Melanie Larkin and her troll cohorts apparently do not understand "free speech" has its limits

Melanie Larkin's obsession with me has me laughing right now, but while she's posting lame ass videos that make me laugh, I'd like to point out that since her field of study was apparently learning how to cook and now the law, she needs a lesson in criminal statutes. 

You see, dear, dumb, Melanie, harassing people on the Internet is actually a crime. You're begging your loser friends to "leave an honest review" and tell the internet to "do their thang", but only an idiot does not know these are euphemisms to harass and annoy those you dislike for no legitimate reason. 

Oh, you can piss and moan and bitch and whine all you want. But you and your wannabe Anonymous friends must have slept through Constitution classes or you'd realize free speech has limitations in America.

From Wikipedia: "Categories of speech that are given lesser or no protection by the First Amendment (and therefore may be restricted) include obscenity, fraud, child pornography, speech integral to illegal conduct, speech that incites imminent lawless action, speech that violates intellectual property law, true threats, and commercial speech such as advertising. Defamation that causes harm to reputation is a tort and also an exception to free speech."

CIVIL LAW

You can't slander others, Melanie Larkin. Calling me a child rapist when I have not been accused of, much less convicted of, rape, is slander. Similar torts include libel, defamation of character and false light statements. 

In your TikTok videos that have been taken down (but I still managed to save) you ADMIT malice, which is one of the elements of proving any of these civil torts. So, should I decide you're worth dragging to court, you've already provided me with ample evidence. You see, this blog isn't just for shits and giggles, this is also where I show that I've collected screenshots as evidence of malice. So thanks for proving a case against you. 

CRIMINAL LAW

Since many of your cohorts (which, for all I know, is just one of your many Facebook accounts anyways) have chosen to make threatening statements against me and others, you are actually engaging in criminal acts. 

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-1310

Current with changes through the 2021 Special Legislative Session

Section 28-1310 - Intimidation by telephone call or electronic communication; penalty

(1) A person commits the offense of intimidation by telephone call or electronic communication if, with intent to intimidate, threaten, or harass an individual, the person telephones such individual or transmits an electronic communication directly to such individual, whether or not conversation or an electronic response ensues, and the person:

(a) Uses obscene language or suggests any obscene act;

(b) Threatens to inflict physical or mental injury to such individual or any other person or physical injury to the property of such individual or any other person; or

(c) Attempts to extort property, money, or other thing of value from such individual or any other person.

(2) The offense shall be deemed to have been committed either at the place where the call or electronic communication was initiated or where it was received.

(3) Intimidation by telephone call or electronic communication is a Class III misdemeanor.

(4) For purposes of this section, electronic communication means any writing, sound, visual image, or data of any nature that is received or transmitted by an electronic communication device as defined in section 28-833.

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-1310

Since WAR is based out of Missouri--

Title XXXVIII CRIMES AND PUNISHMENT; PEACE OFFICERS AND PUBLIC DEFENDERS

Chapter 565

  565.225.  Stalking, first degree, penalty. — 1.  As used in this section and section 565.227, the term "disturbs" shall mean to engage in a course of conduct directed at a specific person that serves no legitimate purpose and that would cause a reasonable person under the circumstances to be frightened, intimidated, or emotionally distressed.

  2.  A person commits the offense of stalking in the first degree if he or she purposely, through his or her course of conduct, disturbs or follows with the intent of disturbing another person and:

  (1)  Makes a threat communicated with the intent to cause the person who is the target of the threat to reasonably fear for his or her safety, the safety of his or her family or household member, or the safety of domestic animals or livestock as defined in section 276.606 kept at such person's residence or on such person's property.  The threat shall be against the life of, or a threat to cause physical injury to, or the kidnapping of the person, the person's family or household members, or the person's domestic animals or livestock as defined in section 276.606 kept at such person's residence or on such person's property; or

  (2)  At least one of the acts constituting the course of conduct is in violation of an order of protection and the person has received actual notice of such order; or

  (3)  At least one of the actions constituting the course of conduct is in violation of a condition of probation, parole, pretrial release, or release on bond pending appeal; or

  (4)  At any time during the course of conduct, the other person is seventeen years of age or younger and the person disturbing the other person is twenty-one years of age or older; or

  (5)  He or she has previously been found guilty of domestic assault, violation of an order of protection, or any other crime where the other person was the victim; or

  (6)  At any time during the course of conduct, the other person is a participant of the address confidentiality program under sections 589.660 to 589.681, and the person disturbing the other person knowingly accesses or attempts to access the address of the other person.

  3.  Any law enforcement officer may arrest, without a warrant, any person he or she has probable cause to believe has violated the provisions of this section.

  4.  This section shall not apply to activities of federal, state, county, or municipal law enforcement officers conducting investigations of any violation of federal, state, county, or municipal law.

  5.  The offense of stalking in the first degree is a class E felony, unless the defendant has previously been found guilty of a violation of this section or section 565.227, or any offense committed in another jurisdiction which, if committed in this state, would be chargeable or indictable as a violation of any offense listed in this section or section 565.227, or unless the victim is intentionally targeted as a law enforcement officer, as defined in section 556.061, or the victim is targeted because he or she is a relative within the second degree of consanguinity or affinity to a law enforcement officer, in which case stalking in the first degree is a class D felony.

(L. 1993 H.B. 476 & 194 § 1, A.L. 2002 S.B. 969, et al., A.L. 2008 S.B. 818 & 795, A.L. 2014 S.B. 491, A.L. 2016 H.B. 1562, A.L. 2017 S.B. 34)

-- You can get charged with a crime, and you could be arrested and extradited and let me tell you as a person who was extradicted for a crime I did not commit, you will NOT like the extradition process at all, and New York is a long ways from Nebraska, and they don't fly you here nor will you arrive in a reasonable length of time. 

You disagree with me? Good. You hate me? Good. You whine online? Even better! But, there ARE limits to what you can say or do. 

But at the end of the day, i'll keep on fighyting to ABOLISH THE REGISTRY, and there is NOTHING you or your cohorts can do about it. No amount of TikToking or trolling will EVER change that. 

PS: It took me maybe 15 minutes to type this, so if you think it took me hours to laugh at you in my last post, you're sadly mistaken. 

Threats are not speech

Melanie's associate admitting to making harassing phone calls

"Addy Lonewolf" confession part 2

Addy Lonewolf confession part 3

Melanie claimed in a now-deleted TikTok video that she only asked people to go "leave an honest review" but it seems to me that all of Melanie Larkin's dumbassed friends understand what she meant by that.

ADDENDUM 3/11/22, I've been collecting data on some of the "CrayolaSec" Anonymous group. A few are lazy enough to have posted info that reveals their identity. Basement-dewlling 'Anonymous" fucks, I don't forgive or forget, either. You should have expected me. 

TikTok th0t Melanie Larkin sends troll army to spam anti-registry Facebook page because she thinks Brock Turner's mother "likes" the page

 Ah, TikTok, the Twitter of the video world. I must be getting old but I don't see the allure of TikTok. And while it is primarily known as the place where people post poorly choreographed dance videos, it is also a place to go to spread very short clips on various topics. It has gained a very bad reputation over the years for its many controversies, including dubious "challenges" and security concerns, but it has not stopped (mostly young) people from going there in hopes of becoming the next viral sensation. 

A few days ago, Melanie Larken of Cochecton, NY, a TikToker going by "thebigbean6969", a person best described as a "TikTok Th0t" (internet parlance for a person, usually female, that attempts to garner attention by making sexually charged videos) decided for some reason to target a woman she claims was the mother of Brock Turner, and discovered this woman "liked" the Women Against Registry's Facebook page. So this person with beans for brains decided that WAR was merely a front for Brock Turner's mom, so she raised the virtual torch-and-pitchfork mob on her TikTok page, which up to this point was comprised mostly of material like this:

I hope for her boyfriend's sake she is over age 18. If she's 17 or under, she committed a registerable sex offense. At least she admits her TikTok page is LOW QUALITY CONTENT. It is probably the only truthful statement on her entire shitty page. 

TheBigBimbo6969 then commanded the army of TikTokers to spam the page:

Of course, out of the roughly 2.1 million views this video has reeived, maybe a couple dozen people tops spammed the WAR FB page with Brock Turner memes. No one there knew why at first but one useful idiot posted the video link to TheBeansForBrains6969 account and it all made as much sense as you can make from blatantly manufactured outrage. 

I suspect TikTok inflates their view counts. But again, I digress. 

As you can expect, however, the few idiots who decided to answer the virtual hue and cry were far from intellectual giants:

It is amazing how many people who claim they are against rape respond to a comment they don't like with "I hope you get raped." (Or should I say R-lambda-e-three-D). 

It seems the only legal case the TikTok trolls know is the infamous case of Pot v. Kettle:

It was only a matter of time for TheBraindeadBean6969 decided to go after other anti-registry activists as well as well, calling her "army" of TikTok fuckwits. (And by "army" it is maybe a handful of bored trolls.) 

Of course, most of this was promptly deleted. TikTok may suck but it seems they take cyberbullying seriously enough to take down videos, as TheBigBrainless posted three videos of me that were reported and taken down within a couple of hours after reported. 

Out of all the trolls I've posted here, "thebigbean6969" and those who answered her call to arms rank among the dumbest people I've ever seen. This is one of the dumbest reasons to engage in cyberterrorism. Essentially, her beef with WAR is simply because someone she dislikes simply chose to like a page. It is the silliest reason of all, quite frankly. As an associate of mine put it, it is the old "Hitler Ate Sugar" fallacy. 

But her followers are even dumber because they saw a 45 second TikTok video and did nother to fact-check anything before coming in to make stupid comments. 

I imagine how much it hurts to spend hours shitposting on someone's page only for all that work to be deleted in a couple of quick clicks, BTW.

She's mostly just looking for cheap clicks because some people measure their pathetic lives by the number of views, likes, subscribers, or whatever else boosts online personality egos these days. On her Twitter page, her sole comment was in reponse to an online vigilante video. She's a real winner. 

You know what is dumber than a TikTokm th0t? A person who watches a 45 second TikTok video by said th0t and spams a page because some bimbo told you to do it. 

Of course, Melanie is too stupid to realize that very few people answered her virtual hue-and-cry, and the few that did were promptly deleted as spam. I love to think about all that time wasted spamming a Facebook page when it takes less than 15 seconds to ban someone from a Facebook page :)

Of course, Melanie Larkin is such a dumb zoomer, she doesn't understand that making derogatory and intentionally misleading videos and calling upon her friends and TikTok dumbasses to spam the page with "honest reviews" and begging her loser cronies to "do your thang" is the literal definition of trolling and cyberharassment. 

Perhaps even loonier, Melanie Larkin, or one of her idiot friends, actually tried making the following demands from WAR:

1. Rebrand your organization 
2. Redirect your approach
3. Replace Vicki as the face of the organization

In other words, stop existing. Fuck that shit, and fuck you, Melanie Larkin. 

In conclusion. Melanie Larkin a complete fucktard, and her blind sheep followers are even dumber. Fuck her and her piece of shit friends. And after they finally tire of crying on the Internet because they got ignored, I'll still be here exposing losers like them abnd fighting the registry.