Archive for Cyber Bullying

Stephen Manning’s Continuing Lie on Peacebringer’s blog about Diggory Press and the Nielsens Book Data memo

On Peacebringer’s blog, Stephen T Manning of Checkpoint Press, Ireland, has continued to lie about, bully and harass some of his victims.

On the 15th March 2010, ‘Dr’ Manning, posting in the name of ‘For The Record’ says in order to continue to discredit Rosalind Franklin and her publishing company Diggory Press Ltd: (you can click on this image to enlarge it)

Stephen T Manning is basically pulling out of his hat one of his old (long discredited lies) concerning the Nielsens Book Data memo, the memo from May 2007 which is posted in its entirety at this link: memo, and indeed he’s even added some new lies of his into the mix about this same memo.

Before we got into the newest lies about the memo posted at Peacebringer’s, it is important to examine the old lies, and the reasons for Manning’s old lies about the memo. You might want to take a few minutes to read the memo for yourself, if you have not already, as it makes interesting reading. The Nielsens book data memo was very important, because it contained essential information that any seeker of the truth could read, use and access to verify who was telling the truth; Stephen Manning/Checkpoint Press or Rosalind Franklin/Diggory Press. And even more importantly, it was verifiable information from a key authority and neutral third party witness.

Stephen T Manning, of course, knew the memo’s importance, he also knew if authors did check out the facts for themselves and contacted Nielsens as Diggory Press suggested he would be found out and thoroughly exposed for the liar he really was. So Manning’s only way out was to throw up a complete smokescreen – a red herring – a new lie. This new lie was simple. Not to answer or rebuff any of the actual points of fact within the memo, but to completely misdirect people with a new lie and claim that the memo was a ‘forgery’. Manning said the memo pretended to be authored by Nielsens and yet was not authored by Nielsens, so was therefore ‘a devious fabrication’ of Rosalind Franklin’s. Yet nobody apart from Manning had ever claimed that the memo originated within Nielsen’s: it was actually a memo written by Diggory Press Ltd that was requested by a member of Nielsen’s staff for Nielsen’s staff, containing salient information on the Manning “campaign” to circulate so they could more adequately answer any queries on it.

The memo was first sent to Nielsens on the 4th May 2007, and later that same evening, Diggory Press posted the memo onto the books and tales forum at this link. The memo must be read in its context for what had already been said by Diggory Press immediately preceding it being posted, and what was said just after it. This comment below, for example, from Diggory Press immediately preceded the memo – so in this post Diggory Press is telling any concerned authors to contact the UK isbn agency, an independent witness, and ask them point by point whether there was any truth to Manning’s claims about the isbn agency investigating Diggory Press for dirty dealing etc –

Posted: Fri May 04, 2007 8:25 pm

“Mr Manning has gone too far, getting so carried away by revelling in his malicious glee at this smear campaign that he has shot himself in the foot. He has told a big whopping lie that can be shown to be exactly that… a lie. Yes, I challenge each and every author who still doubts us to phone Nielsens on the phone number Mr Manning has so kindly supplied here and ask them if there is any truth to these claims OR if these wild claims are even technically possible. For those authors who do not want to make the phone call I am attaching the memo to the end of this posting that is doing the rounds at Nielsens’ regarding these vicious claims. NIELSENS ARE A CREDIBLE INDEPENDENT WITNESS. For the record, the only complaint Nielsens have ever recieved re Diggory or its imprints has been ONE from Mr Manning and it has not been given any credence by them, as it is ‘utterly groundless’ with ample evidence to the contrary as well as of course, being technically impossible. Nielsen’s also indicate Mr Manning and Checkpoint’s incompetence in not following the correct publishing procedure and thus indicate the only ‘abuse’ of the isbn system or the not following it to the letter with the breech of isbn protocols has been done by Manning himself! The only correct thing he ever did with Nielsens was cancelling the title which they would have done at any time for him, and is no reflection of their view of Diggory Press, they just do what the publisher tells them.

Hate to say ‘we told you so,’ but we did tell you so….

THESE LIES PROVE THAT ‘STEPHEN MANNING PHD’ as well as being incompetent IS A BLATANT LIAR, and that we are TELLING THE TRUTH…’

The Nielsen’s Book Data memo is then posted in full underneath this comment in a new post. These two posts NEVER claimed the memo to be originating at Nielsens Book Data. And in fact Diggory Press makes even clearer the authorship and purpose of the memo a few posts on.

Stephen Manning, however, in order to turn attention from the vital truth the memo contained, and to divert people from contacting the very people that would show his lies up for what they were, lied about this and threw up a smokescreen by saying Rosalind Franklin of Diggory Press was claiming Nielsens had written it. On May 08 2007 he says at the books and tales site:

“… So it can now be stated categorically for the record that the supposed ‘memo’ above, represented by Ms. Franklin as being an internal commentary within Neilsens, is yet another devious fabrication.””

On May 12 2007, Diggory Press said in response to this comment:

“… we are being fully open, and readily inviting everyone to go and check out the facts for themselves. If we had anything to hide we would NOT be calling Manning’s bluff and asking authors to check out the facts for themselves. We are frustrated beyond belief that an ‘unbiased’ author forum that is supposed to know a little bit about publishing does not know, or will not admit to, the very fundamental fact that no publisher can steal another publisher’s isbn as Manning keeps wrongly insisting we have done, among the many other wild and impossible things he claims.

As we have stated before we encourage all authors who doubt us to contact Nielsens direct to see who the deceptive one truly is. I invite one unbiased person who Cleaa is happy to verify is not us or Manning, to phone up Nielsens and ask them to confirm all the points made in the memo and then post their findings on here. Nielsens will confirm every single fact we have posted and thus Mr Manning’s story will be thoroughly discredited.

For the record, the Nielsens’ memo posted on here is not ‘contrived’ – neither was is ‘unsolicited’ – this detailed statement for Nielsens management was requested from us from a staff member of Nielsens on Friday 4th May, and it was sent by us that same day. It was requested by Nielsens in order that it can be circulated internally in its entirety (as a memo) so staff are fully aware of the lies about us being currently peddled by Mr Manning, and are equipped with the full facts if any author does phone in. Before the memo was written, all the factual points re Nielsens were thoroughly verified and checked and cross-checked with all the Nielsens data on their systems and agreed by them. However, we did not claim that Nielsens were the author of the memo – what we rightly said was that it was a memo doing the rounds at Nielsens and the facts could and would be verified to anyone calling in enquiring about them.”

So Diggory Press restated what they had said before about the origins and purpose of this memo, restated what they had not claimed about it, and also made clear its authorship. Diggory Press repeated in several other posts on the same website that they were the author of the memo, and repeated they had never denied being the memo’s author. Yet for all that, Manning continued to bluster and misdirect people, and continued to claim Rosalind had lied.

Now, in March 2010 almost three years on from this, Manning goes back and repeats the lie about the memo being false, even though HE KNOWS THIS IS NOT TRUE. He then falsely claims that “Mrs Franklin has long and often claimed … [it] originated at Nielsens” yet it can be seen she or diggory press did not claim this once, let alone claimed this “long and often”, and actually have clearly and explicitly said the opposite. It is yet another creative invention of Manning’s to say that Rosalind Franklin presented the memo in the way alluded to in the court, as someone who has seen the court papers and read the court transcripts can verify – Rosalind did no such thing. Manning is the proven liar here – yet again – as the court papers and court records prove.

Manning then alludes to a supposed recent email to him on the matter from the CEO of Nielsens. I have no way of knowing if this email alluded to is genuine yet nor been able to verfiy who it’s really from, nor do I know what has been edited out of it or what question/s it was responding to if it is actually genuine. Manning is already proven to have lied about Nielsens many times before already, as well as falsified evidence and perjured himself in court and misrepresented screenshots of websites out of context in his rogue’s gallery saying they said something they never did, so it would not be surprising to see similar tactics again emanating from him.  Even if the quote is genuine, it seems most likely Manning sent the CEO a falsified web-link or a fake screenshot, as the link quoted by the ‘CEO’ in this ’email’ is not to the genuine memo as it was posted at Books and Tales, and/or then Manning presented with this false ‘evidence’ the same old lie that Rosalind Franklin/Diggory Press had said the memo quoted originated at Nielsens which she never in fact had.

It’s also very interesting that Manning does NOT post the facts from the CEO that Diggory Press never claimed to be the publisher of his book, isn’t it, or all the other debunking Nielsens could do of his various claims? Of course he doesn’t, as that would should him up as the liar and extortionist he is.

Even if what is quoted is a genuine quote, all it tells us is that should there has been any representation on the internet or elsewhere that the memo or its contents were approved or originated by Nielsen, as purported by Manning in the screenshot/web-link shown the CEO along with Manning’s misinformation, this claim would be misleading. Which we know already, but we know also that it never happened. But we do know for a fact who is continuing to misrepresent the facts for his own twisted ends and who says it did happen. And that is the evil liar, ‘Dr’ S T Manning.

Comments (1)

Miriam Franklin fraud? (endtimespropheticwords blogger)

Read all the truth here at this blog and read about the real victims involved in this saga! The story is more shocking and more dirty than one could possibly imagine.

Comments (4)

Diggory Press v Stephen T Manning Court Case. DIGITAL FILES – THEFT AND EXTORTION

One of the many unreasonable demands that Stephen T Manning of Checkpoint Press, Dooagh Village, Achill Island, Eire has made of Diggory Press Ltd is that “his” digital files are “returned” to him.

Before we investigate this bogus claim, a quick explanation is needed as to what these digital files are:

Stephen T Manning hired Diggory Press Ltd to make his manuscript “print ready” for the printers. This involved Diggory Press creating a front and rear cover and spine for the title, and making sure the title’s cover was the right format, size and print resolution. It involved placing a proper book barcode on it, and working on the book interior, again ensuring it was the right size with fonts correctly embedded at the correct dpi, and so on and so forth. These digital files for the cover and text interior were then checked over and authorised by Manning, and were then sent on to the digital printers to print Manning’s book “on demand’.

Digital files have value because of all the “man hours” of labour behind them in creating them during pre publication work. Even in a digital age, the costs for typesetting, cover art and other such pre production work can be very expensive. Most firms you’d be lucky to get change out of £500 for a very basic service from them – and this would not be counting in the costs of corrections, where each and every correction, however small, can easily cost a minimum of £50 a time.

Digital files also have value in their future potential. Because they are needed to digitally produce and print a book (or ebook), they are an asset because of the potential royalties on any book sales produced by using these digital files.

