From: r.dove on
On Aug 4, 12:00 pm, Mark Thorson <nos...(a)sonic.net> wrote:
> You aren't fooling anybody with your use of
> anonymous servers.  It's part of your pattern
> that is documented here:
>
> http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4183/is_20051128/ai_n15872662...
>
> A Baltimore manufacturer of weather instruments
> is suing a fired employee it claims is on an
> anonymous Internet rampage.BelfortInstrument
> says Mark A.Kukuckahas been harassing currentBelfortemployees via e-mail, calling the
> company's customers and partners alleging
> unethical business practices, and posting trade
> secrets on the Internet. DefendantKukuckahas
> an alarming history of engaging in such 'anonymous'
> Internet attacks against those who he believes may
> have slighted him (including past employers), and,
> absent a TRO, will continue his historical pattern
> of making outrageous and harmful attacks against
> the material business interests ofBelfort
> Instrument, readsBelfort'scomplaint, filed
> earlier this month in Baltimore County Circuit
> Court.Belfort, which obtained a temporary
> restraining order againstKukuckaon Nov. 15, is
> suing him for misappropriating trade secrets,
> breach of contract, defamation and tortious
> interference with contractual relations. The
> company is seeking $1 million. After consulting
> with his client,Belfortattorney Douglas W.
> Desmarais declined to speak about the case.
> My client's position is that this is a dispute
> that they have chosen to resolve through legal
> channels, and they're going to let it play out
> through legal channels, Desmarais said.Kukucka
> could not be located for comment; his phone
> number is unlisted and a reverse search of his
> Kingsville address produced no results. According
> to the complaint, whenKukuckastarted working
> forBelfortin 2001, he signed a contract
> promising that, if he left the company, for two
> years afterward he would not say negative things
> about it; if he did, he would face court action.
> He is also bound by the Maryland Uniform Trade
> Secrets Act not to divulge privileged information,Belfortsays.Kukuckawas fired on Oct. 20 of
> this year and then started to harass his
> ex-girlfriend, still aBelfortemployee, via
> e-mail, the suit reads. He also allegedly
> e-mailed the company's general mailbox anonymously,
> promising to fight back against the company and
> drive it out of business. The company also claims
> he called their customers and made untrue
> allegations.Kukuckaalso used an Internet
> newsgroup to criticize theBelfortproduct he had
> been in charge of marketing, the DigiWx AWOS
> digital weather transmitter, calling it Digi$H*T,Belfortclaims. He also allegedly listed which ofBelfort'scustomers were using DigiWx. The motion
> does not state howBelfortknows thatKukuckais
> behind the anonymous e-mails, phone calls and
> Internet postings, but a letter from Desmarais toKukuckawarns thatBelfortcan easily trace the
> communications toKukucka.Belfortalso claims
> thatKukuckahas a history of using pseudonyms
> to criticize whoever has offended [him] on a
> particular day. Indeed, a search of Google's
> newsgroups shows lots of chatter aboutKukucka,
> including several posts purporting to unmask him
> as the anonymous source of negative comments
> about Baltimore and a Japan-based company called
> Shimadzu, for which he allegedly worked at one
> point.


Mark Thorson: You aren't fooling anybody with your use of an out-dated
bunch of published half-truths either which you continue to post and
cross-post.

I've known Bruce Robinson, owner of Belfort Instrument Company for
several years now. I spoke to him about his company suing a former
employee named Mark Kukucka. Bruce told me that the published
newspaper assertions (referred to above) were not factual nor
accurate.

Bruce hired a new Baltimore-based company president named Mark Decker
in 2001. In 2005, Mark Decker sued a former employee while acting as a
company officer. The lawsuit involved numerous trumped-up charges and
untrue assertions. Over time, Bruce learned that the lawsuit was filed
in retaliation when the former employee cooperated with federal
authorities into two investigations involving fraud upon a publicly
traded company and bribery of a federal employee/contractor.

Bruce would have no part of any wrongdoing going on in his companies
so he immediately fired Mark Decker. And Belfort voluntarily dismissed
the unfounded lawsuit against Mark Kukucka.

Unfortunately, some of this has already been poignantly pointed out to
you Mr. Thorson in this and other newsgroup postings but you persist
in promulgating these out-dated half truths. Considering your
litigious record with Cell Tech, should any of the readers of this
newsgroup be surprised? Not Really!

Mark Thorson: you are the one engaged in smear campaign after smear
campaign dating back for several years now. When will you stop your
character assassination of this former employee who did absolutely
nothing wrong?

