Archive for the do the right thing Category

pastebin sux

Posted in blogosphere, censorship, do the right thing, politics with tags , , , , , , on October 13, 2013 by Qritiq

 

pastebin leaves social security numbers and defamatory crap up…

 

but takes this down:

 

 

Vince in the Bay: My Leniency Letter to Judge Preska.

 

 

wtf?????????


Level Up

Posted in Chagall, do the right thing, evil, politics, victory, visions with tags , , , on September 20, 2013 by Qritiq




I saw the righteous rise from their graves.

There was thick shimmering heat from all the fire but it didn’t bother them; they were made of grey stone.







Admitted Liar

Posted in do the right thing, Doh!, illegal, politics, reality check, sockypuppets, tacky with tags on March 23, 2013 by Qritiq





liar



Top Commenters Of 2012

Posted in blogosphere, do the right thing, Doh!, mental, politics, reality check, sockypuppets, spin with tags , , , on January 14, 2013 by Qritiq




As shown below in the WordPress 2012 report for the qritiq blog, Dustin Farahnak was the 4th most active commenter at the qritiq blog in 2012. He also commented here in 2011. Click on the image for a clearer view:


Dustin Farahnak Lies

From 2012 qritiq blog WordPress report



Yet these are his claims:


This slideshow requires JavaScript.

 


Well, I hope he doesn’t hope to pursue any careers that would demand logic and/or ethical behavior.








SuppliesOutlet – Save up to 70% Using Compatible Printer Ink Cartridges








“Positive feedback 0%”

Posted in blogosphere, crime, do the right thing, Doh! with tags , , , , on October 7, 2012 by Qritiq

.


.

.

.

.

.

.



conspirators rico fraud intimidation Andrew Breitbart ebay scammers Douglas Stewart CT ebay scammer Douglas Stewart Connecticut ebay scam Sean Tompkins San Antonio ebay scammer Sean Tompkins San Diego Dustin Farahnak libeler liar John Patrick Frey TX Patterico Patrick Frey troll Dustin Farahnak defamer paid troll Dust92 liar Dustin Farahnak Texas Dustin Farahnak Austin area Brandon Darby Austin Brandon Darby Sean Tompkins San Antonio Sean Tompkins doch210 docholiday187 guttamane187 Douglas Stewart Douglas M. Stewart guttamane187 docholiday187 CT Patrick Frey TX Lee Stranahan San Antonio Brandon Darby Austin Lee Stranahan Sean Tompkins San Antonio Dustin Farahnak conspiracy Douglas Matthew Stewart co-conspirator felony Douglas Stewart ex-con Douglas Stewart heroin addict CT

“SECRET EVIDENCE”

Posted in audio, censorship, crime, do the right thing, politics, spin with tags , , , , , , , , , , , on June 4, 2012 by Qritiq

.

Patrick Frey, an L.A. Deputy District Attorney, aka the blogger and James O’Keefe supporter Patterico, posted a document produced by one Kent Gibson, who also works with the L.A. courts (presumably an acquaintance, colleague, or friend of Frey’s.) Gibson describes himself as a “Certified Audio & Video Forensic Examiner”.

Based on a test that Gibson refers to as “the gold standard” of voice identification, Gibson determined that:

“Frey Swat [911 tape of caller that perpetrated a crime] and Brynaert Known [a recording from an interview show of Ron Brynaert, former Executive Editor of a political website] cannot be shown to be the same speaker”.

.

There were a lot of other words in this document about results of methods that Gibson indicates are not nearly as  reliable or accurate (if at all) as the test Gibson says is the “gold standard”, which he used to conclude the statement above.  There were also lots of words included in the document, which described opinion rather than statements of fact.)

.

oh, and i’d like to ask y’all a personal question:

Suppose you log on, and you see that a Deputy District Attorney asked someone (presumably a friend of his) described as a “Certified Audio & Video Forensic Examiner” for the courts, to compare a sample of your voice (found on the internet) to a criminal’s, (in order to try to come up with some basis, that sounds official, to make people think that you ARE the criminal), and this D.A. publishes the resultant document, that his friend wrote up, on his blog.

You see that this posted document says your voice was used in the comparison, because you are “suspected of being the Swat caller re: Frey”. And the “Certified Audio & Video Forensic Examiner” says his opinion is that you are a criminal based on a “totality” of stuff (though we’re not privy to know exactly what that stuff may be.)  He writes this opinion even though the results of the test, that he himself says is the gold standard of testing, indicated that you “cannot be shown to be” the criminal.

The D.A.’s  readers see this document; some of them blog about it, tweet it, and get more people to do the same…, and so on, and so on. And as a result, a lot of your former colleagues, people you correspond with online, friends and acquaintances, and anyone else who happens to search on your name, can see that you are being examined by Los Angeles officials because you are “suspected of being” a criminal.  (And needless to say, you’re not a criminal, you’ve done nothing at all wrong – and you’ve never been convicted of a crime.)

So how would you feel about that?

And what would you think the proper remedy would be?

.

.

Downright Dirty

Posted in audio, censorship, crime, do the right thing, illegal, mental, politics, spin with tags , , , , , , on June 2, 2012 by Qritiq

.

.

.

.

the upshot:

.

-Judge refuses to rule on Battle of Thessalonica

-Judge has a LOT of years on the bench; sure doesn’t know much about the internet, but knows about people and their probable future actions based on what he’s seen go down in the past.

-Judge rules Aaron may not contact Kimberlin by megaphone (or any other means.)

-Judge says Aaron is inciting death threats and threats against children.

-Judge finds Aaron is doing a “downright dirty” thing.

.

.

Believe me I’m no lawyer, but I have heard that there is a difference between the letter of the law and the intent of the law, and judges consider the intent of the law in their rulings. If you listen, you’ll see that since he is ruling on a protective peace order, (a pretty common thing), the judge’s primary concern is keeping both of these guys safe, not the intricacies of constitutional law as it relates to electronic communications, conspiracy,  death threats across state lines, incitement to commit violent acts, etc., etc.

Mind Your P and Q

Posted in do the right thing, illegal, politics, spin with tags , , , , , , , , , , , on May 31, 2012 by Qritiq

.

From Slate.com comments on a Dave Weigel post:

.

qritiq
The origins of Blog About Brett Kimberlin Day – in this wordpress post: http://wp.me/p6l52-yC
– the Frey/Kimberlin stuff has a lot to do with keeping James O’Keefe out of jail and a pitched battle over voting rights
Yesterday from slate.com
.
.
Patterico
Convicted bomber and perjurer Brett Kimberlin couldn’t have put it better himself.Qritiq is a champion of a man who tweeted to me that he wanted to punch me in the nose several times and take a sh*t on my wife (he did not bleep the word) — all, apparently, because he was upset I was ignoring his evidence of Kimberlin’s innocence.Qritiq seems t0 have a very c0zy relati0nship w/ Kimbrln ass0ciate NealRauhausr. [Patrick Frey’s team google-bombed the previous phrase – that’s why the spelling changes] Her blog is a cesspool of defamation of me and other Kimberlin victims. Everything she says needs to be understood in that light. I do not find it surprising in the slightest that she is trying to convolute and misstate the intent behind the Brett Kimberlin blogburst.
19 Hours Ago from slate.com
.
.
qritiq

1. I recall he also wanted to staple the truth to your forehead.
The crude tweet dates from October ’11 or before. How many times have you and your trolls repeated it since? I wouldn’t be at all surprised if it was well over a thousand. And you are repeating a crude tweet, that mentions your wife, for over seven months … why exactly?

2. I thought the reason he said it, was because you were phoning him incessantly and menacing him after he asked you to leave him alone. (Interesting you neglect to mention: dude’s website is called “Brett Kimberlin Lies” – http://brettkimberlinlies.blogspot.com/)

3. The truth, is the only thing I’m a champion of, and that’s why you’re out here spinning so hard. You made a point of replying to a pretty benign comment imo, to try to convince people that I’m a liar and also to say things about me that are simply untrue. What are you so afraid people will find out if they give me a listen?

4. I’ve never met Rauhauser, never spoke to him on the phone (I never even heard of him until YOU brought him up), so the probability is that you and your co-conspirators are FAR cozier with Rauhauser than I am.

5. “Everything she says needs to be understood in that light.” Pat, why don’t you let people decide for themselves: https://qritiq.wordpress.com
Slate readers are not children and they don’t need you to interpret for them.

11 Hours Ago from slate.com
.

it’s no contest

.
.

Wonkette Scratches The Surface And Misses The Boat

Posted in blogosphere, censorship, crime, divisiveness, do the right thing, illegal, politics, villain with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on May 29, 2012 by Qritiq

.

Wonkette’s Doktor StrangeZoom presents Frey re Kimberlin in a nutshell:

http://wonkette.com/473744/the-new-horrible-thing-liberals-are-responsible-for-some-bomber-dude

StrangeZoom tells of Patterico.com blogger Patrick Frey’s involvement in Blog About #BrettKimberlin Day. Kimberlin, if you will remember (not saying you’re old mind you) was the guy who said Dan Quayle bought pot from him. Kimberlin is also an ex-con and a purported terrorist. Pat Frey is also accusing those “in league” with Kimberlin, of calling 911 and saying that Pat shot his wife, resulting in a SWAT-type swarming of police and fire at Frey’s residence.

Here’s what Wonkette missed:

This story is really about Kimberlin’s non-profit, Velvet Revolution v James O’Keefe’s non-profit, Project Veritas. Both organizations deal with voting rights policy and are at loggerheads. Check out this 22-page doc by Velvet Revolution’s lawyer about O’Keefe:

http://www.velvetrevolution.us/images/OKeefe_Probation_Revocation_Document.pdf

Patrick Frey also seems to be heading up a conspiracy to spread libelous statements via social media. Their target is a harsh detractor of O’Keefe’s – Ron Brynaert – the former editor of a liberal political news website. Brynaert broke a number of incriminating stories about probationee James O’Keefe that could well have landed O’Keefe in the clink.

Frey and his associates even seem to be trying to frame Brynaert for a crime, by spreading defamatory statements indicating that he is “in league” with Kimberlin and sounds like the voice on the 911 hoax call. Of course neither of these statements are true – they are downright laughable. But right-wing extremists and Patterico.com readers are encouraged to continue to spread those lies, by Frey and his co-conspirators.

Frey even went so far as to indicate on Glenn Beck’s show, that a victim (someone Pat had been communicating with) who was SWAT-ed one week prior to Pat’s alleged SWAT, was also targeted because he also was writing about Kimberlin. Completely false! That victim had been talking about information he had regarding Weinergate, just before he was SWAT-ed. He never had anything to do with Kimberlin!

The reason Frey and his associates are ramping this stuff up now, is because (I believe) the New Hampshire Attorney General has *just* asked for 7-years worth of James O’Keefe emails. And so, there is an attempt afoot by Frey and Co. to head off a potential ishstorm, by directing the conversation away from conjecture regarding the potentially damning contents of those emails, and toward the sensational tabloid-friendly crimes committed in the 1970’s by the head of Velvet Revolution. Concurrently, there is an attempt to both menace and discredit O’Keefe’s seemingly most dangerous critic – Brynaert – who, while he is certainly known for being combative (understatement), is also respected by both progressives and conservatives for being a skilled researcher who’s like a dog with a bone when a story interests him.

I should also note, Brynaert has broken at least one story, that I know of, that proved useful for James O’Keefe; I am not trying to imply that this journo’s reporting has been biased against O’Keefe. Yet, I imagine there is some concern within Team JOK, that if the 7-year email cache were to land in this Brynaert’s inbox, he would undoubtedly read EVERY SINGLE FREAKIN email. And I think anyone who’s been following along for the past year, knows that predicting the potentiality of that outcome, is not such a big leap, and said outcome would likely not be in the best interest of Mr. O’Keefe.

Keep in mind that voting rights policy could determine the next resident of the White House. (Much in the way that those who brought you Weinergate, knew that the NYC Mayoral seat is a very viable step to the presidency.) This is not small potatoes that Project Veritas and Velvet Revolution are warring about. I’m sure there are plenty of donation dollars in both corners.

This is actually some kind-of-serious stuff – I mean a team-attempt to frame a journalist for a crime because he published the truth about someone who has access to big money?

Not. Good.

.

and a reminder –

Patrick Frey’s M.O. is to take advantage of people and manipulate them:

One of Frey’s former supporters whom Frey would not assist with petty cash to cover court costs toward his defense against plaintiff Brett Kimberlin, wrote a note that seemed utterly despondent [to this reader] that mentioned Kimberlin. Kimberlin won a case against that former Frey supporter and I believe that they were even at one point arrested.

Now there are reports that Aaron Worthing aka Walker – a Frey disciple – has been jailed ( http://www.munseys.com/technosnarl/?p=1295 , link courtesy of commenter “Saul G.”.) @rsmccain reports on his blog that Walker was taken into custody after a hearing regarding a permanent order of protection against Walker. (Walker had been bragging on twitter recently, that he always carries a gun. He had a restraining order against him at the time.)

[UPDATE: Walker has now been released from custody. A copy of this morning’s peace order ]

.

And on a more personal note:

I want to warn readers that Patrick Frey is no friend to you. If you have a family and a dog, don’t do Frey’s bidding, because he doesn’t mind getting others into very serious trouble. And if you want to be a lawyer and you wind up getting arrested in the service of Patrick Frey, well, that could actually ruin your life.

Remember – Frey, who resides in a $1.3 million home, wouldn’t even send $200 to his pawn when said pawn was sued by Kimberlin.

.

.

.

(h/t STL Activist Hub for indicating where clarification was needed)

.

Law School For Dummies

Posted in crime, do the right thing, illegal, politics, sockypuppets with tags , on May 1, 2012 by Qritiq

.

I’d thought they covered this basic info in law school, but apparently I’d been wrong. I’m no attorney, but I DO know how to google. (gee ya would think they’d at least cover that; why the heck is law school so gol-darned expensive?)

.

Misconduct rule – Rule 8.4(c): It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation

.

Defamation of character –  n. the act of making untrue statements about another which damages his/her reputation.  Some statements such as an accusation of having committed a crime, are called libel per se or slander and can more easily lead to large money awards in court and even punitive damage recovery by the person harmed.  —Gerald N. Hill and Kathleen T. Hill

.

An attempt to interfere with the judicial system or law enforcement officers is obstruction of justice. It may include hiding evidence or interfering with an arrest.  Interference may be with the work of police, investigators, or other government officials. Often, no actual investigation or substantiated suspicion of a specific incident need exist to support a charge of obstruction of justice. Such activity is a crime.  –uslegal.com

.

from The IT Wiki:

A speaker may not hide behind a pseudonym to avoid liability for defamatory remarks.

.

In Columbia Insurance Co. v. Seescandy.com, the California court required only a showing sufficient to survive a motion to dismiss, in order to compel the identity of anonymous posters.

.

excerpted from Hoaxes and the First Amendment , Volokh:

Re Haley v. State: The Haley court was correct that knowingly false statements that one contemplates will come to the attention of a government agency that has jurisdiction over the matter you describe, should be seen as constitutionally unprotected. This case, involving a knowing hoax that seemed sure to waste a considerable amount of police time, is a good example of why that should be so.

.

from nycourts.gov:

While the original publishers of a defamatory statement are not automatically liable for subsequent republications of the statement by third parties, liability against the original publishers may be found where they “approved or participated in some other manner in the activities of the third-party republisher” (Karaduman v. Newsday, Inc., 51 NY 2d 531, 540 [1980]). Moreover, “an individual may not escape liability when a defamatory statement he makes is foreseeably republished” (Rand v. New York Times Co., 75 AD 2d 417 [1st Dept 1980]).

.

A conspiracy is a combination of two or more persons to accomplish an unlawful end or to accomplish a lawful end by unlawful means  –leagle.com

Conspiracy requires less than attempt.

The law seeks to punish conspiracy as a substantive crime separate from the intended crime because when two or more persons agree to commit a crime, the potential for criminal activity increases, and as a result, the danger to the public increases. Therefore, the very act of an agreement with criminal intent is considered sufficiently dangerous to warrant charging conspiracy as an offense separate from the intended crime.  –legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com

.

Volokh: The law makes it possible to issue subpoenas and track down the people who make false statements. You have a right to know who these people are, and once that happens, they can be sued for fraud and defamation.

.

lawskills.com: “Actual malice” as defined by New York Times, supra, is “knowledge that the defamatory matter was false or it was published with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not.”

.

from case re CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT DEFAMATION :

The defendants published and/or caused the publication of false and disparaging statements. Defendants knew that the statements published were false and/or published or caused their publication with reckless disregard as to the truth or falsity of the statements.

Defendants have combined, confederated, conspired, and agreed to make false and disparaging statements, in an effort to injure the Plaintiff in occupation, business, and employment and to expose to distrust, hatred, contempt and ridicule and to cause to be avoided.

Plaintiff asked for: compensation for the harm to personal and professional reputation and the mental anguish, emotional injuries, humiliation, and loss of dignity suffered, punitive damages to punish the defendants and to deter others from engaging in similar misconduct, as well as court costs.

case said to have been settled out of court (sealed settlement)

.

Helpful tip! — If you love telling lies about folks, make sure you have plenty of assets that you wouldn’t mind losing to them!

.

… and not a legal definition, just some common sense (umm…note to Stranahan):

If someone asks you to tell lies repeatedly, that person is not your friend.  Actually, that person is trying to drag you into some shit while covering their own ass. (Duh.)

.

.

in related news? excerpted from canada.com:

New Brunswick libel case upgraded to criminal charge

Libel cases are normally tried in civil court, but are there some defamatory statements that are so vicious that they warrant criminal prosecution?

That’s the question confronting prosecutors who are deciding whether to approve a criminal libel charge against a blogger who referred to an officer as a “sexual pervert.” Police arrested the blogger in January.

A spokesman for the police, said “when we receive a complaint … we have a duty to investigate. If the facts lead us to a point where a charge is applicable, then it is our role to follow through with it.”

The case involves political blogger, 52-year-old Charles LeBlanc. During an encounter with the police, LeBlanc alleges, an officer touched him in an inappropriate manner. LeBlanc said he tried to get police to investigate but the complaint was dismissed. LeBlanc said he subsequently used his blog to warn the public about the officer.

In January, when police arrested LeBlanc at his home, they seized his computer. The search warrant indicated police were investigating a complaint that one of his blog posts had referred to an officer as a “sexual pervert.”

Police recommended that LeBlanc be charged under the criminal code, which states that someone who is guilty of defamatory libel can be imprisoned for up to two years.

The law defines defamatory libel as publishing material “that is likely to injure the reputation of any person by exposing him to hatred, contempt or ridicule, or that is designed to insult the person of or concerning whom it is published.”

.

.

Tony Martin - Actor

.