Man charged with cyberstalking ex-classmate for more than a decade

“One day in class, Cringle coughed, I guess, and did not cover his mouth, and the victim had asked him to do so and after that, unfortunately, he appeared to fixate on her and it just, this devolved from there,” said Katie Nelson, Mountain View police spokeswoman.

Police say Cringle created fake profiles on Facebook and sent sexually explicit and threatening messages to the victim, her family and her friends.

According to court records, one message read, “Hey b-. I’m coming to rape and murder you.”

Cringle has previously been convicted of stalking the victim, who told police he’s also thrown rocks at her car and run into her with his bike, court records show. She was so frightened she got restraining orders against him.

But Mountain View police say the harassment continued and that Cringle even gave up masking his identity altogether.

“He was getting pretty bold, especially most recently when he was e-mailing her from his personal account, asking about her whereabouts,” Nelson said

Police used search warrants to uncover the real person behind the Facebook messages, all sparked by the woman’s concern over his coughing.

“It’s definitely an unusual case and that something so small triggered something that lasted this long,” Nelson said.

Santa Clara County prosecutors have charged Cringle with stalking and making criminal threats. Authorities say they’ve seen more and more criminals using social media to stalk victims.

In a statement, Deputy District Attorney Kelly Meeker said, “We take such cases seriously. Victims should be free to use these online platforms without fear of threats or harassment. We will continue to prosecute these cases and hold criminals accountable.”

Police say it’s possible there are other victims out there who have not yet come forward. Cringle is being held without bail at Santa Clara County Jail in San Jose.

What is a stalker?

What is Stalking?

Characteristics of a Stalker…

  • Waiting at the victim’s workplace, home or neighborhood
  • Persistent phone calls, text messages, emails, letters or notes
  • The sending of gifts – from the seemingly “romantic” (i.e. flowers and/or chocolates) to the bizarre
  • Breaking into the victim’s home or car
  • Gathering information on the victim: contacting people who know the victim; searching public or personal records, even the dustbin, for information.
  • Surveillance: persistently watching the individual, using cameras, audio equipment, phone tapping, or bugging the victim’s home or workplace
  • Manipulative behaviour : threatening to commit suicide in order to coerce the victim to intervene– forcing contact with the stalker)
  • Defamation of character: the stalker will lie to others about the victim, trying to limit their options and weaken their support network. In an attempt to isolate the victim, making them appear more vulnerable, and giving the stalker a sense of power and control.
  • “Objectification”: the stalker derogates the victim, thus reducing them to an object which allows the stalker to feel angry with them without experiencing empathy. It helps the stalker feel they are entitled to behave as they please toward the victim. Viewing her/him as “lesser,” “weak” or
    otherwise seriously flawed can support delusions that the victim needs to be rescued, or punished, by the stalker.
  • Threats and violence: the stalker uses threats to frighten the victim; vandalism and property damage (usually to the victim’s car); physical attacks that leave abrasions and bruises (mostly meant to frighten); less common–physical attacks that leave serious physical injuries, or sexual assaults.
  • Cyberstalking: using the internet to pursue, harass or contact another in an unsolicited fashion.
  • During a 12-month period, an estimated 14 in every 1,000 persons age 18 or older were victims of stalking.
  • About half (46%) of stalking victims experienced at least one unwanted contact per week, and 11% of victims said they had been stalked for 5 years or more.
  • The risk of stalking victimization was highest for individuals who were divorced or separated—34 per 1,000 individuals.
  • Women were at greater risk than men for stalking.
  • About 43% of victims stated that police were contacted at least once regarding the stalking.
  • Male (37%) and female (41%) stalking victimizations were equally likely to be reported to the police.
  • Approximately 1 in 4 stalking victims reported some form of cyberstalking such as e-mail (83%)or instant messaging (35%). Electronic monitoring was used to stalk 1 in 13 victims (i.e. GPS monitoring, bugs, phone tapping, video).
  • 46% of stalking victims felt a fear of not knowing what would happen next.
  • Nearly 3 in 4 stalking victims knew their offender in some capacity.
  • Often Stalking isn’t taken seriously

Profile of a stalker

Stalking is a crime of power and control. Stalkers tend to obsess about their victim. They may make many plans for the future that involve their victim.

