Monday, September 17, 2007

Felicitous? -- A True Fable

Once upon the blogosphere there were two Englishwomen. One was a youngish wannabe member of the chattering class and the other was a somewhat older reclusive sort with an active imagination and sense of pique.

Let's call them Rachel Whatzername (I'm told she sues people who use her actual name but go here for hints) and Felicity Jane Lowde (who actually goes by her own name).

They had what Brits call a "row"(pronounce "ow" as in "owl"). Anywhere else it would have been a catfight. Meow!

Rachel has parlayed her claim to deep psychological scars from the London bombings of July 7, 2005, into a quasi-celebrity newspaper status in Britain, along with a column in The Times of London and a book whose launch party she has apparently postponed for reasons unknown.

Never heard of her? Neither had I. Someone could pull out the drain-plug that keeps England from sinking into the ocean and I, at least, wouldn't notice.

Not the Brits, of course. Someone else over there, namely Felicity, seems to have taken exception to Rachel's parlaying tragedy (actually a smallish, copycat 9/11-ish event, but with only 52 dead and all on surface transportation) into a PR bonanza full of emotionalism for fun and profit.

Here's Rachel's version and here's Felicity's. More or less.

It seems that Felicity thought that the physically unharmed Rachel, who was apparently somewhere about a block or so from one of the explosions, was a poseur. Claiming to be a researcher with "Special Branch" (a quasi-espionage unit of the London police), Felicity began to protest that Rachel protested too much.

Rachel began to portray herself as cyberstalked and roused a campaign of fellow Brits who raised the alarm. The salts! The salts! Mommy, mommy -- they would say "Mummy" but it sounds too silly -- someone is blogging nasty things about my blogging persona.

Brits used to be a lot more dignified. Before the bathos over the death of Princess Diana -- a talentless bad imitation Isadora Duncan if there ever was one! -- the much ballyhooed stiff upper lip did at least spare us the sight of people with sallow skin crying and despoiling the environment with millions of wrapped flowers.

(Note to emoters everywhere: take the paper and cellophane off the flowers you leave in public pseudo-shrines; the flowers will bio-degrade promptly and cleanly.)

Back to the cybertiff ... it doesn't end there.

The Rachelists managed to denounce what they perceived as malodorous blogging and, using some British law that muzzles opinions (I knew there was a good reason for the American Revolution), got the police of Oxford to go after Felicity and arrest her after she was tried and convicted in absentia. She was imprisoned on June 5 and released Sept. 6.

Sounds like out of the Middle Ages, complete with witch-hunt.

Frankly, I have no idea whatsoever who is telling the truth and it really doesn't matter. Rachel might well be trembling in a corner at the thought of Felicity blogging somewhere about her and several of her male fellow bloggers. Felicity may also well be as crazy as a loon -- although in this case, why not compassion and treatment rather than jail?

A pox on both their houses insofar as their original feud.

But jailing someone for blogging seems to contravene Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations, of which last I checked, the United Kingdom is a signatory member. It reads
Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.
There's actually some sort of court muzzle in the U.K. on both Rachel and Felicity in this matter, as Felicity is appealing her conviction.

I'm writing about it freely under the theory that Britain will not extradite me from the United States for making well-deserved fun of the antics of her citizens and police. In the United States, opinion is protected speech. I am writing within the medium in which both Rachel and Felicity have sought to lead more or less public lives about writings that are extant in this medium.

My opinion, in sum, is that the whole thing is a complete waste of time, police resources and technology. If these two women would find their way to kiss and make up and the police to apologize and somehow compensate Felicity ... I'm expecting too much.

As an uncle of mine used to say, men and women are the worst people in the world. There is no exception in the blogosphere. Unfortunately.


1 – 200 of 254   Newer›   Newest»
Heimat Mary said...

Thanks for filling my Monday afternoon with belly laughs.

thailandchani said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Alexander Fear said...

Great to see an American (untouchable) getting in on this action, however I hope you put a "nofollow" on those links.

You may be out of reach of the UK courts but certainly not the Northsquad, if they discover your post you're bound to get trolled just as I was.

jen said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
jen said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
fjl said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

OK - FJL is someone who has been JAILED THREE TIMES for harassment since 2000, and had a career of harassment since 1995.

I am also someone who agrees in freedom of speech - but not intimidation, or attempts to ruin lives as FJL has done. Know the facts.

Anonymous said...

'a book whose launch party she has apparently postponed for reasons unknown.'

It's not for reasons unknown. Her Mother had a stroke and subsequently died. It is nothing to do with the case of FJL who was convicted, in a court of law, before that happened.

FJL is a repeat offender who has gone to prison before for the same crime.

You are an ignorant bigot.

Anonymous said...

Your opinion is terribly misinformed. You speak about one person - who has been remorselessly victimised - who has suffered several HIGHLY traumatic incidents in her life. It is not some kind of squabble when one receives up to 40 emails a day with evil threats and taunting jibes, talking about the rapist who nearly killed you etc. There are other people who desperately tried to appeal to FJL, till they learnt that it would only fuel her vindictiveness.

Secondly, there were nearly 20 names on that court order, from all walks of life, most of whom were not related to Rachel other than by associated misfortune.

Legal people, policemen and so on. You really have absolutely no idea what you are talking about, and presumably you wouldn't stop to reconsider since you probably enjoy being provocative... but if you might, then consider these facts, and whether or not you ought to be getting involved with a mentally ill criminal.

anon (a different person to previous comments)

rnm said...

Belly laughs?

'Fraid not.

That was as ill judged as it was misinformed.

Funny, laughing at 7/7 because only a teeny weeny 50 odd people were killed? Only a coarse and juvenile intellect could have written that.

Book launch = mother's death. What a devious excuse.

And as for witch hunts may we merely mention Salem here.

Overall this is the worst informed piece I have ever read about FJL. There is a wealth of real life consequences affecting real people's real lives surrounding the case. It is definitively NOT about free speech. Do some more research before you take real life tragedies and treat them like antics of monkeys in the zoo, provided for your derision.

And you are playing with fire mentioning her and the word 'loon' in the same post.

"my 9/11 was bigger than your 7/7" said...

Indeed. Anyone applying some kind of "sliding scale" to such 21st Century terrorist atrocities has to be intellectually moribund. It doesn't matter if it is 30 or 3,000 - the intent is to cause as much death and destruction as possible, and the effect on anyone caught in such an attack, and their families, is obviously profound. You call yourself a journalist... I wonder in what capacity, I sincerely hope your definition is being able to publish a blog, otherwise the state of American media is worse than I thought.

Questioning things, and supporting the underdog, is perfectly reasonable, and often worth doing - but you are making statements about things you know NOTHING about.

mindshave=lobotomy said...

So you believe in freedom of speech? What if I set up a blog describing you as a paedophile, got it to number one in the google rankings, found your address and workplace, and let your employers know about it? Would you so keenly defend one's right to lie and destroy another's life on the basis of freedom of speech? No way. So please consider this; freedom is something we are lucky to have, as members of a democratic society.

The reason FJL has spent so long in prison over the years is because she abuses that position. I happen to think a mental institution would be a more suitable place for her, however, she remains a criminal.

If I were you, mate, I'd be careful about that "shaving bits off your mind" business, because you haven't got much of a mind to start with.

7/7 corrections... said...

One more thing - it was not "all surface transportation" - there was a bomb on a bus and three underground - the subway, you know?

Secondly, Rachel was not "a block away" from one of these explosions. She was on the underground train, on the same carriage - and it took the survivors 20 minutes to escape, covered in other people's blood, and glass, and metal.

Your ignorance is APPALLING, only topped by your arrogance to expound on any topic you so choose, regardless of how little you know about it. Many of your other posts are very decent pieces. This was the first one I read and I cannot believe how you can publish this factual vacuum.

Snoskred said...

Wow. Just when I thought my opinion of you could not sink any lower, there you are in the sewer. Waving up at me. Naked and displaying your true horrible self to the world.

I happen to read Rachel's blog. What you have written here is disgraceful and disrespectful. I'll support your right to free speech, to say whatever you want, whenever and where ever, but I will also support my right to say this is one of the most disgusting posts I have ever read on the internet.

I think that's the effect you were going for, you certainly achieved it.

I cannot believe that there are a few people I respect here having a laugh about this. Rachel is a rape survivor, she survived the attacks on 7/7 in the UK, and she just lost her mother. Yeah, real nice target you picked there.

You want someone to pick on? Pick me. I can handle it. Why you need to have a go at a defenseless woman who is grieving the loss of her mother right now.. I have no idea. :(

Don't you have any compassion? Or do you only have it for people in the US?

She was not arrested for blogging. You have been misinformed. Why didn't you take a moment to check your facts before spewing this bile?

Your true colors are shining through for all to see, right here.

The rest of you, go and read Rachel's blog, and then come back here and say whether you are still laughing about this. Get informed.


A victim of FJL said...

Oh dear, I bet you're regretting this posting now!

Sorry but Miss Lowde really *is* a malicious and previously-convicted serial stalker who aims to ruin people's lives (whatever madness also afflicts her).

And sorry but her behaviour has little to do with 'free speech', which is but a shield to her to justify what she does. Defend free speech by all means (and most of us would wholeheartedly agree), but please do not defend anyone's right to stalk and harrass others or confuse this behaviour with the concept of FREE SPEECH!

another victim of fjl said...

I second the "victim of FJL" - do I have the freedom to burgle you, spit on you, attack you, hack your computer? Not without the consequence of punishment, because they are criminal acts. So too is setting up a blog describing someone as a murderer, a rapist, a stalker and so on. Did you know FJL has set up over TWENTY blogs speicifically to attack individuals she wants to persecute and harass?

The court has decided, three times, that her behaviour is so bad it deserves a prison sentence, and this started a DECADE before Rachel North was herself a victim.

She is a hated and hateable person, quite without understanding of others, and driven solely by the desire to harm others - truly a psychopath.

There's One Born Every Minute. said...

Well, Felicity certainly fooled you.

That's partly because she's devious but mostly because you're lazy.

fjl said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
fjl said...

... for others who're subject to their ludicrous misinformation, simply take no notice. Every time they carry on like this it's simply evidence for the lawyers. Inbetween, rest assured that they are being dealt with, but unfortunately it's a slow process.

fjl said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
fjl said...

Just to say the comments are libellous re allegations about my past ten years. take no notice.

punter said...

And welcome to the circus, Cex.

Was it just prurient glee at watching two girls fighting, or were you after a easy spike all along?

Anyway you now have the FJL seal of approval.

Enjoy it.

Cecilieaux said...

Jen, I think I'll take that rum with my breakfast. Wow! This is truly crazy shit.

fjl said...

You can contribute to the Pity for FJL fund I am thinking of opening. :-)

Anonymous said...

Per RNM: "you are playing with fire mentioning her and the word 'loon' in the same post."

FJL-loon, FJL-loon, FJL-loon, FJL-loon...I'm not burning yet, FJL-loon.

FJL does nothing but sit around Googling herself all day, sad sack that she is...

Anonymous said...

Thank you for the good pint of laugh, as we say.(better than a pint of rum) It sounds that humor is not shared everywhere in the world.

And I prefer your bad boy pirate stuff to decorate your blog 's front page, instead of the good-girl awards.

Yet another victim of FJL said...

Long may you laugh Genevieve & anyone else who still finds internet stalking/harassment amusing! If FJL gets her claws into you, you'll soon change your tune!

But if you insist on believing FJL is an innocent and wronged 'victim' why not prove it by offering her a place in your homes as well as your hearts?

The poor thing has rendered herself homeless as you will see (apparently her victims' fault, who are actually her stalkers in FJL land). All very complicated - I can see why a Johnny-come-lately might get the wrong end of the stick.

