‘Unbiased Bystander’ Unmasked
By Greg L | 1 June 2007 | Blogs | 11 Comments
UPDATE: I have received an email from [redacted], and he is claiming that he is not responsible for this. While I believe I was correct in my assessment, because there is a possibility that someone has attempted to hijack his internet connection by means of an unsecured wireless router and sufficient questions have been raised about his involvement, I am retracting my identification of the person responsible for these smears until a more thorough investigation can be performed. If I have erred in my assessment, I apologize to [redacted]. The original post follows, with the individuals name removed:
I gave the person responsible for anonymous and maliciously false attacks against Julie Lucas one day to come forward and apologize for their behavior. That person has chosen not to do so. Now it is time for the identity of that person to be revealed so that those responsible for this outrage can be called to account for their behavior.
After conducting a forensic analysis of my server logs, I can reasonably conclude that [redacted] is responsible for the outrageous false attacks being made against Julie Lucas. [redacted] was registered as a delegate for the 51st District convention by the Faisal Gill campaign, is a large contributor to the Faisal Gill campaign, and I believe is part of Faisal Gill’s campaign team. This is the second time this week that Faisal Gill’s campaign has attempted to spread false information about Julie Lucas, the first being a phone banking effort by Faisal Gill’s campaign staff alleging that Julie Lucas has been endorsed by a pro-abortion activist organization, which is false.
[redacted] visited this site using his real name in late January of this year from an IP address associated with Cavalier Telephone DSL service. He was using MSIE 6.0 on a Windows XP machine, and the revision of his .NET “Common Language Runtime” (CLR), the framework that MSIE runs on, was 1.1.4322. I very, very rarely am visited by Cavalier DSL subscribers.
On May 31st at 2:05AM, an anonymous poster using the name “Unbiased Bystander” posted maliciously false information from a Cox Cable account. Later that day, “Unbiased Bystander” posted a comment from the same network block of Cavalier DSL as [redacted] used in January, which is consistent with someone who us having their IP address assigned by a DHCP server rather than it being statically assigned. That subsequent comment was posted from a Windows XP machine running Firefox 1.0.4. Within minutes, another visit from the same IP address was from a Windows XP machine running MSIE 6.0, with .NET CLR 1.1.4322. Apparently, this user believed that posting using different browsers would be an effective subterfuge. It is not.
It is likely rather useless to call on Faisal Gill to renounce the practice of spreading maliciously false information around since it appears to be a campaign tactic upon which he seems utterly dependent at this point. Convention delegates will have to deliver the consequences for this behavior tomorrow by selecting Julie Lucas as the Republican nominee for the 51st District. I expect they will.
The opinions expressed here are solely the views of the author, and not representative of the position of any organization, political party, doughnut shop, knitting guild, or waste recycling facility, but may be correctly attributed to the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. If anything in the above article has offended you, please click here to receive an immediate apology.
You can follow the discussion through the Comments feed.
11 Comments
Views: 1626
Loading ...
Greg,
“endorsed by a pro-life activist organization”
This would be good. Don’t you mean pro-choice? If so, you can go ahead and delete this message.
Yes, I did. Thanks for catching that. The post has been updated.
Greg,
How do know that [redacted] is the culprit here and not his wife, son, daughter, etc… or anyone else in his home who may have used the same computer as he did from his original post?
This seems like a huge leap of faith on your part.
Actually, this would probably be handled like a traffic summons when the car was unable to be stopped. When a ticket is issued to an observed license plate (speeder got away from the cops but the officer was able to call in the plate), they will issue the ticket to the owner of the vehicle, then, it is up to the defendant to prove that he/she was not driving at the time.
When it comes down to catching people on the Internet, IPs are used all the time and the authorities have an excellent record of catching the perp.
The two people in question here really don’t have much of a chance. Because of our close proximity to DC, there are a NUMBER of computer forensic experts, both DOD and Civilian, who will EASILY be able to track down the owners.
And, you better hope that Mr. Light does not have any friends or former co-workers at any of those companies you mentioned (I am sure he is greatful to you for providing him and his lawyer that evidence) as they, too, would be interested in helping him out.
“I gave the person responsible for anonymous and maliciously false attacks against Julie Lucas”
I agree that the accusations against Julie Lucas were malicious.
But I didn’t know they were false.
Greg, has she addressed these accusations (in private to you or in public)?
I had thought that she wasn’t going to dignify the accusations with a response… But I may have missed something. Please let me know.
Of course they’re false. John Light, who was named as the “married person” Julie was supposedly cavorting with, has not only been divorced for years, but has flatly denied this baseless smear. Even if they were dating, Mr. Light is not married, and there’s no rational basis for raising a stink about it.
You’d better be right, or [redacted] might well have a cause of action against you, i.e., might be on the other side of the “v.”
Aside from that, truth — as you know — is an absolute defense, and if there is any part of his allegations which are true (and I don’t know that ANY of them are), I suspect that the poster, whomever it is, will have a pretty good defense. Whether true or not, I doubt that I would advise any client to bring an action which necessitates testimony regarding an already-litigated domestic relations matter, since it requires the airing of dirty laundry, and I suspect that the gentlemen at issue has already gotten precisely that advice.
greg drop me a line.
i just emailed you.
“[redacted] visited this site using his real name in late January of this year from an IP address associated with Cavalier Telephone DSL service.”
How do you know this was [redacted] — and not someone else pretending to be [redacted]? There are plenty of people out there sliming FG’s campaign that certainly have a motive to make his supporters look bad.
The individual involved has asked me to redact his name from all comments on this thread in order to prevent him from being unfairly associated with this in web search engines.
The information this individual has provided may be of great value in locating “Unbiased Bystander”, and since this article has been posted there has been a substantial amount of new evidence obtained. There are now additional leads to follow in this investigation, and I intend to follow them up.
I am closing comments on this thread.