Judge Diane E. Gibbons Confirms Herself An Enemy of Free Speech and Supporter of Abuse By Silencing The Psycho Ex Wife Website

Written by: Print This Article Print This Article   
Use of Our Content (Reposting and Quoting)
February 25th, 2012 Leave a comment Go to comments

In June 2011, Judge Diane E. Gibbons of Bucks County, Pennsylvania, illegally ordered an excellent web site called The Psycho Ex Wife to be taken down in violation of the US Constitution’s First Amendment. The site is reportedly owned by a Pennsylvania woman named Misty Weaver-Ostinato whose partner for the last several years has been a man named Anthony Morelli. On the site, they identified themselves as DW and “Mister M” never using their real names or identifying information, nor the real name or identifying information of Morelli’s ex who allegedly inspired the site with her behaviors.

First Amendment rights expert Eugene Volokh writes that he believes this order is blatantly unconstitutional, especially because of its expansiveness:

from “Father Shall Take Down That Web Site and Shall Never on Any Public Media Make Any Reference to Mother At All,”

If the father says anything about the mother in public, he could be sent to jail for contempt of court. The order isn’t limited to banning libelous statements (though I think even such a much narrower ban would itself pose constitutional problems, especially under Pennsylvania law), nor is it even limited to statements about minor children (though even that sort of order strikes me as constitutionally impermissible). Rather, the court order categorically orders the removal of a Web site, and prohibits all public statements — factually accurate or not — by one person about another person.

Allison Morelli apparently claims that PEW (the abbreviation for “Psycho Ex Wife”, one of the main characters discussed on the site) is her, even though nobody is ever identified or named on the site. According to reports in other publications, PEW served as the source for around a quarter of the articles describing bizarre and abusive behaviors on the banned website.

Allison, for reasons that don’t make any sense to me at all, wants us all to believe that PEW is her and therefore the whole site is an attack on her. She claims the site is about her without naming or identifying her or anybody else. She simultaneously implies or maintains that she didn’t behave as the PEW character behaved but somehow she knows they were writing the site about her to attack her. This makes no sense to me, nor does it to much of anybody else except apparently Allison Morelli, her supporters, and Judge Gibbons.

The PEW character may not be meant to be literally interpreted. The words and actions appear to be what you could see as a synthesis of behaviors and conduct of more than one troubled ex-spouse. Certainly describing a person as looking like “Jabba the Hut” (a description used for PEW) is obviously figurative speech that no rational person is going to believe is a literal statement. Yet Allison Morelli claims the site is about her and is an attack on her, all the while trying to imply or claim she didn’t write the emails or do the actions described. But somehow she “knows” it is all about her.

However much literary license may have been taken with PEW’s words and actions and no matter what victimhood badge Allison is trying to win with her weird assertions, it is clear that “PEW” as used on the site often does not even refer to Allison Morelli even if you believe it sometimes does.

PEW is used to refer not just to the PEW character but also as a generic abbreviation throughout the site’s content. It means different things in different places. This abbreviation is often used to refer to any generic “psycho ex wife” or at times even more broadly any “psycho ex” regardless of gender or marital status.

Even the readers of the site used such terms to describe their own conflicts. “PEW” is frequently used to generically refer to a “psycho ex wife” or to some other unnamed specific ex-wife that could not be Allison Morelli, unless of course she wants to claim she has been married to dozens or hundreds of the readers and they are all writing about her, too.

The site and its readers also use “PEH” to refer to “psycho ex husband” which can’t be about her. Or can it? If she were to claim she was a man named Alfred in some past life and therefore any references to “PEH” are about her, too, from her actions to date it looks like Judge Gibbons would be convinced by that argument.

The generic “psycho ex” content and discussion included all the kinds of things you’d expect to see discussed about malicious Borderlines, Narcissists, Antisocials, and other personality disorders that are typically seen in sociopaths. These include drug abuse, alcohol abuse, verbal abuse, emotional abuse, physical abuse, manipulation, projection, gaslighting, pathological lying, distortion campaigns, and more. They even discussed at times how these people get to be their malicious selves, often from a history of abuse as children. All of that is very generic and helpful information that doesn’t specifically pertain to Allison Morelli. Some of it may not have been written to have anything to do with her. Yet Judge Gibbons, in her infinite stupidity, sought to silence all of that content, too, because she apparently is unable or unwilling to differentiate between content that is widely and generally applicable and not specific to any one person and content (be it information or misinformation) that has to do with the Morelli dispute in particular.

Unfortunately for the operators of the site and its readers, Judge Gibbons does not seem able to ask basic questions about how an anonymous site naming and identifying nobody but quoting bizarre and abusive emails and describing similar behaviors could be about a person unless that person is also in effect admitting she is behind those words and actions.

Gibbons must also have failed her Constitutional Law classes on the First Amendment, nor does she understand that even if there was some defamatory or harassing statement on the site that this does not justify banning all the content. She evidently can’t comprehend or doesn’t care that roughly 2/3 or more of the material on the site wasn’t even about the PEW character and therefore could not have been about the Morelli dispute, even if Allison wants people to believe she is the PEW character.

Did Gibbons even review the site? By the appearance of the alleged transcripts I’ve seen so far, it looks like she just took Allison’s word for it when she moved to ban the site.

Take Down the Site Or Go To Prison

The judge stated among other things that if the site was not taken down, she would imprison Anthony and take away his kids. Here’s a direct quote from the alleged June 6, 2011 transcript:

THE COURT:
Father shall take down that website and shall never on any public media make any reference to the mother at all, nor any reference to the the relationship between mother and children, nor shall he make any reference to his children other than “happy birthday” or other significant school events. The father’s girlfriend shall not be referred to as mother and father shall not in any way interfere with mother’s relationship with her children.

Mother will not consume any alcohol at all and will continue in alcohol treatment.

This matter is continued for a period of four months.

By her words in the alleged transcript, Judge Gibbons indicates that Allison Morelli is an alcoholic. Later you see:

NAME REDACTED: You know, in the course of having custody evaluation, it was discovered that I had developed a drinking problem as a result of gastric bypass surgery that I had in March of ’09. And that after that point, you know, I suffered from addiction transference and, you know, it — I am certainly not going to minimize that today, that of course it impacted the children. But the children saw me intoxicated four times in the course of two years. And I am in treatment. I attend AA meetings.

To date I have not seen anybody disputing the legitimacy of this transcript. There’s also a second alleged transcript of a June 14, 2011 hearing available. I’d like to have some reasonably easy way to quickly authenticate such documents with court records, but apparently the Pennsylvania courts don’t publish such court records online.

The website had a lot to say about the “PEW” character over the years. “PEW” was alleged to be an emotional child abuser, harasser, abusive litigator, perjurer, frequent violator of court orders, and was suspected by Anthony and Misty of suffering from Borderline Personality Disorder.

If Allison Morelli didn’t do such things, then why on earth would she be arguing that the site is about her? And if she did so such things, why on earth would she want the public to hear about it by publicly claiming the site is about her?

If Anthony and Misty believe that PEW behaved so abusively, regardless of who PEW is, those familiar with such destructive situations should be able to understand why they would have been motivated to write anonymously about such conflicts.

Later in the transcript, Gibbons talks about incarcerating the father if he does not follow her orders, apparently including the ones regarding the illegal restrictions on his free speech rights and the illegal orders made regarding his partner’s website:

THE COURT:
You better follow it because if you don’t follow it, I will hold you in contempt if you recommend to him not to follow it.

And if he doesn’t follow it, I will incarcerate him. Do you understand?

Anthony Morelli claims that Gibbons made these orders without allowing for a proper hearing. He also claims she doesn’t know the case, either, having less than a month experience dealing with this high conflict case before issuing her illegal orders.

Quoted from Judge Diane E. Gibbons Opinion:

Judge Diane E. Gibbons has drawn a myriad of conclusions over a number of issues without having heard a single word of meaningful testimony, without allowing witnesses, without allowing evidence, without allowing arguments, without allowing objects, etc.

Until Judge Diane E. Gibbons sat at the hearing of June 6th, 2011 – she had not previously presided over a single child custody hearing in the case dating back to the beginning.

One might presume that had she permitted an actual, legal hearing and all that entails, she might have been able to file an informed opinion about many of the issues about which she clearly knows very little.

After reading about Judge Gibbons abusive conduct recently, I’m feeling a bit like an ostrich with its head in the sand. Many of us who have written for this site have been distracted with our own personal family law crises instigated by sociopaths, so we haven’t kept up to date on happenings elsewhere in the online family law community as much as we’d like. We’re late to defend these two people who are being abused by the Pennsylvania courts. But, as the saying goes, it’s better late than never.

Anthony and Misty are still trying to defend their civil rights against abuse by Judge Gibbons via an appeal case in Pennsylvania. They could use your help if you have a few dollars to spare. So far they have raised over $8000 out of the expected $15,000 needed for the appeal.

Many of their readers have donated and/or written testimonials about how The Psycho Ex-Wife helped them. One that I liked in particular is the following reminding US citizens they should not be so quick to give up their free speech rights when the government is violating them:

Mr M and DW

About a year ago a friend pointed me to your blog. It is the single most helpful thing I have ever encountered in my life. At that point I had been subjected to 15 years of trauma in a marriage with a personality disordered wife and for the preceding 12 months had hardly any contact with my two daughters following false accusations of abuse. Despite complete exoneration in the criminal courts the family court system refused to acknowledge my innocence and consequently denied me access to my children and property.

I was caught in a living hell that no one around me could begin to comprehend.

PEW.com has helped me to save my family. I read and learned that I was not alone, that others had and were experiencing the same issues around the world. The combined advice and experiences that the blog brings together gave me hope and way forward.

I now have good access to my children, my ex wife is under medical observation and the court system acknowledges the abuses she perpetrated against our children and is working to assist us.

Without PEW.com I would not have found a path out of this darkness and two young girls would have remained in the sole care of an abusive mother, shielded by the family courts.

It is vital that the blog remains freely available. I live in a country where we have no constitutional right to free speech. Do not allow the rights you have in the USA to be chipped away, it is too precious and I am grateful that in this modern age people across the world can also benefit from the wisdom of your founding fathers.

Monty

They and the many people they helped could also use some moral support, too, to counter the many ignorant critics who don’t understand what it is like to be abused by the sociopath and the government for years. And that’s what I aim to do in the rest of the article.

Courts Aid Sociopathic Abusers

Regardless of who is telling the truth in the Morelli case, it is clear that much of the generic content on the The Psycho Ex Wife website applies to a vast number of cases involving people who behave as sociopaths in their efforts to harm the other parent using the children. Whether any of it applies to Allison Morelli or not, I don’t know, but whatever the case may be it is truly bizarre given what the site says about the anonymous PEW character that she claims the site was written about her.

I am going to write about the controversy over The Psycho Ex Wife based upon what I’ve seen of the site myself, before it was illegally silenced, and what I was able to read in archives I located maintained by others. Also, my opinions consider the plentiful horrific experiences of those I’ve met over the years who have been faced with the malevolent destruction caused by a sociopathic ex.

Many of the writers in mainstream media have failed to grasp this context completely. It is as if they object to Adolf Hitler as being described as a “bloodthirsty, manipulative, genocidal maniac” as nasty, denigrating, and defamatory writing that should not be allowed because they haven’t met anybody like him and don’t believe he could have existed.

Well, let me tell you, just like Hitler did exist, sociopaths do also exist. Even if you think you don’t know any, you probably know one or more. Sometimes even a neighbor could be one. (See the excellent book The Sociopath Next Door for more information.) Just like a blond-haired blue-eyed German might not appreciate how evil Hitler was, you simply don’t realize how evil sociopaths are because you are lucky enough to not be one of their targets. People who have been targeted by a sociopathic ex are put through the ringer for years, even decades, as the world around them often blames them for the abuse and helps the sociopath inflict more abuse.

The typical sociopath in a family law dispute pathologically perjures and lies to the detriment of the children and target parent and that parents’ immediate and extended family. He or she gains allies via the lies and often uses those allies to aid in the abuse. Make no mistake, these are dangerous people who do far more damage than mere insults could ever do. Below, I describe some of their common tactics.

False Law Enforcement Reports

Typically a sociopathic ex files numerous false and malicious reports with CPS and police agencies ranging from physical to sexual child abuse and even poisoning the children. The sociopath often induces doctors, psychologists, therapists, and schools to file false reports by lying to them.

Even in what should be easy cases, such as when false poisoning allegations end up with toxicology screens finding nothing, that doesn’t stop the sociopaths from lying again and getting the same government-aided harassment. Typically the falsely accused parent is banned from contact with the children or forced into expensive and intrinsically abusive supervised visitation situations that can last for months or longer while the “investigation” proceeds at a glacial pace.

Law Violations Including Perjury

Sociopaths violate restraining orders, steal property, hide financial records, defame and slander and libel in their communities, churches, and workplaces. If you simply sample ten typical people harassed like this, I’d estimate that the sociopaths attacking them may have manipulated hundreds of “upstanding people” such as church ministers, police officers, psychologists, doctors, childcare providers, teachers, and more to participate in years of unrelenting harassment, emotional child abuse, and abusive aggression.

It’s common for the sociopath to suborn perjury out of these “upstanding people.” You can find court cases littered with provable lies by “good church people” and “responsible teachers” who are so mind-numbingly stupid that they cannot figure out they are being played like puppets.

And then there are the really sick and evil allies, the disreputable or even disbarred attorneys and the sociopath’s truly disturbed friends who are willing to lie even when they know full well what they are saying is not true because they were there. You see, sociopaths often gang up on their victims. And courts are stupid enough to think the truth is a popularity contest and refuse to do anything to punish people who can be proven to have perjured or suborned perjury. As a result, the sociopath always has the advantage in family law court.

