From: Annie on 3 Sep 2008 13:19
On Sep 3, 8:34 am, Mark Probert <mark.prob...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Always a good idea. I was not referring to a criminal history. I was
> referring to what you had posted and I deleted.
Well, since I'm not the only one that has been using this email
address as if it were their own,
and the computer hacking has gone on since 1997, who only knows who
posted what, and what you deleted.
> > However, you and Frank talked about too much of my personal business
> > that only a person tapping my lines,
> I have never discussed anything about you with Frank, etc. If you
> persist in making this bogus claim, please provide actual
> documentation, since it will refer me to the person impersonating me.
Go back, to about April, where Frank discusses my personal business,
and you made a few comments about where I live.
And you've made all sorts of comments here on usenet.
> > and bugging my residences could ever have known. Even connecting the
> > old private investigator, in my past neighborhood to all of this, is
> > sick and twisted. It never stopped, Mark. And all of us that have
> > had this in our lives
> > for way too long are going to do what we have to do to make it stop.
> > It is the right thing to do.
> Whatever. Howver, I am not involved in any of that.
I know, the local Sheriff's department was.....ask Frank, he can tell
you how that worked.
> > And with the old Mark Lindsay vs Paul Revere lawsuits all we did was
> > state our
> > opinion about things, and tell the truth. No one got anything. Even
> > the Lindsay vs Revere suits-no one got any money. Both settled out of
> > court. But the wire tapping, computer hacking, computer fraud,
> > harassment, following, stalking, etc haven't stopped since
> > approximately March 1997 to present, and it is very old; but I do know
> > who we will see at the very bottom of the pile----that started this
> > whole mess in the first place. I hope that individual (and her
> > friends) realize that there could have been a reunion tour, and no
> > lawsuits were ever needed.
> I am totally uninterested in that.
Good. But those offending parties connected to all of this tragedy
(and I mean, it is a tragedy) have made
names for themselves that have hurt the chances of a possible reunion,
and have harassed people to no end.
> > But I do know that Quackwatch and skeptics group members were involved
> > over on the AOL boards and were involved in those lawsuits.
> Provide proof.
> There will be a time and a place for everything, and this is not the time or the place.
> > But instead, that individual (and her friends) made one huge gigantic
> > mess by making up stuff that was not true, hoping to make a name for
> > herself at the expense of others, and trying to damage the reputation
> > of others. I believe in giving people second chances, Probert, but
> > those second chances have long worn themselves out because it hasn't
> > stopped, and no one should be taping anyone's lines for any reason,
> > and no one should ever hack anyone's computer for any reason. What
> > should have been between two old time friends (Mark Lindsay and Paul
> > Revere) became one huge ugly mess on AOL, instead lawsuits were filed,
> > and ruined old time relationships; but as time will march on (as it
> > always does), I think I can help remedy the solution between those old
> > time friends, and put them back together again. I'm going to talk to
> > Mark about it soon. There's a solution, and at age 66, its never too
> > late to get a back bone and go after the real offending parties.
> Not interested. It is your business.
Just thought your comments about the "friends I was hanging out with"
and "I'll always protect you" were a little odd that you have made.
From: Tess on 3 Sep 2008 14:59
On Sep 2, 7:14ï¿½pm, Annie <SNIFFFT...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Aug 28, 7:00ï¿½pm, Tess <XXFlamingStar...(a)aol.com> wrote:
> > I am the second "defendent" in the lawsuit that was brought against
> > both "Deb" and myself.
> > For the record, yes it was real. ï¿½Yes, the charges were brought by
> > Mark Lindsay and Deb LIndsay via attorney Allen Hyman (though we on
> > occassion address him as Allen Hymen, could have been fruediant, or
> > maybe not).
> By the way, Terri, do you remember when we saw Claudia Doege at one of
> Mark's concert in September 1997,
> in Santa Maria, CA, and that she was pointing to me, saying, "that's
Yes, I remember that day very well.
It was an odd one all the way around.
I do remember the above comment she made.
And I remember Mr. Lindsay and his odd behaviour towards us. The
clinging hand shake, and the "searching" in his mind for "who" we
were. Now me, I understand him not recognizing, but YOU have known
them (the various members at different times), and THEY have known you
for many many years....back to the 70's if I remember correctly.
I remember Claudia at "KICKS" , Paul's Club in Reno and the evening we
all spent there.
She was one of the rudest women I have ever encountered, and was very
"back stabby" in her actions and crude in her verbal skills. She was
the epitome of that song...."... smile in your face when all the time
they want to take your place, the Back Stabbers...."
I can understand, sort of, the reasoning behind her actions! I mean,
when she was putting together the book about Paul Revere and the
Raiders, "HIstory Rebeats Itself", she came to the one person she knew
that had "true" connections to the Band. And wanting you to set up a
"meeting" between her and Paul and Mark for an interview was a pretty
good idea! Except for the fact that you have never used your
"friendship" with either one of them or any band member to your
advantage, nor have you ever abused the connection to make you
"better" than any other FAN. So, when you said NO you couldn't/
wouldn't do that, she was truely upset, and I guess has been ever
Having read, ok, I'll admit "skimmed" the book she wrote, and noted
numerous errors in the basic history, ( which was the real reason that
I just "skimmed" the contents") that even the most "remote" of a fan
would know was either "bad" or "wrong". I was a little surprised that
it was "published", then I found out that it was a vanity publication
and she did it herself.
Then it was told that it was an unauthorized biography of the band.
(She is no Kitty Kelly),
She was trying, IN MY HUMBLE OPINION, to get up close and personnal
with Paul and/or Mark. I also figure that the reason being was to be
acknowledged by the Band, and then there might have been a separate
book for each of them. "Closer and Closer"....and maybe her own
agenda was to be a Manager or Booking Agent or .........(well, I won't
go there, but if you think about it , you will probably figure it
I think the one thing that made me realize who Claudia really was, was
at Kicks, we were at the table, and Deb excused herself to go use the
bathroom, and as soon as she was out of "earshot" , Claudia leaned
into the table and said..." I don't think she will be able to fit in
the bathroom", and then smiled and laughed. Which was rather an odd
thing to say, as she was no "skinny mini" herself. (The bathroom
stalls were very narrow, even an average person had trouble getting
through the door and then closing it. It was one of those slide in
sideways, because they put the doors on wrong, they opened inward, and
then were partially blocked by the toliet paper holder). She was a
piece of work!!!!
As far as the "she's the one" comment, she was letting her little
group know that YOU were who she was talking about, and that topic of
conversation is known only to those in the group....
But I am sure, in my heart of hearts that is was not complimentary on
Would she go out of her way to get revenge on someone who didn't give
her what she wanted....I would say yes, and that is not limited to
Deb, I would venture to say that she would do what she could to cause
members of the BAND problems if it were in her power. And she would
find the "power" to do. But then again....this is MY HUMBLE OPINION.
And this is all I have to say on the subject.... :o)
From: Tess on 3 Sep 2008 15:16
On Sep 3, 8:43ï¿½am, Peter Bowditch <myfirstn...(a)ratbags.com> wrote:
> Mark Probert <mark.prob...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Sep 2, 7:14ï¿½pm, Annie <SNIFFFT...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Do these Quackwatch connected individuals not have anything better to
> >> do with their time----or do they think they are above the law?
> >You have nothing to worry about from anyone from Quackwatch. I would
> >be more concerned with your former, and so-called, friends.
> Her true friends are the ones who visit her now. Those who are
> prepared to go through the locked doors and past the orderlies and
> psych nurses to get to the secure wards in the asylum. This is so
> confronting that most people can't face it.
> Peter Bowditch aa #2243
> The Millenium Projecthttp://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
> Australian Council Against Health Fraudhttp://www.acahf.org.au
> Australian Skepticshttp://www.skeptics.com.au
> To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com
You know, if you are not on the receiving end of the problems that
someone has had to endure for a long period of time then perhaps the
best way to respond is to say nothing.
Kind of that "walk a mile in my shoes".
I have had "problems" with things that have happened, granted not to
the extent or as damaging as have happened to Deb and others.
In my opinion to suggest that someone is in an institution for mental
health is on the rude side, and you wouldn't care for someone who was
referring to you and your mental state in that manner.
From: Mark Probert on 3 Sep 2008 16:54
On Sep 3, 1:19 pm, Annie <SNIFFFT...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Just thought your comments about the "friends I was hanging out with"
> and "I'll always protect you" were a little odd that you have made.-
I do not recall making those comments the way you phrased them.
From: Annie on 3 Sep 2008 17:06
On Sep 3, 1:54 pm, Mark Probert <mark.prob...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> I do not recall making those comments the way you phrased them.
I'll go back and find them.....later this evening.
I have them printed off, but at my other office.