'Gripe Site' Is Protected Free Speech, Not Defamation

(an article regarding 'disclaimers' about the type of site - exposure - EOPC is)

"The contents of a New Jersey man's "gripe site" -- a 45-page Web site dedicated to the perceived misdeeds of his car insurer -- were protected free speech that did not constitute defamation, a Manhattan judge has ruled.

"...alleged that Ronald DiGiovanni's site made eight libelous statements about its business, including that it is a "blatantly dishonest company" that has been "running scams," "committing fraud on a grand scale," and "ripping off its contract holders for quite a while...

"The court holds that the cause of action for libel ... should be dismissed because the challenged speech is merely a statement of defendant's personal opinion...

"...his statements reflect his personal opinion based upon his personal dealings with plaintiff. They're subjective expressions of consumer dissatisfaction [and] are not actionable because they are defendant's personal opinion."

(Stick to the truth and be sure you can back it up -- not just your assumptions or guesses.

The truth is a 100% defence to defamation. If you post something like "John had a criminal record" or "Sue has no licences for her job" WITH THE PUBLIC RECORDS PROVING THAT - it is not defamatory in any way. However, saying something like "Diane is a lesbian" online with no proof... IS DEFAMATORY

Don't assume because someone was angry at you - that makes them abusive. The court could say you made 'assumptions.' And only the TRUTH is a complete defense to charges of slander or defamation.)

ORIGINAL ARTICLE HERE

Divorcee Sues to Reclaim £6.4m Given to Internet Lover

By Amanda Perthen

(U.K.) A multi-millionaire divorcee has launched a High Court battle to reclaim £6.4 million from a lover she met through the internet.

Catherine Wood, 50, who amassed her fortune through property deals, met Shlomo Add via an online dating agency after she split from her husband, Jean Francois Cornet De Chansard.

But the romance turned sour after lawyer Mr Add persuaded Ms Wood to hand over millions of pounds during their four-year relationship, the High Court in London heard. The judge agreed to freeze Mr Add’s assets so that he could not dispose of them before the case came to trial. But Mr Add, 53, insists a large portion of the money was an ‘outright gift’ and is contesting the claims. The court heard that Mr Add came up with a number of plausible stories as to why he needed cash from her.

On one occasion he telephoned from Israel asking for £1.1 million in cash, saying he needed it for bail as he was in custody facing tax evasion charges. Ms Wood wired him the cash so he could be released. On another occasion, the court was told, Mr Add bought a Ferrari using assets belonging to Ms Wood.

Ms Wood, who made her money buying and selling properties through the family business, fought back tears as she said: ‘It’s been so painful, I can’t talk about it.’ The couple’s romance started in 2007 after Mr Add had split from his wife, Ruth, a former dancer. Despite Mr Add making regular trips to Israel, he and Ms Wood met regularly.

Mr Add lived in a £275,000 semi-detached house on an estate near East Grinstead, West Sussex. Ms Wood, who has two children – James, 17, and Natasha, 16, with Mr Cornet De Chansard – had a five-bedroom property worth £2.3 million in Golders Green, North London. But by the time the relationship had ended, Mr Add had bought a £550,000 house on a private road just a few miles from his previous home, which he still owns.

Last week, a blue Maserati saloon and a grey four-wheel-drive vehicle were parked on the driveway. Mr Add is currently staying at his £1.2 million waterfront apartment just outside Tel Aviv. A neighbour said: ‘The people who buy property here are not just any people. ‘They are wealthy bankers, Russian oligarchs, French millionaires and some of Israel’s best known figures in the underworld.’

Mr Add declined to comment on the court case, adding that his daughter Hila, who is in the Israeli Defence Force, was staying with him and he had no time to spare.

After granting permission for Mr Add’s assets to be frozen, Judge David Cook said at the High Court: ‘Her [Ms Wood’s] allegations, if correct, show a course of conduct over a number of years in which he [Mr Add] has been able to obtain assets of a wealthy woman under a series of pretexts and promises which he has not kept.’

The case continues.

original article here

Social Networking Web Sites Encourage Cyberstalking

by Shelby Hill

Many college students use Facebook.com daily without being aware of the cyberstalking threat.

When students put their phone numbers, addresses and other personal information on a social networking site like Facebook, they increase their chances of being a cyberstalking victim, said Michael Kaiser, executive director of the National Cyber Security Alliance.

January was National Stalking Awareness Month and Kaiser said that because people between the ages of 18-24 have the highest victimization rate, due to the popularity of Facebook and MySpace.com, it's important for students to protect themselves against cyberstalking.

"People should be really guarded in sharing personal information," Kaiser said. "I wouldn't suggest that the Internet is a place to write an autobiography."

According to the Pew Internet and American Life Project's January 2009 report about adults and social networking websites, 75 percent of Internet users in the 18-24 age group have a profile on a social networking Web site.

A social networking Web site is a place for people to connect with each other by creating a profile that each individual can customize with pictures, contact information and details about interests, such as music and movies, to reflect that person's personality. Kaiser said an e-mail address is usually the only information needed to become part of a social networking Web site.

Some tips Kaiser had for students were install a firewall, anti-spyware, use the highest privacy settings on social networking web sites and limit the information they put online.

Kaiser advised students that they should "be really careful about who you let into your circle."

