Rcrocket's Libel

[_beastie]

As far as Beastie is concerned, I really really did take exception to threatening to make my life a living hell and making fun of my wife and kids. I really do question her motivations in doing so originally. But I don't think she'll quit.

As this thread explicitly demonstrates, YOU are the one who repeatedly references this incident. by the way, I don't even do searches for you mentioning it - these are just the times I happened to read your reference to the incident. I suspect you probably mention it more times than I've caught.

by the way, this is what Bob calls "threatening to make his life a living hell and making fun of his wife and kids."

I just want to make sure every poster on this board realizes that crocket has insulted scratch by repeatedly calling him a woman.

I'm making a formal announcement: this guy is a misogynist arsehole and from now on I will treat him even worse than our roughest posters ever dreamed of.

Hey, bob, it's a miracle you have seven kids. I guess that means your wife laid back and thought of England seven times. God knows I'd never let a misogynist touch me.

http://www.mormondiscussions.com/phpBB3 ... 880#p81880

Yet, with Bob's "creative license", this single post became "threatening to make his life a living hell" and "making fun of his wife and children" and evidence of me stalking him.

This is exactly why I don't believe a word of Bob's accusations against Eric without hard evidence. Heaven only knows what Eric may have said that Bob's "creative license" turned into an accusation of being a child molester.

Bolding the part bob claims I omitted. Treating someone badly on an internet board hardly constitutes a threat to make your life a living hell.

And note that bob continues to call me a stalker. I encourage everyone to remember that in evaluating the likelihood that he's telling the truth about Eric. I put that likelihood near zero, personally.

[_beastie]

Yes, Ice Age Cave Faunas dealt directly with Mercer.

But it does not appear that you have Mercer.

Cave really doesn't dispose of Mercer at all.

Mercer's book is really quite fascinating. He was a Harvard grad and the Director of the museum at UPenn. His digs at the Yucatan caves were strictly by the modern scientific method, although obviously he lacked the ability to carbon date his finds.

But, he documents many horse finds at the caves. It is pretty obvious from his book (and this led Clayton Ray to conclude similarly by studying Mercer) that some of these finds were modern pre-Columbian.

At page 172 of this book he notes modern horse finds, but says that these finds must be post-Columbian because "we find no reason for supposing that the people of Yucatan knew the American fossil horse, or scattered its remains in late portions of their culture layers." Nonetheless, his co-author and editor notes that these finds were non-fossilized Equus occidentalis (western) and not Equus caballus (Spanish), nothing that elsewhere in America Equus occidentalis is always found fossilized - - a definite anomaly.

Elsewhere, Mercer describes deep horse finds among human occupation stratum (68-69.) Figure 27 shows from Actun Chekt-a-leh horse finds in human statrum between the first and second foot.

At page 40, he photographs and documents deep horse finds in human stratum, but one can see that he thinks this is an anomaly, because he describes them as "two horses' teeth (see Fig 14) that had probably worked down from the surface in recent time."

Elsewhere in his book he puts problematic late dating on sub-surface stratum only because there are horse bones in the stratum.

These specimens are currently in the UPenn Museum; too bad they haven't been carbon dated. Probably buried in a drawer some place.

But, it was Mercer's conclusions that led the Smithsonian Ray to conclude that these were modern pre-Columbian.

The Cave book mentions Mercer only once, and in passing, only to say that Mercer found "modern" horse at Yucatan. But this obviously ignores Mercer's find if E. Occ. in a non-fossilized condition.

I'm guessing you didn't read my webpage. This misplacement of remains is all explained therein.

[Guest]

I predict that in 2012, Obama will beat Romney for the presidency.

[_Spider-to-the-Fly]

Are you the kind of lawyer that tries to resolve disputes between people in an amicable, as painless way as possible? Or are you the kind of lawyer that likes to stir the pot of contention to feather your own nest with more fees?

Here's what's happening. Maybe this will explain things.

I represent some clients in counter-terrorism threats. Basically, these are executives of large business who are the subject of death or bomb threats by disgruntled ex-employees or others. My job is to provide information about using law enforcement or civil process to deal with them, and I team with a psychiatrist who is a consultant to the Secret Service.

When these threats come it, we evaluate them. Very typically, and which is the case with Eric, the threats come from known people but you don't know where to find them. We make decisions about how likely the threat might actually lead to violence, and employ various measures, ranging from making a criminal report, hiring body guards, civil action or nothing.

My exposure to Eric runs deep. He knows my daughter. He has been in my house. I know his personal circumstances. Actually, I know them pretty well. Some of his life and legal difficulties can be obtained from public files. Plus, he's filed various complaints about me to the State Bar, to my employer, and for a while there was threatening me with a law suit.

Some time ago on this board, I took exception to him exposing certain details about his father and sister on this board. His father is a good friend of mine and a past client -- at least, I have given him legal advice. After giving Eric private notice to remove the material, I then went public and called him out on it and defended his family. I then emailed his father to report on what I'd seen, but the email address was not a good one and his father never heard from me about it until after Dr. Peterson notified him about it, and only perhaps a year later.

Well, things sort of exploded. I've had multiple death threats, threats of violence, from Eric coming from various sources. I've also heard that he has done the same to another board participant on this board, who without me asking him provided me similar concerns.

