Comments

  1. Hank Fox says

    They’re still dragging their feet on the reporting, refusing to give his real name.

    I wonder what’s really going on — is he connected with a Montreal official or something?

  2. lordshipmayhem says

    Hello Hank Fox: This is the CBC, Canada’s state broadcaster, doing the reporting. They’re always very careful, lest they violate the human rights of some innocent criminal, and won’t use a real name unless and until the police do lay charges. If you are the victim, however, don’t expect any similar discretion on the part of the nation’s broadcaster – you’re guilty until proven guilty.

    The CBC likewise hasn’t reported the names of any of the 30 most wanted illegal immigrants – suspected war criminals who had gone through the entire appeals process of their cases and were awaiting deportation. They went underground, and when the Border Security released their names and mug shots, the CBC refused to even provide a link on their news web site. “Violation of human rights” was the stated excuse.

    I tend to stick to CTV or Global over the twits at the CBC.

  3. says

    Apparently, the SPVM aren’t sure if they can do anything since Markuze’s victims don’t live in Montreal. I wasn’t aware that threatening to kill somebody is only illegal when you do it to someone who lives in town. Seems like a pretty lame excuse to me.

  4. says

    Apparently, the SPVM aren’t sure if they can do anything since Markuze’s victims don’t live in Montreal.

    Oh good grief. Surely the legal question has been settled long ago, concerning threats made by a person in location A, using telecommunications facilities, against persons in location B (and C and D and E and……). And have the Montreal Humanists, Secular Students, etc, never been on the receiving end of his spew?

    The SPVM continue to drag their feet.

  5. tacitus says

    Laws governing what can and can’t be said about those merely accused of crimes vary from country to country, and given the type of broadcasting that goes on in such cases in the USA (Nancy Grace, et al) I am perfectly fine with the CBC not naming the accused in this case — it’s not as though it adds anything to the case against him.

    I am assuming that those he has threatened want justice, not a witch hunt.

  6. ehmm says

    “Hundreds if not thousands”? Are you kidding? This clown has been at this for almost twenty years. “tens, if not hundreds of thousands” is more like it.

  7. Chris from Europe says

    I agree with tacitus. The CBC’s behavior is better than the alternative. Victims that don’t want public attention to their person should be respected, of course.

  8. says

    Someone should contact ICE, Border Patrol, and the State Department about this guy. I doubt they’ll be able to influence Canadian authorities any better than the FBI has been able to, but they might be able to take action that keeps him from coming into the United States. Granted that does not due much for people in Canada, but such an action might also help shame Canadian authorities into taking action.

  9. tohellwithyourturtle says

    This is such a nice witch hunt you all are on. What’s next? I guess it won’t be /b/ because you are afraid of them. Am I witnessing the birth of the new (revised) internet hate machine? Are you so cowardly that you tremble before an internet tough guy? Grow the fuck up. Yes, Markuze is fucked in the head, that’s well established. Aren’t you equally fucked in the head for thinking you have the right to control the internet?
    Of course you’re not, you are always right. Anybody who disagrees and can’t make a coherent argument must be institutionalized. How could they not? They lack the Special Olympics…I’m sorry, the internet arguing skills that you possess. Grow the fuck up. For fuck’s sake I despise this guy as much as you do.

  10. Escuerd says

    Remember everyone, escalating death threats (along with a recent in-person appearance at at least one atheist/skeptic convention) are nothing to worry about as long as they’re made over the internet. If you think they should be taken seriously, then you’re exactly as deranged as Dennis Markuze.

    [Insert awkward, irony-immune reference to a dated, but mildly amusing internet meme.]

  11. says

    tohellwithyourturtle:

    Of course you’re not, you are always right. Anybody who disagrees and can’t make a coherent argument must be institutionalized.

    No one is put out by the fact that Mabus is incoherent or annoying. The actual concern (and please try to understand this, you stupid stupid stupid little man) is the escalating number of death threats.

  12. democommie says

    tohellwithyourturtle:

    It’s a well known fact that people who threaten to kill people never, ever, like, you know, actually do that sort of thing./bs

    Thanks for your input, I hope you wiped after spewing it–and that you washed your hands THOROUGHLY before preparing or eating any food.

  13. highnumber says

    tohellwithyourturtle:
    He’s clearly more than a bit different from an Internet Tuff Gai. That’s a horrible comparison.

  14. Valhar2000 says

    Lordshipmayhem: I think that refusing to name him (and other people accused of crimes) is an excellent idea. I wish American networks would do the same. The accused should only be named (in connection with their crimes) when they have been convicted and the viewers can thus be sure that they are guilty of the crime, otherwise, they will likely make the same assumption, but they may be wrong.

    In other words, the war criminals you talk about should be named, but not Mabus. People who, nonetheless, want to know who this crazy guy form Montreal is can damn well comes to these blogs, read his comments and find exactly what it is he is being accused of doing, and how much truth there is in those accusations.

  15. Mithiwithi says

    tohellwithyourturtle said:

    trollin’ trollin’ trollin’

    You must be new here. FYI, Mabus has been spotted stalking people like PZ in real life. If that doesn’t seem like a big deal, recall that it’s typically all the warning you ever get before someone starts getting all shooty/stubby/bomby.

  16. Mu says

    I still haven’t seen a good legal analysis of this mess, it has to be a nightmare. Is it actually the responsibility of the Montreal police, or would it be a federal offense? Is it some form or misdemeanor harassment or does it climb to the level of a felony attempted murder? All this “it’s a crime, idiot” doesn’t help unless you can show it’s a crime you can actually prosecute with a reasonable chance at conviction at a reasonable cost. Does a DA or whatever the Canadian equivalent is want to tie down his computer crime specialists sorting through the 25 email accounts PZ described, and then fly in PZ to testify that he actually felt threatened when he routinely deleted the emails as part of a daily ritual? After which a psychologist might testify “yes he’s a lunatic but with no actual intention to act at his threats”, and sees him send to anger management class?
    Probably the best one can hope for is that he gets classified as a terrorist threat and blocked from entry into the USA, to go with a continuous monitoring of his communications. At which point he will most likely make a mistake which can be prosecuted, a la tax evasion for Al Capone.

  17. tohellwithyourturtle says

    Once again, why so cowardly? What are you afraid of? What do you think will happen?
    He’s less of a troll than what you get from the moraltards on /b. Grow a pair and let him try to assault you and kick his pasty ass. It’s not that hard. DM exists in the online world only, barring showing up at a con that he ran from.
    Once again, if you are truly scared, wo/man up and restrain him if violence is inherent. What the fuck are you afraid of?

  18. tohellwithyourturtle says

    I honestly beg DM to come to a con in Ohio. Considering the shit he has said to me, well…it’s his chance to prove his righteousness, we’ll say.
    Is what I said ridiculous? Yes. Then again, so is your witchhunt. Grow up.

  19. says

    tohellwithyourturtle says:

    I honestly beg DM to come to a con in Ohio. Considering the shit he has said to me, well…it’s his chance to prove his righteousness, we’ll say.

    You honestly want a potentially violent, mentally ill person turning up at a public gathering? Your idea for dealing with the situation is to “Grow a pair and let him try to assault you and kick his pasty ass”? Is violence always your preferred method for dealing with the mentally ill?

    This “witchhunt” is an attempt to forestall a possible act of violence. Your desired outcome seems to be a bit of violent drama, at the expense of someone who is ill. Our desired outcome is to let trained professionals deal calmly with the situation. If his condition is treatable, then hopefully he will get that treatment.

    And yet, despite your childish posturing, and meandering semi-coherent diatribes, you have the temerity to tell us to “grow up”. How old are you? From both the quality of your “arguments”, and the quality of your writing, I’d say no higher than 12. Quite frankly, you’re making a fool of yourself.

  20. The Christian Cynic says

    I honestly beg DM to come to a con in Ohio. Considering the shit he has said to me, well…it’s his chance to prove his righteousness, we’ll say.

    Oh, so you’re the Internet Tough Guy. Good to know.

    (Also, I’m amused by people who think they’re so badass that they can take on any comers. If DM brought a gun, though, I don’t think you’d be so confident with your mad fighting skillz.)

  21. says

    The Christian Cynic says:

    Also, I’m amused by people who think they’re so badass that they can take on any comers. If DM brought a gun, though, I don’t think you’d be so confident with your mad fighting skillz.

    In his adolescent fantasies, he’d probably dodge the bullets and then masterfully kick the gun out the attackers hand, as onlookers marveled at how awesome and grown-up he was.

  22. Chuck C says

    tohellwithyourturtle vomited:

    I honestly beg DM to come to a con in Ohio. Considering the shit he has said to me, well…it’s his chance to prove his righteousness, we’ll say.

    Hmm… seems to me there was a guy named Gribbit who used to come around here and make threats like yours: he turned out to be feckless, ignorant, and impotent. Were you separated at birth, maybe?.

Leave a Reply