Tomorrow Is Another blog? Not with Cyber Bullies around, you know

Revised! Two weeks ago, I closed my other blog. The URL and front page are still up, so that the cyber bullies can't use the address—one of them used to grab discarded URLs. I am posting the blog's final entry here as well. This is a more appropriate site for it.

The other night I was tidying my desk drawer and came across a printout of Thomas Churchwell's Diagnostic Assessment, dated July 16, 2008 and written by his psychiatrist, Dr. Alkesh Patel, ACT Team Psychiatrist for Services For The Underserved. Posted by Churchwell himself, it was a stunner. I had forgotten much of it, including this quote:

"This 44 y/o Caucasian male has a long history of psychosis as well as a history of chemical dependency. The patient has a history of multiple hospitalizations."

That paragraph clarifies why he has victimized me (and others) for three years.

In college my major was psychology, though I am a photographer by profession. Yet I think Churchwell's latest hate rant, in which he says again that I "stole pictures off the Internet", am stalking him, work at Walmart, am jealous of Susan, and many other loony lies—forecasts another hospitalization for him.

Anybody want to help him pack?

If you think Thomas Churchwell's blog revolves around BIG LIES, you are right. Lies and contradictions, as he toggles back and forth between grandiosity and libel attacks, between posting lewd pictures and professing outrage over lewdness, between claims of being victimized and victimizing others, between bragging about his anti-social experiences and claiming that he "catches" people in "shameful" behavior, and so on. If you have read any of his posts, then you know that he is the most blatant liar who ever drew breath.

Psychotic people have always existed. They have been studied using various techniques, such as the technique Churchwell's psychiatrist used to diagnose him, and through the years their problems have been blamed on various causes. But one thing never varies: all anti-social people share four common characteristics. They are all very egocentric, they have no empathy for others, they are incapable of feeling remorse, and they are manipulative.

Psychotics are unable to get along in society, so they look for a niche where they can dominate others, and often find it on the Internet. Not all psychotic people are cyber bullies, but if they happen to have both problems, and are predominantly heterosexual, they inevitably victimize women. They have an uncanny talent for spotting nice women. Churchwell certainly found one, when he met me on a message forum three years ago.

He has proved in his writings that he doesn't think rationally. Yet there is something very deliberate, very black and cold blooded about his libel. Whether it reflects some long ago trauma at the hands of a woman, so that I (and others) got cast in the unwanted role of "substitute meanie," or he was born this way, is anyone's guess.

You can read what an expert has to say about bullies who hate women here.

The giveaway is how he libels people for no rhyme or reason, and if one of his victims defends herself against his lies, he immediately libels her again. When caught in a lie and challenged, he makes up new lies. This contradictory behavior—attacking people and playing the outraged victim, when in fact he is the victimizer—sums up his entire blogging history.

From The Mask Of Sanity:

One almost amusing example of how psychopaths lie can be exemplified by a man whose footprint was discovered at the scene of the crime. "No, that's not my foot" he said, even though everyone knew he was lying.

This is how psychopaths operate. They will deny reality until their victims have a nervous breakdown. Often, the psychopath will turn on the victim and claim that the victim is the liar and is not mentally stable...

Churchwell's psychosis is on parade on this site. Go there, if you think you can stomach it.

Like other anti-social people, he has never kept a job for long. His old girlfriend relates that he couldn't even keep a Santa Claus in a department store job for more than a day. According to her, he lost his marbles after he and other store employees were filmed for a segment that was to air on a local TV channel. The camera guy got only one distant shot of Churchwell, and no one recognized him on TV. Next day, he refused to get out of bed.

It was much the same when he was hired as a 'table-hopper' magician in a club, where he worked only a brief time. He had a slightly longer stint as a pickpocket on the street. So, the very thought of working, or competing in the business world with other men and with women, is anathema to Churchwell. Of course, he has no time to earn a living anyway, since he is hard at work being a cyber bully.

Here are links to my posts addressing the diabolical lies he writes about me, in no particular order. I am so done blogging about this crap:

The phone message lie
The child porno writer lie
The Susan and I are the same person lie
The "I never threatened to kill her" lie
The I go to his blog lie
The hate blogger lie.
The nudie pictures lie
The photo thief lie
The stalker lie
The attacking his family lie

If I have forgotten a lie, readers, just read my whole blog.

I cannot think of a more fitting way to end my blog than with the information about his psychosis. Yes, I am leaving the blogs. At some point I might return. With a private blog and an alias.

After dealing with his appalling behavior for three years, I have come to a conclusion: Even though he lacks deep-seated emotions and empathy, people like Churchwell relate to others through power and control. I wrote this blog to defend myself against his repulsive libel, but he saw it as an attempt to "demean" his power and control. He also made himself appear in control by stating that he "kicked" me into the "garbage", when the truth is that I broke off those long ago conversations, not him. Later on, he told Blogland that I was a liar, pornographer, thief, hater and stalker (see the above links) after I had lost sleep, time, and suffered so much that I ended up in a hospital with pleurisy because of his abuse.

I want to share with you what happened to a friend of mine from the UK. She had been communicating for over a year with a man who lived in Florida, and during the time of their correspondence and phone calls, he seemed so "sweet, caring, and kind." She mentioned how he had grieved over his dead wife, and so on.

This man asked my friend to marry him, and, to top it off, he promised her that he had a terrific job lined up for her in the city where he lived.

Well, my friend believed him and came to the United States to marry him.

At their first meeting she mentioned how it was the beginning of the end, and she should have seen it coming. She told him, after they met at the airport, that she needed to make a phone call, but instead of letting her use his cell phone, he coldly told her to use the pay phone. My friend noticed how this contradicted his warm personality on the phone and in emails. She said she was shocked, but being naive, she nevertheless married him.

As the weeks went by, things got worse. She found out that he had lied about the job. Next, she began to get phone calls from two women in Canada who told her that her new husband had been inviting them (via online chats) to live with him. My friend was distraught and told these women that he was lying to them. The women didn't believe it (why do women tend to doubt another woman when she is trying to warn them?), so my friend said, "If you want proof that I am married to him, come down here and you can see the proof for yourselves."

Eventually, she learned from his family that Mr. Wonderful was a pathological liar who had a long history of using women and having his mother cover his tracks. I don't want anyone else to go through what my friend and I experienced. It is my hope that through the many websites that address cyberbullying, more women will become informed and not become victims themselves.

Today, Churchwell has been relatively calm, after having received a "narcissistic hit" from this post. The high will wear off, and he will try to get another reaction. When he rants again, I won't bother to defend myself—it's a losing battle anyway. I will ignore it. If you are a blogger and the victim of a cyber bully, I hope you will do the same, out of respect not only for your readers, but also for yourself.

Before I go...if you have wondered what happened to the timely Breaking News parody blog, it can be viewed in the Google Reader. Of course, you already knew this, if you are a subscriber. If not a subscriber, go to Google, sign in, then click on "Reader" from the drop down list, and enter this URL in the "add subscriptions" bar: http:// thomaschurchwell-breakingnews.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default. Note: The blog was killed off last October, so my subscription link may not work for you. Churchwell himself likes to take credit for the murder, but who knows?

Now, the post telling why I closed my other blog:

May 15, 2009. This is an unpleasant topic, and I am going to spend as little time on it as possible. The operative word is "try", because I am a talkative soul by nature.

A friend of mine started a blog a few years ago, and was attacked by a very nasty bully in her first week. His vicious comments shook her up so badly that she closed the blog down. In her case, it was a drive-by bully, the kind of nastiness that she characterized as a zoo animal screeching at anyone walking by its cage. Random meanness. I wholly respected my friend's decision to quit, but I also believed (then) that you DON'T STOP blogging because of a cyber bully.

Bullies are unhappy, bored, disturbed, or just plain mean enough to want to take it out on someone else. Bullies are looking for a diversion from their own misery. They will take any attention they can get, even if it's negative attention. Ignoring them doesn't make them go away.

For three years I have been stalked by two persistent bullies. One is a woman. She is obsessed with the other bully. Fully aware of his hatred for me (and the rest of the world), she is not above using dirty tricks to get attention from him. Among her tricks, she has written emails to him in my name and posted comments in my name, and ADMITTED it. She goads him into attacking me. What makes her a bit unusual is that she can switch loyalties in the blink of an eye. Just as she is capable of attacking me, she is every bit as capable of reviling him, and has done so exhaustively on her blogs, and other sites. If this description of her sounds like a contradiction, she is that. You never know where you stand with Susan.

You might be new here and thinking: Oh, boy, two women are having a cat fight! Wrong. Anyone who has read the blogs knows that I am NOT a combative blogger. Susan, on the other hand, lives to fight. Go to gretawire.blogs.foxnews.com and you will see one vile put down after another of hers using the aliases Sammie, Deb, Kay and Jane, among other names. She regularly slams the women commenters on that board for no reason and even attacks the journalist and blogmaster, Greta Susteren, who has called her a "miserable person".

Though Susan and the other (main) bully, Thomas Churchwell, don't have jobs, both work hard at slurring the reputations of other people. Today, Susan, having nothing else to do, found a post on some blog and accused me of plagiarizing it. She flooded my inbox with vindictive emails all day, sent copies of every email to Bully No. 1, and even wrote that my dog doesn't exist.

To understand why she came unhinged again, you have to know what happened yesterday. I stumbled upon a Tweet of hers, via a link to my blog that I saw on my site meter. When I clicked on her page, I saw this:

Enjoying Churchwell's photos.
12:42 PM Apr 4th from web

Isn't it mind boggling that she complemented his photos, considering that she so often blogs about his “crappy pictures” and has written many jealous sounding comments—plus two or three derogatory blogs—about those girls who pose for him?

