READING RED FLAG BEHAVIORS IN INTERNET DATING

by Mary Jo Fay, RN, MSN

So you’re single again and the concept of Internet dating seems new and exciting! Upon your first glimpse, you feel like a kid in a candy store! New partners by the hundreds! People just like you – divorced, or otherwise broken relationships, hurt feelings, wounded souls – just looking to be loved by someone like YOU! Right??

Well, beware. Just as you need to be careful when you meet people in the bar scene, the Internet is chock full of predators as well. However, there are lots of "Red Flags" to look for to protect yourself, IF you know how to read the signs.

I’m tempted to write a book just on Internet dating "smarts." You know – things like what to say and not to say to appear to be kind, generous, and all those things that make the writer appear to be a perfect catch. And yet, how would the unsuspecting know then? The red flags would all be hidden and booby traps would be walked into by unsuspecting victims by the score!

Naw – I think it’s best to warn you – the recipient, what to look for and let the narcissistic Don Juan’s (or their female counterparts) show their true colors for what they are!

Here are a few actual statements from profiles of men currently on the Internet dating scene …

"I’m one of those individuals that is looking for a attractive, well kept, female…"

On his description of himself, he claims to be "very attractive."(Big red flag!) Hmmmm… has he looked in the mirror lately? Balding, slightly overweight, posed in three pictures on his Harley need I say more?

"Seeking smart, funny, sexy, balanced, introspective, well read, credible, flexible, independent, complete woman with a fine ass. If her ass is other than fine, I’ll guess we’ll have to focus on her brains and personality. If you’re not smiling right now, then my sense of humor either didn’t translate or you’ll not think me charming."

Was that supposed to be cute and endear him to me? I’ll pass…

Then of course, there are the guys who list their income, ($100,000 -$200,000!) and absolutely nothing else about themselves! Guess they figure that with their money they can get anyone they want. If you fall for that, it’s important to realize up front that money is the only thing important to them. There will not be depth of character, an interesting, empathetic personality, an interest in YOU.

"I dress my women in the finest clothes." (MY WOMEN?!)

This actual statement came from the same $200,000 income gentleman who sent me this quick email that said, "Meet me at Jake’s Bar tomorrow night at 7. You won’t be disappointed!" That’s it. No info on him except about his money and how he "dressed HIS women in the finest clothes."

Hmmmmm… when I opened up his photos, there he was with a woman who looked just like me! Talk about CREEPY!

I wrote him back and said "No thank you," that I didn’t think our profiles showed much in common. He wrote back livid … "What? You’re refusing to meet with me?" In essence … his ego screamed back over email, (never a pretty site) and I blocked any further communication with this demigod with all his money and fine clothes!

Another man (age 64), "winked" at me (I’m 48) to show me that he was interested. I guess he thought he was saving himself time and trouble with a bio that said something like this:

"I have retired here in Texas where it is warm and I can spend lots of time on my boat. Seeking a wonderful, attractive, intelligent woman companion to do the same with me. No fatties please."

NO FATTIES, PLEASE?!

Does he think that only overweight women will then leave him alone? Is he so blind not to understand that ANY woman with a brain will see that and say "What a jerk!"

Then of course, there are those mid life crisis statements that send me running the other way… Things like "Seeking someone age 25 – 35" when they themselves are 45 or beyond. (What, do they want to date their daughter? Will she even know what he’s talking about when he mentions the Kennedy asassination?) Or even weirder, the guy is age 45 but he’s looking for someone up to age 44. Now what’s up with that?

Of course, the other side of that is someone who is middle aged but has to be sure to tell readers in the first paragraph that "I look and act much younger than my age." PLEEAAASSEEEE!!!

Of course, if you do meet with one that seems like Mr. (or Ms.) Right, don’t be surprised if the person who arrives for your date looks 10 or 15 years older than the person in the photos … posting pics from the "younger years" seems to be a common behavior as well!

If someone seems too good to be true … they probably are!

SOURCE

Seduced into Scams: Online Lovers Often Duped

By Bob Sullivan

Richie's picture showed a jolly, bearded man curled up on a couch with a cat rubbing his face. "Loving, caring and hardworking," the online dating profile said.

When Theresa Smalley received a note from Richie last January asking if she wanted to chat, she was flattered. He seemed cute. The two began exchanging e-mails, friendly at first, but quickly swelling in intensity and passion. By Valentine's Day, Smalley received a box of chocolate candy, a teddy bear, and a helium balloon that said "I love you." Smalley, 46, was hooked, even though she had never met him.

Richie said he was from Milford, Mass., but that he was out of the country on a big construction job. He was helping build a stadium in Nigeria, he said. As soon as he returned, he promised, he'd come visit Smalley in Ohio. He couldn't wait, and neither could she.

The spirited e-mail romance hummed along for another two months before there was a problem. Richie said his boss paid him in postal money orders, and he was having trouble cashing them. Could Theresa do a small favor for him? Could she cash the money order for him, then wire the money to him in Nigeria? Smalley agreed, and over the next two weeks, she cashed two $900 money orders and sent along the funds. Then, Richie was ready to leave the country, but needed money to deal with a visa problem. She cashed another money order.

Then, Smalley's bank called her. Something was wrong.

"I had to call a special number at the bank. Even up until that point I still believed him. I had no qualms whatsoever cashing (the money orders)," Smalley said. Even after the bank told her the money orders had been altered — they were purchased for $20, but then "washed" and doctored to read $900 — she still held out hope. But a friend pointed her to an Internet site devoted to Nigerian scams, and suddenly, Smalley's world crashed down around her.

'My whole world had fallen apart'
"The bank told me I was responsible for that money. I had to pay them $2,700, which was everything I had," she said. "I was devastated. I felt like my whole world had fallen apart.

Smalley shared her version of events with MSNBC.com in the hopes that others might not fall for the same trickery.

"Never in my wildest dreams would I have ever known that this is all a part of an elaborate online scam. He spent four months gaining my trust and he did it."

So-called Nigerian scams, where victims are ultimately tricked into sending money to the African country using some irreversible method like a wire transfer, are common. The Secret Service and other U.S. agencies have issued warnings on the scams, also known as "419" or "advance-fee" frauds. But the seductive flavor of this type of the scam — known to some as "sweetheart scams" — and the incredible patience shown by the scammer reveal just how far con artists will go to trick their marks.

Ryan W. of Washington state, who asked that his last name be withheld, says he sent $15,200 to a similarly seductive scammer. And he wasn't even using an online dating service. Ryan was approached while hanging out in a chat room devoted to Grateful Dead fans. His seducer also claimed to be an American out of the country getting paid via money order, and also ultimately asked him to cash them. Five weeks later, when the bank came calling, all $11,000 in Ryan's bank account — most of it from a student loan earmarked for next semester's tuition — was frozen by his bank.

"Typically people go on the Net to get dates. I was just on there trading music," he said. "The thing that duped me was the whole music issue. She seemed to be into the music I was into."

Flowers bought with stolen credit cards
Nigerian-based con artists seem to have seized on sweetheart scams of late, said Dale Miskell, supervisory special agent in charge of an FBI cybercrime squad in Birmingham, Ala. Scam artists post ads to online dating sites and lurk in chat rooms with names like "40 and single," or "Recently dumped." Often, they reach out to a lonely soul with flowers or candy, purchased with a stolen credit card.

"A little gift of flowers or candy is a good aphrodisiac," said Miskell. "The next thing you know, they are in love. I can't tell you the number of women who have fallen for this."

Eventually, the con artists convince their soulmates to do them a big favor — help transfer funds out of the bank.

There have been so many victims that they are starting to find each other online. A new Yahoo group, "RomanceScams," was founded last month by Smalley and Barb Sluppick, who said she almost fell for a similar scam earlier this year. Among the hundreds of messages posted to the group are photographs of alleged scammers, links to potentially fraudulent online dating ads, and copies of come-on e-mails. The group is trying to publicize the problem to limit the damage.

"How many people are out there thinking they found the love of their life and they have no clue what's happening?" Sluppick said. "The first thing most people say to me when they contact me is, 'I can't believe I was so stupid.' "

Sweetheart scams appear to be on the rise, said Julie Ferguson, executive director of the Merchant Risk Council, which tracks scams for online retailers.

"I am definitely getting more calls on this. I used to get one every three months. Now, I get one every couple of weeks or so because it's the easiest way to get somebody hooked," Ferguson said. "The stories are so-gut-wrenching sad."

Some scammers seem to deliberately target groups set up for Christian singles, she said, where people may be less likely to be suspicious. "When you are meeting someone else on a Christian site, you think you are safe."

No dating site is immune from scams, said Jason Tarlowe, who operates MatchDoctor.com, where Smalley met Richie. "This hurts our business. We don't want this," Tarlowe said. "We're trying to do everything possible ... We don't want people to be taken in."

But they are, said Donna Gregory, supervisory internet crime specialist at the FBI's Internet Fraud Complaint Center. She said the con artists are relentless.

"We've even seen them take as long as a year (to seduce a mark)," Gregory said. Con artists will hunt for people's weaknesses, find out what they care about -- such as Grateful Dead music -- and then go in for the kill.

Sometimes, the online suitors don't even ask before sending money orders. They just send them, then guilt their targets into forwarding on the cash, Gregory said. In other cases, the con artists aren't after money -- they are after shipping help. They ask their correspondents to "re-ship" items to locations in Nigeria. The goods are often purchased with stolen credit cards, but the con artists have trouble getting them delivered out of the country, because many U.S. merchants are now wary of shipping to Nigeria. So the criminals need a middle-man.

"They say, 'Oh, once you have them, why not just send them? People say, 'I've got these packages and I don't know why,'" Gregory said.

Sluppick said one confused victim in her Yahoo support group currently has about $50,000 in merchandise that's been sent to her home, and she doesn't know what to do with it.

The Merchant Risk Council's Ferguson said victims can always contact her agency for help returning merchandise to the retailers.

'Keep your money to yourself'
But there is no returning money to consumers who have wired funds overseas, hoping to cement a love bond. Smalley said other would-be victims need to know about the perils of online matchmaking, and they need to listen to the little voices of hesitation and concern inside that she failed to heed.

"So much came back to me after all of this was done," she said. "I sat there thinking about everything. But these guys are professionals. They have the time. They have the patience."

Rhoda Cook has for years operated a Web site named straightshooter.net which maintains a database of sweetheart con artists. She's seen many varieties of romance scams, online and off. There's nothing new about charming men and women swindling would-be lovers, she said.

"When they invented the car, the con artist could drive to the next county. Now they can get on the Internet and go across the world," Cook said. "When you meet someone and you really want someone you just want to believe them."

Her advice to daters is the same, online or off:

"Enjoy the relationship, but keep your money to yourself," she said. "That way, if it goes wrong, all you're going to lose is your heart."

original article here

SEX PREDATORS ON ONLINE DATING SERVICES

DID THEY ASK YOU FOR "PICTURES" (sexual in nature)? DID THEY ASK ABOUT YOUR SEXUAL HISTORY? BE WARNED!!!


A warning to single, divorced or separated persons about sex offenders, sex predators and sex addicts who may be using online dating services to find potential victims. The warning comes after a child advocacy group, Parent's for Megan's Law, received anonymous emails that a convicted child molestor named Michael Bradley was using online dating service Match.com. The advocacy group set up a sting, posting a fake profile of a mother of two boys and emailing Bradley. He responded, which is a violation of his parole. As a result, Bradley's computer was confiscated and he faces the possibility of having his parole revoked.

“It is the responsibility of consumers to protect their safety and that of their families, so do not rely on the assurances of dating sites that attempt to screen out predators,” said Dr. James Houran, spokesperson and feature columnist for Online Dating Magazine. “The best protection is to use your head in matters of the heart. Do not get so caught up in the excitement of online dating that you are not constantly alert – instead assume everyone online is a potential predator.”

Online Dating Magazine recommends the following five tips that parents should follow when using an online dating service: 1) Never post photos of your children in your profile or anywhere online. 2) While indicating that you are a single parent on your profile is ok, don’t talk about your children in your profile. 3) Don’t mention what gender or ages your children are. 4) If you’re dating someone, wait several months – until you are more serious – before introducing your date to your children. 5) Run a background and sex offender check on the person you’re dating before introducing them to your children or getting serious about them!  

Online Dating Magazine recommends that online daters take a cautious approach to online dating. The publication has a list of online dating safety tips on their site at http://www.onlinedatingmagazine.com. About Online Dating Magazine Online Dating Magazine is a consumer watchdog publication for online daters. Located at http://www.onlinedatingmagazine.com.