  • Stalkers tend to have very weak social skills, and see nothing wrong with their behaviour.
  • Few stalkers see how their actions are hurting others, and they do not believe society’s rules apply to them.
  • They don’t believe they are threatening, intimidating, or even stalking someone.
  • Most stalkers see their actions simply as attempts to get closer to their target, help them, or to gain their love
  • Stalkers often ‘research’ their victims via public records for information or manipulating the victims’ family and friends.
  • Stalkers often obtain information from the victim’s friends, their workplace and from the victim’s family.
  • Romantically obsessed stalkers refuse to believe the victim does not want a relationship with them.
  • Stalking can be a form of retaliation because of some perceived slight. Indeed, many sexual harassment victims report being stalked in retaliation for reporting their harassers.
  • A stalker may be so subtle that the victim may not even aware that it is happening.
  • It is not always just the initial victim who is stalked. A stalker may also harass family, friends and fellow workers.

The good doctor

So, now, the good doctor is contacting our staff as well as clients.

You can clearly see the misinformation and scare-mongering he send to vulnerable people in his own name on social media. In this case, he used Facebook to contact clients interested in our services. The blurs are to protect identities for legal reasons. We have dozens of these examples which will be published in his name across all of the planned resources and in the ‘The Descent of Decency’ book.

Our psychology lead received a message through LinkedIn containing comments which have been deemed litigious under the malicious communications act by the CPS.

Should a doctor be behaving this way? We have hundreds of screenshots of harassing messages he has sent to us, to his group of stooges and our friends and business contacts… does he think he’s above the law?

He’s already received warnings, which he chose to ignore, but also use as fuel for further attacks… he has publicly stated that I will ‘pay’ for sending the police to his door.

It is clear that this man isn’t understanding the law. However, he will soon!

Facebook targeted – Freedom of information for suspected criminal behaviour

Mother of Lucy McHugh hits out at Facebook and demands company give access to suspect’s account


The mother of schoolgirl Lucy McHugh has urged Facebook to give police access to an account belonging to the man suspected of murdering the 13-year-old.

Stacey White said detectives could uncover information vital to their investigation if they are allowed to read messages sent and received by Stephen Nicholson before the teenager’s death.

The care worker, 24, was jailed for 14 months on Friday over his refusal to hand over the password to his account.

Investigators face having to take lengthy legal action in the US in order to obtain access, with the delay branded “deeply disturbing” by the head of the Commons Home Affairs Committee.

Ms White has said unlocking the account would “certainly give police an idea of what was being said between Lucy and Stephen”.

“In situations like this, Facebook really should just release the information that is needed and I think that is the opinion that everybody has,” she told the Daily Mail.

“They should give over the account details. Lucy needs justice. It’s so easy for them to do.”

Nicholson, a father-of-one, was staying at Lucy’s family home in Southampton until several days before she was found stabbed to death in woodland on July 26.

According to prosecutors he had contact with the teenager as recently as the morning of her disappearance.

While being questioned on suspicion of murder and sexual activity with a child, he twice refused to give detectives his Facebook password.

Nicholson pleaded guilty to a charge under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (Ripa) before his sentencing at Southampton Crown Court.

The court heard his excuse for refusing access was to protect himself and his family as there was information relating to cannabis on the account.

Prosecutors said police were facing a “lengthy procedure” in order to obtain access and the investigation into Lucy’s death had been “considerably obstructed” as a result.

Yvette Cooper, chairman of the Home Affairs Select Committee, called on the Government and Facebook to create a fast legal procedure for such cases.

“This was an appalling murder, and Lucy McHugh’s family need justice,” she told the Mail.

“For there to be such long delays and cumbersome international processes for getting crucial information in such a serious case is deeply disturbing.”

Facebook told the paper it was “co-operating with Hampshire Police”.

Nicholson remains on bail for his arrest on suspicion of murder and sexual activity with a child.

A charging decision is anticipated on October 27.

Suicide & Harassment

Just 6 examples of where online harassment leads

When people get unwelcome, uninvited attention from people… it’s bullying.

When they push too far… they break. The people doing this to us do it for selfish reasons. Why else would they want to contact Charles’ children? Why else would they phone, email and message all our friends, business contacts and celebrity supporters? Why would they behave this way unless they are the same kind of bullies that led the children below to take their lives?

Charles’ son was attacked online and harassed on social media. The distress it caused him and his sister reading the vile, childish and vicious comments online was immense. It will not be tolerated… as stated above, at some point, people break. Beth Linden ended up in an ambulance and in hospital because of these monsters. The children had to watch that. What kind of sick mind does that to a family?

These people state that Charles is a bully for threatening legal action when they state that he is a conman, is under investigation, is breaking the law, is causing damage and distress, repeatedly across many platforms. You cannot harass and defame people with blatant lies… it is against the law and if you are asked to stop and you don’t, the victim has the right to inform the police and solicitors. If the police and solicitors then contact you, that has been done because they have decided that there is a case to be answered. Charles and Linden Tree have behaved professionally and legally… it is YOU, the perpetrator who is the bully, harasser and law breaker.