Yes she's mad, but she's also bad, make no mistake.

fjl said...


- I am not going about the street homeless atall, please ignore this nonsense.

- The case is going to appeal for a full nd complete retrial. Nothing is yet confirmed. This is an important legal fact.

Xena said...

'Frankly, I have no idea whatsoever who is telling the truth and it really doesn't matter'

er - yes it does. Especially if you claim to be a journalist.

CLUE: Felicity was found to be a liar, a stalker and a harasser
( with previous convictions) in a UK criminal court, and Rachel wasn't.

'I'm told she sues people who use her actual name but go here for hints'

Wrong. North writes under a pseudonymn because people who have survived rapes in the UK and are brave enough to go to court to get justice are allowed to have lifelong anonymity when talking about their attacks. Felicity 'outed' Rachael's real name, as part of her harassment campaign. Rachael's rapist, who left her for dead with horrific injuries was jailed for 15 years. The anonymity given to victims is to protect them from reprisals, and to encourage rape victims to come forward and tell their stories in court.

'Rachel has parlayed her claim to deep psychological scars from the London bombings of July 7, 2005, into a quasi-celebrity newspaper status in Britain, along with a column in The Times of London and a book whose launch party she has apparently postponed for reasons unknown.'

Rachael has PTSD, like many other survivors of 7/7 and has since campaigned with them for an inquiry into the bombings and better victim care.
Her book launch was cancelled because her mother had a stroke the week of the book launch in July, and then died in August.

'Rachel's parlaying tragedy (actually a smallish, copycat 9/11-ish event, but with only 52 dead and all on surface transportation) into a PR bonanza full of emotionalism for fun and profit.'

Just vile and sick. I hope you are flamed to hell and back for this.

'It seems that Felicity thought that the physically unharmed Rachel, who was apparently somewhere about a block or so from one of the explosions'

PTSD is a debiliatating condition. Rachael was treated in hospital for physical injuries and shock, having been a few feet away from a suicide bomber who killed over 25 people and injured 100 in that subway carriage.

'Rachel began to portray herself as cyberstalked ...'

Rachael was harassed for over a year, the harasser was interviewed, arrested, warned off, continued to harass Rachael, called to trial, failed to attend, found guilty on the evidence, went on the run, continued the harassment and was jailed for it - the maximum sentence. The harasser is now out on licence. Not for much longer, one can only hope.

'Sounds like out of the Middle Ages, complete with witch-hunt.'

No. It's the 1997 Protection From Harassment Law. Designed to protect innocent people from stalkers.

'But jailing someone for blogging seems to contravene Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights ...'

Felicity was found guilty under the above harrassment law. Harassing someone is not a human right, any more than raping someone is a human right.

'There's actually some sort of court muzzle in the U.K. on both Rachel and Felicity in this matter, as Felicity is appealing her conviction.'

There's no muzzle on Rachael, or the media, or bloggers. Felicity is banned from harassing over 16 other victims including Rachael, which includes spreading further lies about them in any media. Rachael seems to be having a break because she is dealing with her grief and exhaustion following her mother's death.

'I am writing within the medium in which both Rachel and Felicity have sought to lead more or less public lives about writings that are extant in this medium'

Since when does having a pseudonymous recovery blog mean one is fair game to be criminally stalked and harassed?

What a disgusting blog post by an ill-informed blogger. Call yourself a journalist? Woeful ability to check facts, evaluate sources and a total lack of empathy and common sense.

The one good thing about this is that by linking you, and commenting here, the vicious harasser Felicity is now in breach of her ASBO and hopefully Rachel or one of her other victims will take action.

Anonymous said...

P.S. If you want to be iconoclast, make sure first that one can laugh with everything but not with everyone, as a French humorist said.

I wonder whether your Grande y Felicísima Armada can board the shore of an island, which however was the Monty Pythons' native country.

Joanna R said...

Cecilie, I cannot believe how misguided and fact-free your posting is on this story.

Please refrain from commmenting in-depth on matters you evidently know only the merest shallows of.

At least you've made ONE friend for life out of it. But you may wish you hadn't as time goes on. Surely as a blogger you know better than to mess with trolls.

Xena said...

And anyone in the UK can appeal a conviction at a Magistrates Court and get a retrial.

It's as likely to be as successful as Felicity's other attempts to appeal her convictions.

Right, Felicity?
Remember what happened last time you appealed and lost?

Meanwhile Felicity's conviction for harassment - with the maximum sentence - and her ASBO and restraining order still stands.

(Someone might want to send this thread, and Felicity's contribution to Rachael, so she can inform the police that Felicity just breached her ASBO and restraining order. Which means she's looking at up to 5 years back inside)

punter said...

Geneviève: what on earth is there to laugh at?

Shallow chauvinism and sneering at other people's misfortune?

That post is just witless attention-seeking written by someone with a mental age of jerk.

"The Rachelists ... got the police of Oxford to go after Felicity and arrest her after she was tried and convicted in absentia."

No, not 'Rachelites', the Crown - meaning the Police and the Judiciary actually. What criminal would ever turn up for trial if running away got you off? So attempts to find a convicted criminal on the run in breach of bail shouldn't surprise. And 'getting the Police' to do any such thing would be beyond the power of any 'Rachelites'.

Neither funny, nor well written, nor well informed nor self aware.

Just pitiful.

punter said...

On second thoughts I withdraw 'pitiful'. Lack of upper lip rigidity methinks.

More like: offensive, but, paradoxically, in an ineffectual way.

Yes, that's better.

Click for FJL blog cache said...



- I am not going about the street homeless atall, please ignore this nonsense...'

FROM fjl'S bLOG - CACHED, 9/11/07 -
'The Oxford Judge seemed keen to wage war though- for some odd reason- and stated that the eviction was to go ahead in any case. Flying into the Royal Court's face.

I rang Oxford and said 'What's the meaning of this?'
The Court clerk at Oxford, the current head of department, Geraldine*, explained that unless I got a 'stay of execution' from the RCJ from one of the specialist judges this minute, the eviction would go ahead. And that it was going ahead. And that I was a twerp, and a little scumbag, and didn't I know she had other things to do all day? Or words to that effect. I said 'I'm ahead of you, I'm on my way into the emergency applications Courts Now.' She said "well I'm sorry we just don't care. I have been told by Judge Morton Clark to evict you and unless I get an order form the RCJ staying the eviction specifically, I am going to disregard your application to the RCJ that's currently going on".

I rang the baliffs, who were indeed at my home. Muttering and mumbling. 'Ring the Oxford Court and get them to call us.' Comforting was the fact that they are taking great care of security, and haven't touched or abused any of my affairs, which I am to collect. ( I've also asked friends and neighbours to watch the house, and they still are.)

I went in to see the Emergency RCJ Judge. He was a lovely person, that was obvious, no fancy wigs and gowns, nor anything designed to intimidate, but I wonder at his judgement. He basically stated that technically he couldn't do anything to stay an eviction that was this minute going ahead. Not even for two weeks. He also suggested that I'd had time to liaise with the mortgage company. ( No I hadn't, you can't call anyone from prison on your pin card unless it's governor approved, and then, you only get about two calls.) I think he believed it, though. He lamented my situation, and seemed to be very big hearted. But, he said, 'the law has given the plaintiff an extremely strong call in your situation, and I can't go down to Oxford and force them to stop flying into my face'. ( Or words to that effect.) He said he was so very sorry, and wished me luck for the overall appeal relating to this matter and the other one.

So that's that.

I am not really sorry, to be honest. I don't want the place after everything that's been done there. Bad memories- and I would feel extremely vulnerable. I do not think the effects of the Oxford Mail's false allegations and abuse will ever disappear, unless I'm instantly gone and forgotten, ready to enjoy life and rebuild it elsewhere. I just thought I ought to fight it for the sake of it, in a way, because the way it's being done will hurt my family, and others. But in fact I'm relieved. Let's move on.

Good luck to the new owners. (They can put up a parking lot).

I am officially homeless. (And this eviction fiasco was totally needless!)

* Her assistant, Vicky, is just as bad. Sometimes you get a couple of characters like that, who basically profiteer from their annexed status in the Courts, and there tends to be two of them, in my recent experience. They carry on together.'

Journalist who can research better than blog author said...

A 2000 news story....

'A woman convicted of harassing her former boyfriend bombarded his father with nuisance calls, a court was told.

Felicity Lowde, 34, of Jackson Road, Cutteslowe, Oxford, started making the calls the day she lost an appeal against her conviction for harassing former boyfriend Dr Dov Stekel.

Oxford magistrates made an order on November 22, 1999, that she should not contact Dr Stekel, or his father Ronnie Stekel, after she was convicted of harassment in October 1999. She also received a three-month suspended jail sentence.

But Oxford Crown Court heard yesterday she called Ronnie Stekel's home numerous times between April 18 and 25 this year.

Lowde denies a charge of breaching an order made under the Protection From Harassment Act 1997. Ronnie Stekel, a chartered accountant, told the court: "There were silent calls. There were 'burp calls' when I would answer the phone, a burp would come down the phone and the phone would be put down."

He said he logged 15 to 20 calls on April 18, and took the phone off the hook when they continued on April 23 and 24. He then changed the phone number of his home.

The court heard a recording of a message allegedly left on his answer phone by Lowde during this period.

The message said: "This is Dr Stekel's friend. Please stop leaving pornographic material on people's e-mails because it is not appreciated."

Lowde accepted it was her voice on the tape - but said she had not contacted Mr Stekel at the time alleged.

She said Dr Stekel and two of his friends had made "mocking and abusive" telephone calls in 1998 and she had also received pornographic e-mails from them.

Nichola Hatcher, defending, said the message may have been an old recording played down the line by Dr Stekel or one of his friends to encourage Mr Stekel to go to the police.

She said when the police seized Lowde's phone and mobile phone from her home they showed no evidence of calls to Mr Stekel's home number. She said just eight calls made to the Stekel household between April 19 and April 23 could be traced to a payphone near Lowde's home.

The trial continues'

And FJL was found guilty.

Wake up and smell the arsenic in your coffee.

Journalist who can research better than cecilieaux said...

Next up...A news story from 1999....which predates the last one

Ex-lover cleared of 'sting' plot

STUDENT Felicity Lowde, who was said to have hired a private detective to intimidate her former lover, walked free from court yesterday.
The 33-year-old, of Jackson Road, North Oxford, was cleared of perverting the course of justice after a three- day trial at Oxford Crown Court.
It was claimed that Ms Lowde was said to have offered to pay the detective £500 to launch an elaborate "sting" operation against Dr Dov Shekel, including sending two men to bug the doctor's home and impersonate police officers.
Her aim, the jury heard, was to persuade Dr Shekel to drop harassment charges after he claimed she bombarded him with up to 200 telephone calls in five days in an effort to win him back.
The Oxford Brookes University student was said to have

offered to pay £250 up front and a further £250 if the intimidation was successful.
Police heard of Ms Lowde's alleged plan when the private detective, who is also a police informant and goes by the alias of Reggie Kray, told officers. She was arrested and charged in May last year.
Miss Sandra Stanfield, prosecuting, said Lowde originally made her approach to the private detective to stop the harassment case coming to court.
She said that after the couple's relationship had broken down Lowde had started to bombard Dr Shekel, his family and his friends with phone calls.
Miss Stanfield added: "Miss Lowde decided to set out to try to find a way to stop the court case. She approached a private detective but he turned out to be a regular police informant and, surprise, surprise, told the police."

