STILL THINK ONLINE DATING IS OK? READ THIS!

Warning sounded over 'flirting robots'

Those entering online dating forums risk having more than their hearts stolen.

A program that can mimic online flirtation and then extract personal information from its unsuspecting conversation partners is making the rounds in chat forums, according to security software firm PC Tools.

The artificial intelligence of CyberLover's automated chats is good enough that victims have a tough time distinguishing the "bot" from a real potential suitor, PC Tools said. The software can work quickly too, establishing up to 10 relationships in 30 minutes, PC Tools said. It compiles a report on every person it meets complete with name, contact information, and photos.

"As a tool that can be used by hackers to conduct identity fraud, CyberLover demonstrates an unprecedented level of social engineering," PC Tools senior malware analyst Sergei Shevchenko said in a statement.

Among CyberLover's creepy features is its ability to offer a range of different profiles from "romantic lover" to "sexual predator." It can also lead victims to a "personal" Web site, which could be used to deliver malware, PC Tools said.

Although the program is currently targeting Russian Web sites, PC Tools is urging people in chat rooms and social networks elsewhere to be on the alert for such attacks. Their recommendations amount to just good sense in general, such as avoiding giving out personal information and using an alias when chatting online. The software company believes that CyberLover's creators plan to make it available worldwide in February.

Robot chatters are just one type of social-engineering attack that uses trickery rather than a software flaw to access victim's valuable information. Such attacks have been on the rise and are predicted to continue to grow.

Mike Greene, vice president of product strategy at PC Tools, said that the company learned of CyberLover's existence earlier this week as part of its regular monitoring of IRC chat rooms and other places where talk about malware takes place.

Greene said that it is hard to tell how prevalent use of the program is.

"We don't have exact statistics, but I think it's early on," he said.

Greene said that the perceived anonymity of the Internet has desensitized people to the fact that information disclosed in an online chat can cause real-world damage.

"People are used to not opening attachments or maybe not clicking on a link that shows up in their IM," he said. "But this emulates a real conversation, so you more are likely to give over personal information, click on a link or send your photograph."

MORE HERE

Men Show Up Wanting Sex After 'Ex Posted Fake Craigslist ads'

By Mark Duell

(U.S.A.) A jilted boyfriend allegedly placed a series of fake adverts on Craigslist that appeared to be from his pregnant ex-girlfriend asking men for sex.

Andre Flom, 31, of Portland, Oregon, put up ads with her number and address - and up to 20 men would arrive at her home for sex, police said.

Postings under the name of Catlin Moser, 29, said ‘hit me up - I’m super horny’ and that she wanted ‘guys to take turns giving it to me good’.

The posts also asked people to remove a Japanese maple tree and a play structure from her garden, reported the Smoking Gun website.

‘He was posting my name, my phone number and my address on Craigslist for really obscene sex parties,’ Ms Moser told Fox affiliate KPTV. I was having men showing up at my house all hours of the night.'

He even allegedly posted the contact details of Ms Moser’s mother, who said she would get around 100 obscene text messages in five minutes. ‘The kinds of things that were being said were pretty obscene,’ the mother told CBS affiliate KVAL. ‘He'd set up times for them to come over.’

CONTENT OF THREE ADS ON CRAIGLIST

'What's up, my name's Catlin and I’m very real, looking for a sexy guy to come give me what I need, hit me up - I'm super horny'

'Having a party tonight at my house: encourage single guys to come through, lots of beer and single women, here is a recent pic of me, my name's Catlin, let's go boys'

'Hey, so I'm at home bored, lookin for a guy, or guys to take turns givin it to me good'

It began in October after Flom was convicted of domestic violence and more than 35 adverts were posted on the listings website, police said. Flom was convicted of strangling Ms Moser, who has a two-year-old son, last autumn and she won a restraining order against him.

One of the ads included her address, saying: ‘I’m very real, looking for a sexy guy to come give me what I need, hit me up - I’m super horny’. Another said she was ‘sitting at home bored’ wanting men to ‘give it to me good’ and was inviting people who ‘want to get a little dirty’.

Investigators subpoenaed Craigslist to give them records that showed nearly all of the fake adverts came from the same network location.

In a twist, investigators traced this to Flom’s next-door neighbour. But it turned out the man had an unsecured wireless router in his house. Police raided Flom’s home on Tuesday and took away a computer, modem and mobile phones, reported the Smoking Gun.

Flom was charged with computer crime and identity theft and is being held in Multnomah County jail in lieu of posting a $30,000 bond.

original article here

Bill Targets Cyber-Impersonation

by Alejandro Martínez-Cabrera

Two months ago, a San Jose Mercury News reporter received a profanity-laced e-mail critical of one of her stories. More than a year before, a similar e-mail was sent to a long mailing list of hundreds of Silicon Valley industry, labor, political and community leaders.

The sender of the e-mails appeared to be Carl Guardino, the chief executive of the Silicon Valley Leadership Group, which represents the high-tech industry. The problem: He didn't actually send it.

"This absolutely misrepresented me in a very harmful way," he said. "It was completely out of character and it depicted me in a very bad light."

Guardino was the victim of online impersonation, and he soon found out he wasn't alone - friends, colleagues and relatives had stories of usurped identities and tarnished reputations. Unfortunately for them, the state law on impersonation was written in 1872 and is not equipped to deal with the digital age.

But a bill making its way through the Legislature is looking to change that. Inspired by Guardino's story, state Sen. Joe Simitian, D-Palo Alto, introduced a bill in June that would make it a misdemeanor to maliciously impersonate someone.

If Simitian's bill passes, online impersonations with the purpose "of harming, intimidating, threatening or defrauding" would be punishable with a maximum fine of $1,000 and one year in jail.

But while supporters believe the law urgently needs to be updated to punish and deter malicious impersonators, privacy advocates worry that such legislation might easily cross the line and threaten people's First Amendment rights.
Political commentary

Simitian said his bill is not going after those who create fake Barack Obama Facebook profiles for political commentary, or the likes of Fake Steve Jobs, Newsweek writer Daniel Lyons who poses as Apple's chief executive in his satirical blog.

