A trip down memory lane


Going way back in time for the new audience. This seems so long ago now. This is the proof that Amanda was up to mischief before that special photo from December 18th, and that all her friends found the picture, not some cockamamie imaginary stalker.

Sorry about the jpg. Just click on it.

Well, I have to admit that I have put this off as long as I can. Last night I hardly slept, and regular readers will know that I find all of this emotionally and mentally draining.

I am tangled and confused. As soon as one thing seems to get resolved, something else crops up that turns a lot of the story upside down again. There is a lot of grief in this – not just for the main participants, but for those other, more innocent victims of the witch hunts, the hatred, the suspicions. And for all those people from all across the world, all those genuine people, all those kids who have cried about this, it’s a terrible shame.

We have – and it saddens me to say this – been severely tricked.  I thought that  I would be jumping for joy as I learned that more and more of what I was saying was coming true, but instead I’m simply becoming more disheartened.

The details I have posted today are true. I will seek to evaluate them as clinically and as precisely as I possibly can. At first, I was just tempted to post the screen cap and leave it up to readers to make up their own minds. But, as usual, I will try to analyse what is behind all of this.

As you will see, the capture is from December 5th, 2010. That’s ten days after ‘cutieelover’ aka Amanda Todd joined BlogTV. What she did, or where she was prior to that, I don’t know at the moment. This is eighteen days before the police arrived on her doorstep on December 23rd.

Note that the BlogTV rules are absolutely clear. I have criticised BlogTV (now YouNow) for allowing things, but to give them credit, they were quite clear about the rules, and very quick to ban people who broke them. There is no real excuse for not knowing that nudity was frowned upon. As we know, cutiielover was banned twelve days later.

Amanda is quite well-known. It is possible that, from the commencement of her membership of BlogTV on November 26th, she could have received quite a following – reputations grow fast online.

Note: this may not be the full online conversation for December 5th. I originally thought that this might be the beginning of it all, but it is possible that there were earlier comments.

The first comment available is a cordial ‘sexy’. The second comment from cutieelover is – well, what? – poignant? Could that be the word? I don’t know. Or it could just be straightforward. Who can tell?

‘im not like that anymore’

What can anyone read into this? It sounds quite forlorn, like she’s realised something, and has decided to stop. On it’s own, it sounds like it’s a finality, but, sadly, we know that just a few days later she was flashing again, and that this behaviour continued on for quite some time. Can we deduce any period of time from this? Like I said – and I hope – her reputation might have simply grown in the previous two weeks, but I retain a slight idea that these are the words of someone who has been quite known for some time. But that is irrelevant, really.

It looks like one of her fans issues a ‘sigh’ of disappointment. Or of shared sadness?

I guess that the next comment is from someone new to the room: ‘what were u like’.  The answer is horrible.

‘a slut’

What in God’s name would make a girl say this? Here are some attempts to explain, but first let me say that it is significant and important. It points strongly towards why so many people used the word ‘slut’ to describe her – it’s the term she has applied to herself. It is actually Amanda herself who first uses the term to describe her own behaviour. People would have read these comments, and no doubt her friends would have heard her say it.

(God, this is difficult!) There are two reasons why she should have said this. The first is quite a cold-hearted suggestion; the second is gut-wrenchingly sad. I would prefer to choose the first. It kills me more to choose the second.

The first reason: Amanda is relatively proud of being seen as a slut. It’s a sort of show-off, attention-seeking phrase – ‘Look at me! I’m a slut! I’m not a mundane nobody, I’m someone who boys queue up to see! I’m the centre of attention, and that makes me feel important!’

Look at the news. We live in a society where sluttish behaviour makes you rich and famous. You know the names, I have no need to make a list. Reality TV praises the slut, denigrates the nice people. Look at the magazines aimed at later teens, read by 12-year-olds. In the UK, it’s ‘Nuts’ and ‘Zoo’. And those idiotic cretins who invented ‘slut walks’ – be proud that you look like a slut! Have they ANY idea what they are doing? (OK, reader, I’ll get down off my soap box)

Like so many words these days, slut has lost its meaning. It’s tossed around school playgrounds as easily as the old words like ‘fatty’ and ‘foureyes’. There is a distinct possibility that Amanda uses the term ‘slut’ as a badge of distinction.

The second reason: (this is appallingly sad) Amanda might have had such low self-esteem that she had become used to calling herself a slut. Why she would do this, I don’t know. From family background, I would guess the origin lay elsewhere. There are plenty of vile parents who will destroy their kids’ self-worth, but I don’t see that here. If anything, it might have been the opposite from her parents – they might have built her ego up to massive  proportions.