Along with the active steps that students can take to protect themselves, Kaiser suggested that students enter their names into a search engine to see if they come across information that they didn't know was there.

"People don't even know sometimes how much information about them there is on the Web," Kaiser said. "People leave trails all over the Internet and stalkers will use those trails."

He said stalkers would use anything from an e-mail address to a phone number, street address or instant message, to stalk a victim.

Nick Penta, a pre-veterinary science freshman, said he thinks an ex-girlfriend stalked him over MySpace. He said she sent him several messages and viewed his profile about 20 times a day to learn about his new girlfriend.

Kaiser said stalking is defined as repeated actions that would cause a reasonable person to feel fear.

Penta added that he wasn't scared of his ex's actions.

According to the U.S. Department of Justice's January 2009 report "Stalking Victimization in the United States," of the 3.4 million Americans who reported being stalked, 25 percent reported being cyberstalked through email or instant messaging.

Stephen Orlando, a pre-business freshman said he experienced the same jealous behavior by an ex, over the Internet.

According to the report, 75 percent of stalking victims were stalked by someone they knew.

"The vast majority of stalking is done by people who know each other," Kaiser said.

Even taking into account Orlando and Penta's experiences with exes over the Web, the two men have not chosen to make their Facebook profiles private and non-viewable to users whom they have not given permission.

Kaiser advised students to "use the highest privacy settings you can on any of the social networking sites."

Amy Cheng, a pre-physiology freshman, said her Facebook profile is private and she doesn't post her personal information on the page.

"I don't put anything on there that I wouldn't show my mom," Cheng said about information on her Facebook profile.

Emily Smith, an undeclared freshman, said that although her profile isn't private, she doesn't put any contact information on her Facebook profile.

She added that if she had more of an issue with cyberstalking she might consider changing her profile to private.

Orlando said that he thinks that cyberstalking is more of an issue for women than men.

"There's a lot more creeper stalker people looking for girls than guys," he said.

Penta said that the difference could be attributed to the fact that some women put relatively provocative photos on their individual profiles.

"They're easier targets, just because their pictures might be more revealing," Penta said.

Whatever the reason, the Department of Justice report did concede that women run a much greater risk for being victims of cyberstalking than men.

Whether the victim is a man or woman, the fact that friends and family support the stalking victim is crucial, Kaiser said.

For more information on cyberstalking, Kaiser said that students should visit the National Center for Victims of Crime's Web site, www.ncvc.org or the National Cyber Security Alliance's Web site, www.staysafeonline.org.

The Cyberpath = Psychopath With Internet Access

Psychopaths With Internet Access



An Excerpt from the book: In Sheep's Clothing
By George K. Simon

(how many of these have you seen or discovered in your Online Predator??... comments in dark blue are EOPC's and not the author's)

Two Basic Types of Aggression
There are two basic types of aggression: overt-aggression and covert-aggression. When you're determined to have something and you're open, direct and obvious in your manner of fighting, your behavior is best labeled overtly aggressive. When you're out to "win," dominate or control, but are subtle, underhanded or deceptive enough to hide your true intentions, your behavior is most appropriately labeled covertly aggressive. Now, avoiding any overt display of aggression while simultaneously intimidating others into giving you what you want is a powerfully manipulative maneuver. That's why covert-aggression is most often the vehicle for interpersonal manipulation.

Acts of Covert-Aggression vs. Covert-Aggressive Personalities
Most of us have engaged in some sort of covertly aggressive behavior from time to time. Periodically trying to manipulate a person or a situation doesn't make someone a covert-aggressive personality. Personality can be defined by the way a person habitually perceives, relates to and interacts with others and the world at large.

The tactics of deceit, manipulation and control are a steady diet for covert-aggressive personality. It's the way they prefer to deal with others and to get the things they want in life.

The Process of Victimization
For a long time, I wondered why manipulation victims have a hard time seeing what really goes on in manipulative interactions. At first, I was tempted to fault them. But I've learned that they get hoodwinked for some very good reasons:

1. A manipulator's aggression is not obvious. Our gut may tell us that they're fighting for something, struggling to overcome us, gain power, or have their way, and we find ourselves unconsciously on the defensive. But because we can't point to clear, objective evidence they're aggressing against us, we can't readily validate our feelings.

2. The tactics manipulators use can make it seem like they're hurting, caring, defending, ..., almost anything but fighting. These tactics are hard to recognize as merely clever ploys. They always make just enough sense to make a person doubt their gut hunch that they're being taken advantage of or abused. Besides, the tactics not only make it hard for you to consciously and objectively tell that a manipulator is fighting, but they also simultaneously keep you or consciously on the defensive. These features make them highly effective psychological weapons to which anyone can be vulnerable. It's hard to think clearly when someone has you emotionally on the run.

3. All of us have weaknesses and insecurities that a clever manipulator might exploit. Sometimes, we're aware of these weaknesses and how someone might use them to take advantage of us. For example, I hear parents say things like: "Yeah, I know I have a big guilt button." - But at the time their manipulative child is busily pushing that button, they can easily forget what's really going on. Besides, sometimes we're unaware of our biggest vulnerabilities. Manipulators often know us better than we know ourselves. They know what buttons to push, when and how hard. Our lack of self-knowledge sets us up to be exploited.

4. What our gut tells us a manipulator is like, challenges everything we've been taught to believe about human nature.

We've been inundated with a psychology that has us seeing everybody, at least to some degree, as afraid, insecure or "hung-up." So, while our gut tells us we're dealing with a ruthless conniver, our head tells us they must be really frightened or wounded "underneath." What's more, most of us generally hate to think of ourselves as callous and insensitive people. We hesitate to make harsh or seemingly negative judgments about others. We want to give them the benefit of the doubt and assume they don't really harbor the malevolent intentions we suspect. We're more apt to doubt and blame ourselves for daring to believe what our gut tells us about our manipulator's character.

Recognizing Aggressive Agendas
Accepting how fundamental it is for people to fight for the things they want and becoming more aware of the subtle, underhanded ways people can and do fight in their daily endeavors and relationships can be very consciousness expanding. Learning to recognize an aggressive move when somebody makes one and learning how to handle oneself in any of life's many battles, has turned out to be the most empowering experience for the manipulation victims with whom I've worked. It's how they eventually freed themselves from their manipulator's dominance and control and gained a much needed boost to their own sense of self esteem.

Recognizing the inherent aggression in manipulative behavior and becoming more aware of the slick, surreptitious ways that manipulative people prefer to aggress against us is extremely important. Not recognizing and accurately labeling their subtly aggressive moves causes most people to misinterpret the behavior of manipulators and, therefore, fail to respond to them in an appropriate fashion. Recognizing when and how manipulators are fighting with covertly aggressive tactics is essential.

Defense Mechanisms and Offensive Tactics
Almost everyone is familiar with the term defense mechanism. Defense mechanisms are the "automatic" (i.e. unconscious) mental behaviors all of us employ to protect or defend ourselves from the "threat" of some emotional pain. More specifically, ego defense mechanisms are mental behaviors we use to "defend" our self-images from "invitations" to feel ashamed or guilty about something. There are many different kinds of ego defenses and the more traditional (psychodynamic) theories of personality have always tended to distinguish the various personality types, at least in part, by the types of ego defenses they prefer to use. One of the problems with psychodynamic approaches to understanding human behavior is that they tend to depict people as most always afraid of something and defending or protecting themselves in some way; even when they're in the act of aggressing. Covert-aggressive personalities (indeed all aggressive personalities) use a variety of mental behaviors and interpersonal maneuvers to help ensure they get what they want. Some of these behaviors have been traditionally thought of as defense mechanisms.

While, from a certain perspective we might say someone engaging in these behaviors is defending their ego from any sense of shame or guilt, it's important to realize that at the time the aggressor is exhibiting these behaviors, he is not primarily defending (i.e. attempting to prevent some internally painful event from occurring), but rather fighting to maintain position, gain power and to remove any obstacles (both internal and external) in the way of getting what he wants. Seeing the aggressor as on the defensive in any sense is a set-up for victimization. Recognizing that they're primarily on the offensive, mentally prepares a person for the decisive action they need to take in order to avoid being run over. Therefore, I think it's best to conceptualize many of the mental behaviors (no matter how "automatic" or "unconscious" they may appear) we often think of as defense mechanisms, as offensive power tactics, because aggressive personalities employ them primarily to manipulate, control and achieve dominance over others. Rather than trying to prevent something emotionally painful or dreadful from happening, anyone using these tactics is primarily trying to ensure that something they want to happen does indeed happen. Let's take a look at the principal tactics covert-aggressive personalities use to ensure they get their way and maintain a position of power over their victims:

Denial - This is when the aggressor refuses to admit that they've done something harmful or hurtful when they clearly have. It's a way they lie (to themselves as well as to others) about their aggressive intentions. This "Who... Me?" tactic is a way of "playing innocent," and invites the victim to feel unjustified in confronting the aggressor about the inappropriateness of a behavior. It's also the way the aggressor gives him/herself permission to keep right on doing what they want to do. This denial is not the same kind of denial that a person who has just lost a loved one and can't quite bear to accept the pain and reality of the loss engages in. That type of denial really is mostly a "defense" against unbearable hurt and anxiety. Rather, this type of denial is not primarily a "defense" but a maneuver the aggressor uses to get others to back off, back down or maybe even feel guilty themselves for insinuating he's doing something wrong.

Selective Inattention - This tactic is similar to and sometimes mistaken for denial It's when the aggressor "plays dumb," or acts oblivious. When engaging in this tactic, the aggressor actively ignores the warnings, pleas or wishes of others, and in general, refuses to pay attention to everything and anything that might distract them from pursuing their own agenda.

Often, the aggressor knows full well what you want from him when he starts to exhibit this "I don't want to hear it!" behavior. Ed Hicks & Yidwithlid did this) By using this tactic, the aggressor actively resists submitting himself to the tasks of paying attention to or refraining from the behavior you want him to change.

Rationalization - A rationalization is the excuse an aggressor tries to offer for engaging in an inappropriate or harmful behavior. It can be an effective tactic, especially when the explanation or justification the aggressor offers makes just enough sense that any reasonably conscientious person is likely to fall for it. It's a powerful tactic because it not only serves to remove any internal resistance the aggressor might have about doing what he wants to do (quieting any qualms of conscience he might have) but also to keep others off his back. If the aggressor can convince you he's justified in whatever he's doing, then he's freer to pursue his goals without interference.



Diversion - A moving target is hard to hit. When we try to pin a manipulator down or try to keep a discussion focused on a single issue or behavior we don't like, he's expert at knowing how to change the subject, dodge the issue or in some way throw us a curve. Manipulators use distraction and diversion techniques to keep the focus off their behavior, move us off-track, and keep themselves free to promote their self-serving hidden agendas. (Jacoby, Doug Beckstead, Sammy Benoit /Jeff Dunetz/ Yidwithlid all used this one constantly - and with initial good results for them!)

Whenever someone is not responding directly to an issue, you can safely assume that for some reason, they're trying to give you the slip.

Lying - It's often hard to tell when a person is lying at the time he's doing it. Fortunately, there are times when the truth will out because circumstances don't bear out somebody's story. But there are also times when you don't know you've been deceived until it's too late. One way to minimize the chances that someone will put one over on you is to remember that because aggressive personalities of all types will generally stop at nothing to get what they want, you can expect them to lie and cheat. Another thing to remember is that manipulators - covert-aggressive personalities that they are - are prone to lie in subtle, covert ways. Courts are well aware of the many ways that people lie, as they require that court oaths charge that testifiers tell "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth."

Manipulators often lie by withholding a significant amount of the truth from you or by distorting the truth. (William Michael Barber, John Gash, Yidwithlid, Ed Hicks & Phil Haberman all did this)They are adept at being vague when you ask them direct questions. This is an especially slick way of lying -- omission. Keep this in mind when dealing with a suspected wolf in sheep's clothing. Always seek and obtain specific, confirmable information.

Covert Intimidation - Aggressors frequently threaten their victims to keep them anxious, apprehensive and in a one-down position. Covert-aggressives intimidate their victims by making veiled (subtle, indirect or implied) threats. Guilt-tripping and shaming are two of the covert-aggressive's favourite weapons. Both are special intimidation tactics. (Dorsky, Hicks, Jacoby, Beckstead, Rodger & Yidwithlid all used overt & covert threats - including disappearing on the Targets for days or weeks at a time, as 'threats')

Guilt-tripping - One thing that aggressive personalities know well is that other types of persons have very different consciences than they do. Manipulators are often skilled at using what they know to be the greater conscientiousness of their victims as a means of keeping them in a self-doubting, anxious, and submissive position.

The more conscientious the potential victim, the more effective guilt is as a weapon.

Aggressive personalities of all types use guilt-tripping so frequently and effectively as a manipulative tactic, that I believe it illustrates how fundamentally different in character they are compared to other (especially neurotic) personalities. All a manipulator has to do is suggest to the conscientious person that they don't care enough, are too selfish, etc., and that person immediately starts to feel bad. On the contrary, a conscientious person might try until they're blue in the face to get a manipulator (or any other aggressive personality) to feel badly about a hurtful behavior, acknowledge responsibility, or admit wrongdoing, to absolutely no avail.

Shaming - This is the technique of using subtle sarcasm and put-downs as a means of increasing fear and self-doubt in others. Covert-aggressives use this tactic to make others feel inadequate or unworthy, and therefore, defer to them. It's an effective way to foster a continued sense of personal inadequacy in the weaker party, thereby allowing an aggressor to maintain a position of dominance.

Playing the Victim Role - This tactic involves portraying oneself as an innocent victim of circumstances or someone else's behavior in order to gain sympathy, evoke compassion and thereby get something from another. (Yidwithlid did this one when caught! Beckstead complained about his cold, unfeeling wife...) One thing that covert-aggressive personalities count on is the fact that less calloused and less hostile personalities usually can't stand to see anyone suffering. Therefore, the tactic is simple. Convince your victim you're suffering in some way, and they'll try to relieve your distress.

(Jeff Dunetz /Gridney/ Yidwithlid also used this as a lure, i.e. his cold, disappointing marriage and how Target #1 and eventually Target #2 were the ONLY people he could 'really talk to.'

Dorksy also used this one in telling his Target she was the 'only girl for' him because all the girls in his area were 'sluts' and unworthy.

Beckstead's wife "wouldn't have sex with" him.

Dan Jacoby was "waiting for his divorce to be final" and "no one understood him.")


Vilifying the Victim - This tactic is frequently used in conjunction with the tactic of playing the victim role. The aggressor uses this tactic to make it appear he is only responding (i.e. defending himself against) aggression on the part of the victim. It enables the aggressor to better put the victim on the defensive. (Ed Hicks (aka Charles Greene aka Charles Hicks aka....) was big on this one! Dan Jacoby's the latest to do this tired ploy.)

Playing the Servant Role - Covert-aggressives use this tactic to cloak their self-serving agendas in the guise of service to a more noble cause. It's a common tactic but difficult to recognize. By pretending to be working hard on someone else's behalf, covert-aggressives conceal their own ambition, desire for power, and quest for a position of dominance over others. (Yidwithlid used this one saying he was religious and writing articles to support causes which only furthered his own agenda and were placed on his old website - a site in which he used the guestbook to troll for new targets. Currently he tells people reading his blog to EMAIL him with their email addresses so he can "add them to his mailing list." -- There are free sites that do that automatically; which leads us to believe Jeff Dunetz is collects new emails for targetting! At the same time, he convinced Target #1 he was as altruistic as she was -- when he was actually only furthering a personal, selfish egotistical agenda, serial cheating with high price hookers on his wife and family at the same time and lying to everyone around him about who & what he really was. Just like ALL cyberpaths!)

One hallmark characteristic of covert-aggressive personalities is loudly professing subservience while fighting for dominance.

Seduction - Covert-aggressive personalities are adept at charming, praising, flattering or overtly supporting others in order to get them to lower their defenses and surrender their trust and loyalty.

Covert-aggressives are also particularly aware that people who are to some extent emotionally needy and dependent (and that includes most people who aren't character-disordered) want approval, reassurance, and a sense of being valued and needed more than anything. Appearing to be attentive to these needs can be a manipulator's ticket to incredible power over others.

He melts any resistance you might have to giving him your loyalty and confidence. He does this by giving you what he knows you need most. He knows you want to feel valued and important. So, he often tells you that you are. You don't find out how unimportant you really are to him until you turn out to be in his way. (And then he tells you to get over YOUR 'bruised ego.')

Projecting the blame (blaming others) or Blame-Shifting - Aggressive personalities are always looking for a way to shift the blame for their aggressive behavior. Covert-aggressives are not only skilled at finding scapegoats, they're expert at doing so in subtle, hard to detect ways. (all our Cyberpaths do this so much - we'd spend another couple posts just point it all out!)

Minimization - This tactic is a unique kind of denial coupled with rationalization. When using this maneuver, the aggressor is attempting to assert that his abusive behavior isn't really as harmful or irresponsible as someone else may be claiming. It's the aggressor's attempt to make a molehill out of a mountain.

I've presented the principal tactics that covert-aggressives use to manipulate and control others. They are not always easy to recognize. Although all aggressive personalities tend to use these tactics, covert-aggressives generally use them slickly, subtly and adeptly. Anyone dealing with a covertly aggressive person will need to heighten gut-level sensitivity to the use of these tactics if they're to avoid being taken in by them.

original article here

How Psychopaths View Their World

Most psychopaths are very arrogant and cocky. However, when charming a potential victim, they say all the "right" things and make you believe they are kind-hearted souls; not always, but often enough. The truth is, psychopaths are not altruistic and do not really care about friendships or ties. Guggenbuhl-Craig states that they are very talented at appearing much more humble than the average person, but are hardly so. Some are also able to feign concern about the lower classes and profess that they are on the side of the underdog, the poor, and so forth.


A psychopath may claim, for instance (if he's from a low socio-economic class), that he dislikes rich people intensely, but at the same time, he will inwardly yearn and envy what they have. He is like the narcissist, desiring to reflect a false image of himself through his possessions. Among his possessions are included human beings: girlfriends, wives, and children. Some psychopaths can even very fond of animals (contrary to the common viewpoint), but still view them as objects in relation to themselves.

The psychopath is filled with greed inside, relating to the world through power, even though, as I said, on the outside he can claim to be on the side of the disenfranchised or the downtrodden. I knew one who liked to repeat phrases such as "they have to stop keeping my brothers down" but he didn't mean a word of it. He was actually a racist. The psychopath can also often identify himself as a revolutionary.

On the flip side, the psychopath also often paints a picture of himself as the downcast anti-hero (his "own worst enemy type") and some like to see themselves as lone-wolves. The psychopath may even claim he is sensitive and profound, but inside he is nothing but emptiness and greed. Whether or not the psychopath is aware of his behaviour is something that is often debated. I do believe that psychopaths usually know exactly what they are doing, although others suggest that psychopaths are "born, not made." [1]

As mentioned, psychopaths often claim to settle for second best (being their own worst enemy) and then think they deserve better. This may be manifested in the way they seek power -- either through money (i.e. material goods), manipulation and/or treating people as objects. By enacting such behaviours, the psychopath is also trying to "get back" at society and the world, in order to gain retribution. They will spend their entire lives doing this, whether they are rich or poor, or whatever their social background may be, although studies have shown that they often come from an impoverished or lower socio- economic background and/or social status. (In one of Dr. Donald Black's studies, many of the men were "overwhelmingly white, blue collar, lower middle class, and married, and most had not graduated from high school." [Black, 14]). (Let me add, despite Dr. Blacks' studies, psychopaths can still exist in any social class. Do not be misled).

I also wanted to point out that I will be using "he" and "him" for the term psychopath throughout this website; let it not be forgotten, yes, female psychopaths exist as well; however, according to the Sixth Edition of Abnormal Behavior, printed in 2000 by three male professors, David, Derald, and Stanley Sue, the rates do differ by gender. Included in their excellent text is a report by the The American Psychiatric Association that the general estimate is 3% for men, and less than 1% in women [Personality Disorders and Impulse Control Disorders, 238].

What is very disturbing about psychopaths, besides their sense of special entitlement, is the complete lack of empathy for normal people, for "antisocials (psychopaths) seem to lack a conscience, feeling little or no empathy for the people whose lives they touch...the antisocial effortlessly resists all regulation, unable to see beyond his self-interest or to adopt standards of right versus wrong." [Black, XIII].

