Exposing Online Predators & Cyberpaths
- Thread starter purplehaze
- Start date
Guardian
The Cosmic Force
Re: Exposing Online Predators & Cyberpaths
These screenshots show payments in the amount of $1728.20, made by Melissa Kester directly to Mary Mcgrannahan, and payments in the amount of $149.00 made to Barbara Camwell, for a Mary Mcgrannahan "fundraiser"
I also have the receipts for a $500.00 video camera Ms. Kester purchased and had shipped directly to Mcgrannahan, as well as a $149.00 cell phone, and an $89.00 AAA membership.
All in all Ms. Kester sent Mcgrannahan about $2500.00 in cash and merchandise in a 6 month period. ...essentially because she felt sorry for her and wanted to help her.
Please note: I have blacked out the names of all uninvolved parties.
These screenshots show payments in the amount of $1728.20, made by Melissa Kester directly to Mary Mcgrannahan, and payments in the amount of $149.00 made to Barbara Camwell, for a Mary Mcgrannahan "fundraiser"
I also have the receipts for a $500.00 video camera Ms. Kester purchased and had shipped directly to Mcgrannahan, as well as a $149.00 cell phone, and an $89.00 AAA membership.
All in all Ms. Kester sent Mcgrannahan about $2500.00 in cash and merchandise in a 6 month period. ...essentially because she felt sorry for her and wanted to help her.
Please note: I have blacked out the names of all uninvolved parties.
jumpinjack2011
Padawan Learner
Re: Exposing Online Predators & Cyberpaths
14 years of therapy---- that's so scary it's unbelievable. Guardian, that 1.4 gigs of info you have might be of great interest to all those other forums, websites, and programs she has been ousted from.
14 years of therapy---- that's so scary it's unbelievable. Guardian, that 1.4 gigs of info you have might be of great interest to all those other forums, websites, and programs she has been ousted from.
truth seeker
The Living Force
Re: Exposing Online Predators & Cyberpaths
You've had more than enough chances to explain clearly and in a non emotional fashion what your side is, yet whenever questioned directly, you sidestep the issue. That speaks to avoidance and makes it appear that you have something to hide.
This is our forum, not yours. You don't get to dictate who can participate in a given thread or send people running to find information so that you don't have to be bothered doing so. The onus, the responsibility lies with you to present the facts to us as you are a guest in this house.
edit: clarity
As was said no one will be removing your postings. They have actually given me (and perhaps others) valuable insight into your inner landscape. It's interesting that you think we would allow trolls or troll like behavior to continue via guardian yet think you can post questionable accusations and get away with it. This forum doesn't tolerate such behavior from anyone. Period.artfuldodger said:
You've had more than enough chances to explain clearly and in a non emotional fashion what your side is, yet whenever questioned directly, you sidestep the issue. That speaks to avoidance and makes it appear that you have something to hide.
This is our forum, not yours. You don't get to dictate who can participate in a given thread or send people running to find information so that you don't have to be bothered doing so. The onus, the responsibility lies with you to present the facts to us as you are a guest in this house.
edit: clarity
jumpinjack2011
Padawan Learner
Re: Exposing Online Predators & Cyberpaths
Well, Sandra should send those links I posted to the NC State so they can get a glimpse of someone else's cyber stalking by her and her admitted 14 years of therapy.
Well, Sandra should send those links I posted to the NC State so they can get a glimpse of someone else's cyber stalking by her and her admitted 14 years of therapy.
Re: Exposing Online Predators & Cyberpaths
This, in our forum language here, is called pathological persistence. See, your presence on this forum is very similar to being in someone else's house. You have to follow their rules. If you are unable, you are unlikely to be invited back. This is normal social behavior. You are twisting it to be some kind of unfair censorship, when the reality is you haven't done anything to deserve the right to speak in our house. It is very typical of personality disordered individuals to accuse others of the very thing they are guilty of. We can, and will, ban you as many times as it takes. The fact that you admit to being so obstinate as to continue to come back after banning should be enough for any careful and/or silent observer of this thread to see what kind of person we are dealing with.
artfuldodger said:
This, in our forum language here, is called pathological persistence. See, your presence on this forum is very similar to being in someone else's house. You have to follow their rules. If you are unable, you are unlikely to be invited back. This is normal social behavior. You are twisting it to be some kind of unfair censorship, when the reality is you haven't done anything to deserve the right to speak in our house. It is very typical of personality disordered individuals to accuse others of the very thing they are guilty of. We can, and will, ban you as many times as it takes. The fact that you admit to being so obstinate as to continue to come back after banning should be enough for any careful and/or silent observer of this thread to see what kind of person we are dealing with.
jumpinjack2011
Padawan Learner
Re: Exposing Online Predators & Cyberpaths
Ok, just so we can wrap this up, this person is going by the names of
Barbara Camwell Ness and associations are:
Exposing Online Psychopaths and Cyberstalkers
cyberpaths
purplehaze
artfuldoger (it appears)
The Abuse Sanctuary
One2One4Victims
what else?