Impact on Kids and Target Parents

The impact is usually devastating. It is unusual for there to be less then several tens of thousands of dollars and several years of wasteful and abusive litigation. Extreme cases run up tabs of millions of dollars of legal bills spanning decades, most of it born by the families often by emptying the children’s college savings, selling the parents’ home(s), and borrowing from relatives. Often there is a substantial cost to taxpayers, too, as hundreds or thousands of hours of time from law enforcement agencies is used to investigate false allegations. But the financial damages related to litigation are simply the most easily quantified loss.

The kids are often emotional wrecks from being lied to and manipulated, even if they do not succumb to full-bore parental alienation. Countering the damage inflicted by a sociopathic parent is difficult in the extreme. The more time they have with the kids, the more they damage them. Anything less than about 40% to 50% time with the healthier parent is a recipe for life-long damage to these children. But it’s common for the sociopath to have primary or even sole custody of the kids so they can damage the kids all they like.

Then there’s job loss caused by the harassment. At any moment you may have cops at your office or home searching you and maybe arresting you over yet another false allegation. At any moment, your kids may be detained by CPS and interrogated again over some false abuse allegation. How can you expect to focus on work when your family and you are being abused? Especially after you have probably been kicked out of your home on false allegations and may be living on a friend’s couch because you are too poor to afford anything better.

Then there are forced relocations. It’s dangerous to live in proximity to one of these sociopaths, much safer to live hundreds of miles away. Some have relocated across the country to get away from their abusers as the courts refuse to protect them. But that increases the odds of never seeing your kids again, at least until they are adults, so many people are unwilling to do that even though they know even living in the same state as a sociopath is very risky.

There’s the loss of friends and sometimes even family members who buy into the sociopath’s convincing defamation or because of forced relocations. Sociopaths excel at turning people into their accomplices and destroying the support systems of their victims.

Threats of criminal prosecution over false allegations can sap your energy and keep you so wound up that you can’t even sleep, often leading to chronic depression, anxiety, and other health problems that are worsened by the endless drain on money as the courts rape and pillage the family for all its worth. And usually the sociopath doesn’t pay for much of this as she or he is often able get the government to fund her or his campaign of terror at taxpayer expense.

Then there’s actual criminal prosecution instigated by judges who are tyrants and enemies of the law. For example, the ex won’t let you see or talk with your kids in violation of court orders, and after months of this you make the mistake of calling her a “bitch” or him a “bastard” in email for refusing to allow contact. And then the court attacks the person who wrote the insulting email, not the person who is violating the court orders and harming the children involved.

In some particularly hellish family court systems, in response to such an email you might find yourself slapped with a restraining order and prosecuted for violating it even though it was never served on you and such emails are a tame nonviolent response to the blatantly illegal and/or abusive conduct of an ex. Such courts fail to acknowledge cause-and-effect and treat the aggrieved party as a criminal and the abusive party as a victim.

Cole Stuart is a father and activist attorney apparently targeted by the abusive family law courts of San Diego, California, for founding the California Coalition for Families and Children and protesting against family court abuse. He reports that his ex wouldn’t let him have contact with their child going on a year. He got fed up and called his ex Lynn Stuart (a TV news reporter in San Diego) names in email protesting what he says she was doing to interfere with contact with their child, allegedly against court orders. Then the courts used it as an excuse to persecute him and harass CCFC group members who were peacefully protesting against the abusive courts.

Many suffer from devastating mental and physical ailments caused by the years of stress and require expensive chronic medical and mental health care. Plus there’s the matter of lost wages as they can’t work. The economic cost of the abuse committed by sociopaths and aided by courts is possibly in the tens or hundreds of billions every year in the US alone.

Almost all targets of abuse by a sociopathic ex at one time or another suffer from being banned from talking with their kids on the telephone, or worse not seeing their kids at all for months or years due to false allegations, violations of court orders, and more.

And for those who still saw their kids after spending years and fortunes defending against the sociopaths, even then some of the kids slip away into the abyss of parental alienation as they buy into the emotional manipulations and lies of the sociopathic parents who teach them to mindlessly hate. They learn to obey their abuser and stay away from their healthier parent or else their abuser will make them suffer even more than usual.

Government Aids and Abets Abuse

The government is often the chief ally of the sociopathic abuser. They are quick to remove kids from good parents based upon false allegations. They are slow to investigate, endlessly delaying in court and claiming they need more time and hiding that they haven’t a shred of evidence of the allegations. They sometimes even hide evidence and findings that clear the falsely accused parent.

The police, DA, and courts virtually never act to prosecute or punish the false accuser or hold him or her accountable in any way. They seldom do anything to punish malicious violations of court orders. It’s almost unheard of for them to issue a protective order to put a stop to the endless filings of false CPS and police reports used to manipulate law enforcement to do much of the harassment on the behalf of the sociopath.

All of this creates the distinct appearance that helping sociopaths functions as a jobs programs for the government and its “professional” friends (lawyers, psychologists, etc.) Let a sociopath run lose unrestrained and you keep the wheels of abuse turning. Everybody in this corrupt system gets a cut of the victimized families’ assets plus the Federal funds that are paid out for “providing services” to “help children” despite the malicious and harassing allegations being false. If the aim was really to help children, the sociopaths should at a minimum be spending the time they don’t have with the kids in a psychiatric prison. Clearly, the aim of this system is NOT to help children, it is to help themselves to whatever financial assets the family has including their home(s), savings, and income.

A sociopath committing such abuses over many months or longer deserves to be publicly exposed when the courts fail to stop the abuse. When courts prevent this and even block the discussion of sociopathic behaviors as the abusive Gibbons is doing, they directly aid in the destruction of the sociopath’s victims because they make it far easier for the sociopath to build a community of accomplices to the abuse in the children’s schools, clubs, churches or other religious organizations, and neighborhoods.

The Ignorant Trash The Psycho Ex-Wife

Many of us writing for family law sites (including this one) as well as many of our readers have previously read the The Psycho Ex-Wife in the past and found that it was insightful as to the behaviors of the sociopath in a divorce and child custody battle. The material posted also showed how ignorant and incapable the courts are at upholding the law, preventing child abuse and harassment, and protecting the victims of sociopathic abuse.

Reviewing the discussion on other sites, it’s clear that many of the commenters, bloggers, and mainstream media personalities (Matt Lauer of the Today Show is major offender here) simply are entirely ignorant when it comes to the challenges posed by a person who behaves as a sociopath. These naive people’s opinions are largely based upon a total misconception that it takes two to fight and that the government will usually do something to protect people from being viciously abused and harassed for years. Neither are true statements and anybody who has suffered from the abuse inflicted by a sociopath in a divorce or child custody battle knows this.

Family law courts routinely violate the law. False allegations are given the weight of proven facts until proven otherwise. Access to evidence is restricted, evidence is tampered, perjurers are everywhere and the perjurers include government employees as evidenced by grand jury investigations of CPS. The sociopath knows how to manipulate all of these people for maximum harm. Frankly, I am surprised there are not more murders in these conflicts as it is clear the abuse is intolerable and the courts seldom do anything but encourage it.

Plausible Behaviors For Sociopaths

The content of the The Psycho Ex-Wife was very plausible in terms of the behaviors it discussed about Borderline Personality Disorder, the contributions of a biased and corrupt family law courts in harming people wrongly, and the impact on the kids, new partners, and extended family.

Some of the writing was demeaningly flowery (such as comparison of the psycho ex-wife with “Jabba the Hut”), probably for entertainment value. The site’s writers mentioned that the writing style was meant to attract readers in similar situations. But it was anonymous, and certainly many other people have been even more demeaningly extreme without a court ruling they cannot do so.

To be clear, I don’t know Anthony, Misty, or Allison and have never talked with any of them. I have no idea really of what the truth about their situation is and I’m not claiming to know who out of them is right or wrong. In all likelihood, the courts probably have little understanding of this conflict, either, yet the latest judge is willing to act and assign blame apparently without considering the full picture including how court actions including unwarranted and illegal censorship are now harming people who had no knowledge of or participation in the Morelli case.

Anybody who has dealt with a sociopath and the courts knows that even after months or years of litigation the courts usually don’t have a full understanding and frequently have absolutely no clue of the truth. It’s either that or the judges and court employees simply don’t care about the truth as they pursue their personal political agendas or work to enrich their lawyer friends by dragging out simple matters into years-long battles.

Steps Were Taken To Hide Identities

From what I and others have written elsewhere above how it is right to expose sociopaths who won’t stop, you might think that PEW was exposed by name. But that’s not the case here.

From past reading of the site and reviewing a site archive, it is clear that the writers were avoiding naming names and even hiding their location. Most of their articles don’t even mention the PEW character.

Prior to reading about the court orders to shut down the site, nobody I’ve discussed the site with had any clue where they might have been located, nor any idea of the actual names of the people involved.

This makes it clear the intent was not to harass PEW.

So how did PEW find out about the site? Allison Morelli claims to be “PEW” and she claims the kids told her about the website. Anthony claims that is not true and that PEW showed them the site. Which is true? I certainly don’t know.

But I would point out that computer account hacking, malware, and spyware are common tools for sociopaths or people who behave like them. That means there are a lot of ways, including illegal ways, that such a site could be discovered.

For all we know, somebody could have planted spyware on a USB memory stick that traveled with the kids and when they went to use their father’s computer then it was infected and this was used to track his computer usage and report it to others. Or somebody could have found the site then anonymously emailed the kids something that told them about the site, knowing it would get out and could be misportrayed as it has been as being a site dedicated to attacking a single person when it was not.

Maybe nobody but the parties involved know what really happened. Given the propensity of sociopaths to lie in court, probably the court will never know what actually happened despite how it may delude itself otherwise.

Not Defamatory

If there was something truly inaccurate and damaging to the reputation of somebody that was posted on The Psycho Ex-Wife, perhaps there would be a legal basis to order that untrue material to be removed. But even then, wholesale ordering the entire site to be shut down would be wrong as much of the material on the site had nothing directly to do with the operators or the “psycho ex wife”.

To my knowledge, there has been no legal finding that anything written on the site was defamatory or untrue. Some of the material consisted of sanitized (names and identifying information removed) repostings of emails apparently between Anthony and Allison, if you believe Allison’s claim that she is “PEW”. There have been no reports of defamation law suits filed.

Whatever the full story is behind the emails quoted and attributed to PEW, the text did make her appear to be a very troubled person. But certainly many of the details of scenarios such as blocking child custody exchanges were nothing unique. Almost all of us dealing with sociopaths have seen such tactics. Some of the dates for child custody exchanges might have been somewhat unique, but even that’s hard to say given that there are millions of children of divorce being exchanged and undoubtedly thousands with similar schedules.

So to me, for Allison to be be so sure that PEW is her then it seems likely that those emails and/or behaviors described are substantially similar to hers. Otherwise, how would she know it was about her as there were no names or locations mentioned?

What a lot of people wonder, myself included, is why she would want to promulgate the idea the site is about her in the first place? If she didn’t write such emails or do the things described, then how was the site about her? And if she did, then isn’t this a serious indictment of her own behaviors and words?

Not Harassment

The authors point out that the PEW site wasn’t started to harass the real person behind the PEW character.

This site wasn’t started to put PEW down. If we wanted to do that, we would have responded to each and every one of her disgusting emails, text messages, and phone calls. We would have sent this site, with her readily identified, to everyone at her work, her family, her friends, everyone. We didn’t do that and we certainly didn’t tell her about this site. It’s not about her. It’s not about our alleged hatred of her. This site is about going through a divorce with a psycho ex-wife and what we must do in order to keep her out of our lives. It’s to let others know they are not alone, and our hope to teach them how to handle their own situation better. In that regard, we want to keep this site focused on telling our story and what we’ve learned (and continue to learn) without interacting with PEW. We have no need to interact with her.

Examples of PEW’s Alleged Abuse Against the Kids

That article about PEW’s discovery of the PEW website also pointed out the behaviors PEW engaged in towards the kids, including showing the kids the website and playing the victim to them. Personally I think that the claims the kids are somehow disturbed by the website is one of the weaker cases of “abuse” and that Gibbons is nuts if she is mostly focused on that issue. Many of the other things on the following list sound like child endangerment and emotional abuse. Especially concerning to me are the allegations of having an out-of-control alcoholic relative living with them.

PEW – Let me spell a few things out for you. You are an abuser. You are abusive to everyone in your life. LM never abused you. A woman who has been abused for 10-years doesn’t contact her abuser 21-times in a single day. She doesn’t ask him to come back to her once she finally got free and is “happier than ever.” She doesn’t come to a website that he writes and try to engage him. Only someone who has no fear of someone does this. Someone who was truly abused wants nothing to do with their abuser.

  • Calling CPS with false abuse allegations and making your own children go through interrogations is ABUSE
  • Alienating your kids and telling them “I will drag your ass to court and make you choose me” is ABUSE
  • Lying to them about their stepmother and how she calls you up all the time and calls you names is ABUSE
  • Telling the kids not to tell anyone when PP gets drunk and falls down the steps, scaring the hell out of them as they thought she was dead – is ABUSE
  • Having PP move-in when she is so clearly out of control is dangerous to the children, and exposing them to that kind of situation is ABUSE
  • Lying to them about their father and how he abandoned them and abused you is ABUSE
  • Alienating your kids by withholding phone calls and visits from their father is ABUSE
  • Telling the children about this website is ABUSE
  • The shit you allow your father to do to them and teach them is ABUSE

It’s common for the actual abuser to play victim and torment the target parent by unwanted contact, stalking, cyberstalking, telling the children lies, etc. From the above list, such things are included in what Anthony and Misty think PEW is doing. (And again I wonder: if one isn’t doing any of these things, then how is the quoted text about her?)

If the site is truly harming the kids, then why is the focus on the site and not on the person who allegedly showed the site to them and allegedly doesn’t do anything to block it?

