Now Gordon Roy Parker wants me arrested; I am not kidding
Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2011 7:38 pm
Gordon Roy Parker, a sociopath from Philadelphia who infests the alt.seduction.fast newsgroup on Usenet news, and uses the nickname of Ray Gordon, has apparently finally gotten around to having a police officer come visit me over his dislike of something I've said on that newsgroup regarding him.
According to the police officer who visited me, Gordo claimed that (1) I was harassing him; (2) I was threatening him; and (3) I was stalking him. Please note that Gordon Roy Parker, alias Ray Gordon, lives in Philadelphia, which is what, about 150 miles from here?
Ray got mad when I said something about him publicly in April, and claimed he was going to come after me by filing a complaint about it. Basically when I heard him say that I guessed that he'd bluster for a while then nothing more would happen and a month would go by. When nothing did happen for a solid month I figured he was just doing the same thing he's done in the past, when he got mad, he made all sorts of threats, then just more-or-less ran off with his tail between his legs.
So anyway, a nice police officer from the University Park, MD Police Department comes to see me about Gordon Roy Parker. So I tell him that the guy is a nutcase. I pointed out to the officer that Ray posted a message saying how the people who died in the towers, the World Trade Center, deserved what happened to him.
Yes, he has every right to say that if he wants, but he said it on September 11, 2001. I pointed out to the officer while these people were being crushed to death he claimed that they deserved it.
I said that I've called the guy a sociopath because of the things he's said, and that this incident is over something from six months ago.
I pointed out that it would be extremely unlikely that I would be stalking the guy, as (the officer could see) I'm in a wheelchair, what am I gonna do, roll all the way to Pennsylvania? The officer pointed out that doesn't mean I couldn't get someone to do something.
I pointed out that I don't know anybody. I also said that I know what the law is, I've never sent Ray any e-mails. In order to commit harassment you have to send something to a specific person (which I did know) and it has to be for no legitimate purpose. Public postings fail to represent harassment. It has to be specifically addressed to someone to even be classified as harassment.
Even if I had broken the law (which I know I haven't) all that the law imposes is at most a $500 fine.
That's part of the reason Ray had to lie in the police report: unless I send a message to him personally, that is upsetting and has no legitimate purpose, it's not harassment. As I stated, messages sent to a group are not individually addressed and don't constitute harassment under the law, even if the public message was upsetting and had no purpose.
I had actually looked this up more than a year ago because Ray was in the habit of declaring any criticism of him or his kookscreeds constituted electronic harassment. So I went and looked up the law in a few places including Pennsylvania where he lives and Florida, to show examples where my conduct doesn't even reach their requirements to constitute harassment (I also specifically looked up Maryland's statute on the subject) and found out that in my own behavior talking about him on the newsgroup had been more restrictive and less open than what is permitted under cyber harassment laws, I was actually more careful than what the law allowed.
I don't know about whether talking to the police officer was the right idea. Normally the best advice is not to say anything to the police, but you also have to know when you should say something. I figured by telling the truth about Ray and his September 11, 2001, rant, I'm thus poisoning the well and the officer would see Ray for what he is, a crackpot. And that the cop would be more likely to leave and report it as what it is, a crackpot trying to silence criticism of himself.
Besides, the things I've said about and to Ray can be easily found on Google Groups, I always stick to what's legal by not exaggerating anything about him - that's hard to do with a whackjob like Ray Gordon, his own conduct is so rancid it requires no embellishment - so I figure showing what this guy is like would let it be understood to others what he is. I also said the authorities where he lives know all about him.
I pointed out that I have no ill will toward him, my basic intent is to warn others on the newsgroup not to deal with him because he has the habit of attacking people who disagree with him or suing people in Federal court because he didn't like what they said. He's filed 7 cases in Federal court and lost every one.
I also said I wasn't bothered if Ray did try to have me prosecuted, I haven't violated the law and if it happened, after I win I will sue him and take everything he owns. And that he's libeled me more than once in the newsgroup.
