Category Archives: internet safety

Onision evidence (gallery)

After falling out of a second story window, Greg’s toddler was rushed to the hospital. These are tweets sent by Greg as his child was hospitalized.
Circled in red: the window from which his child fell.
A distrubing tweet that shows the twisted thoughts of Greg aka: James aka: Onision.
Highlighted: evidence that supports the FBI investigation claim.
Police report from his child’s fall. Note that it mentions Onision recorded the child post fall.
More disturbing tweets from Onision. Bear in mind that the majority of his audience are minors.
Tweet sent from Onision’s spouse, Kai. This image needs no further explanation.
Racism: Onision, pictured here, utilizing the infamous “black face” look. This was originally done as a form of making fun of people of color.
When operating “onision.xyz,” Greg had a section entitled “rate my body.” This section was very popular among girls between the ages of 12-16. It was later changed due to contraversy.
In a recent “freak out” video, Onision is seen standing in his underwear. We blurred the image because the garments left nothing to the imagination.
In the above tweets, Greg once again demonstrates his lack of respect toward women.
As everybody already expected, the case was dismissed.
Gregory Jackson at the court hearing regarding a P.O. against Chris Hansen and Repzion.
A message sent by Onision to an unknown user.
Greg posting in regards to his own child.
Greg, pictured above, seen wearing what appears to be Kevlar.
Another police report in regards of Onision.

The above images were collected from a variety of tweets. While some images we took ourselves, WoC does not claim any credit for the vast majority. We felt having evidence in one location would be of a bigger benefit for all.

Onision 9-1-1 call (transcript)

If you don’t know, journalist Chris Hansen arrived at the home of Gregory Jackson (Onision.) Rather than speaking to Hansen, Greg called the police. Below is the word-for-word transcript of the call.

Dispatcher: 911, what are you reporting?

Onision: Hi, uh, there’s a person that’s been stalking me online and they just showed up to my house. Yeah. 

D: Okay. And they’re outside now?

O: Yes, they’re knocking on my door.

D: Okay. And do you know if they have any weapons?

O: They have a bunch of camera people. Like… they’re like YouTube stalkers. 

D: … Okay. But no weapons seen? 

O: I didn’t see any weapons. I just saw like six guys in my driveway. 

D: Okay.

O: And one of them is knocking on my door. 

D: Okay, one second here… 

[Typing and dog barking, indistinct chatter in the background]

D: And the one that’s knocking on the door… is he the main one that’s been stalking you?

O: Yes… yeah, he’s a stalker. He’s yelling things at me through the door, you know. 

D: Okay and do we know his name at all?

O: It’s Chris Hansen. 

D: Okay. H-A-N-S-E-N?

O: H-A-S-E-N [sic], yeah. H-A-N-S-E-N.

D: And then C-H-R-I-S?

O: C-H-R-I-S, yeah. 

D: Okay. Is he white, black, caucasian, hispanic? 

O: He’s white.

D: Okay. Do we know how old he is?

O: He’s an older… he’s like probably 58, 60. 

D: Okay. How tall?

O: Uh… probably 5’10”, 5’11”. 

D: Okay. Thin, medium, or heavy?

O: Uh… he’s skinnier.

D: What color is his hair? 

O: Uh, blondeish gray. 

D: Okay. And are you able to see what he’s wearing or no?

O: I think he’s wearing a black jacket. 

D: Okay.

O: Uh, I have a uh… security camera.

D: Uh huh. Can you see what color pants?

O: Um… [dog barking]. He’s wearing a black jacket, black pants. He’s still yelling things at me through the door. 

D: Okay. Black jacket, black pants. Can you hear what he’s yelling?

O: No.

D: Okay.

O: Oh, he’s yelling I want your side of the story, Greg. My name’s not even Greg. 

D: Okay. What is your last name?

O: My name is James Jackson. 

D: Okay. Last of Jackson, first of James is what I heard. Is that correct?

O: Yeah… he’s saying I just want to talk through the door. 

D: Okay. And what’s your date of birth?

O: November 11th, 1985.

D: November 11th, 1985?

O: Yeah.

D: Okay. And is [REDACTED] your best call back number?

O: Yeah. 

D: Okay. Do you have any weapons in the home, James?

O: No, I don’t. 

D: Okay. And you said that there was roughly five more people there with cameras?

O: Yes. In the driveway. 

D: Okay. One second here. 

