Two Felonies for Dickerman

Michelle Dickerman and her
father Gregory Manweiler

I found something interesting that I wanted to pass on, specifically involving potential criminal charges for Michelle Dickerman.

This will be the first of two short posts. The second post will be a reposting of my former attorney's plea deal proposal letter along with two emails from the prosecution. One of the emails from Joseph Platania (the assistant prosecutor handling the case) threatens me out of a civil right to a fair trial, but he also admits that the railroading occurring to me in order to secure a false felony charge is exactly what Michelle Dickerman wanted as well.

The other email has the prosecutor fully stating that Michelle Dickerman and her parents were consulted about artificially extending my confinement into November. The reason I say artificially is that the prosecution deliberately delayed my sentencing hearing with the expressed purpose of keeping me confined in jail as long as possible (on a felony he knew Michelle Dickerman fabricated evidence for) until November. Thus without a judge's input and outside of any legal mechanisms, the prosecutor was using underhanded means to inflict further injury to me and unnecessarily extend my confinement. Even my former attorney questioned him on the need to extend my confinement.

I was told by my former attorney that this was being done solely as retaliation. Retaliation from the prosecution for having tried to hire another attorney to replace my incompetent one, and retaliation from the Manweiler family for angering them. Thus the Manweiler family was receiving further special treatment and being allowed to inflict harm upon me through underhanded means out of pure spite. Given that Michelle Dickerman was working in DC prior to this and had in turn already moved out of Charlottesville long before November - there was no actual purpose behind extending my confinement into November other than outright maliciousness (which again, my attorney told me it was expressly done as retaliation).

Any reasonable person would agree that this act served no purpose other than to inflict harm, thus malice and intent to cause injury by the act can be proven. My boss at the time at Northop Grumman had attempted to hold my position vacant as long as possible, but by November he had been forced to hire someone else. Thus this act of malice inflicted harm financially and to my career going forward. The years of unemployment that resulted from this even caused me harm very recently, when I had to apply for other jobs after my recent employer went bankrupt. The gap in employment was a red flag to other employers I interviewed with.

The prosecutor further admits that this plan to delay the sentencing and extend my confinement to November was told to Michelle Dickerman and her parents (Greg and Carole Manweiler). He goes on to further state that Michelle Dickerman and her parents were in full agreement with the prosecution pulling this unethical, malicious, and unnecessarily harmful act

Both the letter and the emails on the second post will serve to drive home four specific points:

1. That Michelle Dickerman (and her parents) had a far more reasonable plea deal presented to them than what they ultimately went along with, and thus Michelle Dickerman and her parents were acting with malicious intent to inflict as much harm as possible. Every legal professional I've shown my former attorney's letter to has praised the idea and said there was zero justification on anyone's part to reject the plea deal he proposed. All agree that my railroading into a felony charge instead was done out of pure spite by all parties given that a considerably more reasonable plea deal offer had been put forward to them. Since I can prove beyond all doubt that Michelle Dickerman fabricated evidence and lied to law enforcement, she was aware I was not guilty of the felony I was being threatened into, and yet she wanted to inflict as much harm as she possibly could despite having far more acceptable terms that wouldn't cause as much injury to my future.
   
   
2. That Michelle Dickerman willingly went along with railroading me into the felony charge in full knowledge and agreement with the prosecution's actions. The prosecution fully admitted, in both emails and in court, that Michelle Dickerman was a knowing and willing participant in what was being done. Proving an act of malice on Michelle Dickerman's part given that she had more lenient options available and yet she wished to cause maximum harm against a man she knew she had fabricated evidence against.
   
   
3. That Michelle Dickerman's parents (Greg and Carole Manweiler) were consulted throughout the proceedings and had just as much of a decision in the harm to be inflicted upon me as their daughter did - admitted to by both the prosecution and my former attorney.
   
   
4.  That both Michelle Dickerman and her parents acted with malice and a deliberate manipulation of the legal system to inflict further harm upon me, specifically as mentioned in one of the emails with their request to wrongfully extend my confinement into November - when their daughter had already moved out of Charlottesville long before.

While I prep that second post, I want to share something I found in an article I read today at lunch. This article mentioned two felony charges being pressed against a former police officer. This officer had been involved in two shootings with two different individuals - the first one being a paralyzed man in a wheel chair. The officer did not have charges brought in either shooting (not surprising given how hard it is to overcome the corrupt implementation of qualified immunity), but it did cost the city a great deal of money from lawsuits in both cases.

It was found after the second investigation that the officer had actually made false statements and tampered with evidence. Here is a screenshot of the paragraph related to the charges.

This specifically related to the officer having swapped the barrel of his gun after the first shooting, and then lying to investigators about the barrel swap when being questioned on the second shooting. Thus he was charged with two felonies - one for the false statement and one for swapping the barrel which was believed to be an intent to interfere with the investigation.

As for the mention of lack of candor, in regards to legal matters is typically defined as knowingly leaving out important information and details that should have been disclosed during statements, and that withholding said information causes statements to be inaccurate. A "staggering and disturbing lack of candor" can absolutely describe Michelle Dickerman's behavior during the events of 2006 and her behavior in general. Not to mention just flat out lying about events that happened. This isn't me just saying this either. Just look for the recent post I did called 'A Catalog of Lies', where I prove that Michelle Dickerman has been lying about what went on during our entire butting of heads - using her own statements to prove she isn't being honest at all about what has happened. 

Now granted these charges were brought forward in Delaware and not in Virginia. Obviously not everything is going to line up the same between two different states - but I know that Virginia has charges related to tampering with evidence and making false statements to law enforcement. Virginia also has a disorderly conduct charge, much like the charge brought against Jussie Smollett. It's a 'catchall' type of charge from what I understand - and Smollett got a felony for it by lying to law enforcement about a hate crime.

Delaware was willing to charge a cop with no prior criminal record with felonies for lying to law enforcement and tampering with evidence. Two charges I can prove in court that Michelle Dickerman committed. I have no doubt that Virginia can charge both crimes as a felony, and in our current political climate I doubt they would be willing to risk the fallout of letting a white girl who got special treatment off the hook for inflicting so much harm. And it is my understanding that there are no statute of limitations in Virginia for felony charges. So even today Michelle Annette Dickerman could, and should, be charged with felonies for her actions in Charlottesville in 2006.

One of the few good things about this case is that I have plenty of documentation to back up the events and actions of other parties. My former attorney was an idiot but he was also in love with the sound of his own voice, so he thankfully admits to everything on the tape recordings that were made. From conveniently "misplaced" and "damaged" evidence by police (such as my computer hard drive), to admitting to discrepancies on the emails that prove blatant tampering by Michelle Dickerman - he happily admits to all of it.

He also ended up handing over all his personal notes and the emails with prosecutors, likely because in his arrogance he assumed it couldn't possibly come back to bite him in the ass one day. It was documented by the prosecution and my lawyer that Michelle Dickerman's parents were fully consulted and pushed for the actions of the prosecution on their daughter's behalf. This makes Dickerman's parents just as liable for the harm done to me as any of the other guilty parties. You don't get to push the prosecution to inflict more harm than warranted out of malice, and then pretend you don't bear any responsibility for the damage you inflicted when it turns out your daughter actually lied about what happened.

