed. When released he will be closely monitored. Of course, all of this comes too late for them. They will forever be haunted by their attacker’s depraved acts.'

The court was told that Ryan, who ran his scam from his flat in Highgate, Birmingham, claimed to be carrying out international medical research for a Canadian university.

One 19-year-old victim was subjected to a degrading 40-minute attack that Ryan claimed was important scientific research, the court heard. She returned home to Manchester but only realised she had been sexually assaulted when she received no cash after the so-called examination. She reported the incident to Greater Manchester Police who contacted West Midlands Police.

Ryan was arrested last December on suspicion of sexual assault.

Officers swooped on Ryan’s home where they discovered thousands of pages of mobile phone records and emails from 200 women. All the women were contacted by police but only a handful came forward to say that they had realised the project was a scam and had not pursued Ryan’s offer. Others could not be traced. They discovered Ryan had targeted a 24-year-old PhD student from Birmingham who became suspicious and refused to take part in the examination.

When officers quizzed Ryan he initially claimed the project was legitimate but later admitted he had invented the story in order to abuse women.

Monday, July 30, 2012


The process of brainwashing (or 'grooming') their victims is one consistently reported by those who have dealt with a cyberpath. Here's some of the cyberpath's process:


1. The cyberpath keeps the victim unaware of what is going on and what changes are taking place.

Your cyberpath might make plans for you, or not tell you what his plans are until the last minute. He may talk about you to others behind your back, to isolate you from them. They will always leave you on the edge of your seat about what their next move or even when your next contact will be. (usually on their terms, not yours)

2. The cyberpath controls the victim's time and online environment, and works to suppress much of the victim's old behavior. The victim is slowly, or abruptly, isolated from all supportive persons/friends/net buddies except the cyberpath.

Your cyberpath might have insisted that you stop certain social, hobby, or work activities. Your chats may have moved to a more "private" or one on one forum and they insist you NOT tell others about you & them or include anyone else in your chats. If you do, be suspicious the cyberpath might be working on THEM behind your back as well. You may have been asked (or told) to reduce or stop contact with specific supportive people in your life.

3. The cyberpath creates in the victim a sense of powerlessness, fear, and dependency. Usually by providing unparalleled attention, support and understanding in the beginning and then SLOWLY over time withdrawing it and systematically replacing it with their real 'agenda.'

Verbal and emotional abuse and manipulation creates these emotions, and they become stronger and stronger over time.

4. The cyberpath works to instill new behavior and attitudes in the victim.

The online predator trains to you behave in ways that he wants you to behave. He gradually makes you feel differently about yourself, and erodes your confidence in yourself. They make you feel that everything you do, say or think - revolves around the cyberpath. (i.e. less talking & real communication - more cybersex, doing things for them, in person sexual encounters, money loans, etc)

5. The cyberpath puts forth a closed system of logic, and allows no real input or criticism.

In other words -- What he says, goes.

(We have used the male gender - your cyberpath may well be female.)

Sunday, July 29, 2012

Cyber Thieves Play Their Victim's Heartstrings


There are countless cyber crimes reported to law enforcement and other government agencies. They include work-at-home, check cashing, lottery and too many others to mention.

A computer is described as a device, electronic or otherwise, that performs high-speed mathematical or logical operations or that assembles, stores, correlates, or otherwise processes information.

The earliest form of computers actually date back to 3500 BC in India, Japan and China. The first recorded "computer crime" occurred in 1820 when Joseph-Marie Jacquard, a French textile manufacturer, invented a device that allowed the repetition of a series of steps in the fabric weaving process. His employees, fearing that their jobs were in jeopardy, sabotaged the new technology.

Computers have come a long way. Unfortunately, cyberspace is now the home to hundreds of Internet crimes that are designed to part innocent people from their money. Most illicit acts are described in the Information Technology Act of 2000 that covers everything from e-mail spoofing to illegal financial scams, pornography, online gambling, forgery, defamation and even cyberstalking.

One of the more popular illicit flim-flams involves romantic letters that eventually become pleas for money.

For this story, I answered one of those letters sent to my company e-mail address. It was one of many transmitted daily by swindlers from all over the world.

This particular one came from "Miss Grace," a self-described "single girl looking for honest and nice person, somebody who care and fear God whom I can partner with."

Her English was terrible, but we played her game for nearly three weeks.

Miss Grace, who also billed herself as "Grace John," claimed to be a 26-year-old West African. She sent a photograph of an attractive young woman with a winning smile.

In the initial Jan. 20 letter she wrote, "I would like to know you more, most especially what you like and what you dislike.

"I am sending you this beautiful mail, with a wish for much happiness," Grace wrote.

My reply was a faux background. "I too am looking for someone. My last wife just died. I've had four of them."

That probably set off the bell at Grace's scam central. A lonely old man. A target!

Grace's Jan. 27 letter was long and personal. In it she relates the story of her father, Dr. Benson John, the "director of project department of gold and diamond," and a successful importer and exporter of cocoa.

"I lost my parent during the war when rebels attacked my house one early morning killing my mother and my father," Grace wrote. "I am 5 feet 7 inches height, fair in complexion with average weight. I am very good at cooking. I love music and I like dancing too."

In another letter Grace called me an "angel" that brightens her day. She wanted my photograph. I declined, and elaborated on my alleged wealth that I said included airplanes and racing cars.

The hook was set.

On Jan. 28 Grace dropped the bomb. Her father, she wrote, left $5.9 million and Grace wants to share it with me. She wants to transfer all that money into my account and all I have to do is send her money for airfare and expenses. She further warns that I must keep the arrangement secret, but first I must contact her bank.

"I hope you will never let me down," Grace says.

She describes her life in a "deportation camp." In later letters Grace says she lives with a "pastor." She won't say how she can use a computer from the camp.

"The bank told me to look for a foreign reliable and honest partner who will assist me in the (money) transfer," Grace writes. "I am glad that God has brought you to see me out of this situation and I promise to be kind and will equally need you in every area of my life."