[Typing and dog barking] 

D: And do you know what he was talking about? Why he was stalking you or anything like that? 

O: Yeah, there’s like a… it looks like there’s 1…2…3…4…5…6 people in the driveway. But he..he. I had someone that I uh… there’s an 18… no, I think a 19 year old who I didn’t want to hang out with. I didn’t want to be around them. They have BPD and their stuff…their mental disorder was really affecting my life in a negative way and I didn’t want them in my life anymore. And uh… they went to this person and said a bunch of mean things about me and so now this person is like, trying to aggressively pursue me in a really hateful way. 

D: Okay, you said they were from YouTube. So is it like… a show that they do or…? 

O: It’s a live stream. Yeah, it’s a… I’ve already talked to a lawyer about slander. This guy is just really, really hateful towards me. 

D: Okay. And are you able to see what type of vehicle they arrived in?

O: No… they parked way down the street which is really sketchy. They’re standing out next to my SUV.

D: Okay. We’re working on getting units out there as quickly as we can. Do you feel comfortable disconnecting the line and then if anything changes calling us back? 

O: Yeah. It… it should be fine. We’re just hiding away from the windows. 

D: Okay. If anything changes before we arrive, please call us back okay?

O: Okay thank you. 

D: Thank you. Buh-bye. 

———————— EIGHT MINUTES LATER—————

D: 911, what are you reporting?

O: Hi, um, I’m calling back. I reported some people that showed up at my house. Um. They’re trespassing and they’re on my— 

D: What’s the address there? 

O: [REDACTED]

D: Okay I do show your call here, Sir. Has something changed on scene there? 

O: Just waiting for the police to show up. They’re still on my driveway. 

D: Okay. It is still showing here on my screen and law enforcement has been advised. If anything does change or escalate call us back, okay?

O: Are you guys going to show up?

D: Sir, it has been sent to the officers. They have to drive to you okay? If anything escalates call us back, okay?

O: Okay, thank you.

D: Okay, you’re welcome. 

Famous Youtuber under FBI investigation?

Being a “celebrity” on Youtube often places a person into the “spotlight.” While this is usually a good form of problicity, for one Youtuber, this is far from that. Recently, the famous (infamous) Youtuber, Onision (Greg Daniels) has not only gotten the attention of journalist Chris Hansen, he has apparantly gotten the attention of the FBI. Allegations ranging from sexual acts, grooming, to abuse, it appears that this is one Youtuber who may not be around much longer. This article will be evaluating the situation revolving around this individual, we will also be discussing the various accusations against Greg.

Grooming and abuse

The accusations against Greg Daniels (Onision,) are disturbing to say the least. In fact, they were enough to get the attention of journalist, Chris Hansen. When interviewing varous victims, Hansen learned that Onision treaded the line of legality when it came to women. In every interview conducted, the victims explained how they were, at the time, 16-18 years of age at the time of meeting Greg. In one instance, Greg met a young girl, approx 16 years of age, at a hotel. Allegedly within minutes they were having sexual relations. To see this interview, click the link provided here.

In every interview conducted by Hansen, the common themes are: Greg met the girls prior to them being 18yo. Greg verbally (and potentially physically) abused them, he used various isolation and manipulation tactics to gain and hold control of the niave women. Beyond the above mentioned, the disturbing theme of grooming comes into play. One such example of this behavior is in how Greg would often pressure the teens into sex. If they were to reject him, he would simply find another method to which he would apply the said pressure.

in 2009 Greg’s then wife, Shiloh had a complete mental breakdown. This was a breakdown that the infamous Youtuber posted onto his channel and would later use to smear the young woman. Shiloh, prior (and post) Onision, was a very well off Canadian based singer. Upon getting into a relationship with Greg, she was isolated, forced to move out of Canada, and would later lose her music contracts; as you could imagine, years of this, and various abuses, would cause any rational person to “snap,” and snapped she did.

In regards to grooming, nothing mentioned above is new. It’s common for a groomer to isolate the target from family, friends, and even the things that are familiar to them. Often, once this is accomplished, the abuse begins. The objective with the abuse is to “break” a person, tear down their self-esteem. With their self-esteem broken, this reduces the chances of the victim leaving. In most cases, the victim feels as if they deserve what is being done, this is the best they can do, and the tragic list goes on. However, for some victims, such as in the case of Onision, the victims break away from the abuse.

