Eric Pepin - Higher Balance Institute - Discussion

[Luis Miguel]

Auxology: aux-, pertaining to growth, from Greek auxē, (Auxien) "to increase"; -o-, generic phoenetic combining form, here denoting relationship to growth, stimulation, or acceleration; -logy, pertaining to the study of or science of, from Middle English -logie, from Old French, from Latin -logia, from Greek -logiā, from legein, "to speak", and -logos "word", "speech" and "one who deals with", thus "the character or department of one who speaks or treats of (a certain subject)".

Auxology is a meta-term covering the study of all aspects of human physical growth; though it is also a fundamental of biology, generally. Auxology is a highly multi-disciplinary science involving health sciences / medicine (pediatrics, general practice, endocrinology, neuroendocrinology, physiology, epidemiology), and to a lesser extent: nutrition, genetics, anthropology, anthropometry, ergonomics, history, economic history, economics, socioeconomics, sociology, public health, and psychology, among others

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auxology

 

[Luis Miguel]

I found this about Axien.org in a forum:

Remote Name:
209.144.211.35
I was wondering if anyone has heard of leaving your body while meditating. I recently experienced something intense after checking out a web site on meditation. I have meditated before but consider myself level headed and did not expect to experience leaving my body, or how vivid the experience was. The technique they gave me was different then what Im use to and I wanted to know if anyone has heard of them and if perhaps this meditation triggers hallucinations? If anyone knows anything about this please e-mail me with your experiences. The web site I goot this info from was auxien.org Thanks. E-Mail: ozmosisomegaATyahoo.com

_http://www.windowoncyprus.com/stoic_forum.htm

 

[Luis Miguel]

This is kind of odd, its a message from a forum with a member called Auxien, talking about Higher Balance:

Hello, I am seeking anyone who has information on a company called Higher Balance that offers a
program called Foundation. My brother is either pulling my leg or is out of his mind. This company
makes claims to teach a form of meditation that awakens areas of the brain that contribute to
paranormal abilities such as the "Sixth Sense" they suggest that this is some kind of missing link
in mans evolutionary history etc, sounds logical but lets not buy the farm yet. Although it seems my
brother already has. He claims that he is experiencing some intense things such as lights flashing
from no where in his room, humming or vibrations moving through his body with no reasonable location
of a source and that he can now feel people moving around through the walls! The icing on the cake
is the recent claim that he has traveled outside of his body. My brother is known for down to earth
serious personality which I suppose is irritating me the most. I am concerned that this is some kind
of brainwashing or something beyond my understanding. If anyone here can help or advise me it would
be much appreciated. I guess my questions are is this for real, is it safe and is it there away I
can check these people out? If it is of any help I heard that they have some kind of secret site on
there web site that offers members a variety of paranormal how to information and it may be even
more intense my brother has asked about it but did not get a reply back yet. Can someone confirm
this? Thank you.

_http://www.cycling.net.au/showthread.php?t=70006
And the extract above and the member are related with this forum thread: Cult Education Forum :: Former Cult Members and Affected Families ... (forum.rickross.com/read.php?5,33575,page=1 - 35k -) about Higher Balance cult. (Though i have problems with this link, looks like the link its broken, odd isn´t it?)

 

[christx11]

This is kind of odd, its a message from a forum with a member called Auxien, talking about Higher Balance:

Hello, I am seeking anyone who has information on a company called Higher Balance that offers a
program called Foundation. My brother is either pulling my leg or is out of his mind. This company
makes claims to teach a form of meditation that awakens areas of the brain that contribute to
paranormal abilities such as the "Sixth Sense" they suggest that this is some kind of missing link
in mans evolutionary history etc, sounds logical but lets not buy the farm yet. Although it seems my
brother already has. He claims that he is experiencing some intense things such as lights flashing
from no where in his room, humming or vibrations moving through his body with no reasonable location
of a source and that he can now feel people moving around through the walls! The icing on the cake
is the recent claim that he has traveled outside of his body. My brother is known for down to earth
serious personality which I suppose is irritating me the most. I am concerned that this is some kind
of brainwashing or something beyond my understanding. If anyone here can help or advise me it would
be much appreciated. I guess my questions are is this for real, is it safe and is it there away I
can check these people out? If it is of any help I heard that they have some kind of secret site on
there web site that offers members a variety of paranormal how to information and it may be even
more intense my brother has asked about it but did not get a reply back yet. Can someone confirm
this? Thank you.

_http://www.cycling.net.au/showthread.php?t=70006
And the extract above and the member are related with this forum thread: Cult Education Forum :: Former Cult Members and Affected Families ... (forum.rickross.com/read.php?5,33575,page=1 - 35k -) about Higher Balance cult. (Though i have problems with this link, looks like the link its broken, odd isn´t it?)