Instead, the bill is meant to deal with miscreants whose impersonations range from the naughty to the outright sinister.

In recent years, impersonators have tweeted under the names of Maya Angelou, Kanye West and St. Louis Cardinals' manager Tony La Russa, to name a few. Revenge-seekers and pranksters have embarrassed their victims in front of potential employers and created smears that are difficult to remove from the Web. Students have posed as teachers to harass other kids.

In one case in December, a Wyoming woman was raped in her home by a man responding to a Craigslist ad looking for "a real aggressive man with no concern for women" to fulfill a rape fantasy. However, she didn't post the ad - it had been her disgruntled ex-boyfriend, a Marine stationed in California who was posing as her. Similar stories abound, online abuse experts said.

'No recourse'
The Internet "makes it so easy for stalkers and harassers to ruin somebody's life with a few keystrokes, and there's little to no recourse for victims to try and undo the damage," said Jayne Hitchcock, president of the volunteer organization Work to Halt Online Abuse, who was a victim of cyberstalking.

No one seems to know how widespread the problem is, but Hitchcock said she has noted more complaints about MySpace, Twitter, Facebook and e-mail impersonations.

"I probably see it more often than I'd like to through our organization," she said.

But when it comes to addressing the problem, not everybody is convinced Simitian's approach is the best. Corynne McSherry, a staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, said the scope of Simitian's bill was defined too loosely and could have a negative effect on freedom of speech. For one, she said, the definition of harm needs to be narrowed.

"Harm is a pretty broad term. That could just mean that you undermined a politician's reputation. I'm concerned that the nature of 'harm' is too vaguely defined," she said.

McSherry also expressed concern that the bill would not protect some forms of parody and satire on the Internet that involve impersonation.

For instance, she pointed to the Yes Men, activists that the foundation is representing in a lawsuit filed against them by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. In October, the group held a fake news conference posing as chamber representatives who promised the organization would no longer lobby against climate-change legislation.

"It was a very effective form of satire that was really useful in provoking some form of debate," McSherry said. "I don't think it's Sen. Simitian's intent to shut down this form of freedom of speech but I believe it's what this bill can do."

Simitian's bill names "credible" impersonators that act without consent, but, McSherry said, "Just requiring that an impersonation is credible is not going far enough to protect the type of political speech I'm talking about."

And even though she supports the spirit of Simitian's bill, Hitchcock questions whether it's enforceable, considering the need to educate law enforcers on online abuse issues and the jurisdictional problems relating to cybercrimes.

"Unless the victim and the harasser are both in California, it's going to need a lot of collaboration between law enforcement agencies and the states. And if (the impersonator) is in another country, good luck. But it's a start," she said.

Hard to enforce
Danielle Keats Citron, a law professor at the University of Maryland who has written extensively about the role of the law and online abuse, believes the proposed law will have challenges based on the enforcement difficulties and the broadness of its interpretation.

But even if the bill in its current form becomes law, Citron said, the statute might have an overall positive effect. At its most basic level, the measure might help change attitudes about what's permissible, she said.

"The legislation is trying to take the lead on this emerging technology that people are abusing, and teaching them how to treat each other," she said. "It's an important point we shouldn't forget."

She added: "But we also have to get the law right."

original article here

WHY DO CYBERPATHS PREY ON OTHERS?

(This is merely an attempt to answer the question "WHY did they do this?" This explanation is speculative & by no means final or complete. - EOPC)

excerpted from: "Why Do People Abuse?"


Understanding Abuse
People have difficulty understanding the motives of people who are involved in abuse. Why people choose to abuse other people is a common question.

Abuse situations must be lived in and experienced before their internal logic makes any sense. However, we can try to do our best to understand.

Why Do Cyberpaths Abuse?
The first question, "Why do people abuse other people?" has multiple answers. Some people internalized a particular relationship dynamic, namely the complementary roles of "abuser" and "victim". They are familiar with and fully understand the terror of being the helpless victim from their own childhood experience. The opposite of being a victim is not simply opting out of abuse; it is instead, to be abusive. Given the choice between being the out-of-control victim, or the in-control abuser, some of these people grow up to prefer the role of the abuser.

As they become adults, they simply turn this relationship dynamic around and start acting out the "abuser" side of the relationship dynamic. By choosing to be the aggressor and abuser, they may get their first sense of taking control over their own destiny and not being at the mercy of others. And the anonymity and disinhibition the internet provides feeds that.

Besides, online - others are only objects, not real people.


Still other people who abuse end up abusing because they have an empathy deficit, either because of some sort of brain damage, or because their innate empathic abilities never developed properly.

Such abusers cannot or will not relate to other people as people, choosing instead to treat them as objects. In effect, they confuse people for things. They treat people as though they were there solely for their convenience and do not otherwise have an independent, important life. Far too easy to do online!

Abusers who treat people in this manner are very likely psychologically ill, incurably so. They may have an antisocial, sociopathic or narcissistic personality disorder, and they may have anger or impulse control issues and addition (internet, sex, love & drama) issues on top of that!

Such cyberpaths may abuse via the net because of the benefits they receive from doing so, for instance, sexual or financial gratification, or the simple allure of power over other people's lives.

original article here

THE BAD BOYS OF CYBERSPACE

Getting Known Through Anonymity

Much has been said lately about how anonymity on the internet "disinhibits" people. Feeling relatively safe with their real-world identity hidden, they say and do things they otherwise wouldn't normally say or do in "real life." In some cases, that seems to be a good thing. People may be more honest, open, generous, and helpful. In other cases, however, the nasty side of a person gets unleased.

