MALICIOUS INTERFERENCE CRIMINAL AND CIVIL
© Copyright all materials written by Author DGV Reiman 2008, all rights
reserved. By posting or publishing this article and other copyrighted
articles on USENET and/or elsewhere, Author is expressly NOT granting
any implied authorization to reproduce his copyrighted work in any
manner. The Author further does not accept as "Fair Use" under U.S. Code
Title 17, nor will condone, the reproduction of any portion of his
copyrighted materials IN ANY MANNER for the purpose of harassing,
stalking or defaming the Author, or in conjunction with any violation of
any civil or criminal statutes. Violators will face legal action. If
anyone wishes to reproduce my copyrighted materials all they need to do
first is email me and receive back via email my written permission to do
so - such permission will not be unreasonably withheld. As I have often
stated, I post copyrighted articles on USENET for a pre-review by the
public prior to placing those articles in a book to be sold in
international commerce. All those that read these articles already know
or should already know my copyrighted articles cannot be infringed upon
in any manner simply because they were first posted on USENET. Moreover,
according to case law and expert answers in respect to this issue, the
general stated policy of newgroups, such as to invite comment, DOES NOT
preclude, supercede nor abrogate the author's right of copyright
protection. Moreover, case law has further provided a precedent that
"Fair Use" cannot be claimed by an infringer to disguise the spiteful
and defaming reproduction of an author's work.
(Smear Merchant Disclaimer: Please note this article (the same as all of
my past articles and exchanges with posters) represents an editorial on
contemporary issues and events - my opinion. Nothing in this article
represents in any manner any asseveration of biographical fact, nor is
about, directed toward or against any particular person - other than
those specifically mentioned herein. This article is being posted for
entertainment purposes only. If any person finds this post personally
annoying, abusive, defaming or otherwise disturbing, please notify me of
your specific reasons for annoyance via email at legalcoach@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
If we find your detailed objections reasonable (considering the
"reasonable person" doctrine and case law) we will then remove this
post, or the offending passages contained therein, from the Google
archive, publicly apologize and retract. My intent is to entertain, and
to present articles to USENET readers prior to publication to determine
interest, and not to annoy, abuse, humiliate, or in any way cause anyone
emotional harm by posting on USENET or elsewhere. Please note that
defending myself from harassment and obloquy with rebuttal posts has
been deemed a "lawful and legitimate" publication by my legal counsel.
If I am not attacked, defamed or harassed, or my copyrighted articles
not interrupted nor infringed upon, I clearly do not have a reason to
respond with a rebuttal. Please also note that I intend to notify any
and all ISP's and web hosts of any annoying or calumnious post, web site
or other similar entity about me after I give the offender an
opportunity to retract, apologize and remove said post from the Google
archive).
Civil Malicious Interference Causes of Action Requires:
1. A contract: (Such as my contract with Google to remove my erred posts
from USENET and from the Google archive.)
2. Knowledge of the contract on the part of the Defendant: (The
anonymous cyberstalker SteveLon@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
and Nigel Brooks and some
members of the Nigel Brooks smear gang all knew that Google had agreed
to remove the posts in question from public view, USENET and the Google
archive due to errors or typos in the posts).
3. Malice on the part of the Defendant: (The SteveLon@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
with
the help of Nigel Brooks and some members of the Nigel Brooks smear gang
conspired to and did replace the removed post(s) back on public view,
back on USENET, and back on the Google archive, without the permission
of the author nor of Google, for the purpose of using those long removed
erred posts to defame, harass, cyberstalk, threaten, extort, incite
threats, incite public hatred, besmirch my reputation and cause me
extreme emotional harm and distress.
4. Damages suffered by the Plaintiff: ( Emotional distress, damage to
reputation, time cost due to lawyer fees and posting rebuttals and
defenses to the false accusations and fraud being perpetrated by the
Nigel Brooks gang due to this Malicious Interference. Time cost
calculated at $150 per hour, loss of time in respect to finalizing
books, etc. . . ) In addition, the following claims can be presented due
to the gang's malicious interference:
(1) malicious interference with contract, 2) civil conspiracy, (3)
negligent infliction of emotional distress, (4) intentional infliction
of emotional distress ("IIED"), (5) loss of consortium, and (6) punitive
damages.
In addition the following Torts also apply depending upon the State and
Federal Statutes involved:
5. Malicious Interference with Prospective Business Relations.
6. Malicious Interference with Contract.
7. Malicious Interference with right of Contract.
8. Tortious Interference.
9. Unjustifiable interference with one's business a wrongful and
malicious interference with the making of a contract is also actionable
as some of the posts resurrected (I believe) were erred posts that were
replaced by the original copyrighted posts.
9-a. Ten years before the 1984 Pleading Code was adopted, we held in
Crystal Gas Co. v. Oklahoma Natural Gas Co.,529 P.2d 987, 990 (Okla.
1974), a case in which the plaintiff sought to recover damages for
interference with contractual and business relations. However, we
recognized that the plaintiff could plead causation in general terms."
Criminal Codes that Could be Applicable
10. "Any malicious interference with such business is an unlawful act
and an ..... were privileged by virtue of 12 O.S. 1981 § 1443.1."
11. "A criminal complaint filed Wednesday afternoon charges Gerritsen
with a felony charge of malicious interference with a communications
system."
12. http://tinyurl.com/53l7nl
"U.S. Attorney Stern stated: "The
defendant gained illegal access to several computers, either causing
substantial business loss, defacing a web page with hacker graphics,
copying personal information, or, in the case of a NASA computer,
effectively seizing control. All in all, the defendant used his home
computer to leave a trail of cybercrime from coast to coast." Stern
added: "Investigating and prosecuting this sort of intentional and
malicious activity is a high priority for federal law enforcement."
13. Criminal Malicious Interference Using a Computer: This includes, but
is not limited to: (a) Access, alteration or removal of other users'
files. (b) Theft of printed output. © Attempting to determine the
passwords of other users. (d) Interfering with an account. (e) Sending
mail or messages to other users which is likely to annoy or offend them.
(f) Knowingly using the system in a manner which adversely impacts the
computing resources of other users. (g) Attempting to break system
security in any way.
(Note Item "F" in the above).
14. "Article 361 protects the proprietor's right of inviolability of
information in computers, systems or networks. The owner of automated
system is any person that legally uses services of information
processing as the proprietor of such system (computer, systems or
networks) or as the person authorized to use such system.
Criminal act, responsibility for which is provided by Article 361,
should consist of illegal intervention in the work of computers, systems
or networks. It always has a character of certain actions FULFILLMENT,
and can be a penetration into computer system using special technical
means or software that allow to overcome installed systems of protection
from illegal application of obtained passwords or posing as a legal user
to penetrate into the computer system [3]."
15. "The U.S. Dept. of Justice has asked the U.S. Sentencing Commission
to promulgate a new federal sentencing guideline, Sec. 2F2.1,
specifically addressing the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1988 (18 USC
1030), with a base offense level of 6 and enhancements of 4 to 6 levels
for violations of specific provisions of the statute. The new guideline
practically guarantees some period of confinement, even for first
offenders who plead guilty. For example, the guideline would provide
that if the defendant obtained ``protected'' information (defined as
``private information, non-public government information, or proprietary
commercial information), the offense level would be increased by two; if
the defendant disclosed protected information to any person, the offense
level would be increased by four levels, and if the defendant
distributed the information by means of ``a general distribution
system,'' the offense level would go up six levels. The proposed
commentary explains that a ``general distribution system'' includes
``electronic bulletin board and voice mail systems, newsletters and
other publications, and any other form of group dissemination, by any
means.''
(Doug Says: Note: (1). Accessing private information, and then (2)
disclosing such information over a "general distribution system" the
offense level would go up to six.)