The sad thing is, all I did was disagree when she tried to pass off her Tweet as "sarcasm". To anyone who can read English, the phrase "enjoying churchwell's photos" is a complement, and Susan was, I think, embarrassed and pissed that I saw it, figuring I never would see it, since I don't go to that site, or maybe she just forgot it was on her page.

And her accusation one day later that I plagiarized a blog post? See the paragraph above. Also, this was an excuse for her to email the other bully. She did the same thing when she attacked me last fall. "I hope you're going to write a post about Scarlett," she hissed at him in notes, wanting him to attack me. I would not intentionally use another author's post, though I have seen it happen, innocently enough, on others' blogs many times. Like many who use the Internet daily, I read, absorb, AND retain a lot of material, so it's possible that something I read found its way into a post. So, shoot me, bully. No one cares if I made a mistake, because my tiny amoeba of a blog is so under the radar it's not even funny.

Susan's hypocrisy is astonishing. Why? Because she admitted to me once that she copied some author's post to her suzispeaks site, and published it as her own. This was in the fall of 2007.

The reason I'm even giving it a voice is because SHE NEEDS TO LOOK IN THE FRICKING MIRROR.

On two separate occasions she has attacked me. Outrageous, mean and nasty attacks, considering that I did NOTHING to warrant them, never said one negative thing about her before that (that old phone message, in which I referred to her as a "fifth grader" for writing the first blog about Churchwell, was private until Churchwell gleefully posted it). Her public attack on me last fall took mean to a whole new level. It was just breathtakingly mean. And I was in fact going through a difficult time, and she made me feel like shit. LIBELING me an “alleged photographer" "hatemonger" and "Southern bigot," as she did then, might be worse than calling me a plagiarist. It's hard to say.

Though I knew about her love-hate obsession for the other bully, I was out and out stunned the first time I found out that she betrayed me. Today, it was just as galling, though it doesn't hurt. She's just one of those who is going to attack ANYONE who questions her motives about Churchwell. As a bully she is not quite as culpable as him. But she may be more duplicitous, because she has written about a million blog comments and emails and made about a million phone calls pretending to be my friend.

She is a bully and a betrayer. Not a friend. And frankly, I don't give a flying rat's ass about her opinion, or Churchwell's.

Last December, I tried to go my merry way. I wanted to have a nice blog. In the sidebar I put this saying: 'When a person has had an experience with pure evil, it is important to thoughtfully bring goodness back into life.' But, hey, I didn't want to ruffle the main bully's feathers by doing too much more than trying to keep up the blog. So, I wrote just a few defense posts on my other site, foolishly believing they would stem his libel. Meanwhile, I continued to blog here with roses and buttercups in my heart.

Until he started attacking me here also. Which he has done with stunning regularity. Yet, I MOSTLY left it alone, and asked the friends I emailed to leave it alone, as well. I even played nice when Susan commented on my site and when she said a few days ago that she listed me as a friend on her Twitter or Facebook account. Her double face galls me.

To sum up this post so far: Today, Bully No. 1 moved back a tier, and the other bully moved forward.

Just how long can an average person take abuse from a cyber bully? My friend, who closed her blog, couldn't take it more than a week. Sadly, when children and teens can't take it anymore, some commit suicide. I have endured it for three years. Bully No. 1 started attacking me in 2006 for no reason. Bullies target women who are nice. When I wrote my first defense post, Bully No. 1 stepped up his attacks. I was so sick after those attacks, I ended up in the hospital for three days. Those kind of attacks easily could have KILLED me.

As for other unsavory aspects of blogging: petty jealousies, cat fights, symbiosis and the rest, I NEVER wanted any of it. If a site I read has some melodrama brewing, I go on to the next feed. When Bully No. 1 put his dirty footprints all over my comment section, I sent his abuse to its own site. You didn't find melodrama happening on this site, because I simply didn't want it.

I'm so freaking done. I'm tired of being polite and taking the high road and being called names by cyber bullies. I'm tired of being betrayed. Susan, by chasing Churchwell for three years, has done more harm to female cyber victims than she will ever understand. I'm tired of delusional Bully No. 1 lying to ensure that people don't like me. Libeling me ad nauseum because he DOES NOT know how to let anything go. And because he has the self-esteem of a flea and wants to make sure that he trashes other people to build himself up.

I think right now that there are some really bad people who blog. BAD ugly sad people. People who are miserable and want to shift the blame off their own sad little lives onto me. People who live to bully.

Go fuck yourselves, you sad, mean people. And please, don't ever bother me again. I don't want to know you, I don't want your emails, and I don't want to even know you're alive.

To everyone else reading this final post, if I have another blog, it will be PRIVATE. This means that you will have a user name and password to read it. I am not trying to scare you away. I'm just saying that if you are unable to substantiate who you are, or refuse to do so, I wouldn't add you even if your name is Donald and your address is Trump Tower. Believe me. You will not be reading another blog of mine if you think it's okay to be pals with a hater.

Finally, to the REAL PEOPLE and FRIENDS who took the time to read my blogs, I sincerely thank you for showing up.

Many Women Are Stalked

This is the face of a victim. To read her story, click here.

David Ahntholz for The New York Times

Three Years Later...Churchwell Still Spewing Lies About Old Phone Message

Update! So much for giving it the old college try. Last week, I closed the comment section on this blog, hoping this would end Thomas Churchwell's stalking. It didn't. He just took his stalking show on the road, to my other blog, where he has continued to write abuse and threaten me. You can read some of it here.

It appears he wants everyone to know that being a stalker is the only thing he really knows how to do. Today, he went back to GretaWire and posted this crap:

churchwell says:
April 8, 2009

The voice of a stalker who has been stalking my family for 3 years. She found my phone number and is leaving messages like we are friends. Here her say stuff like, “You took me off your IM” yes because she was a freak stalking my family and sending us pictures of nude children. Yikes

Thomas Churchwell is a liar. It's been three years since I had any phone contact with him, yet he is still spinning those long ago conversations and publishing grotesque sexual lies about me. He has proved again and again that he is a stalker by continuing to play my old phone message on the Internet. Now, he is playing another three-year-old message about those pictures he wanted! What kind of person does this for three years? A real man doesn't broadcast private phone messages. Ever. He doesn't rape women's souls by posting their pictures after they have asked him to stop. Has he no shame? No self-respect? No guts to say "No way" to the one who eggs him on with a "Go get her, Thomas"? What will his psychiatrist make of his latest aberrant behavior? Just what steps will he have to take to control Churchwell's hate? Evidently, the patient wants to be locked up again.

People flagged his filth comment on GW, which automatically threw any replies into 'comment moderation.' So, here is the reply:

"The wonderful Scarlett spent a couple of weeks chatting on the Internet with this loser back in 2006. When she realized he was a liar, she ended their chats and threw away the phone number he had given her. That is the truth. However, Churchwell wasn't about to let her go. The day after she ended the conversations, he attacked her on his blog. He has never stopped.

To read more about his stalking, go here.

Make no mistake, Scarlett is not his only victim. There have been others (males, too), but Scarlett received the brunt of the abuse, because she had the conversations with him. Let's be very clear. This was not a love affair or a friendship. Perhaps it truthfully can be described in retrospect as a few conversations between a Narcissist and a Supplier. Whatever it was, ended, but it never ended for Churchwell, despite what he would have you believe.

Now when Scarlett was talking to him, she didn't know about his child porn obsession. All she knew of his sexual life was that he liked phone sex, if lurid talk and fantasies that included strangling her with a scarf while having sex were any sign. The other thing she knew was that he desperately wanted her to send him nude pictures of herself. She finally put pictures of unknown topless women on the IM for him to ogle, and he copied them to his computer. It is worth noting again that the women's faces had been cropped by the anonymous, uncredited persons who snapped the pictures. For more about the pictures, click here.

The topless women in the pictures were obviously not children, though he may have wished they were children. Click here, here, here, here, here, and here to read about his obsession for child porn.

Recently, he wrote of his libel about Scarlett, "To be quite frank, I'm having fun." To read more about his sadism, go here.

Could the hate hobbyist really think that people are too stupid to get what Scarlett was saying in that old phone message? Here is the gist of it: Scarlett was upset because Churchwell had accused her of being Susan. Susan was writing a nasty blog about him (incidentally, it was the first blog ever written about him) and Scarlett had nothing to do with it. Needless to say, she didn't like being accused over and over of writing Susan's nasty blog. She was fed up.

For a brief summary of lies he told her, go here.

It is telling that he cut off the end of the message, when Scarlett said, "You should check yourself into a hospital." If you listen closely, you can hear the first syllable of "hospital"; the rest of the word was snipped. But even though he snipped it (and will snip the entire sentence, after reading this), he left his cackle. Here was a woman who clearly was upset, but also was trying to help him, and he was laughing at her! A real sicko, yes. He should have checked himself into a hospital before ever having online conversations with anyone!

He is so callous, so uneducated and classless, he sees nothing wrong with laughing at a woman who is crying.

Us women want to believe that men are precisely who they tell us they are. Men have these feelings about us, as well, but women generally are a bit slower to face the realities of deception. This is partly due to the knight in shining armor fairy tale, which to this day, little girls are brought up to believe wholeheartedly. When Scarlett began to realize that Churchwell was the farthest thing from a knight that there could ever be, she said in the phone message, ‘You’re losing the best thing you ever had.’ As parting words go, those didn't blaze any trails. They are words that have been uttered by men and women since the beginning of time, no doubt. Yet Churchwell the wacko says they are the words of a "stalker!" He doesn't want anyone to dwell on the true content—that Scarlett was fed up with his crazy accusations that she was Susan. Likewise, he never mentions in his rants that Scarlett had caught him in several big lies. Summing up, if you have read his disgusting blogs, you know that no woman on God's green earth would stalk Churchwell, unless she happens to dig misogyny, lying, manipulation, felonies, sexual perversion, grandiosity, a past littered with short-term relationships and living on welfare. Once Scarlett put down the fairy tale, she was able to see him as he really is.

