Partly Response-ish

Sep 30, 2006 21:21

I admit that I haven't read all of the posts from Micheka aka Laura aka Purple Popple aka Partly Bouncy, but I've read enough to know that people are going to have questions.

But more than that, it seems from Michela's account that various users of the Sugarquill and Gryffindor Tower forums/sites have been hearing lies about me for years. There's ( Read more... )

fandom

Leave a comment

Part II anonymous October 1 2006, 19:56:41 UTC
I am going to say this now. I broke some major fannish ethics while gathering this information, and if it were discovered I could very well lose my job. Please know, however, that I have seen the horrors of people abusing their power and I only pulled information relevant to these exposes. I won’t comment on what these things mean because I think that people can draw their own conclusions and take the information as it is.

Some things I discovered:

Msscribe sued a trucking company entitled J & P trucking using personal injury attorney Fred Freibott in April of 2002. The suit alleged that the injury’s included head injury, a broken rib, a broken arm, and a dislocated shoulder. The case settled five months later.

From that April 2002 until 2003, msscribe’s tax records indicate that she and her husband employed someone who has a very similar last name to that belonging to the sockpuppet ‘Clarabella’. The title of the position they gave her was ‘home health aid.’ That person also claimed their income on their own tax return. Using the real name on the tax record, I was able to access their college information as well as other information regarding them including the fact that they had been employed at a nursing home for two years prior. The employee of msscribe’s last employment record is as a nurse’s aid in Florida in 2004, the prior record being a child care worker in late 2003.

Msscribe was hospitalized at least five times in that three-year period, twice for surgery according to her application for disability status in 2003. (I would question why someone who is married to a lawyer needs disability, but that might be me being judgemental.) When I gave her real name to the records department at Christiana Hospital in Delaware, this was confirmed.

The alleged stalker: This is a tricky one. The bad penny people can’t be blamed too much for this, but it turns out that there is a record, although it isn’t a police report, rather an incident report, and at the time msscribe appeared to still be using her maiden name and not her married one. In addition, the name ‘Louis’ turned out not to be a legal name, but a nickname. At first attempt to uncover the report, I was told they could find it, but upon inquiring about an incident record, I was able to retrieve more information. It was reported as telephone harassment and not internet harassment, and the charges were dropped. It appears that she lied about any death threats and that even though she may have been harassed, she dropped the ball when it came down to pursuing it, perhaps because she didn’t have a clear case. I’ve dealt with numerous police departments regarding Internet cases and they are pretty inept at handling these things. I toyed with posting the report, but most of the information would be blacked out and I don’t think it would add all that much weight.

In any case, her alleged stalker has no prior criminal history and none since, with the exception of one citation for public consumption of alcohol in 2005.

By accessing tax records from a payment made to Cassandra Claire to her real name, I can confirm that there is a police report regarding her harassment. It doesn’t appear to have been followed up on, however, and I have to say that as people who were harassed they are certainly more than willing to ‘drop the ball’, but this report also does exist.

I am continuing to plow through these reports, but I’ll be happy to take requests. I don’t want to flood the system with inquiries however (things like Lexis and other national databases require logins and often money) but I will be happy to try to clarify things.

I said before, I’m not a writer so this won’t be anything but quick and dirty, but since we’re on a truth seeking mission I think someone who is effectively outside of the situation and who has real access to things most people don’t should be involved.

I'm thinking of setting up a journal and post ing what I find, although please know that it sometimes takes a few days to access information.

Reply

Re: Part II anonymous October 1 2006, 20:36:44 UTC
*cough* BULLSHIT!! *cough*

Reply

Re: Part II anonymous October 1 2006, 20:45:13 UTC
I'm sure I'm not the only one with access to these records. If someone else has law enforcement access, I wouldn't be opposed to them do their own independent searches.

Reply

Re: Part II hedwig_snowy October 2 2006, 02:12:25 UTC
I don't know that the truth is exactly what the author's want. Either way, I'm not sure that the means justify the ends. While it may place doubt on some of their 'research', searching criminal and private records to settle a dispute within a fandom can tend to lend credence to their point of going to any means neccessary to obtain an objective. I was suggesting using personal recollection and documented evidence, but this may be stretching it a bit. Who's to say that someone might not use the same techniques and then another uses it and pretty soon...well, you get my point. If there is a law infraction in any of this 'history', I would suggest letting law enforcement and the courts decide rather than individual searches of private records.