So why would she tag herself a slut? Did she go online, get naked, expect to get praise but get called a slut? Did she find that the only way to get the BlogTV viewers interested was to behave like a slut? It is extraordinary how dependent kids are on online feedback, and we know that Amanda was addicted to it.

Another, less probable but viable view is this: we know that Amanda possibly suffered from learning difficulties. She may well have had a huge sense that she was, in some way, a disappointment and failure. She had tried desperately to publicise herself online and elsewhere – singing, cheerleading – but it looks like the only thing she, as a person, felt that she truly excelled at, and that got her the attention, was to be a slut.

I must move on. The newbie answers a plaintive and shocked ‘oh’. Someone posts a picture.

‘lol….i kinda like sluts’ – seen as positive feedback?

The newbie asks her what made her change her mind.

‘idk why’ is Kon*** basically answering his own statement two lines above.

Another person enters the room.

Dun*** writes: ‘she is a slut she still is 1’. How is that meant? How is that taken? A joke? An insult? Horrifyingly aggressive male words? Or teen nonsense?

And then we have it:

‘all my friends found my pic’

Not ‘I’ve been stalked’. Not ‘I’ve been blackmailed’. All her friends found her pic. To me, this proves that the blackmail case is now closed. She said this to cover herself. There WAS a lot of stuff going on a la Peyton Ramsey, and it’s all very convoluted. But you can strike ‘blackmail’ and ‘stalker’ from the notebook for now.

I will leave it there for now. I’ve said enough for today. God only knows what the flak from this will be. Tomorrow, there will be more about what really happened. It might take me time.

So – return to this blog – same Philip time, same Philip channel (that’s old skool Batman, just in case no-one knew).

By the way. I gave Carol Todd as much time as possible to contribute, and I said I would not do this if she contacted me. There was no response, except from one of her supporters, so I know she received the communication. It’s up to them to tell the truth, not me.


8 thoughts on “A trip down memory lane

  1. Some minor points.

    “As you will see, the capture is from December 5th, 2010. That’s ten days after ‘cutieelover’ aka Amanda Todd joined BlogTV.” Actually, is that 10 days after she joined BlogTV or 10 days after she created that one account? I know she was known prior to 12/5/10 but I can’t recall if it was as cutieelover or under another name. A screenshot of her BTV profile page would have helped but was never done.

    The BlogTV warnings in the screencap appeared only once when somebody joined the chat session, inserted along with the ongoing conversations. It then scrolled up off the screen. BTV only retained about two “screens” worth of chat that one could read through before the oldest ones scrolled out of view permanently. One had to be good at estimating how much chat had already scrolled off the active window to effectively capture a chatlog using BTV’s built-in capture tool.

    Amanda’s broadcast was well underway when it was spotted. Intervention efforts had already been underway with other broadcasters before Amanda’s avatar was spotted with its large viewer figure. When a BTV chat was joined, the warning displayed as shown in the image, followed a few seconds later by the “You have entered the room, etc”. The number of lines of chat between the warning and the “joined” message indicates the chat was proceeding at a rapid pace, typical for a packed broadcast with so many typing at once. The initial “sexy” comment may have been part of the ongoing chat joined in progress and/or a response to something Amanda did or said.

    One thing that’s impossible to determine is what Amanda was actually saying along with her typing. Since these were live broadcasts, broadcasters often both typed and talked, so the viewers may have also been responding to what she said. Only an actual vidcap of the entire broadcast can reveal that, and caps of both the broadcaster’s image AND the text are extraordinarily rare. Cappers only cared about the final video product, while whiteknights typically only cared about the text and occasional screenshots of the broadcaster for identity purposes.

    Another thing to consider is that multiple conversations were taking place simultaneously. This is more evident in the remainder of the chatlog not shown in your image. For example, cra******** asked Amanda what made her change her mind. Apparently, kon**** thought the question was somehow addressed to him and a brief dialog ensued between those two while others continued to address Amanda.

    You left out another critical line. Amanda’s statement about all friends finding her pics was only the first part of her sentence. The second part, appearing three lines later says “and sent my boobs out to everyone in my city.” She stated “her friends” were the ones who did it after “finding her pic”. The obvious question is “where” did they find it?