The bank, she writes, is the Bank of Africa-Senegal. I'm to contact a Mr. Paul Sidibe. She signs the letter, "Always and forever yours, Grace."

On Jan. 30 she pushes me, the faux old and lonely rich man, to provide my personal information to her "bank." I tell her I have more than $5 million in my checking account. That must have caused her and her cronies to salivate.

"You are always on my mind," Grace wrote. She signs her letter, "From my deepest heart, yours forever, Grace."

I told Grace on Feb. 2 that I would not provide the information she requested. On Feb. 3 she asked for money to scan copies of her father's account records. On Feb. 4 she was informed that I was a journalist doing a story on Internet fraud. I asked her a series of questions that received no reply. It was a short lived romance.

Her e-mail is one of many similar ones sent under various names. Consumer Fraud Reporting, a free online site (http://www.consumerfraudreporting.org) that warns of specific types of financial and other cyber crimes, shows an example of a letter from a "Miss Nafisatu John Apollo." It is very similar to Grace's. Maybe they're related? They each have "John" in their name.

Government agencies warn people who receive these kinds of letters to ignore them. They yank at the heartstrings of the old and lonely. Another Web site, www.ic3.gov, is used by law enforcement agencies to track cyber fraud. It is a joint effort between the FBI, the National White Collar Crime Center and the Bureau of Justice Assistance. (IC3 currently has a 6-7 year backlog of cases to investigate - do not expect a speedy answer.)

"If something sounds too good to be true," said Officer Donna Saxer of the Pinellas Park police crime prevention unit, "then it probably is."










Saturday, July 28, 2012

Laws Protect the Harassers!

by James Temple

In the summer of 2009, Carla Franklin landed on a Facebook page created under her name.

She was shocked to see her own image staring back, a swimsuit photo from her earlier days as a model.

Worse yet, Franklin also found a YouTube channel dedicated to her, featuring a student film she had acted in years before. The page labeled her a prostitute and listed her contact information.

Franklin immediately suspected that the cyber bully posting the material was a man she went on a few dates with three years earlier. But it took months to get the companies to remove the content and a court order to force Google to provide the information necessary to link him to the posts. Three years later, she's still in the process of completing the case.

Franklin's experience highlights the long legal battle in store for most people seeking to unmask online harassers, and remove intimate, hateful or defamatory material from the Internet. It also underscores the tension between the rights of harassment victims and the rights of websites, which were granted broad immunity from the actions of their users through legislation that protects free expression online.

These challenges and frictions will be the subject of a panel discussion in San Francisco, during a fundraiser for Without My Consent, a nonprofit that helps to educate harassment victims and their attorneys on legal options.

Franklin, who now acts as an advocate on these issues, will appear on the panel, along with experts from Twitter, Reputation.com, the California attorney general's office and elsewhere.

Traumatic results

The exact scope of online harassment is unknown, but it's clearly widespread.

University of Maryland law Professor Danielle Citron noted in a recent blog post that the Bureau of Justice Statistics estimated that "850,000 people in 2006 experienced stalking with a significant online component," while other researchers predict that 30 percent of Internet users will "face some form of cyber harassment in their lives."

It can take many forms, including hate speech, threats of rape and sexual violence, and posting of nude or doctored images. The threat of uploading intimate pictures and videos is sometimes used to blackmail victims for sex or money.

The results can be traumatic and tragic, as exemplified by the case of Tyler Clementi. In 2010, the 18-year-old Rutgers student killed himself after his roommate hid a webcam in their room and streamed video online of his sexual encounter with another man. Between the Communications Decency Act and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, online companies enjoy broad protection from legal liability for the content created or posted by users, be it copyrighted or defamatory.

These laws basically ensure that companies like Craigslist, Twitter and Facebook can host open forums where people can freely trade ideas and goods. But they also mean that victims of legitimate harassment face a gauntlet of challenges in getting material removed and identifying those responsible.

Costly litigation

It costs at least $10,000 in legal fees to issue a subpoena to an online company demanding the IP address that links a real person to an uploaded file, said Colette Vogele, co-founder of Without My Consent. It costs thousands more to file a lawsuit against the perpetrator.

Depending on the facts of the case and the state involved, the victim might be able to sue the person for defamation, publication of private facts, breach of confidence and other claims. Some acts can rise to the level of criminal offenses, including stalking and extortion.

There are risks in filing a lawsuit, however, as Franklin learned all too well. After she sued Google, she found her name and the details of her case splashed in the New York Post and New York Daily News, which dubbed the Duke and Columbia graduate a "brainy ex-model." Bloggers and commenters were far nastier.

Victim advocates like Vogele argue it should be much easier for victims to pursue remedies. Among other things, they believe more of the offenses should be considered crimes, it should be simpler to sue under a pseudonym, and courts should demand greater cooperation from websites.

"Courts can apply (the Communications Decency Act) in a less overzealous way," Vogele said. "We need to apply it in a way that doesn't protect speech that is harmful."

Protecting speech

On that question, however, many free speech advocates disagree. It should be difficult to unmask anonymous commenters and remove online material because those hurdles protect free speech, said Matt Zimmerman, senior staff attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

If sites were required to respond to harassment claims that hadn't been evaluated by a judge, many would simply remove material by rote. They wouldn't spend the time and money to determine whether someone was legitimately harassed or just meanly criticized, nor would they be particularly qualified to make that call.

Current law "protects channels of speech but still allows people to pursue claims against the bad actors," Zimmerman said. "Yes, it costs you something to pursue your claims, but that's the social deal we've made."

As it is, some courts have applied too lenient a standard in certain cases, he and others say. Notably, in 2009, a New York judge required Google to reveal the name of an anonymous blogger who had called model Liskula Cohen a "skank" and "ho."

Here the critical question becomes: Is labeling someone a "ho" equivalent to describing someone as a prostitute - a factual claim that could be libelous if false - or is it, in common use, a generic criticism?

Or to paraphrase Zimmerman: Would a reasonable reader of the blog go away thinking, "Wow, I didn't realize Cohen had sex for money," or would they assume it was a crudely stated personal opinion?

As much as the blogger's actions were distasteful, the courts shouldn't serve as a "tax-subsidized private investigator" for celebrities, politicians or anyone else who wants to out and silence their critics, he said.

'I try to forget'

On the other hand, it's difficult to feel the law has struck the entirely correct balance when you hear a story like J's. The California woman (who didn't want her name used) made one mistake a decade ago that continues to haunt her.

She agreed to make a sex tape with her boyfriend at the time, with the understanding that it would be kept private. Instead, years after they broke up, it appeared online, edited to look like the debut film of a porn actress. Her real name was used.

With Vogele's help, J sued the man, winning monetary damages along with a requirement that he assist in the ongoing removal of the video and pictures online.

But the legal effort took years and the images had spread so widely by then that they continue to resurface. Her husband regularly searches for new appearances and sends take-down requests to sites. J, who has been contacted by strangers who have viewed the video, continues to screen calls and avoid social media.

"I try to forget, I try to pretend it never happened, but I know it will always be there," she said. "It's a nightmare that will always keep following me."

For more information, or for more on legal options for victims of cyber harassment, go to withoutmyconsent.org.

original article here

NOTE: EOPC is not guilty of any above. We have signed legal releases for our stories. They can ONLY be removed by the written request of the person(s) who submitted them for posted. We are not liable for opinion statements. We are not personally involved in any of our exposes. All other articles are covered under the FAIR USE DOCTRINE. Great care has been taken to legally comply with information on this sort of website. Complaints about exposes must go to the person(s) who submitted them.

Friday, July 27, 2012


Image hosted by Photobucket.com

The power of the internet is helping friends, families and loved ones stay more connected than ever. There is a wealth of information and opportunity available on the internet. With this power and opportunity, however, also comes a variety of illicit activities that your child, your lover, or your spouse can become involved in.

Many people throughout the world use the internet to buy products, research information, connect with loved ones and find support for almost anything that ails them. However, there is a very real and serious problem affecting our families and that is the variety of activities that tear at the core of the family and loving and marital relationships.

A recent survey conducted by Focus On The Family and Zogby International found that 1 out of 5 American adults may have looked for sex on the Internet. 20.8% of respondents to a March 8-10 survey admitted they had visited a sexually-oriented Web site. The percentage of those viewing sex sites was higher among males and young adults. An Internet saturated with pornography is making it alarmingly easy to bring sexual temptation right into our homes. This is a growing problem for thousands of families that struggle with the effects of sexual compulsion and addiction, families like Deanne's.

Deanne's Story
Deanne, a wife and mother of five children, was dismayed about the time her husband was spending on their home computer. "He said he was working late at night sometimes not coming to bed until 3 or 4 in the morning. It was rare that we slept together much because he was awake and online." Deanne would sometimes wake up and go check on her husband and sometimes he would be working online and sometimes he was just "surfing".

What caused Deanne more anguish, though, was her husband's demeanor toward her and their children. "He was distant, short, and introspective. He wasn't the same guy." His sex drive was suffering and he became verbally abusive to her and to their children. "He wasn't this way before he started using the computer so much late at night."
"In my gut, I knew something was terribly wrong but I didn't know what it was. One day while on the internet, I was searching for a site I had previously visited and noticed in the history on our internet browser that a chat room at a pornographic site had been visited. I knew I had not been there."

Deanne confronted her husband about it and said he wouldn't do it again. But her husband's strange behavior continued and Deanne needed to know the truth.
"I downloaded a product called Spectorsoft and installed it in less than 5 minutes. What I recorded that night made me sick. Despair, humiliation and betrayal were what I was feeling that next morning when I looked to see where he had been. He wasn't working at all. He was being unfaithful to me."

Cyberaffairs are more common than people realize. It is not unusual for someone having a cyberaffair to spend at least four hours a day chatting online. To help partners determine if their loved one is cheating, here are the Seven Tell-Tale Signs of a Cyberaffair that you should look out for.

1. Change in sleep patterns - Chat rooms and meeting places for cybersex don't heat up until late at night, so the cheating partner tends to stay up later and later to be part of the action. Often, the partner suddenly begins coming to bed in the early-morning hours, may leap out of bed an hour or two earlier and bolt to the computer for a pre-work e-mail exchange with a new romantic partner may explain things.

2. A demand for privacy - If someone begins cheating on their spouse, whether on-line or in real life, they'll often go to great lengths to hide the truth from their wife or husband. With a cyberaffair, this attempt usually leads to the search for greater privacy and secrecy surrounding their computer usage. The computer may be moved from the visible den to a secluded corner of his locked study, the spouse may change the password, or cloak all his or her online activities in secrecy. If disturbed or interrupted when online, the cheating spouse may react with anger or defensiveness.

3. Household chores ignored - When any Internet user increases his time on-line, household chores often go undone or vehmently complained about. That's not automatically a sign of a cyberaffair, but in a marriage those dirty dishes, piles of laundry, and un-mowed lawns might indicate that someone else is competing for the suspected person's attention. In an intimate relationship, sharing chores often is regarded as an integral part of a basic commitment. So when a spouse begins to invest more time and energy on-line and fails to keep up his or her end of the household bargain, it could signal a lesser commitment to the relationship itself - because another relationship has come between your marriage.

4. Evidence of lying - The cheating spouse may hide credit-card bills for on-line services, telephone/cell bills (often using a work cellphone) to calls made to a cyberlover, and lie (often "WORK" or things billed to work accounts) about the reason for such extensive net use. Most spouses lie to protect their on-line habit, but those engaging in a cyberaffair have a higher stake in concealing the truth, which often triggers bigger and bolder lies - including telling you they will quit, get help, counseling, find religion. (sometimes they do for months or years at a time but without real & ongoing (years of) PSYCHIATRIC help - its rare this sticks.)

