A warning on internet stalkers.

[Sean]

Very well, for the board notice and not addressed to any specific party: this matter is now being reviewed by neutral counsel.

At least we now know that Lo's neutral counsel was not advising her on her alleged stalker of PSMP, but rather Lo's neutral counsel was aiding (unwittingly) in her continuing campaign of harassment and stalking of Gob and myself.

Yes and at this point I would like to apologise to Andrew.

Andrew, when lo mentioned this "neutral counsel" I felt sure that it was you egging her on from the sidelines. I now know that this was not the case and that I was wrong to assume otherwise. I apologise unreservedly for my accusatory posts towards you.

[Andrew D]

Thanks, Sean. I am a lot of things, but Australian lawyer is not one of them.

[Guinevere]

For that matter, what is a "neutral counsel?" It can't be Loca's lawyer since, as advocates, we are required not to be neutral. In the US context, a neutral is a mediator or arbitrator, who participates with parties to a conflict, in bringing about dispute resolution. This also doesn't seem to fit the facts. Of course, I too am patently not an Australian lawyer, so t's a mystery to me .....

[The Hen]

Lawyers are fairly similar world-wide, I would imagine.

As Gob and I are aware of Lo's complaint, but not her alleged lawsuit, I reckon that 1/2 of what has been posted is crud. (eg, everything Lo has posted other than accepting responsibilities for her actions ....I won't take that away from her.)

[Jarlaxle]

For that matter, what is a "neutral counsel?" It can't be Loca's lawyer since, as advocates, we are required not to be neutral. In the US context, a neutral is a mediator or arbitrator, who participates with parties to a conflict, in bringing about dispute resolution. This also doesn't seem to fit the facts. Of course, I too am patently not an Australian lawyer, so t's a mystery to me .....

A judge or a magistrate, maybe?

[loCAtek]

There's no lawsuit, that was scuttle-butt; the neutral counsel is Master Chief 'I' ...that was regarding my stalker, which had nothing to do Hen and Gob, only PMSP.

[The Hen]

There's no lawsuit, that was scuttle-butt; the neutral counsel is Master Chief 'I' ...that was regarding my stalker, which had nothing to do Hen and Gob, only PMSP.

So you lied about the law suit?

Colour me unsurprised.

I think Mr. Gob is confusing filing a lawsuit, with filing a complaint.

However, I have not to been notified that this case is closed; and will call later to see if it is wise to comment at this time.

Gob stated you filed a complaint againt him.

[Lord Jim]

What apparently happened is she obtained the services of a law firm (a pretty lefty bunch by the looks of them...probably suckers for a sob story) to assist her in filing a complaint with the body that handles complaints against people working in Strop's department.

Here again is a link to the firm's website:

http://www.mauriceblackburnnsw.com.au/

Here's a quote from their "social justice" section:

Social justice practice

At Maurice Blackburn we recognise that there are individuals and organisations in our community who cannot afford the services of a lawyer. That's why in appropriate cases, Maurice Blackburn will provide legal services to such organisations and individuals on a no charge (pro bono) or reduced charge basis. We also work with many barristers on a similar basis. We fight for fair.

This work is based on the view that Australian and international law should support the notion of justice and reflect community values. The firm's Social Justice Practice challenges the excesses of government and business and champions the rights of those that are disadvantaged. We believe legal action that supports social justice contributes to a better society.

[Sean]

I really can't see why Maurice Blackburn would involve themselves unless there was a lawsuit involved.

They are compensation lawyers after all...

[Beer Sponge]

Drop the banhammer on her. Lo, GTFO.

Here is a cyberhug from me to Gob and Hen . Gob, please ignore the hand on your ass, I'm sure that is Hens. Also, I can tell you work out. Nice.

[Gob]

Thanks Beery! Now move that hand!!

[loCAtek]

Gob stated you filed a complaint againt him.

Yes, a complaint is not a lawsuit; google it.

[Andrew D]

For that matter, what is a "neutral counsel?" It can't be Loca's lawyer since, as advocates, we are required not to be neutral. In the US context, a neutral is a mediator or arbitrator, who participates with parties to a conflict, in bringing about dispute resolution. This also doesn't seem to fit the facts. Of course, I too am patently not an Australian lawyer, so t's a mystery to me .....

It is true that, as advocates, we are required not to be neutral. But we are not only advocates. We are also "counsel". And in our role as counsel, we are required to give our clients objective -- i.e., neutral -- advice.

[Sean]

Gob stated you filed a complaint againt him.

Yes, a complaint is not a lawsuit; google it.

Actually lo, I've just run a search for the word 'lawsuit' on this board and you were the first to use it*. I'm not quite sure why you think others are confused by the word...


*ETA: In the context of this discussion of course...

[darkblack]

Many of you have known me (or of me) for a time and I must beg your indulgence, for 1) I suspect that I am missing some essential bits of back story in this matter, and 2) I don't really give a toss about that fact.

