To Anthony Zinnanti (presuming it is him),

[How come no one over there ever asked to see the pleadings and orders in the Jack McClellan case?]

Because I posted them, here, when you provided them to me.

[There's a lot of talk and zero questioning as to what really went on.]

We can see what ‘went on’. In any case, it does not matter what really ‘went on’. It is the consequences of what ‘went on’ that matters. You were one of the primary architects of what ‘went on’ and those consequences - you will live with them.

[Do you folks believe everything you see in the media?]

It does not matter what really ‘goes on’ - you know that, you depend on it in your ‘profession’. Just like the way you lied to the judge who made the original order, courts are not about reality, they are about perception.

[Did you know that I was just fucking with you]

Well, do not fuck with me, or you will receive it back … in great measure.

[when I said on CNN that we "thoroughly infiltrated" your blogs and chat rooms. I looked at GC once before saying that.]

After a time, I can smell APs and antis a mile off. I am very well-practised. I do not care if people ‘infiltrate’ or not, they are always exposed and dealt with, or they simply fade away.

[Let that be a lesson. I was seeing if you would react.]

Listen, Mr "do you know who I am?" lawyer - I do not react unless I wish to and if the cause is important enough. You have stepped from the theme park of the place in which you exist into the real world. You have stomped on the constitution of the USA and the civil and human rights of an innocent man (amongst many).

[The other irony is that I never even requested that Jack be kept away from kids.]

Tony, do not be such a tool. Do you think I am so stupid to think that you had to? You only needed to lie in court, as you did, and the rest followed. I am not so disrespectful so as to think you are that stupid.

[It was mentioned in passing, but my proposed order stated that he should be restrained from going to events where the purpose of attendance was surreptitiously taking photos of minors and publishing such photos ]

What is the problem with this? Where do you think the historical record originates?

[… under the guise of pedophilia.]

What does that mean Tony? Remember, you are not shystering a politically-obligated judge now.

[Basically, it was a false light (defamation) and public disclosure of private facts (invasion of privacy) argument.]

‘Private facts’ in a *public place* with no defaming comments (for which laws already exist)? You get better Tony, you really do.

[Also, I have to tell you that I'm disappointed. I corresponded with Lindsay Ashford.]

Lindsay does not speak for anyone but himself, unless you are informed otherwise.

[Further, I read a thread now and then (just to see if anyone's out to rape the kid - which was stated on another board). ]

Because, of course, so many people publicise such actions, online, just before they are going to do so.

You really are a tool Tony … Someone please tell me this is not Tony, a practising SC lawyer.

[She understands the media game. So, she's not bugged by the personal slights, etc. It's the bug on the windshield.]

Hello, where did Cutiewitabooty come into it? Is that who ‘she’ is Tony?

Tony, you introduced her to this when you used her as a pawn in commercial ventures, time and time again.

[Where the serious dialogue about pedophilia and trans-generational sexual contact?]

Oh, there is sooooooooooooo much around, perhaps this may motivate you to learn something about the topic.

[Here, for example, is an interesting and benchmark paper on the issue: http://www.ipce.info/ipceweb/Library/nelson.htm . ]

Tony recommends IPCE to AL - wondrous.

[There is a swath of social and cultural practices well outside of the very artifically imposed age of consent laws that are practiced throughout the world. ]

Indeed.

[Why does the board devolve into bitchy snipes rather than some serious conversation? And, this is the so called open minded crowd.]

Because we can. This is not an academic site. We will discuss what we wish, when we wish, within the mods’ control. When you have learned a little more, you will see that there are individuals, here, and elsewhere, who will outwit any ‘expert‘ you may provide.

[All I get are "statistically" this or "statistically" that.]

Sometimes statistics are useful, that is how judgements are made in the real world, outside that of law.

( edit )

[What a fucken hoot.]

I am sorry that you think this is all so humorous.

[I caught so much shit from the soccer moms when I went to bat for Jack after the Steve Wilkos taping. They lynch a mentally ill guy on stage.]

You reap what you sew Tony.

[What a horrible fucken thing to do with a human being.]

You reap what you sew Tony.

[But, Jack doesn't help himself.]

He has every right to say what he will and what he will, within the law, and to be protected by it whilst doing so.

[He keeps blabbing to the media and finally implicates himself in this murder case. ]

You fucking hypocrite. Do you think I do not have a copy of the RR show?

[While a lot of his behavior can be explained by virtue of his mental illness, he is an enigma.]

… and that is what you hate, he is everything you are not (maybe) - and it is killing you.

