Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

Taking (at least part of) the day off

I’ve been publicly accused of serial harassment. J. Patrick Frey, a DDA from California, has made the public claims that I am responsible for “serial harassment” and that I was sent a cease and desist letter by my victim. I IMMEDIATELY AND WITHOUT RESERVATION asked him to release proof of these accusations. I gave permission for any documents to be released, waving any claim to privacy. I have denied that any of it is true.

No evidence has been offered. And Frey claims he hasn’t seen the emails or the letter. He won’t release the name of my supposed victim. He is suggesting that his reason for not releasing the name or the emails is that it would re-escalate the situation, forcing the victims to relive my assaults on them. Which of course is suggestive that these assaults took place to begin with — something he can’t and won’t prove. Because it never happened — at least, not with my involvement.

And yet he keeps making public the accusations.

He has now added to those false allegations by suggesting that I “edited” my list of email recipients since Nov of last year (which I did not) to excise the name of my supposed victims.

All of which has put me in the awkward position of having to try to prove a negative. None of my questions have been answered. Meanwhile, the accusations just hang there. As I’m sure they are supposed to do.

But I’m not one to be bullied by a guy who likes to use his prosecutorial persona as an online weapon. So I am going to spend the day looking into my options. Because if I don’t, I’m only delaying (as others have noted) the inevitable next instance of such behavior aimed at me. And I’ll listen to any advice from any of you. I’m particularly interested to know if the header info on emails can be faked. And if it can, would a prosecutor know how to do such things, or have at his disposal those who might? At this point, I’d put nothing past this guy. To save his “honor,” he’ll do or say anything, and it doesn’t seem to matter to him at all who gets hurt by it.

Still, remember: when it comes to proof of secretive email rants and creepy stalking behavior, only I have ACTUALLY supplied both.

As I’m doing all this, please remember that your government will spend an additional $72 billion today. And that those $6 billion in cuts we’re supposed to be clapping House leadership on the back for? Are largely symbolic, and are being used by the GOP to burnish its optics, even as their feckless leadership moves us ever closer to financial disaster.

45 Replies to “Taking (at least part of) the day off”

  1. Ernst Schreiber says:

    All of which has put me in the awkward position of having to try to prove a negative. None of my questions have been answered. Meanwhile, the accusations just hang there. As I’m sure they are supposed to do.

    Downright un-American of him if you ask me.

  2. cranky-d says:

    Email headers can be faked. An attorney is unlikely to know how to do that; it would take someone who knows a lot about email servers, I should think (I don’t know how to do it, as I’m a programmer, not a systems guy).

    I think the most likely scenario is that someone Frey knows as a fake internet friend made this story up and Frey ran with it. Or, even better, there is an unnamed completely made up third party involved, and the fake internet friend is an intermediary. There will be no emails, and certainly no letter, forthcoming at any time in the future.

  3. Sinner says:

    Email headers are shockingly easy to fake.

  4. Jeff G. says:

    Email headers are shockingly easy to fake.

    But server logs, etc., can show that they’ve been faked?

  5. Jim in KC says:

    But server logs, etc., can show that they’ve been faked?

    Theoretically, if they exist. And if you can successfully subpoena them.

  6. Jeff G. says:

    Jim —

    I meant my own.

    Here’s why all this matters. Another DDA from LA/Compton is running for District Attorney. I don’t know what kind of relationship (if any) she has with other DDAs working out of Compton, but as someone who has watched how Frey operates, I’d be terrified to think he could be given even more access to power. He clearly doesn’t care how he uses it.

  7. Molon Labe says:

    In discovery, you’ll easily be able to tell when the files were last modified once you get access to his computer.

  8. Squid says:

    As DDA Frey has already stated that some of his correspondence with “Wilson” and “Wilson’s Lawyer” was by telephone, I should think that a subpoena for DDA Frey’s telephone records over the past few days would quickly put this thing to rest. Pretty hard to fake phone logs.

  9. You COULD contact the LA DA’s office and file a complaint of “abuse under the color of authority”…

  10. Jeff G. says:

    I’ve contacted my host to ask about access to logs.

  11. Jim in KC says:

    No subpoena problems with your own logs, obviously.

    There could be other issues to deal with, though. Feel free to e-mail me and I’ll try to help out. This sort of thing falls directly into my wheelhouse, so to speak.

  12. cranky-d says:

    Anything that can be saved in a file can be faked, server logs included. However, one would need root access to do that while the file is still on the server, which is not something service providers give out very often. Once the log leaves the source, of course, it’s suspect.

  13. Jeff G. says:

    Here’s a thought. The person who I supposedly harassed can identify himself or herself. Hell, they can do it privately, if they’d like. Just hit “reply” to one of my harassing emails.

    Well?

  14. Blake says:

    Jeff,

    It’s possible to fake an email header. However, it’s very difficult to falsify records in order to make it look like an email has been sent from a specific email account.

    If I were going to back track this (I’m a systems guy) I’d first request the emails in order to get the time and date stamp from them. I’d also, of course, want to know what email account provider the emails came from.

    From there, I go to the the email account provider and see what kind of records they keep regarding sent emails. Specifically, your account.

    What could very well happen, though, is if the header isn’t faked properly, it’ll point to an email account that doesn’t even exist. Or to an account that has your name on it, but isn’t actually yours.

    It will be more tedious than difficult, I think.

  15. cranky-d says:

    Changing the time a file was last modified is easy. That is a very weak indicator evidence-wise.

  16. Jeff G. says:

    Thanks, Jim. I’m waiting to hear back from my host. I’ll contact you once I hear something and have more info.

  17. Squid says:

    If you’d like, I can send you any number of scurrilous accusations regarding Mr. Frey. You just have to promise you won’t reveal my identity, because I’ve heard that he’s one vindictive son of a bitch.

  18. Molon Labe says:

    cranky: I know but it’s the thought that counts.

  19. Shaitan says:

    Jeff, you’re a shit-magnet. First Frisch, then that musical douchebag from Tennessee, and now Frey.

    The good news is you do have a nice, loyal support group here.

  20. Jim in KC says:

    I’ll keep an eye out.

  21. JHoward says:

    a DDA from California

    Surely there are thousands of single dads out there to destroy.

    Oh, uncalled for? Sorry. I lost my tolerance for, as richard mcenroe said upthread, “abuse under the color of authority” years ago.

  22. LBascom says:

    Frey said:

    It’s quite frustrating to me, but then again, it’s my fault for saying something without having obtained permission to release the proof.

    That’s right counselor, you made an accusation without the proof. You are either a fool or a liar, which is it?

    Retract the accusation and apologize, or present the evidence.

  23. cranky-d says:

    I’ll keep an eye out.

    That reminds me of an old joke.

  24. Jeff G. says:

    It’s quite frustrating to me, but then again, it’s my fault for saying something without having obtained permission to release the proof.

    Tell me: does that not suggest that he’s at least seen the proof?

    Well, has he?

  25. LBascom says:

    “Retract the accusation and apologize, or present the evidence.”

    ‘Cuz, you know, that would be the honorable thing to do…

  26. Jim in KC says:

    That reminds me of an old joke.

    Heh.

    I’m not that kind of a girl, though…

  27. LBascom says:

    “Tell me: does that not suggest that he’s at least seen the proof?”

    Well, you would think an honorable man would would have at least wanted to see the proof before making the accusation, if not actually verify it, but, well, you know…

  28. Kevin says:

    “Are largely symbolic, and are being used by the GOP to burnish its optics…”

    I’ve seen Jeff use ‘optics’ in this way before, but I don’t understand it. Does he just mean ‘looks’? Or is it more than that?

    Thanks

  29. Pablo says:

    “…it’s my fault for saying something without having obtained permission to release the proof.”

    Tell me: does that not suggest that he’s at least seen the proof?

    Seems that way. Why would you even consider obtaining permission to release something you don’t have and have never seen? What would you release?