16. STATE OF WASHINGTON STATUTES
The malicious mischief statute is found at
RCW 9A.48.070
*.
"A person is guilty of malicious mischief in the first degree if he
knowingly and maliciously . . . causes physical damage to the property
of another in an amount exceeding one thousand five hundred dollars . .
.."
In RCW 9A.48.100* physical damage is defined as follows:
"Physical damage", in addition to its ordinary meaning, shall include
the total or partial alteration, damage, obliteration, or erasure of
records, information, data, computer programs, or their computer
representations, which are recorded for use in computers or the
impairment, interruption, or interference with the use of such records,
information, data, or computer programs, or the impairment,
interruption, or interference with the use of any computer or services
provided by computers. "Physical damage" also includes any diminution in
the value of any property as the consequence of an act.
The computer trespass statutes can be found at RCW 9A.52.110* and RCW
9A.52.120*.
9A.52.110
(1) A person is guilty of computer trespass in the first degree if the
person, without authorization, intentionally gains access to a computer
system or electronic data base of another; and (a) The access is made
with the intent to commit another crime; or (b) The violation involves a
computer or data base maintained by a government agency. (2) Computer
trespass in the first degree is a class C felony.
9A.52.120
(1) A person is guilty of computer trespass in the second degree if
the person, without authorization, intentionally gains access to a
computer system or electronic data base of another under circumstances
not constituting the offense in the first degree. (2) Computer trespass
in the second degree is a gross misdemeanor.
In addition to these two computer specific statutes, some computer crime
cases can be prosecuted under the general theft statutes at: RCW 9A.56*.
Copyright Infringement
Federal copyright law pre-empts state enforcement. Thus, a criminal
charge that is based solely on a copyright violation cannot be
prosecuted outside federal courts. If, however, additional criminal
acts, above and beyond the copyright violation are involved, the case
may be prosecuted in state court.
State v. Smith, 115 Wash. 2d 434, 798 P.2d 1146, 17 U.S.P.Q.2d 1480
(1990) is an example of a copyright violation involving other criminal
acts which can be prosecuted at the state level. The case explains the
law in this area.
Suspected criminal copyright violations should be referred to the FBI.
That agency's Seattle phone number is: 206-622-0460.
This Information Provided By:
King County Prosecutor's Office
Complex Prosecutions and Investigations Division
500 Fourth Avenue, Room 840
Seattle, WA 98104
206-296-9010
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. "What is Cyber Crime & Computer crime?
The Encyclopedia Britannica defines Cyber crime as any crime that is
committed by means of special knowledge or expert use of computer
technology. United Nation Manual on prevention & Control of computer
crime and Oxford Reference Online gives list of cyber crimes committed
over internet.[ 1 ] Cyber crime includes a wide variety of criminal
offenses and activities Because of lack of physical evidences
investigating a cyber crime becomes very difficult. Scope of this
definition becomes wider with a frequent companion or substitute term
"computer-related crime". Cyber crimes are harmful acts committed from
or against a computer or network."
18. Criminal conspiracy: Were there two or more individuals involved in
the common purpose of retrieving and disseminating my private
information on the Internet? Of course.
End Excerpts:
And this is just the beginning. I am being told there is much more to
this issue, and we are waiting for Google's reply and more legal
research to be completed. I have also been told that Google will
prosecute people that maliciously interfere with their contractual
relations with their clients.
I cannot imagine why anyone would want to participate in a smear gang
like the Nigel Brook's smear and defamation gang, especially when such
participation makes each gang member individually and severally culpable
and responsible for the acts of all other conspirators or gang members.
Consider the anonymous cyberstalker SteveLon@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
as an example:
It is clear that he has followed me from newsgroup to newsgroup for the
deliberate and reckless obsessive desire to do me harm in any way he can
dream up, and clearly malicious and criminal acts are his stock and
trade.
Below is some very applicable information for all gang members and
prospective gang members to consider. This issue has not gone this far
yet, but if the attacks continue, it will:
USING THE NAME OF THE FBI WITHOUT PERMISSION
Doug Says: It appears a quick trip to sections 701, 709 and 712 of
Title 18 U.S.C. is something worth reading:
http://tinyurl.com/yp73fs
Title 701 (Probably does not apply)
http://tinyurl.com/yv54rb
Title 709 This criminal statute has a six-
year statute of limitation and clearly applies to someone stupid
enough to use the name of the FBI to harass, smear and defame or in any
USENET post regardless of intent:
Here is the key passage.
"Whoever, except with the written permission of the Director of the
Federal Bureau of Investigation, knowingly uses the words "Federal
Bureau of Investigation" or the initials "F.B.I.", or any colorable
imitation of such words or initials, in connection with any
advertisement, circular, book, pamphlet or other publication, play,
motion picture, broadcast, telecast, or other production, in a manner
reasonably calculated to convey the impression that such
advertisement, circular, book, pamphlet or other publication, play,
motion picture, broadcast, telecast, or other production, is approved,
endorsed, or authorized by the Federal Bureau of Investigation;
Shall be punished as follows: a corporation, partnership, business
trust, association, or other business entity, by a fine under this
title; an officer or member thereof participating or knowingly
acquiescing in such violation or any individual violating this
section, by a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than
one year, or both.
http://tinyurl.com/265zuz
Title 712 - Misuse of Names - this could
apply especially if it is connected with threats to repeat FBI
forgeries or blackmail. (Also can be used to prosecute if the name of
the Veterans Administration is used to facilitate any defamation,
harassment, or obloquy against a Veteran.)
Other Smear Gang Crimes that Are Actionable
In addition to the above, what if you knew that members of a
hypothetical smear merchant gang were stupid enough to perpetrate the
following criminal acts against someone. We will name the gang members
(and remember this includes all of them regardless of whether they
actually did the crime due to the conspiracy laws) as "Defendants" and
their target victim as "Plaintiff."
1. Gang members hacked into Plaintiff's computer without authorization
and removed both Plaintiff's and his family's personal information and
trade secrets. And then boasted about doing
so on USENET! (Stupid, stupid, stupid). (See computer crimes).
2. Gang members forged Plaintiff's name to US Government forms
requesting military and personal records, and the gang member then
boasted about doing so on USENET!! (Six Year Statutes). (See forging
government document crimes, fraud, general forgery and invasion of
privacy).
3 Gang members forged Plaintiff's name to electronic communications and
USENET posts, for profit!!!
4. Gang members "repeatedly" published through international commerce
false and forged FBI reports about Plaintiff, and tried to blackmail
Plaintiff to stop posting on USENET by stating those forged FBI reports
would continue to be posted unless he stopped posting.
(See blackmail, extortion, etc . . . ).
5. Gang members falsely and repeatedly published through international
commerce that Plaintiff is a pedophile, and a child pornographer. (That
false accusation carries automatic defamation
damages. Damages do not need to be proved due to the outrageous nature
of these accusations). One gang member even contacted third parties and
fraudulently claimed Plaintiff was receiving child porno on his
computer. (Some of these false child porno accusations also carry
criminal penalties in some states). Gang members also repeatedly and
fraudulently published that Plaintiff was (1) Never in the US Army, (2)
Never went to Vietnam (3) Never achieved the rank of
SFC E-7 in Vietnam (4) was a murderer, war criminal, thief, wife beater,
car thief, a rapist and of course a "cannibal" and a "murderer of
unarmed priests" in Vietnam, lied about attending RVN training and CBR
training, and the gang further fraudulently forged past posts the
Plaintiff wrote, or dictated in general, or did not write, and then used
their OWN FORGERIES to fraudulently claim that Plaintiff had been
awarded the Order of the Purple Heart Medal, and that he had falsely
claimed that he was a 2nd Lieutenant in Vietnam.
