Monday, November 2, 2020

DEFINE YOURSELF.   Harvey Fierstein

Sunday, July 13, 2014


IT'S THE 'COMMENTS' to the posts, the HYPOCRISY of Blog owner Margulies and his
CYBER BULLYING of the Dispatcher


Click images for zoom

 'Anonymous' was published at 6:29pm on
July 11, 2014

About 'a half an hour later, Blog owner Margulies removed it and 
replaced it with this:

Al M, "How many times do I have to say this. If commentators are gonna start throwing around names you have to be using your REAL name to post." 


A couple a' days EARLIER, on the 9th, he posted this:

TRIMET'S sexiest dispatcher voice from al m on Vimeo.

(click the link, then click 'stats') As of this posting there were 34.


This one to date has 24 views. Total of 58. 


They mentioned the Dispatcher's name, THEY SERIOUSLY SLANDERED HER, then the THIRD SICK A-HOLE WANTS A DESCRIPTION!  THEY'RE ALL HARASSING HER VIA THE INTERNET - IT'S NOT OK - IT'LL NEVER BE OK!  At one point a couple 'a days AFTER he published her voice, he went back and tried to distort it. But the damage was already done. Her voice remains recognizable. When I talk on this Blog about the SERIOUSNESS of Cyber Harassment, THIS posting epitomizes it!  By publishing these comments, Margulies created the very embodiment of a hostile and unsafe environment for this woman.  On and off the job! A reasonable person under similar circumstances WOULD NEVER ALLOW such hurtful trash talk against someone 1.) they don't know 2.) by commentors hiding behind a monitor somewhere 3.) using her real name. 4.) under the guise of anonymous. 

The fear is he's inciting cyber voyeurs of questionable motives against someone THEY DON'T KNOW and NEITHER DOES SHE. Margulies has been doing this for a long time. Since July, 2009 that I personally know of. He know's the danger of attacking someone over the internet. It's irresponsible. It's like he 'gets off' on it.  Wanting to hurt someone.  He mentors, supports and encourages others like Lane Jensen who do the same. 

He didn't follow his own policy requiring "REAL NAME TO POST" for disparaging comments about the Dispatcher same as he did for Bob. Similar to what Trimet does, he picks and chooses who he wants to protect.

In the world of Cyber Bullies, motive is everything!
'Motive' on Rantings appears to be sensationalism, at anyone's cost which equates to 'view count' or popularity. He uses the blog to bully, intimidate and harass those with a differing point of view. 

The comment about Bob compared to the Dispatcher is informational. 
The comments about the Dispatcher are slanderous and sick. 
He could have chosen NOT to publish either one. 

In the past he's published disgusting graphic obscenities from 'anonymous' commentors like using the name of the woman Operator who was assaulted/beaten in St Johns last December. That's when I notified him I didn't want him linking my Blog on his site anymore. I do not support abusers!  

He didn't follow his policy here either. The Blog title included the name of the woman being discussed.  

  • "False accusations. Many cyberstalkers try to damage the reputation of their victim and turn other people against them. They post false information about them on websites. They may set up their own websites, blogs or user pages for this purpose. They post allegations about the victim to newsgroups, chat rooms or other sites that allow public contributions, such as Wikipedia or[4]"  

Thursday, July 10, 2014


Click images for zoom

When my name's mentioned in a Blog comment... 

When they ask for an explanation...

When the explanation's silence...


"A number of key factors have been identified:•False accusations. Many cyberstalker's try to damage the reputation of their victim and turn other people against them. They post false information about them on websites. They may set up their own websites, blogs or user pages for this purpose. They post allegations about the victim to newsgroups, chat rooms or other sites that allow public contributions, such as Wikipedia or[4]"
Looking Back Woman

Saturday, June 21, 2014


Since I'm waiting for Trimet's safety/security Department to provide information needed to complete Part III of the Harry Saporta series, it felt like a good time to re-blog this post from May 17th, 2011. It's a compilation of articles, definitions, etc. regarding Cyber Bullying/Stalking.

Because a Step III Grievance hearing is scheduled for August concerning a number of reprimands I received for posting articles and an image of Al Margulies, I thought this would also be a good time to re-post this particular article as it's central to the theme of this blog. 

READ THE WHOLE THING - all the way down........

The interesting thing about THIS particular article is that Al chose it as a reason to write me up to HR. The content largely, mostly, defines his behavior. Seems odd that the article he selected to complain about is so closely related to where he lives. Probably because he never 'G O T  I T' that Cyber bullying is wrong. Probably because he justifies it.

The article is also one of  three accusations made against me to HR, where investigator Peggy Callahan refused to tell me which ones and what I did. I found out later, through an exchange of documents from her to Shelly, Hayden and Evelyn. The one below was about an image. It sat on top of a printed stack she made of my entire blog. She shoved it across the table to an area directly in front of me. She threatened to terminate my employment if I didn't remove it but refused to tell me which one. I remember asking if it was the one on top (cause there were many) and all she'd say was, "Now Ellen, now you know better than Ellen, now Ellen!"   


"The practice of cyber bullying is not limited to children and, while the behavior is identified by the same definition in adults, the distinction in age groups is referred to as cyberstalking or cyber harassment when perpetrated by adults toward adults. Common tactics used by cyberstalkers are to vandalize a search engine or encyclopedia, to threaten a victim's earnings, employment, reputation, or safety. 

A pattern of repeated such actions against a target by and between adults constitutes cyberstalking. 

Cyberstalking is the use of the Internet or other electronic means to stalk someone.

It has been defined as the use of information and communications technology, particularly the Internet, by an individual or group of individuals, to harass another individual, group of individuals, or organization. The behavior includes false accusations, monitoring, the transmission of threats, identity theft, damage to data or equipment, the solicitation of minors for sexual purposes, and gathering information for harassment purposes. The harassment must be such that a reasonable person, in possession of the same information, would regard it as sufficient to cause another reasonable person distress

"Stalking is a form of mental assault, in which the perpetrator repeatedly, unwantedly, and disruptively breaks into the life-world of the victim, with whom he has no relationship (or no longer has), with motives that are directly or indirectly traceable to the affective sphere. Moreover, the separated acts that make up the intrusion cannot by themselves cause the mental abuse, but do taken together (cumulative effect)."

CyberAngels has written about how to identify cyberstalking:

When identifying cyberstalking "in the field," and particularly when considering whether to report it to any kind of legal authority, the following features or combination of features can be considered to characterize a true stalking situation: malice, premeditation, repetition, distress, obsession, vendetta, no legitimate purpose, personally directed, disregarded warnings to stop, harassment, and threats.

A number of key factors have been identified:•False accusations. Many cyberstalker's try to damage the reputation of their victim and turn other people against them. They post false information about them on websites. They may set up their own websites, blogs or user pages for this purpose. They post allegations about the victim to newsgroups, chat rooms or other sites that allow public contributions, such as Wikipedia or

•Attempts to gather information about the victim. Cyberstalker's may approach their victim's friends, family and work colleagues to obtain personal information. They may advertise for information on the Internet, or hire a private detective. They often will monitor the victim's online activities and attempt to trace their IP address in an effort to gather more information about their victims. [5]

•Encouraging others to harass the victim. Many cyberstalkers try to involve third parties in the harassment. They may claim the victim has harmed the stalker or his/her family in some way, or may post the victim's name and telephone number in order to encourage others to join the pursuit.

•False victimization. The cyberstalker will claim that the victim is harassing him/her. Bocij writes that this phenomenon has been noted in a number of well-known cases. 

False Victimization rang a bell so I found a screen shot on Al's blog where he confesses to 'playing that game'.

•Attacks on data and equipment. They may try to damage the victim's computer by sending viruses.

•Ordering goods and services. They order items or subscribe to magazines in the victim's name. These often involve subscriptions to pornography or ordering sex toys then having them delivered to the victim's workplace.

•Arranging to meet. Young people face a particularly high risk of having cyberstalkers try to set up meetings between them.[6]


Cyberstalkers meet or target their victims by using search engines, online forums, bulletin and discussion boards, chat rooms, and more recently, through online communities such as MySpace, Facebook, Friendster and Indymedia, a media outlet known for self-publishing. They may engage in live chat harassment or flaming or they may send electronic viruses and unsolicited e-mails. [7] Victims of cyberstalking may not even know that they are being stalked.

Cyberstalkers may research individuals to feed their obsessions and curiosity. Conversely, the acts of cyberstalkers may become more intense, such as repeatedly instant messaging their targets.

This SCREEN SHOT removed in protest as I am being bullied and intimidated by Trimet's HR Department. 

The Image that I originally posted and received reprimands for is at the bottom of this article. 

"More commonly they will post defamatory or derogatory statements about their stalking target on web pages, message boards and in guest books designed to get a reaction or response from their victim, thereby initiating contact. [7] In some cases, they have been known to create fake blogs in the name of the victim containing defamatory or pornographic content. 