I am guessing that auxien in the above is Pepin promoting himself. The thread is from October 2003 and in the reply auxien's email addy shows as ozmosisomega_at_yahoo.com.

ozmosisomega also comes up in a 2003 October rant here -
_http://www.talkaboutpeople.com/group/alt.fan.earl-curley/messages/2959.html

Looks like more Pepin in disguise promoting Pepin.

I am not sure auxien.org of California is related to Pepin or not.

However Auxien Enterprises, Inc comes up in a business search -

_http://www.portlandonline.com/licenses/lookup/index.cfm?busname=AUXIEN+ENTERPRISES+INC

AUXIEN ENTERPRISES INC
Address(es)
11975 SW 2ND ST STE 110 BEAVERTON OR 97005

And auxien.com is registered to Eric Pepin himself.

Registrant:
Auxien
ATTN: AUXIEN.COM
c/o Network Solutions
P.O. Box 447
Herndon, VA 20172-0447

Domain Name: AUXIEN.COM

Administrative Contact :
Pepin, Eric
ud76r8mv3z4@networksolutionsprivateregistration.com
ATTN: AUXIEN.COM
c/o Network Solutions
P.O. Box 447
Herndon, VA 20172-0447
Phone: 570-708-8780

Technical Contact :
Pepin, Eric
ud76r8mv3z4@networksolutionsprivateregistration.com
ATTN: AUXIEN.COM
c/o Network Solutions
P.O. Box 447
Herndon, VA 20172-0447
Phone: 570-708-8780

Record expires on 10-Nov-2008
Record created on 11-Nov-1998
Database last updated on 08-Nov-2007


Then there is this:

_http://www.send2press.com/mediadrome/2008-02-0219-003.txt
_http://www.send2press.com/mediadrome/news_2008-02-0219-003.pdf

Pepin trying to promote himself again.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

Eric Pepin, Jamison Priebe, Two Oregon Men, Cleared of all Sex Charges

Lead detective admits no evidence other than accusers' conflicting statements

HILLSBORO, Ore. - Feb. 19, 2008 (SEND2PRESS NEWSWIRE) -- Washington county judge Steven L. Price said he had questions regarding the accuracy of the accuser's testimony. The judge's statement came after 5 days of trial (case #C061748CR) where he found Eric Pepin and Jamison Priebe not guilty of all charges.

Reflecting on the case and his accuser, Chris Young, Pepin said, "We're happy with the verdict but the accusations will always be there. Right now it's about picking up the pieces and moving on. In some ways I feel sorry for Chris. He'll be carrying around the guilt of what he did the rest of his life. I don't think he'll ever tell anyone the truth and it will eat him up."

Deputy district attorney Andrew Erwin struggled to build the state's case around three conflicting accounts the accuser, Chris Young, who is now 21, gave to police.

One of the biggest upsets came when Young, having learned about defense evidence, claimed Eric Pepin was not wearing a robe with the words, "Master Eric," emblazoned on it when they first met. Young's dramatic account was given a mass of local and internet media attention when a July article in the Oregonian paper detailed their first meeting with the robe. Young claimed police had gotten the account wrong.

The defense gave evidence to the court showing pictures of the robe being given to Mr. Pepin in January 2005, at a birthday party, with Young in attendance. The event took place nearly a year after Young said he saw the defendant wearing the robe.

The defense also showed receipts of when the robe was purchased by one of Pepin's employees. The employee testified he brought several robes with him to the United States after studying with one of the worlds top martial arts masters. A student of martial arts most of his life, he said it is common to call his teachers master and meant it respectfully, though Pepin has never been called master by anyone.

Young told the court that instead, it was a "fuzzy, brown cotton robe." When asked if he was certain Pepin was wearing a fuzzy, brown robe Young confirmed that was what he told police.

Officer Matthew Groshong, a 10 year veteran of the force, testified that was not what Young told police. Groshong conducted the first interview with Young in January 2006. The interview was done at the office of Young's civil attorney, which he obtained before filing charges. Groshong's report detailed a different version of events than what Young later told other officers and what he also said in court.

Attorney Stephen Houze commented on the prosecutions reaction to all the different stories. "Counsel would have the court believe this seasoned police officer got it all wrong. That he was confused. It's not that Christopher Young is being dishonest, somehow this police officer just screwed it up and didn't get it right."

Christopher Young's testimony also conflicted with lead detective Mike Smith's report of what Young told him. Said Houze, "Are we to believe Detective Smith is lying about it? Of course not. Chris Young is lying about it."

In the last encounter between Young and Pepin, before Young went to police, Young said he went to Pepin for help because nobody else would help him. Pepin helped fix the car of Young's girlfriend, Krystin Birtchet, and worked to find them a place to live. Pepin said they came asking for money but an argument followed when Pepin said he wouldn't continue to help the two unless they agreed to stop using drugs. They refused his help.