EOPC DOES NOT RECOMMEND ONLINE DATING OR SOCIAL NETWORKING FOR ANYONE AT ANY TIME FOR ANY REASON, EVER!

Match.com Member Caught Using Spreadsheet to Rate Women

We'd like to hear what you think of this guy? Predator or playing the odds? - EOPC

By JEANE MACINTOSH

One of the women rated by a Manhattan investment banker who tallied his dates on a spreadsheet isn’t mad at him — but she’s furious at the woman who made the meticulously detailed list public.

“Why would she send it to the whole world?” fumed Liliana Beidaut, a 26-year-old makeup artist who got the highest rating, a 9.5, on the infamous Excel dating scorecard of finance whiz David Merkur, 28. “It was a really stupid move,” Beidaut told ABCnews.com.

The Romanian-born beauty is one of eight women whom Merkur contacted through Match.com in recent weeks — and then entered onto an elaborate spreadsheet with their pictures and a 1-to-10 rating of their appearances. The spreadsheet went viral on the Internet after Merkur foolishly sent it to one of his dates, a 26-year-old Upper East Side brunette named Arielle. She later sent it to her friends, and Beidaut is now furious at her indiscretion.

“My face is plastered everywhere now,’’ she said. “I was just thinking that I was using Match.com.”

Beidaut said she is “absolutely” considering legal action against Arielle. “I think he really liked the girl and he trusted her, so he sent her the thing,” she said. “I think she was spiteful.”

Another woman on the list — whom Merkur described as ‘’jappy” on his chart — told The Post she is horrified that her information was made public.

Merkur, who works for a Park Avenue real-estate finance firm, has apologized for sharing the Excel sheet with Arielle, telling The Post Wednesday it was a “serious lapse in judgment” for which he’s “deeply remorseful.”

Beidaut said she feels sorry for Merkur, with whom she has spoken only online and whom she has never met in person.

“I think the guy is really nice,” she said. “I don’t think he did something that bad. He was nice, and he was trying to keep himself organized. I think he took that seriously and was really looking for a girl.”

Meanwhile, Merkur kept a low profile yesterday, with his boss saying he wasn’t available to talk.

The son of a top New York retail executive, Merkur graduated with “high distinction” from Cornell University in 2006, according to an online résumé. He worked in investment banking at Merrill Lynch right out of college and then for a new Manhattan private-equity firm before landing his current slot as an associate director at Ladder Capital.

original article here

Online Dating -- Dangerous for Your Life

by Jamie Ramirez

Sitting behind a computer, I could be anyone I wish to be. I could be a 13-year-old boy from Kansas who likes to play videogames. Or I could be a 47-year-old woman from another country looking to get married to a single American man. The point is: I could take on any identity and no one would ever have to know.

Online dating is potentially very dangerous. There's no assurance that the person you are talking to is really telling the truth. There's no way of knowing if they have a criminal background, was once or are married or has children.

Blind dates are different. Usually, a friend or an acquaintance has recommended a person who they think would be compatible for you. If someone is referring you on a date with a suitable single, he or she are using his or her judgment and knowledge of what appeals to you.

Online dating services simply use a questionnaire to match up singles through common answers and common interests. A computer does not have the ability to make a judgment call or to decide compatibility for two people. It simply matches answers.

People can also lie about who they are. Behind a computer, anyone could take on any identity they choose. Online dating is dangerous because everyone has access to a computer. That includes rapists and child molesters.

According to a study conducted by the American Psychological Association in August 2004, less than 5 percent of online sexual offenders used force to sexually abuse their victims when they decided to meet.

Victims said they already felt close bonds with their attacker before meeting with them.

People just need an Internet connection. But why put your life at risk for the chance to go on a date? Some would argue that love is worth taking a risk. Call me old fashioned, but I don't think love is worth putting your life on the line.

original article here

Online Dating Sites Sued for Fraud

Are Yahoo and Match.com bolstering their online dating services with fake ads and professional flirts?

Two lawsuits filed in California recently make such bold claims, separately accusing both firms of fraud.

Match.com says the claims are baseless; Yahoo didn't immediately respond to requests for comment.

In the Match.com case, Orange County, Calif. resident Matthew Evans accuses the site of having a "very dirty, very big secret."

"Not everyone that you meet on Match.com is just another Match.com member, " the lawsuit says. "They are Match.com employees with a secret, fraudulent mission."

