What really qualifies, under the law, as an electronic communications device? In the future of this case, this is an essential piece of evidence. When you consider that all of the above are electronic communications devices, you should realize that the law does not limit the possibility of others. Remote Neural Monitoring is classically defined in that law. Once this technology is shown to work, then it is able to be put into the class of "communication device". It incorporates several of the media above so it is really just a reconfiguration of things already shown to be able to send a threat to someone.
Just because a computer and cellphone aren't traditionally working together, it doesn't mean that the pairing has shown all of its misuses. The attempts to hide something like this are ridiculous when you see people using them already. We accept that good can come from these devices, but have we considered the other things that we already know happen? What makes people believe that Stephen Hawking can translate his thoughts to words to a voice synthesizer and this can't be done by normal people too? Is it because Stephen Hawking is brilliant? Can't a "not brilliant" person be hooked into this system too and still be considered a person, nevertheless?
The days of ONLY Stephen Hawking could know about something so interesting as thought translation to words on a screen would be absurd to him. He's known for decades about brain computer interfaces. Hell, you can talk to your phone and have it take notes. Google Home can teach you about all kinds of things. When a gay man comes forward to admit that someone has raped him and that since then he "hears voices" in his head, automatically the guy is written off.
The injuries sustained during that rape are real. They aren't imagined. I did not consent to any kind of sexual encounter because I was asleep. For the police to have seen actual pictures from the rape, lab reports and DNA from suspects, would seem to be a bit of a smear campaign of silence and television statements. Um, that's not how you would treat a female victim of rape with serious skull injuries and bloody clothes.
If a woman had been raped and intentionally infected with HIV after that encounter, would the police even hesitate to look into it? So why wasn't this ever done. It has been suggested that Lori got involved in the investigation from as early as the time I went to the hospital emergency room. So who's fault is it? I reported the rape as soon as I had my faculties together and my head was splitting open. The call was made, the emergency room had to make it and told me so. No cop ever showed and I had time for an MRI. Someone kept someone from coming to the hospital.
The problem with reporting this crime is because most people don't understand it's misuse. The rapist knew I planned on going to the hospital long before I got there. There was plenty of time to use this system to help the rapist. It's not something that would usually happen. A rape occurs, a cop goes to the hospital, they would have received my bloody clothing in a paper bag and that would have been normal. I assumed that the police would come to my home if they didn't come to the hospital. They had all of my information.
The misuse of this system of mind to computer screen is the appearance of someone that is taking an active role in stopping me from reporting the rape. Originally, you should know, I accused Steven Frey and Peter DiMartino. Why? I'd heard about the rape from the second I woke up that morning and the "voices", whom I know to be Lori and Brian, told me it was Steven and Peter. I found out that the pair didn't know each other from my own investigating. Someone wanted me to believe something that wasn't true and you can see that in my diary.
If you don't believe me, there are text messages from Steven to me about Peter...a man that he does not know and vice versa. All three of us are hooked up into this system and easy to manipulate. There is proof that someone was doing this using a text message spoofed number. That is an electronic communication device especially when it shows up on my end of the phone. The threats were real, "u r a deadman" and "now I know why there is a bullethole in ur car window, too bad they missed." These aren't imaginary people in my head, they can text.
I've been told that Lori refers to this "aggravated stalking" as her own investigation. I don't know of any investigation that starts when you a 10 years old and continues to 49? At some point someone has to realize that there is a connection between what is real and what is not real. The bullet hole was real. The broken skull was real. My initial infection of HIV was real. The second attempt by the same person to re-infect me is real. That shows a twenty year span of trying to hurt someone and that isn't investigation. That's something else.
I'm sure, that if pressed about it, both Peter DiMartino and Steven Frey will tell you that during that period, they heard from "Jessica/Lisa/Lori" day and night. I lived near Peter, whom was already a victim of this crime and Steven, another victim. That's a whole lot of opportunity for Lori to fuck with three men that she loves to hate. Think of all the misuse you can cause when you have three "listeners" that one person knows but the others don't.
Afterall, I was in Steven's home the morning that the rape happened. I know he had a valid alibi because I'm the person that asked him to drive someone to the airport. The decision was mine. So then the question becomes, maybe he did it before hand, but the police know he didn't. How? The initial DNA report shows that it isn't Steven, it's a girl and a girl with a brother with HIV. It shows that.
I didn't accuse anyone that wasn't a valid suspect given the information that I had.
Remember, I also got text threats from someone pretending to be Steven's sister on the phone too. You see, I'm not making any of this up, it has substantiation. My actions were a direct result of what I was being told, electronically. Big mistake. I had reasons to believe that Steven was living in this area after I'd done informant work. The threats were real. There was a restraining order for the "u r a deadman" threat. There was a local P.O. Box set up in Steven's name that appeared after I came to where I live. I had plenty of reasons to believe something was causing this fear.