Giving evidence, the private detective, who cannot be named for legal reasons, said:
"The defendant gave me a resume of her problems that she had with a gentleman and that she had harassed him, but believed he was obsessional about her. I gave her an outline of the sort of thing we could do."
But, the court heard, the investigator failed to hand tapes of telephone calls made by Felicity Lowde to him over to police.
Mr Lee Masters, defending, said: "Miss Lowde did not want anything to do with perverting the course of justice or anything unlawful. She did not want the witness intimidated in any shape or form."
He added that the private detective had deliberately left out passages of the taped calls where Lowde said she did not want Dr Shekel approached in any way.
The private detective denied he had tampered with the tapes saying the police had been negligent in not asking for a proper record of the telephone conversations.
The detective went on to describe to the court the nature of his work. This included, he said, gaining evidence to convict alleged contract killers.'

Lowde was found not guilty of this attempt to stop a harassment case coming to court, but later WAS found guilty of harassing Dov Stekel, her ex boyfriend, and was given a 3 month suspended sentence and a fine.

She went on to appeal the conviction ( sounds familiar) and lost...and went to prison.

See my previous comment.

Want more? Or is it time for an apology and retraction yet?

On second thoughts, you have FJL on your tail, as well as looking like a giant arse of a crap hack who can't research for sh*te on your blog. That's all the punishment you need. Good luck over the next year, when she starts on you

Alexander Fear said...

Well, I did try to warn you Cex,

There must be a whole group of non-blogger-RN supporters out there who do nothing else but google for "fjl" and "rachel north" all day long, checking the internets to make sure that no-one is saying anything about RN.

Did you know she is a victim? Seriously... you'd never have guessed it but she is you know! Being a victim means you are absolved of all responsibilities to anyone or anything, it means that no-one is permitted to criticize you- everything you do is beautiful, everything you do is right!

The amount of comments left on blogs that offer any sniff of defense or pity for Felicity would make you think there is stock in Felicities claims that she is stalked...

Wordpress fan said...

It's a big story that horrified many people, and a story that was covered in the national news.Now Lowde is out on licence, and bloggers are interested to see hwether she has mended her ways after being such a cyberpest for so long.

This is not about 'being a victim',or being 'above criticism' : it is about a vicious bully trying to pick on a clearly vulnerable and entirely blameless person, for over a year, denying culpability, continuing the harassment, getting caught out and being punished for it. I have seen a lot of pity for Lowde, people hoping she gets help and treatment - the consensus seems to be that she is severely mentally ill - but that does not excuse her wicked harassment or stop it having consequences.

To see ( thankfully,a minority) of bloggers actually defending the convictedcriminal abuser, and coming out with a load of ill-informed rubbish in the process is sick.

Do you attack all victims of crime in this way, or is this just trying to be controversial?

Publicly kicking a nice woman who'se had a seriously awful time over the last few years in order to defend a serial bully is going to get you a fair few dissenters. There are people who think 'there but for the grace of God'.

Many of the people taking an interest are people FJL has attacked in the past, and who are now protected from her, thanks to RN taking the case forward, at some cost and risk to herself, and in doing so gaining not just protection for herself but for over 15 other FJL victims.

Raped, bombed, stalked, recently bereaved, and now attacked by a few pathetic bloggers looking for hits. Don't you think it's time to have a little pity for the innocent party here? After all, it could be you, or someone you know being tormented day after day and threatened and bombarded with hatemail and putting up with it in silence for a year - all because that's how some mentally ill stranger gets her sicko jollies.

It was only after Lowde's conviction that North wrote about her at all. Meanwhile, Lowde bombarded the internet with posts, comments and emails intent on destroying North's reputation for over a year. Lowde DID have a proper trial - which she elected to miss, waiting outside the court like the coward she is. Then she ran away, with a warrant out for her arrest. Only then did the police and bloggers try to track her down - and she was finally caught and sentenced.

If some bloggers are deliberately being provocative in order to get traffic, I suggest that commenters don't play their games. FJL , like all trolls, feeds off it and so it seems do other silly little boys.

North, meanwhile, has stopped blogging. I don't blame her.

I'm not linking my blog as I don't want FJL's attentions

rnm said...

"The amount of comments left on blogs that offer any sniff of defense or pity for Felicity would make you think there is stock in Felicities claims that she is stalked..."

Only if you're really, perversely dim, Alexander.

Alexander Fear said...

I wonder RNM (Rachel Norths Mate?),

What brought you to this blog (Cex has not posted on this issue before)? And only 2 days after it was posted.

2 days seems to be the average time it takes for RN troll supporters to come crawling out of the woodwork and swarm on a post that might just not worship RN the way everyone else does.

Tell us, do you guys work in a team? Or do you have one person doing all the googling and then sending the signal to the rest?

Anonymous said...

Alex, listen carefully for just a moment please. If you care to read the comments rather than being preoccupied with your RN theories, you might see that there is rather a lot of substantial evidence that FJL has been a pest, and a harasser, for many years prior to anything related to Rachel.

So try to forget about your obsessions, and consider the reasonable, cogent points that are made about FJL, and why it is misguided in the extreme to think she is a victim of any kind.

A fan of neither side. said...

A team? No - I know nobody here. I guess that we all read fjl's blogpost from yesterday, which links to this post.
It's hardly rocket science.

Gulliver said...

Alex has a point. There really is no "evidence" of anything here, other than that a swarm of locusts will descend on anyone who attempts opines on this in any kind of balanced way. Rachel's the loser by association here.

What a bunch of humorless morons!

Tired of the likes of Alex and "gulliver", but trying to make a simple point clear said...

"humorless"... Oh, I can't even be bothered to get angry about that, since this is not a comedy or an entertainment. And if by "balance" you mean decreed by a court of law, over a long period of time - at least a decade of such behaviour, then that is what law is - balanced judgement.

That is why regular citizens cannot decide on an appropriate sentence, if any is deserved. Do these concepts mean anything to you?

TWF said...

Oh look:

another posting giving these 2 tits more publicity for their blogs

another writer's ratings go up in the progress

the trolls are jumping the farm gates and gathering around the circus

time to start making the popcorn

This is entertainment.

There are more impo

irritated reader said...

The 'trolls jumping the farm gates' are Alex Fear, Cecileaux, Gulliver and others taking the side of a convicted abuser, plus Felicity 'Supertroll' Lowde herself. (Though 'troll' isn't the best description for her: vicious bullying criminal harasser is more apt.)

Getting angry with ignorant, research-free, background-reading-untroubled bloggers siding with a
( possibly mentally ill but still vicious) abuser - at the expense of an innocent woman whose latest misfortune was to be targeted by a lunatic stalker after starting a recovery blog - is NOT TROLLING.

And twf - if you think North arranged to get attacked and stalked in order to push a blog (!!!) then you are one sad sack kiddo.

People have obviously come here because Cecilieaux pimped the post on Lowde's stalker blog. And presently lots of people are watching Lowde's hate blog to see how long it takes before the woman breaks her ASBO conditions.
( Sweepstake anyone?)

Lowde is a serial bully with a long list of victims and a history of court appearances. A fact that the blog author, who claims to be a journalist has totally missed - hence it being pointed out in the comments why the original post was a load of b.s by people better informed

rnm said...

Alex: I don't know Rachel and I don't support her (re 7/7). These are my r/l initials.

I came here because the site owner splashed his own url on FJL's site. I commented because I didn't like the way the idiot had gratuitously stomped into the lives of complete strangers for cheap laughs. His incompetence only struck me later.

There is no 'Rachel's mob'. To think there is is to collude with one of FJL's fantasies. Like her insistence that her case is about 'human rights' and free speech. Her obsessions create an oppositional niche and all sorts of people are prepared to fill it. 'Rachel's mob' makes about as much sense as calling you, Jason Palmer and Isadub 'Felicity's mob'.

I have had a blog since 2003. Lowde commented (rather coldly) on my site Dec 05. I clicked through and found her blog strange. After about three posts she started telling what seemed to me to be lies. I stopped reading. Four months later at a blogmeet I met a very nice man who had strange tales of Felicity. He was a 'Ripperologist' (her word) and had made the mistake of having a Ripper book published - making him fair game in FJL's eyes for a campaign of hate mail and web harassment. Which spilled over into some other bloggers' lives, notably NML's. I went back and read her blog again, By then it was full of obvious delusions. I resolved never to read her again.

Having met Petite Anglaise at another blogmeet in Nov 06 I went to her site (I was not a regular) and found FJL all over it making allegations about other commenters. ! I rwent back to SoC again and found stories of policemen coming through her windows. So I began reading, but with a very critical mindset.

A few weeks later I wrote three long comments to her, under these initials. She printed the second but did not reply to any of my points. She assumed I was someone else and shrieked "Harassment!". Her threats to report that person to Police led me to contact him to say I would speak out and affirm that I was not him. What I heard back was really shocking. Incidentally the letters were not abusive. They were directly interrogatory.

Since then I have followed this sad drama. Having heard two horror stories, neither connected with Rachel in any way, I find it hard to see people like you obsessing about Rachel controlling this situation. There is a really large body of evidence (yes, Gulliver) of FJL's depravity. You have now also been told, and I have learned several things on this thread that I did not know. Turning FJL into some kind of martyr is simply to be manipulated.

Perhaps you have some political agenda running that makes you incapable of seeing Rachel in a human light. Perhaps you have been seduced by Felicity's cloying religiosity.

Have you actually read what Felicity has said publicly about Rachel? I have and it passes all bounds of decency.

Which is how Felicity came to threaten me and my family, on my own blog, after I left a cryptic (supportive) comment on Rachel's site (some time before the case) under my blog name. I did not mention Felicity directly but I then had ten comments under different names but all from the same IP. Three were under the FJL name. Over to you Sherlock.

So you in Felicity's mob, take off the rosy glasses and drop the politics. Your call, but ignorance can no longer be any excuse for you.

Fidothedog said...

Another sad glove puppet blog by FJL, the mad stalker, jailed loon and internet harridan.

Anonymous said...

fido, that seems puzzling since it was clearly not written by FJL.

Anyway, logic aside, rnm made a very good point, which Alex "Fear" and "gulliver" ought to see, namely that FJL is the kind of psychopath that lots of people are discussing.

The point is, she has a history of, let us say, "ugly" behaviour. All documented by the press quite before 2007. Way before Rachel North et al.

So she is clearly a stalker, or harasser, or whatever you want to call it.

My advice to FJL, since she is out after serving three months of a six month sentence, is to shut up and move on.

I can guarantee to you that she will not do that, and thereby she will be violating some strict court conditions. This is not a game of name-calling.

FJL is a particularly vicious person who has set up multiple blogs (around 20) to attempt to adversely affect the lives of the names she has used.

For instance - might be one of them - this is an illustrative example, one of a kind of many that she set up.

Alexander Fear said...

Since there has been some attempt at reasonable debate here. Let's look at the troll issue.

1) I come to this site often and have commented in the past, so has the blog author done with my blog, we have not always agreed but respect each others opinions...

As opposed to coming to a blog based on one post- which you disagree with strongly and posting all sorts of rude, accusatory and anonymous messages. Trolling much?

2) With regards to FJL, we all know she's been convicted (which she is appealing, which she is entitled to). I also know she's left comments on other blogs- in a trolling capacity- That doesn't make her a stalker, mad, or deserving of vicious talk and discussion about her (especially since she is trying to rehabilitate- YOU GUYS ARE NOT EVEN GIVING HER A CHANCE TO CLEAR UP HER ACT)!

3) FJL was convicted of stalking IN THAT she emailed North more than twice, because harassment laws in the UK dictate emailing someone on more than 2 occasions is harassment. Therefore I am against this law as well as of the opinion that regarding the witch-hunt organised against Felicity was a result of hysteria, rather than common sense.

4) If you've not read this blog before, or got it saved in your RSS feeder, and have just come to this post only, to comment and put down the author WHO YOU HARDLY KNOW, then that to me is troll behaviour. I also question how you found this blog, since it's not as popular as North or BoingBoing, therefore someone must be googling for issue, and if they are googling for the issue then that strikes me as a tad OBSESSIVE!

