Sockpuppets on t'other forum

[hotterthanurex]

Also, to labour a point. Having a forum owned by someone who shuts down any discussion that don't suit him, and could flounce off at any point he isn't being agreed with or appeased and shut the forum down ISN'T great for our community. It's terrible for our community. Mark Zuckerberg isn't going to close SE23 mums if we say something he doesn't care for.

[Homecroft]

**applause **

[starman]

If people want to use SE23.Life that's up to them, but they should get to read the Flava Baker thread before they make their mind up.
His perception that he can create further fabrications with impunity beyond what he confessed to with Flava Baker is coming to an end.

[/quote]

Now there is a Flavia Baker account which appears local and follows socks. I'm confused by all this.

https://twitter.com/FlaviaBaker10

[hotterthanurex]

Bwahhahahhahah. At last, a Beachy tribute act!
I'd been so seriously considering flogging some Flava Baker merch (T shirts? Mural designs?) but this is waaay better.

[JGD]

There have been many statements made on the dot life forum about a police complaint and an associated police investigation. While those linked with the site have not provided any evidence supported by a valid complaint record number (CRN), Nicola decided to contact Metropolitan Police Service and Kent Police and offer her assistance in the matter. It was with the intent that it could be brought to an end quickly for all parties involved. She's asked me to relate these findings on STF.

Nicola has been completely vindicated in outing a nasty sock-puppet who was trying to spy on her and harass her.

Perhaps this is an end to the matter.

If it is not , Nicola will report this continued harassment to the police.

Any repetition of the suggestion that there is a police inquiry into Nicola or that she has done anything illegal will be regarded as threatening and libellous.

And any trust that most people had in Chris is destroyed by his vindictive actions on STF and against previous moderators and contributors to SE23.life

On Friday (26th July), Nicola drove to Sevenoaks and presented herself to Kent Police. After that she attended Lewisham Police station for a second time. She spent several hours at both police stations and after extensive searches, the following was confirmed to her by both forces:

1. There are no reports filed against her married or maiden names. Chris is aware of both names;
2. There are no reports filed against her date of birth;
3. There are no reports filed against her address;
4. There are no reports filed against Save Duncombe Hill Green or anything that looks or sounds remotely like that;
5. There are no reports filed by Chris;
6. No reports were filed at Lewisham Police Station on 17th July that may even remotely relate to the circumstances described by Nic in a fully and frank report to the officers she spoke to.
7. This point contradicts the post on STF by a non-mod who had been shown an electronic version of an alleged document in evidence created by Chris;
8. Nic disclosed to the Metropolitan police fully the email and its content she sent from the Save Duncombe Hill Green account. MPS confirmed the report would NOT have been transferred to Kent Police. It falls squarely within MPS’ jurisdiction;
9. MPS also confirmed in the event that a report had been filed on 17th July with Lewisham Police and it had been subsequently transferred to Kent Police, it would still show up on Lewisham Police systems as well as Kent police systems. It showed up on neither on either the 22nd or 26th of July when Nicola made her enquiries;

I hope this shows clear evidence that no police complaint exists and therefore no police investigation is currently underway. Nicola has done so much for our community; led on civic campaigns, supported our schools, and been a source of information for so many things in SE23. What many don't know is all the amazing stuff she does behind the scenes, helping individuals and offering kindness. We need more people like Nicola.

[hotterthanurex]

Poor Nicola, what a huge waste of her time. Thank you for this update. I look forward very much to the complete restoration of the Flava Baker thread, as promised by .Life mods.

[JGD]

Also, to labour a point. Having a forum owned by someone who shuts down any discussion that don't suit him, and could flounce off at any point he isn't being agreed with or appeased and shut the forum down ISN'T great for our community. It's terrible for our community. Mark Zuckerberg isn't going to close SE23 mums if we say something he doesn't care for.

and

Poor Nicola, what a huge waste of her time. Thank you for this update. I look forward very much to the complete restoration of the Flava Baker thread, as promised by .Life mods.

To echo Homecroft - ***applause***

[starman]

Wow. This is truly incredible news. So as many have thought there is no complaint. No investigation. I hope this can now be discussed on the dot life forum where it should be discussed. At the very least the hidden topics should be revived.

I completely agree that Nicola is great for this community. I'm so saddened and angry that she is continually subjected to this level of harassment.

I'm one of the many recipients of the kindness that JGD mentioned. Once she read of my search for a food item. She found it in Lewisham, bought it for me, and had her son bike it round to my house. I had never met Nicola. I was really touched by this random act of kindness.

I'm sure there are many other similar stories out there.

