Response To Criticism and the Road Ahead
Posted: Thu Apr 16, 2009 7:35 pm
Well, it's been well over twenty-four hours since the ego-stroking post calling for my banning was issued (by a poster completely unknown to me until now) and I'm afraid I still have no "change of plans" to report.
First of all, I'll put this to rest and say, without a doubt, that virtually everything Robert Crocket of Newhall, California has said about me personally is a lie. That's the only response he's going to get (besides the formal complaint I actually mailed - via this FORM - to the state Bar. (Once he let it slip that his insurance carrier advised him to cease and desist his inflammatory posting here, I couldn't resist.)
But enough about Bob. He's close enough so that I can, and will, deal with him differently than the BYU Professor, Daniel C. Peterson.
Professor Peterson embarked on this journey last year.
I wrote something personal, but still anonymously, out of respect for my parents, and posted it here. I didn't disguise it very well, but the only recipients of the email I was commenting on were "Latter-day Saints" and I certainly didn't think any of them would would use it maliciously against one of their own.
After all, let's remember the timing; Professor Daniel Peterson decided to "rub my dad's nose in it" and forward links to my anonymous posts on this message board to my step-dad while he was traveling back and forth from between his work in California and the Intensive Care Unit in Utah. While I was traveling back and forth, as well as most of the other members of my family.
To be frank, I underestimated Dan would be so egregiously evil. I did nothing to provoke this sort of thing, never exposed anyone to any in real life consequences. Keep that in mind.
Strike 1.
Shortly after that incident, Professor Peterson and his weird, mean-spirited, attorney friend Robert Crockett began to antagonize me on this board with libelous, taunting, and defamatory statements for the public to see -- meant to specifically; one, silence me, two, discredit me, and three hurt me or make me mad.
I've gotten what can only be described as "bizarre" correspondences from Robert Dale Crockett, #105628, ever since.
Both Daniel Peterson, a BYU Professor, and his attorney friend Bob have tried to leverage this outing and vague, thickly separated personal relationship - if you can even call it that - to substantiate false, and sometimes disgusting comments about me. Virtually every post that has been directed towards me by one of these two self-proclaimed apologists has been of this nature.
When I started posting here, I had much more time to post here. I work as a writer - for a living - full-time now, so these colossal time wasting back and forth attacks on my reputation and character cost me money now, too. I have to chose to waste valuable time to answer every stupid accusation - for instance, Bob's constant insistence that I'm not college educated, even though I am - or run the risk that if I don't, it might give the impression that what they are saying is true.
Strike 2.
In spirit of leveraging their vague, personal familiarity* with me -- Daniel C. Peterson deliberately chose to act maliciously, libelously, and thus chose the subsequent consequences. A recurring quote from Orwell's Winston Smith couldn't be more apt, The consequence is contained in the act.
On a thread on this message board, the self-proclaimed LDS bishop proceeded to claim possession of some "inside information" about my personal life, and then proceeded to defame my character and personal reputation with blatant lies. He then decided to try to cover what may prove to be a very costly mistake by disclaiming his libelous post was part of some kind of "experiment" or test of the board's overall gullibility.
Clearly, this was Strike 3.
It may disappoint some of you -especially those I have been corresponding with privately- to hear me reaffirm this, but yes, I am suing Daniel C. Peterson for his libelous, defamatory comments on this board. It's happening. Does that mean he has to stop posting here? Why would it? I don't see why that question wasn't raised to him. I was threatened with a lawsuit for the website http://www.MormonGulag.com, but that didn't cause me to change anything in the slightest. It seems to me that his only concern should be in posting comments here that are of a libelous nature towards those who won't tolerate it.
Obviously, his right to participate on this board and enjoy freedom of speech isn't being hindered. In my opinion, his stated "departure -- effectively with a gun" to his head is merely another show of his famous fishing for compliments. In my opinion, Professor Peterson is - once again - begging for reassurance and support via languishing "fans" after doing something horrible and inexcusable.
For those of you who think I'm foolish enough to post the in real life identity of some unnamed professional so he can be harassed by questionably sane people because they say so; I say come on. You can't believe that I'm that stupid, can you? Jesus.
For those that just overall think it's a bad idea to both file a lawsuit and complain to the State Bar in response to these two self-proclaimed "Latter-day Saint's" numerous libelous remarks, I guess I should apologize, but I won't.
Not for a second. Of course I respect the opinions of powerfully insightful posters like KA, Ray A, Some Schmo, Liz, Dr. Shades, TD, and the like -- so I respectfully disagree. I appreciate your advice, but I respectfully question anyone's ability to really successfully know what they would do in a situation like this. It's about much more than just being on the receiving end of both the BYU Professor and his lawyer's harassment for over a year now.
I didn't chose to post on this website with my real identity or the real identity of my family, that was the choice made for me by Daniel C. Peterson and his attorney friend.
I didn't chose to have my name, reputation, and character attacked, falsely, by either of these self-proclaimed LDS bishops.
Ultimately, they both have left me no choice. Of course I don't plan on retaliating to every libelous comment on this board. I never did.
I don't plan on responding to the recent overflow of cowardly taunts, insults, and accusations from my questionably sane and healthy, no-name, shameful, and sometime foul mouthed critics. I never did.
I can't believe their sense of self-importance is so inflated that they seem to actually expect me to. But, being a showman, I will leave something satiating for the legally curious:
Sincerely yours,
GoodK
*For those who are newer here, the relationship is as follows: My step-dad has written for the FARMS review [of authors] and was solicited by Daniel C. Peterson and the FARMS' full-time fund raiser Ed Snow last year or so, and presumably they share more frequent communication via email now. His attorney, Bob, lives in a neighboring stake, (one which did not even share the same building, and was pretty far away - akin to the distance and separation between downtown Salt Lake City and South Jordan, Utah). Before I officially announced to my parents that I would be "retiring" from early morning seminary class I was forced to sit through Mormon mythology classes at 6:00 A.M before school every morning in a classroom with a lovely young lady who shares his last name. When my overzealous parent reviewed Mormonism by Kurt Van Gorden it resulted in a lawsuit against him personally, FARMS, the editor of FARMS personally, the First Presidency of the Church, and maybe a few others I'm forgetting. Bob Crockett was called upon to aid in my step-dad's defense, and if I remember correctly that was the extent of their relationship. My step-dad and I lived in the same house up until about nine years ago. Thus is the extent of the six-degrees of separation between the BYU professor and FARMS chief, his attorney friend, and myself.
First of all, I'll put this to rest and say, without a doubt, that virtually everything Robert Crocket of Newhall, California has said about me personally is a lie. That's the only response he's going to get (besides the formal complaint I actually mailed - via this FORM - to the state Bar. (Once he let it slip that his insurance carrier advised him to cease and desist his inflammatory posting here, I couldn't resist.)
But enough about Bob. He's close enough so that I can, and will, deal with him differently than the BYU Professor, Daniel C. Peterson.
Professor Peterson embarked on this journey last year.
I wrote something personal, but still anonymously, out of respect for my parents, and posted it here. I didn't disguise it very well, but the only recipients of the email I was commenting on were "Latter-day Saints" and I certainly didn't think any of them would would use it maliciously against one of their own.
After all, let's remember the timing; Professor Daniel Peterson decided to "rub my dad's nose in it" and forward links to my anonymous posts on this message board to my step-dad while he was traveling back and forth from between his work in California and the Intensive Care Unit in Utah. While I was traveling back and forth, as well as most of the other members of my family.
To be frank, I underestimated Dan would be so egregiously evil. I did nothing to provoke this sort of thing, never exposed anyone to any in real life consequences. Keep that in mind.
Strike 1.
Shortly after that incident, Professor Peterson and his weird, mean-spirited, attorney friend Robert Crockett began to antagonize me on this board with libelous, taunting, and defamatory statements for the public to see -- meant to specifically; one, silence me, two, discredit me, and three hurt me or make me mad.
I've gotten what can only be described as "bizarre" correspondences from Robert Dale Crockett, #105628, ever since.
Both Daniel Peterson, a BYU Professor, and his attorney friend Bob have tried to leverage this outing and vague, thickly separated personal relationship - if you can even call it that - to substantiate false, and sometimes disgusting comments about me. Virtually every post that has been directed towards me by one of these two self-proclaimed apologists has been of this nature.
When I started posting here, I had much more time to post here. I work as a writer - for a living - full-time now, so these colossal time wasting back and forth attacks on my reputation and character cost me money now, too. I have to chose to waste valuable time to answer every stupid accusation - for instance, Bob's constant insistence that I'm not college educated, even though I am - or run the risk that if I don't, it might give the impression that what they are saying is true.
