PRESS CLUB
THESE PAGES ARE UNDER LONG TERM CONSTRUCTION BUT FEEL FREE TO CHECK BACK ANY TIME.
PLEASE COME BACK SOON.
RETURN TO DRSUSANBLOCK.COM
These pages have not been corrected.
Tuesday 19 June 2012
An Amsterdam-based cyberstalker has been ordered to pay €70,000 in compensation to American filmmaker Christopher Johnson and actress Mariana Tosca, local broadcaster AT5 reported on Tuesday.
The court ruled Efthimia Dilpizoglou, also known as Maria Technosux, had been plaguing the couple for months using blogs and social media outlets such as Facebook and must remove all messages from the internet within seven days.
'This special case shows American citizens cannot be freely targeted by stalkers from the Netherlands,' lawyer Cees Nierop told the Telegraaf. Nierop told AT5 his clients were pleased with the verdict because they had lost contracts and their reputations had been damaged by Dilpizoglou's campaign against them.
Johnson worked on films such as Night at the Museum, The Final Destination and Live Free or Die Hard. 'This has been a very long and arduous process, but we are pleased and deeply grateful for the court's verdict,' Johnson told DutchNews.nl.
According to Fox TV, Dilpizoglou has been involved in stalking at least 15 people. In the US she has also been accused of identity theft and hacking.
The Amsterdam Herald
Cyberstalker ordered to pay 70,000 Euros
to US movie duo in cross-border lawsuit
A woman from Amsterdam has been ordered to pay €70,000 compensation to two members of the American movie industry after she targeted them for months in an online harassment campaign.
Efthimia Dilpizoglou, 31, has been ordered to take down a series of posts about film-maker Christopher Johnson and actress Mariana Tosca, in which she which claimed they were part of an international vegan conspiracy.
It is thought to be the first cross-border case of cyberstalking to be decided in the Netherlands.
Dilpizoglou became obsessed with Johnson, whose film credits include Final Destination and Die Hard 4.0, after she visited his home in the US in 2010.
She saw Tosca as a rival and published a stream of defamatory films and articles on internet channels such as Twitter, YouTube and LiveJournal, as well as her own blogs in English and Dutch.
A judge in the US had already awarded compensation to Johnson and Tosca, but the pair went to court in Amsterdam to obtain an order that can be enforced in the Netherlands.
Lawyer Cees Nierop said: “This unusual case shows that American citizens are not fair game for stalkers from the Netherlands.
“I don’t know of any other judgments relating to cross-border cyberstalking. It seems remarkable that using Twitter can lead to a substantial compensation claim.”
The US Justice Department has said it will seek to extradite people in foreign countries who target its citizens online. It is not known if extradition proceedings are being sought against Dilpizoglou.
Efthimia Dilpizoglou
Posted on The Amsterdam Herald at 2012-06-22 05:40:27
I have not been fined EU 70 000. The fine itself is a maximum of 25 000 euros, based on the laughable 500 euros per tweet. The bulk of the sum I am ordered to pay is basically the legal costs of the plaintiffs, and is the result of them employing the services of no less than 7 different attorneys, 4 in the US and 3 in the Netherlands. The actual amount is closer to EU 100 000.
- There are NO extradition proceedings with regards to myself. This is not a criminal case but a civil case.
You might be interested to know that the plaintiffs' attorney is being questioned by the Amsterdam Bar Association for his use of falsified documents as well as for perjury with regards to his allegation that I was reported by two agents of the Violent Crimes Unit of the FBI in Los Angeles. I filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the FBI in order to obtain my file. According to the FBI I do not even have an FBI file that the FBI can send me in response to a FOIA request, as I am not in the FBI's central records system. The allegation made during the trial that I was reported by agents of the Violent Crime Unit of the FBI in LA is clearly false.
Lastly, I have not been ordered to take down "a series of posts", I have been ordered to take down everything I have ever published about anyone remotely or possibly related to or associated with the plaintiffs now or in the future. Need I explain how this amounts to categorical censorship of myself? Anytime I post anything remotely critical about someone, the plaintiffs will contact them, conspire to lie about being associates and drag me to court all over again.
I have not been found guilty because I am guilty, I have been declared guilty by a hostile judge who knew she could get away with making an example out of me, because the plaintiffs have 7 different attorneys working for them and unlike them I myself can only afford one attorney and could not afford an expensive IPR (International Private Law) attorney to adequately defend myself. IPR attorneys in the Netherlands are all for-profit attorneys. The average person in The Netherlands cannot afford an IPR attorney. What this means is that everyone is now a potential victim of the type of malicious lawsuit I have been victimized and censored by, simply because they too cannot afford adequate representation.
Finally, I refuse the suggestion that what I did constitutes a form of stalking and I refuse the suggestion that what I did is somehow wrong. Exposing liars and frauds on the internet is never wrong. I fully intend to re-publish everything I have been forced to take down within 2 years when the gag-order expires.
The judge lied to us during the hearing when she promised to be specific with regards to which posts she would order me to remove and which would be allowed to stay up, then the judge stabbed me in the back and imposed what amounts to utterly unconstitutional and draconian orders to censor.
This malicious lawsuit serves no other purpose than to set the precedent to de-legitimize, financially bankrupt and censor independent bloggers. The judge herself has a documented history of being hostile towards bloggers (her hostility can be traced back to her being the subject of a handful of blog articles herself) and has already abused her authority to impose ridiculous fines on other bloggers besides myself using her at best tentative understanding of IPR as an excuse to do so. This pattern of conduct on her part indicates that she is using her court cases as a platform to fight a personal war against independent bloggers.
STALKER'S COMMENTS
ON SALE NOW!
RICHARDSON MAGAZINE
Featuring 14 pages of Dr. Block's husband's work during the 70's as publisher of The La Star, Finger, Love, Hate Magazine, God and other editions.
CHECK IT OUT!!
ITS' FAR OUT!