6. Gang members repeatedly threatened Plaintiff with violence and death
and they published those threats through international commerce, and
gang members deliberately visited third parties about Plaintiff such as
Muslim Mosques, and delivered and published hate filled and fraudulent
accusations about Plaintiff to incite public hatred and to incite those
third parties to hate Plaintiff and to send him threats of death and
violence. (Six year statutes - lots of criminal statutes too many to
list - including obstruction of justice and conspiracy if someone tried
to hide these threats after they were revealed to a Government agency).
7. Gang members conspired to and did file a malicious and false criminal
complaint against Plaintiff. (Abuse of process and malicious prosecution
statutes apply). Also, the gang members actually boasted about this
malicious act on USENET!!!
8. Gang members through international commerce repeatedly stalked,
tortured, harassed, and tormented Plaintiff by almost every
psychological means and process imaginable. (Lots of criminal statutes
depending on State).
10. Gang members did publicly and through international commerce
impersonate an U.S. Army General Officer to defame and misrepresent
Plaintiff's military records.
11. Gang members did publicly and through international commerce mislead
Plaintiff to believe a gang leader was a Federal Agent and was in that
capacity confirming the false accusations, fraud and forgeries published
by him and his gang of smear merchants about Plaintiff.
12. Gang members did publicly and through international commerce,
fraudulently misrepresent that harassing and libelous publications about
Plaintiff were coming from an agent of the US Army.
13. Gang members did publicly and through international commerce, lied
about and/or misrepresented and deliberately omitted key contents of
Plaintiff's military records for the purpose of defaming Plaintiff and
to paint Plaintiff in a false light.
14. Gang members did publicly and through international commerce,
maliciously forged, distorted and altered what Plaintiff might have
written and published or dictated to be published in the past on USENET
so as to distort, falsify and force such publications to appear untrue,
or as preposterous false claims of military bravado, or to paint
Plaintiff in a false light.
Doug Says: I know all must be wondering "who in the world would be
soooooo stupid as to not only post forged FBI documents on USENET, but
then to repeat that FBI forgery more than thirty times, and then use
that FBI forgery as blackmail to force someone not to post on specific
newsgroups?" And who in their right mind for "sport" would perpetrate
all those criminal acts listed above and be a part of a gang that does
so?
You must be thinking NO ONE is that stupid! Wanna bet? Also, six years
is a long time to have crimes hanging over your head - now that IS
stupid!
One gang member replied to one of his target victims that if the target
victim tried to take the gang member's libel and criminal acts to court
it will be very expensive for the target victim. Of course that is not
true. Honest prosecution is your right and it will cost
you nothing.
Why Gangs?
Why do people join gangs and perpetrate these kinds of crimes on the
Internet when they would never in a million years commit the same crimes
on the street?
I am no Doctor, but it is clear to me at least some of these gang
members are very very sick, and they need psychiatric attention
immediately. And if you are stupid enough to join in with a USENET smear
gang you are as criminally vulnerable as the sickest member of that
gang. (Dumb and dumber).
Is it worth it? Just because gang members have not been prosecuted so
far that does not mean when they least expect it the shoe will drop.
Sometimes, hypothetical plaintiffs just want to see how far an
emboldened gang will go before they take action against them, and then
sometimes plaintiffs' want to avoid tying up their time in lengthy
prosecutions. But then that is something that is weighed by the
Plaintiff each day against how far the gang is furthering their
attacks and obloquy. Each new attack will probably bring the plaintiff
closer to doing something he really does not want to do.
Also, what if some of the crackpot criminals are fellow war Veterans?
Could they be suffering from some post traumatic stress or from some
personalty disorder they contracted fighting the same war you fought? It
is hard to file charges against a brother Vet unless of course he
or she filed malicious criminal charges against you or attempted to do
so - and that fact can be easily determined with a flurry of Freedom of
Information Act requests, which I highly recommend.