Significantly, he has kept her voice on his computer (let's not even contemplate what he does to himself while he listens to it) and has played her phone message on the Web for 3 fricking years! That's a long time to obsess over a woman who wants nothing to do with you, a long time to exploit a woman's pain and chew sour grapes. What does this appalling behavior say about Thomas Churchwell? To everyone except himself (and ilk), it says that he is a bully, a loon and a stalker."

That was the comment that didn't make it into GW due to his own comment being flagged. Just as well. GW is a political news blog. "Open blog" on GW does not mean, hey, troll, come on over and take a dump on a nice woman. The fact that Thomas Churchwell feels entitled to dump on women proves what he is, and it isn't pretty.

I wrote this post not as an explanation, or to give "my side" of my own phone message—though who could be more qualified to discuss it than me? Rather, I posted the truth about it, which some of you didn't know before reading this post. For a long time I was stunned and horrified that a man could do this to a woman. I didn't grow up around people (trash) like him. I didn't know to deal with it.

Today, I set the record straight.

For more truth about Thomas Churchwell, go here:
http://churchwelldumpingground.blogspot.com

Here’s a link to Scarlett’s other blog. You will see that she is a terrific person.

http://scarlett-tomorrowisanotherblog.blog

BTW, we suspect Thomas Churchwell's perverted outburst on GW today was another smokescreen to draw attention away from recent pictures he posted of a magician.

In Loony Land With THOMAS CHURCHWELL

It's better to try to laugh than cry...

Scene: A street corner somewhere in New Hamphire circa 1920. A youngster of 17 stands under a gas light on a cold, foggy night, blinking at girls passing by. Soon he spots a lone maiden, pretty and quite demure. He leans into her face and blurts that he is looking for a girl to libel. Not knowing what libel is, but terrified nonetheless, the girl utters a blood-curdling scream and runs away. The youngster's name is Thomas Churchwell. He has strawberry blond hair that he wears in a mullet. He has beady eyes. He is short. Today he was expelled from the tenth grade after he was caught in a lying frenzy. Then, he ran away from home. An alert newspaper reporter riding down the street recognizes him from a recent mug shot. "Whoa, Bessie!" he cries. Climbing down from his buggy, the reporter pulls out a sheet of parchment paper from his overcoat, and a quill, then tethers his snow white horse to the gas light pole. He walks over to the youngster.

Reporter: So, Thomas, today you were expelled from high school due to a lying frenzy then you ran away from home. What are you going to do now?

Thomas: I'm going to Loony Land!

The end.

The above "story" is fiction, just like all the posts on Thomas Churchwell's blog. I have never laughed so hard in my life as when I read his latest piece of fiction about me in the Reader.

This summary shows why:

• On the Cape Cod blog, I sent ONE introductory email to him, because he supposedly was prostrate with grief over Christa Worthington's murder, and I felt sorry for him. Little did I know that he was using her death to get attention. This was unfortunate for me.

• He was never mentioned in the Cape Cod trial.

• I wasn't even AWARE of "SuziQ" until he brought her nasty blog to my attention, his voice choked with persecution. Later, when he accused me of being SuziQ (Susan), I was shocked, hurt and angry beyond belief.
  

• He EXPLAINED how to set up the Yahoo IM, step by step. I knew nothing about instant messaging, had never used it, or even heard of it, until he said, "Let's talk on the IM."

• I did NOT ask for his phone number. He eagerly gave me his number and asked me to call him.

• My first conversation with him was certainly NOT about phone sex. Once again, he is mixing me up with someone else.
  

• I called him several times in NH? Au contraire. He called ME from the bus station, and when I didn't answer, because I was at work, he instant messaged me in a snit. After he reached his destination, he called again.
  

• I did NOT call about his homely date. I emailed a friendly query, after he posted a picture of her on his blog for me to see. Why did he do that? Because he wanted a reaction from me.
  

• Still in NH, he turned on the IM one night at 2AM to see if I was there, saw my name, and satisfied, tiptoed back to bed, he says. I don't know which part of that is the funniest. It's all hysterical.

• Again with the SHAME filled self-flagellation over "nude" pictures? Really, he needs to look into this with a competent shrink. He made a huge, disgusting mistake when he pressured me for "crotch shots," and made matters worse when he announced his disappointment over not getting any. But I wasn't scarred for life, and neither was he. He should have apologized three years ago and moved on!

• I did NOT send him 1970 pictures, unless I sent him my baby picture. I don't think I did.

• I did NOT ever, ever, ever say that I wanted to visit him in NY. He asked if he could come HERE, which startled me, since he was a total stranger on the Internet. He wanted to move in with me "for a few weeks" he told me, just like he did with Christa, Jamie and Laurie. He told me that he wanted to IMPREGNATE me!

• I did NOT say "I want to have a relationship with you." I would never say that to anyone! Where does he get this hackneyed dialog? Sounds like he copied it from an Archie comic book.

• Now, the next two lies made me laugh the hardest. He says that I "begged" him for phone sex and he replied: "Ok, go ahead." Then, he says: "I was just trying to get it over with." *hand clapped to forehead* So, THAT'S why he came three times in one day! He was just trying to get it over with...LMFAO!!!!!!!!!!!

One thing is not funny. The fact that Thomas Churchwell is still obsessed and lying about conversations that happened three fricking years ago.

He really should move on. And stop messing with the truth. Facts don't change, no matter how long he tries to spin them in Loony Land!

Blog Comments Closing

As the victim of a stalker, I have read a lot on the subject of cyber stalking. I have learned that experts have different opinions as to whether it's better to speak out against a stalker's lies, or ignore them.

The general consensus is slightly tipped toward silence, the theory being that if you respond to a stalker, he will take that as encouragement; whereas if you say nothing, he may go away eventually. Most stalkers - 90% - are men.

I can't fathom Churchwell going away, because stalking is just about the only thing he does every day.

I can't picture him being anything in life except a stalker, though wouldn't it be fantastic if he proved me wrong?

For now, I'm closing the comment section on this blog to give myself some relief from Churchwell's non-stop harassment.

If you want to read the abuse that he has been sending to this blog, here's a link:

http://churchwelldumpingground.blogspot.com

MANY READ POSTS ABOUT THOMAS CHURCHWELL

Update! Sometimes, the best response to lunacy is: keep it simple. I hereby present 'before and after' screenshots of a page from the Google Reader, captured for this blog half an hour ago.

The first shot shows a blue square in the bottom left side of the graph along with three blue spikes, representing the days when I posted on my blog. Additionally, there is a small orange square that says "items read," but there are no orange spikes. Why? Because the Reader shows activity in the Reader. Since I had not viewed any of my "items" (Google's word for posts) in the Reader prior to making the first screenshot, the first graph didn't register an orange spike.

You can click on the image to enlarge it:

BEFORE:

Moments later, I scrolled through all of the posts, then clicked on "show details" again, and the result is the shot below. Big orange spike.

AFTER:

Summing up, the graph has nothing whatsoever to do with traffic on a blog. It is not a site meter. Rather, it shows the number of posts that you have viewed in the Reader.

In case the bored stalker accuses me of doctoring these screenshots (like I would know how to do that), I invite everyone to do a 'before and after' test of any blog in the Reader. You will get the same result as the one pictured above.

Random thought: Perhaps the bully is doing what his last girlfriend (from 1990) said he did about practically anything. She said that if he was staring at white, he would call it black and would refuse to drop a rant even in the face of irrefutable proof. Obviously, his personality disorders have worsened since he was with her, suggesting that his fixations have also worsened.

March 29- Stalker Thomas Churchwell sent a comment to my blog tonight, telling me to go to his hate site (like that would ever happen) because he found a graph in Google Reader that shows I have no readers. No readers? The truth is, I have more readers than ever - they are packed into the nose bleed seats now, and this largely is due to Churchwell pimping my blog (in nefarious ways) all over the Web.

Thomas Churchwell's Hate Comments Went Out For Cigarettes and Never Came Back

March 28- Today, cyber stalker Thomas Churchwell exposed a stunning fact (said with sarcasm): He wrote that I edit my blog posts. Yes, and he fabricated posts that I never wrote.

I hereby post today's lesson about writing. I sometimes edit my posts, both on this blog and on my other blog. Why? Because I am striving to be a better writer. One of the problems with the Blogspot format is that the Preview feature sucks, so the best way for me to tell if a post is okay, or not, is by posting it. Oh, and do I need to add that this is my blog, which means I can edit it any time I please? I didn't think so.

Isn't it just too bad the bully won't edit HIS posts-and himself-out of the blogsphere?

Class dismissed.



March 23- Over the weekend, a few of us were discussing the hundreds of abusive and threatening blog comments that I have received from Thomas Churchwell over the past month.

Starting today, his comments will be routed to another site and reviewed by someone else.

The site will be a dumping ground.

The link:

http://churchwelldumpingground.blogspot.com/

A Pile Of Evidence

March 17- This morning, Thomas Churchwell accused me of emailing one of the teenage girls who recently posed for lewd pictures in his apartment. While sending her a warning might be advisable, given his claim that she is just 16, I did not email her. He also accused me this morning of writing a blog about this girl. I have heard there is a blog being written about underage "models", or a blog written by them, but I had nothing to do with it.


Thomas Churchwell rejects reality. He lives alone but is monitored - not closely enough, it would seem. Due to his personality disorders (he posted his diagnosis on his blog last summer), he apparently is unable to hold a job, and spends his days writing cruel, jealous lies about female bloggers. Recently, he has been impersonating me on dozens of websites, including GretaWire, writing despicable comments in my name about the mentally ill. I found out about this when my mailbox was flooded with confirmation emails to sites and newsletters that he had subscribed me to. When not writing hate and taking snap shots of teenagers in their underpants, he is idle. He has no apparent goal in life except to type the word "hate" a billion times before he dies. I mention all of this again, because his life paints an ugly picture of someone who has no credibility.

He would have you believe that I am classless, ignorant and criminally-minded like him. But in reality, I am a very nice woman (though not a pushover), a loyal friend, and I was a devoted daughter. I loved a man who struggled with manic depression. I don't hate anybody. I am a college graduate and hold an upper graduate degree in the fine arts. People say I'm pretty (though I often don't believe them), I work hard at my craft and have a relationship with a nice man who has made something of himself. I am repulsed by men who bully women.

Conversely, I've never been in jail, or beaten and blinded anyone, or been diagnosed by 17 psychiatrists, or had children who I abandoned (he denies the existence of two of his children, yet his ex-girlfriend says there are three); I have never loafed through life aimlessly attacking innocent women on blogs. This is Thomas Churchwell's resume. The only one he has.

A man who attacks a woman physically or verbally is a creep. There are no exceptions and no excuses.

Like other stalkers, Thomas Churchwell attacks to get attention. I think this is the reason he refuses to stop. He has to know that if he stopped, everyone would praise God for peace and never write another word about him! There would be no reason to continue this blog, if he would just stop.

I saw in the Google Reader that he posted this today, among other eye rolling crap:

"My wordpress blog was successfully hacked and taken over by cyber bully Scarlett S and I reported it last week. She seemed to manage to get in and write horrible things pretending to be me to justify her writing hatred on her site about me and my business."

No wonder people call Thomas Churchwell a nasty liar. First of all, I don't know how to "hack" a blog. Secondly, I haven't been to his awful blogs in more than two years. He threatened to hack MY blog a week ago. That is the truth. Let's be very clear about his Wordpress hate site. He closed it himself right after he published the death threats. Now, he is trying to disavow even writing them! Shows you that he is plenty scared.

I enjoy writing. This is why I created another blog late last year, where I am able to disengage from the stench and write the kind of posts that I have always wanted to write. I hope you will visit me, by the way. The link is at the top of the sidebar. But I truly loathe writing about Thomas Churchwell. His lies are so destructive, so vicious and offensive that I sometimes post a rebuttal to set the record straight in cyberland. It is never fun. I have asked him on this blog to stop stalking my blogs, to stop his cowardly cyber pranks and libel, and go away forever.

I thought it would be a good idea to post one of Thomas Churchwell's recent death threats on my blog. The reason I am putting it here is to assist the police, who are being inundated with links to my blog, according to Churchwell. The mayor of my town, who Churchwell states he will soon contact, as part of "March Madness" month (his new phrase for terrorizing me, dear readers) will no doubt be interested in the threat, as will the FBI.

They will see that this blog is not being written by a bully or a hater of the mentally ill, or any of the other strange, projected labels that Churchwell affixes to my name. It is a blog written by me, stating the absolute truth about Churchwell's long time harassment and threats.

Today, he impersonated me on Greta Susteren's Fox News blog, writing hate comments in my name against the mentally ill, then linked his libel to this site. How did I find out? I found out when my mailbox was suddenly filled with emails from GretaWire. He also used my email address on other sites today, and subscribed me to a bunch of creepy newsletters. This is the type of immature, anti-social behavior that Thomas Churchwell engages in all the time.

He has written literally hundreds, if not thousands, of defamation posts about me. He floods this inbox, and my other inbox, with hundreds of disturbing comments. But death threats are a different ball game. I have a pile of threats from this week alone. A pile of evidence.

You see, I found out that local police rarely do anything about these situations, until the stalker shows up at a victim's house, or worse, has killed her. But I am not daunted, because Thomas Churchwell has been broadcasting his brand of terrorism to the world, and eventually, he will accidentally link my blog to someone who will bring him to justice for threatening my life.

From his Wordpress site:

I would shoot her until the gun was empty Mar 9, 2009
from CHURCHWELL by churchwell

A fan emailed me and ask me what I would do if I found out who she really was. My response is: “I would shoot her 1000 times even after she was dead I would continue to shoot.”
March 10, 2009 1:07 PM

Sicko.

Thomas Tarquin Churchwell and Kids

Attention New (Greta Wire) Readers: I heard that Thomas Churchwell, a stalker on my blog, has been saying the author of my blog is Susan a/k/a Suzi. That is a stupid lie. My name is Scarlett, and I am the only author.

Update: Thomas Churchwell, not satisfied with flooding my inbox with more than 300 lurid and threatening comments this week, ran back to his own site tonight to try to dupe bloggers from Greta Wire.

The fact of the matter is that Thomas Churchwell is a known liar, bully, stalker, and ex-convict. If new readers can stomach a factual account of his shady doings on the Internet, you are welcome to read my blog in its entirety.

As for Susan a/k/a Suzi, she and Thomas Churchwell have been locked in a symbolic death dance on the blogs for years, but their intrigues have nothing whatsoever to do with me.

Thomas Churchwell has spent three years writing malicious libel about me. It began soon after I befriended him on a message board in 2006 (fortunately, we never met). He seemed to be grieving over the murdered socialite Christa Worthington and I felt sorry for him. But after talking with him for about three weeks, I found out that his long ago "romance" with Ms. Worthington had been brief, that she had let him stay in her apartment out of pity, because he was living in the Bowery, and that she threw his belongings into the street (literally), sick of his mooching. All of this is documented in a book about her. I caught him in several other lies. He told me that he was a famous retired magician. In reality, he was living in a lock-down building in Queens, his only source of income being the monthly disability checks that he gets because he beat a man and blinded him, and subsequently, was deemed too anti-social to live on his own. Once I discovered the truth, I ended our chats, and the very next day he began his attacks on me.

This page was started by me two years ago as a defense blog against his libel. I also hoped it would serve as a helpful resource for other victims of cyberbullying. I have tired to ignore the hundreds of defamatory posts that Thomas Churchwell has written about me in his relentless attempts to destroy my reputation and my photography career. As I have found out again and again, ignoring him never stops the abuse. For this reason, I have periodically added posts to this page, and tonight I felt it was necessary to do so again, after he spewed lies about me on Greta's very public blog. Fortunately, I am blessed with a wonderful support system.

Here's something you can take to the bank. My blog is NOT written by Susan/Suzi. Along with the fact that her writing style and views are different than mine, there are one or two posts here that are not exactly flattering to her ( I wrote them after SHE libeled me last fall). If you know Susan/Suzi/Sammie from the Greta Wire blog, then you know that she has an ego as large as the Internet and would never write anything unflattering about herself.

The following is the post that actually belongs with the above post title. Thomas Churchwell would like to see it slide on down the page.

This issue needs to be addressed about Thomas Churchwell. I hope you are listening, Google.

In a blog post this morning, he wrote this filthy lie again:

"How funny that this one hater from North Carolina... Her writing about me as a 10 year old having sex with my teacher is writing child porn and just because I know that and I post what she does doesn’t make me a person interested in child porn. No, it makes me a man who is complaining that someone is using my name in their child porn writings."

People know that I absolutely did not write a story about Churchwell as a 10 year old having sex with a teacher. KMA wrote a story about Churchwell and a teacher. His former blog fan KMA. However, KMA's story concerned a teacher spanking Churchwell - not having sex with him.

Update: I just found the story. Churchwell posted it on this site. Be warned, if you go there, it is a kiddie porn website. Churchwell was impersonating KMA, but he registered there in his own name.

How did I find this old story so fast? Simple. I typed "kiddie porn + Tarquin Churchwell" in a search bar and it came up on the first page:

(click on image to enlarge)

I was astonished to see that the original story had been altered. You may remember it. Published as a comment on Churchwell's blog, it had the teacher spanking him. But the version posted by Churchwell on the kiddie porn site is about sex and contains many of the same grammatical errors and misspellings found on Churchwell's blog every day, suggesting that he altered it himself.

I had nothing to do with this so-called story, and clearly, it is not my style of writing:

"Upon further investigation into Tarquins early years it seems his mother was called to the principals office when Tar was a mere 10yo. Seems Tar had sex with his 4th grade teacher & was being sent home w/mom. Mom called Dad to come home and handle the uncomfortable challange of discussing what happened at school. Dad & Tar when for a ride to talk about what happened. Dad said it was normal to have fantisies about some of his teachers "but perhaps it was not such a good thing to act them out and maybe we should all just try & put this all ~behind~ us and go home and hopefully he best not do it again." Tar said: "Gee thanks for understanding Dad." And they went home. As they were pulling into the driveway Tar says "Hey Dad, do you think you can give me a ride over to my friend Billys house?" Whereupon his Dad said "Why son why not take your bike & ride it over there?" To which little Tarquin replies: "Yeah, well I would Dad... But my butt is really hurting." And now Tarquin wants to 'give it back' - what he learned at school - To anyone who crosses him or Ha Ha - "Lies". Where on to you fella -You are in need of serious help. You know: 'Unresolvedchildhood' "issues" still linger. The more you dish it out the more we gonna put it wherethe sun don't shine!"

Now here is Churchwell again, still on the same kiddie porn site, posing as KMA in another comment. You can tell he's excited:

"I'm KMA. I own Cape Cod today. A very successfull online website about Cape Cod. I let people write about anything they want. I write about children sex. I love writing about children having sex. Come to Cape Cod today and read some of my stories. I like to write about the child sex of magician Tarquin Churchwell."

KMA did not write that comment. I don't know KMA, but it's a matter of public record that he was not an owner of Cape Cod Today. He would have had no conceivable reason to write that lie. Churchwell, on the other hand, had a beef with Cape Cod Today (they had shut down his blog there), so evidently, he decided to slur both KMA and the editor of the paper in one swoop.

Churchwell's sick post today, along with the above story posted by him on the kiddie porn website, proves that he has been lying all along. Lying about the innocent woman from North Carolina (me), because he wants attention. Attention Thomas Churchwell shouldn't want, because his writings broadcast to the world that he can't stop fixating on children. Everyone expects him to be classless and a hater of women, that's a given. But I would suggest keeping kid exploitation and writing about kids in a sexual way out of his public displays of hate. To the world, this says that he is a pedophile.

He has crossed the line of decency before when it comes to children, and today is another example.

Hate Blogger THOMAS CHURCHWELL Needs An Intervention

GOOGLE: You may not know this, but Thomas Churchwell frequently addresses you on his wordpress libel site. He writes that you are partnering his libel, and conspiring with him in his blackmailing schemes. He uses your name as a prop in his hate posts against me, just as he uses his family. For example, the "little girl" he keeps telling you about on his blog is 20-something years old. Now if he cared what this adult daughter thinks of him, or cared about his so-called photography business, don't you think he would stop attacking women and posting sexual filth about women and stop writing posts about child pornography? Just something to think about, Google. By the way, no one believes his bizarre allegations that you are in cahoots with him.

And to Thomas Churchwell's PSYCHIATRIST: I remember that you viewed my site last summer. I hope you are doing so again. Your patient's irrational behavior has worsened since he was removed from SUS, and as one of his cyber victims, I ask you again to do something about him. I realize that personality disorders cannot be cured. There is no medical miracle for his problem, but surely he can be controlled in some way? I read his psychiatric DSM classification, borderline axis IV, signed by Dr. Patel, and posted by Churchwell himself on his blog last summer. It stated that those in his classification are prone to engage in "petty thefts" and "extreme sexual perversion." Further, it stated that lying is one of the key symptoms, along with paranoia. I don't need to enumerate every disturbing symptom in his diagnosis, because you know this stuff better than a lay person. But I mention those four, because they are part of his daily life on his blogs. He repeatedly accuses me of the same repulsive behavior that defines his own behavior: stealing and child pornography. He types the words "child porn" over and over, obviously getting pleasure from it. If this were not the case, he would not have done this for years, would he? Normal people don't go around the Internet writing reams of posts about abusing children. As for the "photo thief" lie, I have never stolen another photographer's work. Your patient, however, has a history of stealing. He bragged on his blog, more than once, that before serving time in Riker's Prison for almost killing a man and blinding him, he was a pickpocket. Given his abysmal past and reputation, you might think he would stop his attacks out of shame, but I am convinced that he won't stop without an intervention. His blogs about me are harassment and have nothing whatsoever to do who I am. Nothing he writes about me is true, and frankly, I am sick and tired of being the "fall guy" for his grotesque anti-social behavior. Wouldn't you agree that smearing the reputations of innocent people is wrong, Doctor? The libel he wrote about my photography in my hometown newspaper was yanked by the editor, but his hateful blogs about me and others will be circling the Web forever. He stalks my two blogs every day. Today, he left more than 20 threatening comments. I didn't publish them, though I would be glad to send them to you.

Your patient targeted me in 2006 because I talked to him on the Internet for two weeks. Once I realized he was a liar, I ended the conversations, and he started his attacks on me the next day. He seems to think that he is a photographer and that I am a fraud, when actually, it's the other way around. He also seems to think that he is entitled to destroy my blog, my relationships, my photography business, drive me off the Internet, and threaten my life. I am sure you know he is delusional. It goes without saying that I never would have written even one post about him, if he had left me alone. I want him off my blog and out of my life, Doctor. His writings no longer intimidate me, but they are repugnant. My immediate request is that you do something about him now, be it stronger medication, or putting him to work, perhaps, so he doesn't have so many idle hours to act out; whatever it takes to end his tyranny. If you want to contact me, my address is bloggingright@yahoo.com. Thank you.

Every time Thomas Churchwell writes appalling lies about women, he is reconfirming an awful truth about himself: that he is a misogynist.

He likes to say that those old parody blogs, published more than a year ago in response to his awful misogyny, are the reason for his unhappy life. Don't buy into the BS. He was miserable and acting out years before the parody blogs were ever written, and evidently, has been miserable all of his life.

It's worth adding that the parody blogs were never vicious, libelous or threatening like his own writings about me and many others.

Further, only a sociopath would say that parody blogs, of all things, are a justification for more misogyny, more lies and blackmail, and that threatening others, as he did today, is okay. It is not.

I'm not going to address the filth that Thomas Churchwell wrote today. I have been there and done that a hundred times. Everyone knows that his writings about me are nothing but lies trumped up by a mean, warped, sexually sick mind.

As for the lesser bully, I don't know what part, if any, Susan played in his post today. She may be too busy disrupting the Greta blog to make trouble for me. But I imagine that she is belly laughing over this. She is very much like Churchwell.

Finally, to everyone reading this, please learn from my experience. What happened to me is a lesson for anyone who thinks trust can be handed out on the Web like candy. I trusted Churchwell and Susan when I met them online, and look where it got me! Assume that anyone you meet on the Internet is a stalker, and then you might be pleasantly surprised, as you get to know an online stranger over a long period of time. Be careful out there.

Harassing Blog Comments Faked By Thomas Churchwell Today

First, I want to remind readers that I have a new blog. It is about the real me--not the delusional version of me penned by the woman hater. I am blogging there as often as I can, aiming to keep my posts interesting and worth your time. I truly appreciate your support and hope you will visit often!

Here's the link.

That was the good news. The bad news is that Thomas Churchwell, wanting you to know that he is still a bully and stalker, today faked blog comments in my name, on his wordpress site, according to his post in the Google Reader.

I Have A New Blog!

Ladies and gentlemen, over the weekend I moved many of the posts on this page to a brand new location. The link is at the bottom of the post.

A couple of months ago this blog had an identity crisis, when I wrote a few humorous posts, as an experiment. The result was a confusing mix of funny posts and serious rebuttals against Thomas Churchwell's libel.

This blog will stay here as a resource and archive. I appreciate most of you who have read my posts. I'm especially thankful to those who have posted comments here.

Link to new site.

Thomas Churchwell Threatens Lies To Yahoo About Scarlett

Yahoo: if you are reading this post, feel free to review my site in its entirety. Thomas Churchwell sent threats to my blog stating that he is going to "get Yahoo" to ban me from the Internet. Yes, and he said that Yahoo is conspiring with him.

To the bully: When I reported your copyright theft of my photograph of a watch and Christmas ornament to Yahoo (who owns Flickr) in 2007, they told me that they already had 3 complaints about you. That is a fact.

Today you gave yourself away. In the Google Reader I saw that you wrote on your hate site, in reference to your libel about me: "I will be frack..." (must have meant 'frank') "...that I'm having fun." This underscores the disgusting truth about you, that you are a bully writing horrible lies about me for kicks. There is no other reason for what you are doing, and now you have admitted it.

LEAVE THIS BLOG AND DON'T COME BACK.

Stop trying to ruin my photography business and my blog. Leave me alone.

Thomas Churchwell Puts Words In Scarlett's Mouth She Never Said

Thomas Churchwell, about your recent Wordpress libel posts, stop putting quotation marks around words and sentences that I never said. I NEVER had those conversations that you're posting. Not with you, or anyone else.

Regarding your screwball allegations about the nudie pictures from three years ago, do a Google image search for "nude pictures." Type it in the search bar, and you will get more than 6,000,000 hits. An astonishing number and why do you suppose there are that many? Because people share pictures on the Internet! There are billions of images, from apples to zylophones, on Yahoo and Google, that are being posted and reposted on blogs every day. Almost anyone who has a blog - and there are 70,000,000 blogs - has posted public domain photos (sometimes called stock photos) that were found in an image search. That isn't "stealing," idiot. Stealing is when there is a copyright signature, or other warning to not use a picture. The nudies you copied had no signatures, no warnings or copyrights. Fortunate for you, since you wouldn't want to be bragging that you repeatedly post pictures that were stolen, would you?

A further exploration might be in order, for anyone who has just dropped in from Mars. The last contact I had with Thomas Churchwell, off the blogs, was in 2006, when he pressured me into putting nude pictures on the IM. He really wanted "crotch shots," he told me, and was disappointed when he didn't get any. He copied much tamer snaps to his computer. The women's faces had been cropped by the anonymous, uncredited "photographers" who had snapped the photos.

The day after he uploaded the photos, I told him what I thought he already knew, that the photos weren't me. He believed they were me (he claimed), as if nice women go around the Web showing pictures of their breasts to a stranger! This gets to the core of Churchwell's gripe. It's not his bogus allegation that the photos were stolen. Given his bona fide history of stealing, he wouldn't have cared if the photos were swiped from Hugh Hefner's safe. No, he is still nursing a grudge over being "tricked". He pressured a woman (me) for nudies and still believes to this day that he was entitled to have them!

Churchwell, you began your attacks on me the day after I ended our conversations in 2006. This is a fact. As part of your retaliation campaign, you published my commercial still-life photograph of a watch and Christmas ornament on at least four websites. You defaced my nice photography with one of your software programs and published the defiled version alongside the copyrighted original. When I found out, you refused to remove them from Photobucket, Flickr, LiveJournal and Blogger. You then filed a bogus claim against my copyright, which is a crime, and libeled me all over the Internet as a thief of my own photography! Recently, you admitted on your site that I am the photographer of that image.

Given that your former "career" was pickpocket in a strip bar, where you helped yourself to watches and wallets (according to brags in your own blog posts), and recently stole my copyright of a commercial photograph, you are the last person who should be calling anyone a thief.

With so many anti-social issues rearing their ugly heads in your life, you may never get them sorted out, but you should try. People think you are WACKO. Let me make this clear. If your recent posts with those bogus conversations are another bully scheme, you may as well stop. I am NOT closing my blog.

Got it?

And stop stalking my site. Seeing you refresh my page dozens of times a day (at all hours) is obsessive and makes me wonder if there isn’t something better that you can occupy your time with. Perhaps getting a job?

Loose Ends

For the most part, I dislike FAQs. They’re generally filled with pointless information such as meticulous lists of the author’s favorite foods, as if anyone cares other than family and friends. However, the difference between the average everyday FAQ and this one is that people actually asked me this stuff. Since today is the last day of 2008, I think it's a good time to tie up loose ends. So, here you go.

1. Why do you write anonymously? I’ll never take anything you say seriously unless you’re willing to put your full name on it.

For all you know, everyone writes anonymously, but you just believe them when they signed their posts ‘Sarah Goodbody.’ The name is only important when the author is an egomaniac demanding attention for everything he writes, whether it is true, or not. Egomaniacs scream, "Look at me!" I am not one of those.

For me, the ideas presented are important. I couldn't care less what the name is. Besides, with cyber bullies and stalkers prowling the Internet, it's just plain dumb to blog under your real full name.

Artists and authors have been using pen names and pseudonyms for generations now, so baiters such as Thomas Tarquin Churchwell should stop acting like this is some odd phenomenon.

Mark Twain. Richard Bachman. Meatloaf. Prince. Madonna. Lemony Snicket. J.K Rowling. Fiona Apple. Nicolas Bourbaki. George Eliot. Irving Berlin. Bono. Cher. Elvis Costello. Mick Jagger. Rudyard Kipling. Spike Lee. Jerry Lewis. George Orwell. Lewis Carroll. Sting.

All these names are either partially accurate or completely fake.

Of course, the fact of the matter is that I have revealed my real first name in this blog's title. Anyone wanting more than that should show me that they can be trusted!

2. What was your motivation for starting this site?

World peace.

Is there anyone who doesn't know why I started this site?

The reason was to set the record straight about the multitude of vicious posts that Thomas Tarquin Churchwell has been writing about me every day for almost three years.

Also, I love to write. Beyond that, I have no delusions of grandeur. I really am a photographer, although I never said that I am a famous photographer. Furthermore, I am not gunning for a TV show, a book deal, a spot on a panel, Internet super stardom or an interview with Oprah. I write simply because I have things to say. There is no other reason.

3. For a long time you didn't allow comments on your site. Why?

Well, I think that’s pretty obvious, don’t you?

Every time I allowed comments on my blog, I was bombarded with sick, unprintable anonymous comments, all written by Churchwell.

4. Have you become cynical about blogging?

No way!

One of the reasons I felt relatively comfortable meeting other bloggers two years ago, was because I was under the assumption — and this theory required a leap of faith which required that I accept the innate goodness of man — that if an individual could tie words together and make a sentence that communicated a thought, it meant that he had adequate control over his mental faculties, that he was not crazy, or at least not dangerous, or at least medicated enough to be acceptable to society. I was so naive. Now that I am wiser, I still believe that most bloggers are nice people.

5. Yesterday, Thomas Churchwell wrote another hateful essay about you and Susan, in which he claimed that he has "control of your blogs.." He wrote: "The creatures are being held at bay." Did this upset you?

LOL.

6. Do you think he will ever give up bullying?

I think that if he faces certain truths about himself, he might stop beating up women on the Internet.

I hope you will have much fun tonight! See you tomorrow.

Why Do Bullies Hate Women?

When I came home tonight after attending a dinner party where all the guests seemed normal, I started thinking about that phrase from the play "The Mourning Bride" by William Congreve, an English author of the early eighteenth century. You know the one: "Heaven has no rage like love to hatred turned, nor hell a fury like a woman scorned." When you think of these few words, you automatically think of a woman who has been jilted by the one she loves and wants to viciously strike back. However, have you ever wondered how a bully responds, if he is the one who is jilted?

This thinking/wondering came about as a result of a cyber bully who trolls my blog and leaves disparaging, rude, libelous, abusive, and threatening comments. Sometimes this type of behavior accelerates into death threats, as it has with me. Most cyber bullies - 90% - are men. So, I started wondering just why do some men hate women to the extent that they'd do this.

I started doing some Googling and discovered, not to my surprise, that there's a lot out there on this topic. Some write about this phenomenon being the result of original sin when Eve took and ate the forbidden fruit and then blamed it on Adam. That fruit, by the way, was a symbol of knowledge, something that Adam couldn't supply. Some actually believe that this story is central to the oppression of women worldwide.

Did you know that the English language has 220 words (almost all derogatory) for a female and only 20 for a male (almost all complimentary). Consider the following: A 'master' exercises authority, whereas a 'mistress' is a so-called kept woman. The term 'sir' retains respect, while 'madam' refers to someone who keeps a brothel. A 'lord of all he surveys' is quite different from a 'lady of the streets', and the meaning of 'he's a professional' is generally understood differently from 'she's a professional'. (from "Why Men Hate Women" by Celia Kitzinger, new internationalist issue 212 - October 1990).

We also find that misogyny is present when a woman runs for political office. More often than not, a female candidate is dismissed as either being "too hard" (Hillary Clinton), or an idiot. Take Sarah Palin, who, because she speaks with a Midwestern twang and sprinkles her speeches with colloquialisms such as "Okay doke," was regarded by many as a silly choice, and not altogether bright (she was judged dumb by the media for the way she talked). But if a male running for political office speaks with a twang - and everyone from the Midwest does - there are no smirks from the TV pundits.

Susan Forward, PhD, a leading psychotherapist states: "Once we begin to examine the forces that drive the woman hater, we find that much of his abusive behavior is a cover-up for his anxiety about women. This man needs, as we all do, to feel safe. As adults most men fulfill these yearnings through physical intimacy, emotional sharing and parenting. But the woman hater finds these yearnings terribly frightening. He harbors a hidden belief that if he cares for a woman, she will then have the power to hurt him, to engulf him and to abandon him. Once he has invested her with these awesome and mythical powers, she becomes a fearful figure for him."

She goes on to explain that the woman hater's conflicting emotions of yearning and fear result in behaviors of hostility, aggression, contempt and cruelty. "Early childhood plays a role in contributing to this misogynistic behavior. In an ideal situation, a mother nurtures and is a boy’s primary source of comfort, while fathers help pull the boy away from mother so that he does not become overly dependent on her. If you look closely at the childhood of a woman hater, the father was probably either too passive to pull the boy from the mother, or he was a bully himself, and consequently, the boy had no option but to make his mother the center of his universe."

"Without realizing it, in adult life he transfers this dependency, as well as conflicts and fears that go with it, onto the woman in his life. The woman hater saw his mother as having the power to frustrate him, to withhold love from him, to smother him, to make him feel weak, or to make insatiable demands on him"—and as an adult he views women as having these same powers."

This partly explains why the cyber bully Thomas Churchwell hates women bloggers. The irony is that if he bumped into me on the street, and saw that I am not any of the things he writes about me, but that I am a nice, ordinary girl, he would run away shame-faced. Maybe. Of course, then he wouldn't mind meeting a new online target to assuage his childhood traumas.

I used to feel some sympathy towards this type of man because, no matter what, something terrible happened to him early that skewed his image of women. But now I believe that he doesn't deserve any sympathy except from his psychiatrist.

The Truth About Churchwell's "Photo Thief" Lie

Calling me a photo thief is outrageous.

This lie is closely connected to your own past. Stealing was your profession for a time, according to what you wrote in your blog posts. Remember?

I have never stolen "pictures off the Internet". Yet you continue to write this lie. You attack me without any cause or provocation.

You have bragged on your blogs that you are a "psycho" and have said more than once that "17 psychiatrists" all agree you're nuts. If that is true, you have no credibility. You can't be "mentally ill," and at the same time, expect anyone to believe you when you call me a photo thief. So, what is the point?

You can ponder that question, or not. As for me, I am blogging on my own blog. You drove me away from a blog I wrote last year. This time, you're not driving me away.

About The Breaking News Blog

If anyone is interested, here's what I heard about the Breaking News parody blog. Currently it's closed, because someone flagged it as "spam." Which may mean sabotage, a hacker, or an overly zealous bot that goofed? The good news is, Thomas Tarquin Churchwell's phony allegations of the blog being "hate" was not the cause.

Now Playing

Susan Newton, Stop Your Libel

By Scarlett

Here is the revision of a comment I wrote on the Breaking News blog concerning Susan Newton of San Rafael, California, with a few points added:

Do you really think you're fooling anyone with this game? People are not stupid, Susan. They know that you are having a major MELTDOWN, because you fear that you are losing your slap and slur partner on the blogs: Thomas Churchwell.

In a pathetic attempt to get his attention, you are attacking me. For a solid week you have taken the hate that you usually post about him and thrown it at me instead. Libeling me a "hatemonger" "Southern bigot" and "alleged" photographer, of all things. You are a LIAR.

About the racial hate you posted, I definitely don't hate blacks. And I am sure that Southerners are disgusted by your small-minded, stereotypical prejudices. "Southerners hate blacks." How IGNORANT of you to think people will buy this garbage in the year 2008. That's like saying everyone in California, your home state, is a space cadet.

I am a professional photographer. This is what I do for a LIVING. Got that?

The attack you launched on my dead father was despicable. My father was an honorable man, a good Catholic and faithful to my mother.

As for you writing that I "tracked you down" in a hotel two years ago, that is truly funny. Why do you want to believe that women are pursuing you? What does this say about YOUR sexual persuasion and fantasies? Fact is, you POSTED the name of the hotel on your blog, and that was not the first time you asked me to call you. You were just dying to get the ball rolling on your ridiculing, obsessive chats about Churchwell. Of course, you have obsessed about me for two years also. If I didn't answer the phone when you called, you kept calling and calling until I did. This is a FACT.

I didn't read the rest of your crackpot post, but I imagine it's you giving yourself more airs (your "busy person" charade) and regurgitating the lies you wrote last week. You must be a miserable person.

I realize that you need help. And while I don't care what happens to you, for the sake of innocent people who encounter you on the Internet, particularly women, I think you should resume therapy.

Finally, stop referring to me on your blog as "honey." You think people don't realize that you are knifing me in the back?

Leave me alone.
October 6, 2008 2:26 PM

Thomas Tarquin Churchwell: Stop. Leave Me Alone

I do not know Thomas Tarquin Churchwell from Queens, NY and Portsmouth, New Hampshire, except as a bully on the Internet, and stalker of my blog. He enjoys seeing his name splashed across the Internet. I do not. I do not enjoy being cyber bullied, libeled and stalked. I have asked him to stop many times but he continues.

Please leave me alone. Go away. Stop blogging lies about me.

LEAVE ME ALONE.

Susan Newton Desperate For Thomas Churchwell's Love, Defames Scarlett

By Scarlett

I will address the lunatic post Susan Newton wrote this morning, but right now, I have to go to work. I'll set the record straight later.

Screenshot of Fake Comment

By Scarlett

From the Google Reader, this screenshot was posted by Thomas Churchwell on his blog July 30. An imposter wrote the first comment. The IP address is Susan's.

I never go to his blog.

Fake Comments in Scarlett's Name

By Scarlett

A screenshot in the Google Reader shows that you, Susan, apparently have been writing blog comments in my name on Thomas Churchwell's blog. I don't know why you're doing this, but please stop.

I never go to his blogs or yours.

To Churchwell's Psychiatrist

Yesterday, your patient, Thomas Tarquin Churchwell, stated on his blog that he is a "psycho and a liar". Today he repeated his often published lie that I and another blogger have threatened his family. I am sure you would advise me to ignore him, and I am trying. I just thought you should know that he is still writing malicious libel about women, and is still fixated on child pornography. I understand you are monitoring his Internet listings.

Triviality Threatens

Thomas Churchwell. I just saw that ream of posts you wrote this morning. Your fantastical lie that I am "bullying" your family - who I don't know and couldn't care less about - shows that you really are nuts, if you really believe what you wrote.

Your blogs are not only perverse and deeply offensive, they are cruelly selfish. What comes across to strangers is not that I am any of the terrible things you write about me, but that you are a hateful, narcissistic nutcase.

I, and others, are the true victims here. We don't have to prove a thing to the likes of you, but maybe it's time for you prove a few things to us.

Let's see your psychiatric report again.

Let's see your prison record, showing exactly what crime you were locked up for.

Let's see proof that you blinded the man you called Gumby, because if you did, you are a crumb, for sure.

Original Post: Churchwell has said more than once that he knows when something is morally wrong but he does it anyway. In other words, he makes a conscious decision to harm others. At other times, when he seems to realize that public opinion has completely turned against him, he will say that he's nuts. He recently wrote that "17 psychiatrists" examined him and failed to agree on exactly what is wrong with him.

Cyber bullies like Churchwell typically portray themselves as downtrodden victims. He would have you believe that everyone he has met online is out to get him. His first solo blog in fact was titled 'The Haters.' Just who were these haters? He had a list of people (I wasn't on it yet) who had rubbed him the wrong way CourtTV and on his banned blog at Cape Cod Today. Mostly, they were posters who had called him out on his many lies. So, he opened a blog about them and wrote nasty allegations about them, and called them haters, but he never supplied any proof whatsoever of his accusations. The truth became evident as disgusted readers headed for the hills in less than a month, realizing that HE was the hater. HE was the victimizer and constant liar.

One of his frequent lies is that he is being stalked. There is a grain of hilarity in that one, if you consider that stalking victims are the antithesis of Churchwell. People who are stalked generally are famous, beautiful, accomplished, or possess other qualities which a stalker perceives as meaning the victim is better than himself. Take the nut who stalked and murdered John Lennon. He idolized Lennon for his talent and fame but saw himself as a zero. He wanted to be famous. He was jealous of Lennon. In his marginal mind, all he could do was kill him. Churchwell is a stalker on the Internet. Since he started stalking my blogs two years ago, he has bragged that he called every gallery in my town, and the Chamber of Commerce, trying to get my address. Last May, he posted a defiled version of a commercial photograph of mine on websites, and wrote: "Do you know the photographer of this crappy photo? Email me." In February of this year, he threatened to show up at my home. He actually posted the threat on his blog. In the post where he bragged about blinding the man he called 'Gumby', he threatened me: "Churchwell is coming to stop you." I reported him to the Police. "Oh, he lives in that building for nutsos," they said. Churchwell has written reams of libel about my phone calls to the SUS organization, who couldn't help his victims, since they had their hands full trying to deal with the disruption he was causing there, plus he had gone on his rent strike.

And where is Google in all of this? Given the awful truth that Google hosts blogs penned by terrorists, they couldn't care less about shutting down stalkers and bullies. Speaking out is the only thing that might help. Because if no one speaks out against Churchwell, if bloggers continue to look away apathetically like sheep, the day will come when blogland will be run by marauding bullies and other sickos. It's a fact that many female bloggers already have given up blogging because of these losers.

As I already stated in this post, and elsewhere on the blog, he writes about non-existent attacks on his family. But worse than the lies about his family are the posts in which he accuses me and other people of being thieves and pornographers. There is no truth in his accusations, so why doesn't he stop? Well, he knows that nothing could more damaging to his victims than having defamatory posts circulating about them on the Internet. It's the old Gestapo trick of accusing innocent people of sexual perversion, when they cannot be proved guilty of some other crime. We know why the Nazis did this. They hated Jews. Churchwell hates the world, particularly women. He has the mindset of a thug.

Last year he stopped paying his government subsidized rent at SUS, and now he is about to be evicted. On the Web, however, he thinks he's a "big shot" because he beats up women. He's known as the creep, the tyrant, the loser who spends his days writing hateful lies about women. Some big shot!

In the end, it doesn't matter why he lies constantly, hates the world, exploits his family for libel, and is obsessed with stealing and child pornography. He has no right to malign, stalk, or libel anyone.

Handcuffs For Thomas Tarquin Churchwell

So you're threatening to meet with the Carolina police? Do that! They're waiting for you. They know you've stalked women on blogs for two years and stupidly bragged on your blogs that you tried many times to get my address. They know about your vicious libel, your sick fantasy posts about a certain minor child, your astonishing death threats against me and others, your mental instability and history of violence. They know how you've tried to ruin the reputations of innocent men, women and children by falsely accusing us of horrific deeds that YOU are guilty of.

Is He Sick Or Slick?

Is Thomas Churchwell sick or slick? Is he crazy, or writing vicious posts about me with a wink and a smirk? The answer to this question might be known by his court-appointed psychiatrist. But even if he is nutty as a fruitcake, as he would have us believe in a recent blog post, mental illness does not excuse libel and threats. "I can't help what I do," is a pathetically stupid alibi. If he really can't control his hateful impulses, he should be locked up and medicated. Otherwise, as long as he remains "free" to smear innocent women on the Internet, it is presumed that he knows what he is doing, and therefore, is accountable for every word he writes.

Let's hope his psychiatrist and guardian will take a look at his blogs.

The Truth About Churchwell's "Child Porno" Lie

Breaking News! (June 28, 2009) A few minutes ago, I found my old satire blog, Tarquin's Secrets, on a CD. I had forgotten that I made a copy!

I wrote the blog three years ago. A long time, so it is not surprising that I couldn't recall every word I wrote back then. Now that I have my hands on the files, I can republish the very post that has excited Thomas Churchwell since he first read it all those years ago.

It is the same post that he lies about endlessly.

Reposting it calls for a thorough revision of the post I already wrote. So, why bother? It's not a bother, I have a free hour, and then I am done with this silly topic.

But first, I heard that the bully has been spewing that I "changed" his age from nine years old to ten in one of my edits. So? I honestly could not remember the age I affixed to him in the original post. And, as it turns out, I did not specify any age in the original! But knock yourself out, bully. Maybe your computer will finally explode from all the venom you post every day and then you'll have to get off the Internet and do something productive in your life.

March 18, 2008 (revised): About Churchwell's repugnant "child porno writer" lie, here is exactly what I wrote about him on that long ago satire blog:

"I started masturbating at a very young age, before 5th grade, maybe younger."

The bully has written reams of libel about that one benign sentence.

This might be a snoozer. But if you want to know the full context, the sentence came from a post imagining his "back story." In keeping with the tone of my blog, which was satire, I wrote a post describing what he might have been like when he was a kid, and when he was a teenager and younger man, years before he became notorious on the blogs. Futilely, I was asking the question: How on God's green earth did he become the weirdly sex-obsessed, woman hating bully that he is today? There was nothing salacious about the question. I was serious!

To a cyber bully, words can be spinned and frequently are. But to rational people, the fictitious sentence about Churchwell masturbating is just a sentence about something most boys experience around puberty.

So, here is the final edition of my post originally published three years ago on the Tarquin's Secrets satire blog:

Fans ask me all the time about my sex life.

I started masturbating at a very young age, before 5th grade, maybe younger. I remember I didn't cum and I can't remember the transition from not cumming to cumming. I can remember being aroused by fictional characters. Like, sometimes I would fantasize about tying up the tooth fairy and socking her in the mouth. Then for about two years I had dreams about a groundhog. Every February I would get stimulated when he saw his shadow.

I outgrew the woodland creatures thing and developed a thing for fat girls. Huge breasts, underarm rolls and fat, bloated bellies. Think Anna Nicole Smith before TrimSpa. One of my favorite dreams had a fat supermodel knocking on my window in the middle of the night. We'd take her limo to McDonald's, spend shit loads of money, and stuff ourselves on cheeseburgers till dawn.

My last girlfriend was an old woman. I called her Angel, cause she gave me blow jobs. They weren't bad when she removed her dentures. I lived with her for 3 months and that was two months too long! It's been a while since I moved out, but I can't stop thinking about one thing: the couple that lived next door. Every Saturday night, they spanked each other.

I love being spanked, anywhere, any time. I don't know why, but I am fucking obsessed with having people spank me!

I found out today that I like to grab my own ass and spank it when I'm in the shower.

Hilarious, wasn't it? Oh, that is open for debate, but was it pornography? I think everyone, except the loony bully, can agree that it wasn't even close.

Child pornography repulses me. It repulses most people, yet "child porno" remains Thomas Churchwell's top blog topic. He cruelly, repeatedly, and with malice accuses me of writing pornography about children, based on that one post, and he has been doing this for two years. Some have described it as a pathological fix. Which seems to be accurate, because he has accused at least three others. Character assassination is a common technique of cyber bullies.

On the Web you can find many articles about defamation and cyber bullies. Here are two excerpts from a victim resource site:

"Character assassination is one of the bully's most important techniques. He demonizes his victims. Everyone he attacks "deserves" it. His victims are always pedophiles, perverts, liars, thieves, whatever tag he thinks he can make stick. (Actually, he does this whether he thinks it will stick or not.) Then he pounds his victims again and again. It doesn't matter that the accusations are not true. It is the technique of repetition, time and again, that works in the bully's mind. And once a victim is on his list, he will attack her relentlessly."

It goes on to say:

"Moral outrage is a very important characteristic of a cyber bully. His attacks are always depicted as crusades against some imaginary evil, or righting some perceived slight. How he expects readers to swallow his outrageous lies, I don't know, but a bully's claims to moral authority is definitely typical behavior."

Those two paragraphs fit Churchwell to a T, don't they? Now, just to make sure that everything is clear, let's take a look at the true definition of pornography.

Dictionary.com defines pornography as "Sexually explicit pictures, writings, or other material whose primary purpose is to cause sexual arousal."

The definition on legal-dictionary.com is phrased differently but is the same: "The representation in books, magazines, photographs, films, and other media of scenes of sexual behavior that are lewd and are designed to arouse sexual interest."

Duhaime.org/legaldictionary states: "Art and pornography are distinguished as follows: Art conveys a thought, a speculation, or a perception about the human condition. Pornography is pictures of sex organs and their usage devoid of all other meaning-the personality having no place."

And child pornography? Freedictionary.com defines that as: "the illegal use of children in pornographic pictures or films."

criminal-law.com sums it up: "Child pornography is defined under United States law as the visual depiction (images) of minor children under the age of 18 engaging in sex acts; the definition also covers photographs or depictions of children’s genitalia."

And so, child pornography is lewd pictures of children. Other types of pornography might include the written word, but a reader would have to become sexually aroused by the subject matter in order for a story or book to be pornographic, and even then, there would be lewd pictures and other criteria as described above.

When I wrote my blog, my purpose was to satirize a cyber bully, not sexually arouse people about him. I think Churchwell fully knows this (unless he really is delusional). I also think that knowing the above post is not pornography is the reason he never quotes it in any of his skewed blogs. He has to know that if he quoted the 'masturbation sentence' in context and then screamed "CHILD PORNO!" he would be laughed off the internet by his two readers. How telling that he continues to lie.

And how telling that he never mentions the rest of my blog, which focused on his blogging years and his intense hatred of women!

My blog examined his hatred of women and the bully didn't like that one bit. So, he concocted that terrible lie. One of many lies that he writes about me every day.

Strangely enough, it never dawns on him that writing "child porno" rants over and over—obsessively for more than two years—is out and out creepy. He creates suspicion that he likes child pornography, and could it be that he really does? And that, like a moth to a flame, his obsessive writings reflect an irresistible attraction?

It is curious that around the time I wrote my blog, he posted on a child porn site. True. This person who says (often) that child porn appalls him, did, in fact, post filth on a site for pedophiles. If you want to read what he wrote there, the link follows. But I warn you, the images are disturbing:

Second Life Herald: Virtual Child Porn in Second Life

www.secondlifeherald.com/slh/2004/12/virtual_child_p.html

So, he went to that sicko site as KMA (a reader on one of his old blogs). And in his own unmistakable writing style, he posted a story and a comment on the site. But before that, he fabricated vile stories about me (and others), and wrote a couple of bizarre blogs about Susan's minor son, and sent emails to her describing fantasy sex acts with the boy, and on his blogs has typed the words "child porno writer" literally hundreds of times for years. Sounds like more eye-popping revelations for his psychiatrist, doesn't it?

Perhaps his psychiatrist will be able to figure out if his child porno writer lie is another bully tactic, a smokescreen (he's a failed magician, remember), his own secret fantasy—or all of these. Whatever his disordered pathology may be (and no one cares), accusing innocent people of "writing" child pornography is twisted fun for the bored cyber bully. If he wasn't having any fun, he would apologize for his shameful lies and stop writing those posts.

More to the point, if he truly regarded child pornography as a horror, like I do, instead of a bully weapon to use on women, he never would have written that lie.

Update June 1, 2009: Another year has passed, but the cyber bully hasn't stopped his attacks on me. Does anyone else find it hilarious, paradoxical and disgusting that Thomas Churchwell continues to profess moral outrage over non-existent "child porno" stories, yet brags about taking pictures of nude, underage girls? The recent pic he posted of a 16 year old with her finger inserted in her body actually is pornography, as defined by United States law.

Thomas Churchwell Is a Liar and a Loon

I don't want to address Churchwell, and I know that long time readers of the blogs share my aversion. I am fine, however. This is not like last year, when his vicious blogs made me so ill that I ended up in a hospital with pleurisy. I am stronger this time.

I'll confirm what you already know. Everything Thomas Churchwell writes on the subject of me (and many other people) is libel. There has never been any truth in anything he says.

Thomas Churchwell Lies About "Truce," Defames Photographer

Thomas Churchwell, you tried to trick me and all of the Internet with your "truce" posts. Please get rid of your "photo thief" blog, your "Churchwell Continues" libel posts on AOL and all your other defamatory posts about me.

What Part of GO AWAY Does He Not Understand?

Predictable that when a person is repeatedly called a "THIEF", she will set the record straight. Thomas Churchwell counted on that today, when he wrote another horrible post about me.

I'm not like The Amazing Tarquin, as he once called himself, with a pseudo-career as a pickpocket. I am not a thief.

He should be much more concerned about his recent threats to beat up bloggers than with his treasure trove of public domain pictures from two years ago.

Your Threat

Thomas Churchwell, I just read your threat in the listings. Let me make this clear. I don't know what you mean by "Churchwell is coming to stop you" and "Here I come" but I only know one way to interpret that, and if you walk into my yard, I will call the police. Get it? You will be arrested for trespassing, and for making threats on the Internet and for some other thing about state lines. It involves the FBI. If you're trying to terrorize me, that, in itself, is a crime.

LEAVE ME ALONE.

You're The One Living In A Mental Home

Thomas Churchwell, or Tarquin Churchwell, I'm not going to defend myself every time you write a defamatory post about me. You would like that, because you are only happy when you are goading people with lies and getting a response. I am posting to clear up a couple of things for any readers who might be confused by your libel.

I have never posted about your daughter. She is a complete blank to me, and to everyone else who has read your blogs. This is because you never mention her, except as a prop in your libel posts. Further, I have never threatened any member of your family, including your daughter, or written anything disparaging about her, or about your parents, and you know it. I feel sorry for your daughter, actually, for having a father who abandoned her when she was just an infant. If I were you, I would give her a call, if you know where to find her, and pray that she never reads your blogs.

The excuse you are giving now for your awful behavior is "mental illness". Sorry, that's a lousy alibi, because you do know right from wrong!

Your phone calls to the galleries in my town, and calling the Chamber of Commerce, and the other things you have done to try to find me, IS STALKING. So, stop it.

I used to wonder a lot why you didn't seem to care that your daughter, and two sons, would find out what "dad" was doing on the Internet. You seem to have no regard for anyone, not even for your children. As I told you before on this page, I don't want anything to do with you.

Leave me alone.

Stop Blaming Me, Tarquin Churchwell

Blaming me for other blogs is ludicrous. The fact is, you've made so many enemies in your year of blogging, the author of those blogs could be anyone at all. Stop looking for an easy target.

It's Not My IP, Tarquin Churchwell

By Scarlett

In reference to Tarquin Churchwell's two posts about me this morning, he is mistaken. I did not visit your blogs this morning, Tarquin. I have not read your blogs since April. Secondly, everyone knows you have IP meters. Do you think a person who is up to something sneaky, would go to your blog, then go to another blog bearing your name, then return to the first blog, knowing all the time they were being tracked? You should know that is a ridiculous scenario.

Hope everybody is doing well. Bye Bye!