Given that Michelle Dickerman was 25 years old at the time her parents had no business being consulted or having any part of the decision making process. Dickerman was an adult and her parents did not require any input. My family certainly wasn't consulted or allowed to be part of the process. As I said before, my former attorney admits in writing and on tape that Dickerman's parents had just as much of a role in the harm done against me as their daughter. The prosecution admits to this as well - in emails and in court.

I feel that the only way justice would be fully served if and when any criminal charges are brought against Michelle Dickerman, is if her parents are considered accessories to the criminal acts. I firmly believe that Michelle Dickerman had confessed to her parents about the evidence tampering during this time period. Given the Charlottesville law enforcement was aware of the issue and was railroading me to cover up for their negligence - I can't see Michelle Dickerman keeping her actions a secret from her parents.

I believe Gregory and Carole Manweiler had full knowledge that their daughter had lied and falsified evidence this entire time. I believe Greg Manweiler used his connections and financial means to ensure that I was thrown under the bus so that his daughter would be protected from responsibility - and the prosecution and police were all too willing given that it was their necks on the line as well.

I believe the possibility exists that my former attorney, William Johnson, could have been offered financial compensation by Gregory Manweiler to throw the case. It became blatantly clear that Johnson had ceased being my attorney during the case and was working in cooperation with the prosecution. Either it was hand-in-hand or at least making no attempt to challenge any of it. Whether he did this out of his own laziness and corruption, or whether he received "encouragement" to behave like this - that is something that would need to be investigated.

I absolutely believe William Johnson would take a bribe to screw his client so long as he could avoid anyone finding out about it. The guy made it very clear that he was a complete piece of shit during my case. I absolutely don't put any immoral acts past Johnson and I think he would happily do whatever he believed he could get away with. One beneficial thing with Johnson in this case is that he's also sleazy enough to sell out others to help himself. If Johnson believes he could save his own skin by ratting out anyone else, I have absolutely no doubt that he would do it without a second thought. He's also lazy and arrogant enough to have not covered his tracks very well, meaning that he's the weak link in anything inappropriate that might have taken place in 2006.

I also absolutely believe Gregory Manweiler would be happy to grease a lawyer's palms to get back at a guy who pissed off his daughter. The Manweiler family has always oozed arrogance from every pore, and people who behave like that tend to think the rules apply to everyone but them. "All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others" as the quote from Animal Farm goes. While I honestly believe Michelle Dickerman has a personality disorder known to psychiatrists as Vulnerable Narcissism (also called Covert Narcissism online), there is also plenty of her behavior that I believe to be learned from her parents. When on more than one occasion I've witnessed her and her parents walk with their noses literally pointed in the air as they wear a look of disdain on their faces for everyone around them, you can't help but notice that the apple didn't fall far from the tree and not in a good way. I used to think depictions of snobbish people having their nose in the air was just a caricature to mock arrogant individuals - until I encountered the Manweiler family. Some people really do that nonsense.

Johnson's bank account isn't the only one I believe could have benefited during the 2006 criminal case. When this case goes public Gregory Manweiler should absolutely be investigated for the possibility of bribery and manipulation of the legal process. I wouldn't be the only person calling for this. Every person who hears about the 2006 case makes similar statements - that it sounds like her father got someone important at the University of Virginia to put pressure on the Charlottesville law enforcement. The entire criminal case of 2006 sounds like outright corruption and special treatment from the very start when everything is laid out. Nobody would find it hard to believe that money changed hands during or after the events that took place. I can't imagine that trying to subvert legal proceedings unethically wouldn't be a criminal charge, and that this would apply regardless of whether it was via bribes or by getting important people to pressure the courts and law enforcement. I would think it would fall under obstruction of justice.

Now I'm not a lawyer, and just because I believe that Greg and Carole Manweiler should be charged as accessories to their daughter's crimes doesn't mean it is remotely possible to be charged as such. In fact unfortunately it probably doesn't work like that. Even if Gregory and Carole Manweiler couldn't be charged as accessories to their daughter's crimes, the fact that the prosecution and my former attorney fully admit that they were being consulted about the harm being done to me, were themselves pushing for the prosecution to inflict said harm, and were in full agreement with the damages done to me - they are more than able to be held liable in civil court even if their guilt does not extend to criminal court.

The Manweilers acted with clear malice - and according to the prosecution and my lawyer they were aware of, and onboard with, everything being done to me. They are liable for the mental trauma, physical trauma, financial and career damages, the civil rights violations done for their benefit, and nearly 20 years of life with a false felony charge. All of this was done with the full knowledge and consent of Michelle Dickerman and her parents Gregory and Carole Manweiler.

As I said at the start of this, I will be publishing that proof on the next small post.

Update - End of February

Michelle Annette Dickerman (Manweiler)

Nothing has happened since the odd views I previously discussed, nor did this specific viewer seem to return to the blog so far. The behavior I witnessed from that viewer definitely ended (so far), that is a certainty. It was a full stop on their part as soon as they accessed my now unpublished posts where I first pointed out what they were doing.

At this point I'm assuming nothing is going to come of those views, since I can't see it taking anywhere near that long for any law enforcement action to actually take place. At the very least I would have expected them to at least make contact to try to speak to me by now. Which isn't happening of course - I learned a hard lesson about talking to police in 2006. Not going to happen after Detective Rudman and the Charlottesville prosecution conveniently "lost" the tape of my interview so that they could falsely claim I confessed to everything (making it my word against a cop's word in court).

When it comes to these views and any potential actions from it, I'm assuming one of two things at this point:



1. - Either I was wrong about the nature of the strange views (meaning they were never law enforcement) and nothing is going to come of it

2. - Or the views had been law enforcement, but they either decided they wanted no part of this situation or gave Michelle Dickerman the "call us if he shows up at your door" line

Since I already took steps in the event that the source of the views turned out to be law enforcement, I haven't been stressing over the possibility of them showing up. Either it works out in my favor or it doesn't, and no matter what I'm not stopping until I get justice for what happened in 2006 and beyond. And I'm pretty confident it'll work out in my favor with the evidence I have. I've also assumed for awhile now that if something was going to happen they would have already knocked on my door. I don't expect to be waiting more than a week for that knock, and certainly not approaching a month without word from a cop.

Given that nothing has happened, there is a good chance that I was incorrect about the source behind the very strange views being a cop. The behavior I was witnessing stopped once I called attention to it, and the viewer behind it doesn't seem to have returned so far. I definitely haven't seen that level of hits yet from a single viewer. I mean this was a lot of views that went from 3am to 11pm, and then started back up at 6am the next day until late that night. Not even Dickerman has been that absorbed by anything written on this blog.

Nobody has ever put that amount of time into pulling up and saving individual posts. I've never seen that happen the entire time this blog has been active. To be completely honest I'm not sure what was going on if it wasn't law enforcement. I can't see anyone but law enforcement doing the kind of behavior I was witnessing. The fact that the viewer immediately stopped when I called them out is very telling, as it is clear there was a person on the other side of those views even if they were using something automated to pull up posts. But as for who was behind it - I don't have any answers right now.