    • A long comment. Always difficult to answer fully, especially when the first fag and coffee of the day haven’t kicked in.
      Last bit of the comment first.
      I try to only deal with what I can ascertain with factual evidence. This particular part of the story is complicated. The Bianca/Amanda clip never gets mentioned, but I suspect it was from earlier, simply based on the fact that they look so young. btw – the clip never gets mentioned to protect Bianca, but I guess the cops must have questioned her about ‘coercion’ and so on.
      What IS odd is that Carol Todd insists that the ‘one photo’ was the one from December 18th, whereas this evidence suggests that it would have had to have been another photo or photos. My guess is that it was the Bianca/Amanda dancing vid.
      Anyway. Let’s explain. (It’s not easy, given that most people don’t quite grasp what was going on – the mix of predator, trouble-maker and child idiot) but here goes). The best explanation is nearly always the simplest – at this point, there is nothing sinister going on.
      Amanda and her pals were idiots, e.g. inexperienced children in a shitty world of experimentation. It’s just that Amanda was even more dumb than most. When she and Bianca went online it was for laughs – we have the quote from Amanda that it was ‘no big deal’. At school, her activities would not have been a big secret – she would have chatted about it, joked about it, even boasted about it. Thus her ‘friends’ would have found the pics. Said friends would have simply passed round all the information, not with sinister intent, but purely for the lulz. So, by December 18th, Amanda would have built up a following, and it would have been unlikely that ma and pa knew.
      Now – what happened around December 18th?
      By now, Amanda would have attracted two dangers – the Anon heroes and white knights, and the trouble makers. Why dangerous? Because their tactics were similar – one lot threatening release of info to STOP further behaviour, the other to ENCOURAGE more. That is why Carol Todd gets confused,as she cannot distinguish the difference.
      Important note: I watch carefully. I strongly believe that Amanda kept her own pics on her phone to show ‘secretly’ at school. Good grief, it’s the oldest thing in history. Best friend tells best friend, that best friend tells another best friend…the whole world gets to know. This guess comes from a Carol Todd statement that basically says ‘Never ever lend your phone to someone if it has secrets on it’.
      By December 18th, the white knights are going ape. I have to guess that Amanda’s December 18th vid was almost immediately put on cameracaptures (by BlogTV? a Capper? who knows?). Carol speaks of a link to a porn site being delivered to her (not a photo as is widely assumed). This was never sent to her as part of a blackmail plot (Jeez, I’ve told this story a gazillion times) but as a wake-up call – your daughter’s in danger and this is the nuke approach. It’s just that we all know it failed miserably.
      Oh Lord this is lengthy!
      Going back to the beginning of the comment. I can’t find any specific info prior to all this so semi-guessing what went on before this date is a strain. She had been online since the age of nine. I guess the mandykinz identity would place her at about 11. However, for simplicity I place her main activity around her birthday in 2010. It would kinda make sense – a birthday present of a new laptop. But I can’t be certain.
      There IS a vidcap of the entire December 18th event. What is quite sad is that the whole thing is done for a laugh. It is quite evident that Amanda is having fun. People will no doubt argue that she wasn’t having fun blah blah blah, but she is. She laughs when she eventually flashes. And I repeat – we have the observation from her dad that Amanda considered it to be no big deal. Any talk of coercion, enticement, seduction is total bollocks.
      Anyways. The only way to know would be for certain people to fill in gaps. Most of the kids have moved on. However – I will add at this point: no lessons were learned. Most of Amanda’s delinquent friends have continued on the path to Nowheresville – laptops confiscated by parents, posts on YouTube, same old story.
      I will put out a call: Dan Limmert? Carol Todd? John Golden? Lore Nitoi? You all know what really happened. And you all know that I am the only one who has written the story close to reality. I may have a new source. He’s called Christopher. A good name.

    • OMG, not HIM again!

      It is positively frightening to see this guy’s material. Seriously, he seems like the kind you read about after a mass shooting or something, and he’s already posted death threats to you before. Perhaps a call to his local constabulary may be in order. How many other young girls does he have an interest in?

    • Hey Mr Rose greetings from New Mexico hombre! Yeah i looked at that cat’s site. I emailed him on his google mail. He actually answered everything I asked. I want no trouble from you mi amigo, nor him either. I just logged on to say he must really believe in ghosts. He told me that he watches things like documentaries on spirits. He use to be heavy as a teenager into the occult. Seems he still is. What with believing in spirit contact. But all kidding aside. My line of work besides rodeoing is correctional officer in a prison. Just saying, but I know people in law enforcement and they say through their intelligence this Coban dude is really the guy. He is bad dude. Yeah not arguing with you, but federal agents in the states work with Canadian RCMP and they work with INTERPOL. Aydan Coban is the guy who did this and you are wrong. I got no beef with you my man but just felt the urge to tell you this. It does not excuse people from saying bad things about you either. No body in law enforcement has nothing against you. I cannot say too much how I know, but people have checked you out and so far you are just a man with a blog. Interesting life you have. But just make sure you get your facts straight or you can be sued. Not criminally but libel. Just saying. Peace to you.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.