5. Personality changes - A spouse is often surprised and confused to see how much their partner's moods and behaviors changed since the Internet engulfed them. A once warm and sensitive wife becomes cold and withdrawn. A formerly jovial husband turns quiet and serious. If questioned about these changes in connection with their Internet habit, the spouse engaging in a cyberaffair responds with heated denials, blaming, and rationalization. Often times, the blame is shifted to the spouse. For a partner once willing to communicate about contentious matters, this could be a smokescreen for a cyberaffair.

6. Loss of interest in sex - Some cyberaffairs evolve into phone sex or an actual rendezvous, but cybersex alone often includes mutual masturbation from the confines of each person's computer room. When a spouse suddenly shows a lesser interest in sex, it may be an indicator that he or she has found another sexual outlet. If sexual relations continue in the relationship at all, the cheating partner may be less enthusiastic, energetic, and responsive to you and your lovemaking or beg for sexual practices that you are not comfortable with. Also be aware of them asking you to do certain things during sex that you haven't done before or are uncomfortable with.

7. Declining investment in your relationship - Those engaged in a cyberaffair no longer want to participate in the marital relationship - even when their busy Internet schedule allows. They shun those familiar rituals like a shared bath, talking over the dishes after dinner, or renting a video on Saturday night. They don't get as excited about taking vacations together and they avoid talk about long-range plans in the family or relationship. They seem to plan more "out of town, work related trips." Often, they are having their fun with someone else, and their thoughts of the future revolve around fantasies of running off or hooking up with their cyberpartner - not building intimacy with a Spouse.

Thursday, July 26, 2012

Charged with 'Sextortion'

(U.S.A.) A Maine man is facing charges of trying to extort a New Hampshire resident into providing him with sexually explicit photos and videos.

The complaint accuses 21-year-old John Bryan Villegas of Kittery of sending email threats to publish on the Internet and distribute to the victim's neighbors, work and acquaintances other sexually explicit photos of the victim that he obtained from a computer without authorization.

Villegas made his initial court appearance in New Hampshire on Wednesday on charges of engaging in computer intrusion involving extortion and making interstate threats.

It's unclear if Villegas is being represented by an attorney. He could not be reached for comment.

Wednesday, July 25, 2012


This excerpt from an interview with Martha Stout was so good we are reposting it here. Many of these rules can be applied to relationships with cyberpaths, online bullies or predators.

In our opinion, Cyberpaths are at their cores Destructive Narcissists & Sociopaths

Read & heed! - EOPC

Twelve Rules
by Martha Stout

1 - The first rule involves the bitter pill of accepting that some people literally have no conscience, and that these people do not often look like Charles Manson or a Ferengi bartender.
They look like us.
2 - In a contest between your instincts and what is implied by the role a person has taken on -- educator, doctor, leader, animal-lover, humanitarian, loving parent, activist, religious person -- go with your instincts.

Whether you want to be or not, you are a constant observer of human behavior, and your unfiltered impressions, though alarming and seemingly outlandish, may well help you out if you will let them. Your best self understands, without being told, that impressive and moral-sounding labels do not bestow conscience on anyone who did not have it to begin with.

3 - When considering a new relationship of any kind, practice the Rule of Threes regarding the claims and promises a person makes, and the responsibilities he or she has.

Make the Rule of Threes your personal policy. One lie, one broken promise, or a single neglected responsibility may be a misunderstanding instead. Two may involve a serious mistake. But three lies says you're dealing with a liar, and deceit is the lynchpin of conscienceless behavior.

Cut your losses and get out as soon as you can. Leaving, though it may be hard, will be easier now than later, and less costly.

Do not give your money, your work, your secrets, or your affection to a three-timer. Your valuable gifts will be wasted.

4 - Question authority.
Once again -- trust your own instincts and anxieties, especially those concerning people who claim that dominating others, violence, war, or some other violation of your conscience is the grand solution to some problem. Do this even when, or especially when, everyone around you has completely stopped questioning authority.

Recite to yourself what Stanley Milgram taught us about obedience. 'At least six out of ten people will blindly obey a present, official-looking authority to the bitter end.' The good news is that having social support makes people somewhat more likely to challenge authority.

Encourage those around you to question, too.

5 - Suspect flattery.
Compliments are lovely, especially when they are sincere. In contrast, flattery is extreme, and appeals to our egos in unrealistic ways. It is the material of counterfeit charm, and nearly always involves an intent to manipulate. Manipulation through flattery is sometimes innocuous and sometimes sinister. (i.e. Love Bombing done by Cyberpaths)

This "flattery rule" applies on an individual basis, and also at the level of groups and even whole nations. Throughout all of human history and to the present, the call to war has included the flattering claim that one's own forces are about to accomplish a victory that will change the world for the better, a triumph that is morally laudable, justified by its humane outcome, unique in human endeavor, righteous, and worthy of enormous gratitude. Since we began to record the human story, all of our major wars have been framed in this way, on all sides of the conflict, and in all languages the adjective most often applied to the word war is the word holy. An argument can easily be made that humanity will have peace when nations of people are at last able to see through this masterful flattery.

6 - If necessary, redefine your concept of respect.
Too often, we mistake fear for respect, and the more fearful we are of someone, the more we view him or her as deserving of our respect.

I have a spotted Bengal cat who was named Muscle Man by my daughter when she was a toddler, because even as a kitten he looked like a professional wrestler. Grown now, he is much larger than most other domestic cats. His formidable claws resemble those of his Asian leopard-cat ancestors, but by temperament, he is gentle and peace-loving. My neighbor has a little calico who visits. Evidently the calico's predatory charisma is huge, and she is brilliant at directing the evil eye at other cats. Whenever she is within fifty feet, Muscle Man, all fifteen pounds of him to her seven, cringes and crouches in fear and feline deference.

Muscle Man is a splendid cat. He is warm and loving, and he is close to my heart. Nonetheless, I would like to believe that some of his reactions are more primitive than mine.