There is validation for my concerns. A picture of my face being punched out had to have come when I wasn't conscious. I never posed for anything like that. I wouldn't do that. The hand is male, so the photographer, in that position must be the female contributor to the DNA in the rape. Has to be. I never posed for a picture like that in my life. It was a humiliation photo and a threat.
This is not imaginary. I start talking about the girl that is heading up the suspect list and she shows up in Sedona, Arizona a the same time. Her first trip to Arizona. The only trip to Arizona she's ever made and she's there, as a suspect, during my vacation, with friends of mine that I saw the day before and took pictures with?
There is validity to my reasoning. She's there. Then I get a restraining order for pointing that out? It just adds to the suspicion.
These communication devices are just as potent as any other, maybe more. I can't filter what this person knows so I have to out smart her. I can't have a dumb day. If I slip up and don't cover every single base, then she has a team of five that are willing to pounce on it. One false move and my bank account is gone. My parent's key to their home gets stolen. My car is left unlocked. There are already instances of me leaving things in my car that Lori wanted stolen that are now in her possession. My "Monster Hoodie", my iPod (again) and my new FILA running shoes. I wore those things to the gym...but then I forgot them in my home unlocked and sure enough, they are gone.
I can't let my guard down for a second. There is a team of thieves here taking whatever they can get their paws on. I've already videotaped Christian in my yard on security cameras. Lori, of course, maintains that she doesn't know a "Christian", then she pretends that her friend "Chris" never told her his name. Of course she knows a "Christian now", but she didn't admit that to my friend who she sent to harass me about saying she knew him. She just let that one slide.
Nevertheless, it is with this communication device that I am certain we will have our best luck, simply because once you see what she says to me, you will understand the relationship between victim and criminal. I can't shut her mouth. I can't end the call. All I can do is tell you that I don't want her talking to me or having one of her friends talk for her. Establishing this system as a valid electronic communication seems to be simple. It's old technology. It's seen all the time now. What is so hard about showing this so that we can monitor it with law enforcement until we get a resolution?
I'm obsessed with having Lori leave me alone. I am patient and I know that in the end it will show that Lori has had a thing about hurting me for as long as I can remember. How do you say "obsessed with leaving me alone" without her turning it into something different. It's pretty clear. You need not worry about me becoming violent, I'm the one with the broken skull. Violence wasn't something that I was involved with the entire time. The victim is the only role that I played. It isn't some kind of sinister plot that I've hatched. I wouldn't break my skull into pieces on my own. Clearly someone has the right to say, "stay away from me" when that person has been beaten and shot and intentionally infected. I want nothing to do with this person.
I'm gay. I don't want any relationship with this girl or her brother. I have someone that I love and I needed to protect him from them. Clearly that right is there too. Someone keeps hurting him too. I think that is pretty clear as well. Ask Christopher if I have tried to protect him, don't just accept another fake text message as proof. Talk to him in person. Talk to any of my friends in person, none of them feel threatened by me. They do, I'll bet, feel threatened by Lori though.
On the other hand, you won't see me thing about her at all until she forced her friends to talk about her and she took the mic herself. It's interesting to me to think that someone could talk as much as Lori does and still has the nerve to think she can't be held responsible for it. Admittedly, I am an informant and I use tactics to make her talk, but that's the job of someone wearing a wire and nobody is allowed to use this against me. I've said that a million times. I've had to become a different person when I am on this system, but there are glimmers of myself in every thing I do.
I'm in here somewhere. The electronic communications show that I'm alive and thinking, but that's all they show. My choices are made on a course of action long before today. I have developed my own way of planning that requires a lot of pre-thinking before hand. A little innocuous thinking here and there looks like nothing to Lori and her friends, but everything is in preparation for the truth.
I've been told that Lori refers to this "aggravated stalking" as her own investigation. I don't know of any investigation that starts when you a 10 years old and continues to 49? At some point someone has to realize that there is a connection between what is real and what is not real. The bullet hole was real. The broken skull was real. My initial infection of HIV was real. The second attempt by the same person to re-infect me is real. That shows a twenty year span of trying to hurt someone and that isn't investigation. That's something else.
I'm sure, that if pressed about it, both Peter DiMartino and Steven Frey will tell you that during that period, they heard from "Jessica/Lisa/Lori" day and night. I lived near Peter, whom was already a victim of this crime and Steven, another victim. That's a whole lot of opportunity for Lori to fuck with three men that she loves to hate. Think of all the misuse you can cause when you have three "listeners" that one person knows but the others don't.
