Hello,
It's one of the more paradoxical aspects of my personality that I have have fairly bleak view of human nature, yet when someone behaves badly I'm genuinely shocked. Unless it's me in which case there are sound reasons. To be fair I only really lose the plot once every five years. The rest of the time I operate on the basis that I should remove myself from the situation irking me before I lose it. Then I light up a fag and think dark thoughts. As you can see I don't really mean any real harm.
That is all just by way of background. Most of you will be aware that Rachel from North London has had a spot of bother, to say the least with an online stalker. Thankfully justice has now prevailed, though the stalker has now gone on the run. Given her (the stalker's) continued blogging on the subject and her general behaviour, I'm sure it won't be long until the police catch up with her.
Having always regarded the blogging lark as a jolly bear pit. It's a helpful reminder that some take a rather more obsessive view of their fellow bloggers.
I have had no involvement with this woman, though I noticed earlier that she'd included one of my comments to Rachel on her (now-sabotaged blog), I am perhaps underestimating the level of anger the friends of her victims feel towards her. However I can't help but feel that sabotaging her blog was a bad move. She's already blaming some other people she's stalked. I can understand the desire for revenge but I really don't see any benefit to anyone concerned in provoking her. Frankly her behaviour is bad enough without it.
The people she is blaming for the sabotage have undergone enough misery. We bloggers all love a good barney but these are flames that don't need fanning. There is no effort required to undermine the credibility of her blog. It is clear in her every post post that she is an intelligent, articulate but deeply, troubled individual in desperate need of help. In any case, isn't this sabotage footering with evidence? I believe she intends to appeal, God knows on what basis.
The best people to deal with Felicity Jane Lowde have experience in psychiatry not pranks. She will be caught. Let them do their job and don't make a bad situation terrible.
Cheerio
13 comments:
Your a cliched Misanthropist. Join the club.
As for Rachel hopefully its the end of it.
Just embrace your contradictions.
Anyone who's convicted in the magistrates' court can appeal to the Crown Court for a re-hearing once they've been sentenced, no matter what the merits of their case might be, although some people are sensible enough to accept that they're unlikely to get a different result in the Crown Court.
I think even Donald Finlay would have walked away from that one......
The woman is deranged.
Zin Zin,
Pah! Even my flaws aren't orignal. Must try harder.
Katy,
Thanks for that, I shall defer to your superior knowledge of English law. I very much doubt that Ms Lowde will be showing much by the way of sense on the subject. There really should be a better way to deal with people like her than the courts.
Ill Man,
Undoubtedly too hot for oor Donald. Like I say above she's obviously an intelligent woman. What a terrible shame whatever it is she's afflicted with has taken her down such a dredful path. Hopefully she'll get access to some sort of treatment sooner rather than later.
Mind you she has got a loveley blog template! I would ask her about it but I really don't want to rattle her cage.
I believe the chap who designed it for her is 'on her list' as it were....
I think that's right, she went after him for sending her a bill or some such nonsense.
I've really found this quite upsetting. I remember being told about a senile relative who had a habit of starting to undress every time she felt tired. Luckily for her she had family that cared about her and would stop her to preserve her dignity. I just can't fathom why someone in FJL's family hasn't had her sectioned or taken some sort of action to restrain her.
She is probably not sectionable. Believe me, you have to be pretty fucking doolally before you can be sectioned. I remember a friend having a client in a criminal case whose defence was something along the lines of "my next door neighbour has fashioned a robot out of chewing gum in my image to frame me for crimes I didn't commit", and when they asked for a psychiatric assessment the report that came back said something like "Mr X has a novel defence but clearly understands what's going on." Er...?
Perhas you'll delete this one out of embarrassment. Clairwil, your motive is transparent, and your cover just as bad. Yes, showing yourselves up was a stupid move. One of your most stupid yet. This blog-post won't help you justify yourselves.
Thanks for stopping by and thanks for the mention. It's a cracker.
http://fjlathome.blogspot.com/2007/04
/medical-and-legal-issues.html
*opens mouth*
*thinks*
*closes mouth*
Fjl just get the help you need old girl, trust me a nice padded cell, regular meals(no more trawling dustbins for food) and warm bed in your padded cell.
Post a Comment