Having lived under a rarely revealed pseudonym for years when dealing with aspects of online 'life', I have never betrayed confidences from others or used them for my own gain...and all I ask in return is the same from free men and women (like myself) who can respect the masks we must wear to perform our roles in these environments.

Taking bread from another person's mouth and substituting fear, uncertainty and needless expense is not respect.

It is disrespect in the highest.

And...it saddens me that things must come to this, as they do - but if matters have now become legal, it is my opinion that one of the parties must leave, and further public speech about them also be curtailed out of respect... until this fucking mess blows over.




;>)

[Andrew D]

By the way, I am still not, and I have never been, loCAtek's "neutral counsel". I merely made a remark concerning the dual role of lawyers as, simultaneously, non-objective advocates and objective counsel.

[The Hen]

Gob stated you filed a complaint againt him.

Yes, a complaint is not a lawsuit; google it.

Lo, you must be getting a tad confused. allow me to use big letters for you.

I think Mr. Gob is confusing filing a lawsuit, with filing a complaint.

However, I have not to been notified that this case is closed; and will call later to see if it is wise to comment at this time.

You brought the whole issue of lawsuit to the table. Gob called it a complaint.

How can he get a complaint confused with a complaint?

[Guinevere]

For that matter, what is a "neutral counsel?" It can't be Loca's lawyer since, as advocates, we are required not to be neutral. In the US context, a neutral is a mediator or arbitrator, who participates with parties to a conflict, in bringing about dispute resolution. This also doesn't seem to fit the facts. Of course, I too am patently not an Australian lawyer, so t's a mystery to me .....

It is true that, as advocates, we are required not to be neutral. But we are not only advocates. We are also "counsel". And in our role as counsel, we are required to give our clients objective -- i.e., neutral -- advice.

Andrew, I disagree a bit. Yes, we are also counselors, and one of the greatest services an attorney can provide is objective advice, but I wouldn't consider that advice neutral. Certainly not as compared to the neutral position of a mediator/arbitrator. My point, above, was that someone's lawyer isn't a "neutral counsel" so I was curious where that term came from, and what it meant in this context. It's a bit of a moot point, but that doesn't stop me from being curious

Hen, you might be surprised at the variety of lawyers and lawyering in this country alone, much less across the world.

[oldr_n_wsr]

My view and my view only

loCAtek feels she has been stalked on this board. I don't see it, but she does. If this stalking is happening in real life then this boards acceptance of PMSPrincess as a member may help her case. but then again, PMSP has made her presense known, who she is and has engaged in very little, if any stalking/harrassement of loCAtek.

loCAtek thinks that the owners of the board Gob and Hen by merely allowing someone, whom they have no knowledge of his/her affiliation with any member already on the board, to register and post, somehow constitutes liability and colusion with this person. And by continuing to allow this person to post even after he/she has told the board specifically who they are, somehow exposes them to aiding and abbetting (sorry for my spelling as I am too lazy to look up the correct spelling of words this person in their possible stalking of loCAtek.

Now any person who has read most of the posts on this board and who has searched PMS Princesses posts can see that posting wise, he/she has not engaged in any stalking nor harrassment of loCAtek. other than this latest dust up in which the owners of this boards integrety (and livelyhood has been brought up.

Now maybe PMSP's mere presense here bothers loCAtek, but that definately is not cause for any issues with the owners. The owners merely supply the vessel for which we, the occupants, can engage each other in banter/name calling/ opinion exchange/bashing or whatever. To accuse them of wrongdoing and threaten their livelyhood (aka jobs, personal security) is beyond the terms and expected exchange of the board.

There are many members here who in reading their writings do not like each other. They do not take it to the next step nor the higher step of taking the owners of this board to task for allowing the exchange of ideas and even personality conflicts or idealogical differences.

loCAtek, get help. This board and it's members including PMSP are not your problems. You are your own problem. Only you can change you. If you are indeed being stalked in real life, then deal with that there however, your behaviour here indicates (to me at least) that you are delusional. In addition to alcohol problems, I believe you have other substance issues. I have seen the manifistations of substance issues (AA is not just for alcoholics anymore, although some old alcoholics would like it to be) and number one on the hit parade is paranoia. You are exhibiting the classic symptoms.

I do have to say that banning and letting you go into your own world may be the best for you. For only when we each reach our own bottom, can we begin to climb out of the hole we have dug for ourselves.

My thoughts are with you.

[loCAtek]

Two quick answers to halt [some] of the specualtion: The neutral counseling in this matter of stalking was as a Master Chief, of both my and my Ex's acquaintance. Whom I have stated has been notified about this situation. I say neutral because he is a very good Master Chief, once of a command in fact, if you're familiar with that position.

Second: Among the definitions of cyber-stalking is 'monitering', AKA 'keeping tabs'.