Post-Interview Emails Between Prof. Hollinger And Myself
From: Todd L. Sherman / KB4MHH
Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 1:44 PM
To: 'Richard C. Hollinger'
Subject: This is a start...
http://stormspottertodd.blogspot.com
This is just scratching the SURFACE. I have a long way to go before that
story is finished. But the preliminary idea is there to help you understand
what I've been having to go through with this guy.
Look at all the names mentioned in there. Some of them are big people.
Surprised?
I sure as hell am. I'm surprised at how GULLIBLE our leaders can be, and
how they can be led to take things out on innocent people...things which
cause harm - tangibly and intangibly. And how they can leave these people to
rot when they discover that they were wrong all along. ...To save their
asses from lawsuit.
I went to EVERYONE for help: local clubs, Emergency Management, GPD, UPD,
State Atty's Office...
EVERYONE blew me off. NO one wanted to believe me. I think it had more to
do with titles and uniforms and big names than it had to do with victims and
harassers and proper police work. :(
Todd
From: Richard Hollinger
Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 2:30 PM
To: Todd L. Sherman / KB4MHH
Subject: Re: Encryption...
No, but I have made some inquiries about Mr. Capehart.
Todd L. Sherman / KB4MHH wrote:
> Do you have an email certificate? Do you know how to do encryption?
>
> Todd
--
Best,
Richard C. Hollinger, Ph.D.
Professor
Department of Sociology and Criminology & Law
NOTE: This is the last email I ever received from Professor
Hollinger. After this, I never heard from him again. No phone calls,
emails...not even a letter. Thr subsequent emails from me would basically end
up being me just talking to myself, apparently. (sigh)
From: Todd L. Sherman / KB4MHH
Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 4:16 PM
To: Richard C. Hollinger
Subject: RE: Encryption...
Uh oh. :)
REALLY wary of what the reponses are going to be. I'm suspecting that what
you're going to find are more people championing him than anything else. He
knows a LOT of people who matter and they ALL love him. It's what's been
REALLY getting in my way every time I try to do anything about him.
Todd
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Hollinger
> Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 2:30 PM
> To: Todd L. Sherman / KB4MHH
> Subject: Re: Encryption...
>
> No, but I have made some inquiries about Mr. Capehart.
>
> Todd L. Sherman / KB4MHH wrote:
> > Do you have an email certificate? Do you know how to do encryption?
> >
> > Todd
>
> --
> Best,
> Richard C. Hollinger, Ph.D.
> Professor
> Department of Sociology and Criminology & Law
>
(NO CONTACT + 3 DAYS)
From: Todd L. Sherman / KB4MHH
Sent: Monday, February 08, 2010 7:02 PM
To: Richard C. Hollinger
Subject: RE: Encryption...
> No, but I have made some inquiries about Mr. Capehart.
I'm thinking one of two things probably happened:
1) No one replied back and/or ignored you.
2) You found ONLY people who LAUDED and APPRAISED the good-hearted and
awesome Jeffrey Donald Capehart, and who all thought I was an asshole to
even SUGGEST that he could be bad.
This has been the stuff that has been getting in MY OWN way of getting
anything done. Everybody knows him. No one has anything bad to say about him
because he does favors for everyone, he volunteers for all sorts of public
service stuff, he knows everyone who is important, and no one is willing to
say anything bad about him. In fact, people are willing to help him get out
of trouble to the tune of deleting IP logs, convincing UPD that he's
innocent and that I'm in fact the bad guy, and even sabotaging cases.
I've had doubts that you would be able to get anything useful from anyone,
really. It reflects on who Jeff knows more than anything. I suspected that
your contact might actually KNOW Jeff and has even probably worked with him
in the past because their job duties could overlap, and that he might not
agree with anything negative said about Jeff. I've actually been afraid
that spreading this too far to too many people might even backfire by
getting to the wrong people who might give Jeff a heads up to what I know
and what I'm doing. (sigh)
This is why I've been resorting to logging IP hits and doing things quietly.
Oh, by the way, I meant to tell you that my ex-wife used to WORK under Susan
at the BK. She often came home crying and complaining about Susan. She is
very domineering and controlling. So I've got 20-something years of
experience with these two and I know who they really are as opposed to the
smiles they put on for everybody else.
Todd
(NO CONTACT + 13 DAYS)
From: Todd L. Sherman / KB4MHH
Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2010 9:33 PM
To: Richard C. Hollinger
Subject: What'd yuh find?...
Did you find out anything.
Also, I was curious about your interviews. Did you interview any of the other
people involved in the UF/IFAS hacking, or just Susan? Was this research
included in any of your books? Are the book(s) still available?
Get to read my blog, yet? (sigh) It IS kinda long, so grab a coffee before you
do. There's a LOT of kinda scary stuff in there that I've experienced, though.
This is gonna take me SO long to put together into something that people can
one day read. (sigh) It's also VERY depressing to re-hash it. But I feel like
this is important. It could help people someday. There are lots of other people
out there going through what I did at the hands of people like this and I hope
that what I eventually put together may help others.
Todd
(NO CONTACT + 32 DAYS)
From: Todd L. Sherman / KB4MHH
Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2010 11:56 AM
To: Richard C. Hollinger
Subject: From my blog...
[...]
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
NOTES, March 9, 2010:
Contacted local UF criminologist - Professor Richard Hollinger, back in
February. Phone conversation: Said he's interviewed the people involved in the
UF/IFAS hacking before for his research. He described his interview with Susan
Tipton. Laughed and chuckled and elaborated about how impressed he was with
her, how he thought she was so nice, how she related that the whole thing was
just a minor joke, how the incident was supposedly inconsequential and blown
way out of proportion, how she related the entire hacking incident to even be
an "embarrassment" for the University - and this guy ate it up. (So then, if
such an embarrassment, why did they go so far and to actually prosecute? Why
didn't they just drop charges altogether if it was so "unimportant" and
"embarrassing"? Where's the objective thinking, here?
Prof. Hollinger made the classic mistake of getting caught up in the
psychopath's drivel, something noted in many psychology books - and he missed
it. There are stories, for example, of psychopaths describing the gruesome
murders they've committed as "necessary", and for a second...psychologists
actually smiling with them and nodding their heads in agreement, laughing along
with them even, until they realize..."Oh my god! What am I DOING?!") This
"enamoration" with Susan shocked and frightened me, took me aback, and I did
not think it was appropriate for someone who was supposed to be interested in
ACCURATELY researching the psychology of crimes to be so apparently easily and
gullibly MANIPULATED. How did Hollinger not see this? I worried that the
Professor wasn't going to be very helpful. Prof. Hollinger sounded to me to be
far more overly emotionally attached to Susan than he should be. Seemed way too
overly "compromised" by her charisma and manner of speaking and did not seem
able to speak objectively or in any "detached" way about the situation. I've
seen this Susan repeatedly before, how she is able to manipulate people by
smiling and giggling a lot, disarming them. Throw in her apparent intelligence,
and people get hooked and never bother to question her. Susan knows VERY well
how to manipulate people. Prof. Hollinger did not seem to recognize that he was
being manipulated by the criminal's own words.
Was he expecting the criminal to sob and admit guilt and apologize? NO! They're
going to DENY, even make it sound as if they were being PICKED on by society
and the police! Is this how his entire $400 book is put together - with
non-objective interviews with criminals he "felt" were innocent? I keep going
back over the phone conversation and this is exactly what I seem to be seeing.
I'm going to find a copy of his book and pour through it now from front to
back. I want to see just how "objective" this guy really is. I have to now
admit that I have VERY low confidence going in.)
This is a criminologist with a PhD and who is *supposed* to be a professional
and *objective* and *detached* and I was not impressed with his sympathetic
praisings of the criminal and I did not feel confident in him or in his
abilities to objectively think or reason. I had a SINKING feeling, instead,
like this guy was going to be yet another one who screws me somehow, or dumps
me in the end. It's the same feeling that I had with Detective Mayo, and with
Detective Metz, and with just about everyone else. ... Where something inside
you says, "Here we go again...this doesn't feel right, and it's gonna *happen*
again."
Remaining detached is UNFORGIVEABLY important in research of narcissists,
psychopaths, and other people with otherwise "anti-social personality
disorders"; and in my phone conversation with him, Prof. Hollinger did NOT seem
to have this mastered or to even understand that it was something he should
even be AWARE of. Prof. Hollinger would seem to have made a HUGE mistake in his
interview with Susan Tipton. Books by Hare, et al, WARN of this problem in
academic AND police circles - the apparent lack of education about the ease
with which these people can con and manipulate even the best-trained people who
KNOW what to look for. People just DON'T understand what they're dealing with.
He made the CLASSIC mistake. If you don't WATCH what you're doing, then you
will end up finding yourself emotionally taking sides, and going farther then
you needed to or were authorized to, and taking ACTIONS, and perhaps
inadvertently aiding and abetting the bad guys - maybe even doing so on
PURPOSE, and causing HARM to the innocent people in the end. (This sounds
familiar.) I'm slowly learning that even a degree doesn't necessarily mean
JACK or that the person holding it necessarily knows what he or she is doing.
How am I supposed to trust that this guy is going to take an objective,
unbiased stance of real, true research into the situation with Jeff Capehart if
he's already "taken in" by Jeff's wife? I'm SCREWED. GOD dammit! Jesus CHRIST,
man!
Last I spoke with Prof. Hollinger (by email on Feb. 5th), he advised me that he
had made "inquiries" with some of his "contacts" about Jeff Capehart. I never
heard from him again after that. He will not return emails or calls. Has
not related anything that he had supposedly discovered or uncovered. Fear
Prof. Hollinger spoke too much to wrong people and may have in fact ended up
sabotaging my efforts by giving friends of Jeff heads up word that was brought
back to Jeff. I trusted that he knew what he was doing, that he was objective,
that he would not get emotionally involved and would not pick sides and just
investigate. Then again, I trusted a cop to do the same, too, once. Fear he
came across people who knew Jeff, who were his friends, who vouched for him,
and rather then continue his research he simply decided to dump me - or he was
TOLD to. (sigh) I dunno. I feel like the man just wanted more information out
of me - like Paul Eakin did - perhaps to use as followup for his $400 book,
like Eakin wanted it to use in his political campaign to help his popularity. W
ho knows. He apparently was not actually interested in helping me. But it
would seem that I am no longer worthy of his contact and that he is not
interested in following through with what he started or in keeping me updated.
So for this reason, I believe that he was compromised. Something is definitely
wrong. Something has definitely changed. It is obvious that he bumped into
someone who convinced him to stop pursuing the matter and...he did...including
taking the time to politely advise me that he was no longer interested in
pursuing his investigations for (this) reason.
So much for "commitment" to the research. I guess that only matter as much as
keeping your tenure, not for getting to the truth of anything.
I'm getting real sick of people pretending to be interested in helping me only
to end up aiding and abetting the bad guys somehow, here...from clubs to local
government to bad cops. Fear Hollinger may have inadvertently interfered, now.
Who did he talk to? How much did he reveal to his "contacts?" Which contacts
knew Jeff, and brought that information to Jeff, now? This guy pretended to be
interested in helping me, gathered sensitive information from me, apparently
shared it, will not reveal who he shared the information with (so I will never
know the path that the information took inside UF circles); and then he
abandoned me.
Ugh. (sigh) This guy does not impress me. There are good professors, and
then there are those who have their own agendas. I have NO idea what this guy's
is. But...
There is no place that I can apparently go to for help. :( I don't know where
else to go, now. I've gone everywhere. Local clubs don't want to touch it.
Local government agencies not only won't help but seem content to actually aid
and abet the bad guys and seem bent on running actual interference for them, as
do the local police departments. One cop deliberately sabotaged a harassment
case I'd filed, and another police department actually HELPED Jeff Capehart get
away with hacking my server. I have NO protection. NONE. Jeff has the power to
do whatever he wants. I am unable to do anything about Jeff or the other people
he encourages to attack me, and they have the power to do whatever they want at
any time, and no one will challenge them.
[...]
I did not contact the Professor again, after this. Nor did
he make any attempt to further contact me. I'd been duped...used. I knew it,
now. This guy was a real son of a bitch to do this to me.