So, having seen some of my clients go through this, and wondering whether he was going to show up on my doorstep with a gun when I wasn't home but my children were, and not wanting really to warn my family about this, I drew upon my experience with clients and concluded that the best way to deal with Eric would simply keep his antics in the open somewhat.

So, you might have noticed my long absences here. My true desire is to just leave and be done here. But I visit every few days to run searches for my name, and when it becomes apparent that Eric is revisiting something about me, to act in a defensive manner according to what I've been advised, I bring it up again. The thinking is that Eric, who is an intelligent guy, is not likely to visit violence upon my household as he has explicitly threatened if everybody knows about it.

You may disagree; you may think I'm making it all up. My job is not to persuade anybody here that I am telling the truth. All I want is to minimize the possibility that he'll appear on my doorstep.

Do you think continually antagonizing him will just increase the chances that he'll do something? Maybe.

As far as Beastie is concerned, I really really did take exception to threatening to make my life a living hell and making fun of my wife and kids. I really do question her motivations in doing so originally. But I don't think she'll quit.

Mr. Yahoo Bot,

Interesting. I don't want to you to compromise your techniques used to protect yourself. So I won't ask what they might be, except for the obvious public and legal ones.

Do you consider Eric or beastie to be capable of in real life physical harm to you or your children? What about their online postings suggests to you that either or both of them are capable of such? I.e., that the in real life physical threat is real and palpable?

Have you obtained a restraining order against either of them?

Regards,

Spider.

[_beastie]

And note that bob continues to call me a stalker. I encourage everyone to remember that in evaluating the likelihood that he's telling the truth about Eric. I put that likelihood near zero, personally.

Like I've said, why would one of my little stalkers, who continually makes reference to my wife and children and sex life with republication of the same joke over and over again when I'd rather not see it again, believe me?

LOL. Bob, give it up. Unfortunately for your little game, you outed yourself, and your continual attempts to provoke me won't work anymore.

I trust that any sensible person can read the evidence on this thread and understand that BOB is the one who continually brings up the joke, not me. I simply reference this thread whenever he does so, and he does so quite frequently.

If you really don't want me to ever mention this again, you must stop continually calling me a stalker and making false accusations about attacking your wife and children. Then I will have no need to resurrect this thread.

[Guest]

What is the purpose of life?

[Guest]

Where do we go from here?

[_Eric]

Well, that's the only part of all of this that I've ever commented on. Repeatedly, I've tried to get Eric to confirm or deny whether he actually sent that e-mail and he's ignored me. Take it for what it's worth.

Okay, ttribe. I will respond to you, because I think you just genuinely don't get the nuances here. But I'm not going to do it again. Creepy's goal here is to get us to talk about him, and look at what we're doing. Besides, I wrote a HUGE thread called "What About Bob" detailing all of Bob's abuse, and He just threatened Dr. Shades with legal action and had the thread deleted. But here it goes. For you. 
My "beef" with Bob began when he sent me blackmail-like private messages threatening to tell my parents (whom were both in the hospital while my little sister recovered from a life threatening illness) that I was posting "anti-Mormon" comments on the Internet. 

Even though my step-dad already knew of my online debates as "goodK" and my mom couldn't care less about any of this, out of respect for my family's situation (my seriously ill sister) I begged him not to. He didn't (DCP  was the one who was emailing my family about my posts as "goodK") but Bob told the board and me in PM that he sent my then-anonymous posts to my family. I don't know if Bob was falling on the sword to kiss up to DCP - since Bob doesn't have many friends in the FARMS community - or if he was lying about it to get a reaction out of me, or why, but he said he did when he didn't. 

He also said he provided legal representation to my family regarding some medical negligence that led to my sisters illness, and when I asked my step-dad about that, he said Bob had never, ever served our family in such a capacity. So, in short, Bob likes to make false threats and take credit for things that didn't happen. Does my post that you keep referencing about the email to his firm make more sense now, in that context? 

Even responding to Bob's false allegations with denials means he gets the attention he craves from the community that has pretty much shunned him, but since you seem to drop in every time it's been mentioned, I've given you what I believe to be a generous response. 

I flatly deny all the allegations Bob is making now and in the past, which is a win for Bob because negative attention is still attention, and the troll wants what it wants. I once challenged him to provide proof that he was called a child molester, and offered to donate $1,000 to his favorite organization (I believe he said it was NAMBLA) if he could substantiate his accusation. He then disappeared for a few weeks from the board. So maybe if I offer up the same challenge he'll retreat again and MDB readers will have reason to thank me and rejoice. 

[Guest]

Here's Eric's Facebook threats to me:

Hey, can we meet for lunch? I'll buy.

Eric

[_Doctor Scratch]

Here's Eric's Facebook threats to me:

Between You and Eric Norwood

May 14, 2009 at 9:48am
i hope we never run into each other, for your sake, old man.



Bob Crockett May 14, 2009 at 4:52pm
Hah hah.
Sent via Facebook Mobile

May 15, 2009 at 9:08am
Just let me know when I can come over.


I complained to Facebook; got the account closed.

Wow, is that it? The Nehor has threatened to gut me with a knife, and DCP made threats involving an "assault rifle." Trevor has made physical threats, too. Seems pretty mild to me, Bob.