Strike 2.
In spirit of leveraging their vague, personal familiarity* with me -- Daniel C. Peterson deliberately chose to act maliciously, libelously, and thus chose the subsequent consequences. A recurring quote from Orwell's Winston Smith couldn't be more apt, The consequence is contained in the act.
On a thread on this message board, the self-proclaimed LDS bishop proceeded to claim possession of some "inside information" about my personal life, and then proceeded to defame my character and personal reputation with blatant lies. He then decided to try to cover what may prove to be a very costly mistake by disclaiming his libelous post was part of some kind of "experiment" or test of the board's overall gullibility.
Clearly, this was Strike 3.
It may disappoint some of you -especially those I have been corresponding with privately- to hear me reaffirm this, but yes, I am suing Daniel C. Peterson for his libelous, defamatory comments on this board. It's happening. Does that mean he has to stop posting here? Why would it? I don't see why that question wasn't raised to him. I was threatened with a lawsuit for the website http://www.MormonGulag.com, but that didn't cause me to change anything in the slightest. It seems to me that his only concern should be in posting comments here that are of a libelous nature towards those who won't tolerate it.
Obviously, his right to participate on this board and enjoy freedom of speech isn't being hindered. In my opinion, his stated "departure -- effectively with a gun" to his head is merely another show of his famous fishing for compliments. In my opinion, Professor Peterson is - once again - begging for reassurance and support via languishing "fans" after doing something horrible and inexcusable.
For those of you who think I'm foolish enough to post the in real life identity of some unnamed professional so he can be harassed by questionably sane people because they say so; I say come on. You can't believe that I'm that stupid, can you? Jesus.
For those that just overall think it's a bad idea to both file a lawsuit and complain to the State Bar in response to these two self-proclaimed "Latter-day Saint's" numerous libelous remarks, I guess I should apologize, but I won't.
Not for a second. Of course I respect the opinions of powerfully insightful posters like KA, Ray A, Some Schmo, Liz, Dr. Shades, TD, and the like -- so I respectfully disagree. I appreciate your advice, but I respectfully question anyone's ability to really successfully know what they would do in a situation like this. It's about much more than just being on the receiving end of both the BYU Professor and his lawyer's harassment for over a year now.
I didn't chose to post on this website with my real identity or the real identity of my family, that was the choice made for me by Daniel C. Peterson and his attorney friend.
I didn't chose to have my name, reputation, and character attacked, falsely, by either of these self-proclaimed LDS bishops.
Ultimately, they both have left me no choice. Of course I don't plan on retaliating to every libelous comment on this board. I never did.
I don't plan on responding to the recent overflow of cowardly taunts, insults, and accusations from my questionably sane and healthy, no-name, shameful, and sometime foul mouthed critics. I never did.
I can't believe their sense of self-importance is so inflated that they seem to actually expect me to. But, being a showman, I will leave something satiating for the legally curious:
anonymous attorney wrote:I don't know what it does that he "withdrew" his comments a few hours later.That probably does not matter technically, but it may matter for damages-- ie a jury might consider that the harm was remedied. We'll talk more about this when we talk again.
Sincerely yours,
GoodK
*For those who are newer here, the relationship is as follows: My step-dad has written for the FARMS review [of authors] and was solicited by Daniel C. Peterson and the FARMS' full-time fund raiser Ed Snow last year or so, and presumably they share more frequent communication via email now. His attorney, Bob, lives in a neighboring stake, (one which did not even share the same building, and was pretty far away - akin to the distance and separation between downtown Salt Lake City and South Jordan, Utah). Before I officially announced to my parents that I would be "retiring" from early morning seminary class I was forced to sit through Mormon mythology classes at 6:00 A.M before school every morning in a classroom with a lovely young lady who shares his last name. When my overzealous parent reviewed Mormonism by Kurt Van Gorden it resulted in a lawsuit against him personally, FARMS, the editor of FARMS personally, the First Presidency of the Church, and maybe a few others I'm forgetting. Bob Crockett was called upon to aid in my step-dad's defense, and if I remember correctly that was the extent of their relationship. My step-dad and I lived in the same house up until about nine years ago. Thus is the extent of the six-degrees of separation between the BYU professor and FARMS chief, his attorney friend, and myself.