I hope I do not mistake fear for respect, because to do so would be to ensure my own victimization. Let us use our big human brains to overpower our animal tendency to bow to predators, so we can disentangle the reflexive confusion of anxiety and awe. In a perfect world, human respect would be an automatic reaction only to those who are strong, kind, and morally courageous. The person who profits from frightening you is not likely to be any of these.

The resolve to keep respect separate from fear is even more crucial for groups and nations. The politician, small or lofty, who menaces the people with frequent reminders of the possibility of crime, violence, or terrorism, and who then uses their magnified fear to gain allegiance is more likely to be a successful con artist than a legitimate leader. This too has been true throughout human history. (This applies to Cyberpaths who apply the 'if you do...., then I will...." to keep you silent about the truth about them. Or who threaten to tell your friends, coworkers or hurt your family & friends. This includes those who defame and libel your reputation to people who don't even know you and rewrite history in their favor!)

7 - Do not join the game.
Intrigue is a sociopath's tool.
Resist the temptation to compete with a seductive sociopath, to outsmart him, psychoanalyze, or even banter with him.

In addition to reducing yourself to his level, you would be distracting yourself from what is really important, which is to protect yourself.

8 - The best way to protect yourself from a sociopath is to avoid him, to refuse any kind of contact or communication.

The only truly effective method for dealing with a sociopath you have identified is to disallow him or her from your life altogether. Sociopaths live completely outside of the social contract, and therefore to include them in relationships or other social arrangements is perilous. Begin this exclusion of them in the context of your own relationships and social life.

You will not hurt anyone's feelings. Strange as it seems, and though they may try to pretend otherwise, sociopaths do not have any such feelings to hurt.

You may never be able to make your family and friends understand why you are avoiding a particular individual. Sociopathy is surprisingly difficult to see, and harder to explain. Avoid him/ her anyway.

If total avoidance is impossible, make plans to come as close as you can to the goal of total avoidance.

9 - Question your tendency to pity too easily.
Respect should be reserved for the kind and the morally courageous. Pity is another socially valuable response, and should be reserved for innocent people who are in genuine pain or who have fallen on misfortune. If, instead, you find yourself often pitying someone who consistently hurts you or other people, and who actively campaigns for your sympathy & compassion, the chances are close to one hundred percent that you are dealing with a sociopath.

Related to this-- I recommend that you severely challenge your need to be polite in absolutely all situations. For normal adults in our culture, being what we think of as "civilized" is like a reflex, and often we find ourselves being automatically decorous even when someone has enraged us, repeatedly lied to us, or figuratively stabbed us in the back. Sociopaths take huge advantage of this automatic courtesy in exploitive situations.

Do not be afraid to be unsmiling and calmly to the point.

10 - Do not try to redeem the unredeemable.
Second (third, fourth, and fifth) chances are for people who possess conscience. If you are dealing with a person who has no conscience, know how to swallow hard and cut your losses.

At some point, most of us need to learn the important if disappointing life lesson that, no matter how good our intentions, we cannot control the behavior -- let alone the character structures -- of other people. Learn this fact of human life, and avoid the irony of getting caught up in the same ambition he has-- to control.

If you do not desire control, but instead want to help people, then help only those who truly want to be helped. I think you will find this does not include the person who has no conscience.
The sociopath's behavior is not your fault, not in any way whatsoever. It is also not your mission. Your mission is your own life.

11 - Never agree, out of pity or for any other reason, to help a sociopath conceal his or her true character.

"Please don't tell," often spoken tearfully and with great gnashing of teeth, is the trademark plea of thieves, abusers -- and sociopaths. Do not listen to this siren-song. Other people deserve to be warned more than sociopaths deserve to have you keep their secrets. (i.e. - EXPOSURE WORKS!)

If someone without conscience insists that you "owe" him or her, recall what you are about to read here -- that "You owe me" has been the standard line of sociopaths for thousands of years, quite literally, and is still so. It is what Rasputin told the Empress of Russia. It is what Hannah's father implied to her, after her eye-opening conversation with him at the prison.
We tend to experience "You owe me" as a compelling claim, but it is simply not true. Do not listen.

Also, ignore the one that goes, "You are just like me." You are not.

12 - Defend your psyche.
Do not allow someone without conscience, or even a string of such people, to convince you that humanity is a failure. Most human beings do possess conscience. Most human beings are able to love.

Tuesday, July 24, 2012

Cyberpath, Predator: Narcissist, Psychopath

Image hosted by Photobucket.com

So, at bottom, the nature of the narcissist is the nature of a predator who preys on his own kind. The importance of that fact cannot be overstated. The brain of a predator just does not relate to the living soul of its prey. If you don't believe this, just watch PBS. Watch the behavior, and look into the eyes, of predatory animals while they're making a kill. There's nothing there. They are like machines at that moment. They must be, or they couldn't do it.

In other words, Nature has equipped them with hard-wired circuitry in the brain that takes over the moment prey is sighted when they are hungry. It suppresses what we could observe in that animal only a minute earlier while it was playing with its siblings or a waving leaf on a twig, tenderly nuzzling its offspring or mate. Perhaps it was even grieving over the death of a member of the pack. But that's all gone the moment it sights prey while hungry. Then suddenly it's a killing machine. It likes killing. Nature has endowed it with a taste for killing as necessary equipment for its survival. It even considers killing fun. Which is why we sometimes see in nature killing made sport: Chimpanzees (who don't eat meat) will gang-up on and attack a monkey, cruelly tearing it to pieces and having a blast over its heart-rending cries. Killer whales sometimes play with baby seals like a cat plays with a mouse. Wolves sometimes bring down and eviscerate prey they feed on the guts of till it dies and then walk away. Sorry, that's just the truth.

Humans are animals too and have that same predatory mode. Nature endowed us with it as hunters. It's in everyone. But in narcissists and sociopaths something has gone haywire. They go into this mode against their own kind. And they are permanently in this mode against all their own kind. Why? Because they don't view themselves as of our kind. They are of a superior kind. They think we are here to feed them, just as we think cattle are here to feed us. Correction: we do (or should) treat cattle humanely. We don't relate to them as objects like narcissists relate to us = like we relate to bugs or plants.

Compared to us, narcissists are gods. Alien beings. They can't help it. They are not to blame for feeling this way. Today the prognosis is poor. There is little sign of any real success in treating these people. Those who commit prosecutable offenses are repeat offenders — such as pedophile priests, sexual predators, and serial killers. They get this way as children and demonstrate it by torturing animals or murdering other children on a whim. Though they can't control their temptations, they CAN control their conduct. And this is what competent psychiatric care can really help them with. It can show them better ways to deal with their problems, making them resistant to temptation. In fact, I think it could build in some TRUE self-esteem to counterbalance their self hatred. (Lifelong treatment would be necessary to maintain it though.) And a lion tamer can walk into the lions' den. But they are still wild animals, so he can never be sure they won't give in to the temptation to attack the prey tantalizing them beyond their power to resist. We don't morally condemn those lions for being lions.

And the only thing more stupid and useless than morally condemning narcissists for being narcissists is trusting them. Don't tempt them. Just because a pedophile priest has behaved for the last five years doesn't mean he won't finally lose it and eat another altar boy. Indeed, it's cruel to tempt him daily thus! You wouldn't wave a bottle of whiskey in front of an alcoholic, would you? I don't see what's so difficult to understand about this. Talk therapy and/or punishment isn't the answer with PREDATORS.

We must do whatever it takes to minimize or eliminate their access to vulnerable prey as targets of opportunity. Period. For ever. Indeed, these people will thank us for it. Consider how many of them deliberately get themselves caught just to stop themselves.

Let's get a clue already and stop dangling bait before their eyes. There are many ways to do this: prison isn't the only one. For example, don't let him teach school or be a police officer. Don't give him power over his fellow employees. Don't elect him to be President for Life. Don't let him live off his parents till they die. Don't follow him on a purge to cleanse himself in the Holy Land. And if he steps over the line whack him, so that he thinks twice before doing it again.

And, especially, let's stop passing this curse from generation to generation by subjecting children to narcissistic parents. It takes the consent of the non-narcissistic parent for that to happen. So, just because your mother or father put up with it doesn't mean you should. If we began protecting the next generation today, this accursed cause of a vast amount of both the told and untold human suffering in this world would be gone in 50 years.

by Kathy Krajco

Monday, July 23, 2012

You Too Could Be Slimed - Fighting Internet Insults

Former NFL exec Matthew Couloute Jr. was anonymously branded a devious Don Juan on the Web site LiarsCheatersRUs.com. He is suing two exes he says are responsible for the cybersmear, roller-derby skater “Malibu” Stacey Blitsch and Amanda Ryncarz.

Blitsch has denied posting, but Ryncarz says her screeds are protected free speech.

“Our relationship didn’t last long, as I figured him out pretty quickly, but for others, BE FOREWARNED, HE’S SCUM! RUN FAR AWAY!” one post on the site reads.

Here, Couloute, a former Connecticut prosecutor, speaks out at length for the first time on the cybertrashing -- and how it could happen to you.

Both of my exes were youthful indiscretions. Everyone has that person they dated in their life where you say, “Oh, that’s a mistake.” I have a child with my mistake.

Amanda’s my other mistake. I dated her on and off since 2008, and now she’s shown up and has been in contact with Stacey.

As we date people through our single lives, we get to know them and their true colors. That is what happened along the way with both Stacey and Amanda. I didn’t marry either because they weren’t the right fit for me. I had a son with Stacey, and I love him more than anything.

But everything they said is false.

And that’s why I took the approach I did with the federal lawsuit. I’m seeking unspecified damages, but this is not about money. This is about removing those posts.

Stacey is using this as a tool in order to get custody of our son. We broke up in 2006 and had joint custody until 2008, when a judge deemed me the more fit parent.

Last year, I filed a motion to relocate him to Connecticut, where I moved after working in Florida -- a requirement by law in the state -- and it’s become a contentious battle to relocate him. That’s what her posts are really about.

Look, I’m not here to badmouth Stacey, but read what she’s posted online and what she wants to do with her career and her life. The way she portrays herself online, scantily clad in bikinis, it’s clear that the most important thing for her is not my son.

The posts came up when I was purchasing a house with my wife. Clients ask me about what’s going on. It’s the first thing that comes up when you Google my name.

And I have to answer those questions.

Even my mom was upset with me -- for lowering myself to deal with their online bashing.

The point is you should not be able to anonymously defame people on a Web site set up in Panama -- outside the laws of the United States -- and get away with it. I’ve had a successful career my whole life, am good at what I do, and have absolutely no recourse against this company. And neither do you. I can sign on to the site and post your name and write anything I want about you.

So my voice is the only thing I have, and that’s why I’m speaking out.

I fought too hard in my life and career and to be a good man to sit back and be maliciously lied about on the Internet and media.

Women should never be afraid to speak out. But no one should be able to defame an ex-flame because they’re not happy with the way the relationship ended.

WITH THANKS TO LoveFraud.com

original article found here


Sunday, July 22, 2012

Bi-Polars and Internet Relationships

What Makes Internet Relationships So Desirable?

by Paula (about.com)

People are drawn to cyber-romances for the same reasons they are drawn to face-to-face romances - either they don't have a "real-life" love relationship, or there is something missing in their "real-life" love relationship. On the internet, they may indeed find what they are missing. Or, because of the partial anonymity of cyberspace - which allows lots of room for fantasy and imagination - they may only THINK they have found what they are missing.

The "exotic" and/or "magical" quality of a cyber-romances might be one factor that attracts some people. The lover's presence enters your home (or office) without the person physically being there, which feels very magical. People also enjoy the secrecy that an internet romance provides.

An internet romance can be carried out from home or office without the knowledge of others around us.

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." 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."

The Problems
Online relationships can happen incredibly fast.

