[109687] in Cypherpunks
Re: Ron Guilmette, Gary Burnore, and a Scorecard
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Anonymous)
Thu Apr 1 17:10:18 1999
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1999 23:21:49 +0200 (CEST)
From: Anonymous <nobody@replay.com>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Reply-To: Anonymous <nobody@replay.com>
On Wed, 31 Mar 1999 20:07:13 GMT, gburnore@databasix.com (Gary L.
Burnore) wrote:
>>> > Hardly guessing Ronnie. Your buddy at abusing mfn.org is irrelevant.
>>> > So are you. The page is a fake. The info on the page is incorrect.
>>>
>>> The info may be incorrect, maybe you gained a few pounds, maybe you lied
>>> when you submitted the information, but that was what the state of North
>>> Carolina posted. He's not guessing and you know it, Gary. You're a
>>> liar. The page is legit and was on the North Carolina web site some
>>> months ago, although it has since been removed.
>>
>>Let me see if I have the facts straight here:
>
>0) Roun Guilmette, Tax Evader posts email addresses of THOUSANDS of
>people to usenet to get them spammed. Admits doing so and says "It's
>public record."
Oooh, I'll bet his neighbors are really scared to have an alleged
"tax evader" living in the neighborhood! I'll bet they don't even
let their kids walk to school past his house. After all, who'd want
to risk having his kids EVADED, too. <g>
Get real. You've posted no evidence that Ron was ever arrested or
convicted of tax evasion. (As if anyone really cared.) It's really
pathetic for a CONVICTED CHILD MOLESTER to whine, "yabbut he's a tax
evader"!
The IRS has a toll-free nark line. If you have evidence that he's
evading taxes, call it and turn him in. Then when he's convicted,
feel free to post that and gloat.
>>1) Gary Burnore, who may well be the most obnoxious
>>person on Usenet, found some embarrassing information
>>about Ron (something about a bankruptcy filing or
>>suchlike) and made that public knowledge.
>>
>>2) Ron returned the favor by finding Gary's entry in
>>the North Carolina Registered Sex Offenders Database
>>and making that information public to the world.
>
>Wrong. Ron didn't do that.
You originally placed Ron in the loop much earlier than that.
1a) On 2/18/97, Gary Burnore accused Ron Guilmette of sending
private, anonymous e-mail to his fiancee warning her that Gary
was molesting her 17 year old daughter.
1b) On 2/20/97, Gary Burnore is charged with violating section 647.6
(a) of the California Penal Code for molesting this same 17 year
old daughter of his fiancee.
1c) On 3/13/97, Gary Burnore is convicted of that crime, and part of
his sentence is to register as a sex offender.
You never did say WHEN Ron allegedly tipped Nancy off, but since you
whined about it on 2/18/97, it was obviously on that date or BEFORE.
And that was still two days before you were even CHARGED with the
crime, and nearly a month before your conviction. So how did Ron
find out?
OTOH, you probably know it wasn't Ron. In which case, who else
knew? How did they know? What else do they know? Belinda Bryan's
"shot in the dark" theory is laughable. You've been busted. You
attacked Jeff Burchell's remailer under false pretenses. You were
really trying to trace the person who was about to get you charged
with a crime so that you could get revenge, not trying to trace
an alleged "harasser" as you claimed at the time. Any other
"harassment" you claim to have received at the time was undoubtedly
a smoke screen of your own creation to mask what you were really
trying to do -- get back at the person who blew the whistle on you.
>>3) This caused Gary to jump up and down and holler.
>
>Wrong.
Must have been another Gary Burnore who looks and acts just like
you, then.
>>6) Definition of "vicious circle;" see "vicious circle."
>>
>>Moral of this story: he who lives by the sword dies
>>by the sword. Or something like that.
>>
>>Am I missing anything here?
>
>Mostly the facts. Be sure and go to tim thorne's web page and see what
>I don't look like.
Gee, and where would people go to see what you (supposedly) *DO* look
like? And I don't suppose you'd mind if someone were to send copies
of that mugshot (which you claim isn't you) to your neighbors.
After all, that ugly monster with the hideous necktie *MIGHT*
eventually move there, right? (Since you claim it's not you, why
won't you admit that he's REALLY UGLY?) <g>
>Oh, and *plonk*.
Now there's a sure sign that Gary is LOSING an argument.
