In this post I share recent experiences of logical failure and explain how digging deeper reveals that deception is its driver if persistent. It follows an unsolicited email exchange from a couple of sisters with a chip on their shoulder – actually a few chips, so it seems.
In 2020, I wrote a series of blog posts publishing John Ingley’s research into the Crewe Murders of 1970. Essentially John solved the so-called ‘Cold Case’ by identifying the women who fed the baby Rochelle and showing how more than one family (actually a couple of dozen [!] families) had very good reason to have Jeannette & Harvey ‘disappeared’.
As a result I was contacted by a woman who she claimed that her brother had been murdered and the guilty party had been let off with a Police cover-up. He was a Police witness decades before in the dodgy Arthur Alan Thomas saga. Obviously you can’t put a dude that has spun a yarn to the courts on behalf of the corrupt cops of the time way back when into jail can you? He’d just spill the beans on it all – so the coroner changed his story on the forms and it all became ‘an unfortunate accident’ – and history.
This was why she contacted me and thus began our email exchange.
I’ll just run over the email events briefly paraphrasing the essence of the exchange here because it is not my intention to ‘go’ anyone personally, rather to extract the truth from and to provide commentary about these events.
Sister One [S1]: “Hi!” … and an intro and her background given. “My brother was murdered and the dude who did it was a lackey for the Corrupt Cops who have covered this whole thing up . . . “
Me: Yup. Gotcha. Happy to help.
S1: Chitty chat.
Me: Chitty chat too.
Then a bit later, S1: (with a CC to a bunch of politicians, news media, lawyers and Rochelle McQuin (nee Crewe, but now a different surname)): Guess what? Did you know that Jeannette & Heather Crewe had an older brother in the USA? Better get to the bottom of this one because maybe he killed the Crewes!
Me: Hey S1, you’ve cc’d my email address to all these people – three of them I know are compromised! You gotta use the BCC, honey.
S1: I’m for truth and transparency. If you don’t want to get my emails then you are not a genuine truthseeker and I am so if you are not with me you are agin me.
Me: No S1, I said I was willing to help you but I said that you gotta use the BCC field not the CC field or I want off your list, thank you.
Sister 2 from Aussie (S2): You mess with my sister then you mess with me and that makes you a loser! Now piss off I don’t want to talk to people like you who are not interested in transparency!
Me: No S2, you’ve got it all wrong. Your sister has a chip on her shoulder; let’s be reasonable about this huh? You contacted me and you don’t want to talk to me? Ummm?!
S2: I told you never to contact me again. I’ve deleted your reply without even reading it.
There were several issues I had. First, I warned her (S1) that “everybody has an agenda, sis . . . everybody”. I knew that three people at least were “compromised” on her list and I knew that she trusted them, IMHO foolishly/naively.
Secondly she has had a self-promoted desire to shit-stir over the years and has a ‘reputation’ around town as a woman who never gives up. Good on her for that, I say. From what I have seen and heard she’s been quite successful at getting her story out. She’ll never get justice for her brother this side of eternity because justice can never come from people in a system that protects its own but hey, I’m not fixing the world. I just speak about it! But I didn’t want people getting the wrong impression that I was a part of her campaign. I could have been but wasn’t. Her getting the basics right in email use was important to me.
Thirdly when she asked me what my personal agenda was (IMHO a perfectly legitimate question to which I answered), she crossed the line into the personal and I try not to speak to another man’s wife about personal matters without his knowledge. I told her this but she never acknowledged this. That’s an issue for me, although I think she probably has told him wassup, just not informed me of it.
Fourthly her sister too doesn’t get the picture either. “Please do not use the cc field when sending communications to people on your list. The BCC is the correct format.” seems to me to be pretty straight forward. It’s a specific request and correction – nothing to do with being on her list or not and certainly nothing to do with wanting transparency.
So the problem was set up by a woman who clearly has a chip on her shoulder and misread my clear instructions to NOT distribute my email address to people willy-nilly in her troublemaking efforts.
The Failures of Logic
S1’s first failure of logic (which was also shown with S2’s involvement) was that she didn’t read my words correctly when I gave her instructions to use the BCC field not the CC field.
… never put your list of email addresses into the CC field. Always use the BCC field because now everybody knows that I am on your list and who else is there too: [names listed] … Best to remove me from your list, thank you.
Expecting everyone to want to distance themselves from her, she thought my technical request was a personal one. Despite making it clear that I was simply asking her to respect my reputation she jumped to a wrong conclusion, AND kept on emailing me.
Secondly she amplified her error by calling S2 in Aussie and telling her misinformation. S2 then operated under the false assumption issued by S1; never checked the information fed her and then made a fool of herself by ‘dumping’ on me too!
S2 then made an even bigger fool of herself by refusing to read my reply in which I corrected her sister’s faulty assumption. These girls really are a weetbix short of a breakfast! Personally I reckon she did read it before she deleted it – surely nobody is THAT stupid – especially if they are calling for transparency from the system themselves?
In the process of what appeared on the surface to be a polite and long engagement, S1 asked a question. A perfectly natural question IMHO in the circumstances, I might posit.
> can I ask what your agenda is?
Yes, but this gets personal so I share this on the express understanding that [her husband, name redacted] reads the rest of this email. This is because I will only share personal stuff with another man’s wife with his knowledge. Thanks.
And I said:
My primary agenda is quite self-centered as everything I do is about me – thus I consciously choose to help others. I am a proud man who hates to be wrong – thus I do due diligence sufficient to understand an issue thoroughly. My only life purpose is to hear the words, “Well done good and faithful servant!” at the end of my time. The alternative scares the sh*t out of me.
To this end I act so that genuine truthseekers normally recognise me as a dude that has a brain; uses it and is fearless to speak the truth as I find it.
Most are too busy or self-centered to ask this question of me. Thank you for asking. I hope the answer is sufficient for you. If it isn’t feel free to ask more. I do though trust that you will share this and any future communications of a personal nature with [name redacted]. Thanks
Well that set the cat among the pigeons didn’t it?
It seems that these girls have a thing about Christians because with a chip on their shoulder like they have, out the venom came . . .
For a christian man, you sound awfully threatening Dennis… excuse me for being an inexperienced old Nana when it comes to IT experts such as yourself. Excuse me for being a grieving mother who lost my adult son April 2019 but still persists in trying to get justice for my poor brother killed by [name redacted] 11/11/11 and my poor son who was misdiagnosed… I make mistakes and put my hand up but does that give you the right to abuse and threaten me to ‘obey’ you?
Your defamatory comments about [name redacted] have also been noted and we have shared them with [name redacted]… I think this is cruel and again, unchristian to make comments such as those about someone you do not know. [name redacted] is a genuine person who has EVIDENCE of corruption and we thank him profusely for showing us what our brother’s killer [name redacted] did in the Thomas Royal Commission 1980 and then got away with killing our brother because of [name redacted] part in creating a LIAR about Arthur Thomas… this is unforgivable in our eyes! As far as my sister and I are concerned, exposing [name redacted] as a Police informer would be one way to see the Crewe case opened up again. You can NOT deny what Arthur Taylor did to bring Roberto Conche Harris to justice for being a perjurer in the Tamihere case can you?
I would like to see your evidence of the Crewe murder weapon being a ‘pistol’.. I think the NZ Govt MInisters need an Official Information Act request about this you seem to believe is factual. No one I ever talked to seems to know about this and if your friend [name redacted] has given you information, do you not think the NZ public deserve to know considering they paid for the Crewe review full of lies and innuendo and withheld information/evidence? Can you really substantiate all your information you want to bring out in a book? Can this really be validated going on hearsay of what John Insley has written or said?
Please refrain from threatening me because my terminally ill husband gets very anxious when we see emails like yours… it isn’t very christian is it?
Whew, what a tirade! Three references to my faith [my highlighting] when S1 was the one who asked ME my personal motives brought my speedy reply, her words and logic returned with interest, ending with both a threat AND a promise:
> For a christian man,
WTF has my faith got to do with anything to do with you S1? You’ve got a chip on your shoulder. You asked me what my agenda was which is personal and I told you – conditional upon you sharing our communications with [name redacted], and I told you why at the time. I don’t proselytise so get over it S1.
> you sound awfully threatening Dennis…
Good, you’re finally getting it.
The point S1 is that this all has way more to do with you and your defensiveness than my aggression. I told you that I would/could help you right at the outset. You chose to take things personal and lash out – not me. Please face it. Read back over my emails and cringe.
> excuse me for being an inexperienced old Nana when it comes to IT experts such as yourself.
Yes I am an expert in the eyes of many people and you are clearly not. In this case I asked you to do something you should have always done, obviously didn’t know or understand and I explained to you the social norms around the use of the CC and the BCC field. You should be listening to me and thanking me, not mocking me nor arguing with me. Your initial error was that you misread my technical request as an unwillingness to see transparency and you mischaracterised my request to your sister, compounding your problem.