Ok, just so we can wrap this up, this person is going by the names of
Barbara Camwell Ness and associations are:
Exposing Online Psychopaths and Cyberstalkers
cyberpaths
purplehaze
artfuldoger (it appears)
The Abuse Sanctuary
One2One4Victims
what else?
Guardian
The Cosmic Force
Re: Exposing Online Predators & Cyberpaths
I should add that the "gifts" to Mcgrannahon do NOT include expenses Ms. Kester incurred doing the "Sizzle Reel" ...which she never used of course.
I just got my access to PACER and Kester has WON all the Orders I've downloaded so far....I'm preparing screenshots.
I should add that the "gifts" to Mcgrannahon do NOT include expenses Ms. Kester incurred doing the "Sizzle Reel" ...which she never used of course.
I just got my access to PACER and Kester has WON all the Orders I've downloaded so far....I'm preparing screenshots.
Guardian
The Cosmic Force
Re: Exposing Online Predators & Cyberpaths
barbarany_9@hotmail.com
barbarany_9@womensmail.net
batyah_9@yahoo.com
cyberpaths@zoomshare.com
DisabledParenting@egroups.com
info@orangejudasproductions.com
nyctwinmum@gmail.com
one2one4victims@gmail.com
womansaversblog@gmail.com
barbarany_9@hotmail.com
barbarany_9@womensmail.net
batyah_9@yahoo.com
cyberpaths@zoomshare.com
DisabledParenting@egroups.com
info@orangejudasproductions.com
nyctwinmum@gmail.com
one2one4victims@gmail.com
womansaversblog@gmail.com
jumpinjack2011
Padawan Learner
Re: Exposing Online Predators & Cyberpaths
I meant the 'good work' she is doing through her websites helping women.
What are the names of the websites associated with her?
I meant the 'good work' she is doing through her websites helping women.
What are the names of the websites associated with her?
Guardian
The Cosmic Force
Re: Exposing Online Predators & Cyberpaths
You mean just her websites, or the websites belonging to other women that's she's invaded? These appear to be hers:
_http://one2one4victims.webs.com/
_http://barbarany_9.blogspot.com (MalwareBytes Alert- 208.73.210.29)
_http://abusesanctuary.blogspot.com/ (MalwareBytes Alert- 88.80.7.8)
_http://cyberpaths.zoomshare.com/0.html
_http://cyberpaths.blogspot.com/ MalwareBytes Alert- 208.73.210.76)
_http://l.wbx.me/l/?instId=3324ae76-4e5e-4e91-a1f9-8ed65308d477&token=d7b88af54fca52c2eb8a430d0b50a3c121340a790000012d2c49b7fe&u=http%3A%2F%2Fcyberpathlinks.blogspot.com%2F2007%2F06%2Fj-aka-gridney-aka-yidwithlid-aka-sammy.html
_http://thestumblingblock.wordpress.com/
_http://thestumblingblock.wordpress.com/2008/07/12/lashon-hara-from-ywl/#comment-1265
_http://web.archive.org/web/20051026000916/http://cyberpaths.blogspot.com/
jumpinjack2011 said:I meant the 'good work' she is doing through her websites helping women.
You mean just her websites, or the websites belonging to other women that's she's invaded? These appear to be hers:
_http://one2one4victims.webs.com/
_http://barbarany_9.blogspot.com (MalwareBytes Alert- 208.73.210.29)
_http://abusesanctuary.blogspot.com/ (MalwareBytes Alert- 88.80.7.8)
_http://cyberpaths.zoomshare.com/0.html
_http://cyberpaths.blogspot.com/ MalwareBytes Alert- 208.73.210.76)
_http://l.wbx.me/l/?instId=3324ae76-4e5e-4e91-a1f9-8ed65308d477&token=d7b88af54fca52c2eb8a430d0b50a3c121340a790000012d2c49b7fe&u=http%3A%2F%2Fcyberpathlinks.blogspot.com%2F2007%2F06%2Fj-aka-gridney-aka-yidwithlid-aka-sammy.html
_http://thestumblingblock.wordpress.com/
_http://thestumblingblock.wordpress.com/2008/07/12/lashon-hara-from-ywl/#comment-1265
_http://web.archive.org/web/20051026000916/http://cyberpaths.blogspot.com/
Guardian
The Cosmic Force
Re: Exposing Online Predators & Cyberpaths
OK, I went through all the PACER records and the ONLY Motion filed by the Plaintiff (Kester) which was denied is a motion for a "Temporary Restraining Order" (filed when the case first started) which the courts apparently do not grant unless there is a direct physical danger. The court did however, deem the case important enough to grant Kester's Motion for "Expedited Discovery" which proves that the poster is lying when she says "All of Kester's motions have been denied"
"On December 14, 2010, the court held a hearing on plaintiff’s motion for temporary
restraining order and preliminary injunction. The court declined to enter a temporary restraining
order at that time. Subsequently, the court granted plaintiff’s motion for expedited discovery."
"ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR
EXPEDITED DISCOVERY
Now pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion for Expedited Discovery. Defendant’s
response was due by January 6, 2011, but to date no response has been filed. For good cause shown,
Plaintiff’s Motion for Expedited Discovery (ECF doc. 12) is GRANTED and Defendant is hereby
ORDERED to: (1) appear for deposition pursuant to Plaintiff’s Notice of Deposition within thirty
(30) days of the Court’s Order on this Motion; (2) produce any non-privileged documents responsive
to the requests in Plaintiff’s First Request for Production of Documents within fourteen (14) days
of the Court’s Order; and (3) produce the objects specified in Plaintiff’s Request for Inspection
within seven (7) days of the Court’s Order."
There are also several Motions that the Judge has not yet ruled on.
OK, I went through all the PACER records and the ONLY Motion filed by the Plaintiff (Kester) which was denied is a motion for a "Temporary Restraining Order" (filed when the case first started) which the courts apparently do not grant unless there is a direct physical danger. The court did however, deem the case important enough to grant Kester's Motion for "Expedited Discovery" which proves that the poster is lying when she says "All of Kester's motions have been denied"
"On December 14, 2010, the court held a hearing on plaintiff’s motion for temporary
restraining order and preliminary injunction. The court declined to enter a temporary restraining
order at that time. Subsequently, the court granted plaintiff’s motion for expedited discovery."
"ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR
EXPEDITED DISCOVERY
Now pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion for Expedited Discovery. Defendant’s
response was due by January 6, 2011, but to date no response has been filed. For good cause shown,
Plaintiff’s Motion for Expedited Discovery (ECF doc. 12) is GRANTED and Defendant is hereby
ORDERED to: (1) appear for deposition pursuant to Plaintiff’s Notice of Deposition within thirty
(30) days of the Court’s Order on this Motion; (2) produce any non-privileged documents responsive
to the requests in Plaintiff’s First Request for Production of Documents within fourteen (14) days
of the Court’s Order; and (3) produce the objects specified in Plaintiff’s Request for Inspection
within seven (7) days of the Court’s Order."
There are also several Motions that the Judge has not yet ruled on.
Guardian
The Cosmic Force
Re: Exposing Online Predators & Cyberpaths
"Furthermore, within thirty (30) days of the Court’s Order, Plaintiff is permitted to issue a
subpoena to Barbara Camwell to inspect any and all computers or information storage devices,
including but not limited to desktop or laptop computers: (a) owned by Camwell and used to
communicate with Defendant or regarding Plaintiff, (b) within the possession, custody, and/or
control of Camwell and used to communicate with Defendant or regarding Plaintiff, and/or (c) used
Case 4:10-cv-01215-HFS Document 14 Filed 01/18/11 Page 1 of 2
2
by Camwell between March 2010 through present to communicate with Defendant or regarding Plaintiff."
"Furthermore, within thirty (30) days of the Court’s Order, Plaintiff is permitted to issue a
subpoena to Barbara Camwell to inspect any and all computers or information storage devices,
including but not limited to desktop or laptop computers: (a) owned by Camwell and used to
communicate with Defendant or regarding Plaintiff, (b) within the possession, custody, and/or
control of Camwell and used to communicate with Defendant or regarding Plaintiff, and/or (c) used
Case 4:10-cv-01215-HFS Document 14 Filed 01/18/11 Page 1 of 2
2
by Camwell between March 2010 through present to communicate with Defendant or regarding Plaintiff."