I'd like to give a slightly different spin to this "disinhibition through anonymity" concept. My basic premise is this: NO ONE WANTS TO BE COMPLETELY ANONYMOUS. No one wants to be totally invisible, with no name or identity or presence or interpersonal impact at all. Everyone wants and needs to express some aspect of who they are, to have others acknowledge and react to some aspect of their identity. In some cases, it's a benign feature of who you are. In some cases, not. Anonymity on the internet allows people to set aside some aspects of their identity in order to safely express others. Snerts need someone to react to and affirm their offensive behavior. This need is a bit different than simply catharting their frustrated drives, as the "eros-ridden" idea suggests. Snerts are trying to express some unresolved and warded-off feature of their troubled identity in an (often desperate) attempt to have it acknowledged. Unfortunately, they do it in a way that abuses other people. Under ideal conditions, they may be able to accept and work through those inner feelings and self-concepts that torture them. If not, they will continue to vent that ooze through their online snert identities, while safely dissociating it from their "real world" identity.

Does greater anonymity result in greater deviance? It's an interesting question. Because greater anonymity usually is associated with less accountability for one's actions, the answer would seem to be "yes." (snipped)

The higher prevalence of misbehavior among anonymous users may be more than just a "disinhibiting" effect. Rather than the anonymity simply "releasing" the nasty side of a person, the person may experience the anonymity - the lack of an identity - as toxic. Feeling frustrated about not being known or having a place in the group, the new user acts out that frustration in an antisocial manner. They need to feel that they have SOME kind of impact on others. It's not unlike the ignored child who starts acting "bad" in order to acquire attention from the parent, even if it's scolding and punishment. The squeakiest wheel. Humans, being humans, will almost always choose a connection to others over no connection at all, even if that connection is a negative one. Some snert guests may think (perhaps unconsciously) that their misbehavior is a justified retaliation against a community that they feel has stripped away their identity and alienated them. They reject because they feel rejected.

In rare cases, people who are well known in the community may become the trouble-makers. Social psychology has demonstrated that people with power and status often have "idiosyncrasy credit" - they are given a bit more leeway in violating some of the less critical rules of the community.

EXCERPTED FROM THIS ARTICLE

This is from a fascinating site on the Psychology of Cyberspace which can be read (which we STRONGLY recommend) in full here.) And many many thanks to OneofSeven from our sister site for once again, finding such a wonderful article!! - EOPC

The SEXUAL ADDICTION Affair

(note: Many CYBERPATHS are sex addicts who use the internet to hide their real purposes behind pretty words and promises. "I love you" seems to be their way into your bed. It is cheaper than a hooker or more fun to twist someone's emotions and then dump them because you view everyone as an OBJECT. Many of these Cyberpaths are narcissistic psychopaths who are emotionally vacant & immature to the point that many keep reliving the shallow come ons of their 'teen years' and 'being on the make' to prove their prowess and provide themselves with stimulation.)

Dr. Hare describes people he calls psychopaths as "intraspecies predators who use charm, manipulation, intimidation, sex and [threats] to control others and to satisfy their own selfish needs."

(SEE ALSO: "Don Juan as Psychopath")

Here is an article on this sort of "affair" - real or cyber - EOPC)

By: Dr. Robert Huizenga

One kind of extramarital affair revolves around sexual addiction. The partner involved in the affair, plain and simple, has a difficult time saying "NO." He/she may want to, but feels compelled to say "yes."

People can't say no? Well, I believe we all have the capacity, at some level, to say no. However, not all have developed that capacity or reached that level to firmly say no and mean it.

Some are stuck and seem to lack the ability to consistently act on the no. Please remember that all of us are grabbed by something and then find it difficult to let go. Infidelity when connected to sexual addiction and its many forms, however, becomes a powerful focal point.

How to know if infidelity (or Cyberpathy) is attached to sexual addiction:

1. Sex takes on an inflated role or value. Sex, sexual conquest, sexual release becomes a powerful force. Acting on the sexual impulse is a frequent activity. Thinking about sex likewise consumes an inordinate amount of time. Multiple ways of acting out sexually (internet porn, strip clubs, multiple sex partners, online affairs, email lists full of 'contacts', profiles full of fake information or membership on sites catering to dating, prostitutes and/ or those who frequent them, membership on sites for sexual liaisons, etc.) are common.

2. This activity is bound by fear. The person lives with fear: the fear of getting caught, the fear of consequences, the fear of being found out, the fear of being abnormal, the fear of being punished, and the fear of losing family, spouse, job and respect.

3. A promise/ failure cycle ebbs and flows with the inability to say no. After an acting out episode the person usually experiences guilt/fear and promises to self or others, I won't do it again. This will last... until the urge is acted upon again. The spouse/partner may be aware or unaware (but sense that something is not right) of the roller coaster and succession of broken promises.

4. Others are used or seen as objects for personal gratification. No true intimacy is developed.

5. Sexuality sometimes confused with other needs or connected to unresolved past pain or trauma. A child who experiences confusion around sexuality or sexual abuse of one form or another, may carry along that confusion and attempt to work that through in a marriage or extramarital affairs.

6. Such a person lives in a distorted world. They come to see the world and relationship through the eyes of their addiction. They have a great capacity to rationalize their behavior, deceive others and may lead a dual life. (Or be a Pathological Predator, such as a Cyberpath)

Tip: If you suspect these characteristics fit you or someone you love (even someone you know online), get some help for yourself before your world disintegrates further or falls apart.
------

There are many things in our culture that grab us and won't let go. Sometimes sex is one of them. Perhaps that's the case for you or your spouse/partner.

These questions are intended to help you be more aware of some behaviors that perhaps indicate that sex has a hold on you. If you answer yes to three or more questions it probably is wise to take a closer look at the place of sex in your life.

1) Do I have sex at inappropriate times, inappropriate places and/or with the wrong people?

2) Do I make promises to myself or rules for myself concerning my sexual behavior that I find I cannot follow?

3) Have I lost count of the number of sexual partners I've had in the past 3 years?

4) Do I have sex regardless of the consequences (e.g. the threat of being caught, the risk of contracting herpes, gonorrhea, AIDS, oral or genital STDS, etc.)? (condoms don't protect against everything. Viruses can be transmitted and live on the skin, in the mouth and so on for months and be transmitted to the spouse/ partner -- no matter how clean you think you are)

5) Do I feel uncomfortable about my masturbation, the fantasies I engage in, the props I use, and/or the places in which I do it?

6) Do I feel jaded, exhausted, cynical? Am I on the path to that?