Quoted from Shutting Down ThePsychoExWife.Com:

This brings us to the children. How can the children be protected from this website? The fact is, the children never have to know about this website. However, they do. And do you know why the children know about this website? The children are aware of the existence of this website because PEW, in her infinite thoughtlessness (particularly when it comes to protecting the children from the madness she creates) – told them about it. That’s right, folks. PEW made the unilateral decision to tell the children about a site that details the horror of the situation that is horrible enough because they live it. I would say something like, “…that’s a decision she’ll have to live with for the rest of her life…” but that would imply that she gives a shit or understands what a terrible choice that was, all in the name of her selfishness and attempts to leverage control over whether or not this site continues to exist, and who the children will “choose” when she forces them to go to court. As I’ve said many times before, PEW will not hesitate to throw the children under the bus if it means she can go on the offensive about some nonsensical bullshit. She believes the site harms them, and she tells them about it so that they are harmed and she has something to bitch about. Sick.

PEW won’t take the simplest steps to protect the children from anything, which was exemplified when S1 discovered internet porn. Despite my recommendations which included the easiest fixes such as… password protect the computer so that they cannot login when she is not available… block certain sites via the browser tools so that the sites seemingly don’t exist… actually supervising the kids on the PC… and invest in child safety protective software of which there are many good ones available… she’s done NONE of them. Worse – she actually goes out of her way to tell them about it.

Even today, she still has taken no steps to ensure that the children are protected from “objectionable websites” – of which thepsychoexwife.com must certainly be one. Worse, her failure to take the minimum steps necessary combined with the fact that she tells them (with her spin, no doubt) about certain content – is all about PEW. The fact that she can’t stop herself from stalking the site (and probably when the boys are in proximity) means that the only person exposing the children to such “horror” – is PEW. She’s not that stupid. She does this with a purpose. Somewhere in that twisted brain of hers, she believes that the children will be convinced that my documentation of our experiences is more of a terrible “crime” than the fact that she actually puts us through everything that has been documented. That’s logical only from a PEW standpoint. Writing about her behaviors is unconscionable. Her actual behaviors… well… nevermind all that. Only in the mind of a PEW.

They claim that PEW won’t even bother to take steps to keep the kids from accessing porno sites once they found them. If that’s true, should that be the fault of the porno sites and they should be shut down because of it? (Not that I approve of porn, I’m just pointing out that’s the same twisted reasoning Gibbons is using.) Or is it more the fault of PEW?

Furthermore, if the focus is on the kids not reading it, then why not implement a technological solution such as blacklisting the IP addresses for PEW’s home and the children’s school(s) and using parental web surfing control software on the children’s computers? Of course it’s possible to get around this by some means, but the kids probably don’t know that or wouldn’t be sufficiently motivated to do so.

What Judge Gibbons has done is like saying that since some parents don’t like Huck Finn since it contains some racial stereotypes, all copies of it should be burned so nobody can read it. Such actions are overly broad, unreasonable, unconstitutional, destructive, and harmful to people who are not even involved in the case.

Violation of Due Process Law

The judge allowed no testimony or defense to explain anything about the website. This violated the father’s right to due process. When a court makes orders with no opportunity to explain or dispute and/or blocks access to relevant evidence, it is flagrantly violating many important principles of law.

Judge Gibbons apparently does not care about the law or due process. As such, she has no place on the bench. Personally, I hope this case leads to her removal from the bench via whatever processes are available in Pennsylvania.

Unfortunately, Pennsylvania is a corrupt state in which judicial abuse against children and judicial misconduct and felony crime is rampant and usually ignored by the “professionals” such as other judges, court employees, and police for years. Stories like those plus Ben Vonderheide’s crusade against child abuse for profit in Pennsylvania has made it clear that the government in that state views children as pawns to be used and abused for its own profit. So there’s probably not much chance of tyrant Gibbons being drawn and quartered by the government for her abuses. The best hope rests with the public holding her accountable for her abhorrent conduct.

Court Made Illegal Orders Against Non-Party To Case

Misty Weaver-Ostinato was not a party to the case. Yet Judge Gibbons made orders affecting her website / business without any due process for her. This is clearly a violation of the US Constitution’s 14th Amendment and probably many other laws, too.

“Practicing Without A License” Complaints

Several commenters have ranted about how the “custody coaching” services allegedly offered by Misty and/or Anthony is somehow “practicing law” or “practicing psychology” without a license.

There are many people who provide such services all across the US without having such licenses and they make it clear they are not lawyers and are not psychologists. Some of these people are actually well-known in their communities and get a lot of referrals from the courts. Many of them have been through hell and back based upon their own experiences and have something valuable to offer to clients. They shouldn’t need licenses to share their experience and advice so long as they make it clear they are not lawyers and are not psychologists. And in fact as part of their disclaimer, whomever is running the site writes:

MrCustodyCoach.com™ is not an attorney, psychologist, counselor, nor therapist. The information provided or given, by MrCustodyCoach.com™ or any other members of MrCustodyCoach.com™, via telephone, Internet, e-mail, instant messenger, FAX, in-person or by any other means is provided solely for informational purposes only, and should not be construed as legal advice, counseling, nor therapy. IF YOU ARE SEEKING LEGAL ADVICE, PLEASE CONSULT WITH A LICENSED ATTORNEY IN YOUR JURISDICTION.

What we’ve collectively noticed is many of the people who rant about “practicing without a license” issues are often the sociopaths in the mix. They don’t like what somebody has said about them or a sociopath who behaves like them, no matter how true. So they will find any way they can to attack and harm that person.

Frankly licenses don’t get in the way of their attacks, either. They file malicious licensing board complaints with little or no basis in fact to get revenge even on those who are licensed simply because they recited facts and opinions that the sociopath did not like. This happens often enough that it would dilute the ability of any licensing board to deal with the legitimate complaints. Worse, however, is that many licensing boards are incapable of doing their jobs and routinely relicense people who have engaged in behaviors such as sex with their clients while they threaten to revoke the licenses of practitioners whose billing service messed up a bill sent to an insurance company. With such inept and overloaded licensing boards, it is all too easy for the therapist being harassed by a sociopath to suffer significant damages.

“Misogynist” Complaints

Even more commenters have whined about how Anthony is a misogynist. Reportedly he doesn’t even own the website, his female partner Misty does. How plausible is it that she would be anti-female herself? And clearly many of the readers and supporters of the site are self-identified as women and write as if they are women, too.

Maybe they should have called the site “The Psycho Ex” and made it clear from the start that the sociopath can be a woman or a man. But not doing so does not mean they are misogynists.

On the contrary, they posted several articles with titles including “Psycho Ex-Husband” such as Wise Old Sayings Redefined for a Psycho Ex-Wife or Psycho Ex-Husband. They clearly understand that not all the psycho ex’s are female.

One Partially Redeeming Point of Gibbons

The sorts of things Gibbons had to say in the transcripts that I reviewed which sounded reasonable were to encourage parents to stop the conflict. That might be applicable to as much as 80% to 90% of divorces. But in a case with years of allegations of false law enforcement reports, parental alienation, breaking-and-entering, alcohol and/or drug abuse, emotional abuse of the kids, child endangerment involving alcohol abuse, etc. as this one features, it is totally naive for her to say this. It frankly makes her appear to be totally out of touch with reality, sort of the judicial equivalent to an imbecile walking up into the midst of a warring group of religious fanatics and wondering “Why can’t we all just get along?”

As I said, I don’t know the parties involved. But I do know plenty of others who have been afflicted by sociopathic abuse. Typically the victims tried to be nice and reasonable only to see themselves abused by some combination of being run out of their homes on false allegations, defamed throughout their communities, attacked on the Internet via defamation on websites and threats by email, banned from seeing their kids or being put in supervised visitation based upon lies, and forced to spend most of their incomes if not their life savings just trying to defend against it all.

A person put in that situation by a court that won’t life a finger to stop the abuse has every right to discuss the abuses publicly. The court has failed to do its job. There has to be some other alternative than to just silently suffer for years.

What Anthony and Misty did was far better than many other alternatives. Their creation helped a lot of other people being abused by sociopathic ex-spouses and abusive courts. Contrary to the propaganda espoused by Allison and the inaccurate statements by Gibbons, the site wasn’t about attacking Allison. Anthony’s and Misty’s dislike for her alleged behaviors might have been the inspiration for the site, but bad situations are often the inspiration for people to find something constructive they can do based upon what they have learned through a miserable experience.

Allison is so clearly far from an innocent victim in this case, any way you look at it. If PEW is not Allison, then Allison is severely misrepresenting the whole situation by claiming she is. And if the PEW character is even a somewhat accurate representation of Allison’s behavior, then she’s no innocent victim, either. She and the courts behave as if the site is about her so they can pummel Anthony while doing nothing about the harmful behaviors described. It’s nonsensical in the extreme.

I contend that quite often courts don’t want there to be any other alternatives but conflict. Courts clearly profit from abuse and conflict and want them to continue. After all, if the abuse stops, the conflict would stop, and therefore the court would slow down. When a judge limits a falsely accused parent’s rights and encourage such abuse to continue by failing to punish false accusers, then the judge can create the false impression that he or she cares about children while fanning the flames of the conflict for the job security and profit of those in the family law industry.

Public Defense Against Defamation

Many targets of sociopaths are people who are being defamed extensively with lies claiming they are adulterers, child sex offenders, wife beaters, drunks, drug abusers, pornographers, and more. Somebody who is being defamed should have a right to defend themselves with facts and reasoned opinions. That should apply whether the defamation is on the Internet or in the great defamation gossip mills that Borderlines and other sociopaths create in their churches, schools, and communities.

And when somebody is being harassed with an endless stream of false reports to law enforcement agencies, they should also have a right to defend themselves. Expecting them to file a lawsuit in the very same abusive courts that do nothing when many of these people are being defamed, harassed, and litigated into bankruptcy is completely ridiculous.

If they can’t talk honestly and openly about their plight publicly to try to put a stop to the harassment, what else are they supposed to do? Buy a gun and kill the harasser, knowing that they can make a good case for mental cruelty and abuse causing them temporary insanity? Oh, wait, that smells like what a sociopath would do.

What many family law courts are doing today is to help the defamer / harasser and to punish anybody who tries to defend themselves against defamation and false reports to law enforcement agencies. We see that time and again. Mom (or Dad) falsely says Dad (or Mom) is a drunk, physically violent, and molests the kids to gain sympathy and supporters and instant wins in court. She (or he) then passes those lies around verbally everywhere she (or he) can. She (or he) files many false police reports so she (or he) can pass them out like candy to “prove” the lies are true to the unsuspecting fools who swallow up the sociopath’s lies and buy into the false victim story. Pretty soon the target has trouble finding a job and can’t talk with anybody involved with his (or her) kids without being treated like a criminal. It’s clear that the defamation and malicious manipulation of the government is causing this, and doing nothing is not going to help. It just lets the abuser make the problem worse. And it will get worse. These people even go after your family members such as your new spouse, parents, siblings, etc.

After years of this damage spreading, the victim of the defamation puts up a website refuting it. Knowing that it has spread everywhere, there is no way to put a stop to it by talking to individuals because it has spread to even people he or she has never met. The court doesn’t help because even after being fully aware of false allegations and hearing about how the defamation is causing problems, the judge won’t do a thing about it.

So when the sociopath discovers the website, the sociopath goes running to the court and claims she (or he) is being harassed. Who does the court punish? The victim. Who does the court help? The defamer. And that happens fairly consistently without many exceptions.

Systematically bad-mouthing and defaming a person verbally throughout the community is OK by the standard these judges use, but posting a defense or explanation of what is really happening on a website is not acceptable even when it is true.

It boggles me as to how somebody can claim the site is about her, even though nobody was ever named or identified in any way on the site, and then the same somebody also tries to imply or claim she didn’t do the things described or write those emails, either. So tell me, how can it be about her if she is neither named nor did she write the emails nor did she do the actions described on the site?

Personally I doubt that this Morelli case is the exception to this general pattern. That’s based in part upon how Anthony (Mister M) and Misty (DW) showed great restraint trying to keep the site as anonymous as they did and it was clearly about more than just setting the record straight. And it is also based upon how it makes no sense that somebody can claim victimhood by saying the identity-free site is about her and then claim innocence by saying it doesn’t describe her accurately.

Sociopaths Hate Being Exposed

Sociopaths hate to be exposed publicly. They know that most people they manipulate will not bother to talk with the falsely accused and harassed person and will just side with the emotionally convincing lies they spew absent other information to the contrary. As Dr. Tara Palmatier explains about the PEW case:

One of the things abusive bullies, high-conflict people (HCP) — whatever you want to refer to them as — fear most is exposure. They will fight tooth and nail against having their misbehavior exposed. These types equally fear the loss of control. PEW probably represents both fears for Ms Morelli; exposure and loss of control.

By this reasoning, when Allison Morelli learned about the site, she of course wanted to shut it down. The method she picked was to claim to the court that she was a victim of harassment by claiming the site is about her.

Judging by the site’s reports of PEW’s actions, PEW had been allegedly defaming the authors for years using their names in false reports to police, CPS, and others. Yet by all accounts I’ve seen and from my own personal review, he wrote anonymously and didn’t name her.

So how can she be a victim of harassment when she is not named? If you reason she can be because the site describes her actions and writings, then how can one not see that those actions and writings are unreasonable and even abusive on their face?

It looks for all the world like the roles of victim and abuser are being twisted around via manipulation and distortion. Such behavior patterns are the typical projection and distortion that you see coming from sociopaths and people with personality disorders.

Palmatier goes on to point out that it is PEW’s own fault if her kids are upset about the PEW website:

The only reason PEW is no longer anonymous and that people following this story know that Allison Morelli is PEW is because Ms Morelli, in what appears to be her blind desire to control her ex and portray herself as “the victim,” told anyone and everyone who would listen, that she is PEW — including her own children, in whose best interests she claims to be acting.

Ms Morelli brought her complaint regarding PEW to Judge Gibbons because she alleges the children are hurt by the existence of the website — blithely ignoring the fact that the only reason their children know about PEW is because she, their mother, told them about it.

