XPost: news.admin.net-abuse.email   
   From: none@none.invalid   
      
   "Kelly Bert Manning"  wrote in message   
   news:i60v09$bbh$1@theodyn.ncf.ca...   
   > "Sysop" (sysop@not.invalid) writes:   
   >   
   > You are using that sock puppet to complain about someone else hiding?   
   >   
   Many post to usenet with various aliases for various reasons. Some to troll,   
   that has always been part of usenet.   
      
   > Libel, Slander and Criminal Libel laws have a place to deal with people   
   > who won't appoligize, retract, and stop telling lies, including on the   
   > Internet.   
   >   
   Laws exist, but there is a 7 year history on ott.general x-posted to   
   numerous other usenet groups of one stalker, who will even post as his   
   targets and he will cc those libelious posts to the police, crown,   
   employers, friends and peers.   
      
   > On the other hand, if Sarnia Police and Crown Counsel didn't feel that   
   > charging Jamie Baillie served the public interest, in view of his   
   > mental condition, how is a court going to view your legal action?   
   >   
   Mr. Baillie claims it wasn't him and that those claims are false.   
      
   > Baillie doesn't seem to have much income. Are you really expecting to   
   > obtain a civil remedy?   
   >   
   The only possible outcome as Jamie is likely judgement proof in terms of   
   assets would be a take down order of his hobby website. And perhaps an court   
   order limiting his access to the Internet, but that would be hard to   
   enforce. His website is overseas, and he'll just morph.   
      
   > That seems to be very similar to an Austrailian pursuing a legal action   
   > against Patrick M. Sullivan of Mt. Benson St. in Nanaimo, B.C.   
   >   
   > Has Baillie even come close to PMS levels of personal attack?   
   >   
   The only one close is the "anonymous" ott.general stalker. There is   
   evidence, even by his own admissions that he has gone Real Life (RL) and   
   after seven years he has yet to get bored.   
      
   > In the PMS case the libels at least had a surface apperance of   
   > credibility.   
   >   
   > Jamie is a well known "news group personality" who should be pitied and   
   > ignored.   
   >   
   > Responding to Jamie only feeds his mental condition.   
      
   You are correct, JB seems to actually need the attention. My theory is if   
   nobody poked at Jamie, he would find something else to get the poking back.   
   It's almost like a munchausen type of condition.   
      
   Mike   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)