    As for Mr. Secret Victim, if he’s already sent you a C&D, what’s he worried about? Should you victimize him again, he can just walk his happy ass down to the courthouse and follow through on the C&D threat.

    I call bullshit, top to bottom. Frey is lying, period. Again, period.

  30. Silver Whistle says:

    I think by now he is so invested in his fictions about Jeff that he has to maintain this, at all costs. Prove him a liar here, and all his credibility goes. So, he’s in. Expect more lawyerly wriggles to evade what the meaning of “is” is.

  31. antillious says:

    I know it’s probably not easy, but I’d counsel you to be wary. Frey likes to push your buttons. I’m thinking he’s hoping to push you just far enough so say something that he can weasel into “DEATH THREAT”, or some such actionable thing.

    I mean, he (a DDA) is counselling you that in order to clear your own name, and find proof of your accuser, that you should violate a C+D. Really? An upstanding honourable man in pursuit of justice and truth is saying you should go directly against the terms of a C+D in order to find out what’s up? Sounds a bit entrapment-y. In fact that’s probably his hope, that you DO violate the supposed C+D, in order to once again prove that Jeff is a DANGEROUS PSYCOPATH, and why won’t he leave that poor poor family alone.

    My overall guess is that some third party posing as you was sending out these threatening emails. And THAT individual probably did recieve a C+D. Assuming via email. Otherwise I’d expect a hard paper trail showing exactly who recieved that letter. Registered mail and such.

  32. NukemHill says:

    Sounds like Jim has the expertise to help you out. I don’t know if there’s anything I can do to supplement, but if you need an extra head to bounce things off of, drop me a line.

    The log records on the sending and receiving servers should be subpoena’d immediately. Not like you need more legal bills, but you need to pursue this pretty rigorously. Yes, the logs could be modified, but it would take some work to cover the trail completely. And you should also go after the backups. Every host has them. And it’d be pretty damn difficult to rig those, as well.

    And, obviously, you can subpoena PattyCake, as well. I don’t know how quickly he’d be required to cough up his records, but you should be able to take all of the relevant computers away from him, which has a certain amount of schadenfreude attached to it, if nothing else! :-)

    There are other things you can do, but I’m hesitant to suggest them in a public forum, given our Antagonist’s obsession with you and your blog. Give me a shout if you’re interested.

  33. Ernst Schreiber says:

    One of the things to bear in mind is that this “allegation” started as a tu quoque: (e.g. “Jeff says I’m obsessed with him!? Oh yeah? Well I happen to know he’s been harrassing someone else at all hours of the night with disturbing e-mails about me! So who’s obsessed with whom here?”) (And for those keeping tabs, yes, my gloss of Rénaud’s words, so spare me the “I never said ‘Jeff says…'” bullshit.)

    It’s second hand rumor-mongering at best and deserves to be treated as such.

    Not very ethical, or responsible, blogging-wise. Which, come to think of it, is damn funny. Remember, this latest iteration of Rénaud’s eternal quest to go the full Marcus Porcius Cato on Jeff’s Carthaginian ass began with Rénaud accusing Jeff of unethical and irresponsible blogging regarding Jeff’s posting of a fucking headline.

  34. Seth says:

    Jeff, I work in the computer security field, so I can confirm what others have told you, namely that:

    *Emails are very easy to fake, and a simple google search will tell you how. Anyone could do it, if so inclined.

    *Faking file attributes and server logs takes quite some more knowledge, but still google is a friend here. What’s challenging about that sort of fakery is getting the proper file/server access. That access is gettable if you’re an administrator on that system…or a semi- to really talented hacker (depends on how “hardened” the system is).

    As for legal aspects, I’m not a lawyer, but we are trained in the broad strokes of the law in my position (as there are legal aspects to system administration and security). What you should know:

    * Could be libel – as it is a written statement (slander is spoken). You would have to prove that the statement was false, caused harm, and made without adequate research into its truth. The bad news is that those are awfully tough rows to hoe in a court.

    If you feel it’s libel, you need a lawyer. If you suspect altered/faked emails and server data was abetting the crime of libel, you need the police (they should have a cyber-crimes division). The sad truth is that due to the level of involvement required and the challenge of proof, this sort of thing doesn’t often go very far.

    Hope that you can get this sorted out one way or the other, and soon.

  35. antillious says:

    Earnst, you’ve struck on the funniest part of all this. I’m not obsessed with Jeff and here is all the detailed evidence I’ve painstakingly gathered over the last few months to prove it.

  36. dicentra says:

    I’d just like everyone to know that I used to work for Jimmer Fredette’s uncle.

  37. antillious says:

    Come to think of it, this is probably why the lawyer involved doesn’t want anything to come to light either. I mean, it’ll look real bad if it turns out that they sent a C+D to someone who isn’t Jeff. I mean, that would be the easiest thing to check on in this whole deal. Who was the C+D actually sent to if not Jeff? Confirm that, and you’re done.

    If I were that man’s lawyer, I’d be scrambling to make sure I hadn’t screwed up. Even if the emails were generated by a third party and spoofed Jeff, the lawyer screwed up if they didn’t get the C+D to Jeff. Or conversly, they screwed up and sent the C+D to the person who was actually sending the emails (without confirming that it was actually Jeff). So that lawyer is in a lose/lose situation.

    Heck, just ask the laywer to resend the C+D to Jeff (or Jeff’s laywer). That should clear up a whole lot.

  38. You can spoof the from address, but these days spoofing the whole header and having it delivered is pretty tough. Right now I could send you an email from BarryO@pres.us.gov, but it’s in all probability going to go into your SPAM folder, junk mail, or be blocked completely. Most ISP’s nowadays use some kind of email authentication or reverse lookup, and most companies blacklist open relays. Not only that, but our guy would have to be sophisticated enough that he remembered to change the return path so that Jeff didn’t get the replies. So he’d probably have access to a spambot out there somewhere, or he’s just got an amazing and depressing amount of time on his hands… oooo… wait. Doesn’t Jeff know a super 133t haxor?

  39. McGehee says:

    I’ve heard that he’s one vindictive son of a bitch.

    I’m sure I’ve mentioned this before, but long ago and thus not seen by all who are here now. Back in 2002, I believe it was, or maybe 2001, I had a prosecutor tell me something to my face, in public, that I perceived as possibly a veiled threat of false prosecution. If I were the sort to meet provocation with counter-provocation I would have told him to go for it.

    In retrospect, he was just spouting off, something I gather he has subsequently learned to keep under control, at least in public. Since then, he and I have mended fences and I even advocated his re-election a couple of years back.

    Ironically, if Fried were somehow to attempt something like any of this BS against me, I’d almost certainly be able to get this other prosecutor to offer advice and introductions to help me fight it. There’s a lot to be said, especially where an asshole like Fried is concerned, for having connections of your own.

  40. Seth says:

    LMC: yep. No doubt about it, digital forgery is easy, but good digital forgery isn’t.

  41. Squid says:

    So, should Ia guy I know tell Jeff that a certain unnamed DDA has shown signs of being a:

    A) Kiddie-diddler
    B) Wife-beater
    C) Substance-abuser
    D) Stalker with a vendetta
    E) Douche big enough to leave Lady Gaga smelling fresh as a spring breeze

    READER POLL!

  42. DarthLevin says:

    Squid, only if “that guy you know” has PROOF PROOF PROOF that you never see and that “he” can’t show you.

  43. Squid says:

    Trust me, Darth, this guy’s totally on the up-and-up. Doesn’t matter how strange the story might sound, you just know he’s got the goods to prove it. And his reputation is so sterling that for me even to ask to see the proof would be a grave insult, and far be it from me to spit in the face of my trusted friend.

  44. Blitz says:

    Ok Ok Ok, It was me…I mean all the ‘thank’ you Blitz emails were ok, but the Thank you “Edward” one drove me over the top. I don’t have a wife, but my kitteh was really pissed off too.

    I haz PROOF I tells ya…PROOF!!!

Comments are closed.