If law states that what you have done is harassment or defamation, it is because they have determined in law that your actions were harassing and untrue… which is why you are all under investigation… and you know you are because two of you have received harassment warnings and one of you has been arrested. The police did that, not Charles or Linden tree. YOU deserved it for your actions.

Despite what you believe, we were not forced to work with Trading Standards… we asked if we could apply for Primary Authority partnership and it was granted after they inspected every aspect of our work and policies. If there were anything amiss, they would have found it.

These beautiful young people below were the victims of foul people but more than that, they were the victims of the organisations that provided the weapons that forced them to take their own lives. Social media isn’t a weapon, but it’s used as one. ANYONE who places a weapon in the hands of a killer and does nothing to prevent them from using it is equally to blame for any resultant issues. If you walk into someone’s garden and slip on their path, it’s legally the path owner’s fault regardless of why you are in the garden. the same should be true of every social environment, online and off. That would stop most of this unnecessary suffering.

Look at yourselves in the mirror folks… what do you see? If you’re psychotic, you’ll see perfection, if you are sane you’ll see the error of your ways.

Jessica committed suicide because of online harassment

Felix committed suicide because of online harassment

Hannah committed suicide because of online harassment

Jessica committed suicide because of online harassment

Megan committed suicide because of online harassment

Amanda committed suicide because of online harassment


Internet troll who falsely claimed businessman, faces jail for harassment

18th August 2018

Internet troll who falsely claimed businessman, 32, was ‘dirty paedophile who had sex with underage girls’ causing him to close his shop after losing £75,000 of trade faces jail for harassment

An internet troll who claimed a businessman was a ‘dirty paedophile’ in a relentless barrage of online abuse, which caused his victim to lose his business and his hair from stress now faces jail for harassment.

Oliver Redmond, 37, inflicted a six-month long campaign against vape store owner Paul Cheape, bombarding his friends and suppliers with messages falsely claiming the businessman had sex with underage Eastern European girls.

Fearing he may come to the attention of vigilante paedophile hunters, Mr Cheape, 32, of Portsmouth, started suffering from anxiety, rapid onset alopecia and developed a ‘deep fear’ of being away from his home.

Devastated Mr Cheape was forced to close his store ‘Steamachine’ after losing £75,000 in trade last year when customers’ believed what was being said’.

Portsmouth Magistrates’ Court heard Redmond waged a ‘hate campaign’ against him and posted messages on a Facebook page claiming the store was ‘fine’ but he ‘would not ask the owner to babysit’.

In the message, Redmond, who uses a wheelchair, said: ‘Steamachine is fine so long as you’re not a 13 year old girl.

‘I’m not saying the owner’s a self-confessed predator of underage Eastern European children… but I wouldn’t ask him to babysit.’

In a phone call, Redmond said to Mr Cheape: ‘Why don’t you just fuck off back to Scotland you sheep shagger? You dirty paedophile jock.’

He also said to him: ‘I wouldn’t ask a bearded, ginger, tweed-wearing pervert like you to ever babysit my kids. And that’s a fact.’

Fearing he may come to the attention of vigilante paedophile hunters, Paul Cheape, 32, of Portsmouth, started suffering from anxiety, rapid onset alopecia and developed a 'deep fear' of being away from his home. He lost £75,000 worth of earnings and had to close his vape store

Fearing he may come to the attention of vigilante paedophile hunters, Paul Cheape, 32, of Portsmouth, started suffering from anxiety, rapid onset alopecia and developed a ‘deep fear’ of being away from his home. He lost £75,000 worth of earnings and had to close his vape store

Redmond also claimed Mr Cheape ‘bragged about having sex with underage Eastern European children’.

Giving evidence in court, Mr Cheape said he realised he was being targeted by Redmond after he was shown messages by friends and suppliers sent to them by the father-of-three.

The businessman told magistrates: ‘I took both my laptops to Hampshire Constabulary and I said to them if I’m under investigation I’m offering my laptops to you now and I’m happy to hand myself in.

‘They were unwilling to assist me – they said this was ridiculous. Genuinely at this point, I was scared.

Portsmouth Magistrates' Court heard Redmond waged a 'hate campaign' and sent messages to a Facebook page claiming the store was 'fine' but he 'would not ask the owner to babysit'. Redmond admitted one count of harassment between June 1 last year and January 19, this year

Portsmouth Magistrates’ Court heard Redmond waged a ‘hate campaign’ and sent messages to a Facebook page claiming the store was ‘fine’ but he ‘would not ask the owner to babysit’. Redmond admitted one count of harassment between June 1 last year and January 19, this year

‘These days it doesn’t take much for people to hound somebody.