Young said it was his girlfriend who didn't want Pepin's help; not him. "She's young and angry and has problems with men." He said she flipped Pepin off at their meeting.

Soon after refusing Pepin's help, Young and his girlfriend went to police. Sergeant Matthew Condon said when they first came to police it was for "employment" related issues. Condon said he offered them the chance to speak to an investigator if the matter was serious. They declined. Instead, Young and his girlfriend sought out a civil attorney. Young's girlfriend said she believed he had a case and thought a lot of people would believe it.

"They're calling for an attorney to make a civil case to get the money from Eric Pepin. To them Eric Pepin is the pot of gold in the sky," Houze said. "All you got to do if you're Chris Young, like you do every day, is tell a lie. This is the biggest payday he's hoping he's ever going to see."

Chris Young's mother, Amy Manning, testified to the court that her son is dishonest with her and frequently hid his drug use. She sent him to Mexico for his out of control behavior when he was 15. She told police she felt Eric Pepin was a positive influence on her son.

Young's family refused to provide him with assistance at the time and wouldn't let him live with them, leaving him frequently homeless.

During execution of the search warrant of Mr. Pepin's home and office, lead investigator Mike Smith found Pepin to be, "very cooperative, very polite." Police said Pepin went as far to volunteer locations to the officers they were not authorized to search or were even aware of. Pepin had employees drive police to a house an hour away to secure a laptop computer for them. Lead Detective Mike Smith also admitted Eric Pepin continued to speak to him after his attorney had advised him not to. Pepin said he believed police would seek to find the truth.

Detective Smith testified that he told Pepin during the search, "I will work as hard to clear your name as I will to substantiate the claims." According to Pepin and attorney Stephen Houze, that never happened.

Although the police discovered no evidence that any crime had taken place, other than Young's conflicting statements, Pepin and Priebe would later be charged. "During the search I remember all the officers laughing at me. They admitted it wasn't like TV with how things get resolved. They were right. On TV police remain neutral and seek to find the truth. Reality is far different," Pepin said.

During their testimonies Christopher Young and detective Mike Smith constantly referred to each other as "Chris" and "Mike." Young and Smith admitted to the court that it was the nature of their relationship. When asked how many times he had spoken to detective Smith, Young replied it was, "40, 50, 60 times." Detective Smith told the court that their meetings were not always professional. He admitted sometimes he was off duty.

Houze told Judge Price he would be remiss if he did not address the nature of the investigation and the obvious bias the Lead Detective had going in. "The skeptical guard a police officer needs to have when evaluating a case was not there," Houze said.

"The police never came to talk to Jamison or I after the initial search. No looking into Chris's past. They took his word and ran with it," Pepin said.

To support Young's accusation the prosecution called two of Young's friends, his girlfriend, and his mother. None of them testified about having any personal knowledge of the events. His friends and his girlfriend talked about how Young burned them in the past and lived off them continuously.

The prosecution also called Adam Alder, a one-time friend of Eric Pepin's from California. Mr. Alder testified he met Pepin when he was 16 but that Pepin would not let him attend classes until he was 18. Alder stated he found Pepin again when he was almost 19. He admitted that Pepin ended their friendship nearly 7 years ago when he was 23. Alder's testimony also conflicted with what he initially told police. Alder said, like Young, the police had gotten it wrong.

The reason Alder changed his story may be because Alder and Young were in contact before the trial, said Alder's friend Tim Todd. "I've known Adam a long time. He came to my wedding. About 5 years ago he tried to convince me to make up a story with him and tell the police that Eric [Pepin] had sex with us and that we were minors when it happened. I told him no way. He feels burned that Eric pushed him out of his life."

Some time after news of Pepin's arrest broke in the Oregonian article, Todd and Alder talked. "He said he was talking to Chris Young. He wouldn't tell me about what or if Chris was promising to give him money in exchange for help if he won the case. They at least had time to corroborate their stories once Adam decided to testify," Todd said. A guilty verdict would have been an instant win for Young in a civil case.

Asked in court whether he had any contact with Alder before the trial, of any kind, or if the two had ever met Young replied, "No."

Pepin said some people view him as controversial. "I say what I think and don't make apologies for it. People like to hear what confirms their own thinking. I encourage people to go beyond that. Sometimes that's controversial."

That controversy was evident in most of the news surrounding the case. One reporter in particular painted Pepin out to be the leader of a cult.

"I tell people to question everything, myself included. We have people using our meditation program that are religious but they are more open-minded than the average person. Nobody should tell you what your experience of the Universe, or God, is. It should be a direct, personal relationship. The majority of our customers have never even met me so how can I exert some kind of power or influence over them? To hear me say that and then try and paint me as some 'leader,' people who know me see how it doesn't add up," Pepin explained.