If the existence of PEW hurts the children and the only reason the children know about PEW is because Ms Morelli told them, then it is Ms Morelli who is hurting the children.

Why would she tell their children about PEW if she was so concerned for their welfare?

Why Naming Names Can Be Good

In a normal divorce, I agree that it is reasonable to not write about the ex on the Internet other than anonymously. Despite this case being far worse than a normal divorce, anonymous writing is what Anthony and Misty did.

However, I believe it’s fair game to name the judges and other legal professionals involved in abuses and failure to protect the actual victims.

By reports of her actions to date, Gibbons has engaged in abuse of discretion and outright violations of basic civil rights laws. She should be held accountable. There is no way to hold a judge accountable without names. So she should be named and what she did should be publicized so the citizens of Bucks County can eliminate her from the judiciary as they should.

But if Anthony (Mister M) and Misty (DW) had named Gibbons and other asleep-at-the-wheel family law judges who they believe screwed up their lives via failure to follow the law and put in place protection mechanisms that would help reduce the conflict and stop the abuse, it’s my observation that the courts probably would have targeted them for even more abuse. This is what we’ve seen happen in many other cases. Publicly cite abuse by a judge and the judge will violate the law to inflict even more harm. File a proper legal complaint against the judge, then the judge will refuse to recuse and proceed to persecute any way she or he can, even when that persecution involves judicial abuse of the children.

Today’s family court is not about the best interests of children. It is not about the law. It is about pure unadulterated greed, maliciousness, and outright evil. The judges are for the most part like little miniature devils, sitting up there claiming to be Gods in their courtrooms and violating people’s rights, helping abusers, and all the while claiming this is somehow in the children’s “best interests” to be subjected to endless violations of custody exchange rules, being emotionally manipulated to not want to spent time with their better parent who isn’t trying to alienate or manipulate them, being interrogated over yet another false child abuse allegation, etc.

In the end, even the best courts have usually entirely failed to do their jobs in most high conflict divorces. When they do get it right, it is so late that it can never undo the years of emotional torture inflicted upon the children and better parent. And the courts virtually never do anything to even try to repair the hundreds of thousands of dollars of damage done to the victims of the sociopath.

Family courts in the US are a total failure. Gibbons and judges like her are directly responsible for these failures. They lack the knowledge and integrity to do their jobs competently. And this problem is so widespread that frankly I believe that it is time for the family law industry to be shut down. Family law courts do not provide a valuable service, on the contrary they are directly responsible for a huge amount of damage and waste of taxpayer money not just in court but throughout government as law enforcement, CPS, social services, etc. are all mobilized to deal with the failure of the family court to put a stop to the perjury, false allegations, and harassment and how it more often than not rewards the abuser and persecutes the children and target parent.

Family law courts should not be able to deviate from 50/50 custody barring felony level criminal conviction of something directly related to the physical safety of the children or repeated convictions for filing false reports with law enforcement as a means of harassment. And the courts and DA have to start prosecuting perjurers and false reporters and publicly disclosing their crimes to put a stop to the abuse. Their failure to do so is a major reason why the problems today are so bad.

Short of such changes, I don’t think the situation is going to improve. Sociopaths know how to game the system. The courts and their friends benefit from their games and so are willing accomplices. And usually it is children and the party who is heavily abused by the sociopath who are most abused by the court.

Among the few allies most families have against the hell on earth created by sociopaths and family law courts is websites such as The Psycho Ex Wife that help them understand they are not alone, the sociopath may be bizarre and evil but there are methods that can help such as low-contact/zero-contact, and offer help for figuring out what to do when the next attack of lies and manipulations comes as it most surely will.

Gibbons has done more than just violate the law and people’s civil rights. She has acted to harm many thousands of people who benefited from The Psycho Ex Wife who had no idea who Allison Morelli is until after she started her weird claims the site is about her to portray herself as a victim. They knew very well that the site’s PEW character behaved much like the sociopath in their lives and so they welcomed the opportunity to read and discuss such problems with others having similar experiences. Now these people have one less place to turn for help dealing with their miserable situations, thanks to Allison Morelli and Judge Gibbons.

What You Can Do

If you’re disturbed by the abusive conduct of Gibbons and the implications it has for free speech rights and the rights of litigants abused by a sociopath and the courts, please take action.

You could write, call, or fax to complain. Here’s the contact information:

Dishonorable Diane E. Gibbons
20 East Court Street
1st Floor
Doylestown, PA 18901

Phone: 215-340-8200
Fax: 215-340-8832

You can donate to the appeal case.

If you live in Bucks County, you could be sure to vote against Gibbons in the next election or participate in a recall drive to remove her from the bench.

And you can pass along this article or others like it to raise awareness of the abusive conduct of family law courts and Judge Gibbons in particular.

More On The Psycho Ex Wife and Judge Diane Gibbons

Judge Diane E. Gibbons Orders ThePsychoExWife.com Shut Down: What Would You Do?

Dad Ordered To Remove ‘Psycho Ex-Wife’ Blog. But What About His Tattletale Ex-Wife?

Divorced dad’s blog becomes free-speech test

Anthony Morelli Appeals Against Censorship

Judge Orders Ex Husband To Shut Down The Psycho Ex Wife Blog

Judge Orders Father to Take Down Website Critical of Judge, Mother

Bucks County Judge Diane Gibbons Sued for $1 Billion For Racial & Gender Discrimination of Hispanic/American Man in Child Custody Case

More On Sociopathic Abuse in Family Law Disputes

Sociopaths In Our Midst Hate the Truth and Its Advocates

Telling Your Nasty Ex About BPD or NPD May Hurt You

How Sociopathic Parents Use Police Reports for Defamation

Escaping Sociopathic Abuse Almost Impossible When Children Are Involved

More on Parental Alienation

Review of Dr. Warshak’s Parental Alienation DVD “Welcome Back Pluto”

Dr. Amy Baker On Parental Alienation, PAS, and Helping Your Kids Resist Both

Borderline Personality Disorder and Parental Alienation Involve Similar Abusive Behaviors

  1. TXTOAST
    February 25th, 2012 at 11:20 | #1

    I have been convicted of an assault felony. I have 2 md’s terminating patient relationship with ex for Rx abuse. I can prove perjury but no one wants to hear. My adopted daughter (hers) was arrested for threatening her with a gun – she perjured in assault trial and has been subjected to drug treatment multiple times.

    Wife (refused divorce because judge does not know HIPPA and my insurance is better than hers) files police reports continuously. Last complaint made me pull down the story of Jessibell from the bible on Facebook. Still trying to get appeal or writt but trauma caused plea that court did not follow, crim. lawyer ineffective and forced to wear gps for 10 years. No violation ever except return to home to get wallet and car after release. Loosing my mind as well as job, house (false civil against citimortgage for fraud ) pension (legal fees and orders pending to give it o her) proven false allegation of sex assault of step daughter (sells x drugs) live in hotel no job felon and going crazy fast. If I kill myself on steps of home with all evidence would anyone believe me?

    • February 25th, 2012 at 21:52 | #2

      TXTOAST,

      Please don’t klll yourself. I don’t think the cops would even bother to look at the evidence. They don’t care to investigate deaths they can easily write off as suicides or accidental deaths.

      I don’t follow how your medical insurance could be better for your wife given you don’t have a job.

      How can a Bible story have some impact that makes you pull it down from Facebook? There can’t be any intellectual property or morality reason, so I’m puzzled.

      Maybe you should leave the US and start over somewhere else. The US has abused you and many other men and from what you’re writing mentioning just a nasty wife and nasty step daughter it sounds you have nothing left here.

      Rob

  2. February 26th, 2012 at 01:12 | #3

    Who was it that gave that forbidden apple to Adam… Wait, I think I remember her name… Give me a moment…

  3. Anon
    February 26th, 2012 at 17:37 | #4

    I couldn’t believe tony and misty were so horrible with their posts. And that their kids could read this online. When I expressed my concerns they responded with that it was anonymous and if their kids found out about it they’d shut it down. They recognized that it would be harmful.
    Tony dared me (a midwestern mom w/ an excellent friendship & coparenting relationship with my child’s father) to find out who they were, and I did. He deleted my message and refused to follow through when I pointed out how easy it was for me to find out their identities.
    Well…? Seems the $ and fame means more to them than his kids’ emotional stability and dragging them and his ex publicly through national and international media circus.
    He and his wife/fiancée/whatever (misty ostinato-weaver) have intentionally pitched this to as many media outlets as possible. They probably reached out to You!
    Can you imagine being his kids at school right now?
    I deplore you almost as much as tony & misty for what they’re doing to their kids and the mother of his children, whom they love. Do you know how much it would hurt you and screw you up as a kid to see your Father blasting you calling you fat online, telling all about your private life, and insulting your mommy and then asking the media to blast it all over the online media? and then they do?
    Shame on You, shame on Tony Morelli, and shame on Misty Ostinato-Weaver. I cannot believe what you did and continue to do. Tony, you do not love your children at all, you cannot with what you’re doing to them, and I hope they’re taken away for good!
    And btw tony and misty, you look like a mid-life crisis pimp and a frowny horse-face couple of devils.

    • February 26th, 2012 at 22:32 | #5

      Anon,

      It’s great that you have a good friendship with your ex. But that also means you cannot understand the situation from the perspective of somebody who has been abused and attacked for years and is badly damaged by it while the court reuses to put a stop to the abuse.

      Many parents are being subjected to years of defamation, character assassination, false police reports, false child abuse allegations, being constantly dragged back into court over lies, being blocked from even seeing their kids in violation of court orders, and then being forced to pay for all of this abuse and left with so little that if they didn’t have loved ones helping them financially they would be homeless. The courts allow all of this sort of abuse without even lifting a finger to stop it. Perjury is not just not prosecuted but it is actually REWARDED by the courts. Malicious and totally unreasonable court order violations are often ignored, too.

      That is until somebody criticizes the courts on the Internet or points out the abusive behavior of the maliicious ex on the Internet. Then the courts get all holier-than-thou that “this is bad for the kids and you can’t do that.”

      All the previous things were even WORSE for the kids, and the courts did nothing to stop those abuses.

      As for the kids, they and everybody close to them (school friends, family, etc.) already knew much about their problems. It was already public before any of this was on the Internet.

      And if their mother and aunt are having drunken black-outs and nobody was doing anything about it, do you think that would be good for them?

      They were going to have to learn to deal with this mess whether anybody discussed it on the Internet or not. And the fact is, most people had no idea who any of them were until Allison Morelli made a big stink about it.

      I’d agree that some of the language used (the “Jabba the Hut” comparison and some of the non-behavior focused personal attacks and swearing) was overly incendiary. But when you discuss some of the problems (alcohol abuse, child endangerment, court order violations, harassing emails, etc.) honestly even without such language, you are going to make the parent causing these problems sound nasty. The answer isn’t to not talk about it. The answer is for the problem parent to stop the behaviors.

      Further, if you are offended by such language, then why are you using the same offensive personal attacks? I quote you: “mid-life crisis pimp and a frowny horse-face couple of devils” You come off looking like a hypocrite.

      So what did you do to figure out who they were? And would the same approach even work today? I checked their DNS registration, for instance, and it is private and does not show their names or a business name associated with the site. Their IP address for the site shows up in Chicago, far from where they are physically located. Maybe it was somewhere else earlier, but I have no realistic way of knowing that.

      Your IP address is in that same vicinity, too. That seems suspicious to me. Maybe you know somebody who works for Steadfast Networks (apparently the web hosting provider) or work there yourself (as an employee, consultant, etc.) and violated their confidentiality by illicit means? If so I’d be surprised you would admit it because that could get you fired and in trouble with the law yourself. If not, then what is it that you did to figure out who they were? Neither I nor anybody I discussed the site with recalled seeing a court case number, location, names of judges or family members, or anything else that would be easy to trace. That seems to leave mostly their web hosting account that would expose them and like I said, if that company was a thousand miles away that is hardly much of a clue UNLESS you have inside access to that company’s records.

      Even if you had a legitimate means to trace them, do you think much of anybody else would be willing or able to go through the same effort to track them down like you did?

      Chris

  4. Anon2
    February 26th, 2012 at 22:48 | #6

    Maybe she didn’t work for the web host but hacked into the web site? Bet you can find a lot about who runs a site that way, for example their email addresses that might reveal their names.

  5. Not a Hacker
    February 27th, 2012 at 08:04 | #7

    “Hacker” means somebody who can write code fast. MSM has ruined the term. “Cracker” is more appropriate.

    Did you consider that the woman who claims she found the identities of the people running Psycho Ex Wife could work for GoDaddy or know somebody who does? That’s where their domain name is registered.

    GoDaddy actually supported SOPA. Can’t trust them.

  6. Not a Hacker
    February 27th, 2012 at 08:11 | #8

    @ Anon

    What does “a midwestern mom w/ an excellent friendship & coparenting relationship with my child’s father)” mean?

    You have sole custody, you let your ex see the kiddo once per year, and he pays for everything?

    Like many fathers, Tony was put through a lot of misery to even see the kids somewhat equitably. Thank Allison for that, the oh so wonderful mom she is.

    Like many mothers, Allison is a child-owner who cares oh so much for her kids because she gets child support for them. They are her key to free money, that is why she loves them. And that is why she doesn’t want them to see their father. No time with daddy, more money for her.

  7. Not a Hacker
    February 27th, 2012 at 08:19 | #9

    What does “a midwestern mom w/ an excellent friendship & coparenting relationship with my child’s father)” really mean?

    You have sole custody, he gets to see the kid once per year, and he is homeless after you took his pension, savings, and current income?

    Anthony Morelli had to fight even to see his kids. Allison didn’t want him to see them. She’s such a good mom you say? Hah!

    Allison Morelli loves her children for the money. She doesn’t want them to see their father so she can try to get the court to take all of Anthony Morelli’s income and savings.

    I’ve been reading that Allison’s father hit the younger son, her sister is a drunk who falls down stairs, and her birth family is basket cases because of abuse in the family. Probably explains why Allison is the way she is. If she has her way, she will turn those two boys into abusers just like her.

    The kiddos need to go read “Understanding the Borderline Mother” to understand the dynamics of their family before it is too late for them to have a chance at a healthy future. Too bad they are probably too young to do it on their own.

  8. Allison
    February 28th, 2012 at 13:40 | #10

    Chris, I read your article and you sound like a raving lunatic. You don’t know anything about me or our case. If you want to read the judge’s opinion on custody and get a better idea of what is going on you can email me. You have NO idea. Do you call everyone who doesn’t agree with you a Sociopath? I know a few people who do that. It’s called projection. Take care.
    Allison

    • February 28th, 2012 at 21:16 | #11

      Allison,

      Are you in fact Allison Morelli or just some imposter?

      Chris didn’t call Allison Morelli a sociopath. He was writing about the freedom of speech issues and how The Psycho Ex Wife content covers the behaviors of sociopaths in family law disputes in a much more general sense than it being a “bash Allison Morelli” site. Most of the content on the site was not about Allison Morelli. I used to read that site sometimes and also looked at the archives of it to refresh my memory. So far as I saw, the site never named her anywhere, nor did it provide identifying information that would help the general public figure out who the “PEW” might be. Furthermore, the abbreviation “PEW” is often used when it clearly has nothing to do with that Allison Morelli, even by people who are clearly writing about other people.

      Your implication that Chris calls people a “sociopath” for not agreeing with him suggests a few things:

      1) You have a reading comprehension problem.

      2) You have an inability to differentiate discussion of freedom of speech and the problems that many people are faced with by sociopaths in family law courts from your own behaviors. Does that mean you recognize you behave as a sociopath or does it mean something else?

      3) You are distorting what another person wrote to claim victim status.

      One of the behaviors a sociopath engages in frequently is distortions to claim victim status. So what does this say about you?

      Nobody writing here has called Allison Morelli a sociopath because we don’t know her and don’t have our own independent access to detailed history of the situation. Chris pointed that out not only by using language such as “reportedly” and “allegedly” to refer to claims other people are making about Allison Morelli, he also made it clear that “PEW” isn’t necessarily about Allison Morelli and he doesn’t know the people involved:

      Allison apparently served as the source for around a quarter of the articles describing bizarre and abusive behaviors on the banned website as it is believed that PEW (the abbreviation for “Psycho Ex Wife”, one of the main characters discussed on the site) was based at least partially upon Allison Morelli. However, some statements suggest PEW may be a synthesis of her behaviors and conduct and those of other troubled ex-spouses.

      However much literary license may have been taken with PEW’s words and actions, it is clear that “PEW” as used on the site often does not even refer to Allison Morelli. PEW is used as an abbreviation throughout the site’s content and the discussion of its readers. It means different things in different places. Often it is used to generally refer to a “psycho ex wife” and many readers refer to PEW, too, meaning their own psycho ex wives. Indeed the site and its readers also use “PEH” to refer to “psycho ex husband”.

      The generic “psycho ex” content and discussion included all the kinds of things you’d expect to see discussed about malicious Borderlines, Narcissists, Antisocials, and other personality disorders that are typically seen in sociopaths. Drug abuse, alcohol abuse, verbal abuse, emotional abuse, physical abuse, manipulation, projection, gaslighting, pathological lying, distortion campaigns, and more. They even discussed at times how these people get to be their malicious selves, often from a history of abuse as children. All of that is very generic and helpful information that doesn’t specifically pertain to Allison Morelli. Yet Judge Gibbons, in her infinite stupidity, sought to silence all of that content, too.

      To be clear, I don’t know Anthony, Misty, or Allison and have never talked with any of them. I have no idea really of what the truth about their situation is. But in all likelihood, neither do the courts.

      Finally, as to your statement about projection, it appears that you yourself are projecting projection. So if you are indeed Allison Morelli, comments like those you made are simply tending to confirm the allegations that The Psycho Ex Wife website made about her.

      Rob

    • February 29th, 2012 at 04:39 | #12

      Allison,

      It looks to me that you are claiming to be Allison Morelli, so I will reply as such.

      Insult me all you like, doesn’t change a thing. If you have actual relevant information that has some bearing on the case, you are always welcome to email it to [email protected] .

      You are not the main focus of the story. Please read more carefully. My article was about free speech and why this kind of speech is important, namely to build awareness of sociopathic abuse and help people who are suffering from it. Most people don’t understand what it is like to be attacked by a sociopath and don’t understand why somebody would be motivated to put up a site like The Psycho Ex Wife. Many of the mainstream writers dumb-down and oversimplify is to Anthony Morelli is just nasty. But that is obviously not the case given the steps he took to keep the site anonymous and how much of the content is not even about you. Tthat is why I spent a lot of words on discussing sociopathic behaviors and how much damage they cause. Many of the readers of The Psycho Ex Wife do know that from personal experience, but thanks to Judge Gibbons, one more source of information and support for them was eliminated by her idiotically sweeping illegal order.

      There’s no real difference between what Gibbons did and ordering a library to be shuttered permanently on the grounds that one of the books inside contains denigrating or obnoxious text. Her thinking exemplifies the “I don’t like the racial stereotypes in Mark Twain books and how they might hurt some kids’ feelings, so I’ll shut down the whole library or burn the books” abusive mentality pervasive among family law judges.

      I didn’t call you a sociopath, and I don’t call people sociopaths merely because they disagree with me. They earn that label through a pattern of malicious and abusive behaviors towards others. There are certainly people who are neither malicious nor abusive but who don’t agree with me and I would not call them sociopaths.

      I also didn’t claim what The Psycho Ex Wife wrote about you was accurate, nor did I say it was inaccurate. If you read what I wrote with any objectivity you would see that I was reporting what they said and that the emails purported to be from you do look disturbing, but that clearly they had some changes (at least names were removed) but I don’t know what else might have been changed.

      I have no knowledge of you myself other than how your name is popping up everywhere in relation to that site and what some court documents said about you (e.g., alcoholism). Lots of people are alcoholics and I hope the best for them, but it is not good for kids to be exposed to substance abuse by their parents and relatives, especially if they are living with them on a daily basis. It is a bad role model and in your situation even worse as they are probably going to be highly susceptible to substance abuse problems via genetics and the alienation style warfare between their parents. Note I’m not claiming who is the alienator, either, as without being able to listen like a fly on the wall it is very hard to know that with certainty.

      As Rob wrote, reading between the lines of your comment says a lot, at least if you are really Allison Morelli.

      Many of the accounts of what happened peg you as the one who told the kids about the site. If you were the one who showed the kids the website and told them it was about you, what were you thinking? This looks like a move that is more about playing up false victim status to get an abusive judge to take your side than it is a move with any real concern about the kids. Now that the cat’s out of the bag, there is nothing you can do to put it back in, either. The kids will have to figure out who is telling the truth on their own as the courts almost never understand and with both parents calling the other a liar they can’t count on their parents, either.

      The best that can come of this mess to me appears to be to more clearly establish First Amendment rights, remove Gibbons from the bench because she is clearly incompetent, and to publicize the kind of information that The Psycho Ex Wife was trying to share about sociopaths and their abuse patterns in family law disputes. Your kids will need that kind of information, too, given the apparent situation they are in predisposes them to get involved in the same kind of destructive high conflict relationships themselves in the future.

      Chris

  9. Allison
    March 6th, 2012 at 23:24 | #13

    Chris and Rob,
    I did contact Angiemedia about this article and Rob’s subsequent article. They are meant to be inflammatory and you know it. I do not go back in forth with people about my case. You clearly do not have all the facts and it’s not my job to give them to you and I’m not here to defend myself to you, a bitter divorcee. There are LOTS of men like you guys out there. I will tell you this, I now have primary custody of my children (since December) and when the appeal is done, maybe you’ll have the information you need to write an educated article, as of right now you couldn’t possibly write an intelligent piece about me because your basing it on the information you’ve gotten from the website, which was written by anther bitter divorcee and his new girlfriend. Do you believe everything people tell you? You shouldn’t. Judge Gibbons is a great Judge, her primary focus the whole time was on my kids and that is EXACTLY as it should be. You should try focusing on your kids and stop spewing your HATE all over the web. Allison

  10. Allison
    March 7th, 2012 at 00:37 | #14

    Oh, I see, you’re one of those sites who only allow the comments that you WANT people to read. Still waiting to hear from the Admin. at Angiemedia.

    • March 7th, 2012 at 03:51 | #15

      Allison,

      You’ve lost all credibility. If you are trying to show the The Psycho Ex Wife wasn’t accurate about its description of the PEW character reputed to be based upon you, it’s having the exact opposite effect. You are also doing a bang-up job of confirming other people’s negative impressions of you.

      You emailed us with your threats and demands. Then what looks to be about a couple hours later, before you’ve even allowed reasonable time to even notice your email, you started publicly posting misleading distortions about how we haven’t replied to you and misleading claims that we “only allow the comments that you WANT people to read”.

      Consider this your reply.

      We do review comments and sometimes that means there’s a delay of as much as a few days before they are visible to the public. Until now, all of your comments you posted here have been published verbatim, including your insults, attacks, and distortions. All were published with little delay. But then you started spamming us and engaging in distortion attacks writing that we’ve written things that we did not. And you combined that with threats. You’re no longer welcome here.

      If you had bothered to read the site in interests of accuracy before making your wild claims, you would see contrary to your misleading implications that we certainly do allow comments by people who do not agree with an author. Even our authors don’t always agree.

      We’ve been far more in favor of freedom of speech than many web sites are, even speech with which we don’t agree and which has attacked us misleadingly and inaccurately such as you are doing.

      The two main points of this article were that Judge Gibbons violated important freedom of speech rights and that there are legitimate reasons for running a site like The Psycho Ex Wife that have nothing to do with you or attacking you, regardless of what kind of person you are. I didn’t call you a sociopath. I mentioned when we quoted from The Psycho Ex Wife and when writing about that mentioned its statements are about the PEW character and are allegations. Look it up in a dictionary if you don’t know what the word means.

      Because this case is being widely discussed in public, apparently due to your actions and clearly with your personal participation, many will read about how you are behaving in your own words. Your public beahviors are now lending credibility to what you claim was inaccurately said about you on The Psycho Ex Wife. And the media (including websites such as this one) can write about the allegations made by The Psycho Ex Wife without it being defamatory. For if it turns out some or even all of those allegations are not accurate, they were still allegations and were reported as such. And if that came to pass, then the onus would be on the writers at The Psycho Ex Wife to explain their actions.

      Judge Gibbons messed up. If she was actually competent and truly concerned about the kids, she might have had a leg to stand on to require that defamatory content, if there was any, be removed from the The Psycho Ex Wife. But wholesale shutdown of the site (including much content that has nothing to do with you) under penalty of jail or loss of the kids is wrong. It looks to be an illegal abuse of discretion that violates the US Constitution. It is a tremendous disservice to many people who benefited from that site who had no part in your conflict and knew nothing about you.

      Chris

  11. Borderline Target
    March 8th, 2012 at 19:37 | #16

    So where have they “defamed” you Allison? I read the article, the only thing it said about you which could be defamation (if it were not true) is that you are an alcoholic. But they also refer to a court transcript that shows the judge treating you like an alcoholic and you admitting that you are.

    Everything else is clearly stated as being the position of the people writing the Psycho Ex website. They even say they are not sure what might be true and what might be made up. Hell, if anything that is giving you the benefit of the doubt.

    And they can report about what the Psycho Ex wrote even if you say it is not true. It is no different than a newspaper printing a story about alleged crimes by a person then it later turns out the person didn’t commit those crimes. The person might not like it, but that’s not defamation when the story makes it clear they are allegations made by others like the cops or the alleged victim.

    So what do they allege you did or said that you didn’t do or say? And why do you think it is defamation?

    You sound like you are confusing feelings with facts and have substance abuse problems. Maybe that is why your ex thinks you are a Borderline.

  12. Borderline Target
    March 8th, 2012 at 21:02 | #17

    Hey Allison, is it true that you are such a bimbo that you put your kids on TV with you to discuss the Psycho Ex Wife? I read that on another website.

  13. Borderline Target
    March 8th, 2012 at 21:15 | #18

    Hey Allison, is your name Allison Morelli or Allison Lowry?

    Please keep writing, your psycho comments are entertaining!

    Is it true you were drunk on Mother’s Day and threw your children out of the house because they made a card for Misty?

    If Allison wanted to end the conflict, she would get help for herself and stop jerking the kids around. You don’t throw your pre-teen children out of their house on Mother’s Day because they wrote a card to their ‘step-mother.’ Any father worth his salt would do everything he possibly could to protect his children from a mother like that.

    If it is not true, that is far more defamatory than anything written about you here.

    If it is true, just like the comments you are making here it says a lot about your true nature. Insecure, vengeful, and then vicious even when there is no just cause for such behaviors.

    So what is your real reason for threatening the authors here? That you recognize your own behaviors as a sociopath and don’t want other people to read this article because they will, too?

    • March 8th, 2012 at 21:48 | #19

      Borderline Target,

      Where did you find that quote? I read something about a Mother’s Day incident in the court transcript, but did not know what it was.

      Chris

  14. Borderline Target
    March 9th, 2012 at 00:21 | #20

    Umm, on your home page it looks like you approved some of my comments but I can’t see them on this page?

  15. Borderline Target
    March 9th, 2012 at 00:22 | #21

    Oh, wait, they showed up when I left another comment. Weird.

  16. Borderline Target
    March 9th, 2012 at 00:25 | #22

    I think you guys should write an article using Allison’s comments as examples of why low-contact/no-contact communication with somebody like her is a good idea.

  17. Borderline Target
    March 9th, 2012 at 00:26 | #23

    I got that quote about the Mother’s Day incident from somebody’s comments on another article about Allison Morelli on another site. Will try to find it again.

  18. Borderline Target
    March 9th, 2012 at 00:37 | #24

    I found the quote. It is on the page http://www.examiner.com/public-policy-in-san-diego/why-my-psycho-ex-wife-blog-is-not-about-free-speech from a comment by Karen Baker on November 13, 2011 at 7:29pm.

  19. March 10th, 2012 at 21:01 | #25

    I was curious about the mother’s day incident. Didn’t find it. I did find “The Psycho Ex-Wife” is also a Facebook page. https://www.facebook.com/pages/The-Psycho-Ex-Wife/148259298580733

    Like you wrote, the term isn’t about Allison Morelli. Lots of people are using it.

  20. step
    March 13th, 2012 at 21:15 | #26

    @ Allison
    As a female and a child of divorce, you make me sick, Allison. A tenth of what is written here could be the only truth and you would be in the 1% of crappiest moms I have ever heard of.

  21. step
    March 13th, 2012 at 21:58 | #27

    And the author doesn’t have to call you a sociopath…your writing shows that.

  22. Father of Mine
    March 14th, 2012 at 13:45 | #28

    I have read the Psycho Ex Wife site almost since its creation. I can vouch that I had no idea at all who any of these people were or where they were until I saw the segment on the today show. there were no clues at all. It was completely anonymous.

    The issue here is free speech. Diane Gibbins actions are treasonable against the constitution. Mr. Morelli was threated to take the site completely down (rather than just remove certain articles deemed slanderous) without the benefit of a hearing. Meanwhile, it appears Allison has free rein to badmouth Mr. Morelli and anyone else in any public forum. Nice.

    Incidentally, since the site is completely anonymous, and everything on there is a lie, how did Allison Morelli recognize she was talking about her?

  23. Laura
    March 14th, 2012 at 17:42 | #29

    Please publish Allison’s threatening emails, we all need a good laugh. Thanks!

  24. Jimpy
    March 14th, 2012 at 18:28 | #30

    Hi Allison!

    I’m not a “bitter divorcee”, and I understand if you find these questions are “inflammatory”, but here goes:

    1. If your “civil rights” have been violated by that blog, why haven’t you sued him for libel (as Chris asked as well)? I know this isn’t the first time you have been asked this, but to date you haven’t responded.

    2. You claimed that the website was “harassing”, “intimidating”, and “harmful to the children”, yet none of the parties were ever mentioned by name. How, specifically, was this harassing, intimidating, and harmful to the children?

    3. Why is it okay for a woman to appear on talk shows, radio shows, write books, and give interviews about their ex-husbands, but it is not okay for a man to contribute to an anonymous weblog?

    4. There are many who claim that Judge Gibbons ruling is in direct violation of the 1st and 14th amendments. You obviously agree with the Judge, so can you explain why the ruling isn’t a violation of these basic civil rights?

    5. When Judge Gibbons ruling is overturned, what will you do next?

    Thank you for your time, and I await your response.

  25. Clara
    March 14th, 2012 at 19:27 | #31

    Misty is Karen Baker.

    Sorry to disappoint anyone, but the judge has consistently found in Mother’s favor. Father continues his petulance because he doesn’t want to pay child support. This is very typical in cases such as these. The mother is a nut, the father is a glorious exampe of parenthood. He just doesn’t want to pay childsupport. The shrinks interviewed them both, and whatever you may think of a mother for being irritated as constant misrepresentation, all that matters is what the shrink thought.

    She has fulltime custody and the girlfriend can have no contact with the boys at alll. Not that it would appear she really would want to, given that her own emails were put into evidence to resulted in that decision.

    When it is all said and done, your children know the truth and come to their own conclusions.

  26. Clara
    March 14th, 2012 at 19:37 | #32

    You know, Chris, sometimes things have to happen before a person can sue for additional things. Sometimes getting the domestic issue is more urgent than suing someone for something that was already dismissed in court. No one has to care about what you or anyone else thinks, even if it might hurt. It seems that Anthony continues to lose, and then he tries to shift judges and attempts to do the stuff he then claims on his website only high conflict people do. He’s not an innocent person and certainly not a victim. You would think a person selling custody advice could point to his own successful resolution, but that isn’t the case here.

    You know, Chris, sometimes things have to happen before a person can sue for additional things. Sometimes getting the domestic issue is more urgent than suing someone for something that was already dismissed in court. No one has to care about what you or anyone else thinks, even if it might hurt. It seems that Anthony continues to lose, and then he tries to shift judges and attempts to do the stuff he then claims on his website only high conflict people do. He’s not an innocent person and certainly not a victim. You would think a person selling custody advice could point to his own successful resolution, but that isn’t the case here.

  27. SD parent 22
    March 15th, 2012 at 00:29 | #33

    Ever heard of this mental thing called “hysteria”? How about this one: “Can’t we all just, get along?”

    Some people say laughter heals. Perhaps we all need healing. Here’s the best I can do at the moment:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9BqjhyeHrs

    Blessings to all.

  28. Bob
    March 15th, 2012 at 08:31 | #34

    @Jimpy – I’ll answer for Allison.
    1. She did not sue them for libel or slander because she had already lost her home due to the $75k she spent in legal fees defending her custody. You have to have money to retain a civil attorney, unless it’s a personal injury case.
    2. The website was harming the children because they saw their father and Misty blogging on it all the time. They knew about it because of that. They told their mother about it and several articles about it. This FACT was verified during the last custody evaluation.
    3. Who are you talking about? I don’t think it’s ok in either case.
    4. Judge Gibbons ruling in June was NOT a final ruling. Mr. Morelli volunteered to take the site down when in front of Judge Gibbons. Not to mention the fact that she clarified “keep it, but I will take it into consideration in custody” and she did.
    5. If Judge Gibbons decision is overturned, and if Mr. Morelli chooses to continue to post defamatory information about Allison, she will take the same actions that she is taking against this website for posting defamatory information about her.
    I don’t think the two “anonomous” authors on this website realize that they are responsible for the information they’ve posted about Allison Morelli and what they consider to be thier “facts” for backing their information up, are not “actual” facts, so the information in the articles is libelous, slanderous and harmful.

  29. Glad2BFree
    March 15th, 2012 at 10:39 | #35

    Clara :Misty is Karen Baker.
    Sorry to disappoint anyone, but the judge has consistently found in Mother’s favor. Father continues his petulance because he doesn’t want to pay child support.

    (Disclosure: I was a semi-regular contributor to The Psycho Ex Wife website before it was shut down.)

    I hear this argument all the time: “The father is just mad because he doesn’t want to pay support”. But Clara, if you want to make that argument then you have to accept the opposite: That Allison might only be doing what she’s doing in order to *get* child support. If you want to pin peoples’ motivations on money, you can’t be choosy.

    As Chris has been saying, this piece is about how Family Court judges flagrantly disregard citizens’ constitutionally protected rights, with no practical option for relief (since appeals often cost more than most people bring home in a year). What “Lord Gibbons” did was completely inappropriate, if not illegal. She refused to hear any defending evidence or testimony, she entered excerpts from PEW.com into evidence *without* allowing anyone to see exactly what she was entering, and her ruling was in direct violation of multiple parts of the Constitution. She’s running a kangaroo court and deserves to be removed.

    Also, we apparently have Allison herself demonstrating how she is still under the impression that this is all about her. Trademark narcissism. I also notice she is quick to criticize and mock others, but will never answer the substantial questions such as “why did you admit publicly that you are the sick person known as ‘PEW’?” or “how did you know the site was describing you, if it’s so untruthful?” or “if you claim you’re trying to protect your kids, why did you tell them about the site?”

    She doesn’t answer because she can’t without destroying her carefully constructed “poor victim” facade. Unfortunately for her, there are too many of us – men and women alike – who have been tortured by people just like her, and we can see right through her bull.

  30. Curious
    March 15th, 2012 at 19:12 | #36

    @Bob – Allison and now you claim there is something written here that is defamatory. Neither of you will say what you consider to be defamatory except for making obviously misleading statements of your own. Why? Is is because you know that you are making it all up and you hope to confuse others into taking your side?

  31. Curious
    March 15th, 2012 at 19:38 | #37

    @Glad2BeFree – What Allison leaves out says a lot about her true methods. She and her friends continue to claim defamation. But they also avoid stating what they consider to be defamatory.

    If I was not an alcoholic and a document purported to be a court transcript were circulated and people were relying upon that and making statements based upon it, I would be attacking the legitimacy of the document first. So far there has been no peep from Allison and friends about that.

    So do they agree that court transcript link is legitimate?

    Sometimes reporters and writers are fooled by false documents held out to be true. If it was really false I bet they would correct anything inaccurate they wrote based upon a false document and maybe even apologize for being fooled. I see corrections like that in newspapers, magazines, and websites.

    So is there nothing defamatory and that’s why they will not quote the supposed defamation? That’s what I think is happening.

  32. Curious
    March 15th, 2012 at 19:45 | #38

    Here’s a quote from that transcript link http://www.savethepsychoexwife.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Transcript-Redacted1.pdf:

    NAME REDACTED: You know, in the course of having custody evaluation, it was discovered that I had developed a drinking problem as a result of gastric bypass surgery that I had in March of ’09. And that after that point, you know, I suffered from addiction transference and, you know, it — I am certainly not going to minimize that today, that of course it impacted the children. But the children saw me intoxicated four times in the course of two years. And I am in treatment. I attend AA meetings.

    This reads like it is Allison saying it. So Allison, do you deny saying that in court? If so, what did you say?

  33. Borderline Target
    March 15th, 2012 at 22:16 | #39

    Doesn’t this sound just like a Borderline, trying to blame surgery for becoming an alcoholic?

  34. Jimpy
    March 16th, 2012 at 15:04 | #40

    Hi Bob & Allison!

    Thank you for your prompt reply. Then, I have some follow up questions:

    “1. She did not sue them for libel or slander because she had already lost her home due to the $75k she spent in legal fees defending her custody. You have to have money to retain a civil attorney, unless it’s a personal injury case.”

    False. An attorney can take a case like this on a contingency, but I’m guessing you already knew that. Is Allisons’ case strong enough to pursue, or not?

    “2. The website was harming the children because they saw their father and Misty blogging on it all the time. They knew about it because of that. They told their mother about it and several articles about it. This FACT was verified during the last custody evaluation.”

    “they saw their father and Misty blogging on it”. And how, was this “harming the children”, specifically?

    “3. Who are you talking about? I don’t think it’s ok in either case.”

    Daytime TV is rife with talk shows that feature ex-wives regaling an audience with stories of their evil, abusive ex-husbands. A quick search on Amazon.com shows nearly twenty thousand books on the subject. Question: Do you live in the Western hemisphere? Are you aware that the first amendment guarantees an individuals’ right to free speech and freedom of the press? And again, why is it okay for a woman to express herself in this fashion, but not okay for a man?

    “4. Judge Gibbons ruling in June was NOT a final ruling. Mr. Morelli volunteered to take the site down when in front of Judge Gibbons. Not to mention the fact that she clarified “keep it, but I will take it into consideration in custody” and she did.”

    You haven’t answered my question, so I will ask again: can you explain why the Judge’s ruling is not in direct violation of the 1st and 14th amendments?

    5. If Judge Gibbons decision is overturned, and if Mr. Morelli chooses to continue to post defamatory information about Allison, she will take the same actions that she is taking against this website for posting defamatory information about her.

    Allison was never identified on Mr. Morelli’s weblog. Question: Does anonomous speech afford the same protections from the first amendment or not?

    “I don’t think the two “anonomous” authors on this website realize that they are responsible for the information they’ve posted about Allison Morelli and what they consider to be thier “facts” for backing their information up, are not “actual” facts, so the information in the articles is libelous, slanderous and harmful.”

    If this is truly the case, I would encourage Allison to file a lawsuit. If it is not, this kind of posturing is nothing more than an empty threat.

  35. Bob
    March 17th, 2012 at 10:03 | #41

    The whole article is defamatory to Allison Morelli and to Judge Gibbons. Allison is currently unemployed and looking for a job and you’re writing articles referring to her as an abusive alcoholic and a sociopath. Very irresponsible and you’re opening yourself up to alot of liability with this article and your subsequent articles. You must know that the Morelli’s had psych evals and Allison was not the one to be found to have “sociopathic” traits? Anthony is and always was the “high conflict” party in this divorce case. You all will never be convinced that you’re “barking up the wrong tree” when it comes to the Morelli’s because Allison is a woman and Misogynists don’t support women. The FBI, state attorney general, etc..etc… have already been notified about your harrassment. It will be dealt with, trust me.

    • March 20th, 2012 at 00:09 | #42

      Bob,

      You are the one using phrases such as “abusive alcoholic” associated with Allison, not me. The court calls her an alcoholic in multiple of the alleged transcripts, but they don’t use that phrase either.

      The PEW character’s behaviors are those of a sociopath. I made it clear from the outset that I don’t know how much of what was written about the PEW character accurately represents Allison, or if it is even her. She seems convinced it is, and again the only way I can see she can be convinced it is would be that she recognizes her writing and/or behaviors in those of the PEW character and that they closely match. Why she would want to take the “credit” for PEW’s horrible behaviors by saying PEW is her and the whole site is about her is an excellent question that many are asking.

      Then Allison shows up here and starts behaving just like the PEW character. Apparently she wants to prove that the PEW character’s behaviors includes many things she can do naturally, too. Is that part of her plan to lay claim to being a victim?

      If you have a copy of the psychological evaluations, email it and we can publish it so everybody sees it.

      It is my observation that very often psychological evaluations are way off the mark. The true behavior of a person can’t be seen in a few sessions with a psychologist or some multiple choice tests. You see it over the course of many years, particularly under stressful circumstances. Moreover, cause and effect matter greatly. The Psycho Ex Wife writings claim that the PEW character started the battles and mistreatment. Does that mean Allison started the war between Anthony and her? I don’t know, but if it is the case, it is no wonder he and anybody else living with such ongoing torment described would become bitter after years of such behaviors. When somebody is abused for years, they tend to start behaving as an abuse victim even if they never behaved like that previously. Maybe that is what is happening, maybe not.