‘I genuinely feared that there was a concerted effort, an aggressive effort, from Mr Redmond to cause significant financial damage to the business and myself.’

Scottish Mr Cheape told magistrates he found an address online linked to Redmond – only to find it was the internet troll’s mother Nicola Redmond’s home.

Once there he told Mrs Redmond a ‘white lie’ that her son had left an expensive bit of vape kit in his shop.

Borrowing her phone he called Redmond, leaving him a voicemail saying he needed to speak urgently to him.

Redmond’s mother also handed over her son’s mobile phone number, allowing Mr Cheape to try and call the troll using a new SIM card he bought for that purpose.

Magistrates heard Redmond did not answer but called the businessman back on September 25 last year, immediately launching a tirade of insults.

Mr Cheape said: ‘I didn’t have a chance to immediately respond when Mr Redmond immediately launched a tirade of verbal insults regarding my nationality to the effect of, “why don’t you fuck off back to Scotland you sheep shagger?”‘

‘Then I tried to respond and I was then insulted further by being called a “dirty paedophile jock.”‘

Redmond, who claimed the phone call never happened, denied making a malicious communication but was convicted by magistrates.

Dressed in a navy three-piece suit, Redmond, from Portsmouth, admitted one count of harassment between June 1 last year and January 19, this year.

Redmond, who told the court his actions were ‘silly’, will be sentenced later this month, with Magistrate Sian Bamber telling him he could face up to 12 weeks in jail.

Speaking outside court after the trial, Mr Cheape said: ‘People like this don’t have a place to hide. This is an internet troll being brought to justice.

‘The business has suffered to the point where it’s no longer viable because people believed what was being said.

‘I’ve seen such a sharp decline in business.’

He added: ‘Not only have I had to let staff go but I’ve also suffered significant financial losses through the business.

‘But that’s just the beginning of things. I have developed rapid onset alopecia and lost large chunks of my hair.

‘I’ve been sick, completely unable to eat food, stressed to the point where my body is feeling like it’s giving in for months to the point where my partner has urged me to go to the hospital because of how deathly sick I look.

‘It’s been absolutely hell on earth.’

Internet troll jailed after stalking woman on Facebook and Twitter


21st August 2018

Nicky Wright was convicted of stalking and sent to prison for 24 weeks after targeting online abuse campaigner Nicola Brookes, 51, from Brighton.

Nicky Wright jailed for stalking Nicola Brookes onlineBetween June 2016 and September last year, Wright launched a campaign of abuse in which he made sexual remarks and mocked Ms Brookes’s Crohn’s disease.

The internet stalker, who never met his victim, used 28 Twitter accounts, 25 Facebook pages and made videos about Ms Brookes on YouTube and posted her home address online..

Brighton Magistrates’ Court heard how he digitally altered pictures of her, posted hate mail and doctored her comments as he carried out the trolling from his home.

District Judge Amanda Kelly called Wright a “cowardly predator” who waged a “sinister and deeply personal campaign”.

Ms Brookes told the court she now sleeps with a knife in her bedroom and said her condition had flared up because of the “nightmare ordeal”.

In her victim impact statement, read out in court while Wright sat in the dock with his fingers in his ears, she added: “My faith in human nature has been shattered. This is the most demoralising, dehumanising experience of my entire life.”

As Wright, of Waters Road, was led away to the cells he stuck two fingers up to the court after refusing to accept his stalking conviction.

Beforehand he complained that journalists were present in court and said he did not want “certain information going everywhere online”.

Wright’s defence was he believed he was acting reasonably and it was “social media banter”.

The victim was relieved her online stalker was jailed but after the case said she was worried he would target other people in future.

She said: “I’m pleased he has been jailed but I don’t think it will stop him targeting me or someone else when he comes out.”

Despite Ms Brookes reporting the torrent of abusive posts to Facebook and Twitter, both sites continually said Wright’s actions did not breach community standards.

She believes social media needs to be policed and regulated better than it currently is.

She would sometimes send Sussex Police 150 screenshots of Wright’s abuse in a day.

The judge imposed a restraining order to stop Wright or anyone on his behalf contacting Ms Brookes by any means.

‘Sadist’ internet troll admits posting ‘sick’ comments

Laws are changing and the people responsible for this repulsive behaviour will pay the price.

