More charges for "Brother Petty"

[Anne Cox]

I don't want to "obsess" on this ... having not eaten dinner yet:

Thank you, Stephen for also posting what DL had found.

The message you referenced from a carpal tunnel message board - and its partial URL ctsplace.com - was one that I had posted about him.

Some may ponder, why the focus on him. Simply: It's not him. It is what he represents and that is a threat to children. He is a mere symbol of that overall threat.

The lesson to be gleaned? From my standpoint it is that law enforcement, empowered to take reports, should not ignore the information when probable case is present and glaring.

FBI treated reports about DiStasio no differently than it did reports about Steven Schurgard and Nelson Faerber, who pulled a Nolan. And, detectives had the audacity to ask me why I felt anger? Totally clueless.

I wouldn't make a report if I didn't see probable cause jumping at me. Nor would officers (outside OH and FL jurisdictions), whom also reported. We tried. And, evidently, that was not good enough for the FBI .

I'll have to read this all much more thoroughly after eating and doing more mundane things. If some want to think I focus too much on this type of thing, fine by me. It's part of my job .

[Stephen Calhoun]

Jim.

Depending on what you mean by slack, eh? I would say it hardly matters what you or me thinks. In the final analysis.

Mike Gill? Likewise; 'sick but not insane'. Whatever...

Anne.

If parents are not protecting their own children, who will? I wouldn't throw stones at those who try to look out for others' children, knowing there is a clear and present danger.

Yes, who will? Tis a great question. I think it good to work it from both ends-from the parenting side and from the removal of pedophiles to the last perp.

What's interesting to me is the need for Petty to be sick but not mentally ill. I have no idea what kind of implied sickness wouldn't be mental sickness, but what's interesting to me, is the need; it's not anything--directly--really to do with Petty.

[dl meckes]

Still here. He's still yapping.

Quite possibly my favorite email in the whole process.

[Stephen Calhoun]

Ann.

Basically, we're in the position of opting to disagree agreeably.

Simply: It's not him. It is what he represents and that is a threat to children. He is a mere symbol of that overall threat.

I get this, but in my world, Petty exemplifies a heinous criminal because he's committed crimes, thus has not only presented the threat but acted it out. Over and over, and for a long time.

Whereas what he 'represents' and 'symbolizes' is abstract (to me). This can be demonstrated as a difference between how we think about such things because I'm fairly confidant what you mean by 'symbol' is not what I would mean.

But, nothing rides on this difference. Slife's kiss off gets it.

“We just got rid of a bad seed."

[Anne Cox]

Stephen, I've not attributed the term "sick" to DiStasio. You have, but I have not. And, too, I have purposely avoided referring to him as Petty. His name is DiStasio; in his wishful thinking, he was Brother Petty .

Sometimes, people do just have to agree to disagree.

Since you prefer to affix the term "sick" to him, that's your personal choice, as is your preference to refer to me as "Ann" - even after I posted that my name was spelled incorrectly by Mr. Gill. Don't know how I could have been more clear .

Please don't attribute others' comments to me or anticipate that I may have answers for why they have deemed him "sick" but sane. I haven't done so.

I don't recall having said he is not a criminal; I've stated that he is alleged to have committed offenses. Where you gathered that I suggested something else: I dunno. I'm not diminishing anything. Please re-read what I've posted, and it the context of which I wrote. Because I have not called him sick does not equate with suggesting I think the acts okay. But... weave what you want of what you will . I thought I clearly stated he crossed the line from thought to action and that is what spells the difference between thought and commission of a crime. As a fact, I know I stated that.

I just am not playing the he's "sick" card.

I give you, and others, a world of credit for sitting with him the duration you did. Still, even with my heartfelt appreciation, please: Keep in it perspective. It was some hours out of your lives compared to years I and others have monitored him. He is not sick, and nor have we thought so. To say someone has twisted thinking is not akin to applying the clinical term: sick. He twists data and facts to seek substantiating his philosophy as do other pedophiles. He is not the sole focus of our efforts; in his self-aggrandizement, he might want to think he warrants that much, but he simply doesn't. There are others we also monitor, report... and, based on what Jan and I know, and as she has stated: He is not all that unique. He just isn't.

He is not only a lesson for parents, he is also a lesson for law enforcement, particularly those officers who shrugged reports from peer officers. How lame were they? Plenty.

[Stephen Calhoun]

Anne.

I corrected the spelling error. Excuse me.

Petty/DiStacio. Hmmm. Petty was a fraudulent persona. I might go back and change each mention--even if it's too late.

I haven't made the attributions you've accused me of. Jim thinks DiStacio is sane. I do not as a diagnostic matter. The opposite of sick is not sick; the opposite of unhealthy is healthy. I've stated my interest in the differences of attribution.