Given the timing of it happening after Dickerman was clearly upset over something she read in one of my past posts, it was logical to assume she was tied to it in some way. I just don't know what the specifics are or what would be the identity of the viewer in question if it wasn't LEO in nature.

I heard Michelle Dickerman's brother works for Google and I've been watching for any fuckery since getting word about it. Which I would suspect that any actions towards me and my websites for his sister's benefit would be a breach of company policy worthy of termination of employment. Probably a decent sized civil case as well that I would absolutely pursue - and not just filed against Google. But I seriously doubt those weird views had anything to do with him at least. I doubt it was him for the same reason I doubt it was his sister.

I know it wasn't Dickerman herself behind the views because I don't see her looking at my blog at 3AM and continuing to visit throughout the day until 11PM. Nor do I believe Dickerman is at all computer literate enough to use a Linux OS or hide herself the way this viewer was. Not that she couldn't learn Linux, but why would a lawyer working for the Treasury Department even bother? Hell my job involves designing ship mechanical systems in a 3D CAD environment and I haven't ever bothered to learn Linux - it doesn't apply to my career. So no, it wasn't remotely possible that it was Michelle Dickerman. Her brother probably knows how to use Linux but as I said I don't believe it was him. I don't see him getting on at 3am to play 'fuck fuck games' with my blog. I don't even see him bothering to use a bot to do it.

It's possible for the views to still be law enforcement in nature, but if it was a cop they apparently decided against moving any further on this case right now. They might have taken one look at the situation and said "I'm not touching this". Or they might have responded the way the cops responded to one of my sisters years ago. The oldest of my two sisters had a roommate who was divorcing her abusive husband. My sister was attempting to help her both with the divorce paperwork and the legal paperwork for the violent actions the husband had been involved with.

Upon finding out about my sister's involvement the husband sent my sister emails with threats, including a statement along the lines of "I know where you live and you know what I'm capable of doing" (he had a violent criminal record). Since it was only a handful of years at most since my 2006 case with Dickerman was concluded, my sister decided to see what the cops would do about the threats from the abusive husband of her roommate. She printed out all the threatening emails the guy sent and brought them with her to file a police report. It was just as much a test of the special treatment Dickerman received from Charlottesville, as it was a necessary step given the abusive husband's violent criminal record.

Guess what the cops did when presented with all my sister's evidence? Absolutely nothing.

They said he didn't use the word "kill" so they couldn't claim it was a death threat. The cops claimed they couldn't even justify his statements as being enough of a threat of violence to file charges on since he only hinted rather than outright said what he would do. Even though any reasonable person would clearly see the statements as threats, especially given the guy's criminal history. But the cops just told my sister to "call us if he shows up on your doorstep".

Funny, none of the emails the prosecution had from Michelle Dickerman ever used the word "kill" or anything remotely close, yet somehow those emails were considered to be death threats. My mother visited a Hampton magistrate during my case and showed him copies of the few emails that my lazy attorney had bothered to obtain from the prosecution. After reading them he stated he didn't know where they were getting death threats from, that all it sounded like was "a bunch of clichéd statements from an immature individual" and that he felt it was "defensible" in court.

As a further test my mother also called a Newport News prosecutor and said she had a daughter who was receiving emailed threats from a guy. She described the accusations that Michelle Dickerman had been making as well, but claimed these were experiences from her "daughter". My mother wanted to see what another prosecutor would say when presented with the same evidence as Michelle Dickerman had presented to law enforcement. She read him the emails over the phone - the same emails the magistrate had seen - and asked the prosecutor if it was possible to get "the guy" a felony charge over these statements and "his" actions.

The prosecutor, having no knowledge of my case because he thought it was a situation my mother was dealing with, said he'd have no justification for a felony charge based on those emails. He said in order to justify filing a felony on a guy with no criminal record he'd have to prove "the guy" in question had intent to do harm beyond all reasonable doubt.

He explained further that intent can be a hard thing to prove as people "say things all the time they don't mean". The prosecutor said he just didn't see that there was proof that threats of violence were being made let alone intent to follow through based on the email statements and the accusations my mother was making against "this guy"(which again were accusations Michelle Dickerman and the Charlottesville law enforcement were making). So without knowing that the scenario my mother was discussing wasn't about her own daughter, but instead about Dickerman's prosecution of me, a Newport News prosecutor said he couldn't justify actions that the Charlottesville law enforcement was actively taking against me at the time.

I witnessed the judge at my bond hearings argue with the Charlottesville prosecutor (Joseph Platania) over the emails, demanding for the prosecutor to show him where the threats of death were because he didn't see anything that was a death threat. I watched on the TV screen as Platania kept dodging the question. Instead of answering he kept going off on complete bullshit and unrelated tangents, such as how I owned firearms and wasn't this so very terrifying judge? Grug think firestick is scary unga bunga!

The judge shut Platania down, saying none of it had anything to do with what he asked and he again demanded to know where these supposed death threats were written. Platania threw up his hands and remained quiet. Literally threw his hands up. I watched that living embodiment of a soyjak meme throw up his hands in exasperation because the judge had the audacity to demand his question be answered. Of course Platania couldn't point to a death threat because there was never a death threat nor any threat of violence.

It unfortunately didn't stop the judge from denying me bond, thus resulting in nearly five months behind bars and ensuring I had only an incompetent and lazy attorney to rely upon. But I was also told the judge sat on an important board for the University of Virginia School of Law at the time of my case. Dickerman's father Gregory Manweiler had probably spread some sizable financial love around at the university by that time to bribe the UVA administration into pressuring the courts and law enforcement into hammering me. He was after all a UVA alumni like his daughter and listed as a donor to the university.

I don't like to believe there were bad motives to that judge's decision, given that he comforted my mother in the hallway after the second and final bond hearing, hugged her, and assured her it was all going to work out in the end (it didn't). But I can't ignore his close ties to UVA. I can't ignore the comments from law enforcement and lawyers I've talked to post-2006 who flat out say that this was a bad call by the judge. I can't ignore the surprised reactions to the bond denial by even Charlottesville correction officers at the jail as I was being taken back to the jail cell - one of whom warned me that I needed to get my lawyer to do a change of venue out of Charlottesville because "someone has it out for you".

Nor can I ignore the staring from the inmates in my cell block when I told them about the denial of bond. Prior to the hearing every single one of them said my concerns about the hearing were unjustified, that guys who had done worse than me walked out on bond. When I came back they had assumed I was getting out until I told them I was denied bond. They couldn't believe I got denied bond. I had a fucking gang member making a similar statement to the corrections officer who warned me to get the case out of Charlottesville. Even a gangbanger thought there was something extremely suspicious going on with my case and that I needed to get out of Charlottesville.