Evans claims Match uses "date bait" - employees who pretend to be regular subscribers that flirt with members. The lawsuit claims online daters are often approached by date bait just as their subscriptions are about to expire. Victims receive "winks" and e-mails designed to trick them into renewing their membership, the suit alleges.

Evans also claims in the lawsuit that Match.com employees are required to go on "as many as 100 dates per month," and they are "stationed in most of the major U.S. cities."

Match.com spokeswoman Kristin Kelly called the lawsuit "completely without merit." The firm doesn't send automated winks, she said, and employees are not required to date members. Match.com has about 250 employees worldwide, and 15 million members, making the date bait claim "ridiculous."

"The allegations in this case have absolutely no basis in fact and are completely without merit," she said.

The complaint was filed Nov. 10 in U.S. District Court in Northern California.

In the Yahoo case, filed on Oct. 14, Robert Anthony of Broward County, Fla., accuses the firm of creating fake profiles to keep members interested. Yahoo, the lawsuit alleges, "deliberately and intentionally originates and perpetuates false and or nonexistent profiles on its site to generate interest ... and give the site a much more attractive and functional appearance in order to falsely represent more substantial participation than actually exists."

The lawsuit supplies few other details, however.

"Due to the complicated nature of the fraud, and the use of technology to pertpetrate the fraud, Anthony is unable to disclose all of the examples of fraud," it says.

Anthony's lawyer, Peter McNulty, didn't respond to phone calls requesting comment.

Both lawsuits seek class-action status.

'Black hole'
Mike Arias, Evans' lawyer in the Match.com case, said his client learned about the alleged practices directly from a Match.com employee he dated. Arias said he has no other plaintiffs in the case at the moment, but that he's spoken to other victims and lawyers investigating Match.com practices.

"We've investigated it enough we (to believe the allegations)," he said. "I've talked to enough people who have given me scenarios."

The lawsuit also claims that paid Match.com workers read member e-mails in order to be more seductive to members they contact.

"Match.com typically has their paid employee contact a subscriber immediately before the end of their subscription," it says. "(The employee) goes on a date with a subscriber, (and) gives the deceptive appearance of having a lot in common with the subscriber due in part to having read his or her e-mails."

Match.com's Kelly said employees are allowed to use the service, but are not told to date members.

Evans' lawsuit also claims that a flaw in Match.com technology prevents profiles older than 30 days from appearing in some searches the Web site offers. "Unless a person updates their profile, they fall into a 'black hole' of outdated profiles, never to be seen by any other person on Match again," the suit says.

Online dating is big business; for a time, it was the fastest-growing e-commerce sector. But the industry has always beaten back complaints about fraud and misrepresentation among members. Two years ago, an MSNBC.com investigation revealed a high percentage of ads on several sites were thinly veiled lures to paid porn Web sites. More recently, Nigerian scammers have seized on the services, frequently placing fake ads that lure victims into feigned relationships ultimately designed to trick them into sending large sums of money to criminals outside the U.S.

There have been accusations that dating services benefit from such practices, because if more attractive, young members appear to be using the service, that draws in more paid members.

"That is ridiculous," Kelly said. "We aggressively defend against fraud and proactively pursue it through our fraud and abuse team."

(from 2005)

Secret bait claims hit dating website

A TOP internet dating website has been accused of secretly hiring people as "date bait" to go out with some of their one million customers so they would keep paying for the service.

The lonely hearts website Match.com secretly recruited people to send enticing emails to its customers and to go out on dates with them as a way of getting them to keep up their $41 monthly subscription, a Los Angeles racketeering lawsuit said.

The company's ring-ins, branded "date bait", went on up to 100 dates a month -- three per day -- with Match.com customers, who use the site to search for boyfriends, girlfriends and spouses.

"Hiding behind Match.com's portrait of online success is a very big, very dirty secret . . . Not everyone you meet and date through Match.com is just another Match.com member," says the lawsuit.

Kristin Kelly, a spokesperson for Match.com, which has an estimated one million paid subscribers and 15 million members, said the lawsuit was completely without merit and would be vigorously challenged.

The lawsuit was filed by Matthew Evans, a Match.com customer who hopes it will draw support from enough other customers to turn into a much stronger class action suit.

