Woman Posts her Stalker's Details to 'Defend Herself'

By Chris Parsons

Taking action: German high jumper Ariane Friedrich posted 

her stalker's personal details to 'defend herself'

A sleazy Internet stalker who sent explicit photos to a world high jump star got more than he bargained for - when she posted his personal details to her thousands of fans. German athletics star Ariane Friedrich - who also works as a police officer - named and shamed her online stalker after being emailed photos of a man's genitals.

The 28-year-old star, who will be gunning for high jump gold at the London olympics, posted the man's name, email address and home address on her Facebook page 'as a way of making clear that I am prepared to act'. Friedrich, a bronze medalist a the 2009 World Athletics Championships, said she posted the man's details to 'defend herself' from the many inappropriate emails she receives. In her role as a police officer, the German is also thought to be planning to bring charges against the man. In one post on her official Facebook page, Friedrich, from Frankfurt, told her fans: 'I’ve been offended in the past, sexually harassed and I’ve had a stalker before. 'It’s time to act; it’s time to defend myself. And that’s what I’m doing. No more and no less.'

She defiantly insisted in another post that just because she has a higher profile than others, she does not believe she should be the subject of those who want to 'attack, insult, or sexually harass'.

Friedrich's manager, Günter Eisinger, attempted to play down the incident amid concerns it could affect her preparations for London 2012.  Mr Eisinger told The Local on Saturday: 'The issue has nothing to do with the public. 'We can do without any stress factors.'

original article found here

Cyberstalking by Exes - It's Illegal

by Jann Blackstone-Ford & Sharyl Jupe

(Florida, U.S.A.) Question: I'm going through a divorce. Yesterday I found out my soon-to-be ex hacked my email account and changed all my passwords so he could read my private business. Then he changed them back, thinking I wouldn't know — but they send an alert and my email comes through my phone, so I knew what he was doing. He thinks I had an affair because he still can't believe I would leave him just because he's a jerk, so he's looking for some justification I was fooling around. I know you are going to say it's bad ex-etiquette, but what can I do about it?

Answer: It's not only bad ex-etiquette, but it also could be regarded as cyberstalking, and that's illegal. Hacking an ex's email is not new, but unless the victim feels he or she is danger, rarely does that person press charges. It really depends if this is an obsessed ex and your life is in danger or merely someone feeling particularly desperate one day and making bad choices. Hopefully, from your history with this guy, you know which it is. If it's an act of desperation, talking to him will probably do the trick, but make your boundaries clear.

After a breakup, people often continue to sleep together for various reasons and this sends mixed messages — especially if one of the parties wants to stay together. If you are doing this, or anything else like it, you may be contributing to the confusion. Make sure you're not doing anything that will keep your ex hanging on. That said, if your ex has acted irrationally in the past and you are frightened, consider going to the police. The police take cyberstalking very seriously and many have departments devoted specifically to problems with Internet and social-media interaction.

Unfortunately, it's common practice to share passwords — even PIN numbers — with your partner, but this can present a problem after a breakup. It gives them easy access to your personal life and even your money, so best practice is to change all passwords and PIN numbers as soon as you realize the breakup is final. You may even want to change the email accounts linked to your Facebook or other social-media accounts, so there is no way he can hack into your private business.

It goes without saying that your ex is breaking just about every rule of good ex-etiquette, but that doesn't mean that you have to break the rules when dealing with him. Being honest (Ex-Etiquette Rule No. 8) is always a good one to rely on, as well as rules No. 5 and 6, don't be spiteful and don't hold grudges. Finally, one rule your ex definitely forgot, Rule No. 9, is "respect each other's turf." Respect is critical to any successful relationship — even when breaking up.

original article found here

NOTE: CONTRARY TO WHAT THESE AUTHORS SAY - MANY POLICE DEPARTMENTS DO NOT, UNFORTUNATELY, TAKE CYBERSTALKING SERIOUSLY. - EOPC

Even If People Don't Like It - Freedom of Speech is Protected

(NEW MEXICO, U.S.A.) — A New Mexico man's decision to lash out with a billboard ad saying his ex-girlfriend had an abortion against his wishes has touched off a legal debate over free speech and privacy rights.

The sign on Alamogordo's main thoroughfare shows 35-year-old Greg Fultz holding the outline of an infant. The text reads, "This Would Have Been A Picture Of My 2-Month Old Baby If The Mother Had Decided To Not KILL Our Child!"

Fultz's ex-girlfriend has taken him to court for harassment and violation of privacy. A domestic court official has recommended the billboard be removed.

But Fultz's attorney argues the order violates his client's free speech rights.

"As distasteful and offensive as the sign may be to some, for over 200 years in this country the First Amendment protects distasteful and offensive speech," Todd Holmes said.

The woman's friends say she had a miscarriage, not an abortion, according to a report in the Albuquerque Journal.

Holmes disputes that, saying his case is based on the accuracy of his client's statement.
"My argument is: What Fultz said is the truth," Holmes said.

The woman's lawyer said she had not discussed the pregnancy with her client. But for Ellen Jessen, whether her client had a miscarriage or an abortion is not the point. The central issue is her client's privacy and the fact that the billboard has caused severe emotional distress, Jessen said.

"Her private life is not a matter of public interest," she told the Alamogordo Daily News. Jessen says her client's ex-boyfriend has crossed the line.

