Iain Hall's SANDPIT

Home » Blogging » Stalkers beware – you CAN be found … and charged

Stalkers beware – you CAN be found … and charged

Think you can get away with it?

From behind the Herald Sun’s paywall (*) comes a warning to all the scumbags out there who think nothing of anonymously attacking others on the Internet:

A MAN accused of stalking AFL star Alex Rance has been charged with 71 criminal offences.

Scott Thomas will appear before Melbourne Magistrates’ Court next month. The 33-year-old from Prahran appeared briefly before the court this month but did not enter a plea. Six of the charges relate to the alleged stalking of the Richmond footballer.

Mr Thomas is accused of five different kinds of stalking offences as well as using a carriage service to harass Mr Rance – which can relate to nuisance calls, text messages or emails.

The stalking charges relate to allegedly contacting the player, two counts of publishing material on the internet, one charge of tracing a person’s internet and a charge of arousing fear and apprehension.

I can think of several people who could (and probably should) be charged with similar stalking offences, starting with a certain Melbourne journalist with whom Iain and I have had the bitter experience of being on the receiving end of her obsessive Internet stalking and harassment.

She’s done all of that over which Mr Thomas has been charged – and then some – including sending threatening emails and bagging our names, my business and our reputations all over the place, all from the cowardly position of an alias of course.

It’s finished now, since I managed to convince the owner of a certain hate-blog where this journalist did most of her dirty work to remove the blog from the Internet, or else … .

To this day though, that (senior!) Melbourne journo has no idea or appreciation of how lucky she is that we did not report her stalking and harassment – and proof of her identity – to the police, or even to her employer. I actually think I should have called the cops … and I certainly will if it ever starts up again.

(* The link takes you to a Google search of the H-Sun article – click on the Google link and you’re in, for free)

Advertisements

25 Comments

  1. Iain Hall says:

    Good post Ray and one that should send a chill down the spine of some rather deserving scum-bags.

  2. Craigy says:

    Iain and Ray, aren’t you concerned about this?

    “one charge of tracing a person’s internet”

    I didn’t even know that was a chargeable offence.

  3. Ray Dixon says:

    Why would I be concerned about that, Craigy?

  4. Iain Hall says:

    Well I for one am not concerned at all Craigy

  5. Craigy says:

    Only because you have both admitted to doing that here.
    Not saying I think it’s a big deal, I’m just suprised it’s an offence as I think most bloggers would trace people via their IP at some stage.

  6. Ray Dixon says:

    When have I ever admitted to “tracing a person’s Internet”, Craigy? Noticing that someone has the same IP address as someone else is not “tracing”, it’s just observing something that’s right in front of your face when you see the admin comments page.

    I think you’re misinterpreting the charge of stalking by “tracing a person’s Internet”. I would suggest it involves a lot more than what you imply, and that it is usually coupled with other stalking activities like harassment and posting rather malicious stuff on the Internet. You know, like at that anonymous blog that recently met its demise.

    Not suggesting anything here, Craigy, but you didn’t comment on that little matter or offer any kind of congrats or even an acknowledgement that we were indeed being stalked by the likes of Gread the Journo, yet you’ve sort-of chosen to have a nudge at Iain and I here. Why?

  7. Iain Hall says:

    Craigy
    an IP search gives you a regional location at best and with the use of proxy servers that can be a long way from the actual location of the user that you might want to find. There is also a qualitative difference between trying to track down your anonymous harassers and tracking down someone so that you can harass them.

  8. Ray Dixon says:

    Presumably, Craigy thinks it’s okay for anonymous shitheads to set up blogs to write malicious crap about others but not okay to attempt to expose them. In the absence of any other comment on this issue, that’s all I can conclude. Thanks Craigy.

  9. Craigy says:

    Ray I have read Iains blog for sometime and u must be aware that he started out as an anonymous hate troll with blogs set up just to out another anonymous Blogger Jeremy Sears. Now I have had no input into your blog wars, I just watch but it does seem like your post could concern Iain. Just sayin that’s all…..and u seem to be trying very hard to find out who Bridgit Gread might be. How do you do that……just curious….

