Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'defamation'.
Found 2 results
Two days ago I had a Twitter DM conversation with a man that blocked my friend M---y. I thought it was accidental. It happens. It turned out to be anything but. The entire DM conversation is below. Due to the no "naming and shaming" rule, I have blotched out names, personal photos, and chat identities. I have confirmed with 3 admins that all that is shown below is authentic. I approached this person believing the blocking of my friend @s-----------0 (M---y) was accidental. Then @i--c---------r tells me he received "very very" disturbing message that my friend M---y had written. He says that in them M---y was bullying his friend L---a. I have known M---y for a long time. She is kind, sweet, patient, understanding and would never bully or be hurtful to anyone. This man @i--c---------r is friends with the same people spoken of here: https://www.derwillezurmacht.com/blogs/entry/52-my-own-bullying-experience-part-2/, minus the woman with the autistic kid. She has no association with this man or his actions. I knew this and M---y knew this, but she didn't want to judge him based on a few of his friends being bullies. It is obvious who passed on the lied about M----y to him. ================================================ ================================================ It is quite obvious that @i--c---------r chose to believes those lies that were sent to him. Not once did he attempt to try and talk to M---y. Not once did he stop and think about any of the following. 1. All the pleasant interactions he and M---y had. 2. All the nice interactions on M---y's twitter timeline. 3. How respectful and understand M---y has been with him and others. 4. All the attacks on the timelines of those he is friends with that have stalked, harassed, and bullied M---y. @i--c---------r just chose to blindly believe these people who are frequently nasty to others. These same people who will turn against those who won't turn a blind eye and outlive their use. The way @i--c---------r responds to me is very telling. It's a "it's no big deal" impression. Considering the claims he was making, odd isn't it. ================================================ ================================================ I offer @i--c---------r the blog my friend M---y wrote regarding the people that turned against her unjustly and have been bullying, stalking, and harassing her. He, very easily, brushes it off. She never talked about its contents after posting it. Then @i--c---------r claims to have proof M---y was using a parody account to attack and bully others. Not once did @i--c---------r offer up this so called proof he said he had. I made a point to @i--c---------r about @e----m raging about that blog on her Twitter timeline. Considering no names were mentioned in that blog, what does it show besides guilt. ================================================ ================================================ I continue to make my point to @i--c---------r about how these friends of his have abused M---y. I point out he turns a blind eye to attacks on others via their own Twitter timelines. Right after I make my good and valid point, @i--c---------r decides to say he was given the IP address of M---y's computer. I continue to defend her saying she'd never attack anyone. ================================================ ================================================ I continue to defend my friend M---y. This @i--c---------r claims to have "irrefutable proof!". Not once did he offer anything up to prove his claims. He didn't even try to send me what he was sent that made M---y look so bad. He just gets annoyed that I don't sway his way on the claims. To me, this is very fishy. ================================================ ================================================ Here, @i--c---------r acknowledges that M---y had been nice to him. One plus for him. Atleast he acknowledged that. I then tell him that it is possible to forge a computer IP address. People can lie about it. People can photoshop screenshots taken. People can have their friends back up their lies. People can forge the data, pass it off to a few who ask very few questions so they have some back up. Strength in numbers. It seems that @i--c---------r is acknowledging that IP addresses can be forged. Just right after he claims they can't be. Now, which is it? ================================================ ================================================ I make a point to @i--c---------r that he was given false data. I also make a point how M---y is a good person and has shown she's a good person, but he chooses to believe different without questioning it. Then @i--c---------r tries to get the subject changed by saying he had his life hacked, but I chose to stay on topic. But I chose to stay on topic and point out how he is defaming M---y's character. Generally speaking, when someone tries to suddenly change the subject, it is because their BSing is showing, might show, and/or is getting them nowhere. ================================================ ================================================ After my point about how he is defaming M---y's character, @i--c---------r claims he had it researched by a private investigator. I make good points and he is now getting very "cagey" as he makes a bold claim. ================================================ ================================================ Then @i--c---------r says he hired a private investigator with his own money to "check out all these sick people". Wait a minute, I thought he said M---y was responsible. But he hires a PI to check out "all these sick people". Someone's story is changing a little. I point out how his friends target M---y and others and that he turns a blind eye. His response was saying he's not passing on a word of this as if he is doing M---y or me a favor. So, @i--c---------r allegedly hired a PI to check out these messages he was shown. He claims he got M---y's computer IP address from this PI. He says he had this PI "check out these sick people", when he had claimed only M---y before. A PI can't legally obtain a computer's physical address from these claimed messages unless law enforcement or an ISP got involved and obtained it. I guess what I am saying is, @i--c---------r is lying. My guess is he is hoping I will pass on what he said to M----y so she will get scared and slink away from social media, like his bullying friends have been trying to do to her. ================================================ ================================================ I point out, again, to @i--c---------r that he believes lies about M---y, a good person. Then I point out how he says nothing about his friends' attacks on others. Then I point out that he is an accessory to their bullying, threats, and stalking because he sees it and does nothing. Then @i--c---------r gets very defensive acting like I am judging him. All I did was make a few points. Then he says he is a grown man and can do what he wants. So he is saying if he wants to lie, pass on lies, or defame someone that it is okay. ================================================ ================================================ These "friends" of @i--c---------r that I spoke of that have bullied, stalked, and harassed M---y, are the ones blogged about here: https://www.derwillezurmacht.com/blogs/entry/52-my-own-bullying-experience-part-2/ They are that disbarred lawyer and her friends. @i--c---------r has been lied to. He has chosen to run with these lies and blindly believe what he was shown. Based upon his actions and behavior in our conversation, I firmly believe he was lying about hiring a PI. 1. Why would someone be paying alot of money for a PI to get someone's "computer IP address", only to do nothing with it? 2. A PI can't legally obtain someone's physical computer address without involvement of an ISP and/or law enforcement. No ISP or Law Enforcement agency will go about obtaining that information unless a crime has been committed in which they are prosecuting for. 3. Not once was any type of proof offered. 4. First he claims M---y is responsible. Then he says he hired a PI to check out "these sick people", implying more than one. Story change. 5. He tries to get the subject changed as I make valid points. 6. He gets cagey as I make valid points. 7. Showed agitation when I wouldn't sway his way on his defamation about M---y and continued to stand up for her and have her back.
Late on August 31, 2019, a longtime friend of mine, Mi***, was tweeting with some of her friends regarding one person's cat that is not doing well. If I recall, the issue with the cat, Si***, was something to do with the kidneys. Mi*** was saying that this meant that S**** couldn't have tuna. Then in a later tweet she mentioned "treats" in a general manner of speaking. Nowhere in M****'s tweet above did she even remotely suggest anything that could remotely harm a cat. Treats generally means a reward that the person or animal really likes or would. Then some rather random individual, "A****C**P*", chose to respond to her treats tweet in a rather crude manner. Tweet#1 As seen here, this individual chose to attack M**** by strongly implying she would intend to harm, and desire to cause harm, upon another individual's cat. This person also strongly implies M**** is very stupid. The way he worded it was very suggestive that he was hoping to embarrass and humiliate her. M**** never would wish harm upon another animal. TWEET#2 In this tweet, this individual attempts to cover up his attack upon M****. If this person looked at entire conversations, he would have seen that Miley was generalizing when talking about treats and she frequently suggests tuna as a treat for any cat. TWEET#3 M**** had every right to block this individual. Especially in how he had attacked her and implied she'd intentionally harm someone's cat. He counties to strongly imply that she is stupid. Also his butthurt over a block is apparently obvious. This tweet implies he is encouraging people to speak to him about the matter. I, and a few others, had chosen to defend M**** to this person. Not once did anyone harass, threaten, shame, or bully this individual. Defense tweet #1 Defense tweet #2 Defense tweet #3 Defense tweet #4 Defense tweet #5 Defense tweet #6 Defense tweet #7 Defense tweet #8 Defense tweet #9 Defense tweet #10 Defense tweet #11 Defense tweet #12 Defense tweet #13 Defense tweet #14 Defense tweet #15 My thoughts regarding the defense of M****. Not one person attacked him. Each of them expressed their opinion and thoughts. No one said anything degrading. I have come to notice that "A****C**P*" had chosen to protect his tweets. So I conducted a search of tweets to him. I found 4 tweets that gave strong indications that "A****C**P*" had been openly discussing the matter beyond what I, and others defending M****, had seen. Questionable tweet #1 Questionable tweet #2 Questionable tweet #3 Questionable tweet #4 My thoughts in regards to the questionable tweets are as follows. 1. It has become obvious to me that these 4 are comforting "A****C**P*". 2. Why would someone need comfort unless they spoke of something that struck their nerves? 3. There is talk of weirdos coming out. This implying that "A****C**P*" is saying something to indicate he is being attacked. 4. Talk of weird people on social media implies that someone on social media struck a nerve recently. 5. Talk implying he was attacked for being friendly. This makes me think of when he tried to make it appear as if he was being friendly to M****, when he clearly was not. My final thoughts. What happened, should not have happened. M**** had not done anything wrong. She merely suggested to "M***C***M*****" that she give S**** treats, which meant something he likes, that he can have. Anyone looking at the first picture within this blog should be able to see such. "A****C**P*" took it upon himself to respond to M****'s tweet in such a manner so as to suggest she was suggesting harmful things for S****. He attempted to cover up his depraved behavior by acting as if he was giving a friendly suggestion. What is friendly about taking what M**** said and making it appear as if she was suggesting something harmful, when it is clear she was not? In one of his tweets he gave strong indications he wanted attention for him regarding this matter when he said to DM him with questions. Why would he do that unless he planned to go on and on hoping to rally people to his side, all while playing the part of the victim? People defended M****. They had every right. M****'s good character was being attacked by "A****C**P*". Not one of them attacked him or defamed him. He was called out on his atrocious actions. In my opinion, the questionable tweets I had posted, were highly indicative that "A****C**P*" was complaining about the matter and attempting to play the victim card. Anyone who cannot see how wrong "A****C**P*" is needs to re-evaluate their morals and what kind of people they are that think what did did was okay.