For his part, Holmes invoked the U.S. Supreme Court decision from earlier this year concerning the Westboro Baptist Church, which is known for its anti-gay protests at military funerals and other high-profile events. He believes the high court's decision to allow the protests, as hurtful as they are, is grounds for his client to put up the abortion billboard.

"Very unpopular offensive speech," he told the Alamogordo Daily News. "The Supreme Court, in an 8 to 1 decision, said that is protected speech."

Holmes says he is going to fight the order to remove the billboard through a District Court appeal.

original article here

(hat tip: Mary M.)

Even If People Don't Like It - Freedom of Speech is Protected

(NEW MEXICO, U.S.A.) — A New Mexico man's decision to lash out with a billboard ad saying his ex-girlfriend had an abortion against his wishes has touched off a legal debate over free speech and privacy rights.

The sign on Alamogordo's main thoroughfare shows 35-year-old Greg Fultz holding the outline of an infant. The text reads, "This Would Have Been A Picture Of My 2-Month Old Baby If The Mother Had Decided To Not KILL Our Child!"

Fultz's ex-girlfriend has taken him to court for harassment and violation of privacy. A domestic court official has recommended the billboard be removed.

But Fultz's attorney argues the order violates his client's free speech rights.

"As distasteful and offensive as the sign may be to some, for over 200 years in this country the First Amendment protects distasteful and offensive speech," Todd Holmes said.

The woman's friends say she had a miscarriage, not an abortion, according to a report in the Albuquerque Journal.

Holmes disputes that, saying his case is based on the accuracy of his client's statement.
"My argument is: What Fultz said is the truth," Holmes said.

The woman's lawyer said she had not discussed the pregnancy with her client. But for Ellen Jessen, whether her client had a miscarriage or an abortion is not the point. The central issue is her client's privacy and the fact that the billboard has caused severe emotional distress, Jessen said.

"Her private life is not a matter of public interest," she told the Alamogordo Daily News. Jessen says her client's ex-boyfriend has crossed the line.

For his part, Holmes invoked the U.S. Supreme Court decision from earlier this year concerning the Westboro Baptist Church, which is known for its anti-gay protests at military funerals and other high-profile events. He believes the high court's decision to allow the protests, as hurtful as they are, is grounds for his client to put up the abortion billboard.

"Very unpopular offensive speech," he told the Alamogordo Daily News. "The Supreme Court, in an 8 to 1 decision, said that is protected speech."

Holmes says he is going to fight the order to remove the billboard through a District Court appeal.

original article here

(hat tip: Mary M.)

Cyber-Harassment Trial Found No Proof of 'Emotional Distress'

Your thoughts, readers? -- EOPC

by Shane Anthony

Jurors who acquitted a St. Peters woman in a cyber-harassment case said prosecutors failed to prove a 17-year-old girl suffered emotional distress when the woman posted her information in a sexually suggestive Craigslist ad.

On Thursday, the jury of seven women and five men found Elizabeth Thrasher, 41, not guilty of felony harassment for making the post after she and the teenager exchanged a series of insults on MySpace. Attorneys said this was the first case to go to trial since the state Legislature passed a cyber-harassment law in 2008 in the wake of Dardenne Prairie teenager Megan Meier's suicide.

Jury foreman John Seifert said Friday that all the jurors believed the state had proven all but one element of its case against Thrasher — that the girl had suffered emotional distress.

"We really felt for her," Seifert said. "She made this claim, but we felt like there wasn't any evidence that supported the claim."

The state was required to prove seven elements of the crime. Juror Christine Cundiff said jurors agreed unanimously that prosecutors proved six. But they didn't believe the girl's testimony was proof enough that she had suffered emotional distress, she said.

"We felt the charge of a felony was extremely serious to send someone to prison when we were not 100 percent guilty on all seven (elements)," Cundiff said.

The spat between Thrasher and the girl erupted on May 1, 2009. Thrasher had a conflict with the girl's mother, who was dating Thrasher's ex-husband.

After the two exchanged insults over MySpace, Thrasher used information from the girl's MySpace account to create a sexually suggestive Craigslist ad under the "Casual Encounters" section. The posting featured the girl's photos, cell phone number, e-mail address and the restaurant where she worked.

The girl testified that after the Craigslist post, she started receiving text messages, pictures and phone calls from men. One came to the restaurant looking for her and was asked to leave by the manager, she said.

The girl said she eventually quit her job. She testified she was afraid of being raped and killed.

Prosecutors also called two police investigators to testify, but jurors said they wanted to hear from someone else who could corroborate the girl's testimony about distress.

"Anybody that could have taken the stand and said this is what I've noticed about the young lady," Seifert said.

St. Charles County Prosecutor Jack Banas said he had not thought other witnesses were needed. (note: Banas was the Prosecutor in the Megan Meier case.)

"We didn't feel it was necessary to go on any further to prove what comes out of her mouth based on the assumption that most people would be distressed to have their personal information put on Craigslist," he said.

Thrasher's attorney, Mike Kielty, said the law is flawed.

"It criminalizes behavior that, but for the medium, wouldn't be criminal."

original article here

Cyber-Harassment Trial Found No Proof of 'Emotional Distress'

Your thoughts, readers? -- EOPC

by Shane Anthony

Jurors who acquitted a St. Peters woman in a cyber-harassment case said prosecutors failed to prove a 17-year-old girl suffered emotional distress when the woman posted her information in a sexually suggestive Craigslist ad.