When involved online with someone, you don't experience the negative body language or warning signals that may occur when you meet face to face.

You are taking the other person's word on trust -
while he or she may be romancing four or five others with the same lines that you find appealing.

You may be giving a false impression of yourself due to disinhibition.

What Makes Bipolar People So Vulnerable?
Hypersexuality - hypersexuality is a real problem for the manic bipolar. Because it feels very good, and very powerful, it can be a driving force that propels all thought, all feeling, and all motive. Hypersexuality often causes us to engage in flirtatious, seductive behavior that we would never otherwise consider. Hypersexuality often causes us to abandon real relationships, and it can lead us into dangerous online (and offline) situations. Worst of all, it often causes irreparable damage to integrity, dignity, and reputation.

Perceptual problems - the bipolar often wrongly interprets subtle nuances in voice and body language even when having a physical conversation. In the surreal, artificial environment of the internet, those nuances are further limited by our inability to express them electronically. It's very easy for you - and the person with whom you are communicating - to misinterpret intentions and motives.

Poor impulse control - the desire to live in the moment (without consideration of future consequences) can be real a problem, especially during periods of mania and depression.

Poor self-esteem - bipolars often have a desperate need for attention, friendship, and validation from other human beings. These feelings make us very, very vulnerable to internet stalking, manipulation, and deceit.

Grandiosity - when afflicted with grandiosity, we think we have absolute clarity and can do no wrong. All of our decisions - even the horrifically bad ones - "feel right," and they all make perfect sense.

(be aware - many of these traits apply to psychopaths and narcissists also. Only a qualified mental health professional would be able to diagnose someone as Bi-Polar)

Part 2: Warning Signals and Self-Protection

Now suppose you have met someone via the internet who appeals to you. There are several precautions you can take and a number of warning signals to watch for - signals that can tell you the person on the other end of the chat, forum or email relationship is not what he or she appears to be.

How do you protect yourself?
Be aware of the red flags listed below.

Run your relationship past an unafflicted family member or friend for a second opinion. Listen to his or her responses. Tell your online partner up front that you will be doing this. If the online person insists that you keep the relationship a secret, it's a sure bet that there are troubled waters ahead.

If at any time your instinct tells you that something is wrong; even if you know or "think" you know that person... it probably is. Run, do not walk, to the nearest exit.

Internet Relationships: Red Flags
Some warning signs that you need to watch for in ALL romantic involvements, and especially on the internet with someone you have never really met:

Pay attention to displays of anger, intense frustration or attempts to pressure or control you.

Acting in a passive-aggressive manner, making demeaning or disrespectful comments or any physically inappropriate behavior are all red flags.

Abusive or controlling behavior: Give and take, tempered by some compromise here and there, indicates that a relationship is healthy. However, if one of the persons involved wants everything on his/her terms, then serious problems can arise. Furthermore, there are those who will become verbally, emotionally, or physically abusive if they do not get their way.

Argumentative and irritating behavior: Some people are just contrary. They will question much of what you say to them, put their own twist on it, or challenge your every thought. Basically, they are full of themselves and feel that their opinion is the only one that counts.

Sexual behavior: If your online friend is pressuring you for cybersex, you just might ask yourself the question, "how many others have there been and how many more will there be?"

Inconsistent behavior: Watch for inconsistencies in information about age, interests, appearance, marital status, job, etc. Keep notes!

Avoidant behavior: Consistent failure to provide direct answers to direct questions.

No contact numbers: If you've progressed to telephone contact, and any of the following situations sound familiar, be prepared to further investigate the possibility of a spouse, live-in, or other situation you may not be aware of:
  • You have to page them for them to call you back.
  • They use a separate line. If so, try calling their main line at random times.
  • You can only call during certain periods of time (if this applies to you, try calling at different time periods to see who answers the phone).
  • They will only call you, therefore not allowing you to call them.

Protecting Yourself Online

You may enjoy flirting online with that 25-year-old blonde female hottie with the psych degree ... but imagine how surprised you would be to discover that the "young lady" you've been flirting with online, is really a balding middle-aged male factory worker with a beer belly? The sad fact is, the person that you are involved with could be lying to you.
Deception via internet is incredibly easy.

An exchange of pictures via email means nothing. Go slowly. Meet regularly in the same chat room with others around and see how your love interest treats those others - and how the others interact with him or her.

It's important to remember that online we never really know who we're talking to or what they're real motives are. Until you can internalize that fact, the internet is a dangerous place for you to be spending time.

Safety on the Net
When giving out your geographical location, limit yourself to region only, rather than the exact name of the town, province or neighborhood.

NEVER, EVER give out your work or home phone number to unfamiliar people! Establish a LONG, LONG record of trust before agreeing to do this.

If you must talk on the phone, get the telephone number to a pay telephone near you, and arrange a time when you can be at that phone. Make sure the pay phone you select is able to receive incoming calls. Be Safe!!

If you're going to put your picture on the internet, you have NO reason to believe it's going to stay where you put it. In fact, anybody can right click on an image and take it from a web site. That person that you send it to just might decide to pass it on to friends, and who would know?
Remember, once you put it up, you have NO idea where it's going.

Don't brag. You're sending an open invitation to those who would defraud you, if you tell them you own a house or two, a few cars, etc. Limit how much information you give out!

When you settle on a single relationship, make sure you set up a secondary email account to be used just for this relationship. You can quickly shut it down should things seem not right.

Now suppose the person you have met has passed all the tests and you've decided to take the next step - a face-to-face meeting.

Don't assume that because the object of your affections has not tripped any warning lights during your online relationship, it is perfectly safe to meet.
Keep in mind that when chemistry is the strongest, you are the most vulnerable.

Before you dismiss an online relationship as "harmless," remember that the lack of accountability, the ease of deception, and the anonymity provided by the keyboard all make the online relationship a potential source of instability and even danger.