7) Do I feel that my life is unmanageable because of my sexual behavior?

8) Do I have sex as a way to deal with or escape from life's problems? Do I feel entitled to sex? Do I feel as though I have earned sex?

9) Do I have a serious relationship threatened or destroyed because of outside sexual activity on my part?

10) Do I feel that my sexual life affects my spiritual life in a negative way?

Sued for Refusing to Help a Cyberstalking Victim

By Victor Fiorillo

Earlier this week in Philadelphia’s Federal Court, 25-year-old Temple grad Cailin Arena and her friend Patricia McWilliam of South Carolina sued a John Doe they say has been cyberstalking them and publishing their copyrighted photos and writings without their permission. In the same suit, they name Internet giant Google—which hosts the perpetrator’s blog, Korean Dating Bloggers, as well as a fraudulent Google Plus account set up in Arena’s name—for failing to do anything about it.

In recent years, the women have traveled to Korea and Japan to teach English to grade-school students in those countries. Arena, who has been dating a Korean man since 2010, is currently teaching in Japan, where her boyfriend resides, while McWilliam teaches in Seoul, South Korea. Both women have blogged extensively about their overseas experiences, and these blogs, which they’ve deleted, appear to be the original source of the screen-grabbing stalker’s material.

According to the lawsuit, which was filed by Arena’s father, Montgomery County attorney Charles Arena, the problems began on January 3, 2012, when John Doe sent an anonymous email to Arena’s supervisor containing a link to sexual content and stating that Arena was responsible for it, and another email to Arena, which read, “Sorry to say but you’re an ugly brown something. You probably also smell bad. Have fun in Japan, I hear the radiation isn’t bad in Fukushima. Why not buy some vegetables from there for you and your ugly brown children.” Also that day, John Doe is said to have posted racist commentary about Arena in an online forum associated with her job.

One week later, John Doe created Korean Dating Bloggers, using Arena’s full name and her employer’s name as a website tag, so that his blog would come up in Google searches for her. On the site, he posted screen shots from her now deleted blog, copyrighted pictures she says he stole from her actual Google Plus account, and negative commentary about her. He also created an impostor Tumblr account and Google Plus profile in her name. He reached out to contacts in her actual Google Plus circle, linking them to Korean Dating Bloggers. The allegations relating to John Doe’s actions toward McWilliam are similar.

The plaintiffs contend that the defendant’s use of their copyrighted material violates the Digital Millennium Copyright and that Google has a responsibility to remove it. They and their attorneys have repeatedly contacted Google headquarters, demanding a resolution.

At first, Google responded that they do not remove allegedly defamatory, libelous or slanderous material unless requested by a court order, even though the plaintiffs’ claims were regarding copyright, not defamation.

Then, Google responded with a message that the plaintiffs call “nonsensical.” In it, Google stated that the company decided not to take action “based on our policies concerning content removal. We would like to assist you, but we don’t currently disclose this information. Should it become publicly available in the future, you may find it on our site at http://www.google.com/about.html.” Getting nowhere with Google, they filed the suit.

As for the identity of the blogger, the plaintiffs believe they know who he is and that he resides in Pennsylvania. They hope that the court will compel Google to reveal his true identity and intend to file more actions today. “The law hasn’t caught up with technology,” says Charles Arena. “This is scary. What do you do when someone seeks to do irreparable harm to you online?”

A Google spokesperson was not immediately available for comment.

original article here

Lawyer Loses Defamation Suit Against Website

By Staci Zaretsky

A lesson that Matt Couloute Jr. is learning.

It’s a sad fact, but almost everyone has had the opportunity to partake in a bad romance or two. And although it may sound elegant when Lady Gaga sings about it, in real life, it can be devastating. That’s why websites like LiarsCheatersRUs were created — so that jilted lovers could have a place to unleash their angst about failed relationships caused by a lover’s supposed infidelity.

But what happens when you’re a lawyer and a scorned ex-girlfriend lets loose on the internet about your infidelities? That is apparently what happened in the case of Matthew Couloute Jr., a former prosecutor and Court TV analyst, after he allegedly cheated on Amanda Ryncarz.

Now he’s suing Ryncarz and another ex-flame, roller-derby diva Stacey Blitsch, both represented by [ ] lawyer to the wannabe stars, Gloria Allred. Thus far, we’ve kept our coverage of the drama to Morning Docket entries (here, here, and here), but now, Matt Couloute has spoken out about the situation on television.

For those of you who haven’t been following this story as it makes its rounds on New York’s finest tabloids, here is the LiarsCheatersRUs entry that Couloute is suing over (click here)

Ouch, way to hit him where it hurts — his wallet. Couloute’s ex, Amanda Ryncarz, was outed as the “anonymous” writer of this review, and now she’s airing her grievances even more publicly. In a press conference organized by Gloria Allred last September, Ryncarz announced that she posted on the website “because [she] wanted to warn other women in order to protect them from what [she] suffered.”

Stacey Blitsch, on the other hand, completely denies posting LiarsCheatersRUs, but many suspect that this response to Ryncarz’s original entry was penned by her hand (click here)

Well, if she did write that, then this Blitsch has got balls. Hell totally hath no fury like a woman scorned.

Aww, Couloute just wants a clean Google search. You can’t fault the man for that, but you’ve got to wonder if this attorney is getting what he deserves. Recall from 1L year that truth is a defense to defamation. If you don’t remember, then Gloria Allred is here to help you out:

“I think the minimum the women should be allowed to do is to speak out and speak the truth about the men who they have had relationships [with] and about the men who have hurt them. We believe lawsuits like this should not be allowed. This is free speech. Women must have a voice and be able to speak to each other on matters of common interest without fear of being dragged into court.”

You hear that, ladies? You can say whatever you damn well want to say on the internet, and if you happen to get sued over it, then Girl Power Gloria will have your back.