      Nobody writing for this site is a misogynist. We have highlighted many cases of abuse against mothers and children. Eileen Lasher is one prominent example. We have argued that focus on gender bashing distracts from the real goal of fixing the family law disaster. We have stuck up for female authors whose writings have been trashed and distorted by false feminists who are not aiming for equal rights as real feminists, the kind who rightly worked for women’s right to vote, would do. We have highlighted excellent writings of female authors such as Dr. Amy Baker, Wendy McElroy (who runs the iFeminists site), and others.

      Our authors have met many women who are being screwed over by the family courts. Men are victimized more often because of bias, but that doesn’t make it any less wrong when the woman is the victim. Our goals include combating both the gender bias and the illegal and abusive conduct of many judges and government agencies in their war on families.

      Just because some of the worst offenders are female judges doesn’t mean there are no male offenders. Look at Judge Peter McBrien and the evil Pennsylvania pair of judges Mark Ciavarella and Michael Conohan. The FBI investigated those two scum and they are in Federal prison for their crimes against thousands of children. Many think those two should be executed for their crimes. But they were not the only participants. Little or nothing was done to school administrators who were also participating in systematic governmental abuse against children.

      Ciavarella and Conohan are far from from the only bad judges in Pennsylvania. Recently Ben Vonderheide exposed alleged criminal conduct by another Pennsylvania judge, Kelly Ballentine. Looks like Pennsylvania has abysmal courts staffed by criminals.

      When you falsely claim we are misogynists, you are spewing lies and propaganda with the clear goal of damaging our reputation with malicious misinformation. If you want to see a defamer, go look in the mirror.

      Chris

  36. Psycho Lobster
    March 19th, 2012 at 07:54 | #43

    Chop, chop…

    So how is it that Allison contends that her kids recognized the site was about her?

    Let’s stipulate she is right they saw him or Misty working on it. Doesn’t Misty run a few websites?

    So how would they know it was about Allison?

    Did they read it? And then recognize her behaviors?

    Did they have that moment of realization: “Oh, they are writing about mom and all the horrible things she has done to Dad and us.”

    If you believe her version of events, it must have been something like that because it sure didn’t name a single person.

    Judge Gibbons posits that it is not OK to talk about abuse publicly but it is OK to abuse other people so that they could recognize the description of the abuse when they read it because they experienced it personally.

    WTF kind of reasoning is that?

    Judge Gibbons must be aiming to drum up the child abuser vote.

  37. Psycho Lobster
    March 19th, 2012 at 08:00 | #44

    @Bob

    Judge Gibbons is a public official. Anybody has a right to criticize her decisions as a judge. It’s not defamation, esp not with Volokh and attorneys doing the same.

    Sounds to me like you are trying to intimidate the press with lies to the government.

    What’s your connection with Gibbons and Allison? Friends? Lovers? Stablemates?

  38. Psycho Lobster
    March 19th, 2012 at 08:02 | #45

    “If Allison Morelli didn’t do such things, then why on earth would she be arguing that the site is about her? And if she did so such things, why on earth would she want the public to hear about it by publicly claiming the site is about her?”

    New judge, new lies. She figured the new judge would be too dumb to realize it. Guess she was right.

  39. Psycho Lobster
    March 19th, 2012 at 08:03 | #46

    @Bob

    Come on Bobby, upload the psych evals! We want to read them.

  40. Psycho Lobster
    March 19th, 2012 at 08:23 | #47

    So Bobby, are you saying the linked transcript is false? Looks to me like they heavily relied upon it for their opening monologue.

    Most of the article isn’t about Allison. Allison says “boo hoo hoo, it is all about me” because she wants to shut up another website by lying it is all about her. It worked so well for her last time, why not try again?

    How can you call these people misogynists when they write “she (or he)” all over the place when talking about sociopaths? Because you believe that no woman could ever do a single wrong thing and anybody who says otherwise is a misogynist?

  41. TB
    March 19th, 2012 at 09:13 | #48

    @Bob,

    You wrote:

    “You must know that the Morelli’s had psych evals and Allison was not the one to be found to have “sociopathic” traits? Anthony is and always was the “high conflict” party in this divorce case.”

    So you are saying that Anthony is a sociopath?

    Why do you say he is high conflict? Because he wanted to see the kids fairly and wouldn’t accept the usual “Mom gets all” abuse from the family court?

    Almost any parent who is being treated unfairly and illegally is going to fight it. That doesn’t make the parent high conflict.

  42. Dasher
    March 19th, 2012 at 13:13 | #49

    @ Allison

    You know what, I have watched my husband deal with a woman like you for years. Same play book, same lies. Attack his wife, then attack him, lie lie lie, destroy his kids. The mistake that Chris is doing on this site is to try to talk to you like a reasonable human being, which you are not. Punishing you ex for your perception that he has abandoned you because he has moved on is your sole motivation. You my dear are a Psycho ex wife and I hope you and all those like you pay for your sins.

    • March 19th, 2012 at 23:38 | #50

      Dasher,

      Good observation regarding my mistake. I tried to give Allison the benefit of the doubt, that maybe she has not been represented accurately, so I did not dwell on her and focused on how Gibbons is a problem, sociopaths are problem, and the kind of behaviors said to be executed by the PEW character are a problem but that I don’t know how accurately that represents her. I most definitely did not call her a sociopath, nor an “abusive alcoholic” as her distorting and intimidating buddy Bob says. Most of my article is about Judge Gibbons and why her decision is both illegal and irresponsible, including that people need help dealing with psycho ex type people who behave as sociopaths do. Allison then tried to claim victimhood again, even when I directly avoiding quoting some portions of the alleged transcripts that made her look even worse.

      Another commenter quoted that part, where she tries to say she became an alcoholic because of surgery and that her kids have only seen her intoxicated four times in two years. Well, so be it, if she wants it to be all about her then I can add more about her from the transcript and so I added that quote in, too. I think it is telling on its own with little commentary. I know a lot of people who have had surgery but nobody who has ever claimed to have become an alcoholic from it. Only Allison, because Allison is special.

      Allison’s writings and behaviors here match up with many of the problems attributed to the PEW character on The Psycho Ex Wife site. The “it is all about me” thinking, projecting, distorting, avoiding discussing what she has done wrong while blaming everybody else, threatening and intimidating to get her way, falsely accusing people, etc. are all included. She and her friends are making an excellent case that she can behave much like the PEW character. Maybe that’s part of her weird strategy of claiming her victimhood badge?

      Somebody else mentioned that we should write an article on low contact / no contact communication with a psycho ex. The comments on this article are turning out to be an excellent example of why that can be good advice. Once you try communicating with a psycho ex, you are all too easily sucked into the twisted word warfare they use to manipulate, intimidate, threaten, and harm other people to get their way. And if you show even the slightest bit of irritation or anger with them, they are so adept at twisting it around to be all your fault and falsely playing the victim yet again.

      Chris

  43. WTF
    March 19th, 2012 at 20:31 | #51

    How can Allison have it both ways that a site that named nobody is about her and then act like she didn’t write the emails and do the evil things described?

    And why do Allison and her groupies assume that the whole article is about her when it is not?

    Are these both signs of BPD?

    It is mass stupidity. They are too stupid to comprehend a long text can have sections and also their stupidity reinforces the same in the other members of their group.

    Bob and Clara showed up when Allison disappeared. Maybe they are actually both Allison and it is just Allison being stupid?

  44. WTF
    March 19th, 2012 at 21:24 | #52

    If Allison didn’t write the emails and do what Psycho Ex Wife says PEW did, she could simply tell the kids “no, the site is not about me”. End of story.

    Gibbons is a simpleton if she thinks that all parents are unable to partition something they write not for children’s viewing having a different style and tone than what they say around the kids or show the kids.

    With what PEW is alleged to have said about dragging the kids into court, don’t you think she probably is the kind of person who would be showing them court papers and other inappropriate writings naming their father herself? That’s worse than some nameless website that can easily and truthfully be said to be about somebody else if she really didn’t write and do what the site mentions.

  45. Tom
    April 13th, 2012 at 17:48 | #53

    @Allison
    Allison,

    Why to prove you’re not a psycho by posting like a psycho. Way to follow me on twitter just because I followed Misty and when I post a tweet to Misty, ” Guess who’s Stalk- er following me on twitter!” You send me a nasty tweet and then block me. With every single post you are confirming what you are trying to disprove. This is down right comedic. It’s going to be hard for you o take the stance that you didn’t write the emails posted on thepsychoexwife.com when your posts follow the pattern and writing styles to a tee.

  46. The Shadow
    May 9th, 2012 at 19:23 | #54

    @allow2011 on twitter

    Between her random on-again, off-again twitter accounts that she uses to stalk and abuse others and her antics on Facebook as Allison Lowry Morelli in the same vein, in my quiet opinion, this is no longer about where there is smoke, but about how many firefighters it’s going to take to put out the raging inferno.

    Truly a shame for the children. You done good, Judge Gibbons!

  47. Karen Baker
    June 17th, 2012 at 16:18 | #55

    I am the Karen Baker that wrote the following.

    “If Allison wanted to end the conflict, she would get help for herself and stop jerking the kids around. You don’t throw your pre-teen children out of their house on Mother’s Day because they wrote a card to their ‘step-mother.’ Any father worth his salt would do everything he possibly could to protect his children from a mother like that.”

    I was a member of The Psycho Ex Wife Blog and Forums at one time. The Mother’s Day incident was posted on the PEW blog before it was ordered taken down. I have no personal information regarding the “Mother’s Day Incident” other than what was posted publicly.

    There have been accusations here (and in comments on many other articles) that I am Misty Ostinato-Weaver. I am not. I am myself. In fact, I have never met Misty Ostinato-Weaver or Anthony Morelli. I have never spoken to them, and until the Today Show coverage I had know idea who they were or where they lived- in spite of being a member of the PEW forums since their inception.

    It should be said that while the PEW site was still public, Allison outted herself by posting comments on posts that she strongly disagreed with. She would then post comments in support of herself using the Aliases- Allison/Bob/Clara/Anon. If I remember correctly, all posts made under those names were tracked to the same IP address or known IP addresses of her immediate family members. I am not surprised that she is doing the same here.

    I thought clearing up the confusion would be beneficial to the authors of this article.

  48. June 19th, 2012 at 19:41 | #56

    @Karen Baker
    Karen,

    Thanks for clearing this up.

    It’s a staple of sociopathic behavior to discredit any criticism by falsely accusing the person of being a liar, distorting the person’s words to be something they were not, and playing the innocent victim when in fact the sociopath is the one who started the conflict and keeps it going. I think we see all of these behavior patterns in the writings of Allison Morelli aka Allison Lowry and the other aliases she may be using.

    Rob

  49. Karen Baker
    June 19th, 2012 at 23:59 | #57

    Here is an exchange between Allison and I on an article posted on the Phillyburbs.com where she mentions and admits to the statements I made on the Examiner post being accurate. The Phillyburbs comments have since been removed (I think she was banned) but I kept a copy of our exchange. As you can see, she continues to use her staple behavior in this exchange as well.

    I did forget to mention that she also used the alias “Liz” on the Psycho Ex Wife as well. You can find some of her comments on archived posts. Simply look through the media links on the SavethePsychoExWife.com. One of the articles has a link that will take you to the archives.

    If you chose not to post this publicly, I do understand. My intent is not to continue the conflict, but to further demonstrate the nature of the beast. The Phillyburbs exchange follows:

    Allison Lowry Morelli commented on http://www.phillyburbs.com.

    no testimony about her incoherent rantings on the internet, no testimony about her mental health…..and the sick get sicker. I guess all the “Welcome to Oz” folks are happy!

    Jury finds Burklund guilty of first-degree murder in husband’s death
    http://www.phillyburbs.com
    It will be life in prison without parole for Dorleen Burklund, the Upper Bucks wife who fatally pumped eight bullets into her husband during an altercation at their Springfield home. ..

    Like · · May 18 at 6:38pm ·

    Karen Baker- Allison, I don’t understand the comment about her incoherent rantings on the internet, or testimony about her mental health. Obviously, if she were incompetent to assist in her own defense, a psychiatric evaluation would have been ordered. Mental illness does not excuse a person from taking responsibility for their actions.
    May 21 at 6:55pm · Like.

    Allison Lowry Morelli- Thank you, Karen/Misty for your input. I didn’t realize you were so knowledgable about criminal law, as well as mental health. If she was able to get a criminal defense attorney, instead of a public defender, this whole trial would have went down a totally different way. Everyone knows that….why do you think her son was trying to use his money to get her a defense attorney? Her internet rantings indicate her state of mind at the time of the murder, from what I read, she could not put a thought together in any cohesive way. That’s a sickness. I’m sorry if I don’t think she should rot in prison for the rest of her life for being sick.
    May 21 at 7:29pm · Like.

    Karen Baker- I’m sorry, Misty? I am not Misty. How could you know how knowledgable about criminal law and mental health I am if you don’t know me? I asked a simple question as a person who is interested in this case. A public defender has an obligation to give a person the best defense they are able. It would be poor practice for even the prosecution to continue a trial without establishing the mental status of a person on trial. They would be creating a situation that would be immediately appealed. If Ms. Burkland were not competent to stand trial they would postpone it until she was, or place her in a mental health facility. She killed her husband. She should go to prison. Even Charles Mason, obviously mentally ill, has to serve out his sentence.
    May 21 at 7:40pm · Like.