30th August 2018 SKY NEWS

Paul Hind, 38, caused parents “anxiety and distress” after posting “sick” comments about their dead children on social media.

Ms Burt’s father, Nigel, said Hind’s actions were a “desecration” of his 20-year-old daughter’s memory.

Describing how Hind’s postings had made him and Ms Burt’s mother Paula feel “physically sick”, he said: “The person who carried out this trolling can only be described as a sick sadist who knows that they are adding to our anguish and gets enjoyment out of this.

“Even though the Facebook posts have now gone, we keep expecting them to reappear on some other social media platform.

“This is causing us continuing anxiety and distress.”

District Judge Kate Meek sent Hind’s case to Newcastle Crown Court for sentencing on September 27, and praised the Burt family for sitting in on the proceedings.

Judge Meek also passed on her “deepest condolences” for the loss of their daughter and said that the defendant had only added to the “already unimaginable” pain that they were suffering.

Speaking outside court after the hearing, Hind said he was “deeply sorry” for his actions and that he had done them “for attention”.

Describing how he was suffering from mental health issues and was “highly intoxicated” at the time of the offences, he said: “All I can say to the families for the actions I have committed is sorry, that is all I can say – sorry.

“I don’t expect them to accept any apology from me whatsoever for what I have done.”

When asked whether his actions could be seen as worthy of a jail sentence, he said: “From my point of view, personally, and for what I did, I would say yes.

“I do deserve a punishment, and I don’t just deserve a punishment of being banned from social media, trying to apologise to the parents and forgetting about the whole thing.

“I have to be punished accordingly for causing people the anxiety and the stress I have caused them, there’s no question about that.”

Doctors Should Know Better

You would expect doctors to be pillars of society wouldn’t you?

We have always expected doctors, priests, bank managers and other respected individuals, to uphold moral standards but, sadly, it has become all too common for these people to let us down and to behave in highly inappropriate ways.

Involved in this case of organised harassment are two doctors who have spent hundreds of hours over many years…

  • creating defamatory, harassing materials and posts
  • contacting our friends, clients, potential clients, partner organisations and people we work with
  • contacting numerous complaints organisations
  • reporting us to a variety of governing bodies
  • creating falsehoods about us
  • reporting us for anything and everything they can
  • creating uncertainty amongst those people whow have come to trust us
  • accusing qualified staff of making up their qualifications
  • accusing staff members of illegal and immoral activities
  • fabricating falsehoods about our products and services
  • telling people we are ‘under investigation’ by the police, trade organisations and journalists
  • and so much more

One doctor called a university at which the data computers were used to calculate our trial results, asking if they knew who we were… out of the 1000’s of people at the university, the person answered that they had not heard of us… why would they have? The chances were that they wouldn’t know what was going on in all departments… the doctor then posted that he had spoken to the university and they had no knowledge of us and that we had therefore lied. He constantly generates these falsehoods to undermine us. This one example in many of the level of effort these doctors went to in order to cause distrust and to incite anger against us. They did this with a number of establishments and people with whom we have worked.

Trading Standards said that they were being driven mad by the level of contact these doctors were making. When did they have time to do their day jobs?

It’s so disturbing that people who treat mental illnesses were displaying the clear traits of severe mental illness – obsessive, paranoid and dillusional behaviours that are only normally evident in psychiatric conditions.

There have been fake accounts set up as well as hundreds of posts across multiple online facilities and the police are working hard to connect it to the people involved… slowly it is taking shape and the police have already made one arrest and charged the person concerned. They will appear in court very soon and other evidence is being gathered to add to that case.

Our solicitors are preparing the civil case off the back of the criminal case.

Doctors should be vetted and constantly monitored in order to assure that they are acting appropriately.

I believe that all NHS and private medical people should be contracted to never post on social media or elsewhere as a matter of protection for both them and the potential for them to become the focus of public attention.

The posts these men have created, not only, attack us, but also, others, making highly inappropriate comments that are threatening, weird, troubling and discriminatory in some cases about carrying weapons, ridiculing those with learning disabilities and containing the use of very foul language.

They have contacted many vulnerable people, people who have high level anxiety conditions, some have contacted us with the evidence and some have become ill and have even suffered with increased anxiety and panic attacks about the unfounded comments and attacks against us. Our priority is to make sure that these poor people are protected from further contact.

It’s unacceptable and they should be struck off the medical register.

This is all documented in the full version of this website and the book.Every last post, letter and screenshot has been documented ready to post alongside their names and the action taken against them by solicitors, barristers and the police.

IF appropriate and necessary, it will all be made public and published.