Couloute’s lawsuit will be heard in court early this year, and when we get more details, we’ll be sure to pass them along to our readers. For now, if you’re thinking of cheating on your significant other, just remember that the internet is kind of like that Rockwell song — somebody is always watching you. But don’t even think about suing them for their online rants, because they’ve probably got Gloria Allred on speed dial.

original article here

____________


Couloute loses his Defamation Suit:

Couloute was called a cheating “scum” who, according to Amanda Ryncarz, dumped her over the phone five days before marrying another woman. Blitsch has a son with Couloute.

Baer ruled that the statements were opinion and “clearly hyperbolic.” Couloutee identified the following statements on the site as defamatory and injurious to his status as an attorney:

Ryncarz statements:

1. “[Mr. Couloute] lied and cheated all through his 40 years of life.”

2. “[Mr. Couloute] [u]ses people/his son/women to get what he wants then dumps you when he’s done with them. Has no long term friends. He rents or finances everything and owns absolutely nothing.”

3. “He is very very manipulating. he’s an attorney so he’s great at lying and covering it up without batting an eye.”1 .

Blitsch statements:

1. “[W]hat these ladies have said about his character is very true. I met him and dated briefly and I was taken in with the charm and instant “connection” he claimed we had . . . [A]s soon as I started asking questions about other aspects of his life and figured out he wasn’t comple[tely] honest he turned cold then disappeared. And of course another male is going to say Matt is a “solid dude” . . . if you agree with lieing [sic] and manipulating any female you come in contact with I guess he could be considered that. . . .”

2. “I came across this site by accident by following a UFL news feed, so your friend Matt has more problems than these posts if in search for the league his name is associated with this site.”

Couloute insisted that these comments included factual misrepresentations. Notably, one of the comment came with the following observation:

“This is the absolute truth about this man!! He will stop communication with you suddenly, then reach out years later as he did with me trying to sweet talk you and make you feel like you’re the most special woman in the world that he’s been looking for. He is very very manipulating. he’s an attorney so he’s great at lying and covering it up without batting an eye. Our relationship didn’t last long as I figured him out pretty quickly but for others, BE FOREWARNED, HE’S SCUM! RUN FAR A WAY!”

Couloute originally alleged only tortious interference with prospective business relations — perhaps in recognition of the opinion defense. However, he later amended to add the defamation claim.

Nevertheless, Baer (the judge) found that these comments, except one, were clearly opinion found on a site filled with one-sided accounts:

With the possible exception of the statement that Plaintiff “rents or finances everything and owns absolutely nothing”—a statement clearly capable of being proven true or false—the comments, even if viewed in isolation, are opinion. Defendants state that Plaintiff “lied and cheated all through his 40 years of life”, and that, because Plaintiff is an attorney, “he’s great at lying and covering it up without batting an eye.” Comments such as these are clearly hyperbolic. And when viewed within the larger context of the website on which they were posted, there can be no doubt that a reasonable reader would understand the comments to be opinion. As Defendants note, liarscheatersrus.com is “specifically intended to provide a forum for people to air their grievances about dishonest romantic partners.” Id. at 9. The average reader would know that the comments are “emotionally charged rhetoric” and the “opinions of disappointed lovers.” Id. Of course the Internet makes it more likely that a greater number of people will read comments such as these, and thereby amplify the impact they may have on a person, but this does not change the underlying nature of the comments themselves.

Couloutte plans to appeal.

There is a site with Couloutte’s name that contains the following odd statement from “him or her”:

Put Matt Couloute into the Google Search engine and you will not find Matthew Couloute’s background regarding his / her time as a news reporter on Court TV. You won’t learn Matt Couloute once represented a football league. An individual won’t learn this individual ended up being the assistant district attorney throughout Connecticut record.

Not at all, you will end up forwarded to liarscheatersrus.org, a site wherever ladies admit regarding extramarital affairs of the these people out dated or perhaps married.

Well Matt Couloute has decided to deal with the problem. In his or her case he recorded a lawsuit towards Amanda Ryncarz, his former sweetheart, that admits putting up on the spot relating to a few year romantic relationship. . . .

Matt Couloute has additionally within the go well with his / her child’s mom whom furthermore published on the website. She declines it but states the lady nevertheless believes Couloute is often lies. spouse.

It is not clear who has created this site, but it is one of the first sites that comes up when you try to find any site from Couloute. Here is his site. He includes a specialty in dealing with “cyberbullying.”

The case is Couloute v. Ryncarz, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20534.

original article here

Doctor of Economics Sentenced for Cyber-Stalking, Extorting Ex-wife

By Nicholas Phillips

(Missouri, USA) ​Jovica Petrovic, a 62-year-old native of Croatia, was sentenced today to 97 months in prison for cyber-stalking and extorting his former American wife.

Last November, a jury found him guilty upon learning of the bizarre events that transpired after the couple's divorce: Petrovic posted on a website some images of them having sex (which he'd secretly recorded). He also added personal information about the woman's past and her children.

In addition, the jury learned how Petrovic printed that web address on about 150 postcards and mailed them to her colleagues, friends, family -- even the local Walgreens. He told her he'd take down the site if she gave him furniture, her wedding ring and $100k.

"I was out of my mind," Petrovic told the court today in a long, meandering statement delivered with a heavy German accent (he was born in Croatia but grew up in Germany; he also has a doctorate in economics).

His attorney, Steve Stenger, added that the government had "overreached" in a private dispute, and sought to "demonize" his client.

Assistant U.S. attorney John Sauer, however, countered that Petrovic "made himself into a demon" by committing acts that were "vile, appalling and disgusting." The defendant's deeds were coldy calculated in advance, Sauer added, to destroy his ex-wife and inflict as much personal pain and humiliation as possible.

In the end, it came down to the opinion of U.S. district court judge Henry Autrey.

"We can do so many things with the Internet," Autrey said drily. "Nobody can see us as we slink and stalk and covet. It's fun. The Internet is a beautiful thing."

But Petrovic was trying to diminish his responsibility, the judge observed, by suggesting that his ex-wife was complicit in his crimes. Autrey -- like the jury -- found such a version of events "inconceivable."

The government had asked for a sentence above the guideline range for a total of 87 months. Judge Autrey went above and beyond that, sending Petrovic away for 96 months.

