Introduction to "What has been going on" 
and to put the footnotes below into a 
meaningful context

(If the bold, large type on this page irritates you, a link right here to a regular text 
 copy of this expose' -- all the same content).   The typeface used here simply indicates 
 the degree of my anger and how emphatic I am after years of harassment and 
 abuse, and thus I felt it was appropriate.  I am tired of being a victim of unethical 
 people -- malicious people who are acting obviously to silence views and 'protect' 
 an unethical field and a fraudulent 'science'.  These people have shown great 
 tolerance for all sorts of nonsense on Usenet, BUT NOT CRITICISMS OF THEIR 
 'SCIENCE' !  The newsgroup record of the last several years proves this.  (Again, 
 out of consideration for the reader, let me provide a link right here to a regular text 
 copy of this expose' below.)

I feel a need to introduce this footnotes page by providing readers 
with an overall perspective on "what is going on."  The first thing 
that should be said is that I never had any intention that "things" 
(accusations, explanations) ever leave the newsgroups where 
debates and fights began.  Unfortunately, my opponents could NOT 
content themselves with keeping Usenet (newsgroup) debate ON 
Usenet.  I feel I must explain the lies about me written publicly 
on the Internet, written on anon abuse web sites hosted by anon 
persons (perhaps this alone says a lot about my opponents, yet 
I feel the need for a clear response).

Let me state here by name and on my properly registered web space 
that I am a victim of a stalking/harassment/defamation campaign       
lead by some psychology Usenet leaders.  The motivation for their     
actions is simply the suppression of certain facts and views.  These     
facts and views are summarized at the bottom of my my_posts.htm     
web page and elaborated on the main page of this web site .                
                                                                                      -- Brad Jesness     

My opponents have felt it necessary to do every conceivable thing 
to try to defame/slander me on-Usenet and off. Any suggestions that 
I was the first to go off Usenet in any way is false.  And, any 
suggestion that I began anonymous Usenet activities is also FALSE.
 
The deja and now the google record shows that the first anonymous 
personal attacks were against me.  The first off-topic and personal 
"FAQ" was against me and posted anonymously (it rather quickly 
became clear that this personal off-topic and malicious "FAQ" 
was written by Paul Bernhardt, 'ombudsman' for the ridiculous 
sci.psychology.psychotherapy.moderated newsgroup).  Soon 
this "FAQ" was elaborated and hosted for a time by Peter Hood, 
one of my primary tormentors.  He hosted it until he went back to 
graduate school (for a masters degree in Forensic Psych. from the 
University of Leicester, U.K.) and had to look more "respectable."

This "FAQ" was soon taken over by a proxy hoodlum and 
proven stalking and harassing thug going by a true alias and 
calling himself "Taylor Jimenez".  "Taylor" has anonymously 
hosted an elaborated and even more libelous/slanderous/defamatory 
AND FALSE version of this "FAQ" for at least 7 years, perhaps 
for a while having his up concurrently with Peter Hood. 
Obviously my web page addressing all these activities is very new 
and began just in early 2002.  (I did NOT initiate such off-Usenet 
activities NOR WAS I ONE THAT BEGAN ANY OTHER SORT 
OF OFF-USENET ACTIVITY.  Absolutely any and all claims of 
email harassment from me are completely false -- absolutely no 
evidence of this false accusation has EVER been shown NOR could 
it be.)  

AND: ALL INDICATIONS ARE THAT THIS MALICIOUS 
BEHAVIOR AND ALL OTHER MALICIOUS BEHAVIORS 
DESCRIBED ARE MOTIVATED BY A DESIRE TO SUPPRESS 
FACTS AND VIEWS ABOUT THE FRAUDULENT FIELD OF 
PSYCHOTHERAPY.  This is what is REALLY going on.

Other off-Usenet activity (some of which you will read about below) 
was instigated by Peter Hood.  Peter Hood, it is claimed, sent out 
a cd-ROM full of "evidence" about how bad a person I was to 
just about every conceivable place and to any malicious hoodlum 
that would help him in stalking/harassing/defamation efforts. This 
began what was apparently a full effort to ruin me in real life. 
Again, I never ever have done anything like this or comparable to 
this. This is aggression initiated by my opponents and is NOT 
retaliation for anything I have done.