So yeah - there isn't any way for me to excuse the judge's decision regardless of him hugging my mother and comforting her after the hearing. There is no doubt he was pressured into denying me bond, but he could have shown some spine and done the right thing regardless. His decision helped the Charlottesville prosecution and my own attorney railroad me into a felony I didn't commit. Because once I couldn't leave the jail, I was stuck with having to depend solely on a lazy attorney who was actively fucking up my case because he just wanted to take the money he demanded upfront and run off with it.

Returning to my sister's report to police, they flat out told my sister to call if the roommate's husband ever showed up at the door. They refused to do anything else despite my sister having more to show justification than anything Michelle Dickerman had. Yet again the special treatment the Manweiler family purchased in 2006 is put on display.

I would imagine that Charlottesville, and the influence of UVA on the legal system in that city, is a completely different animal from Falls Church or Arlington Police however. Michelle Dickerman doesn't likely have any ties that would help pressure cops into doing something if they didn't want to act. Especially if they read over the history of this case and said "fuck all that noise". I know if I was a cop I wouldn't want to wade into this if I could help it. Hell I don't like still dealing with this shit almost 20 years on (I don't have a choice), so I can understand an outsider taking one look at this case and saying "Nope".

If the cops refused to make a move on me, I doubt that Dickerman would risk trying to get anyone in the Treasury or DoJ to pressure law enforcement even if she were inclined to do that. If high-up people who know her aren't among the Treasury Department viewers I get, then informing said individuals of this situation would be rather stupid of her. There is no way she'd be able to keep them from finding out about this blog or the website, in fact she'd only end up steering them towards it. So I doubt Dickerman would risk trying to pull strings.

It doesn't give her a lot of options if the cops told her the same thing they told my sister - "Call us if he ever shows up on your doorstep". Which is admittedly a really stupid comment from law enforcement. By that point it's already too late for cops when the threat is at your door. Typical LEO response time is five to ten minutes even in a good neighborhood. That's just enough time for them to show up to draw the chalk outlines around the bodies. Not to mention the smart thing is to attack the person while they are in transit to a location (like how the Hampton police waited for me on the road in 2006 while I was heading back home) or ambush someone in a transitional space away from home.

A frequent saying in the 2nd Amendment crowd these days is "Nobody is coming to save you, act accordingly". So yeah, I'd imagine hearing cops say "just call us if he shows up" wouldn't be a comforting statement that Michelle Dickerman would want to hear. Too bad. Because this is entirely a situation that she created herself, and her shitty decisions are the reason that everyone around her gets dragged into this as well. She shouldn't have lied to law enforcement and demanded I get railroaded into a felony she knew I didn't commit.

But as I said earlier, I could be completely wrong about those views even being related to law enforcement. It could have nothing to do with Dickerman, it could just be an odd coincidence that it happened to occur right around the time that she was riled up by one of my posts. But that's a pretty convenient coincidence. And I have no idea what the explanation behind it is if it wasn't the cops. I've never seen views like that since creating this blog in 2010 - which is why it immediately rang alarm bells. Guess I'll see if this viewer shows up again, but like I said they seem to have backed off since I called them out.

I'm still angry about the possibility of it being cops. There has been a cold rage slowly simmering for a long time now towards Michelle Dickerman, though my recent issues with employment have only exacerbated that. I'm less certain of what options I'm going to pursue in the end to get justice for what was done because of my feelings on the situation right now.

The recent far, far better pay I get from my new employer has opened up options for me that I didn't think I had before. I probably still don't have those options due to the railroading, but at least now I have the income to start looking into it to see what might be available. But frankly I've also had other plans on resolving this that I've been working towards for the last few years. And to be honest I'm thinking I might just move forward with them regardless of other options. I'm pretty fucking angry at this point and I've already lost my best years to this shit. Something needs to happen.

I'm pretty much taking things one day at a time until then, and whatever happens happens. I don't see any point in commenting on the views again unless something changes - either confirmation it was cops or if the views start up again. I don't see that anything else remains to be said about that incident right now. Either I got it wrong, the cops said "fuck no", or they are really taking their sweet time to do anything. My time would be better spent trying to get that big update post ready instead of commenting on this any further until something comes from it.

Commenting on a Comment

This isn't the big update post I've been talking about. That's taking some time, including the preparations offline that I need to make before posting that update. So that post isn't happening until 2023. With work and the holidays I've just been too busy to spend time on it like I want to, not to mention that it's turning into a longer post than I thought it would be. Speaking of which - so did this one. Which is why I'm only addressing this situation now in December, when it actually took place in November. That situation being a very interesting comment that was left on one of my posts.

This comment was actually a first for me because it's a comment that had nothing at all to do with Michelle Dickerman. Instead this comment involved information about Andrew Alston, a former UVA student with a rich father who got a slap on the wrist in court for stabbing a guy to death in Charlottesville. Before I've only had comments discussing Michelle Dickerman, and in one specific case someone who had a family member named Michelle Manweiler (Michelle Dickerman's maiden name) and they cussed me out because they thought I was talking about their specific Michelle Manweiler. The name Michelle Manweiler isn't a common one apparently in the US. I've only seen two other people besides Michelle Annette Dickerman who held the name Michelle Manweiler since starting this blog long ago. One of them is dead now I think, I believe she was a retired school teacher.

I should say this is the first legitimate non-Dickerman related comment, because as usual with anything online I've had spam comments like anyone else. Those disappeared however once I got rid of anonymous comments. This change was intended to keep Dickerman from running her mouth anonymously on here again, but apparently spammers don't like having to log into an account to post comments either.

That decision did have the side effect that some of those contacting me about Dickerman don't want to risk leaving a comment on here that is linked to their Google account. Their concerns have been completely understandable since in some cases they don't know me. But I've assured those that have contacted me through other means that blog comments are moderated by me, and they do not get put in public view on the blog until I hit the publish button. But I have no desire to publish comments and risk doxxing someone who attempts to help me.

Not only would it be shitty behavior on my part, but understandably there would be less people willing to help out if I screwed over someone by announcing them on here publicly. Granted I'm not entirely trusting of everything I've been told since it's hard to verify some things. But even though there have been instances that I felt I was getting bad info, I'm still not going to put that person on blast when I could be wrong about their intentions (or they could just be mistaken on what they were telling me and not deliberately trying to pass on wrong information).

That said I've never solicited for information on Dickerman nor do I need it, and to be completely honest it's really better for people that they do not contact me or get involved in this matter in any way. Frankly the bulk of the gasoline thrown on the flames in this dispute has come from third party interference solicited by Michelle Dickerman herself, so I have no desire to enlist third party help like I've received from people contacting me.

It would be hypocritical of me to encourage direct third party efforts against Michelle Dickerman and her family, when this entire clusterfuck of a dispute is in large part the result of Dickerman dragging other people into a fight that was none of their business. The entire reason that her and her family have to spend their lives looking over their shoulders from potential retribution is thanks to the idiot dragging law enforcement into this situation - especially through lies and evidence she falsified. A situation mind you that could have been easily and immediately solved by her simply not behaving like an arrogant ass and instead attempting to talk it out peacefully. But I do appreciate the thought when someone sees that the actions of Dickerman and law enforcement was wrong, and want to help tip the scales even in some small way. It's just better for your own sake that you don't get involved.

