Aug 072012

[Please Note: Per these instructions of our WebHost, Bluehost, we have altered the presentation of the following post:]

Kari Simpson and Ron Gray follow up on the story of a convicted sex offender using the courts and personal intimidation to cover up the very public truth about his crimes. The young man in question, Mr. Flanders, is a self-proclaimed convicted felon who spends much of his time harassing people who are only carrying his own message to the masses, a message he published to protect youth from older predators. He now attempts to censor the truth by threatening video hosts like our own favourites, and A very bizarre case.

  3 Responses to “RoadKill Radio News: A Slow Learner Loses Ground While Harassing Others”

  1. According to the judge, his crime was a MISDIMEANOR, not a FELONY.

    With examples like these, RoadKill Radio, I can see why this “sex offender” seems to be suing so much. Whether or not his lawsuits are justified and/or reasonable is beyond my point; simply that I understand why he is suing.

    Just a thought


    • The State of Maine has no felonies or misdemeanors, just Classes of convictions, so I doubt if any judge called his convictions misdemeanors. Flanders himself claims to have several felony convictions. If this guy – who is in fact a convicted sex offender – would just shut up and let this pass, it would just disappear. Instead, he screams bloody murder every time his name is mentioned in order to get more and more attention, which is a classic trait of a narcissist.

      • “in order to get more attention”

        Ad hominem attacks don’t get one very far, Fran. You’re an adult in a position of responsibly passing news to your audience, you know better than doing that.

        But more pertinently, maybe he couldn’t “just let it pass”. Imagine yourself being an individual who’s been through a lot of legal baggage, whatever it may be , and that baggage was plastered amock on the web. Sure, if you were guilty of some heinous criminal doing you should own up to it and take responsibility; point taken. Having said that, how do you think you would respond if people repetitively brought up the same baggage as if it should be the end of your good public image?

        Let me guess: you’d “deserve it”, right? Or, you’d “ignore it”, right? (Or whatever convenient trite responses might be amoung them) …

        I’m sure even you don’t believe you wouldn’t be at least decently frustrated with people’s interaction with you.

        Adam Flanders is frustrated with the WAY he is being represented. The point of fact is that you guys, the well-mainstreamed roadkillradio, are not letting this issue pass yourselves: you decided to make an entire half-hour syndicated program just dung-talking him; not to mention making him a worse public enemy than what I’m guessing he probably is.

        What difference does it make?

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.