Other off-Usenet malice has included filing false charges of 
unethical behavior and harassment against me with authorities. 
NONE OF THESE COMPLAINTS WERE SEEN TO HAVE ANY 
MERIT.  And, as you will read below, even an ethics complaint 
against me with the APA was found lacking in merit and I was 
cleared of any wrong-doing, **  EVEN ANY ETHICAL 
WRONG-DOING **, by the Amer. Psychol. Assoc.  I myself filed 
charges of ethical wrong-doing against some of my psychologist 
opponents ONLY AFTER THEY HAD INITIATED SUCH 
ACTIONS AGAINST ME.  (Again, any suggestion that I began 
ANY sort of off-Usenet activity is absolutely false.)   

There are so many sorts of malice and harassment and stalking 
I have been a victim of that I cannot address them all.  But I will 
address two other false accusations and associated wrong-doings 
by my opponents.  First, there is this repeated charge that I have 
used "aliases" while on Usenet.  This is 100% FALSE and I can 
and DO PROVE IT.  While on Usenet, I used only 10 email 
addresses when NOT LEGITIMATELY ANONYMOUS IN 
STANDARD ACCEPTED WAYS (<-- this sentence is a link to the 
proof).   This often repeated lie and intentional gross slanderous 
misrepresentation well illustrates the malice of my opponents. Using 
various "screen names" OR, actually, "post labels" along with a 
person's valid well-known email address was common in the early 
days of Usenet and in fact BEGUN by persons like John Grohol, 
the founder of the sci.psychology.* newsgroups.  (Ironically, 
I just followed suit with this practice.  If I am said to have "aliases", 
then John Grohol must also have many aliases.)  

Not only have I not had ANY aliases: 
I have posted with well-known, valid email addresses and, 
IN FACT, I USUALLY SIGNED MY POSTS WHEN 
NOT USING MY MOST FAMILIAR SCREEN NAME AND 
EMAIL ADDRESS.   ALSO, only in the last few years have I ever 
posted anonymously, and when I did so I did so in the common and 
accepted manner.  There was MUCH anonymous harassment of 
ME before I ever made an anonymous post.

Over the years I took great pains to always be on-topic on Usenet 
and the historical record of my posts PROVES this to be the case. 

A second thing I would like to address expressly here is the totally 
FALSE accusation of "stalking and harassment" that has been 
made against me REPEATEDLY (AND especially now in the 
anonymously hosted "FAQ" on the Internet about me, hosted 
by "Taylor" -- a person going by a true alias and running this 
falsely registered anon abuse domain against me).  I have NEVER in 
any way stalked or harassed ANYONE and NO evidence I have 
has EVER been produced NOR could it be.  

But, in fact, I have shown several instances of what most people 
would consider stalking and harassment by my opponents, 
even including Packer/Hood cronies and sppm moderators, 
John Price and Dan Rogers.  Both of these individuals AND 
OTHERS CLEARLY ASSOCIATED WITH THEIR MOB have 
gone into my local newsgroups to post off-topic personal 
defamation about me.  

THIS IS WHAT MOST PEOPLE WOULD CONSIDER STALKING 
AND HARASSMENT.  I am a victim of this AND HAVE NEVER 
DONE ANYTHING LIKE THAT MYSELF.  (I can and have 
provided evidence of their transgressions here.  There is NO 
credible evidence I have EVER DONE ANYTHING LIKE THIS.)

One other thing that comes to mind I would like to address is the 
way my opponents make their complaints.  My main complainant 
has NEVER contacted me in ANY personal or ANY one-to-one 
way before making all of her complaints, including those to 
organizations and officials.  NO ONE COULD SEE THIS PERSON 
AS ACTING IN A CIVIL OR REASONABLE MANNER.  This 
simply shows the malicious intent of Leslie E. Packer, a person 
who has harassed me with lies for several years (and I say 
so here by name and with full accountability) and she has 
tried to harass and defame me in several ways EVEN THROUGH 
OFFICIAL CHANNELS.  NONE OF HER EFFORTS WERE 
JUDGED TO HAVE MERIT AND HER SANITY IS IN 
QUESTION.

NOW, FINALLY THE "FOOTNOTES"
 (addressing things people 
have heard about from my opponents).