Before I move on with discussing this comment, I want to make something absolutely clear to those who have spoken with me in the past. I have never published anyone's comments other than the one left by Dickerman herself. None of the past comments that were on moderation even exist anymore, as I made sure to purge them. I only bring up this person's recent comment because I need to make some statements about it since it doesn't involve Michelle Dickerman. I won't be publishing this person's comment to the blog, and I'm blocking out sensitive info here in the screenshot for their safety so that they can't be identified.

As I said the only comment I've ever published in this blog's was the insult Michelle Dickerman herself left on the now unpublished "The Long War" post. I'm only assuming it was Dickerman of course, and admittedly it could have been one of her family members instead. But let's face it - it was probably Michelle Dickerman. Her comment was the only comment I considered hitting the publish button on in order to demonstrate her behavior. Although I did turn off anonymous comments to make it less easy for Dickerman to talk shit from behind an anonymous mask, I honestly don't expect any further comments from her. I highly doubt she'd be that massively stupid to keep poking the bear by leaving insults again on here anyway. I think she knows I've been pushed pretty far already, especially lately. She's also never had the backbone to run her mouth to me unless she can hide behind something or someone, so as I said I don't believe I'll see any further comments from her.

 Anyway, the comment on the Andrew Alston case post goes as follows:

Now I sincerely appreciate that this person reached out to me. However I can't use any information from them nor could I discuss this type of information on this blog. While I have no doubt this information is probably true given everything that was made public about the Andrew Alston case, there are a couple important reasons why I can't use anything that this person would tell me.

First and foremost this would essentially be hearsay. I would have no way of personally verifying this information or the person giving me the info. I simply wasn't around to witness any of what I would be told, nor would I have any personal knowledge about the events in Alston's past. Everything I discussed in the Andrew Alston case post was based almost entirely on the news media coverage. The only exception was my mention of the inmates at the jail all stating to me that Alston was moved to a white collar prison that people with voluntary manslaughter charges don't get sent to (further evidence of the well known Charlottesville special treatment of UVA students with rich parents). I made it clear that this was merely something that was relayed to me, and it is an accusation made against the Charlottesville legal system's favoritism of rich UVA students. Alston himself wouldn't have had anything to do with that decision. That would all be corruption on the Charlottesville law enforcement's side if it turned out to be true.

Now I'm no stranger to the media getting things wrong believe me. They certainly got plenty wrong in my case as I'll discuss. But if I'm merely repeating what was reported in the news media there isn't anything that can be done about it. I can't get served with a cease & desist because I'm merely repeating information that was disseminated to the public already via the media.

Not to mention Alston was tried in court and convicted by a jury. Something I never got since I was threatened out of that right. One of the reasons that happened is so that Michelle Dickerman could go on her summer trip to Europe without worrying about something as bothersome as my right to a fair trial. The civil rights of human beings obviously take a back seat to some spoiled rich girl living her best life. So unlike my case, all the information about Alston was out in public thanks to the trial.

That immunity would go completely out the window if I start using unverified information from a third party that I've never met, involving an individual whose life and personal history is also not completely known by me. Granted I would make it quite clear that this account was being told to me by someone else with no claims made by me as to whether it was true or not. But it opens a potential can of worms that I would rather just keep shut. I've got enough on my plate with setting out on the path I'm taking to make Michelle Dickerman and her family finally answer once and for all for the crimes against me and my family.

Any attempts to use the claims from this individual about Alston is a different legal situation than the one related to what is being posted on this blog about Michelle Dickerman and my case. The simple fact is that every single thing I've said on this blog about Dickerman and the events of 2006 I 100% believe. I believe in everything I've said with absolute certainty because I've either witnessed it, experienced it, or have evidence of it. When someone has proof, along with a sincere belief in what they say that is backed up by their experiences and evidence, it clearly and unequivocally makes their statements fall outside of anything the law is allowed to deal with. That in turn would put Michelle Dickerman in an untenable position because I can either prove my claims or the claims are made with 100% conviction on my part. Not to mention I think Dickerman knows better.

Dickerman would be well aware that rattling that particular cage isn't going to result in anything she wants any part of, at least she would if she has any level of intelligence. Granted Dickerman's level of critical thinking has shown a combination of autism and arrogance in the really stupid and poorly thought out decisions of her past. But I think that stupidity in her decision-making process has some limitations. After all she hasn't been stupid enough to pull that particular trigger yet. Additionally there is a little thing called the Streisand Effect that she should research a bit. While she might not know about that particular effect of information suppression, I have no doubt that a big reason for Michelle Dickerman not taking any actions against me is because she knows quite well that it'll merely draw more attention to what was done in 2006 in her name.

Anything she does try against me risks drawing attention to the events of the 2006 case that even someone as oblivious as her has to acknowledge looks really, really bad for her and the Charlottesville law enforcement. That legal hammer she used to bludgeon me with in 2006 could easily swing back in her direction and fuck her life completely if the word gets out on what took place. Because the Commonwealth of Virginia apparently doesn't have a statute of limitations on felonies related to fabricating evidence and lying to police and the courts. The legal system also doesn't care about the lives it destroys, even the lives of spoiled rich girls like Dickerman. I would say especially spoiled rich white girls like her given how things are in society today.

Like the lifeless machine that it is the court system will chew Michelle Dickerman up and spit her out the same as it did to me. Because there is too much here for her to be shielded from legal repercussions. She had her chance in the past to come forward and sell out the DA's office and police department in exchange for immunity from prosecution. But that's not likely something that would be extended to her anymore no matter how good her testimony against the Charlottesville law enforcement. Not in our current legal and political climate. People would want her head just the same as the guilty members of law enforcement who helped her out. After all, why should some rich white girl get off the hook for inflicting so much harm? Why should Michelle Dickerman not suffer for what she did when so many people these days receive no justice for the wrongs done to them? Why should she prance away while others are left holding the bag for a situation that was entirely of her own creation?

All of the evidence shows Michelle Dickerman committed some really serious criminal acts (fabricating evidence, lying to cops/court, deleting evidence when as a lawyer she knew better), and of her actions there are certainly some very, very questionable ones. It all looks like she committed multiple criminal acts and it looks like the Charlottesville DA's office and police department covered up for her due to her status as a rich UVA student (a status for which an accusation of favoritism has already been brought up before in the Alston case).

Even the manner that I was dragged up to Charlottesville under the cover of night (so that C'ville PD could lie and say they arrested me in their city) is viewed as extremely strange. My family and I have spoken with the two Hampton officers who arrested me. They are completely blown away by what happened to me during the entire case, the punishments done to me, and have said that the way I was transferred to Charlottesville at night is very shady. A family friend of one of my sisters is former Hampton PD who now trains cops in the area, and he has said that how I was transferred to Charlottesville was not at all procedure and that something was clearly wrong. Which the booking officer at the Hampton lockup argued with Detective Rudman about that night. Rudman was halfway to Charlottesville when his supervisor called his cell phone and told him to turn around and take me up that night. I know this because Rudman bitched about it to the booking officer.