If you do decide to meet someone offline:

Always meet in a public place! Don't even agree that the parking lot is a good idea - you have NO PROTECTION from anything in a parking lot, and no, your car is NOT SAFE! You can be easily overpowered, you don't know if other cars in the parking lot are safe, and nobody from within another car is likely to see you.

Always tell a friend or relative where you will be and write that information down!

Never allow yourself to be picked up for the first meeting. If you don't own transportation, get a ride from a friend, take a cab, or bus. Do not become a statistic! It is never safe to leave your home with a total stranger or to give a total stranger your address - and no matter how well you think you know someone you met online, at this point he or she IS a total stranger.

Women - never leave your purse unattended, even if the person you are meeting offers to watch it for you. Contained within your purse or whatever you carry is not only the obvious personal information, but your car and house keys. You may not notice they're gone in time.

Never leave your drink on the table or bar! If you have to go to the bathroom, or leave for whatever reason, take your drink with you. If that is not possible, dump it out! Order a fresh one when you return. Rohypnol - commonly known as the date rape drug - is not the only drug you need to be concerned about.

If possible, get a cellular phone. Even if everything goes great, what if the unthinkable were to happen and you were followed home? Lock the car, drive to a busy lighted area, and don't open your car door for ANY reason unless you see the red lights of a police car in your rear view mirror ... and even then, only open that window about an inch. You are safe inside your car if you restrict access. The cell phone is your friend - use it.

Be very aware of your surroundings! Memorize important landmarks such as where the telephone is, park in a well-lit area, and ask someone to walk you to your car in the event the meeting does not go as well as you had hoped. You only have one life, protect it!

Cyberstalking is defined as "the use of the Internet, e-mail or other electronic communications device, including IM services, to stalk or harass a person."

Cyberstalkers usually target their victims through chat rooms, message boards, discussion forums and e-mail. Cyberstalking takes many forms such as: threatening or obscene e-mail; spamming (in which a stalker sends a victim a multitude of junk e-mail); live chat harassment or flaming (online verbal abuse); leaving improper messages on message boards or in guest books; sending electronic viruses; sending unsolicited e-mail; and electronic identity theft.

Online stalking can be a terrifying experience for victims, placing them at risk for psychological trauma and possible physical harm. Cyberstalking shares important characteristics with offline stalking. Many stalkers - online or off - are motivated by a desire to exert control over their victims and engage in similar types of behavior to accomplish this end. In many documented cyberstalking cases, the cyberstalker and the victim had a prior relationship, and the cyberstalking began when the victim attempted to break off the relationship.

Many cyberstalking situations do evolve into off-line stalking, and a victim may experience abusive and excessive phone calls, vandalism, threatening or obscene mail, trespassing, and physical assault.

Experts suggest that in cases where the offender is known, victims should send the stalker a clear written warning. Specifically, victims should communicate that the contact is unwanted, and ask the perpetrator to cease sending communications of any kind. Then, no matter the response, victims should under no circumstances ever communicate with the stalker again.

As soon as you suspect you are experiencing online harassment or cyberstalking, start collecting all evidence and document all contact made by the stalker. Save all e-mail, postings, or other communications in both electronic and hard-copy form. Record the dates and times of any contact with the stalker. If the harassment continues, you may wish to file a complaint with the stalker's Internet service provider, as well as with you own service provider.

Finally, under no circumstances should victims agree to meet with the perpetrator face to face to "work it out," or "talk." No contact should ever be made with the stalker. Meeting a stalker in person can be very dangerous.

from - about.com

Saturday, July 21, 2012

Arizona, U.S., Outlaws CyberStalking

(U.S.A.) Arizona has broadened its laws on stalking and harassment, joining 24 other states with similar legislation.

House Bill 2549 will prevent anyone from terrifying, intimidating, threatening or harassing an individual through electronic communication. The previous law, crafted in the 1970s, protected individuals from these acts only via telephone.

The new law, effective Aug. 2, also makes it illegal to use an electronic, digital or Global Positioning System device to monitor an individual for 12 hours or more on two or more occasions.

"We had a loophole in the law that had developed because technology had outpaced the law," said Republican state Rep. Ted Vogt of Tucson, who sponsored the bill. "We communicate in very different ways in 2012 than we did in the early 1970s."

According to the law, an electronic communication is considered a "wire line, cable, wireless or cellular telephone call, a text message, an instant message or electronic mail."

"Every legislature moving forward is going to have to deal with the impact of technology," said Republican state Rep. Vic Williams of Tucson, a co-sponsor. "Many of the issues that will come up, we don't even realize what they will be."

Besides Arizona, 24 states have cyberstalking and cyberharassment laws, 10 states have only cyberstalking laws and 13 have only cyberharassment laws, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Kentucky and Nebraska don't have laws in either category.

The new law does not apply to Facebook or other social networking sites or blogs. The communication must be considered unwanted or unsolicited and be directed to a specific individual.

Williams said people usually are communicating with more than one other person on these sites, which is allowed.

"People have the right to make comments about people," he said. "Those things shouldn't be inhibited or blocked."

Kim MacEachern, staff lawyer for the Arizona Prosecuting Attorneys' Advisory Council, said the law will help prosecutors win cases they previously lost.

In the past, harassment cases involved victims receiving voice mails constantly. Now, it's text messages, she said.

"It clarifies what it means to harass someone using an electronic communication," MacEachern said. "I think, in the end, the bill turned out to be pretty specific at what it was getting at."

Harassment is classified as a Class 1 misdemeanor, which carries a penalty of up to six months in jail, three years on probation and a $2,500 fine.

Stalking can be classified as a Class 3 or Class 5 felony. Those convicted are eligible for probation but could get six months to eight years in jail.

The final version of the law says it does not apply to constitutionally protected speech.

Seth Apfel, a former board member for the American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona, said wording in the law is open to too much interpretation.

He said he is concerned prosecutors will take advantage to prove an intent to harass even if there wasn't.

"When you have language that allows for potential abuse, there might be someone in the government that will abuse it," Apfel said. "I'd rather not present that opportunity and have language that is very narrowly written."

original article found here