Let me put this more clearly: I'm much more intrigued by your psychological make-up than I am interested in DiStacio's.

***

I more than understand that we're all in agreement that DiStacio is a criminal and I have not suggested otherwise.

You did write this:

A psych. evaluation determined him to be sane and competent to stand trial - something to which both the defense and prosecution stipulated.

Where does mental illness factor in?

I responded and made an important distinction.

[Anne Cox]

Stephen,

Even if we may not see some things the same way, that's okay. I appreciate your input and all that you have shared. It is also what leads to critical thinking, and that's something everyone can use to do a bit more in life .

Please know I am earnest in sharing this: If I could, I would turn back the hands of time and also would have asked my own group's lawyer to pursue DiStasio. He had encounters with him, as did I. It was not pleasant for any of us. And, maybe, just maybe: If more aggressive legal action had been taken from a civil standpoint, possibly DiStasio's "plan" might also have been thwarted.

Believe me: I take no comfort in any of this.

To me, this case is so much like ones where the suspected perps were reported, and the info. was totally solid but officers were maybe toking something stronger than DiStasio had in his stash. At this point, I have thought of asking those officers, but... I doubt they'd tell me. They might confide in a peer agent, however.

Officers are also following this thread and they know: I'm not a LE basher. They went through the same as I did with DiStasio and others. I wasn't trying to guess what might be probable cause. I mean, with S. Shurgard, heck, he filmed himself taking a box out of a closet (from a shelf) he self-labeled "child pornography." He posted it online. No one coerced him to do so no more than anyone knew DiStasio molested a toddler until he shared it.

It's just really discouraging to see some suggest folks are obsessed. No, we're not. We're trying to understand: Why federal officers, with over-riding jurisdiction, did squat. That hurts.

It's not easy doing this "stuff" tracking perps and reporting when cause is present, but to be considered obsessed or to suggest no lesson is to be learned (not that you have done so, since you have asked the question about what is the lesson) is like driving a stake into everything and saying: Kiss it off; he's in jail and let the chips fall where they may.

Not good enough. Maybe I'm hoping for answers no one can provide:

Why FBI turned a blind eye.

I could understand if I had cold-canvassed, but I was given the contact to FBI from a detective who vouched for me and the validity of my work.

So... where do parents turn when they ask for help and intervention from such an agency? That, to me, is another question.

[Anne Cox]

My psych. make-up likely pales in comparison to many folks'; I've been evaluated. There is nothing remarkable in my $700 evaluation by a doctor whose license was subsequently revoked by the state of California. I don't know why he was stripped of privileges, only that he was. One of my doctors was on the review board and she told me, and said she could not tell me why. I verified his license was revoked via CA med. board. Perhaps it related to him leaving patients in the waiting room for an excess of 45 mins. yet billing as if he was in session. (Uhmm, that seems like a bit of a rip-off.)

Why the interest in my psych. make-up? Pedophiles also have an interest. But why do you?

I've endured far longer than many of them would have wished .

Ohh, you might want to correct the spelling of his name, too; it's DiStasio.

I could imagine what would happen if I mis-spelled a name in reporting/writing.

I was invited to post here, so if you want to take pot-shots at me, feel free. I'll stick with the subject which is not me, but "Brother Petty"/Phillip James DiStasio.

I don't see myself questioning your "make-up." What's up with that?

Anne.

I corrected the spelling error. Excuse me.

Petty/DiStacio. Hmmm. Petty was a fraudulent persona. I might go back and change each mention--even if it's too late.

I haven't made the attributions you've accused me of. Jim thinks DiStacio is sane. I do not as a diagnostic matter. The opposite of sick is not sick; the opposite of unhealthy is healthy. I've stated my interest in the differences of attribution.

Let me put this more clearly: I'm much more intrigued by your psychological make-up than I am interested in DiStacio's.

***

I more than understand that we're all in agreement that DiStacio is a criminal and I have not suggested otherwise.

You did write this:

A psych. evaluation determined him to be sane and competent to stand trial - something to which both the defense and prosecution stipulated.

Where does mental illness factor in?

I responded and made an important distinction.

[Jan McMahan]

"Let me put this more clearly: I'm much more intrigued by your psychological make-up than I am interested in DiStacio's."


Stephen, I don't understand what Annes psychological make-up has to do with anything. She isn't the one who's sitting in jail and hasn't molested any children. That just seems like a bizarre statement to me. DiStasio is a perverted predator, a user and a con artist. Don't think for a second these children in Rocky River are his only victims.

[Stephen Calhoun]

Wow. What a ripple of unfounded assumptions tumble my way.

Anne.

Why the interest in my psych. make-up?

Jan.

I don't understand what Annes psychological make-up has to do with anything. [snip] That just seems like a bizarre statement to me.

Why? You have an expectation about my interests?

***

Beyond Anne and DiStacio, I'm much more intrigued by Jim O'Bryan's psychology. And beyond his, even more fascinated by Ken Warren's. And beyond that, tremendously engaged by the 'bizarreness' (?) of my own. Etc.

I haven't taken any shots. I haven't characterized Anne's psychological make-up in any way. I just stated that her psyche interests me. (My admission of pointed interest is generally considered bad form in casual social interactions. Mea culpa.)

The assumption that DiStacio's psychology should--by right--be of more interest to me is, to me, nonsensical. I'm primarily interested in human nature, social manifestations of psychology, especially unconsciously collectivised patterns within (what are termed) group relations.

As well, and as much as the DiStacio case is about a pedophile, it's also about Lakewood and its group relations and microcultures. This also interests me more than DiStacio's psyche interests me. A handful of us have spent literally hours discussing the psychological aspects oriented around Lakewood's culture(s) and group relations. Anthropology, y'know?

Because the human psyche is my principal interest and research subject, for me to state that any individual's psychological make-up is of interest is only to state the most obvious fact about my interests.

But, I sure don't expect someone else to have the same interests as I do!

nosiree

***

Anyway...a real roll of jumping to conclusions and floating assumptions...very interesting as matters of psychology.

[Jan McMahan]

[quote="Stephen Calhoun"]Wow. What a ripple of unfounded assumptions tumble my way.


Stephen,

I don't think you understand the risk Anne and I have taken by coming here using our legal names and posting on this forum. I have every reason to believe that pedophiles are also reading this forum. We can be abused by posting on pedophile message boards. Lord, we ARE abused by them when we don't post on those boards. We've been called every name in the book followed by direct threats. We can't post anywhere else using our legal names. (Jim and DL know more about this topic than Anne feels comfortable posting about)

I understand you all spent hours with DiStasio but Anne and I have spent years monitoring him and his cohorts. We've spent the same amount of time reporting them and speaking with law enforcement. No easy task by any stretch of the imagination.

Don't get me wrong, we admire all of you for sitting face to face with him for 5 hours. It had to be stomach churning.

Anne and I take enough of a verbal beating. You may not see it that way but you haven't walked in our shoes as a result of trying to protect other peoples children. I thought we were all on the same side here. This doesn't start and stop for Anne and I with just this one case.

Again, we thank you for what you've done so far. But asking about Anne's psychological make-up is akin to a sucker punch.

[Charyn Varkonyi]

Hi Jan,

I didn't read Stephen's comments as a slam or 'sucker-punch' in any way and I am sure many others did not either. I simply see someone who is more curious about what drives you and Anne to do what you do, and what ramifications it may have upon you, as well as how you handle all of it during the course of a 'normal' day.

Frankly, it intrigues me as well because I have to say that in all honesty, I don't know that I *could* do what you do. And, also quite frankly, I dint care to know Brother Piece-of-human-excrement's psychology any more than he's competent to stand trial. Once that's determined, I'd rather understand what gives people like yourself the drive, courage, determination, ambition, and so on that I can only dream of.

From my personal chair - I find you both amazing and interesting people that I/we owe a debt of gratitude towards for your hard work and efforts.

I cannot speak for Stephen as do not know him or his intentions; however, I hope you understand why I would be more inters ted in you and others like you and take my int erst to be the compliment that it is.

Peace,
~Charyn

[Jan McMahan]

Hi Jan,

I didn't read Stephen's comments as a slam or 'sucker-punch' in any way and I am sure many others did not either. I simply see someone who is more curious about what drives you and Anne to do what you do, and what ramifications it may have upon you, as well as how you handle all of it during the course of a 'normal' day.

Frankly, it intrigues me as well because I have to say that in all honesty, I don't know that I *could* do what you do. And, also quite frankly, I dint care to know Brother Piece-of-human-excrement's psychology any more than he's competent to stand trial. Once that's determined, I'd rather understand what gives people like yourself the drive, courage, determination, ambition, and so on that I can only dream of.

From my personal chair - I find you both amazing and interesting people that I/we owe a debt of gratitude towards for your hard work and efforts.

I cannot speak for Stephen as do not know him or his intentions; however, I hope you understand why I would be more inters ted in you and others like you and take my int erst to be the compliment that it is.

Peace,
~Charyn

Thank you Charyn,

I really appreciate your kind words. If Stephens intent was as you explained then I misunderstood him. I'm on the phone with Anne right now and she feels the same as I. Our apologies to Stephen if you've explained as he intended.

We are admittedly defensive. There are no other child protection advocacates out there who have been put through the wringer like Anne and I have by pedophiles. We have to protect ourselves.

What drives us? Not only child protection but self protection. As an aside, I was never the victim of child abuse but Anne was, and pedophiles use that all the time against her. To question her psychological make-up is very hurtful.