Afterall, I was in Steven's home the morning that the rape happened. I know he had a valid alibi because I'm the person that asked him to drive someone to the airport. The decision was mine. So then the question becomes, maybe he did it before hand, but the police know he didn't. How? The initial DNA report shows that it isn't Steven, it's a girl and a girl with a brother with HIV. It shows that.
I didn't accuse anyone that wasn't a valid suspect given the information that I had.
Remember, I also got text threats from someone pretending to be Steven's sister on the phone too. You see, I'm not making any of this up, it has substantiation. My actions were a direct result of what I was being told, electronically. Big mistake. I had reasons to believe that Steven was living in this area after I'd done informant work. The threats were real. There was a restraining order for the "u r a deadman" threat. There was a local P.O. Box set up in Steven's name that appeared after I came to where I live. I had plenty of reasons to believe something was causing this fear.
There is validation for my concerns. A picture of my face being punched out had to have come when I wasn't conscious. I never posed for anything like that. I wouldn't do that. The hand is male, so the photographer, in that position must be the female contributor to the DNA in the rape. Has to be. I never posed for a picture like that in my life. It was a humiliation photo and a threat.
This is not imaginary. I start talking about the girl that is heading up the suspect list and she shows up in Sedona, Arizona a the same time. Her first trip to Arizona. The only trip to Arizona she's ever made and she's there, as a suspect, during my vacation, with friends of mine that I saw the day before and took pictures with?
There is validity to my reasoning. She's there. Then I get a restraining order for pointing that out? It just adds to the suspicion.
These communication devices are just as potent as any other, maybe more. I can't filter what this person knows so I have to out smart her. I can't have a dumb day. If I slip up and don't cover every single base, then she has a team of five that are willing to pounce on it. One false move and my bank account is gone. My parent's key to their home gets stolen. My car is left unlocked. There are already instances of me leaving things in my car that Lori wanted stolen that are now in her possession. My "Monster Hoodie", my iPod (again) and my new FILA running shoes. I wore those things to the gym...but then I forgot them in my home unlocked and sure enough, they are gone.
I can't let my guard down for a second. There is a team of thieves here taking whatever they can get their paws on. I've already videotaped Christian in my yard on security cameras. Lori, of course, maintains that she doesn't know a "Christian", then she pretends that her friend "Chris" never told her his name. Of course she knows a "Christian now", but she didn't admit that to my friend who she sent to harass me about saying she knew him. She just let that one slide.
Nevertheless, it is with this communication device that I am certain we will have our best luck, simply because once you see what she says to me, you will understand the relationship between victim and criminal. I can't shut her mouth. I can't end the call. All I can do is tell you that I don't want her talking to me or having one of her friends talk for her. Establishing this system as a valid electronic communication seems to be simple. It's old technology. It's seen all the time now. What is so hard about showing this so that we can monitor it with law enforcement until we get a resolution?
I'm obsessed with having Lori leave me alone. I am patient and I know that in the end it will show that Lori has had a thing about hurting me for as long as I can remember. How do you say "obsessed with leaving me alone" without her turning it into something different. It's pretty clear. You need not worry about me becoming violent, I'm the one with the broken skull. Violence wasn't something that I was involved with the entire time. The victim is the only role that I played. It isn't some kind of sinister plot that I've hatched. I wouldn't break my skull into pieces on my own. Clearly someone has the right to say, "stay away from me" when that person has been beaten and shot and intentionally infected. I want nothing to do with this person.
I'm gay. I don't want any relationship with this girl or her brother. I have someone that I love and I needed to protect him from them. Clearly that right is there too. Someone keeps hurting him too. I think that is pretty clear as well. Ask Christopher if I have tried to protect him, don't just accept another fake text message as proof. Talk to him in person. Talk to any of my friends in person, none of them feel threatened by me. They do, I'll bet, feel threatened by Lori though.
On the other hand, you won't see me thing about her at all until she forced her friends to talk about her and she took the mic herself. It's interesting to me to think that someone could talk as much as Lori does and still has the nerve to think she can't be held responsible for it. Admittedly, I am an informant and I use tactics to make her talk, but that's the job of someone wearing a wire and nobody is allowed to use this against me. I've said that a million times. I've had to become a different person when I am on this system, but there are glimmers of myself in every thing I do.
I'm in here somewhere. The electronic communications show that I'm alive and thinking, but that's all they show. My choices are made on a course of action long before today. I have developed my own way of planning that requires a lot of pre-thinking before hand. A little innocuous thinking here and there looks like nothing to Lori and her friends, but everything is in preparation for the truth.