Mr Evans' lawyers said he went on several dates with an attractive woman named Autumn Marzec before she allegedly confessed she was paid by the company to meet him.

Such people are given access to customers' emails to familiarise themselves with the customer, allowing them to feign interest and compatibility, the suit claims.

The worker goes on a date with the subscriber and acts as if they have a lot in common so the subscriber re-signs.

The suit also charges that when a customer's subscription was expiring, Match.com produced fake responses to customers, suggesting another person had an interest in meeting them in order to prod them to resubscribe.

The suit represents growing reports of disappointment among the tens of millions of customers of the online matchmaking industry.

The industry enjoyed an estimated $334 million in turnover during the first half of 2005. - AFP
*****

Leading online matchmaker sued for bogus dating scam

Match.com, one of the top Internet dating websites, has been accused of hiring people as "date bait" to date some of their one million customers to encourage them to keep paying for the service.

A Los Angeles racketeering lawsuit said the lonely hearts website secretly recruited people to send enticing emails to its customers and to go out on dates with them as a way of getting them to keep up their 30 dollars monthly subscription.

The company's ringers, branded "date bait", went on as many as 100 dates a month - three per day - with Match.com customers, who use the site to search for boyfriends, girlfriends, and possible husbands and wives. "Hiding behind Match.com's portrait of online success is a very big, very dirty secret ... Not everyone you meet and date through Match.com is just another Match.com member," said the lawsuit, filed in a Los Angeles court on November 10.

Kristin Kelly, a spokesperson for Match.com - which has an estimated one million paid subscribers and 15 million members — denied the charges, saying the lawsuit is "completely without merit" and would be "vigorously" challenged. The lawsuit was filed by Matthew Evans, a Match.com customer who hopes it will draw support from enough other customers to turn into a much stronger class action suit.

Evan's lawyers said he went on several dates with an attractive woman named Autumn Marzec before she allegedly confessed that she was paid by the company to meet him. Such ringers are given access to customers' emails to familiarize themselves with the customer, allowing them to feign interest and compatibility, the suit claimed. "The paid Match.com employee then goes on a date with the subscriber, gives the deceptive appearance of having a lot in common with the subscriber ... with the intent of luring the subscriber into re-signing with Match.com," the suit alleges.

The suit charges as well that when a customer's subscription was expiring, Match.com produced fake responses to customers, suggesting another person had an interest in meeting them, in order to prod them to resubscribe. The Los Angeles suit represented growing reports of disappointment among the tens of millions of customers of the online matchmaking industry, which is led by Yahoo! Personals, Match.com, and EHarmony.

The industry enjoyed an estimated 245 million dollars in turnover during the first half of 2005. While the industry advertises its success stories - customers who meet online and eventually get married - some disappointments have raised questions of industry practices. Earlier this year Californian James Hunt complained that for the nearly 3,000 dollars he paid to matchmaker Together Inc., he didn't receive the guaranteed nine introductions of "nearly compatible" women. The company disputed his claim.

In New York, the Great Expectations dating service was recently ordered by a judge to refund money to two women who said they never got any dates after paying up to $1,000 for a six month subscription. "I just wanted to go out for coffee and have nice conversations with a couple of people. Instead, I got not a single introduction," said a disappointed 43 year old who identified herself only as Jennifer. "I think I’ll stick to meeting people at bus stops and the elevator," she said.
*****

Better to have loved and lost, even on the internet

A quick look at any online dating site will tell you that everyone is lying

The online dating world has been rocked by claims in Los Angeles that dating companies have been paying women to go on sham dates with male subscribers to make the men think the site is generating results and thus renew their membership fees.

A man in his thirties who signed up to www.match.com, a web dating service that claims 12 per cent of American weddings began with an online introduction has launched a lawsuit accusing the company offraud. He claims to be the victim of a scam he discovered after a "buxom, dark-haired, younger woman" that he had taken on several dates confessed to having been paid to make contact with up to 100 members a month.

More complaints and revealing comments on Online Dating, click on the site name(s)

:

Mate 1

EHarmony and Cupid.com

Adult Friend Finder

True

Yahoo Personals

These are just a few! BEWARE!!!

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

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

Another Woman Raped by Person She Met Online

By Leon Watson

Internet daters have been warned after a legal secretary was raped by a man she met on a popular dating website.