On Thursday, the jury of seven women and five men found Elizabeth Thrasher, 41, not guilty of felony harassment for making the post after she and the teenager exchanged a series of insults on MySpace. Attorneys said this was the first case to go to trial since the state Legislature passed a cyber-harassment law in 2008 in the wake of Dardenne Prairie teenager Megan Meier's suicide.

Jury foreman John Seifert said Friday that all the jurors believed the state had proven all but one element of its case against Thrasher — that the girl had suffered emotional distress.

"We really felt for her," Seifert said. "She made this claim, but we felt like there wasn't any evidence that supported the claim."

The state was required to prove seven elements of the crime. Juror Christine Cundiff said jurors agreed unanimously that prosecutors proved six. But they didn't believe the girl's testimony was proof enough that she had suffered emotional distress, she said.

"We felt the charge of a felony was extremely serious to send someone to prison when we were not 100 percent guilty on all seven (elements)," Cundiff said.

The spat between Thrasher and the girl erupted on May 1, 2009. Thrasher had a conflict with the girl's mother, who was dating Thrasher's ex-husband.

After the two exchanged insults over MySpace, Thrasher used information from the girl's MySpace account to create a sexually suggestive Craigslist ad under the "Casual Encounters" section. The posting featured the girl's photos, cell phone number, e-mail address and the restaurant where she worked.

The girl testified that after the Craigslist post, she started receiving text messages, pictures and phone calls from men. One came to the restaurant looking for her and was asked to leave by the manager, she said.

The girl said she eventually quit her job. She testified she was afraid of being raped and killed.

Prosecutors also called two police investigators to testify, but jurors said they wanted to hear from someone else who could corroborate the girl's testimony about distress.

"Anybody that could have taken the stand and said this is what I've noticed about the young lady," Seifert said.

St. Charles County Prosecutor Jack Banas said he had not thought other witnesses were needed. (note: Banas was the Prosecutor in the Megan Meier case.)

"We didn't feel it was necessary to go on any further to prove what comes out of her mouth based on the assumption that most people would be distressed to have their personal information put on Craigslist," he said.

Thrasher's attorney, Mike Kielty, said the law is flawed.

"It criminalizes behavior that, but for the medium, wouldn't be criminal."

original article here

Girl gets revenge on ex-boyfriend by spamming Google with his image

NOTE!!: BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU PUT ONLINE (forums, online dating, Facebook, etc) about Yourself and ANYONE else!!! - Sometimes even GOOGLE can't remove it!

It may be a tale as old as time but, in a modern version of 'hell hath no fury like a woman scorned', a teenage boy's ex-girlfriend has wreaked her revenge by spamming Google with his image.

Using a picture of hapless Jack Weppler, his former partner has pasted his image all over the search engine under such unloving messages such as 'I can't read', claiming unfashionable rocker Kenny Loggins 'is my saviour' and he's working in the gym 'on my two pack'.

He comes in for further ridicule with an assessment of his fashion sense: 'V-necks. Mom jeans' and the camp avowal 'This diva needs his stage', alongside dozens of others which are not fit to print.

The cyber-attack has left him 'stressed out and embarrassed', according to his mother, who apparently wrote to Google's webmaster help forum for advice on how to remove the images.

She wrote: 'My minor son's ex-girlfriend took a copyrighted picture of him (we own copyright) and uploaded it more than 60 times to a website.

On each image she wrote slanderous, defamatory and pornographic captions.

'The webmaster of the site states he removed the images 6 weeks ago, but Google Search still shows all the images.'

'My son is so stressed out and embarrassed and we've done everything we can to get images off of Google including URL removal tool, a letter to Google Legal with all the URLs because of copyright infringement, and nothing has worked!'

Online commentators have commiserated, but advised that no one should upset a partner with such technical knowledge of search engines.

A Google spokeswoman said: 'We crawl, index and rank millions of web pages everyday, to make content discoverable and searchable for users online.

'To get content removed, users should contact the webmaster or owner of the site where that content appears.

'They can also file a removal request with Google at: https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/removals.'

original article here

Girl gets revenge on ex-boyfriend by spamming Google with his image

NOTE!!: BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU PUT ONLINE (forums, online dating, Facebook, etc) about Yourself and ANYONE else!!! - Sometimes even GOOGLE can't remove it!

It may be a tale as old as time but, in a modern version of 'hell hath no fury like a woman scorned', a teenage boy's ex-girlfriend has wreaked her revenge by spamming Google with his image.

Using a picture of hapless Jack Weppler, his former partner has pasted his image all over the search engine under such unloving messages such as 'I can't read', claiming unfashionable rocker Kenny Loggins 'is my saviour' and he's working in the gym 'on my two pack'.

He comes in for further ridicule with an assessment of his fashion sense: 'V-necks. Mom jeans' and the camp avowal 'This diva needs his stage', alongside dozens of others which are not fit to print.

The cyber-attack has left him 'stressed out and embarrassed', according to his mother, who apparently wrote to Google's webmaster help forum for advice on how to remove the images.

She wrote: 'My minor son's ex-girlfriend took a copyrighted picture of him (we own copyright) and uploaded it more than 60 times to a website.

On each image she wrote slanderous, defamatory and pornographic captions.

'The webmaster of the site states he removed the images 6 weeks ago, but Google Search still shows all the images.'

'My son is so stressed out and embarrassed and we've done everything we can to get images off of Google including URL removal tool, a letter to Google Legal with all the URLs because of copyright infringement, and nothing has worked!'