When prosecuted, many stalkers have unsuccessfully attempted to justify their behavior based on their use of public forums, as opposed to direct contact. Once they get a reaction from the victim, they will typically attempt to track or follow the victim's internet activity. Classic cyberstalking behavior includes the tracing of the victim's IP address in an attempt to verify their home or place of employment.

Some cyberstalking situations do evolve into physical stalking, and a victim may experience abusive and excessive phone calls, vandalism, threatening or obscene mail, trespassing, and physical assault.[7] Moreover, many physical stalkers will use cyberstalking as another method of harassing their victims.

Cyberstalking legislation In the United States
The current US Federal Anti-Cyber-Stalking law is found at 47 USC sec. 223.

The first U.S. cyberstalking law went into effect in 1999 in California. Other states include prohibition against cyberstalking in their harassment or stalking legislation. In Florida, HB 479 was introduced in 2003 to ban cyberstalking. This was signed into law on October 2003.

Some states in the U.S. have begun to address the issue of cyberstalking:

•Alabama, Arizona, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, New Hampshire, and New York have included prohibitions against harassing electronic, computer or e-mail communications in their harassment legislation.

•Alaska, Florida, Oklahoma, Wyoming, and California, have incorporated electronically communicated statements as conduct constituting stalking in their anti-stalking laws.

•Texas enacted the Stalking by Electronic Communications Act, 2001.

•Missouri revised its state harassment statutes to include stalking and harassment by telephone and electronic communications (as well as cyber-bullying) after the Megan Meier suicide case of 2006.[15]

•A few states have both stalking and harassment statutes that criminalize threatening and unwanted electronic communications. 

Cyberstalking has also been addressed in recent U.S. federal law. For example, the Violence Against Women Act, passed in 2000, made cyberstalking a part of the federal interstate stalking statute. Still, there remains a lack of legislation at the federal level to specifically address cyberstalking, leaving the majority of legislative prohibitions against cyberstalking at the state level."

This is it. I captured it from the internet which is protected under Fair use laws.  It's from a YouTube in which he was calling me names. It's also a selfie.  

Callahan, in email to Hayden Talbot and Shelly Lomax, admitted that I "REMOVED his IMAGE", then 7 months later in a Bureau of Labor and Industries investigation she told their investigator that I "DIDN'T REMOVE the IMAGE." 

 He was allowed to violate the same policies Trimet used against me, to beat me up in meetings and give me reprimands. He was calling me, "Whack job, woman with obvious mental problems, Paranoid Schizophrenic and many many other names with negative slanderous references, repeatedly for years.  He attacked my reputation so no one would believe he's an abuser and incited others to take sides against me. He tried to get me terminated from my job and blackballed from my Union. As a result I was harassed in my workplace and the community I live. Trimet protected other employees who were similarly situated but conspired with him against me.  It was all very deliberate and hostile!

I never lowered my standards to name calling or Blog wars. I used screen shots from his blog to make my point. This was not a 'he said, she said'. His own words captured, documented - nothing else was necessary. 

 He used my name and picture recognition along with defamatory name calling. They allowed it because they're vested in retaliating against women employees who sue them, win and come back. There are other reasons as well such as the extreme conservative right wing religious faction which continues to exist in the managerial branch of the agency. They pick and choose which policies and which employees are worthy of workplace protection. 

Evelyn Warren
Garage Manager, Center Street
$87,628.06 per 2013 W2

Callahan, with the assistance of Hayden Talbot and Evelyn Warren did one of the most cruel and evil things one can do against another.  Callahan admitted, through a document exchange that she monitored both blogs from May through October, 2011. She knew from that and through conversations with Evelyn Warren that I was having a difficult time as a result of his attacks. I was using a lot of FMLA, so they waited to pick a date and time for the HR interview when she felt I was most vulnerable. They did it by using (my abuser's) Al's HR writeup against me. He filed it June 21, 2011, but they waited until October 12th to pounce. Evelyn made sure the date and time of the attack would coincide with my sign-up. I was beaten up badly, they refused to accommodate my disability, then expected me to Operate a Bus.  

Hypothetically, had I drove that day. Had I caused a fatal wreck. Who woulda been responsible and what would the charges be?  The only ones protecting the Community that day was my ATU Representative and an alert Station Agent.

T H I N K  about it!

Click images for zoom

***Forgot to white out the address. I haven't lived at this address for over a year but whited it out anyways so the folks who live there now don't get harassed. I notified them earlier today.