  10. Ray Dixon says:

    Craigy, from your above comments, it’s quite obvious on which side of the fence you sit on the serious stalking issue that was going on for the last 3 years until Iain & I managed to put a stop to it.

    But, in your own words, you seem to think that a bit of harmless outing Iain did 6 or 7 years ago is the equivalent (or worse) than what Gread & Co have done since 2009, when Grods closed.

    Well here’s some news, Craigy:

    You are sitting on the wrong side and, quite frankly, I find your inferences regarding me to be offensive.

  11. Iain Hall says:

    Craigy
    I appreciate where you stand on the matter even though I largely disagree with your characterisation of the history here, but when it comes to working out who the real person behind various anonymous identifies were what it often boils down to is the often innocuous things that they have thrown into their comemnts over the years. “Bridgit Gread” often added little personal details about her life and career. Eventually there is enough of these to match a real name to the alias. Nothing illegal or underhanded is required just a keen eye for detail in the things people freely say. Further to that there are the little stylistic quirks in their writing, its as distinctive as a fingerprint sometimes.

  12. Ray Dixon says:

    I wouldn’t have bothered giving Craigy an explanation as to how Gread’s identity was discovered, Iain. He doesn’t deserve one. But, for the record, it was as you say, an accident that I stumbled upon her real identity … way back in August 2010. She gave it away herself and there was no “tracing” or “stalking” involved or even required to discover the obvious. She is a mainstream Melbourne journalist. One who since 2009 has harassed and stalked both you and I via that malicious hate-blog that is now deleted, via her Twitter account and via email, which included blackmail attempts to gain information on me via third parties and a physically threatening email sent under her so-called husband’s name but via her email account.

    And that, Craigy, is the type of person you are – for all intents and purposes – defending here. Get this straight: there was no ‘blog wars’ to speak of going on during the past 3 years (not from our side) until last month when Iain and I decided we’d had enough of their malicious crap, defamation, harassment & stalking. For 3 years they conducted a one-way hate campaign with us doing nothing to prompt it. And, even though we could have taken action against Gread (criminal & civil) we didn’t. Alternatively we could have also given that information to her media opponents, who would have had no hesitation in taking her down. But again, we didn’t.

    Yet you still don’t even have the good grace, courtesy and common decency to even acknowledge all that. Which makes me wonder about you, quite frankly.

  13. Craigy says:

    Calm down Ray. I knew about that blog and Iains various other blogs but last time I looked they were locked. I am not taking sides at all. What I know about your flame wars comes from your posts here. I am happy for you that it is over. Is that okay with you!

  14. Ray Dixon says:

    No, it’s not “okay” with me, Craigy. that you have as much as accused me of “stalking” while failing to – at any stage – condemn the actions of that other blog … the one you now admit you knew about. I thought you were better than that but now, I’m not so sure. I find your comments on this matter rather at odds with someone who claims not to be “taking sides” and I feel compelled to ask you if you ever commented @ SW?

  15. Craigy says:

    LOL Ray, please, I really don’t give a shit. You will give yourself high blood pressure.

    I am sorry that some people have been running a blog attacking you. I don’t know what they have said about you as last time I looked they were attacking Iain and Iain was giving back as good as he got. It was that long ago.

    If they were saying nasty, untrue things about you with no provocation, then of course I condemn that, if it really was that nasty (I will have to take your word on that).

    The blog wars thing, from what I’ve seen, can get very nasty and with some of the weird people around (some of who comment and post here, not you of course) it is no surprise that these things escalate as seems to be the case between you and whoever is attacking you.

    Anyway Ray, you don’t need to attack me, we may not agree on every issue but you seem like a reasonable person from what I can tell and you don’t deserve an attack blog that’s for sure..

    BTW. My questions about tracing an IP and the law were innocent, I wouldn’t know where to start and it surprises me that it would be against the law.

    Cheers.

  16. Craigy says:

    Oh and one more thing…Iain’s history is what it is. We have all said things in the heat of the moment that we learn from later. I think Iain has changed for the better over the years he has been blogging, not that I agree with his world view, but he is hard to get to angry at these days…..or is that just me…..who knows…….