    Allison Lowry Morelli- um…yes….I was told you were Misty by several pretty reliable sources almost a year ago. I would tend to believe it since the nature of your comments on my case contained some pretty intimate and specific information. Regarding Dorleen Burklund, unless you were present at the trial and behind the scenes, you have no way of knowing what was done by the Public Defender, nor do I. I do know what wasn’t brought up during the trial and what the jury didn’t hear. Obviously, her husband believed she was mentally ill because he was part of a support group for loved ones of Borderlines. According to the info available to the public, the Jury didn’t know that. I think comparing Dorleen Burlund to Charles Manson is a huge stretch. Who ever said he was mentally ill? was that written somewhere? He was an obvious danger to society….I’m not so sure this woman is….and you couldn’t be either because there isn’t enough information available to make that assessment.
    May 21 at 7:55pm · Like.

    Karen Baker- Well, Allison. Your reliable sources were wrong. I do not know Misty. Never have.

    Prey tell me what does the husband’s involvement in a support group for loved one’s with Borderline’s have anything to do with her shooting him 5 times, reloading the gun, and then shooting him 3 more times?

    You wrote- “Regarding Dorleen Burklund, unless you were present at the trial and behind the scenes, you have no way of knowing what was done by the Public Defender, nor do I. I do know what wasn’t brought up during the trial and what the jury didn’t hear.”

    So which is it Allison? You stated that you didn’t know what was done by the public defender because you weren’t at the trial. So tell me, how do you know what wasn’t brought up during the trial and what the jury didn’t hear? Were you present or not?

    Okay, so Charles Manson is not mentally ill, and neither is Ms. Burklund. They both are a danger to society. They have killed other people. They both belong in jail.

    If Ms. Burklund is mentally ill like her husband claimed she was, it still doesn’t excuse her actions. It only supports that a support group for loved ones with borderline may have been a good choice for him.
    May 21 at 8:09pm · Like.

    Allison Lowry Morelli- If you don’t know Misty and never have, how did you find yourself AGAIN commenting in the same forum as me almost a whole year after your original posts about me and my case? With regard to this case, the trial was covered by the newspaper, I only know what they published and I’m pretty sure they didn’t leave out a huge fact like her mental health history if it was brought up. Are you telling me that you don’t know the difference between the representation of a Public Defender and a Criminal Defense Attorney? I don’t know why you’re dogging me or what you’re getting at but you have my phone #, just call me directly and drop the charade.
    May 21 at 8:17pm · Like.

    Allison Lowry Morelli- BTW, Charles Manson was interviewed a few years ago….and remains unruly and unremorseful.
    May 21 at 8:19pm · Like.

    Allison Lowry Morelli- and still not mentally ill
    May 21 at 8:19pm · Like.

    Karen Baker- No, I don’t have your number. This is not a charade. I am not Misty. Never have been. Never will be. Yes, I have commented on other forums that you have commented on. We seem to be drawn to the same kinds of stories. Great minds think alike!

    If all you know is what was covered in the newspapers then, perhaps, the newspapers did not report on a psychological evaluation being requested by the defense or the prosecution? It makes little difference if Ms. Burkland is mentally ill or not. She was found “sane enough” to withstand trial and assist in her own defense OR the trial wouldn’t have taken place. She killed her husband, she belongs in jail. No excuses.

    You are the one implying that Ms. Burkland is mentally ill. “no testimony about her incoherent rantings on the internet, no testimony about her mental health…..and the sick get sicker.” I didn’t realize you were so knowledgable about criminal law, as well as mental health. If it’s true that all you know about the case is what has been posted in the newspaper, and there has been no public announcement that she was mentally ill, then how can you imply that she is mentally ill. What are your credentials Allison?

    Agreed, there is a difference between a Public defender and a Criminal Defense Attorney. One the taxpayers pay for, and one the defendant (or in this case- family members) pay for. Both have the same legal training. Perhaps Ms. Burkland should have saved her money before she decided to shoot him.

    You feel I’m dogging you? Why? I’m simply trying to have a reasonable discussion with you. That’s all. I’d love to hear why you believe what you do. So far you’ve done nothing to back up your claims with anything but “feelings” and “opinions.”
    May 21 at 8:39pm · Like.

    Allison Lowry Morelli- I read what Dorleen Burklund posted on the internet. Her husband met with members of the support group the week before the murder. He must have believed she was mentally ill right? why did he pick a “BPD” group I wonder, if she was just evil, why not just join a group for people going through a difficult divorce ? I read some posts by friends and neighbors of hers who said things like “it’s such a shame, she needed help for a long time”. Her son is supporting her and she shot his FATHER. The public defender didn’t call any of those people to testify. Nothing was reported about any of that during the trial, so deductive reasoning tells me it wasn’t brought up. You can bet your ass a criminal defense attorney would have called her mental health into question. you didn’t just “happen” upon this story…why don’t you go back and read your comments on the examiner.com and then tell me again “we’re just drawn to the same type of stories”? I’m done here. You’ll never comprehend why I feel the way I do about this case and I’m not capable of being as nasty and judgemental as you, so I’ll never see it your way. Have a nice night.
    May 21 at 9:22pm · Like.

    Karen Baker- Allison, how have I been nasty and judgmental? Have I called you names? A liar? I’ve simply disagreed with you and asked you to back up what you are saying with facts. That’s all.

    You call my knowledge about criminal defense and mental health in to question, yet you are willing to make a diagnosis based on some things that Dorleen Burklund posted on the internet. What difference does it make what support group Mr. Burklund met with? He probably picked one related to BPD because he believed his wife exhibited symptoms of the disorder. Yes, many people do believe that people that suffer from BPD are ‘just evil’ as you say. They can be very trying individuals to reason with. He probably didn’t join a support group for people going through a “difficult divorce” because divorcing a person with BPD is far different than divorcing a difficult person. A difficult person will eventually be able to come to a somewhat satisfactory agreement with their former spouse and be able to move on. Not so when you are divorcing a person with BPD. They will litigate for years and years simply to feed their need for conflict. They just don’t know how to drop things, will continue to attack, make false accusations, spread lies and rumors, project their own feelings on to others, alienate their own children against the other parent, and be offended when their self-entitled needs and wants are not met by the other party.

    It is likely that the neighbors did say things like, “it’s such a shame, she needed help for a long time.” BPD is quite recognizable if a person is familiar with the symptoms. If Ms. Burklund did indeed have BPD, it is unlikely that she was able to recognize the disorder in herself. That is one of the symptoms. Denial that their thinking may be in any way skewed is another. BPD’s are notorious for pitting one family member against the other, and accepting no hint of loyalty to the ‘enemy.’ They also attack unjustifiably when they are questioned. Ms. Burkland’s son could very well be a victim of his mother’s successful alienation attempts. Often a child of an individual will believe the lies and fabrications about the alienated parent, or they will simply agree with them because it makes their own life easier. Individuals suffering from BPD also tend to walk away from a reasonable conversation when they know they are losing it, and project their own feelings on to others.

    I imagine that it was best to leave Ms. Burklund’s mental health out of the trial. It is hard to feel sympathetic to a person who makes excuses for their behavior, especially when they are nasty and judgmental. Ms. Burklund judged her husband unworthy of living, and disposed of him like a nasty little problem. Her mental health (healthy or not) would not give her reason, or excuse for murder. Plain and simple.

    I do not recall ever posting anything on the examiner.com. It’s possible, but I find it unlikely because it requires a person to log in to post, and that is not something I typically do. If you could find the post and point it out to me, I would be happy to own up to it if it is mine.

    (Note- I have ‘owned up to the Examiner post,’ with my explination above.)

    I believe I can comprehend why you feel the way you do. I am an intelligent person. At this point, basically the only reason you are giving me for your feelings is because ‘you say so.’ Your opinions are solely based on emotions and feelings and have little factual information to back it up.

    May 21 at 10:22pm · Like · 1.

    Allison Lowry Morelli- The bottom line is this: She was convicted and is going to spend the rest of her life in prison. If you’re comfortable with that, super…that’s good for you. I’m not comfortable with it for all the reasons I’ve stated over the past week and I’m not going to post a long diatribe with you because there isn’t a thing I can do about this woman’s situation. I can’t help her, I can’t change what happened. I already stated why I posted what I posted on the other article. Another thing, I have little respect for people who post under “fake” identities.
    May 22 at 7:19am · Like

  50. Clara
    July 19th, 2012 at 02:00 | #58

    @Karen Baker

    No, I am not Allison, and my IP address was never connected to her. I am grateful that she has continued to win in court, Karen.

  51. Karen Baker
    July 19th, 2012 at 22:25 | #59

    @Clara

    Okay, Clara- So you aren’t Allison, but you are a supporter of her, and have been for quite sometime.

    How is it that you were so sure that I was Misty? I’d would really sincerely like to know. I posted nothing that wasn’t public knowledge. Allison as much as admitted that my post on the examiner was accurate. The accuracy of my Examiner post is also backed up by the transcripts listed on the Savethepsychoexwife.com site as well. Copy and past this link. You will find it there in black and white.

    http://www.savethepsychoexwife.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Transcript-Redacted1.pdf

    It seems that, in my experience, you only come out when Allison is also posting as Bob or Liz. (Anon typically appears as well.) You must have some close connection to her, as you have posted on the PEW blog defending her since the initial outing. It’s rather bizarre that you appear and disappear just as quickly as she does.

    I could very well be wrong, but this appears to me to be a parting shot to try and recover from the damning train wreck that occured above. Allison’s FB page disappears after there were attempts to disguise it under an new name- Allison Doe. Now at about the exact same time, Clara comes back out of the wood work to get one last shot in about how Allison is winning- two days after oral arguments for the appeal took place. The coincidences are simply amazing.

    I suppose in the end none of my suspicions really matter. You say you are not Allison, I will have to assume that you are telling you the truth. I have no real evidence otherwise.

    Clara could you do me a favor? Let Allison know that it really isn’t winning if the children are hurting. Period. There is NO win in this situation. I am sure that there will be arguement that the children are happy as clams and have never been more content in their lives than they are right now. I’m not buying it. Any child denied access to the other parent based on the wishes of the other is being hurt. No doubt. They might not show it now, but it will come out later.

    Hopefully you will also be around to support her when the kids figure out the truth.

  52. Ann
    September 5th, 2012 at 01:44 | #60

    I found the Psyho Ex-Wife when I remarried a man who also had an ex-wife. His ex-wife was just like Ms. Morelli. For years we have combated her false allegations, threats and lies. I have had to send proof to her family that my husband did in fact pay child support because it was a long standing lie that she spread. Then I had to email the parenting plan to prove she was lying about us refusing to allow her to see or talk to the kids when in fact the choice has always been hers. I can tell you once that was done she changed her ways. She stopped saying those lies, and even attempted to be involved in the kids lives. I imagine that is hard to keep up the lies in your head. Maybe it was a release actually for her. I don’t know only time will tell.

  53. Lauren
    November 7th, 2012 at 05:00 | #61

    @ Allison

    If this is really Allison Morelli, can you please contact me by email. I am a Mother that is currently being bashed and bullied on Savethepsychoexwife.com FORUMS! I had someone from the website send me a message today telling me to shut my mouth or her lawyer would chew me up and spit me out!! AND I have NO clue who the woman is! They know my kids names, they know where I live and I am concerned with my privacy and safety.

  54. Not Paige
    November 7th, 2012 at 19:53 | #62

    @ Lauren

    Umm…if you want to speak to Allison, it might be helpful if you leave your contact information.

    Another bulb shines so bright :-)

  55. Tiffany Traylor
    November 16th, 2012 at 23:54 | #63

    @ Karen Baker
    Bravo. I thought I was the only one to remember the Bob and Liz comments on PEW. That always seemed so funny to me. Sometimes I make up people to love me, also. I made up five of them the other day but they all called me crazy and ran away so I sued them and made up two more.

  56. March 9th, 2012 at 01:04 | #64

    Allison,

    I am not a follower of your ex-husband. The last time I read the site prior to reading about it being illegally censored was probably in 2009 or 2010. It took me over half a year to even notice it had been shut down, and that was only because I was checking some links to other sites.

    It looks like you are very busy searching the web for your name (Google searches for “Allison Morelli”) and visiting web sites about you the past few days. Don’t you have something better to do like spend time with your kids?

    If you contend there is something I wrote that is not true, quote it and explain. So far you have not done so.

    It appears that you are defaming me by claiming I have defamed you when there is no basis for such a claim that I can see. I have reviewed the article repeatedly and rephrased a few things which could be more clear but which were not defamatory. I do not see anything I wrote which is about you which isn’t backed up by another source not including solely what was written about you on The Psycho Ex Wife. I relied upon the alleged transcripts and other media reports including ones in which you participated. Now I can use your own words and behaviors here, too.

    As I wrote from the start, I think that probably some of what was written on The Psycho Ex Wife included some “literary license” and might not be exactly accurate and that it is not clear that the PEW character was intended to be a literal representation of you but could be some representation of behaviors or examples based upon multiple people, none of whom were identified.

    We have bent over backwards letting you have a forum to wrongfully and inaccurately attack me. Then you started spamming the site. That reminds me of things I read about what the PEW character did to The Psycho Ex Wife when it was discovered. You behaving similarly builds credibility for Anthony Morelli’s version of events.

    If you contend that what Anthony Morelli wrote about you was untrue, then why didn’t you sue him for libel? That you have not done so and yet attack other people who have sided with him having First Amendment rights to write anonymously about his experiences says to me that what he wrote about the PEW character was probably largely true and/or that you can’t prove it was about you. But like I said, I don’t know for sure.

    Your aggressively hostile and threatening attitude further confirms that impression that you want to shut up everybody else who has anything to say with which you disagree, even if those things are not defamatory and are not about you.

    If you are truly the victim you paint yourself to be, you are doing a horrible job of demonstrating that.

    Chris

  1. February 25th, 2012 at 07:48 | #1
  2. March 7th, 2012 at 06:16 | #2
  3. March 14th, 2012 at 00:56 | #3

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *


Comments are moderated to remove spam and harassment. They may sometimes be edited to correct spelling, grammar, and linking errors. Most comments are approved within a day, but at times review and approval may take a couple of days.

81,852 Spam Comments Blocked so far by Spam Free Wordpress

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>