Mobbing for “life”: Pro-life mobbers

The holiday season has been a time of intensified harassment for me. A lot of people are out of town, the neighborhood is even quieter than usual and the mobbers are under pressure to finally break me, to finally “get [me] out.”

I stack layers of sound board in front of the window panes in whatever part of the house I’m inhabiting. For daytime, it’s the dining, kitchen, and living room areas. At nighttime, it’s the bedroom.

The truck of the guy who owns the mobbing house to the north is gone and his tan Toyota sedan and the familiar Mazda used by those who come and spend the night is there, as it is many weekends. I haven’t seen the guy who owns the mobbing house to the south and his vehicle is out of site. But I have seen his girlfriend’s vehicle there a couple of times—she’s the one who said in court that they wouldn’t have children if I lived next door—and I do hear the voices I associate with her presence in the harassment. Now the guy with the red SUV is there; he was here yesterday and pulled in again this morning with the same child whose presence often coincides with the voice of a child in the mobbing. (For more on the incidence of children’s voices in the mobbing, look for a post I wrote a few weeks back, Fourth Rule of Mobbing.)

In that light, on this rainy December day, when the my modest view of Lake Washington is blocked by sound board, this post is about hypocrisy.

In the course of a real estate mobbing of nearly two years duration as mine as been, the harassers say many, many things— a lot of it garbage, a lot of it lies or stupid grandiose statements. It has often seemed that they spoke for each other more than for me, competing to see who could spin the wildest hoax about why I was being harassed from my home or to see whose words had the greatest effect on me. Constantly referring to themselves by the names of people in the neighborhood, out of my past or declaring to represent them; claiming to be traffic cops (attempting to criminalize me, the victim) and then to be attorneys (attempting to intimidate me by threats of civil suits); telling me that the therapist I’d most recently seen had put patient notes about me on the web (a lot of trumped up psychobabble and diagnoses attended this story) and then later, after I called her to see if it was true, openly attempting to dissuade me from seeing her again because the content of psychotherapy might be admissible in court. If these things seem extravagant to you, I assure you, there’s much, much more. So much so, that it will take weeks and perhaps months of time after the mobbing for me to recall even most of the hoaxes, the insults, and the other extraneous statements with which they’ve been mobbing me day-in and day-out since May of 2014. Some days, something comes to mind that I haven’t thought of in a while, or sometimes they suddenly throw in something they haven’t said in a while.

The burden of non-stop harassment is the immense liability of inadvertently disclosing information useful in prosecuting the crime during its commission. And while regaling me with wild stories and trying to impress each other with their monologues and mobbing double-talk, they’ve given me too much information.

So much the better.

These days they tend to rely on the repetition of a smaller set of insults, accusations and threats. I have wondered if these are the comments they hope will be so unbearable for me to hear that I will decamp from my legal home and scurry off, leaving them scot-free to go on mobbing and victimizing others for property or money or both. I have also wondered if they speak for themselves based on some half-assed psychological profile of me or whether they speak for those who hired them or whom they “represent.”

In other words, are the insults I am told repeated for the sadistic pleasure of, for example, the co-captain of the neighborhood watch who almost certainly invited this crime to be perpetrated against me? Does real estate mobbing offer an unparalleled chance for people who hate to vent their hatred without the penalties that would follow a murder? Or are the insults made to a purpose? For example, to hurt a person to the point where she would leave her home and not sue since the very repetition of those insults in court would humiliate the victim further? Lastly, is the purpose to fault the victim in order to distract from the real goal of the mobbing: Property acquisition.

In any case, I say mobbing is more about the people who mob than the one they mob. These people have turned out to be every bit as ugly and miserable as they seem.

I haven’t wanted to create an exhaustive listing of the things that I recall have been said for this website though I would hope to have the opportunity to be extensively interviewed by a forensic interviewer when the FBI finally involves themselves. But on this occasion, I do want to mention one of the utterances that has been repeated in the mobbing: This is the constant claim that I have “killed three girls,” sometimes that I’ve killed boys. Alongside that, there were claims made that they were from the pro-life movement (“We’re all pro-lifers here”).