I just remembered something else: I also pointed out (despite his claims to the contrary) he's never said one word to me complaining about what I wrote or ever asked me to stop saying anything.
I'm guessing the police officer got the point I was making, because he was courteous and left.
What surprised me was something I've mentioned publicly and to Ray over many years. It doesn't matter what he says or does on that newsgroup, since he's done nothing directly to me, I lack standing to do anything to him in court. If he doesn't do anything to me to give me standing, I am absolutely powerless to do anything to him in a court.
"Standing" is an important point in legal circles. You have to have a legitimate reason to sue someone. You have to have something to lose as a result of an action or event that grants you the privilege of suing them. Since nothing Ray has done really rises to the level of anything serious enough to give me standing, I have no grounds to sue him. "Plaintiff lacks standing to sue" is the court saying "don't let the screen door hit you on your way out."
But if Gordon Roy Parker sued me or if he filed a criminal complaint against me, and I end up being arrested over something meritless, then he grants me standing to come after him in court and sue him.
That it took six months for this to even come around tells me that this ain't a huge issue.
So we'll see what happens.
A federal judge said this about him, * "... upon consideration of Plaintiff Gordon Roy Parker's... continued and inexcusable failure..." Gordon Roy Parker v. "Wintermute" et. al. 02-CV-7215 (Feb. 25, 2003, Federal District Court, Eastern District, Pennsylvania)
When the judge said this, the only other reference on the Internet to "continued and inexcusable failure" was the UN clusterfuck in Kosovo that got people killed.
He also made it into the law books with another one of his cases, when the judge in that case said, "Plaintiff is... completely incomprehensible..." Gordon Roy Parker v. Google, Inc. 422 F. Supp 2d 492 (2006, E.D. PA) (He tried to sue Google for indexing his website, because he was too stupid to know about using "ROBOTS.TXT".)
Here's one of his really juicy comments he made once (not to me, though):
"[Y]ou can again go fuck yourself. I am too polite to get into detail about what I think is wrong with someone like you." - Ray Gordon, March 16, 2003
http://groups.google.com/groups?&selm=2 ... bj.aol.com
http://tinyurl.com/nhof
According to the police officer who visited me, Gordo claimed that (1) I was harassing him; (2) I was threatening him; and (3) I was stalking him. Please note that Gordon Roy Parker, alias Ray Gordon, lives in Philadelphia, which is what, about 150 miles from here?
Ray got mad when I said something about him publicly in April, and claimed he was going to come after me by filing a complaint about it. Basically when I heard him say that I guessed that he'd bluster for a while then nothing more would happen and a month would go by. When nothing did happen for a solid month I figured he was just doing the same thing he's done in the past, when he got mad, he made all sorts of threats, then just more-or-less ran off with his tail between his legs.
So anyway, a nice police officer from the University Park, MD Police Department comes to see me about Gordon Roy Parker. So I tell him that the guy is a nutcase. I pointed out to the officer that Ray posted a message saying how the people who died in the towers, the World Trade Center, deserved what happened to him.
Yes, he has every right to say that if he wants, but he said it on September 11, 2001. I pointed out to the officer while these people were being crushed to death he claimed that they deserved it.
I said that I've called the guy a sociopath because of the things he's said, and that this incident is over something from six months ago.
I pointed out that it would be extremely unlikely that I would be stalking the guy, as (the officer could see) I'm in a wheelchair, what am I gonna do, roll all the way to Pennsylvania? The officer pointed out that doesn't mean I couldn't get someone to do something.
I pointed out that I don't know anybody. I also said that I know what the law is, I've never sent Ray any e-mails. In order to commit harassment you have to send something to a specific person (which I did know) and it has to be for no legitimate purpose. Public postings fail to represent harassment. It has to be specifically addressed to someone to even be classified as harassment.
Even if I had broken the law (which I know I haven't) all that the law imposes is at most a $500 fine.