Peter Ramsey, 26, beat the woman to the ground, ripped off her tights and had sex with her when she refused him a goodnight kiss at her front door. Ramsey punched the 27-year-old repeatedly knocking out one of her front teeth and left her with 21 injuries. Her facial wounds were among the most shocking detectives investigating the case had ever seen.

The sex attacker was caught after using the victim's Oyster travelcard to board a nightbus within minutes of the attack in Clapham, south west London.

Ramsey and the woman had spent four days chatting on plentyoffish.com site which claims on its homepage to be 'responsible for more dates and more relationships than any other dating site'. They arranged to meet for drinks in Brixton town centre at 7pm.

She later said: 'He seemed like a nice guy. The date was going very well. I thought we had a lot in common.' In the early hours of August 27 last year they went for something to eat before climbing into a cab to her flat near Clapham Common. She believed he was going to walk her to her front door but when he lent in for a kiss and she pulled back, he 'switched'.

In the communal entrance to the block, he pinned her against the wall and rained down punches on her face until she slumped to the ground. When she screamed for help he used one hand to cover her mouth and pinch her nose shut, while continuing to hit her with the other fist. 'I thought I was going to die,' she told Inner London Crown Court.


A 'SEVERE RISK' TO WOMEN

Outside court DC Huggins praised the SOIT role which was crucial in securing the conviction. He said of the result: 'I feel relieved that somebody like Ramsey who had access via the internet to so many women, is now safely behind bars.

'He posed a severe risk to other women on that internet site, which he had been using for a number of years. I would urge people using dating websites to thoroughly vet the people they meet and before they spend time alone. I would also like to thank my SOIT officer, who had the initial contact with the victim. I would like to reassure other potential victims that there are people who are willing to listen to them and take their allegations very seriously in order to bring the perpetrator to justice.

'The victim in this case is relieved about the verdict. She was also concerned for other women and that if he had walked free, there would have been other victims. This woman was unrecognisable after the attack, compared to the woman who gave evidence. Fortunately she has recovered from her physical injuries. I have been in the police for 14 years and these were some of the most shocking facial injuries I have ever seen.'

Ramsey, who has several previous convictions for shoplifting and assaulting police officers, but none for violence or sexual offences against women, then stole the bleeding woman's bag.

As he left she staggered to her feet and called to a passing man, a Muslim on his way to Ramadan prayers, and he came to her aid. The victim's mother, who had heard the screams, also rushed out to find her disfigured and traumatised daughter.

In a further insult, before Ramsey fled, he said to the pedestrian of the two women: 'Don't worry about them - they're crazy.' The rapist then used the woman's stolen Oyster card on a passing N35 bus.

The following day he left two voicemails on the victim's mobile telling her he was sorry and had now sobered up. He said he was left feeling something had happened that 'wasn't good'.

Soon after her ordeal the woman was interviewed by a specialist SOIT (Sexual Offences Interview Technique) officer from Lambeth's Sapphire Unit. PC Damien Hutton-Baber worked closely with the victim to get her detailed account, an interview which was filmed and played to the jury to reduce her time in the witness box.

Ramsey was arrested a week after the attack when a DNA match appeared to have snared him. But when he lied he had not even met the woman on that day, officers were forced to dig deeper. DC Richard Huggins, the officer in charge of the investigation, examined CCTV footage from the bus which showed him on board near the scene.

Ramsey continued to deny the rape, changing his story at trial. He put forward the defence he had consensual sex with the woman but left her rowing with another man who must have beat her.

Ramsey boasted said he had been out with 'hundreds of women' and did not need to rape because he could get anyone he wanted. But he was found unanimously guilty following a trial.

Ramsey, of no fixed address but who had been staying with friends in Forest Hill, south east London, was convicted of rape, wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm and theft.

Following the verdicts Judge Patricia Lees said: 'I would like an assessment of the defendant's future risk that he may pose to women. It seems to me the violence meted out was frankly horrific and wholly unnecessary to commit the offence of rape.'

Remanding him in custody ahead of sentence on April 27, Judge Lees warned him: 'You face an extremely lengthy sentence of imprisonment.' The court heard Ramsey has been diagnosed as biopolar while on remand.

original article here

Romance Scammers using Fake Webcam Footage

By Pat Williams

A new evolution in romance scams is about to create tens of thousands of new victims. Online Dating Magazine reports that scammers are now using fake Webcam footage to convincingly deceive victims.