Two other Hampton cops are family friends and they both agree that something really underhanded happened with both my case and the transfer. The way I was transferred to Charlottesville at night is just tip of the iceberg of extremely questionable things that were done during my 2006 case. But even just the manner of that transfer raises an eyebrow from those who know what was actually supposed to happen that day. But by all means let's continue to pretend blatant law enforcement corruption and favoritism of the Manweiler family didn't take place. The evidence and events surrounding the case say different. It's so blatant it can be seen from space.

Not only was she a University of Virginia student, but Dickerman also has a father (Gregory Manweiler) who was the CFO at the time of a prominent bank in the area that is tied financially to Langley AFB and NASA. Just as important, Mr. Manweiler was a UVA alumni himself and a donor to the university. The plot thickens. How very convenient that his daughter was given special treatment by law enforcement and the courts well in excess of anything given to regular members of the public. I wonder what the amount of UVA donations from Greg Manweiler totaled after my conviction. I'm sure the public will ask that question as well.

You have only to read the posts on my evidence involving Michelle Dickerman's lies and her evidence tampering (here and here) to know that none of what happened in 2006 looks good for her and her family. The public will draw the exact same conclusions I have from the evidence and the events that occurred during the case - especially in our current situation with distrust of law enforcement at an all-time high.

Returning to my belief in my statements, this conviction in what I write would not reasonably apply to anything I was told about Alston via the person leaving their comment. That's because I know nothing of the events in Alston's life other than what the media has repeated. So I have stuck to the narrative that the media gave for his case because I don't have any other narrative. Now I acknowledge that there is a good chance the media got some things wrong in Alston's case, at least information they published prior to his trial. After all I had the media report a lot of incorrect stuff about me during my case. In fact I would say that pretty much the only thing most reporters got right about the coverage of my case was the fact that I was arrested. Everything else was either completely wrong or based on incorrect statements about what did occur.

I had a particular reporter, Liesel Nowak (IIRC Croiser is her last name now) for the Daily Progress that even went so far as to put words in my mouth that were never spoken or written by me. She continued to even claim throughout the case that I went to Dickerman's home in Charlottesville (which I've already proven false here using Michelle Dickerman's own admission in her Victim Impact Statement), and she reported that I had been arrested in Charlottesville (which even a casual glance at the police report would have proven I was arrested in Hampton). This reporter continued to claim I was arrested in Charlottesville trying to confront Dickerman even after other new outlets went quiet about that particular bit of false information. Those other outlets went quiet because they found out from the police report that I was actually arrested in Hampton. Nowak however was too lazy to look up publicly available information and continued to report false information throughout the entire case.

So I acknowledge that not everything the media reported initially about Alston's case might have been correct. But as I said before Andrew Alston got something I didn't - he actually got a trial by jury.

During a trial, where all the facts (at least those not hidden by the prosecutors) are laid out, it is a little harder for media to screw up. Though I don't doubt that false reporting can potentially still happen as well. But I'm less inclined to believe that a mistake was made when Alston's defense is to apparently have his martial arts instructor testify to the ridiculous claim that the victim could have stabbed themselves (a reported 18 to 20 times) with Alston's knife during the fight. Really man? I could believe one or two times. Hell I could maybe even buy five times since a little alcohol was involved. But 18 to 20 times? Get the fuck out of here. The simple fact is that regardless of the stupid testimony a man was killed by Alston's own actions and the jury agreed. Alston should be fucking ecstatic that he only got sentenced to the absolute trickle of jail time that he did receive. He could have been sitting in prison for a decade or more.

As I recall it was three and a half years which he only served two and a half for good behavior. For putting a reported 18 to 20 stabs wounds in a man and ending his life. 

Meanwhile I got a suspended sentence of five years in 2006 for printed up emails that were blatantly tampered with and never verified by the police via any source other than a "trust me bro" from Michelle Dickerman. Emails I was accused of sending to a woman who hadn't even been in my presence since 1999. The first time that woman breathed the same air as me since we graduated high school was the preliminary hearing of 2006. A spoiled and arrogant little rich girl I had never laid a hand on, not even to tap her on the shoulder. I would have likely gotten more than five years if the prosecution carried out their threats. I was warned by my former lawyer that I could have faced ten years or more in prison when all was said and done. Ten years or more for fucking emails. 

Alston killed someone and I would have served more time behind bars than he did. For. Fucking. Emails. Actually that's wrong, it wasn't done to me because of emails. All of this was done to me because a spoiled child who has never been told "No" in her life had a rich daddy with strings he could pull. It's not the first time Greg Manweiler used special treatment from people in authority to help his daughter coast through life or mop up her mistakes.

Alston can cry me a river if he doesn't like me repeating what the media said about his case. At least you got a trial. Alston got way better treatment than I did and he actually stabbed someone to death. Which certainly puts a spotlight on the massive special treatment Dickerman received in 2006. 

I wouldn't have been sent to some white collar country club prison like Alston was claimed to have been sent. The trash in the DA's office threatened to send me to one of the most violent prisons in the region as punishment if I dared to exercise my right to a fair trial. My own lawyer even threatened me into pleading guilty and said he'd sit back and not defend me in court if it went to trial - all because the lazy bastard wanted to take his money and move on to the next client to ripoff. When I tried to fire him for his incompetence and deliberate obstruction of my case I was threatened by the prosecution for that as well.

I didn't have anything available to me at the time to prove my innocence, certainly not while I was stuck in jail with an incompetent and lazy individual for a lawyer who refused to do his job. I knew something was wrong with the emails and that Dickerman had lied, but like I've said before on this blog - it's not what you know it's what you can prove. The problem is that at the time I couldn't tell what exactly she had done to the emails and I didn't have all the proof available to me back then that I have in my possession now. It took me getting out of jail before I could get my hands on the evidence that proved what Michelle Dickerman had done. So I didn't have a choice. Because here were my only two options:

1. I could cave to the threat, find the evidence to prove their lies that I believed I could track down once I was released, and hope that I find some way to clear my name and record later on. 
   
   
2. I let them carry out the threats, get falsely convicted because I didn't have the proof I needed at the time, nobody to help me, and a city that let a guy who stabbed someone to death get a slap on the wrist because of the same UVA student status that Dickerman shared. Then get sent to a really violent prison for ten years or more that I might leave in a body bag before reaching that ten years. Even if I walked out of there in one piece all the evidence of what they did to me would have been completely destroyed by the time I was released. So I'd have been absolutely screwed anyway because I wouldn't have any proof of what they did to me, and I'd have been through a really bad if not lethal experience on top of it.

Now tell me all about what kind of choice I had during my court case. Because option #2 would leave me with nothing to prove the crimes committed by Michelle Dickerman and the Charlottesville law enforcement. Plus years of brutal experience in a very violent prison. Getting abused in prison for years on a charge I knew I never committed, getting railroaded into that prison, and not having the ability to clear my name afterwards with all the evidence being destroyed - ironically that all would have actually led to the very violence against Dickerman that she claimed to have wanted to prevent.