Hansen vs. Onision

As mentioned above, Chris Hansen has now been investigating Greg. According to him, the FBI have also been conducting an investigation. Thus far, Hansen has interviewed, at minimum, a dozen of Greg’s former victims. Each story reveals the same disturbing trends: Isolation, verbal abuse, manipulation, and barely legal sexual acts. Another common accusation, though unconfirmed, is that Greg may had potentially recorded such acts. We mentioned that Onision had began a relationship with the, then teenaged girl, Shiloh. What we hadn’t mentioned was the two had met in PA., where they had sexual intercourse. During this time, the police had been called, the room was raided, and the two were found laying on the hotel’s bed. Next to the bed stood various electronics used for recording, though at this time, nothing had been apparantly recording.

Because of Hansen’s involvement, Greg has obviously gotten a lot of “unwanted” attention. However, this attention is warranted. In a recent video, clips can viewed to which Greg explains how a 16yo girl (child) flew herself to their house just to visit Onision’s wife. The video in discussion is here. According to the Youtuber, “no funny business” had occured during this visit. However, we have learned that the claim is very likely to be untrue.

Review

The case is still very much open. With that, we are going to continue monitoring and watching as new information becomes available. As we learn more about this case, and the potential involvement of the FBI, we will be doing update articles. For now, we will leave it to this. Rather you know of this man or not, it is abundantly clear that something disturbing is occuring within his house. While we normally take a neutral stance to these sort of accusations, the overwhelming amount of evidence, and victims, strongly implicates truth to the accusation.

Corrections (Insider report)

Disclaimer:

This article was composed based on information provided to us. We will not reveal the source nor will we reveal the State to which the source worked. We are doing this for the protection of the individual legally as well as from those within the department who may not agree with this article. War on Corruption takes no responsibility for the information provided, we are merely sharing what was provided to us.

Introduction

In many ways correctional institutions are contraversial. Rather it be in how offenders are treated, the quality of life, or the occasional violence, these locations have, upon many occasions, sparked outrage. We often hear about how life is for those imprisoned within these institutions, but we rarely hear about those who are (or were) employed. We recently got a bit of insight into how this agency works, the behind the scenes if you will, into the life of the employees. For protective reasons, we have omitted the specific agency’s location as well as the former employee, the reasons will become abundantly clear throughout the article.

Life away from work

When working, it is expected to uphold the policies and guidelines of your employer. Failing to do so is usually met with some form of consequence, even termination of employment. However, this field is slightly different. For those who are employed, the policies appear to apply 24/7. Rather you are at home, at work, even on vacation you find yourself constantly having to “look over your shoulder.” One example that we were given, in regards to this, is Facebook. While it isn’t new for companies to speak to employees regarding posts, for this agency, your posts could be met with harsh consequences including termination.

Speaking ill of the agency is also forbidden. For example, if our contact were actively working for the “Department of Corrections,” they could be met with termination simply for speaking to us, it is to our best guest that whistleblower laws are completely obsolete for these employees. The agency is very “image” focused. Every expectation, on or off duty, that is held toward their employees, is primarily to ensure that this agency maintains a good public image.

Pay

Admittedly, from what we have seen, the average correctional officer does make good pay. So why mention this? Well, this is also a punishment that can be utilized against them. As it was explained to us, it is not unheard of for the Department to withold paychecks, forcing employees to go without for “X” amount of time, or until the next pay period. The typical solution for the employees, to which suffer this virtually inhumane form of control, is to go into debt with loans. Because the department can opt out of paying their employees at any given cycle, this means that they are forced to find alternative ways to make ends meet; for some, this means sneaking contraband into the facility for the offenders. Common reasons for this is even more bothersome: you get sick and your supervisor doesn’t approve the time off, you simply miss to many days, and so fourth. Regardless of the reasons why, it does leave questions into the legality of this consequence.

Keeping with the trend of loss pay, we go into another questionable act: Removing your pay. According to our insider, another “dirty” move that is often enacted is the deduction of your payroll from your bank account. According to the individual, this comes in a bit of a process, we will simplify it:

  1. Payroll is issued and deposited into your checking account.
  2. Employee uses money to pay bills, etc.
  3. Up to a week later, the account can suddenly go into a negative standing with the bank due to your check being withdrawn by the department.

Upon asking for the reasons why, we were informed that it is usually classified as an “overpayment.” With this, the insider informed us that they are actually salary based with the addition to getting overtime. This has left many questions regarding this action.

Staffing and Retaliation

The agency is always in a status of “hiring.” Given what we have composed thus far, I can’t fathom why. Nationally, the Department is critically understaffed, often only having one officer for each unit. Each unit could have 300+ offenders versing this one officer. “So why are they always hiring,” a question we had to ask.

“There are many reasons as to why the department is constantly hiring. If an officer angers the wrong person, usually a higher ranking individual, retaliation for this is not uncommon practice. But, aside from that, the field really isn’t for everybody, it really does require a specific personality type in order to truly thrive in such a negative environment,” was the response we got.

We inquired into the retaliation claim. The response, in essence, spoke of payroll (covered above,) frivilous write-ups, being treated in such a way that one is forced to resign, and so fourth. We inquired as to how common this occurs. According to our insider, this was very common practice. The department had a sort of shield in that the policies practically forbade employees from being able to publically speak out against the department, thus leaving them at their mercy.

Offender Treatment

Another concern that was brought up was regarding how “inmates” are treated. While some officers make a valiant effort, most treat them as though they were the “scum of the earth.” It was upon this note that the insider stated, “we have all made mistakes, we have all done s**t that wasn’t exactly legal. These people simply got caught. It is, to my core belief, that I treated all of them with respect so long as they returned that respect. When they failed to do so, I would attempt to calm the situation which usually meant actually speaking to the offender.”

Conclusion

There is much more we could go into. To do that, however, would require a novelette. While we have much more information, we will leave it to this for this article. For now, we can make a rather damning conclusion as to how these individuals are treated. Furthermore, we can even conclude that the State demands control of the personal lives of its employees, a disturbing concept at best. If requested, we may compose a secondary article into this subject. For now, we will simply leave it with this.

Alleged predator sues group

There are a variety of “predator hunting” groups in the world. However, you don’t hear about them being the target of a lawsuit, this group is special in that regard. Recently, a group that seeks out child predators and exposes them live has come under fire. Florida resident, Roy Anderson of Pensacola has filed a lawsuit against the predator hunting group, Oklahoma Predator Prevention (OPP.)

In the lawsuit, Anderson claims the group has maliciously slandered his name. One of many reasons for this lawsuit derive from what has happened post the video being broadcasted. Death threats, various calls, and even the loss of his job are just among the many events Anderson has delt with since the video. While we are not in the business of protecting predators (nor are we doing that here,) it is our job to present the facts as we know them. Below, are some snippets from the conversation between Anderson and whom he believed was a 15 yo girl.

The conversation does have us wondering just how far his lawsuit will actually go. Within, there are a variety of “red flags,” potential indicators that OPP may have been onto something. Even if they are in the right, the group itself has arisen questions with us.

While we have seen a variety of videos from this group, what we have not seen is any evidence that the group actually contacts law enforcement. While there maybe a reason for this, the group has never addressed them, a potential red flag in itself. What we have seen, however, is a couple of men who have conversations with potential predators. They meet up with the target at public locations, make a video, and leave it at that. There is a correct way to do this and there is an incorrect way to catch predators; this method would be correct if they worked with law enforcement and actually removed these people from the streets. Instead, in most cases, the alleged predator leaves upon gaining some fame and the story ends there. So who are they really protecting by doing this?

To be for the children, and to be about protecting them means that one takes the evidence in hopes of securing an arrest. If they aren’t doing this, and that does appear to be the case, than they really aren’t protecting the children; the advice is simple: get the predators off the streets. We are going to be observing this one closely due to the lawsuit. While we do intend to update this when able, we also hope the group takes a more proactive approach of getting these predators incarcirated.

Exposure pages/groups: Legit or is it harassment?

In the field of journalism, regardless of the sort of platform you operate, you can expect that somebody will, at one point, challenge your information. Earlier tonight, a page calling themselves, the “Victim’s Rights Advocacy Group,” had made a video to which they target a few individuals. However, within the video, they make a claim that was found to be questionable. Doing what we do, one of our admins challenged the claim. The claim was against the girlfriend of journalist, Meko Haze, Paige Adrian Chapman. Though the accusation, in itself wasn’t much, it accused her of being a “traitor.” At this point, our admin asked to see the evidence.

“There are many sources of information that can be easily looked up. You can do your own homework and catch up. But if you insist we would be more than happy to do a “Traitors Caught Red-Handed” video.”

The above is a portion of the reply given to our admin upon challenging the claim against Meko’s girlfriend, Paige. If so much “information” exists, as the administrator claims, than why was it so difficult to simply provide the said “information?” In normal circumstances, it isn’t. However, it is much harder to produce information that doesn’t exist than it is to provide something that does. With this response, the agenda of this specific page became clear. At the end of the statement, the admin makes mention of creating another “video.” It is presumed, based on the overall context, that they would, in some way, include either our admin or the overall platform. We will use this time to make the following statement:

“You may create any video you wish, your 253 followers may enjoy it. However, if you wish to include War on Corruption, please bear in mind, that we are a much larger platform, on multiple sites. If you do create a video, by all means, let’s see some of this alleged evidence you were so unwilling to provide.”

A key point to know is if a platform is posting factual information, providing documentation isn’t a problem. At this point, however, the group’s owner, became aggressive, and proceeded to ban the individual prior to deleting comments. While that may not seem like a “big deal,” it actually sheds a lot of doubt into the credibility of her page. However, this isn’t the first time we’ve seen this sort of irrational behavior. Another group, “Un-blessed BIG Liars, Frauds, and Fakes” has displayed similar behaviors. But are groups like this actually legal?

Legal Issues?

Exposing an individual for malicious, illegal, or unethical deeds is one thing. However, looking into these groups, they go well beyond simply exposing an individual’s wrongful deeds; in fact, they borderline harass whoever they are after. So who makes this list? From what we can tell, it’s anybody who simply pisses the page owners off. While we have exposed some of the nonsense from Jamie, Fran, David, etc. we have always left it to specific situations. Beyond those situations, we have made a point of not hammering them. The pages in question, however, make a point of constantly harassing individuals they target, this is where the harassment aspect begins to form.

According to the dictionary, harassment is defined as,aggressive pressure or intimidation.” According to pacer.org, cyber harassment can include:

  1. electronic forms of contact
  2. an aggressive act
  3. intent
  4. repetition
  5. harm to the target

Over the years, I have seen many pages like this. They have three things in common.

  1. They rack up a few followers.
  2. They begin targeting individuals, groups, or pages.
  3. And finally, they seem to eventually phase out.

While we aren’t fond of some of the people mentioned on pages such as this, we are even less fond of blatently harassing, stalking, and bullying an individual. At some point, one must pull the ethics card. For groups like this, we have decided to do that very thing. We have seen personal information such as home addresses blasted into groups like this, what exactly is that exposing? If anything, information such as this can potentially place somebody into a dangerous situation; this is not “exposure.” This is outright digital stalking, and WoC is standing up against this behavior.

P4P: Final Review

As you have probably figured out from the title, this is most likely the last article we are going to cover on this subject. While it is our goal to protect vulnerable families from those who may potentially cause them harm, we can only beat this dead horse so many times. For those who have followed our platform, you are most likely aware of the alleged “non-profit” organization, “P4P.” Punished 4 Protecting, which was founded by Francesca Amato-Banfield, is an organization that has been under fire for sometime now. The reasons for such scrutiny vary for many reasons. This article is going to cover, not only this questionable organization, but its founder as well.

Punished 4 Protecting

Punished 4 Protecting was founded in early 2018. While this alone has no merit, it does in that Francesca Amato claims to have been around for many years, that is the only claim she makes that is factual. According to Amato, P4P is a “non-profit” organization. As a matter of fact, the below image is one to which makes such claim.

70687609_10156117359077303_421226430769135616_n

As stated, she claims to be a “non-profit.” What exactly does that entail? To be classified as a non profit, an organization has to be a 501(c)3. Organizations of this nature are tax exempt. However, with “P4P” one simple issue arises; it’s not a 501(c)3.If anything, it would be a  501(c)4. This sort of organization is defined as, “an organization that is not geared for profit and operated exclusively to promote social welfare. However, her organization is neither of these. It is incorporated and as such, cannot be a 501(c)3 or 501(c)4, We covered this issue in one of the first articles regarding Francesca’s organization. You may read the article, Sorry: 501c3 not found. 

When looking at the “P4P” site, you will notice another contradiction. Looking at the name, it has one slight flaw that disproves it being a “non-profit.” The minor issue is simply “inc.” If that doesn’t sound like anything critical, it actually is. It is because an organization cannot be incorporated and be a non-profit; it is either a corporation, or a non-profit, it can’t be both. While this could be argued as a simple oversight, looking into the list of New York’s registered non-profit organizations, one organization is missing: Francesca’s.

The above image brings fourth another problem. In the same post, Francesca, the family advocate, actually threatens Ashley Cooper with CPS. Now, for an individual who is “bringing down the system,” wouldn’t this be a bit counter-productive to her cause? If anything, it does demonstrate what lengths Francesca is willing to go to silence anybody who opposes her. Given the dialogue, one can presume that Francesca is fully aware of who Ashley is. Though this is also useless by itself, it plays into something we will be covering shortly.

Francesca Amato-Banfield

As we have stated, Francesca is a woman that has been encircled with controversy since 2017. With a variety of articles and YouTube videos, she has been repeatedly accused of being a con-artist. Furthermore, there have been many accusations regarding her friendships with registered sex offenders. In recent times, she faced accusations of spreading “sovereign citizenship” ideologies. One such example, comes from early 2019. Francesca Amato, alongside her typical group of associates, had a “one cure fix all” affidavit. While they claimed this affidavit worked, no evidence has ever been produced to validate this claim.

70458054_10156117127127303_9187273085839998976_n

In the first image we presented, it is clear that Francesca seems to know about Ashley’s case. Furthermore, she alleges to know enough to even know who the caseworker. However, in this most recent image, she is seen asking, “Who are you?” and, “Again who are you?” This question is a complete 180 from the original image. How does one implicate to know about another’s case if they don’t even know who that individual is to begin with? The fact that a self proclaimed advocate would resort to, what is essentially a form of blackmail, to silence anybody who speaks out against her, has only added to the controversy surrounding her.

Francesca Amato-Banfield, as we can tell from our research, is not an advocate. The amount of controversy, damaging information provided by her, and various other forms of questionable deeds has many people raising a brow. If the controversy isn’t about her directly, it surrounds her associates. One example of such is David Jose who, according to many people, takes money from a victim and then proceeds to block them. As if that isn’t enough, photographic evidence shows him illegally withdrawing funds out of bank accounts.  If you intend to use an advocate to fight your case, do your research. Don’t just pick the first beautiful flower you see, it may be toxic.

 

Other related articles:

Secret “Congressional” meeting?

Jamie Johnson (documentary)

Infamous Jamie Johnson gun video (full version)

“Advocate” exploits sexual abuse victim

Illegal counciling services?

 

Oklahoma man exposed live

The internet is a place that should be taken with caution, especially for children. Between the various scams, bullies, and even predators, children have much to be alert to. For some of these predators, however, they’re game is over before it even begins. One such case, is a man named Andrew Weaver of Midwest City, Oklahoma.

Before we get into the “meat” of the story, let’s first discuss who Andrew Weaver is. Weaver is a local man living in Midwest City. From what we were able to find, prior to his Facebook page being deleted, he works at a dairy facility called “Braum’s, allegedly as a manager. He has a wife and at least one daughter. This last fact makes this story all the more disturbing. War on Corruption has, at this point, attempted to make contact with his workplace. If we receive a response, we will update the article. Weaver was not available for comment as we have no method of contacting him. If, by some chance he sees this article, we would love to get a statement from him.

Weaver, recently was exposed by the Oklahoma group, “Oklahoma predator prevention,” when he appeared at a movie theatre in attempt to pick up whom he presumed to be a 15y.o girl. In the video, which can be viewed here. The video begins in the parking lot of the local theatre. Within minutes, Weaver is seen walking away from the group, “OPP” as they attempt to engage contact. However, the confrontation is short lived.

Weaver makes a dash to his car, where he quickly gets in, and makes a speeding dash away from the scene. Eventually, after several insults at Weaver’s expense, and rightfully so, the group is able to make phone contact with him. As they begin asking him questions, we learn a few more things about Andrew; the most damning being the fact he himself was allegedly a child victim. While this is no excuse for his actions, it does demonstrate a common knowledge: people who are victims as children, have a higher chance of being a predator as an adult.

At this time it is unclear as to rather or not the police have been contacted. However, given several indications within the video, it is presumed that the group did not make any contact. With that said, they also mention to Weaver that several officers do follow their page. To this regard, should we get any updates, they will be posted here. As for Andrew, his future has yet to be determined. In retrospect, however, we do wonder how those around him will feel once they learn of his recent fame.