Here’s how it works:

First, the scammer spends weeks inside Webcam chat rooms recording footage of an unsuspecting person on different days. The person being recorded doesn’t know they are communicating with a scammer.

The scammer then tries to deceptively obtain photos of the unsuspecting person by email. The scammer may also find photos on Facebook or via online searches.

Finally, armed with photos and multiple days of Webcam footage of the unsuspecting person, the scammer creates a fake online dating profile to lure victims.

“Up until now scams would consist of communication via an online dating service followed by emails and phone calls,” says Joe Tracy, publisher of Online Dating Magazine. “Now scammers can initiate fake Webcam chats with you to further make you believe the lie. They have full control over the footage. They can pause it, make it jump to a point where the person is laughing, type when the person is typing, etc. It comes off as very realistic and impressive.”

Tracy says that this new scam is creating two types of victims: the person being scammed, and the person who was recorded by Webcam and doesn’t realize their footage is being used in scams.

Imagine a guy named Andrew having a Webcam chat with someone he believes is a 28-year-old traveling businesswoman. The scammer memorizes the illicit video and bookmarks, in advance, certain parts of the video for quick access. So Andrew may see a woman in the Webcam typing while the scammer types, “Andrew, look at this new dress I got today.” The video of the woman in the Webcam then stands up to show off the dress. There’s now no doubt in Andrew’s mind that the person he is chatting with is real when in reality it is someone completely different. It’s possible to have a Webcam chat with the “person” on 18 different occasions and they are wearing 18 different outfits. That’s how elaborate this new scam has become.

Tracy warns that the scam can be taken further, with scammers using recorded Webcam sessions of their victim to scam someone else after they’ve gotten the victim’s money.

“This has taken the romance scam to an entirely new level,” says Tracy. “Word needs to get out quickly to warn people about this new development.”

Tracy says that the best way to test whether you are Webcam chatting with a scammer is to innocently ask them to do something and see if they react. For example, type, “What’s that crawling on the wall behind you?” If the person “pauses” or doesn’t look, then that’s a major red flag. When asked to do something they don’t have footage recorded of, scammers will pause the Webcam video and attribute it to a communication problem while answering your question in the chat window.

Online romance scams are the most successful of all online scams, costing victims worldwide hundreds of millions of dollars a year.

“Some of these scam organizations are making more money that the big online dating services,” says Tracy. “It’s important to warn people so that they don’t fall prey to these elaborate schemes.”

original article here

More Evidence Online Dating Sites are Dangerous

(U.S.A.) Army lieutenant Peter Burks was killed in Iraq in 2007 but that didn’t stop dating website True.com from swiping his picture and using it in ads to attract women to their website.

The picture was spotted on two ad spots at free dating site PlentyofFish.com with the words ”Military Man Searching for Love” and ”Soldiers Want You!”

The Burks family is now planning to sue both PlentyOfFish.com and True.com for their parts in using the photo without permission.

The family says Burks died just days after the photo was taken and that he definitely didn’t upload the photograph to the website. In fact the photo was being used on a website to help raise funds to provide supplies to troops in Burks’ honor which is likely where the picture was stolen from.

The Burks family also notes that Peter Burks was engaged when he died which makes True.com’s claims of “Soldier’s Want You!” nothing more than a scam to attract users to the site through the use of fake profiles.

In the meantime a representative for PlentyOfFish notes that the website displays ads from hundreds of thousands of advertisers and is not in charge of the ads for those websites. True.com ads were quickly blocked by PlentyOfFish.com after the Burks family notified the website of the issue.

In the meantime True.com’s potential members might want to look for a dating site that doesn’t create fake profiles in order to lure them in.

What might be the most tragic part of the entire ordeal is that True.com founder Herb Vest attacked other dating websites during a 2006 Forbes interview, as he put it at that time:

“We had to establish a wholesome environment for courtship. Internet dating is populated, to a large degree, by criminals and married people.”

It looks like True.com has turned into the exact type of company it hoped to fight against just five years earlier.

original article here

The SEXUAL ADDICTION Affair

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

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

(SEE ALSO: "Don Juan as Psychopath")

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

By: Dr. Robert Huizenga

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

After Meeting Via Online Dating, Cyberpath Stalks and Threatens

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

original article here