[hotterthanurex]

Just read Nicola's post on SE23.com. Feel a little guilty about my levity upthread as the effect this has had on Nicola and her family is absolutely horrible. I've actually met a few trolls and former trolls (IRL!), and, to an extent, they see the internet as a game. They like the attention, they like the reaction, and a fair few of them get off on being notorious or even reviled. So maybe CB won't change his ways, but please. SE23.Life mods. End this now, and post a brief and public apology. Remove all the (clearly, and now demonstrably) false references to a police investigation. Yes, it's fine to have lively discussion of local issues (and of course lively disagreement too). But a poster on a community forum should NEVER been allowed to target another individual in this way. This IS a failure (albeit a 'built-in' failure) of the moderation team. You must do the right thing and correct it immediately.

[brazil nut]

While those linked with the site have not provided any evidence supported by a valid complaint record number (CRN)

It occurred to me today that I may have unwittingly deceived readers here on Chris Beach’s behalf

Dick spotted this days ago and was decent enough to speak up about it. What a disappointment that the moderators haven't done the same. Isn't that their job?

[DickWynne]

I am hugely relieved for Nicola (whom I don't even know) to hear this news, and sorry that I appear briefly to have been instrumental to Chris Beach in perpetrating an apparent untruth in pursuit of reputational damage limitation by him.

My bizarre follow-up theory on the STF thread was thought most likely to smoke out the CRNs, which I was prepared to believe existed but were being withheld for psychological reasons, but it appears it was not too wide of the mark after all.

I am still mystified by the images I received from Chris of convincing-looking and recently-dated written and email acknowledgements (but with CRNs redacted for no good reason) allegedly received by him from both police forces, and I have contacted both forces offering them as evidence.

Chris would rather I did not put them online, but given his (at best) intransigence on the CRN matter, and the fact that crime reports are a matter of legitimate public interest, I don't feel bound by his wishes. If there is a valid explanation for the below images (and it seem improbable that there has been a clerical error at both police forces) it's high time we knew it.

To make a false crime report, or even to claim the existence of a fictitious one, is, I believe, an offence carrying a range of sanctions or punishment -- from police caution, through fines, to jail time.

[JGD]

I have just received this:

This is a formal request under the GDPR / Data Protection Act 2018.

Please remove any information from your site that personally identifies me and/or can be linked to me. I no longer wish to have anything to do with sydenham.org.uk due to the unpleasant culture that has formed there. For example, the following page:

viewtopic.php?f=9&t=19646

On a separate note, you may also wish to review some of the accounts on your forum to prevent your site hosting libel and defamation (and general unpleasantness).

Over on SE23.life, a small handful of accounts which frequently made personal attacks on others were first warned about this behaviour and then eventually suspended after repeat offences. Some of these abusive accounts have now migrated to STF, so please see this as friendly advice - to steer STF to happy and community-focussed culture, you may wish to respond to the behaviour of these individuals.

Chris Beach

This i regard as further harrassment by Mr Beach. He has sent me numerous previous threats [example here]. He has been asked to stop it and been blocked. But obviously found a way round.

So here is a formal notice to Mr Beach. JUST STOP IT.

Nobody wants to hurt you, but we do need to stop you harrassing, bullying and telling phibs. The more you try, the more you will be exposed. Simples.

Stuart

A quote from a response by the ICO on a similar matter:

The ICO’s role

Part of our role is to consider complaints from individuals who believe their data protection rights have been infringed.

Our view

We have considered the information available in relation to this complaint and we are of the view that [Redacted} forum does not fall under the remit of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)

This is because most social forums and social media come under domestic exemption, so the GDPR doesn’t apply.

From a trusted source.

Checking the Act for confirmation and screen dump.

[DickWynne]

[

The ICO’s role

Part of our role is to consider complaints from individuals who believe their data protection rights have been infringed.

Our view

We have considered the information available in relation to this complaint and we are of the view that [Redacted} forum does not fall under the remit of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)

This is because most social forums and social media come under domestic exemption, so the GDPR doesn’t apply.

From a trusted source.

Checking the Act for confirmation and screen dump.

Many thanks for this very interesting information JGD. Chris Beach gave me GDPR as the reason the forum could not change ownership, which is the only way I would reactivate my membership of it.

[hotterthanurex]

Ah. Yes, I imagine Chris could be right there, Dick, as that's to do with the data they keep and store? Although who knows as the legislation while well intentioned is extremely confusing. But yes, GDPR doesn't cover what people write on forums or social media. That's covered by usual laws for libel, hate speech, revenge porn, harassment etc. Which is why it seemed so odd when Chris Beach invoked the mysticical powers of GDPR. I'd be surprised if he didn't know it didn't apply?

[stuart]

GDPR doesn't cover what people write on forums or social media. That's covered by usual laws for libel, hate speech, revenge porn, harassment etc. Which is why it seemed so odd when Chris Beach invoked the mysticical powers of GDPR. I'd be surprised if he didn't know it didn't apply?

Chris threatened me with taking my company to its regulatory authority, Nominet, in an attempt to intimidate me into doing something illegal or close STF down as its server provider.