--Footnotes on the Most Malicious and Inappropriate Usenet 
   Leaders, CONTINUING THEIR IMPROPRIETIES BY PROXY--

FOOTNOTE on Leslie Packer, NY 'psychologist',  
     who claims to work with tourettes children and who 
     spearheaded efforts to take newsgroup disputes off Usenet. 
     If you read the material below and then just do some basic 
     investigating (e.g. by using the link provided in text below) 
     you will discover that Leslie Packer is by far a MUCH more 
     malicious individual than me.  Her activities are MUCH more 
     inappropriate and MUCH more stalking and harassing than 
     anything I have ever done.  She is an obsessed, out-of-control, 
     malicious hypocrite.  It is VERY ironic that she ever 
     complained about me to any officials.  THIS IN AND OF 
     ITSELF should NOT be taken to add any credibility to 
     what she and her cronies have said.  That is simply just how 
     completely crazy this individual is.  Regarding this particular 
     matter:  

The only law enforcement agency known to respond to Packer's 
BOGUS complaints about me apparently considers her a pest and 
a crank.  Regarding repeated complaints ABOUT HOW 
PEOPLE HAVE BEEN TREATED  (and ALL that is involved 
here w/r to Leslie Packer's complaints is Usenet posts !! -- i.e. 
she was complaining about how she has been treated on Usenet!), 
these law enforcement people have said: 

" ... [the agency] will not pursue any investigation nor will it 
[(the agency)] pursue any prosecution relating to your ongoing 
dispute ... any claims of criminal activity in relation to this 
dispute should be addressed to local law enforcement.  ... 
[the agency] will take no action to intervene in your ongoing 
dispute " (end quote of very high level MN official of that agency)

By the way, ANY statement that ANY legal action was taken 
against me OR that I am under ANY legal "order" IS FALSE. 
There IS NO evidence that I was ever formally or officially 
"investigated" BECAUSE that claim is totally FALSE.  I have 
secured an official statement to the CONTRARY.  
In Earlier efforts to combat this BASELESS, FALSE charge: 
About as soon as I learned of Leslie Packer's harassment of MN 
officials I asked about what was going on.  I asked if I was being 
investigated in any way and I was told "No, I was NOT".  This 
information was officially related to the APA where the goof, Leslie 
Packer, had also filed bogus ethics complaints.  I WAS CLEARED 
OF ANY ETHICAL WRONG-DOING BY the Amer. Psychological 
Association.  THUS, NOT ONLY AM I NOT GUILTY OF ANY 
LEGAL WRONG, I AM NOT EVEN GUILTY OF AN ETHICS 
VIOLATION !!!!  This should certainly add some perspective here.

Another set of facts provides perspective on this very bizarre complaining to   "authorities" done by Leslie Packer:  The complaints by Packer occurred 6 years ago, still she and/or  her pals have  harassed me with the fact she and Peter H. made complaints for all of the 6 years   since.  It is as if the mere complaining about a person is in itself supposed to be taken  as an indication of wrong-doing. Well, it should not -- esp. when the the complaints  are made by hypocritical kooks (read on for more).  Again, in fact, this is just  another way of Packer, Hood et al continuing the stalking/harassment/defamation --  most done by their anonymous pals presently. What is especially ironic is that the complaints followed three years of intense  harassment and other attempts at defamation by Packer and her pals. Yes. If you  check the record you will find that I had been repeatedly accused (falsely and  without evidence) of email abuse I had never done.  This was spearheaded by Packer  herself, PLUS I had endured about three years of Usenet posting of a personal FAQ  about me.  All this was done in a harassing/defamatory manner and off-topic in  response to my on-topic posts.  I never had or have done anything like this.

Anyway, from the material I have provided HERE, BY NAME 
and on THIS NON-ANON web site, one can conclude Leslie E. 
Packer of NY has been told NOT to contact and bother the ONLY 
law enforcement people EVER known to even respond to her 
BOGUS and RIDICULOUS complaints of being mistreated 
on Usenet.  She, it seems, has been basically told NOT to 
bother MN law enforcement and bother her own LE with 
her KOOKY complaints instead.  (She is a well-known KOOK in 
her home state of NY, known as a harasser of medical doctors.)

No evidence has ever been presented to anyone 
that makes them see any significant problem with 
the way this 'doctor' of psychology has been 
treated on Usenet.  You will be given a link to 
ALL the posts on Usenet I ever made related to 
her complaint (below) and you can judge for 
yourselves. 

I believe this is what most people would call a "crank" or KOOK.  Ironically much of the problem Leslie Packer seems 
to have is with people pointing out that while she has a 
license as a psychologist in NY, she has NO graduate degree 
in either Counseling or Clinical Psychology -- she is an 
Experimental Psychologist (old vintage, you know, pigeons
and rats). 

