Even more fake letters.

Simon Mason said:

Thanks to James H. for pointing out the fake letter in
today's Mail on Sunday with my name and address. The gist
of the letter is that the police should leave motorists
driving at 35 mph alone and crack down on pavement
cyclists etc. There is one sad weirdo out there with a bee
in their bonnet!

You might be able to get some info off the MoS - I would
expect them to have made contact with the author in which
case they would have the contact details. I would also
consider mentioning it to the police - identity theft is
illegal and could lead to worse over time.

Tony

On Sun, 4 Jul 2004 16:37:10 +0100, "Simon Mason"
<[email hidden]> wrote in message
<[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

Thanks to James H. for pointing out the fake letter in
today's Mail on Sunday with my name and address.

Time to take action, I'd say. At the very least the MoS need
to print a retraction, and I agree with Tony, I'd inform the
police. This is harrassment.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after
posting. chapmancentral.co.ukchapmancentral.co.ukOpen ↗

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at
Washington University

"Tony Raven" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Simon Mason said:

Thanks to James H. for pointing out the fake letter in
today's Mail on Sunday with my name and address. The
gist of the letter is that the

police

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

should leave motorists driving at 35 mph alone and crack
down on

pavement

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

cyclists etc. There is one sad weirdo out there with a
bee in their

bonnet!

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

You might be able to get some info off the MoS - I would
expect them to have made contact with the author in which
case they would have the contact details.

...

But presumably the MoS assume the author is Simon Mason
posting from Simon Mason's address. If he gave a different
name and a different address then presumably they wouldn't
have publshed it under Simon's name and address in the
first place.

..

Quoted message said:

I would also consider mentioning it to the police -
identity theft is illegal and could lead to worse
over time.

...

If this person is using Simon Mason's full addressm rather
than a partial address, then not only is this illegal in a
criminal sense,
i.e impersonation, but in principle it's also actionable in
Civil Law. However any likely damages would proably be
miniscule. The point being that the newspaper wouldn't
have printed the letter unless it accorded with the views
of the average MoS reader i.e Juror. You'd imagine the
newspapers probably also have a standard legal defence to
cover such circumstances, but there's no reason why they
shouldn't print an apology and a retraction nevertheless.

The real problem though would finding the culprit which
would appear to be next to impossible, given the likely
available resources.

Curious

Quoted message said:

Tony

Simon Mason typed:

Quoted message said:

Thanks to James H. for pointing out the fake letter in
today's Mail on Sunday with my name and address. The gist
of the letter is that the police should leave motorists
driving at 35 mph alone and crack down on pavement
cyclists etc. There is one sad weirdo out there with a bee
in their bonnet!

Gotta agree with Tony and Guy .. it sounds like this
'impersonator' might get serious .. then where will you be
.. At least, even if the police can do nothing immediately,
your knowledge of the impersonation and your concerns of it,
should then become a matter of record, 'just in case'.

--
Paul ...

(8(|) ... Homer Rocks

Dr Curious said:

But presumably the MoS assume the author is Simon Mason
posting from Simon Mason's address. If he gave a different
name and a different address then presumably they wouldn't
have publshed it under Simon's name and address in the
first place.

My experience of the bigger papers is they get positive
confirmation that it is from a real person at a real address
either by phoning, if a phone number is given or by writing
if its an address.

Tony

"Tony Raven" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Dr Curious said:

But presumably the MoS assume the author is Simon Mason
posting from Simon Mason's address. If he gave a
different name and a different address then presumably
they wouldn't have publshed it under Simon's name and
address in the first place.

My experience of the bigger papers is they get positive
confirmation that it is from a real person at a real
address either by phoning, if a phone number is given or
by writing if its an address.

You would have thought so. But then the impersonator is
hardly likely to be living in the same street. Even allowing
that the actual house number probably won't be an issue, as
it won't be printed anyway. So a postal enquiry is out. But
then given the availability of off the shelf pay-as-you-go
mobiles, presumably they only check using land-line numbers
nowadays. In which case you'd imagine the impersonator has
either cooked his chips by giving a valid contact number*,
or simply wouldn't be that stupid to start with.

Curious

* Even if they used a work number, they'd still need to take
the call as "Simon Mason".

Quoted message said:

Tony

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
<[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

Gotta agree with Tony and Guy .. it sounds like this
'impersonator' might get serious

Also a good opportunity to get your real point of view
printed as part of the retraction :-)

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after
posting. chapmancentral.co.ukchapmancentral.co.ukOpen ↗

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at
Washington University

Dr Curious [email hidden] opined the following...

Quoted message said:

* Even if they used a work number, they'd still need to
take the call as "Simon Mason".

Or just answer "Hello".

The usual response to this is "Is that Mr..."?

Jon

"Jon Senior" <jon_AT_restlesslemon_DOTco_DOT_uk> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Dr Curious [email hidden] opined the following...

Quoted message said:

* Even if they used a work number, they'd still need to
take the call as "Simon Mason".

Or just answer "Hello".

Quoted message said:

The usual response to this is "Is that Mr..."?

Only if he gave a work extension. That's the point.