Facebook Pedophile group causes outrage

Update:

Just a little over an hour ago, the group mentioned within this article, was taken down by Facebook.

 

More and more, we are seeing groups utilize, and even exploit flaws within the social media giant. Because of this, many of these groups have been allowed, regardless of its content; the group, to which we are exposing, is no different. Recently, what appears to be a pedophilic had been brought to light. Naturally, the group, “Hayden Summerall & jade weber Mc” has placed many activists into a fit of rage. The wall, while clearly displaying innapropriate images of young, non nude girls, is the primary reason behind the outrage. From nearly nude photos, to sexually suggestive poses, young children are portrayed in a variety of positions. While activists are very much offended and upset, Facebook has already displayed, in the past, an unwillingness to remove pages containing content such as this. This only raises further alarms as to how Facebook will choose to implicate, if at all, their “community standards” policies.

In the past, groups that had clearly violated the policies Facebook claims to uphold, had managed to slip through the cracks. Meanwhile, independent media platforms, CPS groups, and a variety of activism groups had been deleted, often with no explanation from Facebook. Furthermore, the administrators would often find themselves in “Facebook jail” post deleting of the groups. One such example of this occured with the former media platform, “The Daily Haze.” This was a platform, near the end, that couldn’t seem to evade the scope of Facebook’s selective policy enforcement, often times leading it’s journalist, Meko Haze, blocked from his primary account.

Questions as to rather or not Facebook will actually uphold its policies are currently pending. Once we learn the fate, if any, of this group, we will post the update to this article. However, for now, it is a literal standoff between activists and a diabolical group of individuals who actively, and openly, prowl the social media site. Stay tuned.

Super “Starr”

When we released the article on Francesca Amato, it was only logical that we would, in time, write this article. Looking into the self proclaimed “advocate,” Jamie “Starr” Johnson. While Jamie isn’t as popular as some of the others, she is equally, if not more, diabolical than the Fran club.

Jamie, while it isn’t confirmed to us, appears to have gotten her name known through a specific case. The mother, Nikki (lastname omitted) had a child who was hospitalized. We are going to spare the details as that isn’t prudent for this article. We may cover that at a later time, only with the mother’s consent. To make a long story short, while the child was dying in the hospital, Jamie made multiple videos to which she exploited the situation. Bear in mind, that nobody related to the child had knowledge of this until much later.

In time, the child did pass. Jamie retreated to the hospital grounds, just outside the hospital. Again, without the family’s knowledge or permission, a livestream was made. During the video, Jamie, without consent, had announced the untimely death. Naturally, this created a rather large rift between Nikki and herself. The exploitation didn’t end there, however. While the mother begged her former “advocate” friend to cease, Jamie continued to exploit the death, all while Nikki publically demanded that she stop. From this point forward, Jamie’s shattered legacy spirals downward.

Contraversy involving the self proclaimed advocate doesn’t end there, however. Recently, there have been several images discovered pertaining to the “super starr.” While taking seductive images is not a crime, it has many people asking, “should a family adcocate act in this manner?” The answer is simply, “NO.” When proclaiming to be a family/child advocate, there are certain expectations that one must uphold. For example, an off duty officer posts racially driven statements, they are suspended. While Jamie defends the images, it has risen much concern regarding her advocasy. However, we will let the evidence speak for itself. At the end of this article, we have attached some of the images.

Jamie has caught even more attention. In a recent livestream, in which Rudy Orr and Randy Davis seem to make amends, Jamie went on the offensive. Among words of encouragement, Jamie began a vicious attack against Mr. Davis. During this assault, one of our own began to challenge her. He asked, on several occasions, for evidence to support her claims. Among her claims were: stalking, harassment, and slander. As of the time we wrote this article, Jamie has still failed to provide any evidence.

Following the assault, Randy and Rudy conducted another livestream, openly inviting Jamie to partake. They are heard repeatedly questioning rather or not Jamie would appear to present her evidence. Jamie did not. In fact, while they were doing the livestream, she had apparantly been commenting in the initial post, containing her assault. As far as we can tell, she has no evidence to present and thus avoided any subject to which she is called out.

If this is what an advocate is, I truly feel for any family who are desperate. Before choosing an advocate, look into them. It is strongly suggested that you not only check into them criminally, but morally, afterall it’s your children who depend on you to make the correct choices. We are going to assist in the moral department. Here is your potential advocate.