This really stood out in Aaron Worthing’s description of his recent hearing to remove an illegal (and utterly dishonest) restraining order: Of course the highlight of the hearing came when my attorney sought to cross examine Kimberlin. Of course he gave Kimberlin an epic cross-examination back on April 11, but today he was more focused… Continue reading Lawyers and Harassment
Someone commented at Peter Aranyi’s blog: Brown has been subjected to 18 months worth of intermittent blog posts, a total of just under 50 and countless comments, accusing her of stalking, making fake rape complaints, inviting rape, faking suicide, attempting suicide to get attention, acting like a bunny boiler, abusing police time, committing perjury, bringing… Continue reading Sperling’s Testable Claim – Part1?
Well, tonight Sperling wrote a rather pathetic post dredging up an incident from Madeleine’s past and telling some lies that are even less believable than usual. (It was designed to undermine their fundraising efforts I’ve discussed before.) It seems to have worked though. Before (10pm ish from her post) After: (11pm ish from MandM) Massive fail. Not only has… Continue reading Attack – fail
I noticed this in the Brown v Sperling decision today.  Some of those posts are distressing and are made knowing that their content would distress. [snip] In addition comments had been made of a derogatory nature regarding Ms Flannagan’s religious beliefs and her competence as a law practitioner which have no substance and are clearly… Continue reading I would just like to thank the judge and attack the lawyers he praised
Your guess is as good as mine. Seriously though, can I call this behaviour crazy? ———————— This post is about Jacqueline (Jackie) Sperling, and is part of an ongoing series discussing her ongoing campaign of harassment and lies against lawyer Madeleine Flannagan and Ms Brown, and The Narrative – the alternate reality she presents on her blog in which she pretends… Continue reading 3am
Well, that’s something of a first – a deleted comment. I will publish it here instead. Peter, I believe that Sperling is crazy. I believe that the evidence shows this to be an objective fact. I note that you have pointedly failed to mention one post where I have said something untrue. Yet the… Continue reading Comment Deleted, aw.
The below is a response written by Matt Flannagan on Peter Aranyi’s blog*. Peter, I think this analysis is in places misleading. You write: “In their affidavits to the court they claimed ‘distress’ at reading what another blogger/ex-friend wrote about them on her blog. They claimed it amounted to harassment. Judge Harvey agreed that the statements… Continue reading Matt Flannagan Responds to a Critic
Oh boy, Jacqueline Sperling does not like the fact that her victims refuse to be beaten down. Three weeks after Judge Harvey’s ruling – two Lawyers, and an Accountant are still unable to get it. Translation: “Why can’t the victims of my harassment get over it? I have.” She is nothing if not generous, no?… Continue reading Sperling is still obsessing over her loss of face
I just read this post on LMC’s blog. The headline material is from here. I’ve been talking about how Sperling has no shame, how the irony in her posts is laid on in spades. But thinking about that for a few seconds just broke my heart. Let me hilight part of that: God’s patience is… Continue reading Nasty without any trace of shame
As readers will be aware, I’ve been blogging a bit on Jacqueline Sperling’s campaign of lies and harassment against (among others) Madeleine Flannagan and her friend Ms Brown. I wasn’t online last night, and I missed this post: So here goes the fisk. Full disclosure when begging for money… should not be optional. One rule for thee, another for… Continue reading How to shoot your credibility sky-high