Not all psychopath are uneducated low-class misfits. Some of them are quite handsome and have good careers, and use this all the more to their benefit. Take a look at Ted Bundy; my friend's mother once went on a double-date with him and claimed he was the nicest person. His mother said he was the "best son any mother could have." Bundy was also apparently quite good-looking, which made him even more dangerous. So not all psychopaths are derelict, low-class, high school drop-outs, there are many who also work in professional occupations.

Also, not all psychopaths are calm, cool, and collected. Some of them appear strange or odd, and their behaviour can be eccentric or unusual. I believe this is what can confuse victims most often. Psychopaths often appear [see pictures here]: intense and "electrifying". Do not be misled if someone appears harmless, "foolish", or seems offbeat. An "angelic" visage can also often fool people. Just picture John Wayne Gacy in his "clown costume" as he entertained children as one example.

A psychopath (he was diagnosed anti-social) I knew used the harmless cover-up quite well. Everyone thought he was very funny. I did too, at first. Then, little by little, I realised there was something "not right" about him. At first his seemingly harmless pranks were charming, but after a while, he became more of a nuisance and disrupted our work environment, which created havoc and tension between employees. I've learned, a psychopath can use these disguises for his own hidden purpose.

Regardless of race, social class, or occupation, however, the psychopath is dangerous to society, for "the nature of ASP (psychopathy) implies that it wreaks more havoc on society than most other mental illnesses do, since the disorder primarily involves reactions against the social environment that drag other people into its destructive web...The despair and anxiety wrought by antisocials (psychopaths) tragically affects families and communities, leaving deep physical and emotional scars..." [Black, 5].

There is much to the psychopathic personality which is baffling and disturbing. 1 in about 25-30 people are psychopathic (also known as sociopaths or anti-social -- the correct title being psychopath.) Since the majority or them are men, I wrote this site in part, to warn women about the dangers, especially women online, which I believe is a favourite "new medium" which appeals to psychopaths. I have personal experience with this subject as well. This is because "antisocials (psychopaths) are not just characters in our fictional or true-life entertainments. They are family members, friends, co-workers, neighbors, or strangers we may encounter every day." [Black, 10].

Pamela Jayne, M.A., writes that "30% of men are sociopathic." If about every three out of ten men I may meet are psychopathic, I would assume this is not something to take lightly. According to these statistics, that would mean every three out of ten men and maybe every one out of ten females. The truth is, we do not really know exactly how many individuals are psychopathic; however, there seems to be a rise in the prevalence of psychopathy and that is why some claim that numbers are higher. Dr. Black claims that psychopathy leads right behind depression, along with schizophrenia and borderline personality disorder, which is an astounding fact.

Do You Google Those You Meet Online?

Nearly two-thirds of daters use Facebook, Google and LinkedIn to scope out potential matches.

Online dating may no longer be taboo, but there's still the nagging question of safety associated with meeting someone over the internet.

Sure, some dating websites may begin screening their users, but in the land of "I'm-a-20-something-who-can't-pay-for-a-membership-or-for-your-fancy-background-checks" there's another alternative: total internet recon.

Yes, Google searching and Facebook stalking is good for more than just tracking the news on your former flames. In fact, the folks at JDate conducted a poll of their members to find out just how they gather information before meeting their online-interest in person.

Of the nearly 500 users surveyed, a whopping 59 percent of them use a combination of Facebook, Google and LinkedIn for investigative purposes. This makes a lot of sense—scan some photos, look for red flags in your search results and make sure your date has been honest about their work history. (note: if you find NOTHING - be suspicious. Better yet, don't meet people online.)

Some still stick to one platform—27 percent use Facebook only, 13 percent use Google only—but some searching is done nonetheless.

Now, the concept of "online stalking" is nothing new, but I must convey some words of caution for all of you research-crazy daters out there. Yes, knowledge is power, but don't spoil all of the mystery. Try and limit your pre-date investigation to a few basic questions. Ask yourself: Will I feel safe? Is this person an axe murderer? Is he going to dress like Marty McFly? Once you've squared all of that away, leave some room for on-the-date discovery. (and only meet in public the first few times)


(This would only work if the 'date' was using their REAL name and REAL location/ job - EOPC)

original article here

The Core of the Cyberpath: THE SOCIOPATH

...being alone isn't always a tragedy... I've known more than a few people in my life who made being alone seem like a little bit of heaven -- and I'll bet that you have known a few too. Run of the mill jerks and liars, two-timing cheats, verbal or physical abusers, small time con artists and that most dangerous one of all...the charming sociopath.

Oh, you've never met one? I sincerely envy you that, but just between friends, and speaking as someone who has had the misfortune to meet and all too closely observe one, let me introduce/warn you. Sociopaths are the most accomplished liar you've ever met in your life. In fact, they lie so well, that even when every instinct within you tells you they are lying through their teeth, you still can't quite make yourself accept the truth about them. They are masters of the old adage that says...if you want to get away with a lie make it such a big one that your audience/victims will believe it is true, simply because they cannot bring themselves to believe that anyone would actually tell such an outrageous lie...and think you were stupid enough to believe it! But their arrogance doesn't stop there, oh no, they lie, they cheat, they steal and they mercilessly use the very people who try to love them, or help them and they never...ever feel any guilt or remorse no matter who they hurt...unless of course it is themselves who are hurt.

Did I mention that they have no shame, an accomplished sociopath if caught outright, or even inconvenienced by any degree of disbelief will try to overbearingly dominate the situation with words, and if that doesn't work they will cry and whine and turn into a pitiful sniveling excuse for a human pleading for your mercy, with a lot of psycho-babble excuses for why it isn't their fault.

So now that I've introduced you to the lowest form of humanity, and possibly scared you half to death, or worse yet...made you snap your fingers and say, "I'll be darned that's what HE is--a freaking sociopath!" So now that I've done this to you, now what do I intend to do about it? Well I'll tell you. I intend to give you a few useful hints about things to watch out for and how to protect yourself and your family.

Sociopaths are likely to be rootless wanderers with nothing much to show for their lives. Why? For the simple reason that they are parasites. Therefore, sooner or later they always wear out their welcome and have to skip town or at the very least find a new set of victims. Of course, they always have some grandiose tale to explain their lack of home, family, possessions.... And believe me, it will be a truly convoluted tale -- starring them of course -- as the sympathetic, innocent victim of some horrible other person's treachery, deceit, thievery, evil etc. combined with lots of bad fortune and plenty of convenient reasons why they don't have any proof and why you can't talk to anyone, anywhere who can confirm any of this. And by the way, they probably won't be able to hold a "real job", because they have been in some sort of tragically disabling accident, or have an old war wound that prevents working! Let me state here for the record, I mean absolutely no offense to any veterans out there, because most sociopaths would be 4F'd in a heartbeat, so their war wounds and their war records are almost always going to be just another in a long line of lies! Anyway, whatever the excuse, even if they could find and hold a job for more than a few days, no self-respecting sociopath will work for a living ...they much prefer -- and in fact live for -- the thrill of leeching off of others like parasitic scum.

So what do you do to protect yourself against such a monster. It's really quite easy. Take nothing for granted. If you meet someone, whether it is on the internet, or at your local college campus, or at a bar or a movie or at a political rally or even in church and you decide you like them and want to get to know them better, use a reasonable amount of caution and always make sure that someone knows where you are, and who you are going to meet at all times. Don't give out too much information about yourself, and absolutely don't bring them home to meet the family until you "know" enough solid "facts" about them to trust that they are on the level and have a verifiable history. Try not to be paranoid, everyone has little secrets, and one little area that doesn't seem quite right is probably ok, but more than one should start to worry you, and if you have any real suspicions at all, either turn, walk away and never look back or visit a Web Detective Service and learn to protect yourself by investigating anyone, anywhere before it is too late! Find the facts that others want to hide. You can find missing people, including so-called long-lost relatives, court records, criminal records, vital records and more! Do it!

(thanks to OneOfSeven for this gem! - Fighter)

It's a Crime: Harassment

(INDIANA) Here’s how a Chesterton Police officer spent part of her shifts[].

At 9:36 a.m. on Monday, according to the officer’s initial report, a woman filed a complaint against her ex-boyfriend—with whom she’d broken up on Saturday—after he “harassed her extensively via telephone over the past 24 hours” and sent her as well a total of 46 texts.

“She stated that some are just general conversation but in some he makes threats against both her and her estranged husband,” the officer stated and included these examples: “Watch your back the next few weeks”; and “I’m going to put your husband in the hospital.”

The officer duly contacted the ex-boyfriend and strongly advised him to “cease all contact” with both the woman and the woman’s husband. The ex-boyfriend admitted having sent some “stupid” texts and promised the officer that he would so cease.

Then, at 3:25 p.m. on Tuesday, the ex-boyfriend discovered what it’s like to be on the receiving end of threatening texts, the officer stated in her second report on the case. Beginning at 8:30 a.m. that day, the ex-boyfriend complained, he’d gotten a series of threatening texts apparently from the estranged husband. Examples: “Im still waiting 4 u 2 run ur mouth some more”; “Why dont you tell police that u like 2 chase married women”; “Better yet why dont u meet me”; “Whats wrong? U have nothing 2 say now?” and “I will find u!”

The ex-boyfriend advised that he hasn’t responded to the estranged husband’s texts and doesn’t intend to, that at the moment that estranged husband doesn’t know where he lives and he wants keep it that way, and that the estranged husband owns “multiple firearms” and “he is afraid that (the estranged husband) may harm him.”

Then, 4:04 p.m. on Tuesday—less than 30 minutes after the boyfriend had filed his complaint—the woman’s estranged husband also reported receiving from the ex-boyfriend a derogatory text about his wife at 12:05 a.m. on Monday, the officer stated in her third report on the case. This time the officer strongly advised the estranged husband to “cease all contact” with the ex-boyfriend.

The officer told all parties that her reports will be forwarded to the Porter County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office for review.

Harassment

Harassment in Indiana is a Class B misdemeanor punishable by a term of up to six months in jail and a fine of $1,000.

Code defines it as occurring when “A person who, with intent to harass, annoy, or alarm another person but with no intent of legitimate communication,” makes a telephone call, sends a telegram, writes a letter, broadcasts over a CB radio, or uses a computer network to communicate with another person or to transmit “an obscene message or indecent or profane words.”