Online commentators have commiserated, but advised that no one should upset a partner with such technical knowledge of search engines.

A Google spokeswoman said: 'We crawl, index and rank millions of web pages everyday, to make content discoverable and searchable for users online.

'To get content removed, users should contact the webmaster or owner of the site where that content appears.

'They can also file a removal request with Google at: https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/removals.'

original article here

Hitman E-Scam Exposed

(United Kingdom) Hundreds of (retired) pensioners have been targeted by an email scam telling them to pay £5,000 or be killed by a HITMAN.

The chilling message, believed to be sent by an Eastern European gang, claims the "killers" have been watching OAPs in Eastbourne, East Sussex.

One woman victim aged 72, said: "I'm terrified. I checked my account to see if I had enough to pay them."

Cops dubbed the scam "particularly nasty".

ORIGINAL ARTICLE HERE

Hitman E-Scam Exposed

(United Kingdom) Hundreds of (retired) pensioners have been targeted by an email scam telling them to pay £5,000 or be killed by a HITMAN.

The chilling message, believed to be sent by an Eastern European gang, claims the "killers" have been watching OAPs in Eastbourne, East Sussex.

One woman victim aged 72, said: "I'm terrified. I checked my account to see if I had enough to pay them."

Cops dubbed the scam "particularly nasty".

ORIGINAL ARTICLE HERE

Back in Court With Second Lawsuit Against Dating Advice Site

By David Ardia


Pittsburgh lawyer Todd Hollis is back in court with a second lawsuit against the dating advice site Don'tDateHimGirl.com, whose users accused him of infidelity and infecting women with herpes. Hollis had previously filed a defamation lawsuit in Pennsylvania state court against the owner of the site back in June 2006. The Florida-based web site and its owner Tasha Joseph were able to have that case dismissed for lack of personal jurisdiction.

Acting as his own lawyer, Hollis filed a new complaint in federal court in Miami last week, alleging defamation, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and false light invasion of privacy. Hollis told the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette that

he reluctantly sued again in Miami because Ms. Cunningham refused to remove the numerous lies that her Web site has published about him. "I never wanted to file a lawsuit. I wanted my name cleared," he said yesterday.

Tasha Cunningham, formerly known as Tasha Joseph, launched DontDateHimGirl.com two years ago. The site allows anonymous users to post information and photos of men, often accusing them of infidelity and bad behavior. Cunningham told the Post-Gazette that she would not answer questions about herself or the lawsuit, but gave the paper a written statement:

DontDateHimGirl.com's mission is to empower women with the information and connections that help them make better life decisions. DDHG.com is fully protected [from defamation lawsuits] by the Communication Decency Act. ... Any attack or lawsuit put forth regarding DDHG.com will be dealt with strongly, swiftly and in a manner which will seek to end this type of erroneous, wasteful litigation.

As we've noted in a number of past posts, section 230 of the Communications Decency Act [7] grants immunity to website operators for these types of claims if the content is created by third-parties.

(Note: The Communications Decent Act governs EOPC as well.)

Update:

03/31/2008: Cunningham answered Hollis' complaint and filed a counterclaim against Hollis for defamation. The defamation claim arose from an telecopier document allegedly sent by an organization related to Hollis that stated as fact that Cunningham had been convicted of grand theft by the State of Florida.

04/14/2008: Defendants filed a motion for partial summary judgment. The motion argued that defendants were entitled to summary judgment on several of plaintiff's claims because certain examples of the disputed content were true and certain examples were entitled to protection under CDA 230.

03/2008 through 05/2008: Plaintiff and defendants filed a series of motions disputing discovery issues. These primarily concern defendants' requests for information from plaintiff and plaintiffs requests to depose individuals regarding defendants' reputation.

05/15/2008: Court dismissed Cunningham's counterclaim at Cunningham's request and granted Cunningham's request for protective orders that would prevent plaintiff from deposing certain individuals on the issue of defendants' reputation.

06/20/2008: The case has been dismissed with prejudice by stipulation of both parties. Details of the settlement are not yet available.

(as you can see - be careful about dragging people to court - because things about YOU will come out as well!)

Back in Court With Second Lawsuit Against Dating Advice Site

By David Ardia


Pittsburgh lawyer Todd Hollis is back in court with a second lawsuit against the dating advice site Don'tDateHimGirl.com, whose users accused him of infidelity and infecting women with herpes. Hollis had previously filed a defamation lawsuit in Pennsylvania state court against the owner of the site back in June 2006. The Florida-based web site and its owner Tasha Joseph were able to have that case dismissed for lack of personal jurisdiction.

Acting as his own lawyer, Hollis filed a new complaint in federal court in Miami last week, alleging defamation, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and false light invasion of privacy. Hollis told the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette that

he reluctantly sued again in Miami because Ms. Cunningham refused to remove the numerous lies that her Web site has published about him. "I never wanted to file a lawsuit. I wanted my name cleared," he said yesterday.

Tasha Cunningham, formerly known as Tasha Joseph, launched DontDateHimGirl.com two years ago. The site allows anonymous users to post information and photos of men, often accusing them of infidelity and bad behavior. Cunningham told the Post-Gazette that she would not answer questions about herself or the lawsuit, but gave the paper a written statement:

DontDateHimGirl.com's mission is to empower women with the information and connections that help them make better life decisions. DDHG.com is fully protected [from defamation lawsuits] by the Communication Decency Act. ... Any attack or lawsuit put forth regarding DDHG.com will be dealt with strongly, swiftly and in a manner which will seek to end this type of erroneous, wasteful litigation.