But, being a member of Nominet, I knew the procedure he was threatening to invoke simply didn't apply. I reported his actions to Admin here. The rest is history and may explain why I'm not on his Christmas Card list.

I think he has found legal threats, justified or not, have worked well in the past and will save his remaining reputation for the future.

Stuart

[DickWynne]

The visual evidence above begs a number of questions and invites much speculation, but I really can’t be bothered.

The fact remains that Chris’s account is incompatible with information Nicola gained from the police. The only logically possible explanations are:

Two police forces are in error regarding the alleged crime reports
Chris has made a bogus crime report claim
and (for technical completeness but improbable in my view)
Either Nicola or the poster relaying her findings above is being untruthful.

I have heard from both police forces that the anomalous CRN acknowledgements from Chris will be looked into on receipt of a relevant formal crime report. This will be made later today unless (which seems unlikely) Chris can clear up the mystery and exonerate himself.

[Homecroft]

Fair play for grabbing the bull by the horns Dick. It does indeed make a very confusing read, for anyone completely on the outside of this, I am sure they are either completely perplexed, or losing interest. Which is sad, as the whole situation is a very important one. It is amazing how quickly the cracks in the integrity of a man can be painted over, and almost forgotten about, especially by those who refuse to belief he would set out to harm someone mentally or by way of reputation.

The visual evidence above begs a number of questions and invites much speculation, but I really can’t be bothered.

The fact remains that Chris’s account is incompatible with information Nicola gained from the police. The only logically possible explanations are:

Two police forces are in error regarding the alleged crime reports
Chris has made a bogus crime report claim
and (for technical completeness but improbable in my view)
Either Nicola or the poster relaying her findings above is being untruthful.

I have heard from both police forces that the anomalous CRN acknowledgements from Chris will be looked into on receipt of a relevant formal crime report. This will be made later today unless (which seems unlikely) Chris can clear up the mystery and exonerate himself.

[DickWynne]

<wild hypothesis 2>

Chris made a report to the Met, and maybe they can’t now track it down. We don’t know which Met division he reported to, if he did, so Nicola may have barked up the wrong Met tree, or there is some other explanation why they couldn’t find the report.

Met forwarded the report to Kent police. Why? Well there is no way to be sure where an online accused lives, so Chris’s home location is the only geography they have to go on.

Kent police took one look and said ‘don’t waste our time’.

Chris fished up an old, genuine Kent Police CR acknowledgement, containing the magic word Harassment, and used that with the Met one, redacting both to hide the subterfuge.

</wild hypothesis 2>

This hypothetical sequence is completely compatible with the visual evidence. But it could still be wrong! We are well beyond the looking-glass now.

ETA: It is hard to resist trying to solve this puzzle!

[JGD]

I have heard from both police forces that the anomalous CRN acknowledgements from Chris will be looked into on receipt of a relevant formal crime report. This will be made later today unless (which seems unlikely) Chris can clear up the mystery and exonerate himself.

Dick, a number of us feel very strongly about the distinct probability that Nic was the subject of a piece of conspiracy and entrapment, pre-set up in a plan to engage her, harass her and her private accounts and then to report any encounter with her to the police as a potential crime. For the owner of a local forum to engage in such a scheme is almost unthinkable.

To find evidence in the form of incontrovertible fact that this indeed was his plan and he was in the midst of carrying it out before he self-confessed he was fabricating the Flava Baker entities and lied about their relationship with them is actually horrifying. Fear was being foisted on Nic in an uncontrolled manner by this guy.

So question is, what assurances can be given by the police that the anomalous CRN acknowledgements from Chris will be looked into effectively? Do you feel that the position has been considered by officers senior enough in both Services to make such a commitment on the evidence of the documents provided to you by Chris?

Do they in turn understand the nature of Chris's behaviours and how bizarrely he has behaved toward Nic and the fact that given the evidence on Twitter and a local Mums forum over the last days he continues hide his own proclivity to fabricate and obfuscate and to promulgate a view that it is Nic who is telling lies? And has continued to cause some people to take action against her.

He has rejected advice from people he once had respect for to stop his activities.

I hear reports you are a careful man and I am sure will take no step that will harm Nic. And it is hoped there will be a positive outcome.

Nic most of all may need protection from the uncontrolled reactions of this man. Those reactions are possibly based on one dysfunction or another. It makes sense that police be made aware of their presence and potential impact.

[DickWynne]

Dick, a number of us feel very strongly ...

Your points are very well taken and it’s not for me, as a latecomer to this lengthy business, to get actively involved. I just happened to unexpectedly come by some potentially conclusive evidence of a single bad act. My speculations may have been unhelpful. I’m PMing you and Nic regarding the full content of your post, but rest assured that in my mind Nic has the reins of this affair.