Which further shows Michelle Dickerman's level of incompetence given that she apparently never realized that result would have been the only outcome of sending me to a really violent prison. Did Dickerman really think the guy she would be facing after that, on top of everything else that was done to him in her name, was somehow better than the guy she had dealt with prior? It was better to deal with the guy who before the 2006 case wasn't handed a massive dose of hate and motive until after the court system got done with him. She was better off being hated by the guy who didn't get handed all the evidence to validate every bad thing he ever heard until 2006. Even with me not going to prison, does she even think she still ended up better off even now?

If the answer is yes to any of those questions I asked above - just how stupid is this chick and how did she manage to get as far as she has in life? Just how far has daddy's money had to carry Michelle Dickerman if she's incapable of recognizing the complete fuck up she made in 2006? The felony slapped on me has done nothing they claimed they wanted to prevent. Nothing about the felony stops me from doing anything violent to her were that my desire, and nothing about it stops me from getting access to a firearm illegally if that was something I wanted to do. So what has threatening me into a felony I never committed actually accomplished? I mean besides escalating her situation and ensuring she was never going to walk away from this fight even a decade plus later?

How stupid did she have to be to pull the trigger on law enforcement instead of even attempting to talk it out first? The spoiled ass didn't even try that before going with the nuclear option. What really would have been the harm in pulling her head out of her ass and trying to talk it over before getting the shit-show called the Criminal Justice System involved? Given everything that happened in this clusterfuck of a criminal case - I wonder if she now wishes she had at least tried to talk it out before she royally screwed herself (and her family) and has to now spend the rest of her life looking over her shoulder?

I wonder how she feels knowing there is enough evidence against her to rip her entire life to shreds, and that anything she does towards me will cause every bit of it to come out in public. What took place in 2006 was a massive fuck up and she deserves everything coming to her. She deserves to get her life ruined once it all comes out. Michelle Dickerman made everything worse for herself and everyone else around her, which seems to be her only true talent in life. The only question I have for Dickerman now and in the future when it all inevitably comes out is this - was it all worth it?

Michelle Dickerman got treated excessively better by the Charlottesville legal system than the man (Walter Sisk) who was fatally stabbed 18 to 20 times by Alston. Dickerman was babied by the Charlottesville court system because she was a UVA student with money and family connections to the university - while Walter Sisk's family had none of that. You think three and half years would be considered enough for the death of their son? Would you consider that enough for the death of someone you loved? They sued Alston after he walked out of jail, but if I recall correctly he filed for bankruptcy and they didn't get much. I think a few thousand. That's apparently all that Sisk's life was worth to the city of Charlottesville - three and a half years and a few thousand dollars.

So Michelle Dickerman can cry a river as well for having to look over her shoulder for the remainder of her life. That spoiled brat's life was not only considered more valuable than mine to the Charlottesville court system, but her life was also considered more valuable than Sisk's life. Her family was given more priority than Sisk's family was simply because daddy has that banker money to let his daughter coast through life. Hell Dickerman got more protection than any raped woman or molested child in Charlottesville - unintentionally admitted to by the assistant DA Joseph Platania. At the guilty plea hearing Platania admitted to the judge that one of the penalties of the plea agreement I was being threatened into was the most that had ever been handed out in the history of the Charlottesville Circuit court. Platania used this exact phrase in court in front of me and everyone else in that courtroom that day - "the most ever handed out in the history of the Charlottesville Circuit court". That phrase came out of that bastard's mouth and he didn't even flinch.

I want you to understand what that means. 

Andrew Alston stabbed a man to death. He put 18 to 20 stabs wounds in Walter Sisk according to media reports. Think about what kind of pain Sisk would have been in as he was dying. Bleeding out on the ground from stab wounds isn't that quick of a process. But the Charlottesville legal system didn't think Alston deserved the same penalties that was given to me in the plea deal I was threatened into signing by the prosecution and my garbage lawyer. For writing emails to Michelle Dickerman. Emails to a woman who hadn't been in my physical presence since 1999. I had a bigger sentence hanging over my head than what was served by the guy who put 18 to 20 stab wounds into Walter Sisk. I got punished more than a guy who killed someone. For sending emails.

Circuit court handles serious crimes like murder, rape, molestation, etc. I'm sure no one would be stupid enough to claim that the city of Charlottesville has never had a rape trial or a case of child molestation in it's entire history. So I received a penalty that, by District Attorney Joseph Platania's own admission in court, has never been given to a rapist or a child molester in the C'vile Circuit courts entire existence. But I get that for sending emails to a rich UVA student.

That's privilege folks by definition. That's what daddy's money can buy you in the legal system. That's what happens when your father has money, graduated from the same university you had just graduated from, has contacts within the university, and donates money to UVA. I wonder how high the donations from the Manweilers were to UVA after my sentencing? How much money did it cost Daddy Manweiler to fuck up the life of a guy who wrote mean emails to his narcissistic daughter that she deliberately tampered with and even outright fabricated just to create a false narrative? Additionally Dickerman herself interned for a Virginia Supreme Court judge as a clerk prior to the 2006 case and I'm willing to bet she contacted him as well to get him involved behind the scenes.

So like I said - Alston can shut up if he didn't like me writing about his case, because he got a hell of a lot better result than I did and he's done a lot worse.

Sorry rant over, let's get back to the second reason why I won't be using information from this source.

The person who came to me is claiming to be someone from Alston's past who knew him before the events in the manslaughter case. The thing is I have to wonder what unknown person might try to say the same things about me when this case eventually comes to light in the news media. There are plenty of people out there who crawl out of the woodwork to get their 15 minutes of fame. I encountered this during the 2006 case, though it wasn't from someone who knew me and Dickerman from the past. Not saying at all that that's what is going on with the person who contacted me, but I'll get into that in a bit since I want to touch on the personal experiences behind why I'm averse to using this individual's statements.

As I've said, I've unfortunately already had the experience of people jumping in to comment on my case when they knew nothing about me, so I'm already well aware that this issue will likely arise when the case inevitably goes public in the future. In 2006 when news of my arrest got out, I actually had neighbors in the area surrounding my apartment building run their mouths about me. Their statement on my guilt was that in the whopping one year I lived in that neighborhood that I "was always so quiet". As if somehow that is some kind of indication of guilt. I lived there for only one year but because I didn't talk to many neighbors or make a lot of noise I'm guilty before I've even had a bond hearing? Very intelligent people we're dealing with clearly. You know why I didn't talk to most of my neighbors?

I didn't talk to my neighbors because they were rich bastards in waterfront houses who completely ignored my existence the entire year I lived there. Go ahead and look at the area of Grand View in Hampton VA in Google Maps, specifically near the area the old lighthouse was long ago, and you'll see what I mean. It isn't cheap living that close to the water with beach access in a really short walking distance (that was before the really big houses came in and turned Grand View Beach into private backyard beaches). Even the small houses there would have cost quite a lot.

Now don't misunderstand me when I make comments like "rich bastards" in regards to well-off individuals. I don't have a problem with people who have more money or means than I do, and I especially don't have a problem with people who legitimately worked their way up to that point. Hell being paid what I'm getting currently with the new employer would probably put me in that category to some people with far less means. While I'm not into displays of wealth and typically go for practical over flashy, I also don't take issue with someone having nice things that I do not have.