> Excuse me for being a grieving mother who lost my adult son April 2019 but still persists in trying to get justice for my poor brother killed by [name redacted] 11/11/11 and my poor son who was misdiagnosed…
So? Shit happens. You want sympathy? Sure. You’ve got it – from me. I could tell you how many children I have put in a casket and then into the ground in a cemetery too; I could tell you how many women said to me that I could trust them and then they screwed around while I didn’t; I could tell you how many countless hours and dollars I’ve lost over greedy self-centered fools, but I won’t because it will be water off a ducks back and I don’t need violins playing to speak the truth. The bottom line [name redacted] is that this is all no excuse for repeatedly putting my email address into the CC field and distributing it to a bunch of politicians, police, media and others, three of whom I do not trust. THAT is what I asked (and repeatedly ask) you to stop doing. I still do. Then getting all defensive and personal is just stupid, IMHO.
> I make mistakes and put my hand up but does that give you the right to abuse and threaten me to ‘obey’ you?
No, but what gives me the right to talk to you like this is not that you made one mistake (everybody can do this, yes even including me) but that you ignored my request and got (and still are) overly defensive seeing my generic statements as personal threats. You are clearly gun-shy, overly sensitive and still very raw. Sometimes S1, people ‘out there’ are not agin you nor your mission to gain justice. You WILL “obey” me and cease putting my email address in the CC field to your list whether you like it or not though because otherwise I will take the matters further and you definitely do not want that, I can assure you. If pushed I will start by sharing everything that has happened with you (and your sister who you have also misinformed) by email writing and publishing a formal public warning about you both. If that has to occur and you still don’t respond positively I reserve the right to commence litigation or lay a formal complaint with the Police to force you to comply.
> Your defamatory comments about [name redacted]
The word defamation S1 has dangerous legal connotations. You use it here incorrectly. Speak to a lawyer, any lawyer and be very careful to listen to them when they tell you what it is and how it works in NZ. Google it[i] also as there is good information out there now about defamation in New Zealand.
> have also been noted and we have shared them with [name redacted]…
Good. Dare him to call me with any concerns he has S1. He will NEVER contact me in a month of Sundays, never and there are very good reasons for that. I’ve shared one of them with you already.
> I think this is cruel and again, unchristian to make comments such as those about someone you do not know. [name redacted] is a genuine person
Sure, he may be, to you, when he chooses, but I spend my life investigating and exposing crooks, crims & crazies. Everybody S1 has an agenda and I can usually sniff it out in a second. [Name redacted] may be the kindest old man on the planet in your eyes with the sun shining out his *** in the middle of a winter’s night; his wife, kids and grandkids may love him to bits, but there is another side to the Thomas family that I do know. I warned you to try to help you grow up and smell the roses – not because I have anything against him personally. I don’t.
Also, you better explain what “unchristian” means if you’re going to use dopey words that I don’t understand to try to push others around using guilt. Perhaps you mean that I gotta shut up, switch my brain off and bow down to your sense of justice and judgment? Nah – no thanks! Doesn’t work on me honey ’cause I know who I am and I know where I’m going. More importantly I also know why and I’ve just told you that what you think about me means little.
> who has EVIDENCE of corruption
Everybody has evidence of corruption somewhere, somehow S1. Everybody (unless they’ve lived their lives under a rock). You just wait until my book about the Crewe murders comes out. You don’t need more proof S1. You just gotta read what’s already there with your eyes open.
> and we thank him profusely for showing us what our brother’s killer [name redacted] did in the Thomas Royal Commission 1980 and then got away with killing our brother because of Fisher’s part in creating a LIAR about Arthur Thomas…
True . . . I do too and your story helped me understand things deeper too.
> this is unforgivable in our eyes!
But this is just the way things are S1. Can’t you see that? Anyway, what gives you the right to judge? I keep telling you that corruption exists. It is universal. You can’t fight evil. Not even God does that. He just lets it implode in due course. Your/our only option is to reveal it. In that [limited] regard IMHO you are actually quite successful.
> As far as my sister and I are concerned, exposing [name redacted] as a Police informer would be one way to see the Crewe case opened up again.
You [pl] are totally dreaming. You [pl] clearly do not understand. The Police will never do this because they have never wanted to do this and now CAN never.
> You can NOT deny what Arthur Taylor did to bring Roberto Conche Harris to justice for being a perjurer in the Tamihere case can you?
What’s that got to do with the price of fish?
> I would like to see your evidence of the Crewe murder weapon being a ‘pistol’..
So would many others. Shame nobody read Ian Wishart’s book properly eh?
> I think the NZ Govt MInisters need an Official Information Act request about this you seem to believe is factual.
[Sigh] I don’t. You really don’t understand what the OIA is nor how it is supposed to be used, nor how it is actually used. You also don’t understand how to work your way through the minefield of politics. You also have no idea who I am nor what I do nor why I do it. If you can get over yourself and sit down and talk sensibly one day, I might be able to help you understand it – suffice to say the OIA and politicians (especially Ministers of the Crown) are always at the polar opposite direction to where truth lies.