When asked if his company, Higher Balance, is a cult, Pepin said, "What I offer are tools to experience things for yourself. What you do with those tools is up to you. If someone invents a hammer, and you use it, that doesn't make the inventor a leader or his company a cult. Same thing. I think people respect me and appreciate what I offer because it works and because I'm not running around saying worship me, I'm a guru. Instead I'm saying, be your own guru. Here's how."

The prospect that Pepin's company was a cult was quickly abandoned by the prosecution after several employee's testified about the nature and operations of the business.

Detective Mike Smith agreed that he could not say the company was anything like a cult. He told the court, "I don't know exactly, how do you define a cult?"

Defense attorney Stephen Houze brought out the Oregonian article where Smith was quoted talking about the "Master Eric" robe and stating simply about Pepin's company, "It's a cult."

Smith said it was the reporter who got it wrong. "When the newspaper article came out I felt that what happened was that she wrote down two separate sections of our conversation and put them together. Like it was one continuous quote when, in fact, it wasn't. I wasn't happy about the way she put that together."

Houze asked detective Smith if he felt the reporter misquoted him. He replied, "Yes sir."

It wouldn't be the only time the media would report incorrect facts regarding the case. The same day the trial ended two other articles came out.

"One article claimed I said I've had sex with my employees. I never said anything close to that. I told the truth. I've had relationships with 3 people who are now employees. All of them long before they were hired. I'm very loyal and stay close to people in my life. Maybe a relationship doesn't work out; it doesn't mean we can't remain friends. Better to have a friend for life than push people away for pride or your own hurt."

The article also said a videotape was seized at Pepin's house showing Pepin, Priebe and Young in a three-way sexual act. Detectives testified to the opposite stating no videotape, pictures or any proof was ever found showing Pepin, Priebe and Young in any sexual act and that no evidence was ever seized indicating any crime had occurred. The article went on to state Alder testified he had sex with Pepin when he was 16, the opposite of his testimony.

"I don't know how they can print some of these things but that's why I've been silent so long. There have been so many wrong facts reported by the media it's hard to say anything because you're worried how it will be twisted," Pepin said.

Houze said the case was about money for Young and his girlfriend. He asked the court what Chris Young had to lose or if there were any consequences should the defendants be found not guilty. He told the court there were none at all.

Young and his attorney asked for half a million dollars before trial to settle the case, Pepin said. "You can't ask for $500,000 and then say it's not about money."

"I thought of Chris as a friend. Someone genuine," Priebe said. "Now, after the paper came out, my whole family has suffered too. They've stood by me but it shouldn't have ever gotten this far. We've lived here pretty much my whole life. The police should have stopped it. Instead they encouraged it. He hurt a lot of people."

Stephen Houze summed up the case, "All it takes is for a person, in this case Christopher Young, to make the statement 'it happened,' and this whole case is launched. How does a person who is in the position of Eric Pepin or Jamison Priebe disprove an accusation? How do you prove your innocence?"

Houze went on to say, "Mr. Pepin has helped many people in his lifetime. He has helped numerous people. Men, women. He helped them overcome their difficulties and encouraged them. Get your education. Better yourself. He worked with people to keep them doing positive things. That's a rather extraordinary portrait of a person. Christopher Young is at the opposite end of the spectrum by anyone's reckoning in this case, including that of his own mother."


Send2Press(R) is the originating wire service for this story - www.Send2Press.com.

All trademarks acknowledged.

NEWS SOURCE: Eric Pepin


# # #

/RELEASE END/


MEDIA CONTACT(S):

Tom Roberts
of Auxien, Inc.
for Eric Pepin
+1-503-808-9570
press @ auxien.com

.........
Text provided by news source who is solely responsible for accuracy of content.
.........
This news story from Send2Press Newswire may be redistributed and re-posted in part or in whole by members of the media. Copr. (c) Send2Press, a unit of Neotrope(R). For news aggregation sites, blogs, and bureaus, you must retain Send2Press as the original wire service source. Do not stream graphics from our server.
.........
The original version of this release was issued on behalf of the above organization (the "news source"), by Send2Press(R) Newswire, a unit of Neotrope(R).
.........
February 2008 // Press Release

Notice at the bottom -

Tom Roberts
of Auxien, Inc.
for Eric Pepin
+1-503-808-9570
press @ auxien.com

Auxien is Eric Pepin, Tom Roberts of Auxien may or may not exist. It could just be Pepin himself. Regardless Auxien is Pepin and here we basically have Pepin pretending to write to himself from Tom Roberts, a press release on Eric's great clearing of his name.

What an upstanding individual Master Eric is.

I find it amazing that even the Judge said he thought Pepin was guilty and did everything he was accused of. Pepin isn't going after the judge or the prosecuting attorney, who both said things in public on the public record that are way harsher than anything anyone here ever mentioned.

Price said it was "probable that the conduct alleged in all counts occurred," but he wasn't convinced beyond a reasonable doubt. "There's a lack of strong corroboration," such as a date-stamp on a videotape of the sexual encounter, the judge said.

Friday, May 25, 2007
By Kurt Eckert
The Hillsboro Argus

Judge Price gave his verdict after five days of testimony. He said he had problems believing Pepin or Priebe, but felt the state had not fulfilled its burden of proof. Videotaped evidence wasn't enough to prove underage sex, he said.

"I find it is probable that all of the conduct alleged occurred," Price said. "But I have no choice but to find the defendants not guilty on all counts."

Basically the judge found it highly probable that Pepin engaged in sex with a minor by grooming and enticing and controlling, which is what was alleged. Hmmm, what is that called in the general public? But the judge has a right to say such things even after finding that evidence was not sufficient for the state to proove its case. None the less the judge could say this and have it published in a newspaper. But you, me, anyone else has no right and we are responsible to the tune of 4.5 million for hurting poor Master Eric.

This only shows how mentally twisted this person is.

 

[PepperFritz]

Here's something I found, where Eric Pepin himself talks about what he thinks about adults having sex with adolescent boys. It is a "comment" posted by him on Rick Root's blog "Deep Thoughts", in response to a piece titled "Double Standard: Debra LaFave". LeFave is a 20-something teacher who was prosecuted for having sex with her 14-year-old students; Root suggests she got off lightly with house arrest and probation, and that a male perpetrator would have been punished much more severely.

Here's what Pepin had to say; it was posted about a month after he was charged with sex abuse:

Last night's Dateline interview with Debbie Lafave was very ordinary and mainly showed her as "still not having a clue". I don't forsee a very happy future for her new "Fiance". She strikes me as still being a party girl more than a woman.

Finally, Don't feel sorry for the "kid", he was never traumatized nor will ever be; he worked his way to get her, got her, displayed her and used her much more than she used him. He'll be fine and he'll brag about getting "in her pants" for a long time to come.

He was a kid only age wise, not in any other ways. I believe that he showed her to his friend in the classroom with the intent of having a threesome and if the story would have never come out, he would have bullied her to be shared and abused by more of his friends.

Just a typical ignorant all American idiot!!!! A classic "Whassup" wanna be a gangsta! I don't feel sorry for him at all.

Posted by Eric Pepin on September 14, 2006 at 9:39 AM

 

[NormaRegula]

From Yahoo's wicca2 mailing list is this message from ozmosisomega, dated February 26, 2002:

Seeking info on auxien.org PLEASE!!!!

Recently I checked this site out auxien.org
nothing less than amazing can do it justice.

Any
one who might know anything about the people who run
it or for that matter any info at all would be
greatly appreciated. Thanks.

The yahoo profile of ozmosisomega states only that he is male. Last updated on 7/09/2001.

 

[anart]

Then there is this:

_http://www.send2press.com/mediadrome/2008-02-0219-003.txt
_http://www.send2press.com/mediadrome/news_2008-02-0219-003.pdf

Pepin trying to promote himself again.

- apologies, but I find this absolutely hysterical - check out the disclaimer at the bottom of the website upon which this was posted:

DISCLAIMER: the above article is believed accurate but not guaranteed, and is based on business news supplied by the source (Eric Pepin).

In my personal opinion , that is not connected legally to QFG, Sott, Laura, or Major League Baseball in any way, shape or form, - - how pathetic is that?



Far be it from me to determine another's path, but it appears that it might be time for 'Master Eric' to discern between objective reality and the reality he is trying to create (with faux news sites); born of pathological thinking and predation. I suppose, ultimately, that this 'create your own reality' thing can really mess with a person's mind? Or, maybe it's the 'remote viewing'? Or maybe it's genetic? Really difficult to tell at this point, though certain signs point in a certain direction.

Apologies for the joking attitude, since, ultimately, the fact that Laura is having to deal with this is very serious and will be quite costly and time consuming (which is Eric's point I think - intimidation and financial threat) - and who knows, in today's pathocratic environment, he may succeed in taking SotT down which will affect thousands of people - but, when the maneuvers reach this level of absurdity, it really is quite difficult to not shake one's head and chuckle just a bit at the blatant manipulation.

I suppose that, if nothing else, it is quite a stunning look into the mind of a predator. (again, from my personal perspective - no other perspective is implied nor intended)

 

[Laura]

Well, the support is pouring in - ole Eric is doing a good job of attracting more readers to sott, that's for sure. I just received an email from a reader with the following link and info:

http://www.acsblog.org/economic-regulation-employment-federal-court-reaffirms-immunity-of-bloggers-from-suits-brought-against-commenters.html

Federal Court Reaffirms Immunity of Bloggers from Suits Brought Against Commenters

Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act provides that "[no] provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider," and that "[n]o cause of action may be brought and no liability may be imposed under any State or local law that is inconsistent with this section." A recent decision of the First Circuit has reaffirmed the broad protection this statute provides to bloggers and message board administrators.

In Universal Communication Systems v. Lycos, a company who had allegedly been victimized by defamatory statements on a message board regarding the value of its stock sued Lycos, which operated the board. The message board allowed users to post comments with minimal moderation, and no one from Lycos was responsible for the allegedly defamatory statements.

Examining the impact of Sec. 230 on this case, the court noted that "Congress intended that, within broad limits, message board operators would not be held responsible for the postings made by others on that board," adding that allowing bloggers and message board operators to be sued for the statements of commenters on their sites would have an "obvious chilling effect" on speech. Accordingly, the court dismissed the complaint against Lycos.

 

[hungrig]

_http://youtube.com/watch?v=Xz6G1rCgu2k

Eric Pepin - Higher Balance Institute®: Sex

02.27

"I spoken a great lenghts with the females students as mush as I have with males. I certainly impreve too great intiment secrets that are revealed and trust too me... and so, I know they want that energy..."

I wonder what he means by 'intiment'....

 

[CarpeDiem]

as i see all Pepin legal claims to QFG publishing 'false, baseless and defamatory claims' distills to point 20:
a) HBI is a ‘front for pedophilia’
b) HBI is a ‘cointelpro’ organization
c) Meditation as sold by HBI is a n act of ‘falling into confluence with a psychopathic reality
d) Those associated with HBI must be careful to avoid sexual molestation by HBI members
e) HBI is ‘conning’ the public
f) ‘fishy’ sexual conduct is occurring at HBI; and
g) HBI ‘leads people more deeply in sleep’

Each complainer could be required to swear (under penalty of perjury) that he [read: Eric Pepin] has made his accusation of libel in good faith, and to make a detailed factual accounting of his basis for claiming that the assertion is false and injurious to his reputation. If the accusation did not provide the ISP with the basis to determine if the statement was defamatory, then the ISP could be deemed to have not received sufficient notice for
notice-based liability. A requirement of providing detailed information concerning both why the assertion is false and the specific damage it had caused would likely discourage many of those who might wish to exercise a "heckler's veto" for ulterior motives.

It had NOT been stated

There is a provision of the CDA 230(c) (Supp. II 1996) at issue in the Internet defamation cases which states that '[n]o provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider. '

Immunity under the Communications Decency Act

Under the Communications Decency Act of 1996(CDA), interactive computer service providers are immune from publisher liability. The statute provides in relevant part:

(c) Protection for "good samaritan" blocking and screening of offensive material

(1) Treatment of publisher or speaker

No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.

(2) Civil liability

No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be held liable on account of

(A) any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict access to or availability of material that the provider or user considers to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected; or

(B) any action taken to enable or make available to information content providers or others the technical means to restrict access to material described in paragraph (1)

Three elements are thus required for § 230 immunity: the defendant must be a provider or user of an "interactive computer service"; the asserted claims must treat the defendant as a publisher or speaker of information; and the information must be provided by another "information content provider."

1. [SOTT] Is a Provider or User of Interactive Computer Services

The statute defines "interactive computer service" as "any information service, system, or access software provider that provides or enables computer access by multiple users to a computer server, including specifically a service or system that provides access to the Internet and such systems operated or services offered by libraries or educational institutions."10 Thus, to qualify for immunity, a defendant must be a provider or user of an information service or system that "enables computer access by multiple users to a computer server." .

It should be applied in this case as sott / qfg republished materials from other mass media sources such as newspapers

In process Reno v. ACLU [Reno, 521 U.S.; 885] the Supreme Court overturned the indecency provisions of the Act on First Amendment grounds stating that they were impermissible content-based restrictions on speech. The Court found it crucial that the regulation in question was "more likely to interfere with the free exchange of ideas than to encourage it" and that society's interest in encouraging that freedom outweighed "any theoretical but unproven benefit of censorship.

The Supreme Court has recognized that unjustified fears of liability for libel can produce a chilling effect on speech that is antithetical to the First Amendment. [Philadelphia Newspapers v. Hepps, 475 U.S. 767, 777 (1986)]

plenty of legal advice/ info for sott/QFG on Jerome Schneider v. AMAZON.com, INC. suit
31 P.3d 37 (Wash. App. 2001)

_http://www.internetlibrary.com/cases/lib_case447.cfm
Stephen J. Barrett, et al. v. Ilena Rosenthal
S122953, 40 Cal.4th 33 (Cal. Sup. Ct., November 20, 2006)

Communications Decency Act Immunizes User Of Interactive Computer Service From Liability For Republishing Allegedly Defamatory Statement

Reversing the Court of Appeals, the California Supreme Court holds that Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act ("CDA") immunizes defendant Ilena Rosenthal ("Rosenthal") from defamation claims arising out of her republication in two online newsgroups of an allegedly defamatory article authored by a third party. In reaching this result, the California Supreme Court rejected the Court of Appeals' attempts to limit the immunity afforded by Section 230(c)(1) of the CDA to publishers, while leaving exposed to defamation claims "distributors" of defamatory statements who have notice of the defamatory nature of the statements they distribute. The Supreme Court held that such "distributors," commonly know as "secondary publishers," are entitled to the same broad immunity afforded publishers under the CDA. As explained by the Fourth Circuit in Zeran v. AOL, cited with approval by the California Supreme Court, the CDA "creates a federal immunity to any cause of action that would make service providers liable for information originating with a third party user of the service" except claims such as those arising under the Intellectual Property laws, specifically exempted by the statute.

The Supreme Court also held that the broad immunity afforded under the statute to the providers of interactive computer services extended by operation of the statute's express language to "users" of such services. "Users" protected by the CDA included those who use an interactive computer service to access the Internet and thereby to post or republish on the Internet a defamatory statement authored by a third party. As stated by the Court, "by declaring that no 'user' may be treated as a 'publisher' of third party content, Congress has comprehensively immunized republication by individual Internet users."

_http://www.internetlibrary.com/cases/lib_case28.cfm
Banco Nacional de Mexico, S.A. v. Menendez-Rodgriguez, et al.
Index No. (Sup. Ct. N.Y. Co., December 14, 2001)

Plaintiff bank brought defamation claims against defendant Mario Menendez-Rodriguez, a Mexican resident and journalist, defendant Narco News, a web site, and defendant Al Giordano, its publisher, arising, in part, out of statements defendants made concerning Roberto Hernandez-Ramirez, plaintiff's largest shareholder, general director and chairman of its board of directors, and the bank itself. In these statements, defendants accused Hernandez-Ramirez of being a "drug trafficker", and of having used gains from illegal endeavors to acquire the plaintiff bank. The Narco News also allegedly claimed that "bank officials have been arrested for drug-money laundering …". Defendants allegedly made the statements in question in a newspaper published in Mexico, Por Esto! with which defendant Menendez-Rodriguez is affiliated, in an interview given to The Village Voice, a New York publication, during a panel discussion at Columbia University in New York, and/or in articles published on the Narco News web site.

The court, on defendants' motions, dismissed the complaint. [..]
The defamation claims against the remaining defendants were dismissed as a result of plaintiff's failure to allege facts sufficient to state a claim against them. The court determined that these defendants were media defendants entitled to heightened protection under the First Amendment. Given that they were reporting on matters of public concern plaintiff, to state a claim against them, had to allege facts sufficient to show both that the statements they allegedly made were false, and that they were made with "actual malice," that is with knowledge that the statements were false or made with reckless disregard for the truth. The court held that plaintiff had not alleged facts sufficient to establish that the remaining defendants had acted with actual malice, given, inter alia, their reliance on articles appearing in Por Esto! for the statements they made, and accordingly dismissed the complaint against them.
[...]According to the court, "defendant Giordano is alleged to have made a series of spoken and written statements calling Mr. Hernandez-Ramirez a criminal, a drug trafficker and money launderer and portraying plaintiff as an institution that is involved in criminal activity. In addition, plaintiff alleged that Giordano published a series of articles in defendant Narco News that repeated and expanded upon his portrayal of plaintiff. Plaintiff states that Mr. Giordano's online magazine informed readers that Mr. Hernandez-Ramirez purchased the nation's banks with narco-money and that bank officials have been arrested for drug money laundering."

 

[Laura]

While cruising the net about Eric Pepin I noticed a couple of odd things. First of all, Rense.com - which advertises Pepin - was down for a bit yesterday. So was whatreallyhappened, close bud of rense. Then, oddly, the forum pages on the "Ross Institute" about Eric Pepin were also down, but the cache was still available. I've taken screen shots of these for archive purposes.

In any event, the whole episode has prompted me to revisit Rick Ross as you can see by today's article.

 

[anart]

While cruising the net about Eric Pepin I noticed a couple of odd things. First of all, Rense.com - which advertises Pepin - was down for a bit yesterday. So was whatreallyhappened, close bud of rense. Then, oddly, the forum pages on the "Ross Institute" about Eric Pepin were also down, but the cache was still available. I've taken screen shots of these for archive purposes.

In any event, the whole episode has prompted me to revisit Rick Ross as you can see by today's article.

Interesting, as 'guruphiliac.org' removed their pages on Eric Pepin yesterday afternoon as well (that was the top google link for a long time on a search of Eric Pepin). They have a link to Rick Ross on their home page, so there appears to be a connection there. I've saved those pages as well, from cache. I bet whoever is scrubbing the net is not too happy about the whole 'cache' thing - or the printing out and storing of these webpage caches to keep the information in case of hard drive failures. Seems to me the more people who save these caches the better.