As I mentioned, Leslie E. Packer of NY
filed an ethics violation against me (Brad Jesness) with the
Amer. Psychological Assoc.  IT WAS DISMISSED.  She, in
contrast, had QUIT the APA before my counter ethics
complaint could be heard.  In short, only ONE of us has been
officially found to be w/o an ethics violation.  THIS IS ME. 

When you consider the fact that Leslie Packer has told mental 
health clients to "blow their brains out" and has guided her 
minor children to vote for people as "kooks" on an abuse newsgroup 
(a number of times), the person with the real ethical problems 
seems clear.   This is Leslie Packer, who in my view, is unfit to 
practice psychology.  This same person one year posted several 
hundreds of times to an abuse newsgroup.  This is how malicious 
and out-of-control she is.  She is the "kook" and brings disgrace to 
practicing psychologists everywhere.  She has expected I would 
cave in to her years of what is clearly malicious harassment and I 
have NOT and I will not.  If she chooses to back personal web 
sites against me full of lies and distortions, she should expect a 
response.  But I, unlike her and her pals, need not hide behind 
anonymity.  When the truth is on one's side, one need not HIDE!

One should know (or recall, if one already knows) that Leslie 
Packer has on more than one occasion expressly proclaimed her 
friendship with persons like "Crawdad" and others who threatened 
and/or engaged in illegal activity.  Many of her posts were 
apparently cancelled to hide her shameful record in this regard. 
(I have never had to cancel a post due to shameful behavior like this.)
Unfortunately, as many have witnessed over the last few years, 
several psychology leaders, and even newsgroup moderators, have 
followed her shameful lead. Even now "Kali", a sppm moderator, 
continues to proclaim her friendship for the anonymous stalker 
and complete hoodlum, ICEMAN.

Again, ironically, Leslie Packer's behavior toward me on Usenet 
has been MUCH, MUCH, MUCH worse than mine towards her. 
Of the two of us, ONLY she has repeated off-topic LIES in a 
stalking and harassing manner. And she did this over a long 
period of time in response to on-topic posts.  An example of this 
is the many, many, many claims that I sent email which I NEVER 
DID (and, by the way, this email was CLAIMED to have been 
sent, NOT to her, but another person!).  There are also many 
examples of intentional misrepresentations used in a 
stalking an harassing manner against me.  In short, Leslie Packer 
is an extreme hypocrite and an sick, obsessed, malicious person. 
(WHY WOULD YOU NEED ANON AND NAMELESS WEB 
 SITES TO DO YOUR DIRTY WORK OTHERWISE???)

Regarding ANOTHER example of the lies and intentional 
malice and harassment: 

AS I SAID ABOVE, but it bears repeating w/r to Packer's 
and Peter Hood's charges -- charges made by them repeatedly 
in a stalking and harassing manner:
  
Contrary to the claims of Leslie Packer, Peter Hood, and their 
proxies, I have NEVER used ANY aliases.  I have either posted 
by name and/or a few well known email valid email addresses 
or have been legitimately anonymous (in recent years only).  
I document ALL MY NON-ANONYMOUS POSTS, proving 
the claims of aliases against me is nothing but a malicious lie. 
(This link provides a link to ALL the posts I made on Usenet 
 related to Packer's official complaints.  NONE were made 
 x-no-archive and NONE have been cancelled or "nuked" from 
 the Deja or Google record.  Simply judge for yourself, from all 
 the direct record of the facts, what has gone on in these 
 newsgroups .)

One Final Matter, which now seems historical -- since the site is 
down: 
One might run across a cyberstalking web site that looks 
legitimate that makes mention of me.  When one looks closely, 
one finds that this is an anonymous web site AND it is actually 
a cotse web site, with the same IP as cotse.net .   There are 
absolutely clear and certain connections to Leslie Packer. In the 
beginning, the web site used EXACTLY the same html template 
with exactly all the same style choices made as Leslie Packer's 
tourette web site.  There are other reasons anyone can see certain 
connections between this defamatory site and Leslie Packer. 
This is the only other site that defames me other than the one 
"maintained" by "Taylor Jimenez" -- another anon site and 
one with NO real name associated with it (clear connections 
between Leslie Packer and Peter Hood have been demonstrated 
w/r to this web site as well).

