If you had written about one tenth of what you have in the last two days, you'd come across as a reasonable person concerned people were being scammed. As it is, you might be mistaken for Martin Hunter trying to discredit someone with higher ratings than Erasmus or America.snoop4truth wrote:Dear Fortinbras,
Your comments online are always thoughtful and scholarly.
The people behind the "Judge DALE Hoax" have already admitted that "Judge DALE" really is "Rodney DALE Class". These are the very same people who completely re-write, copyright and license out fake pseudo-legal documents that they fraudulently claim were written by "Judge DALE". So, the very same people that effectively claim legal ownership of the "Judge DALE Hoax" (by copyrighting and licensing of the "Judge DALE" forgeries) also claim that "Judge DALE" is really "Rodney DALE Class". In my opinion, the people who copyright and license out the entire catalogue of "Judge DALE forgeries" are in the best position to know the true identity of the author of their own forgeries. Just a thought.
I agree with you that the person (or persons) writing as "Judge DALE" has (have) no legal training and know nothing whatsoever of the law and the legal system as it actually exists.
I also agree with you that when an amateur pseudo-legal theorist pretends to be a judge, such pretending reveals that person's amateurism and that amateurism leads to fakery and hoaxing. This case is living proof of that.
I certainly hope that you are right in your estimate that less than a hundred victims got duped by the "Judge DALE Hoax". My estimate is a more pessimistic.
Regardless, perhaps fewer victims will be duped in the future, not that the hoax has become public knowledge.
We get it.
We also, and this isn't just me, tend to frown on people who join, lay low a few days and then pull a 12 post cut-paste-dump rant in a little more than 24 hours in a discussion that largely no one else was participating in. Yes, a few have chimed in and I'm not saying your initial theory wasn't worthy of bringing up, but, well, over doing it is hard to quantify but as my old neighbor Potter Stewart once said 'I know it when I see it" and right now I see it.
If you have proof (oh yes you saved the e-mails!) that this person is who you say, post it. An e-mail from another person in the whacked out part of the internet isn't proof, it's only proof that people who will lie to everyone will lie to you too. After that, well, you're trying too hard, and I'm starting to look for the hook you seem like you're baiting.