Are you a proper autist, with an autism certificate, or did you diagnose yourself with a quiz on Buzzfeed?
According to Tervenet, Ma Farrow is a self-diagnosed autist.
Anywayz, there is someone there ('Mycatwantsmedead ') purporting to be a fan of Ma Farrow:
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4794032-caroline-f-new-arrest-harassment?page=10 https://archive.fo/wip/cdf2c
This pompous drivel reads like the sort of thing Fat Tony would write.
It's worth noting that this person, has no posts on Tervesnet aside from this one.
Post follows, with my commentary
I am on side with CF, but @Felix125 is correct.
'I am swatting CF, and Felix125 is a kindred spirit as a copper/nonce.'
The police have a duty to investigate and if CF is to be believed, they began demanding to speak to her urgently this week which prompted her to spiral.
It seems doubtful that they are under any sort of obligation to follow up claims from noncing abusive litigants like you, Fat Tony. The second part of the sentence seems reasonably accurate.
It is reasonable and proportionate to arrest someone to prevent a crime or if they are in the process of committing it.
You wot m8?
It can be reasonably inferred that CF’s alleged crimes, remembering innocent until proven guilty, were not of a violent nature. CF does not seem the type to put in someone’s windows, and I cannot see her visiting anyone’s property to leave notes or objects.
True.
What then, was CF doing? She was fervently and imprudently posting in what appeared to the impartial observer, an agitated state.
This is probably accurate also.
What had caused CF to become so agitated? She said that the police rang her on her birthday, wanting to interview her over new allegations that had occurred subsequent to her arrest. She also then received a welfare check.
Translation: you knew it was her birthday and you arranged for the rozzers to harass her some.
The complainant must have perceived that her online behaviour was posing some risk to their safety. CF needed to be arrested to prevent her from continuing to commit online crimes that harmed the victim.
You wot m8? You just said she was not putting in yer winders, so what kind of risk is she posing to your safety by being autistic on the internets?
Lisa Townsend is coming out in favour of the police because they may have acted procedurally correctly.
Yes, that seems to be correct in that Ma Farrow apparently agreed to attend an interview which she did not turn up to, whether she did this because she loves drama, because drama loves her, or just because she's a bit of a mess is not really the point.
That should not imply agreement with what has happened to CF or that it is just. My suspicion is that the victim claimed that CF's posts were an imminent threat to life.
Lol. 'My suspicion'.
CF’s Twitter feed made reference to 3 policemen and also a policewoman who would have been needed to perform the requisite searches. This makes more sense operationally.
If you'd not post this tedious legal bullshit that nobody cares about but you, it'd be less obvious that it's you posting this, Tony.
My take is that CF is the victim of narcissistic abuse and needs to seek an expert trauma-informed professional..
You w0t? She's a victim of an unprofessional litigant nonce, and the victim of herself. Trying to pretend this is about some ancient blog is a failed distraction attempt.
The claims about the blog are wild, and the screenshots produced on CF’s Twitter feed are worrisome..
I don't think the claims are particularly 'wild', I viewed the blog at the time and it was in a similar vein to previous attacks on Mother Farrow, by the rent-a-womb faggots she criticized previously, and a result of publicly criticising degenerate types while being a target for criticism oneself
I searched on the Antipodean registry for some background on the blog to contextualise and authenticate CF's claims. Their archivists have missed a beat..
No, Tony. Farrow is a cow but a generally sympathetic figure; nobody here is obligated to archive the ravings of the degenerates who attack her.
I then checked the Wayback machine and archive today (archive.ph) for the URL cited by Farrow. The results are astonishing.
No, Tony. Even if you helpfully provide the url for 'archive today', the terves of Mumsnet are not:
a) going to know the name of the blog you are trying desperately to get people to look at
b) still less be able to/arsed to work out the url for said blog.
c) work out how to do a wildcard search
d) have nothing better to do than to look at the half-decade-old ravings of the demented and degenerate, on a site no long accessible to the public
Still less are they going to accept that this abrogates your responsibility for whining to the cops every few weeks that Ma Farrow hurt your fee-fees as hard as you hurt that little boy's rectum.