  17. Ray Dixon says:

    If they were saying nasty, untrue things about you with no provocation, then of course I condemn that, if it really was that nasty (I will have to take your word on that).

    That’s about as disingenuous as it gets.

  18. Ray Dixon says:

    Oh, I wish I’d read this piece of twisted moral equivalence you wrote on the other thread first, Craigy.:

    the Hun ran a story on the rightwing nutter who shot 77 to save the world from Marxists

    … without any criticism of him

    … Not a good look, is News limited a supporter of this mans views? We don’t know.

    I mean, we could just as easily say this about you:

    Craigy made a lot of comments on my post about stalkers who ran an anonymous hate-blog to “save the world” from so-called stalkers

    ….. without any criticism of them

    …. Not a good look, is Craigy a supporter of those people’s views? We don’t know.

    We sure don’t.

  19. Craigy says:

    Ray, you do have me giggling this morning……

    Fair enough, I have explained to you that I don’t really know what you are on about, as I have not read the offending blog since it started attacking you…..But….

    I am happy to say they are scumbags and you are a saint if that is what you need Ray…. And I mean the scumbag tag. (Although, as I said, I find it hard to get angry at anyone these days).

    Just a quick explanation on my other post you quote. It was tongue in cheek Ray. I don’t really think anyone supports that man, but so many right wing bloggers have tried to smear the Age, the Greens and people like me for what we don’t say. The Hun is usually the first to question peoples religion or politics if they are ‘left’ or follow Islam. I think it’s right to question their lack of consistency when violence comes from someone on the side they support and from the religion they prefer. Especially given their reach in this country.

  20. Craigy says:

    Oh and I never answered your question (maybe that’s why you are upset with me) ….

    I have never commented at any site attacking you or Iain or at Iain’s war blogs. I’m just not that interested. You must understand this is all very boring to readers, while very interesting and I’m sure time consuming for you and Iain. I have a passing interest in the way internet stalking is becoming an issue, but this is mainly for my own protection……Cheers again.

    And I hope an emu kicks those bloody stalkers dunny door down………or something even harsher….

  21. Craigy says:

    Oops….What did I say that tripped the moderation filter?

  22. Ray Dixon says:

    I’m just not that interested

    You were interested enough, Craigy, to attempt to tar both Iain and I with the same brush as the scumbag stalkers.

    I have a passing interest in the way internet stalking is becoming an issue, but this is mainly for my own protection

    So it’s only an issue if it happens to you? I see. Well if it ever does happen to you there’s one thing you can count on. My quick condemnation of those people.

    Btw, it was the word “stalker” that tripped moderation.

  23. Craigy says:

    No smear intended Ray.

    I have seen comments that you have ‘evidence’ that Greed is a Journalist at the Age and I assumed that was from an IP address or found by digging out some details available on the net, so I wondered if you would be in trouble as well. You and Iain have explained that you have not done anything that breaks the law and I take your word on that. I never implied you had done anything wrong, I was just asking in light of the post.

    I probably would be happy to condemn people with a stronger tone if I knew what they had done to you, but it is a bit hard when I didn’t see the offending posts.

    It is nice of you to say you would defend me Ray, but it really isn’t required as I don’t run a blog and I post under my real name, so I don’t have much to fear. Although your warning about at least one person who posts here was taken seriously, there are some nutters out there to be sure, and when they know where you work and live it is sensible to be cautious.

  24. Ray Dixon says:

    I never implied you had done anything wrong, I was just asking in light of the post.

    The post (and other ones) fully explains what she did, Craigy. And it fully explains that, despite us having her identity, we did not act on it – i.e. we did not harass, damage or stalk her. Self explanatory, I would have thought.

  25. Craigy says:

    Yep, fair enough Ray…..Boy, I’ll leave that topic alone in future….

Comments are closed.

Welcome to the Sandpit

I love a good argument so please leave a comment

Please support the Sandpit

Please support the Sandpit

Do you feel lucky?

Do you feel lucky?

%d bloggers like this: