Archive for SMEAR CAMPAIGNS

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)

Proof of Stephen T Manning’s fraudulent court claims against Diggory Press and Rosalind Miriam Franklin. Illegally Using Someone Else’s Name

Proof that dirty dog Stephen T Manning of Checkpoint Press, Dooagh Village, Achill Island, Ireland, entered yet another fraudulent and nonsense court claim against Diggory Press, illegally using the name of somebody else without their knowledge! (This is not the only occasion, I have already shown proof concerning one other supposed claimant).

(You can click on this image to enlarge it. I have whited out some of the personal information on this letter such as full names and addresses and signature).

As a bit more background information, in their defence to the fraudulent claim (before being made aware of the above letter and the surrounding circumstances), Diggory Press had said to the court:

“VMK is not a customer of ours and has not yet paid us any money as even she/he admits. We dispute the fact that any such CD was sent to us, as it has not once been requested to be returned, let alone requested “numerous times”, and no setup/file review fee of £30 was ever enclosed with it, nor were we ever informed of the CD’s existence before this court claim. However, even if it had genuinely been sent, by sending materials to us the author has agreed to our terms and conditions as posted on our website which include that we are not responsible for loss of, or damage to material submitted by the Author, including but not limited to manuscripts, discs, CDs, and artwork.

They have also agreed that: “The Author agrees that the liability of Exposure Publishing, its employees and agents, if any, arising out of any kind of legal claim (whether in contract, tort or otherwise) connected with any transaction entered with Exposure Publishing shall not exceed the amount The Author paid to Exposure Publishing in connection with the transaction giving rise to such a claim. Exposure Publishing or its employees, agents or third-party licensors and content providers will not be liable to The Author or anyone else for any special, consequential, indirect, exemplary, cover, punitive, incidental or similar damages (including, without limitation, lost profits, lost sales, or lost business) directly or indirectly related to The Book.”.. and they paid us nothing.

Furthermore, at the time VMK was requesting to be invoiced for publishing services (but that is all – with no mention of any CD) we were NOT accepting in new work and had this fact posted on the front page of our website. We cannot therefore be blamed for not invoicing him/her, or for not corresponding with them. It is no failure on our part – only the author’s for not reading the website properly.

The fact we did not invoice or accept in new work when we were then at full capacity indicates our continued trustworthiness and integrity in not invoicing for work we do not think we can fulfil. I highlight the personal remarks and character assassinations about ‘Mrs Franklin’ and her alleged failures, which is not necessarily the same as any alleged failures of Diggory Press Ltd. These remarks are made by someone who has not even dealt with us/far less me personally and indicates collusion with and ‘coaching’ by Stepehn Manning, otherwise how would they have known my name or even gotten personal?This claim is highly suspect and we do not think it can be true for the reasons given already and many more. If the author had really sent a disc they would have really sent a cheque. But they did not.

It is also not logical to not make a copy of ‘irreplacable photos’ before sending them to any publisher in the Royal Mail. Furthermore, it is most likely these same photos were on another CD or computer hard-drive anyway and so nothing has really been lost apart form a CD disc worth less than a £1, and this is a bogus claim.

The claim for £250 for “cost of trying to obtain materials so far” is also highly suspect with no actual backup or real data given. Regardless, the fact is the author has not once requested [to] the first port of call – us – for the disc.

However, regardless of whether an actual disc was genuinely sent out or not, this claim has no substance because of our terms and conditions, not to mention common sense. This is a harassing, frivolous and vexatious claim and the claim should be struck out. ..”

This, by the way, is the bogus claim entered by Manning (supposedly) on VMK’s behalf: (you can click on the image to enlarge it – private details such as names and addresses, although in the public domain, I have chosen to white out for the sake of privacy – especially as VMK is one of Manning’s “victims” too.)

Comments (31)

Mary Ann Simpson caught falsifying documents against Diggory Press Ltd – the actual court transcript

This is part of an actual authorised transcript of the Diggory Press court case proceedings in November 2009.

(Mary Ann Simpson was one of Stephen T Manning’s co-conspirators and had entered a false claim of her own against Diggory Press. Mary Ann Simpson had been caught out falsifying documentary evidence against Diggory Press, and was cornered with irrefutable evidence from an important witness, Bill Wiggin MP, that she had done this.

Here, Mary Ann Simpson of Horley, Surrey, admits under oath to falsifying the documents in question. However Mary Ann Simpson dares to brazenly state to the court she does not think her fraud in this instance ‘relevant’!)

________________________

“ROSALIND FRANKLIN (TO JUDGE):  Mrs Simpson forged a letter allegedly [sent] to Bill Wiggin, MP, she forged a letter and she has entered false evidenceand we have got proof that what she has entered in her evidence bundle as what she actually sent to Bill Wiggin is not what was actually sent to Bill Wiggin, because we have the original and we have the proof, which is signed and annotated by [him].

… [it] in black and white … proves forgery and fraud … One of the testimonials on our website is given from a Bill Wiggin who is a Conservative MP, and a number of people coached by Mr Manning approached Bill Wiggin and, you know, told various lies to him etc about us.  In Mrs Simpson’s evidence bundle is one of the letters that Mrs Simpson says that she sent to Bill Wiggin. She has actually concocted this after the fact because we have actually got proof and she probably did not know this. Bill Wiggin had actually sent us the original letter that she had sent him and the two are very different. So she has obviously concocted it after the fact.  She has changed her story.  Somebody who is content enough to do such a thing before a court of law in a sworn evidence bundle, well, you know, what else are they going to lie about… ?  ….

MARY ANN SIMPSON [To Judge] Could I… the letter to Bill Wiggin is not germane [relevant] in my opinion ….”

________________________

Comments (5)

Diggory Press Were Taken To Court Over A £10 Courier Charge

In a previous post, I mentioned, among other cases, one of the Diggory Press court claims that had not succeeded that was linked to rival publisher Manning’s ongoing campaign of smear and harassment against Diggory Press.

“8PZ00098, author name Karina Kantas. This must be the most petty case of the lot, quibbling over DP asking for £10 to redirect her books to a new address after having stored them for free for her for months after they’d been returned by the courier for persistent non collection despite cards left for the author. This author or their representative did not turn up at the first court allocation hearing or apologise for their absence. Case was dropped Aug/Sept 08.”

I have been released to post some supporting evidence regarding this.

Here’s the initial delivery note, proving the books were printed and shipped to Karina Kantas’ address in Greece on 21st June 2007. (Personal details have been blacked out.)

The next picture shows one of the many courier’s notes on the returned box of books. It’s all Greek to me but it’s evidently a courier’s sticker, and I’m guessing it was the depot in Greece that handled the box of books.

And here’s some more stickers from the returned box of books. If you magnify it you can see who it was sent to (Karina Kantas) under the layers of courier stickers the prove this box has bounced around a bit. The sticker in yellow gives a date in July 2007, and says the reason for the box of books being returned to Diggory Press Ltd in England was because the courier had tried to deliver and failed, and despite three courier cards being left, they had not been contacted and the books not picked up.

Karina Kantas was informed by Diggory Press of the box’s return, and then asked what she wanted done with the box. She asked for the books to be sent to a new address linked to her in England. Diggory Press asked for £10 to cover the courier charges as in these circumstances they are charged by the courier to send to a third address. Karina Kantas refused to pay this paltry amount, and the rest, as they say, is history….

Manning filled in the court paperwork on this court claim, signed it and also paid for it. The only case that was more pathetic than this was the customer who was not even a customer claiming £250 for a computer disc sent by normal mail!

Comments (1)

Manning Proved To Have Lied About Court Judgments Entered Against Diggory Press

Compare the facts given in a previous article, List of the Diggory Press fallen, to what Manning for rival publisherCheckpoint Press said on November 4th 2008 to his authors’ list –

“Naturally I cannot go into too much detail, but I can report that some County Court Judgments have already been issued against Diggory / Mrs Franklin, and although she continues to try to manipulate the legal system to avoid accountability, we know that one outstanding judgment in the amount of over £1,300 UK pounds was paid this past week – under a certain amount of duress of course.. I know certain persons on this list were awaiting confirmation that Judgments had been issued and enforced – so I hope those persons can now use this information to move ahead with their own plans in regard to their business dealings with Diggory.”

This is what he said in December 08 –

“Several aggrieved authors have already taken independent action via the Small Claims Court in order to secure the monies owed to them, and despite Mrs Franklin’s increasingly desperate attempts to stall or circumvent the process, some are reporting success. Approximately three weeks ago for example, one County Court Judgment was enforced against Diggory Press to the tune of around £1,400 UK pounds.”

This is a barefaced lie as can be proven by anybody as County Court Judgments (CCJ’s) are a matter of record, very easy to check. NOT ONE CASE AGAINST DP HAS WON. They don’t have any CCJ’s against them as a business, and Rosalind Franklin does not have any CCJ’s against her personally. STM is not only lying about the fact there are successful judgments to encourage others to sue Diggory Press, but lying that this money had been paid “under duress” to even further smear Rosalind Franklin’s character. What a piece of work he is!

Comments (7)

The First Unauthorised Court Claim against Diggory Press by Manning

Manning  entered a claim against rival self publishing business Diggory Press in the Bodmin small claims court, according to at least two of the named parties themselves, without the named party’s knowledge or permission.

The first claim, for the record, was also for over and above the amount originally paid to Diggory Press. And the second claim was from someone who wasn’t even a Diggory Press customer.

I have deleted some identifying details for privacy reasons. However, all this information (and more) is available on the court records re case 8PZ00097,  author’s initials J.C.  The other known case being number 8PZ00093, author’s initials V.M.K. So that’s at least 2 unauthorised claims that are known about among the “Diggory 17”.

The letter below was sent to the courts and to Diggory Press in September 2008 from the “named author” J.C. when according to him he FIRST became aware of the action lodged by Manning in January 2008 in J.C.’s name:-

I think that’s pretty clear.

I’ve been informed that in the last few weeks J.C. is alleging Manning is now threatening him, apparently trying to get J.C. to retract his statements to the police and to the courts on STM entering unauthorised fraudulent claims.

This is very serious stuff.

You might also want to see the post on Who paid the court fees.

Comments (6)