What I have a problem with is people who treat others like shit because of that difference in financial situation. I have a problem with someone with money acting like they own me, think they know what's best for my life more than I do because of their cash flow, and/or believe they have a right to dictate my life because of their financial status. I have a problem when people with money use their money and/or status to get special treatment not afforded to the rest of us "plebs". It's even worse if they think special treatment is "owed" to them because of how much money they have, and especially when said special treatment involves the courts or government. I have a problem with people who think having money makes their shit smell like a Yankee Candle factory. Basically I have a problem with arrogant assholes regardless of their financial means or lack-there-of, though my experience has been that the level of arrogance tends to increase proportionately with higher bank balances.

I was a guy who just moved into a very old and beat-the-hell-up beach house badly converted into a three bedroom apartment. That's all I could afford on the low salary I made at Northrop Grumman as a junior designer. Meanwhile the people around me lived in nice houses (or rented those houses out to people on vacation who wouldn't be chatting up the locals), made very high salaries, and drove around in golf carts to each others houses rather than walk. The roads were private roads that weren't paved, but at the time they were sandy in color and the unpaved nature was intentional to keep a sort of "beach" appearance to the area. It was pretty clear I wasn't on the same financial level of the people living around me. Thus many of the people living there wouldn't have pissed on me if I was on fire, and some even had no issue making that rather clear. Rich bastards like I said. Michelle Dickerman and her equally arrogant parents would have felt right at home living with people who are up their own ass.

The entire time I lived there I only had two groups of people bother to acknowledge my existence let alone get to know me - my landlady's family was one group, and a man and his family who lived next to me was the other (my building was at the intersection of two roads and he was across one of the roads from me). Those two groups are the only ones who ever introduced themselves to me and would talk to me. Everyone else in the neighborhood couldn't have cared less, and so I didn't care about them either. But I'm guilty of all the garbage that the news accused me of simply because I was quiet around people who kept to themselves and never cared to even acknowledge me. Apparently being so quiet with snobbish neighbors was clear evidence that I was a killer in the making, rather than a by-product of those same people pretending I didn't exist. My former landlady said she argued with those people about just how stupid their claims of my guilt based on my quietness were - "So what if he was quiet? How was that a problem? What does that have to do with anything?"

While this was annoying considering the hypocrisy that's not the bad part. Where this really became a problem is when I had one guy living in the area run his mouth to the news media standing outside my apartment while I was in jail. He was repeating that same bullshit about me being "so quiet" as if that meant I was guilty of everything. Based on what my landlady told me after my release I'm 99% certain I know who it was. She said that given his issues with his heavy drinking, and arrests made because of that drinking, that this guy had no business running his mouth about me to the news. Which would mean that the guy telling the news I was guilty because I was "so quiet" was the same guy who once drunkenly shoved his way into my apartment and began yelling.

The day before the incident where he shoved his way into the apartment, my landlady mentioned they were having someone come over to work on some repairs. The guy knocked on my door, a sliding glass door, and I opened it up to speak to him thinking he was the guy my landlady mentioned. As soon as the door opened enough for him to physically enter he immediately shoved past me, gracing me with the reek of alcohol as he did so, and stood in my living room shouting loudly "Where the hell's *Redacted* at?! Bring his ass out here!" The name he was shouting was the landlady's brother who lived next door to me, though I didn't know his name at the time having just recently moved into the apartment next to him.

The drunk gossiper should be thankful I wasn't the violent guy the news and police claimed me to be. Because he easily and justifiably could have been looking down the barrel of one of the guns in my collection. Lucky for him I only braced myself for the potential of a fight but made no attempt to be aggressive with the guy because I assumed he got the wrong apartment. Without a word from me the drunk realized his mistake after looking around for a bit, makes a statement of "Oh wait a minute", walks right by me out of my apartment without an apology, and knocks on the door next to mine.

I closed my door after he walked out and never said anything about the incident. He apparently told the landlady's brother what happened, because she apologized to me for what he did the next day. I told her I wasn't worried about it and knew it had just been an accident. I doubt most people would have been as generous with a drunk person barging into their home while shouting. Given he (according to my landlady) has a history of alcohol abuse, and apparently history with the legal system as well because of said abuse, I'd agree with my landlady's assessment that the guy had no business talking shit about me to the news media.

So I think you can understand my reluctance to run with anything told to me by someone from Andrew Alston's past. There were people spouting misleading statements to the news media about me for attention during my criminal case after all. Now there is a high chance that this person is exactly who they say they are and that they actually know the details they claim to know about Alston. I see little gain for them in being willing to pass on information to me. I'm not a journalist, though most claiming that title these days aren't one either, and I'm not someone famous that they can get 15 minutes of fame from exploiting.

I don't think anyone is even talking about Alston's case anymore in the media. I do get regular views on that post about his case, but I'm not sure why those views tend to be rather steady since I don't think people talk about his case. Granted a substantial portion tends to come from Pennsylvania, which is Alston's home state IIRC. I tend to get unique visitors rather than a repeat visitor so they can't all be Alston or his family. I do get Charlottesville views as well, some who appear to be journalists. I don't recall seeing any media coverage of it in a very long time and thus I don't really have an explanation behind the steady views on that Alston post. So I'm not seeing any benefit for this person to give false information to a nobody like me who just writes a blog about his legal troubles, especially about a resolved manslaughter case from over a decade ago.

I think this person might be telling the truth about their knowledge of Andrew Alston's past, but I have to acknowledge the fact that this is the internet and people lie for shits and giggles rather than any tangible gain. I'm also well aware some hanger-on's in my past or Dickerman's past would probably try to get some media air time when that coverage does happen in the future. One way or another I'm getting my case out there in the media regardless. Whatever method of mine forces it out into the public's attention, I know there are people who will likely run their mouths on subjects they knew nothing about even when the first disputes originally happened.

I'm not expecting more than one or two, and it would probably be friends of Dickerman rather than an outsider to the dispute. I can't see anyone outside the fight remembering anything decades later about two people they didn't have any close associations with. But there is plenty of trash out there looking for even the tiniest crumb of attention when the cameras turn on, so it's not impossible to have people who knew nothing about the dispute between myself and Dickerman coming forward with complete bullshit. After all, I had a guy who didn't speak to me again after he drunkenly entered my home start gossiping to the news media pretending as if he knew anything about me.

Hopefully the two reasons I've discussed help explain to this individual why I can't use anything they are willing to provide. So I haven't bothered to contact them except in this post statement, assuming they come back to the blog. It has been some time since they left the comment, but with work and the holiday season I just didn't have the time to pound this post out - which is already much longer than I originally intended but that tends to be a common problem for me. If this person was legitimate and wanted to share truthful information with me, I sincerely appreciate that you wished to share your story with me. I just can't post anything you say about Alston, both for the legal can of worms it opens up and because of the moral issues I have with posting such info due to my own experiences. I wish you well, and I'm genuinely sorry you had to experience anything involving Alston.