Just for the record, I don't see what they gain from any of this other than some smug satisfaction that in one small way or the other they could actually be right about something, for the first time in their miserable, demented lives. They certainly aren't doing it to promote the 'fandom' in any way, shape, or form despite their protestations to how it will 'cleanse' it. It's just some vindictive individuals who somehow see this as a way to become 'famous'. Good luck with that.

Reply

Re: Part II anonymous October 2 2006, 14:43:34 UTC
They gain attention. Michaela, especially, is someone who's been in fandom for years, writing fic no one reads, creating "fandom histories" no one cares about, designing fake wikis no one can edit but her and then being enraged when no one takes them seriously, and putting herself forward as a "fandom academic" even though, unfortunately, she's borderline illiterate and can't keep her personal biases out of what should be neutral accounts. She's discovered that by slamming Heidi and Cassie, she can assure herself of a near-endless flow of attention. She's a parasite sucking off their fame, or infamy, or whatever you want to call it. Pity she misjudged her audience this time. Fandom Wank likes to be able to pretend to itself that what they're wanking about actually happened; when her account didn't even let them do that, they turned on her. I doubt anyone will pay the slightest attention to her reposted and "improved" account; she's shot her credibility, such as it was, in the foot. Good riddance.

Reply

Re: Part II hedwig_snowy October 3 2006, 00:54:40 UTC
Well, that's unfortunate that anyone would make that amount of effort over spite.

She has a post on her journal that she has taken down her account of events.

My concern was that if people start posting personal info, it could get real nasty, real fast. Much worse than it is now, especially if someone has a job where that access compromises someone's privacy and/or security. And, that there were better ways to handle these things. Not that sanity would work at this point.

Reply

Re: Part II anonymous October 2 2006, 23:18:17 UTC
Msscribe was hospitalized at least five times in that three-year period, twice for surgery according to her application for disability status in 2003. (I would question why someone who is married to a lawyer needs disability, but that might be me being judgemental.) When I gave her real name to the records department at Christiana Hospital in Delaware, this was confirmed.

So...the hospital records department, in violation of federal law (HIPPA) exposed itself to 1) a huge ass fine (per violation), 2) a lawsuit by msscribe, 3) a lawsuit by the United States Government, 4) loss of its accreditation, 5) etc., because it felt like being really nice and "confirming" the information you listed?

Newsflash: Not everyone on the internet is an idiot who will believe anything they read. Some of us have functioning brain cells. The likelihood that a hospital would expose itself to all of the above and THEN some just to give you information is pretty much NIL.

I'm going to give you a hint. HIPPA violations are taken very seriously by the government and by the medical community. Confirmation that X person was/is/will be a patient without the expressed consent of the patient, the patient's medical power of attorney, or a court of law is strictly prohibited.

Even if its possible someone in the hospital record's department was stupid enough to fall for whatever scheme you laid out in order to extract this information, the very fact that you would have had to have had a "scheme" makes you a "not credible person".

Take your bullshit to another fandom. We aren't buying.

Reply

Re: Part II heidi8 October 3 2006, 15:31:15 UTC
If you wish to make your own journal and risk running afoul of LiveJournal's ToU's bar on uploading or posting "...any Content that is invasive to another's privacy (up to, but not excluding any address, email, phone number, or any other contact information without the written consent of the owner of such information)..." then do it, but I am not going to unscreen the post you* made after this one, because I am not interested in pushing the line on this section of LiveJournal's ToU when it's easy enough for you to take the risk yourself. If you want to risk violating HIPPA and other laws and regulations, please do it in your own space.

*At least, I assume it's you, but since I didn't get the IP on the first post, I can't be 100% sure of that.

Reply

Re: Part II heidi8 October 3 2006, 16:47:15 UTC
...and I just googled the IP and it's listed on Wikipedia as a blocked IP, because [t]his IP address has been blocked because it is believed to be an open proxy or zombie computer. To prevent abuse, editing from these proxies is currently prohibited.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up