R Dove
Albuquerque, NM
From: r.dove on
On Aug 4, 12:00 pm, Mark Thorson <nos...(a)sonic.net> wrote:
> You aren't fooling anybody with your use of
> anonymous servers.  It's part of your pattern
> that is documented here:
>
> http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4183/is_20051128/ai_n15872662...
>
> A Baltimore manufacturer of weather instruments
> is suing a fired employee it claims is on an
> anonymous Internet rampage.BelfortInstrument
> says Mark A.Kukuckahas been harassing currentBelfortemployees via e-mail, calling the
> company's customers and partners alleging
> unethical business practices, and posting trade
> secrets on the Internet. DefendantKukuckahas
> an alarming history of engaging in such 'anonymous'
> Internet attacks against those who he believes may
> have slighted him (including past employers), and,
> absent a TRO, will continue his historical pattern
> of making outrageous and harmful attacks against
> the material business interests ofBelfort
> Instrument, readsBelfort'scomplaint, filed
> earlier this month in Baltimore County Circuit
> Court.Belfort, which obtained a temporary
> restraining order againstKukuckaon Nov. 15, is
> suing him for misappropriating trade secrets,
> breach of contract, defamation and tortious
> interference with contractual relations. The
> company is seeking $1 million. After consulting
> with his client,Belfortattorney Douglas W.
> Desmarais declined to speak about the case.
> My client's position is that this is a dispute
> that they have chosen to resolve through legal
> channels, and they're going to let it play out
> through legal channels, Desmarais said.Kukucka
> could not be located for comment; his phone
> number is unlisted and a reverse search of his
> Kingsville address produced no results. According
> to the complaint, whenKukuckastarted working
> forBelfortin 2001, he signed a contract
> promising that, if he left the company, for two
> years afterward he would not say negative things
> about it; if he did, he would face court action.
> He is also bound by the Maryland Uniform Trade
> Secrets Act not to divulge privileged information,Belfortsays.Kukuckawas fired on Oct. 20 of
> this year and then started to harass his
> ex-girlfriend, still aBelfortemployee, via
> e-mail, the suit reads. He also allegedly
> e-mailed the company's general mailbox anonymously,
> promising to fight back against the company and
> drive it out of business. The company also claims
> he called their customers and made untrue
> allegations.Kukuckaalso used an Internet
> newsgroup to criticize theBelfortproduct he had
> been in charge of marketing, the DigiWx AWOS
> digital weather transmitter, calling it Digi$H*T,Belfortclaims. He also allegedly listed which ofBelfort'scustomers were using DigiWx. The motion
> does not state howBelfortknows thatKukuckais
> behind the anonymous e-mails, phone calls and
> Internet postings, but a letter from Desmarais toKukuckawarns thatBelfortcan easily trace the
> communications toKukucka.Belfortalso claims
> thatKukuckahas a history of using pseudonyms
> to criticize whoever has offended [him] on a
> particular day. Indeed, a search of Google's
> newsgroups shows lots of chatter aboutKukucka,
> including several posts purporting to unmask him
> as the anonymous source of negative comments
> about Baltimore and a Japan-based company called
> Shimadzu, for which he allegedly worked at one
> point.


Mark Thorson: You aren't fooling anybody with your use of an out-dated
bunch of published half-truths either which you continue to post and
cross-post.

I've known Bruce Robinson, owner of Belfort Instrument Company for
several years now. I spoke to him about his company suing a former
employee named Mark Kukucka. Bruce told me that the published
newspaper assertions (referred to above) were not factual nor
accurate.

Bruce hired a new Baltimore-based company president named Mark Decker
in 2001. In 2005, Mark Decker sued a former employee while acting as a
company officer. The lawsuit involved numerous trumped-up charges and
untrue assertions. Over time, Bruce learned that the lawsuit was filed
in retaliation when the former employee cooperated with federal
authorities into two investigations involving fraud upon a publicly
traded company and bribery of a federal employee/contractor.

Bruce would have no part of any wrongdoing going on in his companies
so he immediately fired Mark Decker. And Belfort voluntarily dismissed
the unfounded lawsuit against Mark Kukucka.

Unfortunately, some of this has already been poignantly pointed out to
you Mr. Thorson in this and other newsgroup postings but you persist
in promulgating these out-dated half truths. Considering your
litigious record with Cell Tech, should any of the readers of this
newsgroup be surprised? Not Really!

Mark Thorson: you are the one engaged in smear campaign after smear
campaign dating back for several years now. When will you stop your
character assassination of this former employee who did absolutely
nothing wrong?

R Dove
Albuquerque, NM
From: r.dove on
On Aug 7, 12:38 pm, Mark Thorson <nos...(a)sonic.net> wrote:
> Mark A. Kukucka wrote:
>
> > Mark Thorson: you are the one engaged in smear campaign after smear
> > campaign dating back for several years now. When will you stop your
> > character assassination of this former employee who did absolutely
> > nothing wrong?
>
> As long as you continue your smear campaign
> against me, you will be seeing documentation
> of your stalking behavior put up for everyone
> to see, so they'll know who is doing it.
> I only post it when you attack me like you've
> been doing for the past several days.  When it
> stops is up to you.


Mark Thorson: You're delusional.

And I didn't have to read too many of your luny posts to conclude
that.

It occurs to me that a continuance of your personal attacks (with no
incontrovertible evidence offered by you whatsoever) will eventually
buy you another lawsuit similar to the one that Cell Tech already
undertook against you.

R Dove
Albuquerque, NM