[He has moments of brilliance. He is tenacious. He is engaging and brutally honest and I think he found some form of society in this crowd.]

What crowd would that be Tony?

[On the other hand, it appears that a lot of people here could give a fuck about Jack McClellan as he is the dance boy for the crowd.]

He is own man, a free spirit and I have stated so. However, this is a free board, and we will comment as we will. Do you think he has not had personal advice from people at AL and outside it?

[Most people - here and in the general public - have no idea of what happened over the last month. ]

But they will soon, Tony, oh yes they will.

[It's very ironic that the very crowd that is so critical of mainstream media is so readily accepting of it as the gospel truth.]

I have collected every piece of media output I could find on Jack’s case. By triangulation, I have more than enough to create the story, which I will, in the next few weeks. You do not warrant instant action.

[Start asking questions and stop giving speeches. ]

Who the fuck do you think you are to give me advice … you are the one who linked to sexually-arousing, bikini images of your young daughter from your Flickr site (and, yes, they are archived) and, at the same time, continued to harass and bad mouth Jack, inside and outside court, so as to further your failing public position.

When you have cleared up a few of your own issues, then feel free to come back and believe that you can begin to start advising me about the quality of debate and morality.

[Those with little more than bitchy snipes are . . . the bug on the windshield. You’re a snotty mess, but you'll never impact the landscape.]

Patronising and ill-informed bullshit - to be ignored.

[The GL crowd ]

The what?

[had a golden opportunity to present its point of view.]

But, ‘they’ do, more and more, every year.

[People were listening].

No they were not, you closed them down when you fucked up Jack’s life. Jack was doing an OK job with his site.

[What happens? You attack a kid. What a cluster fuck.]

I think you will find it is the cluster fuck who peddled his own daughter’s CP pictures, online, and then named her as a Jane Doe in a civil case about taking clothed images of minors in public, who may be responsible for that.

[Many of our laws are ridiculous.]

No shit Sherlock? It does not stop you making money from them … eh Tony?

[For example, in terms of art - what gets put into a photograph is illegal; but if it a rendition in paint, charcoal, pen, etc. it's okay. So, the media of expression protects the child? What kind of crap is that?]

Then get it changed Tony. Become an advocate.

[Further, who is to judge what is art and whose art is worthwhile? No one.]

The jury.

[Accordingly, the benchmark for legality should be set at the place of harm to the child.]

Should it?

[Further, many age of consent laws are a disaster waiting to happen (many of which have unfortunately occurred). While the age of consent is probably low for most to tolerate, the Canadian scheme of age of consent is more realistic than California's draconian age of 18 years. Ironically, in California, in a divorce case, a child can express their preference for which parent to live with if they are "of such age and maturity" to do so. "Such age and maturity" can be four, six, nine or 17. It depends on the kid. Conversely, an 18 year old having sex with a 17 year old subjects that 18 year old to potential serious criminal consequences.]

Interesting, but not really relevant, at this time

[By not engaging in the dialogue, you are solidifying the very antiquated, stodgy, unrealistic and cold Victorian ethic you seek to combat.]

Oh Tony, you really have no idea.

[There are tremendous cultural and legal questions that need to be addressed in this arena.]

Tony is having a Eureka moment here.

[Pedophilia has been a theme in civilization since there was civilization.]

No, being a MAA has been. Paedophilia is a very recent fabrication, in human culture.

[Don't you think it warrants lucid dialogue?]

Hell Yeah … how about you start a radio or TV show, Tony, and invite us on? Get RR to do a open phone-in.

[Well, carry on. If there was some serious discussion going on, I would join the party. But, we'll have to see.]

Patronising and ill-informed bullshit - to be ignored.

[The mainstay of my practice is criminal defense. Try and imagine the issues and personalities I deal with on a daily basis. Bianca has been there for much of it. So, a little taste of the real world hardly hurts.]

Please see above … Cutiewitabooty is simply a ‘victim’ of your greed and personal ambition - deal with the consequences, as unintended as they may be.

[Okay - bitchy snipes or something of substance? Ball is in your court . . .]

It is very rare for me to participate in ad hominem attacks. I am doing this, so as to illustrate how much I despise what you stand for and what you have done … to your constitution, to Jack, to the law and to your daughter. The MAA issue is actually secondary to my position.

I do hope you read what I have typed, very carefully. I have more than enough to make your life awkward. However, in the spirit of redemption and humanity, I will allow you 2 weeks to make up for the damage you have done, before I create my piece. You may do this as you see fit. We reap what we sew.

Yours,

Dr Nigel Leigh Oldfield
Director and Webmanager