And 'interesting' that the SotT article has yet to show up at the top of the google search, even though links to it through blog sites show up on the second page of searches.

 

[Hildegarda]

Each complainer could be required to swear (under penalty of perjury) that he [read: Eric Pepin] has made his accusation of libel in good faith, and to make a detailed factual accounting of his basis for claiming that the assertion is false and injurious to his reputation. If the accusation did not provide the ISP with the basis to determine if the statement was defamatory, then the ISP could be deemed to have not received sufficient notice for
notice-based liability. A requirement of providing detailed information concerning both why the assertion is false and the specific damage it had caused would likely discourage many of those who might wish to exercise a "heckler's veto" for ulterior motives.

yes -- and this should be done to PREVENT the case going into court.

Oregon's anti-slapp law would allow the QFS attorney to make a motion to dismiss the lawsuit under the Special Motion to Strike, part 2 (c):

(c) Any oral statement made, or written statement or other
document presented, in a place open to the public or a public forum
in connection with an issue of public interest; or

(d) Any other conduct in furtherance of the exercise of the
constitutional right of petition or the constitutional right of free
speech in connection with a public issue or an issue of public
interest.

What this means is that the ball will be in Pepin's court (no pun intended) -- he will now have to prove under the anti-slapp law part 3 that he has sufficient grounds to prevail in court.

I.e., to proceed with the legal process, he will have to show that

1) what he stated that Laura\QFS did was indeed correct, and

2) he'll have to prove that he DID indeed loose reputation and income SPECIFICALLY due to the this discussion on this forum. He'll likely have to provide income statements, customer volume estimates, some other evidence, and show how it corresponds to the QFS discussion in time.

I think this will be pretty difficult to do -- if he DID indeed lose business, it was likely because of that lawsuit of his own and the media attention to it.

If he balks at this, the case is thrown out of court.

If he perseveres and the case goes before the judge, the defense should be built on either

\\\Statements made in a good faith and reasonable belief that they were true are generally treated the same as true statements; however, the court may inquire into the reasonableness of the belief. The degree of care expected will vary with the nature of the defendant: an ordinary person might safely rely on a single newspaper report, while the newspaper would be expected to carefully check multiple sources.\\\

or, much better,

\\\ Fair comment on a matter of public interest, statements made with an honest belief in their truth on a matter of public interest (official acts) are defenses to a defamation claim, even if such arguments are logically unsound; if a reasonable person could honestly entertain such an opinion, the statement is protected. \\\

Under the Communications Decency Act of 1996(CDA), interactive computer service providers are immune from publisher liability. The statute provides in relevant part:

I think he may be trying to circumvent this by suing Laura personally -- in their previous letter, when they asked to remove the thread, they also hinted that since Laura is actively leading the discussion, this all reflects her views.

the key at this point, I think, is to find a good attorney who would write it all up in the motion to strike in such a way as to make his accusations completely ridiculous and baseless, to make the case be thrown out of court -- hopefully.

fwiw,

 

[PepperFritz]

Interesting, as 'guruphiliac.org' removed their pages on Eric Pepin yesterday afternoon as well....

Wow, Pepin's lawyers have been BUSY. Other than news articles reporting that Pepin was cleared, I can find no references to Pepin and the sexual abuse charges ANYWHERE on the net. Yesterday's SOTT article (and various references to it) can only be found if you specifically google "Pepin + SOTT".

Pepin's suit will be quickly dismissed by the courts as being without merit, but in the meantime he and his lawyers seem determined to cause anyone who has ever criticized him as much trouble and expense as possible. What a scumbag....

 

[Mr. Premise]

Yes, people like that seem to count on fear and intimidation: "Oh, no they're suing us for x million dollars!!! Let's just take the easy way out and remove the material." In the U.S. anyone can sue anyone at any time pretty much. Winning a suit or even getting one to go to trial is much harder.

On the face of it, Pepin's lawsuit seems completely ridiculous. And even if he were to have some kind of success it would only spread around the very allegations he's trying to deny and spread the word about SOTT. No doubt there is more going on behind the scenes.

Interesting, as 'guruphiliac.org' removed their pages on Eric Pepin yesterday afternoon as well....

Wow, Pepin's lawyers have been BUSY. Other than news articles reporting that Pepin was cleared, I can find no references to Pepin and the sexual abuse charges ANYWHERE on the net. Yesterday's SOTT article (and various references to it) can only be found if you specifically google "Pepin + SOTT".

Pepin's suit will be quickly dismissed by the courts as being without merit, but in the meantime he and his lawyers seem determined to cause anyone who has ever criticized him as much trouble and expense as possible. What a scumbag....