In which case he'd be immediately traceable.

Otherwise if the call was routed through the switchboard,
the switchboard operater would need to be informed if the
subtefuge beforehand.

Capiche?

Curious

Quoted message said:

Jon

On Sun, 04 Jul 2004 19:08:47 +0100, Tony Raven <[email hidden]>

wrote in message : said:

My experience of the bigger papers is they get positive
confirmation that it is from a real person at a real
address either by phoning, if a phone number is given or by
writing if its an address.

Not happened to me, and I have had letters published in most
of the broadsheets by now.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after
posting. chapmancentral.co.ukchapmancentral.co.ukOpen ↗

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at
Washington University

"Simon Mason" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Thanks to James H. for pointing out the fake letter in
today's Mail on Sunday with my name and address. The gist
of the letter is that the police should leave motorists
driving at 35 mph alone and crack down on pavement
cyclists etc. There is one sad weirdo out there with a bee
in their

bonnet!

It's obviously P**l Sm**h and he's having a laugh reading
this thread ....

On Sun, 04 Jul 2004 20:00:23 +0100 someone who may be "Just zis Guy,
you know?" <[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

Not happened to me, and I have had letters published in
most of the broadsheets by now.

The Glasgow Herald always used to telephone people and I
imagine still does.

--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number
F566DA0E I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK
government prevents me using the RIP Act 2000.

Hi Simon,

I feel we have a profile of this crank building up. Daily
Mail reader, anti-cyclist and pro zero-tolerance policing,
however strongly opposed to the law being used to regulate
driver behaviour or enforce speed limits. Also wants
national service bringing back. Given the number of
authoritarian 'libertarians' and downright Fascists we have
in the UK that really narrows it down!

I have sent another e-mail to the Hull Daily Mail pointing
out the latest bogus letter and asking them to check any
letter claiming to be from yourself, me or Mr Minns.

Howard.

"Howard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Hi Simon,

I feel we have a profile of this crank building up. Daily
Mail reader, anti-cyclist and pro zero-tolerance policing,
however strongly opposed to the law being used to regulate
driver behaviour or enforce speed limits. Also wants
national service bringing back. Given the number of
authoritarian 'libertarians' and downright Fascists we
have in the UK that really narrows it down!

I have sent another e-mail to the Hull Daily Mail pointing
out the latest bogus letter and asking them to check any
letter claiming to be from yourself, me or Mr Minns.

Howard.

Thanks Howard, I sent the MoS the following.

Dear Sir/Madam,

"In today's (4 JUL 04) Mail on Sunday letters page you
published a letter purporting to be from myself. The gist
of this letter was that motorists be left alone and
cyclists clamped down on. The writer of the letter is a
phoney who has persistently had published fake letters in
my home city's local paper the Hull Daily Mail slating
cyclists and has not only hijacked my name but two other
pro-cycling letter writers as well. Could you possibly give
any clues as to the identity of this individual so that
they can be exposed?"

Haven't had a reply yet, but it is extremely unlikely that
there will be a retraction published, as even the greatest
stars only get a tiny column somewhere when a major story
about them turns out to be false, so I've no chance!

I think I know who it is now though. There was a persistent
letter writer to the Hull Daily Mail called "P. Scott" of
Tranby Lane, Anlaby (yeah right! not in the phone book) or
sometimes it was Tranby Road or Priory Road; he seems to get
addresses confused. He sent in letter after letter
obsessively going on about cyclists with no lights,
sometimes directly asking me what I thought should be done
about them. "P. Scott" of course is probably not his real
name and unfortunately the HDM archives don't seem to go
back beyond JAN 04, otherwise I could show a whole list of
letters under that name that fits his profile perfectly. All
that's on the archive is this:

May I comment on the letter to you from P Scott (Letters,
January 14), "Are there laws about cycle lanes"?

--
Simon M.

Dr Curious said:

that the newspaper wouldn't have printed the letter
unless it accorded with the views of the average MoS
reader i.e Juror.

No. The Mail and the MoS have printed several letters from
Simon during the last year or two. The majority of these
have been pro cycling, the sort of comments he usually
makes here.

James

Dr Curious:

Quoted message said:

Only if he gave a work extension. That's the point.

You're making a few assumptions that may not be valid.

d.

"davek" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Dr Curious:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Only if he gave a work extension. That's the point.

You're making a few assumptions that may not be valid.

d.

Go on then. Surprise me.

Curious

...

Dr Curious:

Quoted message said:

Go on then. Surprise me.

The culprit's place of work may not operate a switchboard.
The culprit may be a bored housewife ("Mrs Average"?). etc.
you get the gist

d.

Simon Mason said:

Haven't had a reply yet, but it is extremely unlikely that
there will be a retraction published, as even the greatest
stars only get a tiny column somewhere when a major story
about them turns out to be false, so I've no chance!

It falls under section one of the PCC code :

"1 Accuracy

i) The Press must take care not to publish inaccurate,
misleading or distorted information, including pictures."

They obviously don't check the letters, and so are failing
under the code. If your don't get a published retraction
from the paper, make a complaint to the PCC, they will take
if further.

Steve