Petrovic said he would appeal.

original article here

After Meeting Via Online Dating, Cyberpath Stalks and Threatens

A jilted former City worker found guilty of orchestrating a campaign of harassment against a doctor and her mother faces jail.

Al Amin Dhalla, 42, moved into the home of Dr Alison Hewitt, 35, in Brighton, East Sussex, months after meeting her through an elite online dating agency for professionals.

But relations soured after Dr Hewitt's family voiced concern over his "unseemly haste" to marry her and over lies they uncovered about Dhalla's past.

The couple split after a year, triggering a terrifying four-month campaign by stalker Dhalla in which he tried to burn down her mother and stepfather's home and hired a private investigator to snoop on her.

Yesterday at Lewes Crown Court, ex-City auditor Dhalla was found guilty of seven counts, including arson being reckless as to whether life is endangered, attempted arson, harassment of Dr Hewitt and her mother, theft and damaging property.

He was found not guilty of two counts of the more serious charge of putting a person in fear of violence by harassment.

Today, following further deliberations, jurors also convicted Dhalla of perverting the course of justice, having an offensive weapon and found him not guilty of another theft charge.

Dhalla stalked Dr Hewitt by posing as a doctor at the hospital where she was due to start work and asked to see the trainee doctors' rota. He also bought two mini-crossbows and a 1.77 air pistol with ammunition for both and a van specially adapted to include a cage in the rear.

At the height of the harassment, police airlifted Dr Hewitt's mother Pamela Hewitt and stepfather David Gray from their holiday home on Lundy Island off the Devon coast amid fears for their safety.

A senior detective believes they foiled Dhalla - described by Miss Hewitt's family as a "narcissistic psychopath" - from committing three murders. The trial heard that Canadian national Dhalla came to Britain in 2009. A year later he met Dr Hewitt through a London-based internet dating agency.

Prosecutor Richard Barton said he moved himself into her home in Church Place, Brighton, but cracks soon appeared in Dhalla's claims about his background.

Due to Mr Gray working in the defence systems industry, he required security clearance and had to tell his employers about any changes in his family's circumstances.

Through his own inquiries and those of his employer, it emerged that Dhalla had lied about his past. He falsely claimed that he was 35, an orphan and had lived in Britain for several years. He also did not mention a conviction in Canada for assaulting his uncle with a weapon. His lies led to him being suspended from his job in December 2010 and in the same month Dr Hewitt decided to end their relationship.

The court heard that Dhalla's behaviour turned increasingly erratic and sparked a manhunt involving five police forces. He at first refused to move out of her home, forcing Dr Hewitt's relatives to evict him. Days later, poison pen letters started being received by Dr Hewitt's NHS employer, where she was a trainee doctor, maliciously claiming she acted in a criminal way.

Neighbours of Mrs Hewitt and Mr Gray in the upmarket village of Aston Abbotts, near Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire, were also sent anonymous vindictive letters.

Over the course of the next few months, Dhalla's behaviour became increasingly threatening towards both Dr Hewitt and her family, Mr Barton said. In one incident, he stood in the middle of the road and blocked her path as he pleaded with her to give their relationship another chance. On April 1 last year, Mr Gray and Mrs Hewitt went on holiday to Lundy Island, with only a few friends and family knowing where they were heading.

The next day, after buying a .22 air rifle and a 1.77 air pistol and two mini crossbows, Dhalla was arrested in a field near Chippenham, Wiltshire, while target-practising.

Inside his specially-adapted van were masking tape, tools and details of locations, said by the prosecution to include Mrs Hewitt's and Mr Gray's holiday spot, their home addresses and hospitals where Dr Hewitt worked.

He was charged with offences related to discharging the weapons and freed on bail, a decision described by detectives as "regrettable".

Days later, while Mrs Hewitt and Mrs Gray were still on the island of Lundy, he torched their thatched cottage in Buckinghamshire. After dousing newspapers with petrol, he set fires by the front and back doors but no one was hurt, although people were asleep in neighbouring homes. Such was the concern by police for Mrs Hewitt and Mr Gray at this point that they airlifted the couple off Lundy Island to safety.

The case took a further dramatic twist when, a few days later on April 7, Dhalla was spotted at the Princess Royal Hospital in Haywards Heath, West Sussex, by Dr Hewitt's new colleagues. Posing as a doctor, he was trying to lay his hands on the trainee doctors' rota, including the times when Dr Hewitt would be on duty. On the same evening, he hired one of a series of cars to drive back to Buckinghamshire. But in a fit of frustration at seeing his ex-girlfriend's family home surrounded by police, he drove to a nearby police station at Wing instead and tried to burn it down.

Dhalla then visited Dr Hewitt's hospital workplace at 6.30am the following day, about two hours before she was due to clock on. Staff who had been warned that Dhalla was a potential threat spotted him dressed smartly and armed police arrested him.

In another hire car parked nearby, police found a loaded crossbow, a large knife, fuel cans and a fake doctor's outfit, including a stethoscope. Police officers also discovered razor blades, a fuel-soaked envelope addressed to Mrs Hewitt and a folder containing the trainee doctors' rota. He was charged and remanded in custody until his trial but while on remand he sent Dr Hewitt letters, prompting prosecutors to charge him with perverting the course of justice.

Bringing Dhalla to justice involved a "unique" partnership between five forces: Sussex, Devon and Cornwall, Wiltshire, Thames Valley and the Metropolitan Police.

Judge Charles Kemp adjourned sentencing to April 16 and requested psychiatric and probation service reports. Dr Hewitt told reporters that ministers should take note of her disturbing case and she called for harassment laws to be updated.

She said: "I ask that those involved in debating stalking and harassment laws look at this case. It is another example of how important it is that harassment laws are updated. Stalking destroys lives and we need to take it seriously. If it is not, it will be somebody else tomorrow, maybe even yourself."

Dr Hewitt choked back tears as she urged anyone who faces a similar ordeal to speak to the police immediately.

She said: "My message is to anyone out there who has been harassed or stalked. If you try to control the situation yourself and failed, if your family and friends have tried to help you and failed, then you need to go to the police. You cannot control this situation yourself. You need professional help. You must talk to police in order to get your life back and it takes time."

Detective Inspector John Wallace, from Sussex Police, said the case was the worst he had ever dealt with as he described Dhalla as "industrious, resourceful and intelligent".

He said it was "regrettable" that magistrates in Wiltshire chose to free him on bail, leaving him free to go on to commit further crimes against Dr Hewitt and her family. Although Dhalla remained "one step ahead of us" at some points, Mr Wallace said police eventually managed to bring him to justice.

Mr Wallace said: "We lost control of him at that point. It was regrettable but we deal with whatever hand we are dealt with in terms of investigation. He was arrested, charged, he was released by a court regrettably, but we caught up with him."

Mr Wallace said he believed Dhalla could have gone on to kill or cause serious harm.

"This man was arming himself with lethal weapons and going to extreme measures, so I believe there was a serious risk of harm," he said.

"This is a case that really stands out from the ordinary. In short, he is a dangerous man. I don't believe that he is a danger to the wider public but someone who enters into a relationship with him and things don't work out, he poses a serious threat to them. It was a real challenge to catch up with him. He changed car four times. Initially he was one step ahead of us but we caught him in the end."

Detective Chief Inspector Rebecca Mears, of Thames Valley Police, said she believed police prevented three people being murdered by arresting Dhalla.

Outside court, Dr Hewitt stood by her mother and stepfather and said: "I feel very relieved that it is all over now. I'm looking forward to getting back to my normal life. I feel very emotional at all that's happened and all I can say is a big thank you to all who have supported me through this process."

Mr Gray said: "Our daughter has endured considerable harassment and our primary consideration has always been for our daughter's safety. The family is hugely relieved that it is all over." He praised the police and prosecutor Richard Barton for their work on the case.

Detective Chief Inspector Rebecca Mears said: "Without a doubt, the joint actions of all five forces prevented a tragedy and without this joint working we could very easily have been dealing with up to three murders. "This horrific case clearly demonstrates the serious threat that stalking presents and how rapidly and dangerously it can escalate.

"I hope today's court result will enable the victims to rebuild their lives and attain a degree of normality after their frightening ordeals."

Tim Thompson, head of the Crown Prosecution Service, south east area, central district, which dealt with the case, said: "Mr Dhalla first appeared at Brighton Magistrates' Court in April 2011, charged with three offences, two of which could only be tried in the magistrates' court.

"Throughout the case, my team has set out to ensure that the overall pattern of behaviour would all be considered by one court, rather than allowing different incidents to be dealt with in isolation."

original article here

How to Avoid a Broken (Online) Heart

Here are some red flags that might indicate an online "romance" may be nothing more than an attempt to steal your money:

• You've never met face to face with your online suitor.

• They profess love immediately, often within 24 to 48 hours. They claim fate or God brought you together.

• They quickly use terms of endearment: "sweetie," "hon," "baby, " etc. (they can't remember your real name)

• On a social networking or dating site, their profile photo disappears soon after making contact and they prefer chatting by instant messaging. If they chat with you by webcam, theirs never seems to work.

• Their emails use bad grammar, poor spelling and the pronoun "i" instead of "I." They often misspell the name of their supposed hometown and don't know any local landmarks.

• They misunderstand typical American slang, such as "night owl" or "poker face."

• They quickly send small gifts (teddy bears, chocolate, flowers), often purchased with stolen credit cards or unwittingly by other victims being scammed.

• When asked a question they can't answer, they go offline to look up a response, always claiming they had a phone call or needed a bathroom break.

• They claim to be well-paid professionals in another U.S. city but traveling overseas for work assignments (engineering, mining, solar power, construction, etc.).

• They often say they've lost a spouse, child or other family member in a horrible accident or have seriously ill family members.

• They repeatedly request financial help for varied, urgent reasons: airline tickets to visit you; hospital bills after a car accident; difficulty accessing their bank account while traveling; need for shipping, customs fees, etc. for work assignments; family members require emergency surgery.

• They always have a new story for why repayments don't arrive.

• After an online absence, they call you by a different name, an indication they're working several victims at once.

• If caught in an inconsistency, they always have a cover-up (e.g., someone else used their computer to talk with you) or suggest you don't trust them.

• They insist you keep the relationship secret until they come to live with you.

___________________________

• For victims seeking support, go to www.RomanceScams.org, an online nonprofit started in 2005 to raise awareness and offer peer counseling.

original article here

IT'S NOT YOUR FAULT

I FEEL SO STUPID -
I SHOULD HAVE KNOWN -
I DIDN'T LISTEN TO MY INSTINCTS -
IT'S ALL MY FAULT

Just some of the things the victims of an internet predator say.....


One of our discussion group contributors and a victim themselves - recently wrote the below to a reader who was blaming herself and was chided for her obsession to get to the bottom of what her apparent cyberpath was.

It was so powerful we asked and got permission from this contributor to reprint her response here (edited for clarity). Everyone should read it and heed it.

There's no fault when dealing with a cyberpath. Remember "PREDATORS HUNT THE WOUNDED" - EOPC

THIS CONTRIBUTOR SAYS:
Let's get focused on him - the internet "friend" you say is NOT a cyberpath - because it was with HIM you interacted with and HE'S the cause for all the stress and suffering you are going through nowadays.

It's more than obvious (and I want you to take me seriously) this guy is not so wonderful as you think and say he is. An emotionally stable, honest man, who is looking for a serious relationship or even a friendship over the Internet, will not create a profile on a sex site (such as AdultFriendFinder or Eroticy to name a couple) and won't try to find possible real/ serious partners on a sex site!.

You had a profile there because as you said, your marriage wasn't good. I understand. When we are in emotional pain we can do stupid things. But believe me, even on a seemingly innocent site like PenPalWorld, or reunion sites like Classmates.com and the online dating sites, recovery sites, single parent sites, Facebook, you can find idiots, posers, players, etc. (the predator stories on EOPC will tell you just that!!)

The possibility of finding them on a sex site is higher (sex addicts, narcissists, sociopaths, users and abusers love the Internet and they place themselves on these sites just waiting for the next victim). A sex site can be the ideal place. They will find lots of people to communicate with, to chat occasionally, to have cybersex with and nothing more than that. Casual, no strings. The difference is that on a sex site, they don't need to lie as much as they do on a dating or e-friends site.

This type of man - the one you e-tripped upon - when they feel someone is starting to get emotionally attached to them, they will do everything to get rid of you or drive you crazy. Emails will go unanswered, generally with the excuse they are busy, sick or whatever their imagination can make up. Or they answer emails with short lines like "I don't know what to say/ tell you" or "Thanks" or "we will talk later."

They're either never online on MSN Messenger, AOL IM, YahooChat, etc. (they are - they just appear to be offline - blocking those they're not interested to chat with). Or they are there - putting on their AWAY or BUSY messages or just plain IGNORING you & PURPOSELY HURTING you by putting these messages up. (usually busy with other women!)

They make it all your fault!

They will even tell you they are busy working if you try to IM them anyway. These guys are emotional vampires and mental sadists.


When something like this happens, its clear, they are not really interested in any type of genuine communication. I know by experience (although on a different level) it's time to say "bye bye - have a nice life."

Unfortunately most of the times we can't. We have feelings - they don't. We would not do that to someone and can't understand why they are doing it to us. We blame ourselves for the situation and we wonder over and over, what have we done so wrong, to get such cold treatment. Actually, we did nothing wrong.

However, they've allowed us to put them on such a pedestal that we can't see the real truth. We think they' the best thing in the world, better than sliced bread.

We idealize them and they knowingly allow it without telling us the truth.

So, I know what you feel and empathize with you, but he is not 'a great guy' and it wasn't your fault.

You just didn't know the best way to deal with him. The best would've been ignoring him, but gradually he made himself an obsession to you, always in your mind, a fruit of your desire. Your need for emotional connection made him into something he wasn't and it's not your fault. He could have responded to you and said something but he didn't. He let you dangle there confused... (this is a SEDUCTION method used by cyberpaths remember?)

Keep Them in Suspense: What Comes Next The moment people feel they know what to expect from you, your spell on them is broken. More: you have ceded them power. The only way to lead the seduced along and keep the upper hand is to create suspense, a calculated surprise. People love a mystery, and this is the key to luring them farther into your web. Behave in a way that leaves them wondering, What are you up to? (from LURES OF THE ONLINE PREDATOR))

You are a sensitive caring person who doesn't just use and drop people when you are done using them - even online. He is.

And here you go blaming yourself. "It was my fault", "I shouldn't have said this and that", "I shouldn't have done what I did", etc... Ok, you sent him some e-mails, even a love letter... All of us victims have done things like that. Maybe because on the chats he was sweet, he called you "Princess", but unfortunately it was just words he didn't mean.

See how he avoided giving you his address? He doesn't want any type of contact with ANYONE except for "discreet sex encounters."

That's not the actions of a nice guy.
This isn't a normal person.
Keep that all in mind.

The e-mail he sent you was 100% bullsh*t. I'd bet money he wasn't going to 'get married.' I also doubt he was 'in love with' someone. Guys who are really "in love" don't go on sex sites looking for a little fun.

He said that to get you out of the way and then to scare you he mentioned he would call the police if he heard from you again. This isn't the behavior of a nice guy. (typical predator move - now the victim is a "stalker" because they want & deserve answers! )

He probably has many friends from the sex site he exchanges e-mails with, many others to chat with, many to have cybersex with -- both he and they: without any emotional attachment. That makes him "busy" and obviously he is not on a sex site for genuine romance.

I'd also bet he was busy with other women online (you know what I mean).

Understand this situation isn't the way you have pictured it in your head: that others are good and you're a bad person for letting it get this far. This isn't true. Don't beat yourself up this way.

A good and nice guy would have interacted with you differently. The e-mail would have been different. He'd have been straight and honest with you. He'd have told you he wants no emotional involvement and just wanted sex. Problem is this guy most probably uses and abuses women. It's obvious. He thinks women are objects.

Notice how that female friend of his told you if you had met him in person, you could see how flawed he was "in heart, mind and body". She gave you the accurate picture.

He is not a nice guy, much less principled. He is another jerk on a sex site! There are thousands like him.

Although you don't think so, it's a good thing you didn't remain friends with him. He would have caused even more damage to you. At any moment he would have revealed his true personality and you'd see the idiot he is -- then you would have been reeling.

I know, I have been there. Study his motives and see how he is an idiot with a oversize ego who thinks women are good for only one thing: Sex.

Sorry but he is a jerk, not you!
Stop blaming yourself!

Pubgoers Urged to Help Find 'Love Rat' Thief

(U.K.) Pubgoers are being urged to help trace a man police have labelled a "love rat" who befriended a woman, then sold her car.

The woman, from Easington, County Durham, met the man calling himself Jamie Patterson, on a dating web site. But on the day he was due to move in with her and her teenage daughter, he sold her car and vanished.

Posters are now being placed in pubs in Newcastle, where Durham Police believe the man may live. The incident happened in October, but so far police have been unable to trace the man, who is in his 40s and has a number of distinctive tattoos.

A Durham Police spokeswoman described him as a "love rat" and added: "This was a single woman in her 40s who was looking for friendship and took this man at face value.

On 26 October, 2011 she contacted us to report her green Ford Fiesta stolen."

"It later transpired she had been befriended by this man on a dating website, and within a few weeks their relationship had become serious enough for him to start leaving belongings at her house. Jamie said he would drop the woman at her place of work in Sunderland, following which he would go to his home address in Newcastle and pick up more of his things. However, he failed to pick her up and she could not get an answer from his mobile phone. She got a taxi home and, because her house keys and car keys were on the same key ring, she needed to smash a window to get into her own home. She found all of his clothes gone and documentation for the car which showed it had been sold for about £1,000. Luckily we managed to recover the vehicle, but so far we have not been able to trace the man."

Police said the man is in his 40's, of stocky build and bald. He also has some distinctive tattoos, including the names Melisa and Keighley on his arm.

original article here