The long and the short of it is that Leslie Packer must get her 
way, including the suppression of facts and views on Usenet, OR 
she will intentionally and purposefully engage in defamatory 
harassment -- this has included repeated lies and doing so in a 
harassing manner; campaigning for people to be voted as "kooks" 
on abuse newsgroups; soliciting aggression from anonymous punks 
and hackers of several sorts (including supporting anonymous 
false and defamatory web sites).  Not only are Packer's ethics and 
character in question; her sanity is as well.

----------------
FOOTNOTE on Peter Hood, masters degree in Forensic      
     Psychology from the Univ. of Leicester, U.K.  and who     
     has spearheaded efforts to threaten and ruin people. His  
     inappropriate behaviors have included, but gone beyond, 
     threats of illegal actions against me, posted on Usenet.  
     He has sent of a defamatory 'cd' of "evidence", apparently 
     indiscriminately, to any punk who has wanted to help him 
     with his personal and real life abuse of me.   He reportedly 
     also has tried to ruin me in real life in many ways using this 'cd' 
     full of "evidence" -- sending it out to many people and places.  
     I know of no more malicious behavior by anyone and I personally 
     would not even consider such a malicious and depraved thing, 
     especially just to "get" a person whose views on Usenet I just  
     didn't like !!    But that is what he has done.  PLUS:         

Again we must ask, if his case were just and his accusations 
appropriate, the WHY WOULD HE NEED ANON AND 
NAMELESS WEB SITES TO DO HIS DIRTY WORK FOR 
HIM???  He is a psychopathic hoodlum, that is why, unfit 
for any high degree in psychology or for any psychology practice.

Peter Hood is an incredible loser and was clearly tied
up with much of the illegal activities and the stalking,
harassment, lies, defamation, and inappropriate off-topic
activities JUST TO TRY TO SILENCE FACTS AND
VIEWS ON A SCIENCE NEWSGROUP.  Click HERE to
learn more about him AND Click HERE to learn about all
the psychologists willing to join a fan club for him after he
threatened physical assault several times.  This man has also
expressly threatened illegal actions against me.  He is a good
friend of Leslie Packer and has stayed at her home.
 
Still, Peter and Packer work together by proxy to do anonymous 
stalking, harassment, and defamation.  People in high places,  
with whom THEY initiated contact, have been made well-aware 
of this and I am confident evidence I provided has made this clear 
to them.  To wit: On at least three occassions, changes where made 
to the web sites of their proxy hoodlum pals, based on me 
making what was going on clear to authorities.   In short:

There is a lot of evidence that ANONYMOUS web sites 
are a sort of harassment and defamation "by proxy" being 
done by Leslie Packer and Peter Hood.  The prime example 
is "Taylor's" anonymous web sites that are totally anonymous 
and have NO valid registrations.  (For example, the 'wilhelp' 
 site does not have normal accountability since the owner of 
 the site is impossible to know.  The site is clearly used by 
 "Just Taylor", aka "Taylor Jimenez" -- an admitted 
 true alias, AKA Joe Jared. [link 2])  This site is clearly 
 based on 'material' clearly provided by Hood and Packer. 

Recall also the second anon web site, described above in Packer's 
footnote, that one is also is clearly connected to both Hood and 
Packer.

THERE IS PLENTY OF EVIDENCE OF IMPROPER AND 
ILLEGAL ACTIVITY, BUT ALL OF IT HAS TO DO WITH 
HOOD, PACKER, AND THEIR PALS.  NO EVIDENCE OF ANY
IMPROPRIETY (NOT EVEN AN ETHICAL IMPROPRIETY) 
HAS BEEN PRODUCED AGAINST ME.  NONE.  ALL 
CHARGES AGAINST ME HAVE BEEN MADE ONLY TO 
HARASS AND DEFAME ME TO SILENCE FACTS AND VIEWS.
(see the bottom of THIS LINKED PAGE for a summary of the 
 facts and views they feel they must silence through aggression.)

I testify that all the above is true.  This web page is NOT
anonymous and is properly registered and I, Brad Jesness,
am responsible for its content.

LET ME REPEAT: This web page is NOT 
anonymous and is properly registered and I, 
Brad Jesness, am responsible for its content 
(this is in stark contrast to any web site about
 me).

The real difference between my opponents and 
me seems to be THEY feel compelled to turn 
to anonymous hiding hoodlums to do their 
defamation.  I can say the TRUTH using my name 
and being fully accountable because I operate 
in the right.  -- Brad Jesness

This web page updated 09-02-05