As Porter County Prosecuting Attorney Brian Gensel told the Chesterton Tribune, the key statutory element of the crime of harassment is “no intent of legitimate communication.” He gave this example. Say an estranged husband and wife are talking on the phone about the custody of their child. “There may be cussing and shouting, there may be trash talk, but at the end of the call they make some arrangement or reach some agreement about their child’s upraising. That’s not harassment. If there’s some legitimate communication beyond merely haranguing, then it’s not considered harassment. But if one parent is just calling up the other and screaming for the sake of screaming, then that may be harassment.”

Harassment can be a tricky crime to prosecute, Gensel noted. For one thing, “there’s the difficulty in interpreting a basis for what constitutes meaningful communication between the parties involved. Obscene calls are clearly harassment. But a text or call with a legitimate nugget of communication is not. It has to be wholly devoid of legitimate communication to be considered harassment under the law.”

For another, there really needs to be documentation of the harassment—a recorded call or a text—for a prosecution to be successful. “Otherwise, it’s just one person’s memory of what was said,” Gensel observed.

On occasion, a decision may be made not to prosecute because the harassment “was an isolated incident,” Gensel said. “Typically police officers took at whether the harassment is part of a continuing pattern and so do we.”

For the record, in November 2009 a Porter man was charged with harassment after Chesterton Police said that he e-mailed photos of himself to a Westchester Public Library employee and then left a note for her indicating that he was “waiting” for her.

Harassment as his deputies usually see it, Gensel said, tends to involve ex-friends, acquaintances, and family members in face-to-face or telephonic communication. Cyber-harassment is an altogether different issue. “One of the dilemmas about e-mails is who’s doing it, where are they doing it, and how will you find them?”

In any event, Gensel said, pinpointing the federal agency with jurisdiction in the matter can be problematic.

As it happens, Chesterton Police Chief George Nelson said, his officers spend a fair amount of their time responding to what are classified as either “Harassment” complaints or “Obscene/Harassing Phone Calls.” In 2009 alone, calls for service included a total of 122 of both.

More: according to the logs, the CPD officer who filed three separate reports on Monday and Tuesday devoted a total of 35 minutes of her time to the case or just under 12 minutes per report. If that average is in any way typical, the CPD devoted 24.4 hours or three full eight-hour shifts in 2010 to harassment complaints.

original article here

OH THE THINGS CYBERPATHS SAY!

OH, THE THINGS CYBERPATHS SAY!

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

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

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

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

Also, we encouraged him to seek counseling for the way he had treated his victims and even offered to help him find a counselor in their area. We never heard from him again; nor did we remove any of the postings. hhmmmm......

We have reports of cyberpaths filing restraining or cease & desist orders or DMCA Takedowns on their victims to turn it around make themselves or their families look like the hurt party. Some, we guess, have enough money to drag all their victims to court and blame them for not controlling the whole internet. Most times - they have taken doctored or 'selective' information to law enforcement to get these orders. Law enforcement is often SHOCKED when they find out they have been lied to by these seemingly 'upright citizens.'

Sheer stupidity. All to support lies.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Remember - abuse happens in secret.

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

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

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

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

[the victim] is lying/ made it all up

[the victim] is psycho/ crazy

[the victim] set me up

[the victim] is obsessed with me

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

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

I don't even know [the victim]

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

It never happened

[The victim] is just jealous

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

That is false, I am the victim here!

They [the victim] abused ME!!

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

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

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

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

"GIVE IT A REST"

Mrs. Drew - you have confirmed via your lawyer's statements: that were full of "poor me" and blame-shifting to your victim (a 13 year old victim) that you are mentally disordered. You have proved your cyberpathy - because you just did precisely what every other perverted predator here does: BLAME YOUR VICTIM!

Nathan Thomas (a.k.a. "T") asked one of Targets to please not "annoy him" once she found out. He also accused one of his many overlapping wives of CAUSING the problem because she DIDN'T STAND BY HIM (i.e. believe and support his lies). You used women for free sex, room, board - even MARRIED THEM and now you don't want them to "ANNOY YOU?"

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

Sick... just sick.

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

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

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

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

She (like many of our victims) only told his wife in the hopes his wife would HELP him break his sex addiction and exploitation of women. It's too easy to believe women like this are doing it for revenge. But often, they aren't! She felt compelled to go to police to protect her children - and look what happened! A $2million a year brothel ole Dunetz/ Yidwithlid was going to for about 3-4 years - was BUSTED!

Recently Yid With Lid went so far as to send a statement that this whole thing was because Target #1 was "jealous" that he wouldn't "bang" Target #1 because she is fat & ugly and (most hysterical) he "didn't want to hurt his wife." Very third grade. Obviously, the expensive hookers, phone sex and other women were of no consequence in hurting his wife. Despite him trying to tell everyone that his victims are jealous and planting it all.

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

from Yid's blog

______________

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

Victims:

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

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

IN FACT, THEY BLAME THE VICTIM FOR TELLING!!

To make the point about how these predators have no feelings or feel the least bit sorry for what they do to you. Think about how they belittle, smear & blow you and your trauma off.

And yes, its trauma - make no mistake.

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

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

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

EMOTIONAL RAPE IS A STATIC EVENT.

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

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

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

There's a huge difference between obsession and JUSTICE.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE!

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

REMEMBER: People who are honest have nothing to hide.

MORE: VERBAL ATTACKS OF THE SOCIOPATH