As we've noted in a number of past posts, section 230 of the Communications Decency Act [7] grants immunity to website operators for these types of claims if the content is created by third-parties.

(Note: The Communications Decent Act governs EOPC as well.)

Update:

03/31/2008: Cunningham answered Hollis' complaint and filed a counterclaim against Hollis for defamation. The defamation claim arose from an telecopier document allegedly sent by an organization related to Hollis that stated as fact that Cunningham had been convicted of grand theft by the State of Florida.

04/14/2008: Defendants filed a motion for partial summary judgment. The motion argued that defendants were entitled to summary judgment on several of plaintiff's claims because certain examples of the disputed content were true and certain examples were entitled to protection under CDA 230.

03/2008 through 05/2008: Plaintiff and defendants filed a series of motions disputing discovery issues. These primarily concern defendants' requests for information from plaintiff and plaintiffs requests to depose individuals regarding defendants' reputation.

05/15/2008: Court dismissed Cunningham's counterclaim at Cunningham's request and granted Cunningham's request for protective orders that would prevent plaintiff from deposing certain individuals on the issue of defendants' reputation.

06/20/2008: The case has been dismissed with prejudice by stipulation of both parties. Details of the settlement are not yet available.

(as you can see - be careful about dragging people to court - because things about YOU will come out as well!)

Trying to Recruit Prostitutes - Through MySpace

By Helen Croydon

Ordinary women are being lured into prostitution through networking sites with offers of glamour and cash.


After a friend was approached through her MySpace profile with the promise she’d “earn £100 an hour having fun”, I went undercover to find out exactly what these girls are being lured in to.

The flattering email – from “Jules” – complimented her on her appearance and told her she’d be able to “select the type of clients she sees and approve every appointment”.

It also assured her that security checks would be taken care of.

So, to expose the reality, I emailed Jules, calling myself Charlotte and pretending to be interested.

Two days later I turned up to meet her at a London Tube station, armed with a small bag of clothes.

She’d asked me to bring a selection of sexy outfits so she could take photographs and put my “working” profile up on the web right away.

Jules reeked of alcohol and later apologised for “being a bit tipsy”. She’d been with a client that day and had been drinking champagne. “You get a lot of that in this job. So if you like champagne you’re on to a winner,” she laughed.

We settled into a nearby Starbucks and she immediately reassured me: “You’ve got the job by the way. This is not really an interview – if we like the look of you, you can start.”

She didn’t ask about my background, my age, whether I’d done this before and she didn’t question my emotional state.

The only questions she asked me in the course of our two-hour meeting were what sexual acts I was uncomfortable with and what days I was unavailable to work.

She never once made any reference to safe sex or asked if I’d had sexual health checks myself.

She told me the going rate is £100 an hour. She charges a £25 booking fee plus a £10 fee for every hour.

But for the first five bookings, she takes an extra £10 per hour because she claims it takes extra time to push the profiles of new girls. That means her recruits are expected to perform a series of sexual acts for just £55, and to arrange their own transport.

“We used to be able to charge more, but with the credit crunch it’s gone down, and there are much less overnight stays,” she said. “You would have got a lot for those – around £800.”

Jules explained that the price could vary from week to week.

“If we find you’re getting loads of inquiries we might put your prices up but if you’re not getting much response from the website, and it does happen, we’ll have to put your prices down.”

I asked her how the security checks were done. “Oh, that’s Jonathan, he does all the client side of things, I don’t know how he checks, but trust me, he does.”

Having supposedly calmed my fears about safety, she went on to paint a glamorous picture of a life full of luxury hotels and gifts. “I’ve not bought perfume for two years,” she bragged.

“You’ll meet so many interesting people. I’ve had all sorts of clients from High Court judges to electricians.”

After a half-hour chat, she was keen to get me to the hotel to do the paperwork. She had a room booked that she’d used to entertain a client earlier.

She wanted to use the room to photograph me. I asked if we could do the paperwork in the hotel bar – unwilling to have my photos taken by a stranger.

Jules ordered a large glass of wine and water for me then produced three sheets of paper.

The first page asked for my real name, a “working name” and physical details such as height, bra size and eye colour.

I gave a false name but she never checked my ID. If I ever went missing on a job – how would anyone find me?

The second page was to select the type of male client I’d prefer. The third listed the sex acts I may be expected to perform. They were colour coded: white for what was “normal”, yellow for “what I can refuse to do” and blue for what would merit “extra payment”.

The “extras” included “unprotected sex” and “unprotected sex until completion”. There were some phrases I’d never heard before. Jules didn’t offer to explain them.

After half an hour another girl joined us for the photo session. Jules had recruited her the day before.

Jane (her “working name”) was mouse-like. “I’d never normally do this,” she confessed as Jules went outside for a cigarette, “but so many things are bad in my life right now.

“I split with my boyfriend and then I lost my job and I just can’t get anything. I went to two other agencies from an advert on the internet. But both of them ripped me off.”

She reluctantly told how she’d given them an “appointment fee” of £200 or more then the so-called agencies disappeared without trace. “I have bills to pay, and this could just be what I need,” she concluded.

Worryingly, she seemed to genuinely believe that escorting was a good way of getting out of a bad situation.

Even more alarmingly, despite admitting she was in a very vulnerable state of mind, she was willing to be represented by a stranger who contacted her on the internet.

Certain types of prostitution are legal in the UK but for girls who chose to do it there is a significant risk to personal safety and emotional stability.

Chris Student from the International Union of Sex Workers warns: “I’d never encourage this type of work. But if people are going to do it they need to know exactly who they are working for, get ID, ask to meet other workers. This is an industry where there is a particular danger.”

Jules was persuasive and charming and it’s easy to see how girls hungry for money could trust her – and her reassurances that male clients go through security checks.

But what she does is another argument against having an open profile online. Anyone could be studying your photos, sizing you up as a possible sex worker.

Jules told me MySpace kept deleting her account when they found out she was contacting potential recruits. But it didn’t deter her. “I just start a new profile up again,” she laughed.

A MySpace spokesperson said: “We have measures to monitor emails, but unless something in the language triggers an alert, we can’t investigate. If someone reported a potential abusive email, we’d look into it.”

Excerpt from the MySpace email:

Hiya, you seem like an adventurous, fun-loving girl… perhaps you’d be interested in this?

Would you like to earn over £100 an hour having fun, part-time, with flexible hours to suit you? Working as little or as much as you want?

I’m an escort working together with part-time girls from 18 to 35 who earn on average over £100 an hour. Everyone works flexibly with hours to suit them – some work up to 10 hours a week, others only a couple of hours a month – it’s entirely up to you.

All the girls choose the kind of client they see and approve every appointment before it’s finalised.

The agency does all the marketing, sales and security so you have nothing at all to bother about except the appointments.

Thanks

Kisses, Jules

SOURCE

Trying to Recruit Prostitutes - Through MySpace

By Helen Croydon

Ordinary women are being lured into prostitution through networking sites with offers of glamour and cash.


After a friend was approached through her MySpace profile with the promise she’d “earn £100 an hour having fun”, I went undercover to find out exactly what these girls are being lured in to.

The flattering email – from “Jules” – complimented her on her appearance and told her she’d be able to “select the type of clients she sees and approve every appointment”.

It also assured her that security checks would be taken care of.

So, to expose the reality, I emailed Jules, calling myself Charlotte and pretending to be interested.

Two days later I turned up to meet her at a London Tube station, armed with a small bag of clothes.

She’d asked me to bring a selection of sexy outfits so she could take photographs and put my “working” profile up on the web right away.

Jules reeked of alcohol and later apologised for “being a bit tipsy”. She’d been with a client that day and had been drinking champagne. “You get a lot of that in this job. So if you like champagne you’re on to a winner,” she laughed.

We settled into a nearby Starbucks and she immediately reassured me: “You’ve got the job by the way. This is not really an interview – if we like the look of you, you can start.”

She didn’t ask about my background, my age, whether I’d done this before and she didn’t question my emotional state.

The only questions she asked me in the course of our two-hour meeting were what sexual acts I was uncomfortable with and what days I was unavailable to work.

She never once made any reference to safe sex or asked if I’d had sexual health checks myself.

She told me the going rate is £100 an hour. She charges a £25 booking fee plus a £10 fee for every hour.

But for the first five bookings, she takes an extra £10 per hour because she claims it takes extra time to push the profiles of new girls. That means her recruits are expected to perform a series of sexual acts for just £55, and to arrange their own transport.

“We used to be able to charge more, but with the credit crunch it’s gone down, and there are much less overnight stays,” she said. “You would have got a lot for those – around £800.”

Jules explained that the price could vary from week to week.

“If we find you’re getting loads of inquiries we might put your prices up but if you’re not getting much response from the website, and it does happen, we’ll have to put your prices down.”

I asked her how the security checks were done. “Oh, that’s Jonathan, he does all the client side of things, I don’t know how he checks, but trust me, he does.”

Having supposedly calmed my fears about safety, she went on to paint a glamorous picture of a life full of luxury hotels and gifts. “I’ve not bought perfume for two years,” she bragged.

“You’ll meet so many interesting people. I’ve had all sorts of clients from High Court judges to electricians.”

After a half-hour chat, she was keen to get me to the hotel to do the paperwork. She had a room booked that she’d used to entertain a client earlier.

She wanted to use the room to photograph me. I asked if we could do the paperwork in the hotel bar – unwilling to have my photos taken by a stranger.

Jules ordered a large glass of wine and water for me then produced three sheets of paper.

The first page asked for my real name, a “working name” and physical details such as height, bra size and eye colour.

I gave a false name but she never checked my ID. If I ever went missing on a job – how would anyone find me?

The second page was to select the type of male client I’d prefer. The third listed the sex acts I may be expected to perform. They were colour coded: white for what was “normal”, yellow for “what I can refuse to do” and blue for what would merit “extra payment”.

The “extras” included “unprotected sex” and “unprotected sex until completion”. There were some phrases I’d never heard before. Jules didn’t offer to explain them.

After half an hour another girl joined us for the photo session. Jules had recruited her the day before.

Jane (her “working name”) was mouse-like. “I’d never normally do this,” she confessed as Jules went outside for a cigarette, “but so many things are bad in my life right now.

“I split with my boyfriend and then I lost my job and I just can’t get anything. I went to two other agencies from an advert on the internet. But both of them ripped me off.”

She reluctantly told how she’d given them an “appointment fee” of £200 or more then the so-called agencies disappeared without trace. “I have bills to pay, and this could just be what I need,” she concluded.

Worryingly, she seemed to genuinely believe that escorting was a good way of getting out of a bad situation.

Even more alarmingly, despite admitting she was in a very vulnerable state of mind, she was willing to be represented by a stranger who contacted her on the internet.

Certain types of prostitution are legal in the UK but for girls who chose to do it there is a significant risk to personal safety and emotional stability.

Chris Student from the International Union of Sex Workers warns: “I’d never encourage this type of work. But if people are going to do it they need to know exactly who they are working for, get ID, ask to meet other workers. This is an industry where there is a particular danger.”

Jules was persuasive and charming and it’s easy to see how girls hungry for money could trust her – and her reassurances that male clients go through security checks.

But what she does is another argument against having an open profile online. Anyone could be studying your photos, sizing you up as a possible sex worker.

Jules told me MySpace kept deleting her account when they found out she was contacting potential recruits. But it didn’t deter her. “I just start a new profile up again,” she laughed.

A MySpace spokesperson said: “We have measures to monitor emails, but unless something in the language triggers an alert, we can’t investigate. If someone reported a potential abusive email, we’d look into it.”

Excerpt from the MySpace email:

Hiya, you seem like an adventurous, fun-loving girl… perhaps you’d be interested in this?

Would you like to earn over £100 an hour having fun, part-time, with flexible hours to suit you? Working as little or as much as you want?

I’m an escort working together with part-time girls from 18 to 35 who earn on average over £100 an hour. Everyone works flexibly with hours to suit them – some work up to 10 hours a week, others only a couple of hours a month – it’s entirely up to you.

All the girls choose the kind of client they see and approve every appointment before it’s finalised.

The agency does all the marketing, sales and security so you have nothing at all to bother about except the appointments.

Thanks

Kisses, Jules

SOURCE

Lori Drew (MySpace Suicide Perpetrator) Tries To Get Case Dismissed... AGAIN

A federal judge has tentatively rejected two motions to dismiss charges against a woman in a MySpace hoax that allegedly led to a 13-year-old girl's suicide.

During a hearing Thursday, U.S. District Judge George H. Wu said he intends to take more time to consider a third motion to dismiss the case against Lori Drew of O'Fallon, Mo. She is accused of helping create a false-identity account on the social networking site and harassing her young neighbor with cruel messages.

The girl subsequently hanged herself in 2006.

Drew has pleaded not guilty after being indicted by a federal grand jury in Los Angeles.

A defense attorney previously argued that prosecutors are bending a cyber crime statute to prosecute his client on charges of conspiracy and accessing computers without authorization to get information used to inflict emotional distress.

Wu set an Oct. 7 trial date.

SOURCE

Lori Drew (MySpace Suicide Perpetrator) Tries To Get Case Dismissed... AGAIN

A federal judge has tentatively rejected two motions to dismiss charges against a woman in a MySpace hoax that allegedly led to a 13-year-old girl's suicide.

During a hearing Thursday, U.S. District Judge George H. Wu said he intends to take more time to consider a third motion to dismiss the case against Lori Drew of O'Fallon, Mo. She is accused of helping create a false-identity account on the social networking site and harassing her young neighbor with cruel messages.

The girl subsequently hanged herself in 2006.

Drew has pleaded not guilty after being indicted by a federal grand jury in Los Angeles.

A defense attorney previously argued that prosecutors are bending a cyber crime statute to prosecute his client on charges of conspiracy and accessing computers without authorization to get information used to inflict emotional distress.

Wu set an Oct. 7 trial date.

SOURCE

Michigan woman charged with cyber-stalking

Police say messages posted to a blog were threatening, harassing

In an electronic age which makes every text-message, e-mail and blog entry part of cyberspace permanent record, a particularly vicious break-up can lead to criminal charges as well as broken hearts.
Frances Boensch, 28, of Essexville (Michigan), found that out the hard way. After contacting police ...about what she said were threats from a former lover, Michigan State Police launched an investigation that lead to cyber-stalking charges filed against Boensch.

Boensch was free on a $5,000 bond after being arraigned last week in Bay County District Court on a charge of stalking via posting a threatening message on the Internet.

If convicted of the felony, she faces up to two years in prison.

Boensch works at Delta College, teaching her colleagues to avoid sexual harassment.

But police and prosecutors have decided that entries in Boensch's blog, along with content of text messages and e-mails to the alleged victim, amount to Internet stalking.

In 1993, Michigan became the first state to make "electronic stalking" a crime, but Bay County Chief Assistant Prosecutor Nancy Borushko said this is the first case that she personally has been involved in.

"As more people have access to the Internet and get more comfortable online, I think we may see more charges like this," Borushko said. "We're not talking about protected speech here, we're talking about things that make the victim feel terrorized, threatened or molested."

The Times was unable to reach Boensch, of 886 N. York Drive, for comment.

Her defense attorney, Joseph S. Scorsone, said he advises his clients not to make statements while charges are pending, but that he will be prepared to make a statement on her behalf after the preliminary evidence hearing, set for Aug. 12.

The blog - frandazzel.com - has been cleared of the previous content, and the lone page at the address [used to show] a photo of Boensch's face, wearing sunglasses, in a cemetery full of white crosses.

"With much sadness, I have to report that frandazzel has died," the message said. "She was brutally raped and murdered for reasons unknown to us at this time."

The police report prepared by Michigan State Police Trooper Elizabeth Hunt, however, contains copies various blog postings, e-mails and text-messages. A blog - short for Web log - is like an online diary.

Hunt launched an investigation after Boensch, herself, called Delta College police to report that she was being threatened by someone via e-mail who claimed to have semi-nude photos of her that were about to be printed and distributed.

While no criminal charges stemmed from that incident, Hunt spoke to the person identified as the suspect, a former lover of Boensch, who provided additional information about the blog and other communications from Boensch.

"With technology," Borushko said, "things can be saved for a very long time."

Ironically, in literature distributed by Boensch to Delta employees, she urges her colleagues to "record the date and time" of any threatening actions by another and to "save all e-mails, voicemails, and messages that relate to the complaint."
~~~~

What is Internet stalking?

Michigan Compiled Law 750.411s forbids a person from posting a message 'through the use of any medium of communication, including the Internet or a computer, computer program, computer system, or computer network, or other electronic medium of communication, without the victim's consent' if several other factors are present.

Those factors are:

• The poster realizes 'that posting the message could cause two or more separate noncontinuous acts of unconsented contact with the victim.'

• Posting the message is intended to cause conduct that would make the victim feel terrorized, frightened, intimidated, threatened, harassed, or molested.

• Conduct arising from posting the message would cause a reasonable person to suffer emotional distress and to feel terrorized, frightened, intimidated, threatened, harassed, or molested.

• Conduct arising from posting the message causes the victim to suffer emotional distress and to feel terrorized, frightened, intimidated, threatened, harassed, or molested.

Conviction is punishable by up to two years in prison and $5,000 in fines.

However, if the posting results in a credible threat against the victim, violates probation or a restraining order or if the victim is under 18 and five years younger than the perpetrator, the crime in punishable by up to five years in prison.

The section does not prohibit constitutionally protected speech or activity.

FROM THIS RESOURCE

Michigan woman charged with cyber-stalking

Police say messages posted to a blog were threatening, harassing

In an electronic age which makes every text-message, e-mail and blog entry part of cyberspace permanent record, a particularly vicious break-up can lead to criminal charges as well as broken hearts.
Frances Boensch, 28, of Essexville (Michigan), found that out the hard way. After contacting police ...about what she said were threats from a former lover, Michigan State Police launched an investigation that lead to cyber-stalking charges filed against Boensch.

Boensch was free on a $5,000 bond after being arraigned last week in Bay County District Court on a charge of stalking via posting a threatening message on the Internet.

If convicted of the felony, she faces up to two years in prison.

Boensch works at Delta College, teaching her colleagues to avoid sexual harassment.

But police and prosecutors have decided that entries in Boensch's blog, along with content of text messages and e-mails to the alleged victim, amount to Internet stalking.

In 1993, Michigan became the first state to make "electronic stalking" a crime, but Bay County Chief Assistant Prosecutor Nancy Borushko said this is the first case that she personally has been involved in.

"As more people have access to the Internet and get more comfortable online, I think we may see more charges like this," Borushko said. "We're not talking about protected speech here, we're talking about things that make the victim feel terrorized, threatened or molested."

The Times was unable to reach Boensch, of 886 N. York Drive, for comment.

Her defense attorney, Joseph S. Scorsone, said he advises his clients not to make statements while charges are pending, but that he will be prepared to make a statement on her behalf after the preliminary evidence hearing, set for Aug. 12.

The blog - frandazzel.com - has been cleared of the previous content, and the lone page at the address [used to show] a photo of Boensch's face, wearing sunglasses, in a cemetery full of white crosses.

"With much sadness, I have to report that frandazzel has died," the message said. "She was brutally raped and murdered for reasons unknown to us at this time."

The police report prepared by Michigan State Police Trooper Elizabeth Hunt, however, contains copies various blog postings, e-mails and text-messages. A blog - short for Web log - is like an online diary.

Hunt launched an investigation after Boensch, herself, called Delta College police to report that she was being threatened by someone via e-mail who claimed to have semi-nude photos of her that were about to be printed and distributed.

While no criminal charges stemmed from that incident, Hunt spoke to the person identified as the suspect, a former lover of Boensch, who provided additional information about the blog and other communications from Boensch.

"With technology," Borushko said, "things can be saved for a very long time."

Ironically, in literature distributed by Boensch to Delta employees, she urges her colleagues to "record the date and time" of any threatening actions by another and to "save all e-mails, voicemails, and messages that relate to the complaint."
~~~~

What is Internet stalking?

Michigan Compiled Law 750.411s forbids a person from posting a message 'through the use of any medium of communication, including the Internet or a computer, computer program, computer system, or computer network, or other electronic medium of communication, without the victim's consent' if several other factors are present.

Those factors are:

• The poster realizes 'that posting the message could cause two or more separate noncontinuous acts of unconsented contact with the victim.'

• Posting the message is intended to cause conduct that would make the victim feel terrorized, frightened, intimidated, threatened, harassed, or molested.

• Conduct arising from posting the message would cause a reasonable person to suffer emotional distress and to feel terrorized, frightened, intimidated, threatened, harassed, or molested.

• Conduct arising from posting the message causes the victim to suffer emotional distress and to feel terrorized, frightened, intimidated, threatened, harassed, or molested.

Conviction is punishable by up to two years in prison and $5,000 in fines.

However, if the posting results in a credible threat against the victim, violates probation or a restraining order or if the victim is under 18 and five years younger than the perpetrator, the crime in punishable by up to five years in prison.

The section does not prohibit constitutionally protected speech or activity.

FROM THIS RESOURCE