5) If this post did not defend FJL or mention her, but still offered criticism of North, what would the comments be like? I am willing to bet that they'd be in a similar vein. Something about North makes people want to stamp out critics. Just check out David Duffs blog. It's almost a religion or cult.

Alex needs to look at point 3 said...

"3) FJL was convicted of stalking IN THAT she emailed North more than twice, because harassment laws in the UK dictate emailing someone on more than 2 occasions is harassment."

Alex, you are clearly a total idiot. We are not talking twice, we are talking 40 emails in a DAY. With another guy, HUNDREDS of answerphone messages in a week, to him, to his father, to his employer - ten years ago, provable by court.

Got it? The woman is mentally ill, and she needs serious psychiatric help.

a fan of neither side said...

For heavens sake, Alex, have you not read the previous comments???

People have come to this blog because it was ADVERTISED by the blog owner on FJL's OWN BLOG - see the comments to her post of Monday 17/9.

There is no question of anyone googling. I seriously doubt that most commenters here know any of the other commenters - I certainly do not.

Just because this is the first visit by many to this blog (at Cecilieux's invitation) doesn't make any of them trolls.

Should FJL now be left in peace to rehabilitate? Probably. I hope she does recover. Not for her sake, she deserves no pity, but for the sake of her potential future victims.

I do not particularly like Rachel North for various reasons, not least political, but I was appalled by the way that FJL dealt with her.

Her conviction was based not just on North's evidence but also that of many others who were stalked by FJL. That is why the ASBO covers so many names.

I would add that, contrary to the statement at the start of this blogpost, North has never sued anyone. She did not complain about FJL to the police either - they approached her when FJL accused North of stalking her and the police took the opposite view.

Anonymous said...

And Alex - sorry but I have to be blunt. You are a moron and a hypocrite. You seem to be a Christian. You are rather a bad model for any potential conversion, since you are so filled with hate - and obviously 7/7 lunacy. Do you know where FJL lives? Shack up with her, think of the money lenders etc, the good samaritan.

I can publish your address. Do you think she would like that? After all, she is homeless. Put your money where your mouth is.

Joanna R said...

I don't see what the problem is with Rachel North. We all know one of those people to whom one extraordinary thing after another (good or bad) seems to happen and she just happens to be one of those people. Why on earth shouldn't Ms North get something positive out of all the terrible things that have befallen her by turning her experiences into a successful writing career? You don't have to like Ms North's style of writing or agree with her politics but that doesn't mean she's not entitled to be who she is or is not a good person.
One thing Rachl N is NOT though is a stalker or a nutter.
Rachel North was just the most recent in a very long line of harassment victims of Ms Lowde over the years who happened to dare take her to court for her incessant and appalling abuse against her. Ms North's actions have subsequently enabled 15 other victims to also obtain legal protection from FJL.
If this is not a public spirited act, to protect the public in addition to Ms North herself, I do not know what is and I wish her all the luck in the world in helping end Mr Lowde's reign of persecution to innocent parties.

interested bystander said...

I agree with much of what you say, but a minor point of clarification: Ms North did not take Lowde to court, rather the Chief Constable of the Metropolitan Police did, via the Crown Prosecution Service, as it was a criminal and not a civil matter. North was a witness and *one* of the injured parties. There were others, who were part of the same action, who are now protected by what Lowde affectionately refers to as her gagging order.

fjl said...

Okay, this is quite enough foolishness.

The above comments remain extremely libellous, whoever might have written them.

This situation is being dealt with in a Court of law, the case is not over in any shape. It is very clear indeed that I am being harassed by these characters, and this will shortly be a legally established fact.

The Court where this matter is headed, is a far more serious one than the magistrates' Court that found me guilty in my absence, when the defence wasn't there, I wasn't there, and no material was present.

We all know what the libel is going on about me, and there is no need to print it fifty times over.

fjl said...

I am not a harassing stalker and I never have been. I am a mature person with an interesting life and a job to do. I am simply trying to organise an appeal and get things together again.

I have been counseled that my appeal will very probably be successful.

I have not been abusive to anyone throughout this matter in fact, despite everyones' carry on. I have simply reported facts.

Shakey said...

methinks the lady doth protest too much!

Anonymous said...

Here's another example of Felcity's mature, non harrassing nature :

Alexander Fear said...

From Cex's comment on Felicities blog- seems it was addressed to Felicity, not you lot.

Also seems the argument has gotten personal, and who is the anonymous coward that has my address?

7/7 sorry, you have the wrong campaign there.

And well done for correctly assessing I am a Christian, born again variety thanks. In fact I would offer you that I am perfectly emulating my faith and proving to you all what a Christian is.

The pharisees convinced the Romans to hang Jesus on the cross- his crime? Blasphemy- not just in the obvious declaring he was the son of God, but in forgiving sinners no less! When he had no right to forgive! Befriending those that society hate!

Not many of you here should pretend or want to call yourselves Christian, it's a difficult life to choose (for example many people who are not Christian know exactly how you should behave and act).

Jesus came not for the healthy but for the sick, he was not desperate to get people to believe or follow him and instructed people to forgive offenders and point out hypocrisy in those that consider themselves good and righteous...

Like I say, if you don't want to do these things, don't become a Christian- I plead with you even! We already have enough self-righteous idiots embarrassing my Saviour than to add a few more.

fjl said...

That socalled example has just been downloaded by the defence, and it will be produced in Court.

Fearless lion said...

Ah, so you admit you became a Christian because you are sick Alexander...?

Or do you labour under the same grandiose delusions as FJL (ie the more people I can provoke into hating me, the greater I must be, as 'genius' is always misunderstood)?

Got a shag out of it yet? (your only other possible reason for defending FJL's and her unconscienable behaviour). Oh I forgot, Christians marry first. Well I think the genius researcher's still single - go for it!

Enjoy the blog traffic oh previously little-known Cecilie aux! You'll have to pen ill-informed wacko defences more often.

Anonymous said...

Oh yes..

This Rachel is a 'wannabe member of the chattering class' and likley so are the others who chased Lowde. To be honest, with these Brits, I would not at all be surprised if the thinking behind the baying hate mob was to put someone like Felicity in her place, to show her where she stood in the 'class' pecking order (I am not British and only go on what I observe). I think as Felicity continued to question what she read North became jealous and afraid she would be pushed off the headlines!

Sure Felicity comes off looking bad (my God she is a criminal!!!! whoopdedoo) but from the terraces, it is this rachel who comes off worse.

While my violin gently wept said...

I don't see how you work that out Anonymous.

In what way does Rachel N come off worse? In what way is Rachel N a convicted criminal guilty of criminal behaviour?

And your allusion to 'class' is even more bizarre. In what way is Rachel N supposed to be any more middle-class than FJL? The real difference between them is that FJL is crazy as a shaken box of snakes and a malicious convicted criminal to boot and Rachel N is not and has merely sought to defend herself from FJL's repeated malicious attacks.

FJL has clearly put HERSELF in her OWN place through her OWN behaviour for whatever bizarre reason known only to herself. She should just fess up and admit it like a proper grown up adult and act her frickin' age.

Lost on that argument said...

Comes off looking bad ? I guess that's what's called an understatement. Lowde is a convict who habitually bullies, stalks, lies and threatens. She has been found guilty numerous times of these acts. Rachel North has no convictions for any of these crimes.

In what way is North seen as coming off worse ?

Bystander said...

Don't get too complacent. I've seen exactly the same behaviour by your compatriots on Usenet. But yes - these people are slightly deranged. Some of them actually believe that denigrating someone over the internet is more reprehensible than battering an old lady to death with an axe. Strange days indeed.

fjl said...

Hi all,

can I ask people to not judge my files atall and to recall that my case has yet to go to Court, whereupon the conviction is in fact likely to be quashed.. I can't make references to some people currently, so really this sort of business puts me in an unfair position. I can't respond.

I don't know who wrote the above comments but I'm assuming it's the Conservative blogger team?

I wonder if Cecilieaux might feel inclined to delete this unhealthy diatribe of comments, I'd be grateful. The lawyers saw it this afternoon and printed it all off already.

Thanks to some for the kind support and please let it be established that I have ( as is clear) encouraged no posts or comments etc.

rnm said...

Typical FJL that. Muddled thinking all over.

Let's have a bit of a look at her request/threat then.

So this thread is all libel/contempt of court/whatever. And it's all been 'printed off' by her marvellous lawyers. Well, um, yes. Presumably because she thinks it's all good material for her defence. (Personally I don't believe any decent lawyer would waste the time, paper or ink.)

So why delete it if it puts all of us in jeopardy and in line for imprisonment/fines/damages? Why, exactly, if it makes her case? Oh, because she hasn't the faintest idea who 'we' are. So why bother printing it off then? Does anyone see my point here? Eh, Felicity?

And Alex, one last point. If you think she's so wonderful?Christian/saved/put upon - and not just a menace. Please go read her 'thesis'. Just plough through all that ridiculous ill informed nonsense, all the jumps in reasoning, errors in logic and basic misinformation about British history. That thesis is her Crown Jewels. She says that whole pile of silliness is the reason she is in her current situation. Read her blog - that is what she maintains.

Go read it and work out for yourself what you think of it. No specialist knowledge required. Just read the documents she has photographed and tell me that they say what she says they do.

And then tell me that 'Special Branch' (now defunct) have targeted her for blabbing 'secret' history. Go on. Dare ya.

Now, in Court, they will ask her about that stuff and they will put it to the Judge that if she cannot be relied upon about that then on what exactly can she be relied.

Just open your eyes. It's not about Rachel, it's about a seriously deluded, very nasty person.

Anonymous said...

Odd how you always ask for things to be deleted when they relate to you Felicity. Shame you don't afford those you have wronged the same remedy. All those blogs slandering people which are still kicking around the Net.

Always someone else - Conservatives, Ripperologists, loons. Yet your attacks are on the poor, everyday people that for whatever reason you attach yourself to and attack so mercilessly.

All that has been said here is a matter of fact and court record where it applies to your previous convictions. As has been said I doubt if any lawyer would bother to print it off. My feeling is that you want it expunged from the Net so you can carry on thee deluded campaigns. Unfortunately you played a little fast and loose and life came back to bite you. You can't remove court records just like you can't remove previous convictions.

The more people who see you for what you really are will I truely hope realise that they are not alone in suffering at your hand and perhaps there is an end to it all.

Irony fan said...

Now we know why Felicity has comment moderator on her blog..this must ewhat people have beeen saying all along, to her, but she won;t let comments through..

The irony! She wants commnents abot her ( public record) of criminal convictions deleted - yet claims 'free speech' is the cornerstone of her 'defence'!

She claims she will 'see her harassers in court' and that they are 'being downloaded by lawyers' yet does not know who they are!

The case - the appeal, such as it is - is about whether Felicity harassed North or not. She clarly did and the evidence for that has already been presented - and FJL found guilty on it by a Judge.

Waste of public money, this appeal.

twf said...

Hey, FJL, have your solicitors download this:

You are a stalker!
You send threatening emails!!
YOu are breaching an asbo by commenting on a case coming up for appeal!!!
You tell lies about people online!!!!
You live in a fantasy world supported by just enough sillies on the outside to keep you fuelled!!!!!

... and I don't even like Rachel North.

Tell your solicitors, I am out in the morning but in during the afternoon if they want to come and get me. Oh, no calls after 4 as I have a dress fitting and you *know* how they can be.

gws said...

FJL - you can't ask people anything. You are being talked about in a way you cannot control, and you deserve every bad word said about you. Your actions have been detestable, even your son has disowned you.

You set up many, many blogs aiming to destroy people's reputations. Now, this is what happens. You are not welcome anywhere, and the only reason you are known at all is because of the bad things you have done in your sad life.

It is time to face reality, seek help, and sort yourself out.

Anonymous said...

North comes off looking worse as she comes off looking like an opportunist. She comes off as looking as someone who thinks they are a celeb, thinks stalking is fashionable and therefore wanted one of her own.

I have more sympathy for Lowde. Statements like Lowde was found 4.5 miles from North's home in London do it for me (oh how I laugh). For heavens sake!!!! Most people in inner London are within this radius of each other. Sure Lowde was from Oxford but she is allowed to move.

I hope North's career plans come of and she makes the dough she wants from her litany of victimhood, but she should remember that people like her are a dime a dozen.

Raising my eyes to heaven a la FJL said...

You think North got raped bombed and harassed by a demented criminal because it was FASHIONABLE??!!


Either you're particularly, you're obviously a sock puppet.

Anonymous said...

These nasty messages are mostly from Ripperologists, conservative bloggers who support North and Daniel Hart- your stalker, FJL.

Have you checked out who began the Wanted campaign, whose idea it was?

You don't know the half of it said...

Fair point about the 4.5 mile radius in Central London & people being allowed to move Anonymous, but all else you say on the FJL matter is utter tosh. Sounds like you just don't like Rachel North and are using FJL as a means of getting at her. However Rachel is only ONE of many FJL victims over MANY years, albeit one of the most severely (recently) hounded.

Face Facts said...

So Anon. you think Dan Hart was stalking FJL ?

A rather different view is presented here :

" The artist said Lowde had written online that he was a "vindictive stalker" and deliberately used the Google search engine to smear his good name.

Mr Hart has taken on a solicitor to have the offensive material removed from the Internet but the bizarre postings are still largely in place.

Mr Hart said: "This has caused me great mental distress and she has pushed me close to the point of a breakdown.

"My girlfriend has been very supportive about this and I have sought advice from Victim Support.

"Felicity is a case study in madness but her methods are very clear-headed.

"She should be jailed once she is apprehended but the real comfort for me, and lots of others who have also been targeted, would be to have the offensive blogs removed."

Away from your own blog Felicity you dont win. Where free speech is allowed every argument and lie you put up can be countered with fact.

This whole matter started because of actions you took - how you treated people, what you said and what you did.

Bystander said...

The wanted campaign was started by a blogger called Mike Rouse who wished to offer his assistance when FJL was on the run from her criminal conviction.

Anonymous said...

Can I just add, I ended up humouring her comments, they became steadily crazier and more oblique. Now they've turned nasty. Just drop the whole thing, Cex, for your own sake. I wish I'd listened to those who warned me about fjl all along.

Bystander said...

It was a Police-approved campaign and similar are going on to aid the finding of missing girl Madeleine and various kidnapped hostages around the world.

fjl said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Always something there to remind you said...

Deleted or not there's enough of a record of what you have done to people both on and off the Net.

No ones laughing - we just want this to end

fjl said...

Well, shut up then?


Personally Cec I would encourage you to delete this sort of stuff, I'm just underlining the fact that I'm not making you.

rnm said...

She was on the run for six weeks, but she deliberately let the Police find her. That's what she says.

They took away her house. But she didn't want it anyway. That's what she says.

And now that it looks like it's staying, she wants this thread to stay. That's what she says.

Anyone here with control issues? Anyone round here who can't BEAR to be seen as anything less than omnipotent?

rnm said...

I really don't care to be honest.

She also said that.


fjl said...

Stick your headphones on everyone they'll get the message eventually :-)

Anonymous said...

Over on FJLs blog, a discussion about prostitution in the East End.....

"Cads and bounders all trooped down to the east End for a **** but then that lot always will; a sexual experience with them is really nothing more than a wardrobe falling on top of you, at best."

The best writing often draws upon personal exeriences...

BellaCat said...

'A case study in madness'?

This 'Dan Hart' he a psychiatrist as well as a fine arts graduate? And if Ms. Lowde is indeed a 'case study in madness' then that makes the lynch mob on here about a thousand times worse than she is. A case study in hypocrisy, methinks. There's a bit of Matthew Hopkins in all of you.

Anonymous said...

No its the Dan Hart who Felicity setup numerous blogs about, stalked, called, tried to ruin a business.

Odd how stating truths about FJL is seen as a witch hunt but her calling, abusing, wrecking peoples lives, ignoring the law of the land is seen as quaint and to be applauded.

Louise Mills said...


If you think that what you're doing is right then why do you feel the need to post anonymously? Isn't that just a tad cowardly?


BellaCat wants some traffic methinks! said...

Hi there BellaCat - well, although your points about mental illness over on your blog are quite reasonable, you are in fact missing the point. All of those who have been directly affected by Lowde have expressed a wish that she gets the help that she so desperately needs.

The problem is that she fails to recognise she even has a problkem, and she won't be sectioned against her will. Therefore, she is a menace to people and to be jailed at least keeps her away from her computer, the tool of so much destruction.

Oh, and people post anonymously because they don't want to provoke any potential problems from FJL - not cowardly, but absolutely sensible based on past evidence, surely.

Also, since you find all these negative comments about FJL to be somehow denigrating the mentally ill community, perhaps you could explain why, quoting your blog postings, it is fine to say,

"Grrrrr. frustrated and annoyed. Another day of waiting. I'll take the earphones off (industrial strength because of the Madwoman in the Attic.)"

You're not very consistent, are you?

Louise Mills said...

Er, no, 'Anonymous' - criticising you for posting anonymously and then posting anonymously myself really would be inconsistent, wouldn't it? You'll have to let me critique your blog sometime. Oh no, I can't because you're anonymous. BTW people are always sectioned 'against their will' because that's the point of 'sectioning'. Duh!

fjl said...

Very good point about anonymity. Surely if they weren't committing libel and harassment, they'd be glad to announce their identities. Honest people don't hide their lives, surely.

Let's have done with the 'let's hope she gets the help she needs' line, which is obvious malice and spin, and no one is falling for it.

Anonymous said...

Anyone who criticises North would be wise to remain anonymous.

Please explain .. said...

Not sure whats libel here Felicity.

All I see is a lot of statements of fact. You have been convicted multiple times. You did go on the run. You did setup blogs defaming other people.

The "its libel and my lawyers" line is rather tired.

rnm said...

Felicity: you have only the most tenuous grasp of what libel is. Like your tenuous grasp of 'free speech' which is something you think you are entitled to but no one else is.

The truth, may I remind you, is not libellous.

And 'the best' lawyers don't do 'no fee no win' cases. They don't have to - see? So if you want the best then you'll have to pay for them.

Incidentally the anonymous posting throws up something other than the ridiculousness of your whole 'libel libel libel' threat/whinge. None of us know who the others are either. So unless we're all guessing, e-mailing each other, going through our existing address books, then how come the story of your life, as told by us, is so similar - nay identical?

OK paranoia fans, because we are all one, Rachel worshipping, opportunistic, social climbing net nerd.

Or - we are actually a bunch of people who have learned : 1.) To be very cautious in our dealings with fjl and 2.) Who have different parts of a long complicated and depressing story of one person's anti-social and compulsive behaviour.

Unlike Felicity (who at this point would issue some command like "Have nothing to do with such people" or "We all know ...something or other" or, as just above, "No one is falling for this or that") I will leave it to the man/woman in the internet street to choose between a story of constant, hectoring denials, and a great lump of dismal evidence coming to light little by little as the perpetrator tries yet again to bully real life into an acceptable shape.

It's not your dreams that are unacceptable Felicity, just your behaviour. Want to be a researcher? Then publish rather than picking (displacement activity) fights.

Incidentally I think it's interesting how she takes the one genuinely human emotion that people regularly and voluntarily express towards her - the hope that she will get help - and contrives to turn it into 'malice and spin'. No hope for you, fjl, till you recognise genuine humanity in others.

fjl said...

Keep those headphones on guys!

rnm said...

Basically I'm done but I wish to say one general thing to any reader new to the FJL story, if you've had the stomach to get this far.

It may look a bit over the top, the amount of attention this thread has attracted. And with so many words and so many of them fairly harsh, it doesn't look nice and I'm guilty too. Alex, I did read another post here and I'm mystified why the site owner put this up. His previous was well written and perfectly reasonable. Why he chose to put this nonsense up beats me. Answers perhaps from the man himself?

Re this thread, two things should be said. Which are my opinion and my perceptions. I speak directly for no one but myself. Firstly, this is the first forum for the whole Felicity thing, for and against, since she reappeared. We have not all been bitching and swiping at her. But to most people's intense disappointment she is as militant and misguided as ever and people want to say that to her. It was here, that's all.

But secondly, it is also the ONLY time that Felicity has ever engaged with her critics at any length. I must point out to newcomers how incredibly difficult it is to get Felicity to engage in any kind of dialogue at all. Her own blog is as tightly controlled as any Stalinist state. Fel Jong Il brooks no criticism. She simply never answers direct questions, and here she is again for two days doing exactly the same thing. But we did try...

fjl said...

Oh shut up... you nasty, pompous ass. Anyone would think you had access to Court files. There is nothing militant about me whatsoever. I don't go around having wanted campaigns about innocent people.

No need for court files said...

District Judge Malcolm Read told her: “The offences, I would say, are at the very top end to be taken in a prosecution of harassment and therefore have to be dealt with at the top end of my powers.

“You persisted in that for a considerable period of time, causing her intense distress.”

rnm said...

Thank you.

No further questions, m'lud.


rnm said...

Above @ Felicity.

fjl said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

Thats not true - it was a different judge because you chose to abscond from justice when found guilty.

Just because it's a different judge the comments and court record still stand.

Your defence team at that trial also chose not to represent you.

fjl said...


The Judge who sentenced, wasn't the judge presiding on the case. The sentencing task had simply been passed to him, by which time there had been a press furore. When sentencing, he had to go on what the CPS sweep was, which was simply form. This is because I was found guilty in absentia. Therefore, CPS could say what they liked.

It means nothing.

You rather ridiculous prat, this case is now going to a High Court for a complete retrial. No one is going to 'sit' in the place of the judge who takes it.

A Crown Court Judge is now presiding over this matter, and the newspapers have got nothing to do with it.

fjl said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
fjl said...

My current defense team were at the sentencing hearing. They are being extremely loyal in this matter, and the case continues.

Anonymous said...

If a high Court is now taking it then a Judge has ruled a mistrial in the first instance. Must be.

Tha Quality of Mercy .. said...

Ironic that you get another bite of the justice cherry Felicity to see if this time you can get the outcome you feel you deserve.

Unlike those poor people you hounded.

The Poet Laura-eate said...

Quite so RNM, if FJL wants to be known as a wonderful researcher, why on earth doesn't she just get on with researching and quit getting a reputation as a loony internet stalker instead?

Is all this how you *really* want to be remembered Felicity? Rather than for being a top-flite researcher?

People don't consider posterity nearly enough these days. But we're all still mortal at the end of the day whatever broadband width we play with or latest iPod we own.

fjl said...

Part of the malice involved in this affair, is in respect of the confiscated hard drives. My research is on these, as well as evidence that acquits me of the false allegations.

This however is being rectified and applications are now in process.

fjl said...

.. I haven't hounded anyone atall. I have been a victim of hounding.

Anonymous said...

Your obfuscating Felicity - your hard drives were taken around November 2006 you say they contain your thesis. You claim they were taken by the police.

I fail to see what that has to do with harrassing people online and in real life who have nothing to do with the police.

rnm said...

* Stands up again reluctantly *

Would the witness please make up her mind. She has claimed repeatedly, and gloatingly, that her hard drives were all backed up.

And secreted with 'friends'. And kept 'up at tree' as I recall.

So which is it? Have you outwitted the heavy handed Special Branch plodders? Or have you been deeply wronged?

Both cannot be true.

In other words, are you an ace researcher or merely a boo-hoo net blatherer?

fjl said...

Let's let the wombats have their last madcap word as they'll never clear off otherwise.

Anonymous said...

More avoidance of direct questions. I thought researchers investigated, challenged and backed up their assumptions ?

You say you haven't hounded people yet there is ample evidence set before the courts on multiple occasions.

You say your drives have been taken, backed up then claim its due to them bring taken by police that you laid in to so many people.

Help us to see the folly of our ways Felicity - explain to us

rnm said...

Oh, and how exactly did you publish all that Ripper thesis stuff while on the run through Apr-June 07 if your hard drives were seized before then?

Psychicnet cables?

So, I put it to you. Do you have backups? Or not?

If you do then how can you claim your inability to publish? A bit selective, that inability, is it not?

And if you do not, then how did you put out all that stuff, still accessible on your blog, which you surely cannot deny exists? You may claim you remembered the text but surely not even someone with your prodigious academic powers could have remembered around fifty photos?

I put it to you that you are a liar.

Or very confused.

you don't know the half of it said...

Perhaps it's a bit too late for Felicity's fans to begin outnumbering the enemies she's made.

Shame that her dreams came to nought. She did make them sound ever so slightly noble when she wasn't busy being a malicious stalker.

Anonymous Wombat said...

Here are just some of the blogs FJL has set up:

rnm said...

October 18 2006. Streams of Consciousness.

"The high tech crime unit have told Inspector Colin Brooker that I can have the contents of the computer back excepting things relevant to the local "investigation" into my internet behaviour (which I'm perfectly happy for anyone to see), and the Special Branch document photos themselves. I've said before, I have the original photo-discs, they are not at my home, they are up a hoola tree, so they can take the copies from my computer if it gives them pleasure."


We are waiting Ms Lowde.

rnm said...

February 21 2007.

"You will please give me back my hard drive which you are unlawfully withholding while persuading corrupt officers to make their malicious allegations about my alleged disposition as a 'conspiracy theorist'.

You god forsaken liar. I have given you every chance.

It is archive evidence and inasmuch, it should have been made available to the public.

You leave me alone now with your malicious prosecution.

(That's all you're getting for now guys.)

... I saw the lady whose (one of the many) keeping the digital originals and copies."

Oh dear.

Pants on fire?

fjl said...

Bye, wombats.

Retrial information said...

Anonymous said...
If a high Court is now taking it then a Judge has ruled a mistrial in the first instance. Must be.

9/20/2007 11:16 AM

Wrong. Anyone can apply for a retrial after a Magistrate's Court, and can appeal conviction AND sentencing ( if they pleaded not guilty) and sentencing only ( if they pleaded guilty).



1 It’s easy to appeal against a criminal conviction or sentence in a Magistrates’ Court, but you have to make your mind up quickly. If you entered a guilty plea you can only appeal against your sentence, not against the conviction itself.
2 Although there is no special form to complete, you must put something in writing and send it to the court where you were convicted. They will need your name and address and the date of your conviction. There is no need to explain why you want to appeal, but you can do so if you want. This document becomes your ‘Notice of Appeal’, and it must reach the Magistrates’ Court within 21 days of the date when you were sentenced. You can do all this without any help from a lawyer, if you have to. The court staff make a note in the court register to say you have appealed, and send your notice on to the local Crown Court.

3 The Crown Court will hold a fresh trial of your case – a re-hearing. In an appeal against conviction, each side can call the same evidence as before, or can add or drop witnesses. There is no jury: the decision is made by a Crown Court judge, usually sitting with two magistrates. If they find against you again, the original conviction stands and there will usually be some extra costs for you to pay. There is a risk that the sentence might be increased as well. If you win the case, your own legal costs will probably be paid back to you, the conviction will be removed, and the sentence falls away, but you will not get any compensation for the inconvenience or loss you have suffered. When you appeal only against the sentence, the hearing is shorter. The prosecution will outline the facts of the offence and tell the judge about any previous convictions you may have, and you can say what you want in order to persuade the Crown Court to reduce the sentence.

Anonymous said...

Those blogs are set up by people complaining about the wombats. What has that got to do with fjl. It is no surprise that people complain about them.

Go find another pretty woman to persecute.

fjl said...

No, there are two that are mine: the fjlathome, and it's connection, 'blogging the malice.' A number seem to have been set up by so called supporters but I haven't encouraged it.

I can't really see what's wrong with them in any case. If they're honest, what does that matter? It's not my problem though. I wouldn't be interested in that.

Anonymous said...

You didnt set them up Felicity ? That's odd as this posting :

Mentions how you stalked Hutchinson - odd how some of those blogs above rant on about him eh ?

Dan Hart - oh look again - more mentions by people who setup blogs but of course these arent you ..

Come on - for a top researcher do your research

sick of the subject said...

Who is this who keeps getting those alleged blogs out as an excuse for the foul mouthed mob's behavior to fjl?

And I agree, what's wrong with them?

So it's illegal to support fjl or what??

rnm said...

That's OK for the net Felicity, but boy are you going to struggle on any witness stand. You can't run away there. Answers will be required and you clearly have none.

You are not only a liar but you are a very poor liar. You are way too cocky and you shoot your mouth off too often. That is because you have a misplaced confidence in your own abilities and you believe yourself invulnerable.

You isolate yourself from the consequences of your actions whenever they do not go as you wish. You have, in this way, parlayed yourself out of a house, a son and a career.

My next question - and I bet you're still reading - is: how much money have you ever earned as a writer? We hear so much about your loss of earnings after the seizure of all your material (which, inexplicably, you also still have and publish as you wish), but I suspect you have never submitted any manuscript to anyone, ever. You certainly have never had any material peer reviewed because if you had you would have been sent away with a flea in your ear.

A random example of your research standards. April 23 2007.

Charles Dickens (b 1810) lived at 22 Cleveland Street in 1821. OK, no problems there. You weave a lovely story about how, as an eleven year old, he watched and befriended the boys from the workhouse opposite. Charming. Except that you then tell us the workhouse was not built till 1830.

And do you know what a workhouse was? People went in to workhouses, they didn't come out, especially not in titfers and high collars.

That's one example of about fifty I could mention without pausing for breath.

Come on, 'fess up to the whole awful fantasy. You are not a writer, or a researcher of any repute.

fjl said...

Bye wombats. Feel free to wombat on- Ceciliaux is amused and so are the solicitors no doubt!

rnm said...

You said 'bye' before and yet you're still here.

Inconsistent, confused, academically challenged and a LIAR.

anonymous baiter said...

anonymous wrote

"Those blogs are set up by people complaining about the wombats. What has that got to do with fjl. It is no surprise that people complain about them. Go find another pretty woman to persecute."

What is funny, is that although it is 100% clearly written by FJL, she said how cowardly people who post as anonymous are... she just cannot keep up with her endless deceptions, can she?!

Anonymous said...

I can't see how any of those blogs are any use to those who complain about them in the circumstances.

If people are upset by them and think they can prove their innocence perhaps it would be best to begin libel proceedings instead of trying to scape goat FJL.

Anonymous said...

From your own blog Felicity :

29th December 2006

"Dan Norder, Philip Hutchinson, Stan Russo, Alan Sharp, and that character of an ex magistrate, Bob Hinton, read the blog abit. What part of 'clear off you pointless oafish goons' do these men not understand? I think you're total cr*p, a research joke and complete waste of time, and your sabotage is very unlikely to succeed; no one believes you, in active life or on the blogs. There's your answer. Now Clear Orf."

Odd how theres so much invective on your site and how all these names tie up to blogs so clearly written by you Felicity...

fjl said...

I can't comment further, since I can't refer to anyone, except to say that I'm not accountable for so called supporters' behaviors especially as they seem not to be doing anything wrong.

rnm said...

Now you're embarrassing yourself Felicity. Your pose as a top literary aesthete and brilliant writer is wearing thin.

You can't spell 'Chatterley' and now you can't even spell 'cecilieaux.

fjl said...

Here is a picture of a wombat in captivity.

fjl said...

Here is another one, at large:

Perhaps he most closely resembles the anonymous commenters here.

Click 4 FJL's list of hated ememies, then compare to the list of anon blogs said...

The demented anonymous blogs are perhaps evidence of bad character, the outward and visible public sign of Lowde's inward and private hate, usually expressed via hatemail to her intended victims? Could be. Let us examine the facts.

The 'blogging the malice' blog, (which Lowde admits is her own work), provides a convenient and detailed description of how much she hates all her victims, her threats and lies about them, and general character defamation. They are about people whom she alleges to be stalkers, harsssers, malicious, corrupt, mentally ill and so on.

Golly Gosh - what a coincidence...

All the same allegations and obsessions about the exact same people can be found on the long list of blogs Lowde claims she didn't write, that were set up by her 'supporters'.

Hmmm. Fishy......

Alexander Fear said...

Oh dear Cex, this thread has gone completely OTT!

For what it's worth I think RNM has made some valid points and has been reasonable.

This argument probably won't end but I'm making this my last comment. I think what it boils down to is this:

You either believe in redemption and mercy,


you believe in absolute punishment, revenge (she gets what she deserves) and that a leopard doesn't change it's spots.

I count myself amongst the first camp. I don't think Felicity is entirely innocent in this whole affair, but more importantly I don't think North or anyone else involved is either!

And let us not forget that FJL has done her time for the crime- she's an equal amongst us now as far as the law is concerned.

Felicity, there are those of us who will defend you and wish you well but we are all telling you to tone it down and stay away from flamewars and discussions like this. By churning it up and getting involved you are not helping yourself- trust me, it's better to move on and rise above it.

With regards to Rachel North and other so-called "victims" of FJL, first, FJL did not rape her, bomb her or kill her mother. She sent some discourteous emails is all (and sometimes made fair arguments). I do not know of any cases myself outside of the blogosphere, but whether Felicity is innocent or guilty is no matter... I expressed interest in this when the blog buttons went up and made my own balanced analysis.

I took sides with the hunted when I was set up on by vicious, anonymous commenter's who took umbrance with the fact that I dare say anything critical of Rachel North (which is how they interpreted my post and why I dubbed them the Northsquad).

I've had dialogue with North on my blog. I don't hate her or have anything against her personally, but I find her to be hypocritical and reliant on a perpetual state of victimhood.

We all know Felicities faults, but how the hell is she supposed to move on when there are people out there who have chosen to hate her with more passion than they would a pedophile or rapist (I don't see people attacking Norths rapist though she has published his name).

Those that say "I hope she gets help" whilst spitting out at the same time "she is a ......" (fill in the blank). Do they really wish her well and hope she gets help?

And how is Felicity supposed to get help when everywhere she goes there are people with daggers ready to stick it in her?

Redemption vs Retribution is what this is about.

Mercy or revenge.

rnm said...

And still no answers.

I'm not asking you to name names. Just to confirm you have backups (as you bragged) or if not, then how you can publish your thesis as you have done. If you do have backups then you can earn a living. Fair question, entirely based around your claims about yourself.

And pictures of animals? Isn't that the standard device all those stalker blogs use to ridicule Karen Trenouth, Alan Sharp, Stan Russo etc? Did you learn that trick from those blogs? Or just put it into those blogs? Close parallel I think a reasonable person might think.

No need to answer with names. Just a yes or no type of answer will do.

Like "Yes, I see a similarity" or "No, there are no pictures of funny animals with captions on those blogs".

fjl said...

Excuse me, you none of you know the case file atall.

fjl said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

Incidentally the wombats here may be the people who set up this vulgarity:

What do you think Alex?

Anonymous said...

FJL said...

'I'm not accountable for so called supporters' behaviors especially as they seem not to be doing anything wrong.'

Surely, Felicity, ( and Alex, and Bellacat etc) Rachel North could say exactly the same?

And the appeal is not about the alleged leagues of supporters/wombats of you - or of North - but simply about whether you harassed North. That's all.

You clearly did harass North and your own blog backs up your obsession with her and your hatred of her ( and lots of others)! That, plus the comments you left on various websites also confirm your state of mind and what you think - how you hate her enough to harass her. Very powerful evidence for the prosecution, your blog, indidcating your state of mind

But the blog and the comments you left all over the internet are not actually the evidence that the case was judged on - the main evidence was the many vicious emails sent by you, to North, and the replies asking you to stop.

From that, you were found to be harassing North.

Whinging on about how since your conviction in court, random bloggers have a tendency to send you arsey comments is sadly for you, utterly irrelevant to the case. Free speech and all that, as I'm sure you'll admit, is important, eh?

Bad luck old bean.

rnm said...

That last is at Felicity, Alex. You raise some interesting points and I will try to reply to you in a minute. I have no desire to be on bad terms with you and I think that can be avoided.

However i have a bath to run and a dirty son to clean up.

fjl said...

I agree with 2 above- these anonymous comment people are setting up hate blogs all over the web, it seems. It's best to have nothing to do with them, Alex. Just dismiss them for the wombats that they are.

If they were in any way honest non abusive people they wouldn't be hiding their identities.

fjl said...

What do you think Alex?

fjl said...

How sick is this Alex?

fjl said...

How sick is this?

fjl said...

How sick is this?

Anonymous said...

Very. I pity you fjl

Anonymous said...

A lot of people pity you Felicity - that's one of the interesting things about this - a lot of people want you have the help you so clearly need.

You need to get a grip on this online thing and follow what Alex suggests.

another wombat said...

wow! It's ACE, Felicity!!

fjl said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
fjl said...

Anonymous said...

Incidentally the wombats here may be the people who set up this vulgarity:

What do you think Alex?

This was the comment I was agreeing with when I said 'I agree with 2 above.'

I am not going to worry about it as the solicitors think that the allegations and case against me is a spectacle.

I keep getting 'Oxford' appearing on my visitors list on my blog, funny about that.

another wombat said...


You said that only two of the blogs listed above are yours, fjlathome and blogging the malice.

Could you explain why, on April 25, you posted the following on your blog:

Counter links have been put up to appear on google etc. and the search toolbars, that deal with the false claims and abuse going on and properly inform the public of the current situation.

You can find them here, here, here and here, to name afew. There'll be more, as the case continues. :-)

They are dignified and appropriate, unlike my saboteurs' behaviour. Rachel has so been rampaging round the Internet with her malicious campaign that there are now thirty links producing false info, so this must be done.

Where you linked to:


Do you still claim only two of the blogs are yours?

Stats and lies said...

Oxford - well 16 hits isn't a lot Felicity - nice of you to put your blog stats up so we can all check that lie as well.

Theres loads more for London - many from Belgium - can we expect an all out attack on Belgium bloggers or has Jack moved there - is that the secret of your research ?

rnm said...

Yup, those parodies are a bit rough, Felicity. But that's what they are - parodies. Of your bombastic pomposity and 'unique' grammar/spelling/inability to stick to the point.

And rough is what many think you deserve because you fight dirty and tell a lot of lies on the way to doing real harm to real people in their real lives. Unlike that parody.

So, that just leaves all those unanswered questions you have wriggled away from several times. You know, ones those questions that don't need the use of names. The ones based on your own claims about your own doings.

There is a Roman law precept - Quia Tacet Consentire - which means that silence is accounted as approval. I will proceed on that basis.

You can't research for toffee. You read meaning in people/speech even worse than you read it in documents. The whole Kelly's library theory is a personal invention of your overactive imagination. Apart from one newspaper clipping (which you have interpreted in a bizarre and extremely unwarranted way) there is absolutely no support for your ideas anywhere.

You can't add up or spell. Charles I did not go into exile as you claim. British soldiers could not desert to the Nazis in WWI. The Bridge of Sighs in Oxford has got absolutely nothing to do with the bridge of the same name in Venice. Naples is not in North Italy.

Anyone who thinks any of these things must be an idiot, not a researcher of beautiful research which is an utter wonder. Agree or disagree?

My question is 'evidence based' and has been witnessed by anyone reading this blog. (That's a modified quote from her scare-the-plagiarisers-off section of her blog, btw.)

Coffee. Smell.



wombling wombat said...

About your backups. On October 18 2006 you said:

I've said before, I have the original photo-discs, they are not at my home, they are up a hoola tree, so they can take the copies from my computer if it gives them pleasure.

... I have in my posession and my mind the names of over 1000 spies and 500 descendants, the names and faces of the lost heirs and hard evidence against the head of covert operations. If anyone f*cks me around I shall, like David Kelly, buy myself a nice new trumpet.

twf said...

Hi all ...

in my last post I said:
"Hey, FJL, have your solicitors download this:

You are a stalker!
You send threatening emails!!
YOu are breaching an asbo by commenting on a case coming up for appeal!!!
You tell lies about people online!!!!
You live in a fantasy world supported by just enough sillies on the outside to keep you fuelled!!!!!

... and I don't even like Rachel North.

Tell your solicitors, I am out in the morning but in during the afternoon if they want to come and get me. Oh, no calls after 4 as I have a dress fitting and you *know* how they can be.

Guess what happened? Guess who turned up on my London doorstep? No, go on, GUESS. I am so excited as I have *something* to tell

and here it is ...

No-one turned up.

So your threats of solicitors are all hogwash FJL. Gee, I wonder how much else that you say is hogwash too.

shurely shome mistake said...

Hey, look what is a matter of public record: (don't you just love the civil service in the UK?)It is details from a court of FJL's offence:

Register for 28/06/2007
Adjourned from 07/06/2007. Remand in custody/accomodation code 131

Felicity Jane Lowde

[FJL's Oxford address given]

Offence: Between -04/05/2006 and 21/01/2007 at Within the juridiction of the CCC pursued a course of conduct which amounted to the harassment of Ms Rachel [surname given] and which you knew or ought to have known amounted to the harassment of her in that contrary to Section 2(1) and (2) of the Protection From Harassment Act 1997

[various reference numbers]

Solicitor: Hickman and Rose

[note: FJL had a defence team at sentencing]

6 months inprisonment.
21 days spent in custody shall count as time served as part of this sentence.

Restraining order made for _years

[this is to protect main victim with same clauses as ASBO detailed below]

Anti Social Behaviour Order made under S1 Crime & Disorder Act 1998. The defendant was convicted of an offence under S2 Protection From Harssment Act 1997 at Thames sitting at Stratford Magistrates Court on 2 April 2007. In accordance with s1(c) Crime and Disorder Act 1998 the following anti social behaviour order is made to protect...

[list of 15 names of people who presumably state that they have also been harassed by Lowde in the past]

1. The defendant shall not contact directly or indirectly by any means whatsoever [list of 15 names]

2. The defendant shall not make any posts or any comments on any internet site regarding [list of 15 names]

3.The defendant shall not make any comments in any media regarding [list of 15 names]

4.The defendant may not by act or ommission enable or encourage others to make any derogatory posts or comments on any internet site or in any media or publication regarding [list of 15 names]

This order shall remain in place for five years or until the remit of any appeal

Adjourned from 7/06/07 Same defendant
02/04/07 at 9.30 AM failed without reasonable excuse to surrender to custody at Stratford Magistrates Court having been released on bail on criminal proceedings on 01/03/07 at Thames Magistrates Court.
07/06/07 PROVED.
Contrary to section 6(1) and (7) of the Bail Act 1976.

Ordered to pay £150 or serve one day under s.135 MCA 1980. Defendant did not pay

Idle persecuting wombat said...


Let's see if we can get fjl!

Ah but she hasn't referred to anyone she shouldn't.

Pah mmmrrrmph!

fjl said...

Very amusing wombat :-)

For clarity, the comment stating:

You guys don't know anything about the case file, refers to:

Alexander fear, and Cecilieaux.

I have not done anything banned in the (temporary) order.

Who are these crazy anonymous commenters in any case?

Surely it's time for them to reveal themselves?

fjl said...

make derogatory postings?

Heavens, I haven't made any. Even were I so inclined, there wouldn't be any room in among all the malice going on against me here.

fjl said...

... all the same Cec, I think I'll call it a day. Defending myself is fair enough, but whoever these anonymous commenters are, there are some very malicious people here on this thread.

wombling wombat said...

That's right, call it a day.

Otherwise you'd have to answer the blindingly obvious contradictions in your statements that have been pointed out. Contradictions in what you say, not what people say about you.

Do you still claim that only two of those blogs are yours?

Did you make backups of your research?

Or are you going to carry on avoiding the answers? It's not malicious, libelous or abusive to point out that you contradict yourself, but it is cowardly not to respond.

fjl said...

Bye wombat.

fjl said...

Hello... re commenter above:

no, I'm not breaching an ASBO bu commenting on a case coming up for appeal, that's not a part of the gagging order ASBO.

No breach committed. And for the record, I advised Cec to take this down, but no one can make him, least of all myself.

Anonymous said...

My God fjl- before I saw this I hadn't realized how malicious some people were!

You have my sympathy

Altman said...

"Even were I so inclined, there wouldn't be any room in among all the malice going on against me here."

There is the old FJL double standard. You slag someone off and it is the truth. Someone slags you off and it malice.

I think I'll call it a day.

Bet you come back. You are as needy for feedback and reaction to yourself as you are for air.

To pinch someone else's post:
Are you you are a stalker?
Do you send threatening emails?
Is there a current asbo against you relating to these charges?
Have you told lies about people online?
Have you been previously jailed for the same offenses?
Did you set up those 'support' websites? I have to admit the writing style on them is identical to your own.
How come after you post under your own ID, there is always a supporting anonymous comment a few moments later?

These are the things people are accusing you of. What are your answers? Yes or no.

Oh and publishing the URL of the parody site was not very clever. I expect you have driven their traffic through the roof.

fjl said...

Bye wombat.

Do you think they'll get bored soon?


G'night all.

twf said...

Just to tidy up the questions post if the OP does not mind.


Are you or have you ever been a stalker?

Do you or have you ever sent Rachel North threatening emails?

Is there a current asbo against you relating to these charges?

Have you told lies about people online?

Have you been previously been in court more than once for the same offenses as listed above?

Did you once try to hire an undercover policeman to harass an ex-boyfriend of yours?

Did you set up those 'support' websites?

How come after you post under your own ID, there is always a supporting anonymous comment a few moments later?
(I hadn't spotted that one Altman, well done)

If anyone has any more questions, please feel free to add them to the list. Let's see if we get answers. There is no attack or malice in the post FJL, just a plain request for information.

Katy Newton said...

I think anyone who actually reads Rachel's blog, FJL's blog and the other blogs that have been set up out there can form their own opinion about the rights and wrongs here. But I am a bit appalled at the way this post is so dismissive of the July bombings, for example, and the lack of research - I mean, one click on Rachel's blog will tell you that she cancelled her book launch because her mother died; what sort of journalist embarks on a post about something which is so fully documented on other people's blogs without actually reading them? Say whatever you like, but don't be surprised if your sloppy research gets you flamed to a crisp.

Alex Fear, you said this:

FJL was convicted of stalking IN THAT she emailed North more than twice, because harassment laws in the UK dictate emailing someone on more than 2 occasions is harassment.

That's not right. The Protection from Harassment Act 1997 defines harassment as "a course of conduct which the defendant knew or ought to have known amounted to harassment", and goes on to say that a course of conduct must include at least two separate incidents amounting to harassment.

The statute requires at least two incidents of behaviour which the defendant knew or should have known would amount to harassment. It is not the case that sending two emails automatically qualifies as harassment and that is certainly not the basis upon which FJL was convicted. Each case has to be decided on its facts, but I cannot imagine that anyone would be convicted of harassment for sending two emails to someone, no matter how offensive they were.

rnm said...

So, Felicity, no proper answers except "Bye wombat". Try that when you're on oath why don'tcha?

Alex: she says she's left the thread. For the, um, nth time. Can't be bothered to count, myself. The point is she is no lover of the truth. Anyway, while she's gone perhaps we can have a calmer look at some issues.

This is how I see it. For you this is about Rachel North and Redemption. Fair enough.

You think Rachel is opportunistic and insincere. OK. No alterations to historic fact need be made to read history in that way. Such an interpretation is at least consistent with events, because it is an interpretation of motive and therefore a form of valid opinion. A harsh one, but not impossible or unlikely. I do not speak for Rachel. She can defend herself and nothing I can say will change minds about her. Personally I think a good deal of the comments on her blog are a bit overwrought but she, by her very history, attracts a certain type of attention. And she didn't write those comments herself.

You, I gather, had a bad experience at the hands of her supporters, prompted by some critical remarks of yours. I had never heard if you till yesterday and I have no knowledge of this spat.
How the question of whether this makes Felicity a nice person got attached to this punch up I don't know. But I can guess.

Surely the alignments here have become way too crude. I don't support Rachel but I am very critical of Felicity. You dislike Rachel... If we go any distance into the "my enemy's enemy" malarky then we often get weird and unsatisfactory results.

I have explained my history re Felicity. My purpose here is to challenge Cecilieaux's wannabe shock jock reading of serious events. For Felicity is not the twee character she tries so hard to portray. Why does this matter? Because people like you, possibly guided by the best of motives, often read her that way, as harmless, arty and put upon. This reading recurs partly because she wants it to, but partly because the Rachel thing alienates people, and also partly because a natural sense of underdog support and fair play comes into it and people think - she can't be that bad.

Well, and this is the sad bit, she is.

I saw a friend of mine destroyed by the lies and fantasises of a woman who manipulated social workers into believing that a small child had been abused by his father (my friend) and not by her boyfriend (who had done it and has now run off). People - a Court - could not believe that she was as bad as he (my friend) said she was. But she was.

Back to Felicity. Supporting her may have a sense of specious natural justice to it, but I warn you it is no defence against her darker nature. There is a list of people who were once her mates/supporters who are now anything but. The latest is TRT. One of her last active, genuine commenters, she has turned on him since coming out of prison. He has stopped blogging after a torrent of very nasty web harassment from fjl.

Now this brings us to Redemption. You believe in it as a Christian. I believe in it as a liberal. But we would both agree that some form of repentance is required. The sinner must own the sin (your version). Or the criminal must acknowledge the crime and the damage it has done (my version).

The problem with fjl is that she will NOT accept any of the damage she has done. And she has indeed done a great deal of damage. Courts, ASBOs, judgements? Nope, all temporary, flawed, engineered by secret forces or jealous Ripperologists. Therefore they don't apply. Wrong judge, wasn't there, wasn't ready, no fair etc etc. Bail conditions? Not for me. I didn't do it. Etc.

I think the Book of Revelation has a nasty fate envisaged for unrepentant types.

So, Alex, you have seen some of her history presented here. Make of it what you will. But for those who have a fuller picture, her failure to answer any of the simple direct questions put to her about her bragging and inconsistency, about her stalker blogs designed to manipulate Google, about her denial of past misdeeds, about her implacable belief in her own (Superhuman) innocence, are all like red rags. Maybe not as calm or as fully detached as they could be, but strong reactions have been elicited.


Think well of her if you wish, love the sinner but not the sin if you must. But please, please see her as she is. Forget Rachel, I came to know about fjl before I fully appreciated what was going on between Rachel and Felicity. Because Rachel never spoke of it and Felicity told some other story. And think what you like about Rachel, she can sort that out herself.

But. Please don't feel the need to champion a vitiated character who does not deserve your support, even if she merits your Christian love. She is tormented and uncontrollable. She is, in fact, a quite unusual person. Such do exist and they end up, by default, in extraordinary situations.

I leave it with you.

about cyberstalking.... said...

Education begins at school...

Louise Mills said...

Having fun? I appreciate the comments left on my blog by one of the anti-FJL brigade. The idea of a young man committing suicide gave this contributor a real thrill. What a charming bunch of people you are. As I said, it's not the band I hate, it's their fans.



Mother of all Meerkats said...

Mad woman and your cat. I have looked at the comments on your blog & there is no indication that anyone got a thrill from anyone's suicide. He simply appears to have taken exception to you & your blog, which is completely different.

There is more than one liar on this thread, it seems.

How can you have a go at people for calling fjl mad when you do similar name calling on your blog?

You are also a hypocrite, it appears.

Anonymous said...

When folks started sending the wanted buttons chasing this Felicity then I lost all sympathy. That was out of order and came off looking like a bunch of London wannabes trying to put someone they didn't like in their place. Felicity has the luxury and I dare say the ability of being able to change, but the hate lynch mob will be themselves (all of them are themselves, they are each other) forever!!!

Anonymous said...

When Felicity started sending people emails, reporting people to the police for crimes they had never done, tried to ruin people lives, setup blog after blog with vile hate and lies a lot of people thought she was out of order but a lot of people still want her to get help and stop this.

Even a brief reading of this matter will see that this isn't London specific so I fail to see what that has to do with the matter. I guess you mean that she feld Oxford to be in London ?

rnm said...

FJL has left the building.

This from her pen this morning.

In the meantime I've had to unlink to would be story-follower Cecilieaux, who runs a blog called 'Shavings from my mind' for a) making posts that are ill advised, b) refusing to take ill advised posts and defamatory comments-postings down, c) encouraging anonymous abuse about me and d) making false and careless reports on his own blog about goings on ( which are after all plain to see). Let it be known that I advised Cec to take the post down, repeatedly.

I'll just let them wombat on in their mad corner, the lot of them. It was simply that a supportive post he wrote about me was met with a stream of abuse from a certain quarter, and I had to defend myself on numerous occasions, (carefully and sensibly). I did a reasonably good job I think. :-) Cecilieaux' comments box is one of many crazed postings going on about me, and I think he just wanted to cash in on a story stats-wise. It seems to have been the only thing that has ever really happened to his blog, poor man.

Well, yet more inconsistency, control freakery and bespoke rewriting of history there. "Had to unlink" she says. She never 'has' to do anything. Not even laws make her do anything. So why unlink to yesterday's big friend?

For yesterday Cecilieaux was a 'brave man'. Now he is an 'ill advised' shameless exploiter, 'poor man'. Ill advised? I think the only person who advised him was you, Felicity. And he wasn't that 'supportive' either. For him it was an open question whether you were 'as crazy as a loon'.

As for doing a good job of defending yourself? W-e-e-ell. You used the word 'wombat' a lot - what a deadly weapon and prime debating manoeuvre that is. And actually you just wriggled and wriggled. Again, good luck in the witness box. You'll have to do better there.

Of course, in the end you just ran away. As ever, because you can't face up to real people. Or even real history. You just rewrite it all endlessly, just like you re-edit and re-trim your blog posts.

All you can do is retreat into some kind of wagon circle, fenced round with comments moderation, comforted by delusions and bolstered with sour cockiness.

We all know now. You have no answers and you ran away.

Cex, you're off the hook. Give thanks for that news.

rnm said...

Oops. Wrote that too quickly and didn't really get the main point clear enough. My bad.

In para 1 of the Lowde Withdrawal Manifesto above:

There are 4 reasons (a-d) why she has 'had' to unlink Cecilieaux. Main one being his post was 'ill advised'.

Para 2 that same post is 'supportive'. Huh?

This is an example of the Lowde Law of Multiples, which states that the more excuses there are for any action taken the better, and it doesn't matter if any of them are contradictory.

This is the cunning rationale behind Felicity's main defence re Rachel, which goes: I didn't send those e-mails, and if I did they weren't that bad. and you can't prove it even if I did, and she started the email exchange so everything that followed was entirely Rachel's fault, and anyway she sent worse ones to me (now lost).

It really would take an ace lawyer to make that lot work.

fjl said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

As you wont disclose if you own those blogs (see question above) or if you had backups of those fabled drive are these matters part of your defence as well or are you just avoiding direct questions which may shed light on this whole matter ?

fjl said...

Yep, I'm avoiding your lame questions until you're cross questioned in the dock.

Like I said, naff off.

I am not defenseless now.

Anonymous said...

Well thats going to be a little hard as Im not pertinent to your case eh Felicity ?

I think people can see that avoidance of fact is one of your key skills

fjl said...

You have been identified, and I have told you, in clear terms, I have no wish to speak to you.

If you choose to reveal your grotesque nature on here for people to download and print off that's entirely up to you!

Apart from that the matter is closed as far as I am concerned. I was obliged to defend certain points due to another debased libellous outburst being slung my way: that's it as far as I'm concerned.

Meerkats in Every Closet said...

Whose identified me then ? Heres a chance to put up or shut up - exactly who am I and when did you tell me that then ?

I dont see any defence - just avoidance - thats all you do - avoid :

Backups yes or no

Blogs yours or not

Anonymous said...

meerkats it doesn't look like anyone gives a damn.

@ meerkats said...


If you thought you had a point suggesting fjl complained about you in blogs she put up in her defense, (IF she did, and thats a big if) you have sure as hell detonated it with your 'Streams of Utter Nonsense ' blog which graphically demonstrates why anyone would want to denounce you.

Drop it.

fjl said...

Oh please ignore them entirely. They are potty wombats, obviously, and this case isn't being won or lost on the Internet, contrary to their asinine delusions.

They are in an imaginary Courtroom, and are a waste of space even to their own heads.

They are the most rejected corner of the web for obvious reasons.

Anonymous said...

Maybe if the anonymous folk here that FJL calls wombats- not altogether undeservedly it appears- could reveal their identities if they're expecting arguments from her?

It's time.

fjl said...

Anon, am I supposed to respond to this?

"I think the Book of Revelation has a nasty fate envisaged for unrepentant types".
And then this anonymous lot carry on as they do.

Like I said, wombats.

Here's a picture of them all:

Now, please!

Anonymous said...

I dont see what value my name adds to this - Im just someone from the net who has seen the havoc you inflict on peoples lives - and I do mean lives and not the Internet.

Im not the one making claims of being a researcher, having special branch secrets or access to MI5. Nor am I am the one making up claims against people or lying.

And before you say none of this is libel as has been shown in this thread.

Anonymous said...

Why don't you shut up, anonymous wombat who has commented here fifty times before. You're fooling no one.

Anonymous said...

Funny how fjl actually talks about her Special branch research only a little. It seems to be you people who are obsessed by it, and you try and discredit her because she's in an unusual situation.

When you're not acting like no brains and no mates on a blog called 'Streams of Porrige.'

You are some disgusting people.

Enigma said...

Fooling no one about what ?

Well not every one claims to have a Special Branch supervisor as you do Felicity :

"This does not detract from my horror at the way my Special Branch supervisor, Jon Holland, is behaving over other matters related to my hard drive. "

Anonymous said...

Yep, that's what she's saying. There's no evidence she's incorrect and why is it a big deal to you anyhow?

Why is it your business?

You are an obsessive meercat by declaration obsessing over the internet looking for people to hurt.

Anonymous said...

I have looked at this thread for a half hour. FJL has not breached her asbo gag she's been very restrained, as ever.

A great number of these anti-fjl comments seem to be coming from that ghastly web designer from Oxford. He really is a piece of work!

Observer said...

Oh wow. That last sockpuppet comment is sooooo in breach of your ASBO, fjl.

5 years ......

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 254   Newer› Newest»