Our goal and determination is just to save one child at a time and one predator at a time incarcerated.

Trust me, we are not obsessed. We are just wanting to follow through with this case and all cases that may follow. When Anne and I met there were 7 of us that all worked together. One of those seven is now deceased but her words were delivered to the DA. Anne and I have perservered.

The friend who is now deceased was also a Sharon but I love the way you spell your name. (very pretty)

[Anne Cox]

I'm outta words. Just don't know what to say after being invited here. I think Jan expressed it well.

I've been the focus of too many, and ... while speaking with Jim and DL - and I thought those conversations were quality talks, I assured: If, at some point, I became a focus, I would shy. Thus, I will do. I'll keep my word.

I may have mis-read what Stephen was leading to, in that he is interested in anthropology. That's cool .

But my life has been so shredded, and disrupted as a direct effect of pervs such as DiStasio, and even a nurse on the ctsplace.com site (whom said she saw more dead children than dinners I've eaten in a lifetime). Some things, I just don't grasp.

It seems, make of the story how it factors into Lakewood.

I'm back to work. And I really do feel hurt, Jim and DL, and not by your fingertips . You have been most kind and caring. I just haven't time to make out the intellectual whatever-whatnot of others.

I'll hold myself to my word to you. I want the focus where it belongs and not on me.

P.S.: I'm editing this in, while also noting that I've yet to read Ken's post which caught my eye: Of all the people Jan mentioned we started out working with: It is civilians, just as we are. Law enforcement didn't bail on us; to this day, they continue to maintain the momentum, just as we do, and not to internalize. It was civilians whom bailed... wanting to make bank or place themselves, somehow, at the center of things. Uhhh, wrong focus. It's not about egos but about perps being busted . That's the story, the only story that matters. If it seems Jan and mee... kinda stick up for each other. Heck yes, we do. No one understands what the other has been through better than the other . Why we don't "throw the towel in the ring"? It's because all good things come with time and one perp at a time, one less on the streets, one less committing offenses - in your community, as in ours .

[Kenneth Warren]

It is good that Anne Cox and Jan McMahan have entered the Lakewood Observer’s real name civic communication experiment – the city that would know itself better than any other city before.

In Lakewood we are drilling deeply together into reflections on the failure and success of local and global cultures.

Self-knowledge through community practice is the effort here.

Welcome. Hang in there.

DIY post-social scientists come with the territory.

Do not be afraid.

My encounter with Distasio, who cited Saint Francis in his Dionysian dream of community appetite, leads me to consider more critically howâ€Â￾ 1) the deconstruction of the Roman Catholic culture of Natural Law, which attempts to sit firmly upon the bag of passions and; 2) the construction of counter-culture, with its drift toward instinct, energy, nature, brings us to the edge of the abyss of orgiastic and violent impulses.

Will an Opus Dei Supreme Court put the Humpty Dumpty Civilization of Natural Law together again?

Alternative culture bears the boatload of passions spinning variously and progressively out of control. The moral control box of civilization stopped applying consistent repressive pressure. This, some traditionalists would say, is the Kali Yuga.

Call the brothers of hood and NAMBLA lawbreakers. Say lower classes are living according to the passions – it’s all part of the sub-cultural mood on contemporary scene.

Dan Slife’s story on Distasio’s effort to expand the territory of his desire through teaching children in Lakewood captures both the sub-cultural mood and the Dionysian disruption at root the anarchic pothead friar.

It is interesting to me that Ms. Cox raises the question of marijuana use in the Lakewood Observer triangulation session with Distasio at the Phoenix Coffee House. Perhaps she infers this from Gill’s article which states Distasio was seeking a community of pot-smoking adults.

There was no cannabis smokescreen to blind the LO triangle or bind its interests to Distasio’s marijuana ministry. The cannabis kernel would have subverted the lawful kernel. To break the law with Distasio would compromise us.

There was an active and critical engagement with the rules of collective dreamscapes, both Distasio’s and the Lakewood Observer’s.

From my end I wanted to probe the astrological, esoteric and religious symbols that masked what I sensed was the immoral order of the sanctuary through which Distasio rationalized his desire for children.

In the Lakewood Observer experiment, there is a tendency to play critically with psychological chops. In this sense, during our session with Distasio, the predatory nature of psychology was applied to the predator.

Although we post to the deck, we do much of our work on the street, in the body, in person, in the neighborhood.

We are actual; not virtual in this experience.

Does that make a difference when filing a suspicion report with police authorities?

I wonder what Anne Cox and Jan McMahan might think about that?

I am very interested in why there was no response from authorities to your reports.

Is it because all the monitoring you are doing is as vast as cyberspace, and hence authorities don’t sense gravity or stakes in sweep of your attention?

Kenneth Warren