Everybody in the printing and publishing process knows the value of digital files  – especially the self publishing author.

A few printers or agents may offer significantly discounted price pre-publication work to create digital files for authors or publishers, provided that the digital files they produce for the author or publisher are only used by and through their print services. They’ll often have a minimum amount of copies the author has to buy to recoup what profit was “lost” at the pre production stage, and/or have a minimum contract and tie-in to cover themselves in the future to ensure the author has to come back to them for more books.

So even though the content of the book (e.g. the story) is fully the author’s, and it is his or her copyright, and is (usually) his or hers to use as they wish and even have printed and produced elsewhere, the cut-price digital files produced by the printer or agent on the author’s behalf are not the author’s property.

So digital files produced in such a way are NOT the author’s property. And they would not be ‘returned’ to the author, as they were never ‘given’ by the author in the first place.

A printer or agent would not be “seizing and highjacking” the title (as Manning wrongly claims Diggory Press did) by refusing to “return” digital files when there was a parting of ways, nor would they be “making extortive demands” (ditto, Manning) by asking a reasonable market price for the digital files so the author could freely use them anywhere else he wanted to in the future.

To explain this a little bit more clearly for technophobes – it’s rather like if you go and get something printed at an old fashioned printers (i.e. a non digital printers that use print plates). Even though the printer may design your item of stationery for you, and then create print plates especially for your stationery, and then print off your stationery items using these same print plates, you as this printer’s customer would have no right of ownership to the valuable print plates he used to produce your item. You’d only have rights to the end item, the actual stationery produced. You could not take that printer’s plates to use at another printers for a new print run! Unless of course, you bought the plates from the first printers by separate negotiation. (It’s possible also that the printer’s design for your stationery would be copyrighted, so if you produced ‘knock off’ items on your photocopier or at another printers you could also be breaching the printer’s copyright and breaking the law.)

Manning took Rosalind Franklin personally (not the Diggory Press Ltd company she worked for) to the small claims court, suing her for “his” digital files along with a load of other concocted nonsense he’d made up to smear her. This was part of Manning’s ongoing harassment against Rosalind, an openly Christian businesswoman.

The small claims court is a civil (not criminal court) where anyone can attempt to sue anyone else for pretty much anything  – it does not mean their claim has any truth or substance to it whatsoever, or is even against the right person to being with. (Manning even had the brazenness to claim relief from court fees to make his abusive, fictitious and harassing claims, but that’s another story.)

So anyway there was a court case between Manning and Rosalind Franklin of Diggory Press where a judge heard evidence about Manning’s digital files claim.

Rosalind Franklin of Diggory Press Ltd when giving evidence on this issue explained it to the court by equating it to a professional wedding photographer taking photos at a wedding. The photographer takes “your pictures”, using your face, in your environment at your wedding, having been ordered by you and paid for by your money; and he’s working on your behalf in response to your specific requests. You are entitled to purchase pictures taken under this deal from the photographer as many times as you like in the future, however you would NOT be entitled to have outright ownership of the negativescontaining “your images” of “your occasion” (unless this was separately stipulated in the contract). And you would also be technically breaking the photographer’s copyright if you tried to bypass the photographer and get prints of his work elsewhere, or otherwise tried to copy it by scanning it or photocopying it. In such a way, Rosalind Franklin successfully argued, digital files were like the negatives of the book, and the author had no rights to demand them for free, especially and even more so when the contract between Diggory Press Ltd and Manning clearly stipulated that digital files remained the property of the publisher and would have to be purchased by separate negotiation.

Under such circumstances, any newly-wed trying to sue his wedding photographer for “his” negatives, and any author trying to sue the printers for “his” print plates would be laughed out of court – rather as Manning was, the judge ruling in Rosalind Franklin and Diggory Press’s favour in November 2009 that Manning had no right to the digital files Diggory Press had worked on for him  – which, of course, Manning had known all along anyway.

The evidence illustrates Manning had not been innocently mistaken. The abundant evidence shows that Manning knew the files were not his to keep from day one. This is shown in his own emails on the issue before his failed extortion attempt, as well as the clear contract between him and Diggory which was not in tiny print, plus there is more damning evidence from his own Checkpoint Press publishing website which I’ll go into shortly. Also, IF these digital files were Manning’s property, then once the finalised files had been checked over and authorised by Manning, Manning would have then used these files directly with the printers for himself instead of continuing to use Diggory Press as the middleman once the publishing process was over, as he did in fact do. He would not have placed orders for books with DP but with the printers direct instead. So his behaviour for many months after the files were finished for him makes no sense unless he is lying now, which we, of course, assert.

Rosalind Franklin has consistently stated to the courts and the police that Manning is not innocent – he is a criminal, a serial blackmailer who was trying to extort these valuable files along with some money from Diggory Press, with the threat to smear her and her business if she did not give into his unreasonable demands.  She refused, and the rest, as they say, is history.

Diggory Press as a company, and RF as a person, have had one of the most sustained, lying, hateful and vindictive orchestrated smear campaigns conducted against them possible. This is in addition to everything else behind the scenes such as death threats, And for what? All for Manning’s greed – and a sick pleasure at taunting and punishing his prey for not giving into him, boasting he is teaching them a lesson.  Even though Manning’s first alleged extortion attempt failed, Manning is allegedly carrying on lying, smearing, threatening, bullying, intimidating and harassing his prey with the hope that she will crack and bow under all the relentless pressure and pay him off.

Manning by his writings demonstrates an evident hatred against professing evangelical Christians like Rosalind Franklin so this may be an additional motive for his harassment. Certainly Manning taunts her regularly calling her deluded for holding her professed beliefs. Manning has revealed he hated that Rosalind Franklin and Diggory Press helped produce a Christian charity’s “non tolerant” book which showed up religious cults and sects including the Unification church (the Moonies) to which Manning and his spouse (that he was married to in a Moonie mass wedding ceremony) have had long term associations. So who knows all this criminal’s additional motives in this campaign other than ‘pure’ greed for filthy lucre and personal ambition.

The ironic thing for all their vilification is that Diggory Press Ltd had been so good to Manning and had significantly undercharged him. Rosalind Franklin personally had gone more than the extra mile with Manning at a tiny price, and had graciously put up with him taking a lot of liberties even before he made his extortive demands. She personally, and the company, gave an excellent service at a fraction of all the other firms out there – doing literally ten times more for authors, at literally ten times less the price charged by most other self publishing operators. It was no wonder that in a tainted industry Diggory Press shone and had such an impeccable reputation, and no wonder they were growing so rapidly with so many repeat customers. Until Manning started to smear them, that is.

For a web based business dependant on getting custom through the web, mud sticks. And one malicious man can pretend to be many people from the safety of his computer, and make it appear something has gone on to “the many” that has not even happened to the one. Diggory Press WERE too good to be true, but only because Rosalind was a mug and charged too little for what she did. But for those what suspected it was too good to be true, when they heard the mud they were all too inclined to believe it.

In addition to all Manning’s lies against Diggory Press and Rosalind Franklin and any other innocents caught in the path – hundreds and hundreds of Manning lies, ever evolving, constantly contradicting –  and an ongoing barrage of other dirty tricks, threats and harassment, Manning did dirty things like entering multiple false claims against Diggory Press Ltd in the small claims court (alleging anything damaging he could make up), and then going to the press and saying “Diggory Press have all these claims against them for fraud, theft, abuse etc etc  ..” and the press printed that as fed to them by Manning without checking it out. This sounded terrible and did make their name mud, but what the reckless press did not report was all these claims were all nonsense claims entered and paid and sponsored for by Manning, operator of a wannabe rival business, Checkpoint Press, and that none of these claims had any truth or substance to them – some of these claims even used false names!

Some of these claims were so bogus it was laughable (e.g. the person, “VK’ who was not even a customer claiming £250 for the loss of an unsolicited CD disc she’d supposedly sent into DP), – laughable claims that is, if it had not had such a devastating affect on Rosalind and her business, and also the genuine Diggory Press customers who suffered because of Manning’s criminal and perjurious activity which in time affected all of them.

Anyway, here is the evidence from Manning’s own Checkpoint Press website. (You can click on any of the images to enlarge them). The screenshots are evidence that Manning is well aware about who owns digital files in the publishing process. Here is what Manning says to HIS own prospective self publishing authors about digital files – taken over three different screenshots –  so he doesn’t just say it one time. He obviously knows the custom and is not an innocently mistaken author! What a total menace he is – and a hypocrite. It’s one rule for him, and another rule for anyone else.

Screenshot 1 from Checkpoint Press, Achill Island

Screenshot 2 from Checkpoint Press, Achill Island

Screenshot 3 from Checkpoint Press, Achill Island

This article was written by Sleuth for Truth, Nov 10th 2009

Leave a Comment

Stephen T Manning’s Lies To Court re. Service of Documents

The following article is based on court documents on file.

Stephen T Manning of Checkpoint Press, Achill Island, Ireland, in seeking to get Diggory Press Ltd’s court counterclaim against him thrown out, lied to the courts (that is he attempted to pervert the course of justice), and sought to mislead the court by claiming that Diggory Press had not served certain court papers on him in time.

These said papers needed to be served on him (that is arrive) by the 28th April 2009. Manning claimed DP had not done it and lied to the judge about it. The soonest these documents could possibly have been deemed served was out of time on the 29/04/2009, Manning insisted, in seeking to get the counterclaim struck out.

It’s just as well that Rosalind Franklin of Diggory Press Ltd had irrefutable evidence that these papers sent by recorded delivery had arrived on time, as per the screenshot below from the Royal Mail website, submitted in response to Manning’s concocted claim. (You can click on the image to enlarge it).

This article was written by Sleuth for Truth, May 29th 2009

Comments (1)

The Smear about Kingdom Come Publishing and Deborah G Hunter

Despite Stephen T Manning of Checkpoint Press, Ireland, being explictly told by another poster that the Kingdom Come Publishing operation he says that Rosalind Franklin/Diggory Press Ltd are associated with [without any proof or evidence, and actually proof to the contrary but more on that later] is registered to: Kingdom 7 Apparel, CMR 454 Box 1628 APO, Armed Forces Other Areas 09250, United States. [ie nothing to do with RF/DP or any of their contacts] and then being asked by the poster:

‘Are you sure this is RF?’ [RF = Rosalind Franklin]

Manning deceptively responds, knowing full well that none of this has been verified by him as factual and it is also not the actual truth. This while Manning adds some other complete inventions of his own within the post such as his claims to know RF’s “international movements”.

RF informed us it’s all nonsense and Manning is making it up as he goes along. However, if Manning insists he really does know RF’s international movements, then he admits he’s her obsessive stalker. So what Manning say raises a red flag whichever way one chooses to look at it.

This Kingdom Come company operation, as it turns out, had nothing at all to do with Rosalind Franklin, Diggory Press or any of RF’s friends, business associates or relatives.

(However, it should be borne in mind that even if this Kingdom Come Publishing company were a company operated by Rosalind Franklin or anyone linked to her, there was no proof of anything illegal or untoward going on there anyway, so any connection still would have proved nothing. Like everything else Manning has said about RF/DP to date, it is smear for smear’s sake.)

I took a screenshot of Manning’s conversation on a publishing blog with a person called ‘Slim’. I have whited out some parts of the conversation for the sake of highlighting specifics of what was said that I want to deal with in this post here. (And Manning’s other false accusations in this comment have already been dealt with elsewhere). The first part of the conversation is from Manning, the middle comment is Slim, then it’s Manning again.

It should be noted while reading this that Manning has continued to make the same accusation to this date against Rosalind/DP – that is a long time afterwards.

First off, note the warped logic. Manning says to Slim under questioning:

“This particular url is definitely Mrs Franklin’s handiwork – as I have sent Court papers to her via the site.http://kingdomcomepublishing.com/

Huh?! So because Manning says he sent court papers to RF via th ehttp://kingdomcomepublishing.com/ website (a bogus claim in itself as if he were a genuine litigant, he’d just send any papers in the mail to DP/RF’s known address. And if Manning still insists he sent court papers via another website, then he admits he’s harassing Diggory Press’s director, RF, personally,in this instance by spamming and stalking her, so it’s not a good reflection on him either way – but let’s go on …) – so because Manning’s supposedly sent court papers via that site, this therefore “proves” that it’s RF’s website?

What odd and warped logic. So if I go onto youtube, and email them a load of nonsense about someone I’ve got a grudge about (Father Christmas was not good to me last year, I’ll send a nasty note to him), that proves that youtube is owned and operated by Father Christmas?! Because I’ve sent him an email or letter there? Huh?!

It would be bad enough if this kind of stupid logic was coming from a batty old lady, but it’s coming from someone who markets himself as an “adjunct professor”, an academic, a “licensed Christian minister”, a supplier of education services to degree level and beyond, a “qualified editor” and a doctor and psychiatrist with a doctorate degree. Manning always makes sure to mention “his credentials’ in his every breath (which to me is obviously a sign of something very wrong when someone always calls themselves ‘Dr’ and ‘Phd’ even in informal situations as real doctors don’t have that need. It should come as no surprise, then, that Manning’s “credentials” come from a notorious unaccredited American diploma mill…)

Something somewhere is seriously wrong with Manning and his claims about RF/DP. And apparently also in his claims about himself.

So Manning’s supposed ‘evidence’ is bogus. And Manning brazenly ignores all evidence and facts that contradict his evidence. Manning is bogus. Manning’s claim is bogus and he knows it. He knew it when he said it. He knew it as Slim questioned him. And he knows it now.

But moving on – because we have even more damning evidence against Manning.

This comment below was posted at http://ilovetoddbentley.wordpress.com/2009/01/06/rosalind-miriam-franklin-aka-the-endtimes-prophetic-diva-is-allegedly-bilking-authors/ in January 2009. (The post has since been taken down, and kingdomcomepublishing.com and the other associated domain also taken down.) But look what the key witness in this matter says:

deborahghunter said
January 12, 2009 at 9:40 pm

“My name is Deborah Hunter and I was contacted by Mr. Stephen Manning, along with several of my business associates this morning. He advised me that he was looking into my website http://www.kingdomcomepublishing.com to see if I was using this website to mask myself as Ms. Rosalind Franklin? I do not know who Ms. Franklin is, nor have I ever heard of her company Diggory Press. Yes, I am a publisher, as well as an author, and started my company in 2008 with the name of Kingdom Come Publishing. I am very disturbed at the allegations that are being associated with this woman, but I need to clarify that my business and website is in no way, shape, or form connected with Ms. Franklin or Diggory Press. I have seen links to my website associated with several of these blogs and it is very sad to have your company put on display like this and assumed to be a part of such an evil scheme.

I found Mr. Manning to be very personable, and in no way malicious. I understand that he has been in this battle for some time now, and can absolutely understand that he thought this was her reappearing with this website. I can assure you that it is not, and we will be changing the name of the website, so that we are not labled because of this issue. My husband’s website was also under scrutiny for being a mask for Ms. Franklin, and several of our close and dear friends in the ministry….

In His Service,
Deborah G. Hunter”

I can be e-mailed at kingdomkidz777@hotmail.com for any concerns regarding my website.”

Yet despite the fact that Mrs Deborah G Hunter made this comment on a post where Manning was active and where he would have seen it (he did and he chose to ignore it), and in spite of her kindness and graciousness giving Manning a lot of personal time and attention – and giving him all the verification Manning needed she/her company was not RF/DP, it has not made the least bit of difference – for either her or RF/DP. Because Manning has never publicly apologised for his “mistake” or retracted it. And Manning has continued to make the same allegations online and through the media and even the court service, perjuring himself.

So Manning knowingly continued to maliciously smear and wilfully ruin the reputations of a completely innocent party for the sake of his own personal obsessive vindictive agenda against RF/DP. And perjured himself in court by repeating the malicious allegation there. (We have proof of many other innocent parties also used and abused by Manning, accusing them all of being Rosalind in “disguise” (to smear Rosalind) when he knows full well they are not RF!)

If that’s not malicious, I don’t know what it. Deborah G Hunter though finding this liar, extortionist and cyber bully “charming” to her, misinterpreted Manning was not malicious as can be seen by his continued atrocious behaviour toward her (and others) since.

For the record, Manning’s accusation that this Kingdom Come Publishing company is RF/DP has been made outside of that blog comment on many other subsequent occasions. This includes in perjurious court documents he’s issued against DP/RF and also on other blogs, forums and websites.

Manning has even gone to the press with this same accusation among many other false accusations against DP/RF, and the lazy, sloppy press have just printed what the evil Manning has fed them without doing due diligence and checking their Manning-feed of lies out for themselves – shame on you, The Guardian newspaper and journalist, Tony Levene! Manning is quite happy to libel and defame other completely innocent people if it suits him in his war against DP. That’s shocking enough. But press assistance in being Manning’s sock puppet? Absolutely disgusting!

Manning and Levene and/or The Guardian newspaper have never retracted their allegations that Deborah G Hunter’s company is RF/DP “in disguise’, or apologised to Deborah G Hunter for dragging her and her husband’s names through the mud, along with the names of some of their associates, nor have they apologised to RF and DP for the false accusations and religious digs against them either.

Worse still, despite Deborah Hunter’s evidence being there for all to see, and her being easily contactable at that time, and Manning knowing this, and The Guardian paper having been explicitly told by other parties involved too that they had printed utter nonsense about them, Tony Levene of the Guardian (still using the evil Manning as his ’source’) repeated the completely false information while making some more barbed jibes about Christians. Charming!

It should be quite apparent now what sort of man Manning is. Someone who will say whatever he wants, against whomever he wants, for whatever reason he wants. However untrue and however many people get hurt. He is a complete menace. The sooner he gets locked up the better.

This post was written by Sleuth for Truth, 29th May 2009

Comments (1)

Stephen T Manning & Checkpoint Press Lies & Hypocrisy On Alleged Diggory Price Overpricing

Stephen T Manning for Checkpoint Press, Ireland, in seeking to smear and harass Rosalind Franklin (RF) of Diggory Press Ltd, has repeatedly lied about her and her company.

Manning said in a comment left on a publishing blog in 2007 that RF of DP sent in over-inflated prices on his title to amazon (and that RF therefore kept the profits from these excessive prices and never passed them onto him, the title’s author).

Manning has continued to say similar to this day and has never retracted this allegation. Manning’s supposed ‘evidence’ for this claim? Because of the prices asked for his title by certain third party retailers on amazon!

Most people should be able to spot the bogusness of Manning’s claim straight away, but for those that can’t, let’s examine Manning’s claim in detail as well as note the continued lies and hypocrisy of the man. Remember, this guy is a publisher – and a “publishing expert” at that – so would know more than the average man on the street about the publishing and book selling process. It’s therefore not an ‘innocent’ mistake made by an inept and incompetent bumbling fool – it’s a premeditated deliberated wilful smear against a publishing rival.

Let’s look at Manning’s comment first from this link – I have whited out the rest of the comment for the sake of clarity so as to focus on the lies of Manning’s I wish to highlight and deal with now  – (you can click on this image to enlarge it)

So basically Manning is saying because third party retailers, in no way connected to amazon itself or to Rosalind Franklin and Diggory Press itself, are asking more than the recommended retail price on his book, therefore Rosalind Franklin of DP must have:

a) ’sent in the price’ to amazon like this

and

b) must be profiteering from the excess mark up

and

c) be still “illegally” selling his book

and

d) not passing on the royalties to him

Now let’s look at the actual facts.

a) Manning accusation – RF/DP ’sent in the price’ to amazon like this

  • This is what Manning says about listing practices to his authors on his Checkpoint Press website: (so it’s one rule for his company and another rule for Diggory Press – the hypocrite!) It also illustrates he KNOWS he’s lied about Diggory Press.
    1. No publisher ’sends in prices’ to amazon anyway (as Manning, the Checkpoint Press Charlie well knows).
    2. RF/DP were not the publisher in this case, Manning was. DP only helped print and distribute the book through their network, as they were authorised to by Manning.
    3. If RF/DP had sent in prices to anybody in the retail chain asking over the RRP, the price hike would have shown on amazon and everywhere else and nobody would have been able to purchase the book at the normal retail price. However that was not the case as the book WAS listed on amazon etc at the normal price, it was only the third parties that charged more, indicating that RF/DP had set the RRP EXACTLY as was agreed: (see also their own website listing showing them listing the book at the authorised price at this link)
    4. If RF/DP had put Manning’s book at an unauthorised price through their distribution network then Manning would have known about it and complained about it long before he did (and certainly would not have commissioned them to do more books for him as he did in fact do). Instead, according to court and police records, RF/DP says Manning made it up as smear after the fact (along with many other false accusations) many months afterward when RF/DP refused to give into Manning’s blackmail demands. RF/DP says Manning threatened to smear the Diggory Press business (which at that point had an impeccable reputation) and campaign against DP if RF did not give into his blackmail demands. RF stood her ground. The sick Manning then boasted to RF she did not know who she was dealing with as he had done it to others before her so she should really give into him then. She still stood her ground. She then says Manning threatened RF and told her she needed to be taught a lesson and punished by him for daring to stand up to him. (He calls himself ‘teacher’ for this reason in some of the many harassing emails he continues to send her over three years on).
    5. Questions of motive must arise as to what a publisher could possibly gain from risking sending in unauthorised over-inflated prices to amazon – even if it were possible – when most print on demand books only sell an average of 2 copies. (And self published books are an even lower average).
    6. Most sales are also made by the publisher to their authors direct, and so it is the author that should be kept sweet so they come back for more books and services! Even if RF/DP were fraudulently inclined they’d have to be really, really stupid to take such a risk for such little reward when much much more could be gained by keeping Manning sweet.

    b) Manning accusation – RF/DP must be profiteering from the excess mark up

    1. Just because a print on demand item is listed does not mean it physically exists. And it also does not mean it’s sold.
    2. The third party merchants on amazon are listing items just like people do on ebay and so they can ask what they want for something – it doesn’t mean they’ll actually get it!
    3. If I go out and put some of my new or second hand books for sale on amazon or ebay or sell them at a garage sale or market, who is responsible for the price I charge? Who makes the money on this specific transaction? The publisher? The original bookstore I bought from? Of course not! It’s me and only me, and I make or lose money depending on what I manage to sell my stock at. Nobody can be blamed for the price a third party tries to sell a product at! It’s dumb to even try to lay the blame elsewhere.
    4. None of these third party merchants are Rosalind Franklin or Diggory Press.
    5. The third party merchants on amazon pre-list print on demand books – so they don’t have the book in stock when they list them (because they’d go broke as most p.o.d books never sell), but the merchants anticipate being able to quickly and easily order the book if there is an order and then send on these books.  Some of these merchants, for reasons I don’t personally understand, will even say the book that doesn’t even exist yet is ’second hand’. This is one fact that does confuse genuine authors, and they will sometimes over-estimate their sales as a consequence, but anyone browsing publishing forums and checking facts out for themselves will soon find out about this practice as it is commonly discussed among authors. Certainly any publisher would know! And Manning does know, as it happens, he’s been convicted by his own alternative version of the truth spoken to his own authors (see green screenshot below on number 7).
    6. As to motive – if Diggory Press struggled to sell Manning’s book at the authorised RRP (4 sales I believe in total ever!), and as a consequence DP decided to have it removed it from their distribution service as it did not make enough even to cover the tiny annual costs of keeping it in distribution, then why on earth would they think they could sell it at 3 times the RRP price?! Why would they even try?!!! If they were going to change the price, surely it would have to be DOWNWARDS!

    c)  Manning accusation – must be still “illegally” selling his book

    1. The facts given in b) link into this as to how print on demand books are listed by websites, especially third party merchants. So even if a book is listed on a website as ‘for sale’ or ‘in stock’, it does not mean it’s really available to purchase and receive – it only means the merchant expects it to be available and will take an order for it hoping to be able to get it.
    2. DP cannot be blamed for a third party merchant’s mistake of wrongful presumption.
    3. The fact that the title was ONLY listed with third party merchants, and not from amazon proper itself when the allegations were made, actually proves that RF/DP had withdrawn it from distribution and printing. Because if they hadn’t withdrawn it, it would still be available on amazon and regular merchants at the regular price with a much quicker time turnaround (24 hrs usually)
    4. The facts are Manning KNEW his book with DP/RF was no longer in distribution and had it directly confirmed to him by the printers and distributers themselves. Yet he still continued to make this slanderous accusation against DP/RF, and has never retracted it.
    5. It should also be remembered that because Manning still owed DP/RF money for work on his books (around £80), DP were contractually entitled to keep on selling his title, even if he requested it to be withdrawn, to offset any future royalties against his bad debts. So they would not have been ‘illegally’ selling his title anyway, even if they had continued to sell it for a long time afterwards. They didn’t carry on “selling” it, as it turned out, or even attempt to, as his title made too few sales to cover the tiny costs of keeping the book in their distribution system.

    d) Manning accusation – must not be passing on the royalties to him

    This has been pretty much covered in full in the points above.

    1. A book being listed is no proof of sales made, at any price
    2. DP/RF would not get the excess profit even if there were any third party sales over and above the retail price (the third party would keep all the excess)
    3. Manning owed DP/RF money, and so DP were contractually entitled to offset any earned royalties against this bad debt.
    4. Manning knows for a fact how many sales have been made, and has seen the evidence from third parties of when the book was withdrawn and its total sales, yet still falsely smears RF/DP as having robbed him of royalties and having carried on selling his book.

    If all this weren’t enough to convict Manning, there’s yet more damning evidence against him.

    I did a search on amazon.com by publisher. I put in ‘Checkpoint Press’ – Manning’s company – to pull up only his company’s titles. It came up with a list of titles and these are some of them below – (you can do the same search and click on some links and see for yourself what happens).

    You’ll notice a few things, the ‘buy new’ price which will be the RRP and what you would pay if you bought a copy from amazon direct (eg: the last one on the list, Winderbilt Over Floodsville is $14.99), and then you’ll see the prices underneath that, pp ‘8 new’ and ‘1 used’.  These are the third party merchants having a go at selling on amazon, such as ‘The Book Depository’.