Because of what has seemed to be a tendency to say anything and everything in hopes of coming across the thing that would cause me to pack my bags and leave my legal home because of criminal harassment, I’ve been skeptical of many of these statements. My assumption has been that they probe for reaction, that they want to frighten people into believing that they’ll spread rumors that will ruin his life or that the mobbers believe they might be able to arouse guilt in the victim if they make the right accusation. Specifically, I assumed they expect a woman who has had an abortion to have some deep-seated guilt about it that they can criminally exploit. There’s also the possibility they thought I might flee my home in fear of my life if a bunch of crazed “right-to-lifers” were after me.

That said, in case there is something to this one, I’m putting it on the record here. I wouldn’t be too surprised if some “right-to-lifers” (as they call themselves while they’re acting like vigilantes and assaulting or killing others who are exercising their legal rights) were going around harassing women who’ve had abortions or used the morning-after-pill out of their homes or if they were going after people who were otherwise outspoken about the right to choose.

I note that, according to the laws of the city of Seattle, targeting individuals based on political ideology is considered malicious harassment or a “bias” crime. Regardless of whether this crime is done in the name of property acquisition and influenced by anti-renter sentiment on the part of some in the neighborhood watch, the harassment has been chock-full of statements that show bias. Additionally, the predatory nature of the crime, revealed by the fact that it targets a single, middle-aged woman who lived alone at its outset and was intentionally surrounded by harassers… this should make the very fact of the crime a hate crime even if those who rent are not a protected class.

A few other things that have made me wonder about whether some of the mobbers actually justify what they are doing based on the pro-choice views of the victim include:

  • Before the mobbing, when I was feeling increasingly uncomfortable with what seemed to be going on around me, I tried to learn more about the people around me by looking online. I found a social networking page for the girlfriend of the owner of the mobbing house to the south. The page had one of those propaganda pictures on it that “pro-lifers” like to use, it might have been a picture of an aborted fetus or something. I saw it and went on.
  • One of the frequent visitors at the mobbing house to the north who I strongly associate with some of the harassment because of the timing of her stays had hanging from her rear-view mirror one of those sets of angel wings. I thought I remembered reading somewhere that that was a symbol of the “pro-life” movement.
  • The mobbers used to like to say that they were “moral hazard” patrols. (And I never even got a scarlet letter!)

I wouldn’t be surprised if there were real estate mobbers involved in the “pro-life” movement who thought it was just dandy to harass pro-choice people out of their homes. After all, there sure seem to be a lot of money-grubbing conservative Christians.  It would just be another hypocrisy from those who wear the mantle of “pro-life” while they physically assault and even murder others. Bombing an abortion clinic is considered a form of domestic terrorism; I have argued that real estate mobbing should be considered the same.

Attempting to justify real estate mobbing based on the victim’s views on abortion would just be another case of “pro-lifers” showing themselves for what they are by deciding that those who believe in choice don’t deserve the rights given to every citizen of this country under the law.

If a business deal was brokered to sell houses around me to mobbers who promised the nasty neighborhood watch they’d get rid of me, then those in the neighborhood watch who believe in choice for themselves would be even more guilty of instigating a violence against me, another woman. They would also be guilty of betraying their own convictions and using those who would deny all women choice in order to vent their spite.

And if the mobbers have deliberately made statements to indicate that they’re “pro-life” because they think it might make me uncomfortable, they’re using the “pro-life” movement in the commission of a crime, something that should be offensive to anyone who understands what it is to have strongly held beliefs about right and wrong.

One would wonder about the flexible morality implicit in acts like this. But then, mobbers are people with tongues glib and waggling, people whose talk is cheap. And as for any “pro-lifers” who would claim to defend their beliefs by criminally stalking, cyber-stalking, and harassing a woman for profit?

One’s most deeply held beliefs should always pay so well.

 Postscript: A more expensive vehicle, one that looks like that of the attorney pal of the owner, the attorney who co-wrote a brief that said the “only explanation” for the reports I made to the police of harassment was paranoid schizophrenia, pulled into the driveway of the south mobbing house as I edited this post. And as I returned to the computer and began to write this postscript, that vehicle departed.




Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: