"Up from here" Chapter 21: Cyber stalkers (part two)

Most states provide for a demand for a printed retraction of defamation and only allow a lawsuit if there is no such admission of error.

From the very first post he made standing up for the rule of law against vigilante justice, his name and reputation has been drug through the mud and to the cleaners by these thugs, animals and vigilantes who claim they are proud law abiding citizens in Redding, California.

If anything they have shown they are just the opposite and guilty as charged as being cyber stalkers as Internet bullies who stalk, harass, libel, slander and intimidate another poster over an opinion and point of view in the comment section on a local newspaper.

While standing up and defending his self against stalking, harassment, libel, slander and intimidation his comments were removed and theirs were allowed to stay and left intact after requesting that they be removed, instead he was denied his freedom of speech from making any further comments by being banned over others defaming him.

There is something definitely wrong with this picture where the person being stalked, harassed, libeled, slandered and intimidated against is the one that is banned and the stalkers are allowed to stay and continue to stalk, harass and intimidate others the way they have done to this poster over an opinion and point of view.

How many more posters are they going to be allowed to stalk, harass, libel, slander and intimidate when they do not agree with their opinions and point of view? How many user names are they going to be allowed to have under the same ISP address with no other purpose but MALICIOUS intentions against posters?

A business owner in Redding can be proud to know is a cyber stalker and an Internet bully who owns a business that does not accept food stamps and has a night auditor for the second shift? She also has a brother that has ADHD and talks about him on line without his permission too. She also has a daughter that is a senior at Enterprise High School who is a member of one of the sports teams. And her daughter’s best friend’s name is Amber, the sister to a 14-year-old boy Frankie that was hit by a car and is still in the hospital in the Bay Area. A car also hit his best friend James on Halloween night.

How would anyone know if a person has a clean record with the exception of some traffic violations? Unless they worked in the Court House basement or have access others do not have to their files.

It has been suggested that if this poster does not like what happens they can start their own newspaper. They have also been told that the constitution does not guarantee freedom of speech on a newspaper comment section on line. They have been told they know nothing about constitutional law.

They have been called every name in the book because of their opinion and point of view for standing up for the very Constitution that others say they do not have a right to do. They do not have the right to speak out about the rights of the accused for fear by those that the accused will not get what they have coming to them. Regardless what the law says on how they will be prosecuted and given their day in court to face the consequences of their actions as to their guilt or innocence.

Why bother with having laws, if they are going to be ignored by the majority that feel they have the right to say how they want the sentences carried out before the accused even step foot in a court of law and are given their day in court. When they make statements to the effect they hope they will get called for jury duty so they can make sure they are all found guilty without first even hearing the evidence that will be presented by the prosecution?

These are the same type of people who have no problem taking a posters personal information that they find on the Internet and twisting the facts to suit their way of thinking; because they are perfect and have never made an error or mistake in their life. Instead of letting other posters search for that information on their own, they take it upon themselves to do it, because they are so righteous and no body is as perfect, as they are in life.

What they do not realize in the little world they live in, they do not have that right (even though they think they do) to stalk, harass, libel, slander and intimidate others who they feel do not agree with their opinion on how the world works in their mind. Stalking, harassing, libeling, slandering and intimidating another person are against the law.

If they did to a person what they have done on line, they could be charged with breaking the law by the very law abiding person, who sees no problem with breaking the law behind multiple user names and accounts. Yet, this person sees nothing wrong with their actions, as they feel it is within in their right to stalk, harass, libel, slander and intimidate anyone they feel disagrees with their opinion and point of view. Because they are above the law and it is everyone else who are the criminals that break the law, not them, they are perfect and would never do anything that would be considered against the law. After all, they are the judge, jury and executer of every one, but themselves, as the cowards they are, hiding behind anonymous multiple user names and accounts.

Go to "Up from here" Chapter 21: Cyber stalkers (part three)

Comments