> No one I ever talked to seems to know about this
Funny that eh? I wonder why not? Is it because there was a deliberate Police effort to avoid looking in one particular direction? Oops, sorry S1 that means Police corruption from the outset of their involvement. Umm … we can’t have that negativity can we? [sarcasm]
> and if your friend Robert Fisher has given you information,
WTF are you talking about? Do you live on Mars or something?
> do you not think the NZ public deserve to know
So is a detailed blog and three books on the subject are not doing exactly that? How did you know about my claim S1? Think about it … for just one second.
> considering they paid for the Crewe review full of lies and innuendo and withheld information/evidence?
Well of course! Have you contacted David Jones QC and confronted him about his role in covering up? I have. Have you analysed the report and written about it online? I have. Have you spoken to the NZ Police and told them prior to John’s book getting published? I have. Did you offer an advance copy of John’s book that identifies the women (pl) who fed the baby to them before the media so that they could potentially inform Rochelle as I could have but chose not to? I did. And then to the media before it was released? I did. The public including the authorities S1 know and knew if they bothered. Andy has retired but David had every opportunity to know who I am and what I think the week before it was released.
> Can you really substantiate all your information you want to bring out in a book?
I am a professional S1, not some fly-by-night BS artist. How many books have you written? If you’ve done 36 then you’ve done one more than me. How many crooks, crims and crazies have you taken on S1? Dozens, like me? How many words have you blogged online? More than 2 million? I have. And how many times have I been sued for defamation S1? Never. You know why? Because I understand human nature and the law and I only ever deal with the truth, established from applying sound logic onto fact.
> Can this really be validated going on hearsay of what John Insley has written or said?
What do you think? Have you read the book? Find a fact wrong and I’ll correct it. Find something that fails the test of sound logic and I’ll change my opinion in an instant. Would you do that if someone found fault with your work? Or would you double down and attack the messenger?
> Please refrain from threatening me because my terminally ill husband gets very anxious when we see emails like yours…
Sorry [name redacted], but she’s your wife not mine. Please tell her to get with it or to keep you out of it or just remove me from her list or use the BCC field, not the CC field. Easy.
> it isn’t very christian is it?
FFS! What a hangup you’ve got about this Christian thing. Something has put some stupid idea into your head that because I accept that there is a Creator and that He sent His Son into the world 2,000 years ago to be the Messiah and that He is alive and well thank you very much – so much so that I choose to do what He wants of me today, now, that I have to have my email address spread around by women with an attitude and getting dissed because I’ve got a brain and use it and that I’ve got balls to stand up for who I am in the face of whinging. That’s BS. I don’t.
If you don’t remove me from your list OR start using the BCC field when sending out your emails to politicians, media and others, then I will take the matter further. This is both a threat AND a promise – and yes, for the record, that’s from [as you call me] “a Christian”.
Deception the Root Cause
So let’s calm down a minute and get to the root cause of all this BS. A woman is clearly upset here because her brother got taken out by a crook who got away with it because the corrupt cops way back when don’t want to upset the crook today. I understand that but she is ‘out there’ with a chip on her shoulder and takes a whack at me, a guy who dares to warn her that not all her friends are as trustworthy as she thinks they are and instructs her to do email things properly. She makes things worse for herself by involving her sister and failing to listen. How come?
The root cause of all wrong is pride. It manifests in three dimensions – horizontal, vertical and central. Horizontal is the human relational difficulties – side-to-side with the tension, miscommunications and so on causing conflict. Vertical is the screwed-up relationship between our Creator that comes when we are ‘up ourselves’ – all the Garden of Eden stuff. The central is our view of ourself and our treatment of ourselves – self-loathing, self-centeredness, insecurity and so on resulting in depression, many forms of self destructive behaviours and suicide at its worst.
I’ve shared this previously many times. While logical failure can be an innocent error, when pride kicks in, failure in logic is institutionalised and cemented. It’s a real bastard to deal with then because there is no solution other than to eat humble pie; go back to the facts and fess up. Sadly people rarely do, even if they have to. If these girls don’t get the message, they will be facing a bigger problem than just a blogger writing words about them anonymously online, because it is illegal in NZ to abuse another digitally. I’m not averse to using the laws of the land to enforce compliance to ensure my rights. Hopefully they’ve got it and/or ‘gone away’ and this will not be required.
If I’ve got anything wrong here, feel free to drop me a note and I’ll correct it. And if you want to be ‘up yourself’ and you invite yourself to attack me, be prepared for the same sort of response. Please engage brain and deal with facts. We can all get on a lot better if we all do this. In a
future the next post I will deal with the “Christian” thing in more detail. It trips many up – but it’s only because of our pride, of course!
Leave a Reply