    I took a screenshot on what happens for this Checkpoint Press title when you go to these third party merchants by clicking on the link (see below). As you can see, some of them are reasonable mark-ups, some of them are not. Some of them are asking $35 on a $15 book! But these are all against Checkpoint Press’s own titles.

    If Manning insists that what he says about Rosalind Franklin and Diggory Press is true then HE AND HIS OWN COMPANY –

    a) have ’sent in the price’ to amazon like this that has not been authorised by his self published authors

    and

    b) he and his company must be profiteering from the excessive mark ups, in this case $20 a book

    and

    c) he and his company are not passing on the royalties to his authors

    d) he and his company are frauds and cheats etc

    Somehow I think now we’ve publicly busted him on this, Manning’s ever more convoluting story is going to change again, with an even more convoluted explanation as to why his ‘evidence’ says RF did things the way he says she did, but the very same evidence that damns him too in that case, doesn’t actually apply to him.

    This article was written by Sleuth for Truth, June 16 2009

    Comments (2)

    Stephen T Manning’s Checkpoint Press fraudulent books defrauding the book buying public?

    Stephen T Manning’s qualifications that he so loves boasting about are actually bought from an unaccredited “diploma mill”. (Read more details on the post on his ‘academic fraud’.)  Diploma Mills are a big problem in the United States, and it can be illegal as well as immoral in some states (e.g. Florida and Maine) to make fraudulent claim of academic degree or title.

    “The 2003 Florida Statutes (link)

    Title XLVI
    CRIMES Chapter 817
    FRAUDULENT PRACTICES

    817.567 Making false claims of academic degree or title.–

    (1) No person in the state may claim, either orally or in writing, to possess an academic degree, as defined in s. 1005.02, or the title associated with said degree, unless the person has, in fact, been awarded said degree from an institution that is:

    (a) Accredited by a regional or professional accrediting agency recognized by the United States Department of Education or the Commission on Recognition of Postsecondary Accreditation;

    (b) Provided, operated, and supported by a state government or any of its political subdivisions or by the Federal Government;

    (c) A school, institute, college, or university chartered outside the United States, the academic degree from which has been validated by an accrediting agency approved by the United States Department of Education as equivalent to the baccalaureate or postbaccalaureate degree conferred by a regionally accredited college or university in the United States;

    (d) Licensed by the 1State Board of Independent Colleges and Universities pursuant to ss. 1005.01-1005.38 or exempt from licensure pursuant to 2s. 246.085; or

    (e) A religious seminary, institute, college, or university which offers only educational programs that prepare students for a religious vocation, career, occupation, profession, or lifework, and the nomenclature of whose certificates, diplomas, or degrees clearly identifies the religious character of the educational program.

    (2) No person awarded a doctorate degree from an institution not listed in subsection (1) shall claim in the state, either orally or in writing, the title “Dr.” before the person’s name or any mark,appellation, or series of letters, numbers, or words, such as, but not limited to, “Ph.D.,” “Ed.D.,” “D.N.,” or “D.Th.,” which signifies, purports, or is generally taken to signify satisfactory completion of the requirements of a doctorate degree, after the person’s name.

    (3)(a) A person who violates the provisions of subsection (1) or subsection (2) commits a misdemeanor of the first degree,punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.

    (b) In addition to any penalty imposed under paragraph (a), a violator shall be subject to any other penalty provided by law, including, but not limited to, suspension or revocation of the violator’s license or certification to practice an occupation or profession.

    History.–s. 2, ch. 89-40; s. 32, ch. 94-310; s. 1039, ch. 2002-387.

    1 Note.–Section 246.031, which created the State Board of Independent Colleges and Universities, was repealed by s. 1058, ch. 2002-387.

    2 Note.–Repealed by s. 1058, ch. 2002-387. Similar material is now found at s. 1005.32.

    • Here’s the law in Maine.

    Maine Revised Statute Title 20-A, Chapter 410:FALSE ACADEMIC DEGREES OR CERTIFICATES (link)”

    There may well be other states and countries than the above where such activity is also illegal. However even knowing just the above, we have enough to show that criminal offences are apparently being presently committed in the USA by Stephen T Manning and his Checkpoint Press by offering for sale goods with false claim to academic title to those specific states where such activity is illegal.

    Stephen T Manning’s own two books, The Color of Truth, (ironic title that, given the author’s behaviour) (see link where it is on sale) and Psychology, Symbolism and The Sacred, (link) clearly imply the author has a genuine Ph.D. These titles are being offered for sale throughout the whole of the USA (and beyond)– including to the states of Florida and Maine where making false claims as to academic title is illegal and an arrestable offence as has already been shown. And even putting aside legality, the book-buying public everywhere are also being misled, which is no small thing.

    I’m not a lawyer, but I have been informed by a Floridian lawyer  that this is an arrestable offence, even though Checkpoint Press is presently operating from Dooagh Village, Achill Island, Co. Mayo, Ireland. The lawyer said if ever Stephen T Manning touches down ground in Florida all someone has to do is call the cops to get Manning arrested for this activity.

    – Written by Sleuth For Truth, May 31 2009

    Comments (1)

    Older Posts »