Public Funds to Invade Privacy
Note also if any gang member, government employee, former government
employee, used or caused to be used public funds or public servants in
any manner to assist his smear and defamation campaign then the doo doo
will really hit the fan in respect to the agency involved, and the
persons involved.
Say hypothetically someone in a government agency used public funds to
tip off a smear merchant that someone had investigated some of his false
claims. Is that Government Agency person now involved in helping the
smear merchant defame and smear his victims? Of course.
How about if a smear merchant used past law enforcement connections to
review files or obtain information on his victims, and one of those
screaming morons actually boasted about doing so on USENET!!!! What if
someone filed a FOIA request and asked for all that accessed his
file, and why? What if someone was stupid enough to post private
information that was obtained illegally or by false pretenses (such as
lying on Government requests or using past connections) on a private or
secret newsgroup or web site? Do you believe anyone could be that
stupid?
It is important to understand that illegally or under false pretenses
accessing information about anyone from a Government file of any kind,
including Passport applications, is a criminal act. But then if such
information is actually published somewhere by the perpetrator or one
of his conspirators, then several other criminal acts are also invoked.
In many cases one criminal act bleeds into another.
Helping a smear gang victimize and demonize its target victim is stupid,
dangerous and is a very slippery slope when it comes to civil or
criminal charges being filed against you. Personal attacks, and
demonism, especially with the use of past extemporaneous statements,
errors, typos and outright forgeries, does not accomplish anything
except provide sick satisfaction for some pathetic con man with an
inferiority complex as big as his fragile ego.
http://tinyurl.com/qpopt
Statute of Limitations (remember when one gang
member does something ALL gang members are culpable).
http://tinyurl.com/235ypr
Normal Statute of Limitations for Non- Capital
offenses are five years - UNLESS the person committing the crime is not
known - such as an anonymous cyberstalker - then the statute does not
start until the identity of the person has been
determined.
End excerpts.
Think about what you are doing people. Is it worth it? I have said I
have not even started to defend myself, and that is a very true
statement. There is much more I could have done that I have not yet
done. Apparently the gang leaders believe my desperate attempts to avoid
litigation represents some kind of weakness or fear, yet nothing could
be further from the truth.
I have been though bitter litigation before. I know what kind of shit
storm it is. It will intertwine and interfere with every element of your
life. And since I have been through it all before you can bet the Casino
lawyers uncovered and found every smidgen of dirt they could find on me,
and yet they found nothing simply because I have nothing to hide. But
most people do, and you can bet everything about you is going to surface
during discovery. Your house will be locked up, your loans, your
business, your life, all due to this looming litigation for a long long
time, and either you will admit to what you have posted on USENET, or
you will lie about it, and in either case you are going to lose this
case. And that will probably cost you everything you have and will ever
have. And once I start litigation I have learned not to accept
settlement offers from Smear merchants, they will just change their
names and start the defamation all over again.
Do you really believe no action will be taken against you? If you do,
you are going to be in for a big surprise. Stop the attacks, stop the
cyberstalking, stop the lies and the fraud and the false readings of my
military records, stop the computer crimes, the hackings, and the false
accusations, stop the invasions of my privacy, and stop the malicious
interference of my life and property, or I absolutely assure you that I
will bring this issue into a court of law and you will be standing in
front of a Judge explaining your and your gang member's actions.
Note my desperate pleadings to stop the gang attacks before litigation
becomes inevitable is directed to those people that are rational, and
not to the gang members that have child like minds and thereby gain a
perverse pleasure in using fraud, false accusations, lies and obloquy to
defame others. I doubt seriously if they are smart enough to find a cure
for their sickness, but for those of you that were sucked into this
Nigel Brooks fraud and hype, I urge you to distance yourself from this
gang forever, because I absolutely assure you I have not yet begun to
defend myself from their attacks should they continue.
Doug Grant (Tm)
|