That's part of the reason Ray had to lie in the police report: unless I send a message to him personally, that is upsetting and has no legitimate purpose, it's not harassment. As I stated, messages sent to a group are not individually addressed and don't constitute harassment under the law, even if the public message was upsetting and had no purpose.
I had actually looked this up more than a year ago because Ray was in the habit of declaring any criticism of him or his kookscreeds constituted electronic harassment. So I went and looked up the law in a few places including Pennsylvania where he lives and Florida, to show examples where my conduct doesn't even reach their requirements to constitute harassment (I also specifically looked up Maryland's statute on the subject) and found out that in my own behavior talking about him on the newsgroup had been more restrictive and less open than what is permitted under cyber harassment laws, I was actually more careful than what the law allowed.
I don't know about whether talking to the police officer was the right idea. Normally the best advice is not to say anything to the police, but you also have to know when you should say something. I figured by telling the truth about Ray and his September 11, 2001, rant, I'm thus poisoning the well and the officer would see Ray for what he is, a crackpot. And that the cop would be more likely to leave and report it as what it is, a crackpot trying to silence criticism of himself.
Besides, the things I've said about and to Ray can be easily found on Google Groups, I always stick to what's legal by not exaggerating anything about him - that's hard to do with a whackjob like Ray Gordon, his own conduct is so rancid it requires no embellishment - so I figure showing what this guy is like would let it be understood to others what he is. I also said the authorities where he lives know all about him.
I pointed out that I have no ill will toward him, my basic intent is to warn others on the newsgroup not to deal with him because he has the habit of attacking people who disagree with him or suing people in Federal court because he didn't like what they said. He's filed 7 cases in Federal court and lost every one.
I also said I wasn't bothered if Ray did try to have me prosecuted, I haven't violated the law and if it happened, after I win I will sue him and take everything he owns. And that he's libeled me more than once in the newsgroup.
I just remembered something else: I also pointed out (despite his claims to the contrary) he's never said one word to me complaining about what I wrote or ever asked me to stop saying anything.
I'm guessing the police officer got the point I was making, because he was courteous and left.
What surprised me was something I've mentioned publicly and to Ray over many years. It doesn't matter what he says or does on that newsgroup, since he's done nothing directly to me, I lack standing to do anything to him in court. If he doesn't do anything to me to give me standing, I am absolutely powerless to do anything to him in a court.
"Standing" is an important point in legal circles. You have to have a legitimate reason to sue someone. You have to have something to lose as a result of an action or event that grants you the privilege of suing them. Since nothing Ray has done really rises to the level of anything serious enough to give me standing, I have no grounds to sue him. "Plaintiff lacks standing to sue" is the court saying "don't let the screen door hit you on your way out."
But if Gordon Roy Parker sued me or if he filed a criminal complaint against me, and I end up being arrested over something meritless, then he grants me standing to come after him in court and sue him.
That it took six months for this to even come around tells me that this ain't a huge issue.
So we'll see what happens.
A federal judge said this about him, * "... upon consideration of Plaintiff Gordon Roy Parker's... continued and inexcusable failure..." Gordon Roy Parker v. "Wintermute" et. al. 02-CV-7215 (Feb. 25, 2003, Federal District Court, Eastern District, Pennsylvania)
When the judge said this, the only other reference on the Internet to "continued and inexcusable failure" was the UN clusterfuck in Kosovo that got people killed.
He also made it into the law books with another one of his cases, when the judge in that case said, "Plaintiff is... completely incomprehensible..." Gordon Roy Parker v. Google, Inc. 422 F. Supp 2d 492 (2006, E.D. PA) (He tried to sue Google for indexing his website, because he was too stupid to know about using "ROBOTS.TXT".)
Here's one of his really juicy comments he made once (not to me, though):
"[Y]ou can again go fuck yourself. I am too polite to get into detail about what I think is wrong with someone like you." - Ray Gordon, March 16, 2003
http://groups.google.com/groups?&selm=2 ... bj.aol.com
http://tinyurl.com/nhof