Follow-up: Yes, SHAWN O’HALLORAN, you ARE stalking ALEC PETERS!

Yesterday, I called SHAWN P. O’HALLORAN a moron and a stalker. Shawn didn’t like that at all. In fact, he got so upset that he wrote an 800-plus word Facebook response, culminating in the following hysterical rant…

Please excuse the vulgarity. I felt it necessary to show how off-the-handle Shawn had flown.

Unfortunately, the saddest part is that Shawn has COMPLETELY missed the point of yesterday’s blog. Whether he wants to face the truth or not, Shawn P. O’Halloran IS a stalker—at least according to this definition on Wikipedia:

Stalking is unwanted or repeated surveillance by an individual or group towards another person. Stalking behaviors are interrelated to harassment and intimidation and may include following the victim in person or monitoring them.

That’s almost word-for-word what they (the detractors operating individually and as a group) do to ALEC PETERS. Looking though his records (public or not), analyzing his business dealings, even following him around at conventions and live-streaming him and his girlfriend…that is MONITORING. Heck, the Facebook group is even named for the blog site: AaxMONITOR!

In Shawn’s case, the obsession with Alec has become socially demented and dysfunctional. I mean, Shawn spent his own money to research Alec Peters’ business records and even whether or not Alec owns his own house!

What normal person does that?

It’s not like Shawn is a journalist working on an article (Carlos Pedraza claims that alleged distinction). Shawn doesn’t work for law enforcement or the plaintiff’s law firm. He’s not a private investigator. He’s just some obsessively weird nobody from Las Vegas who can’t stop writing about, ridiculing, and prying into the professional and private life of some guy in Georgia. In other words: a stalker. (Victims of stalking don’t necessarily have to be famous or beautiful or even women.)

Of course, Shawn says his primary goal is to “keep the public informed” before they give Alec any more money. But that’s essentially bull poop. Shawn’s true purpose is intimidation and harassment, as shown here in Shawn’s original post announcing his “deep research” into Alec…

Sounds so ominous, right? Almost like a threat. And Shawn thinks he’s not a stalker. You wanna tell him or should I? Oh, wait…I am telling him.

If Shawn’s true intent were simply to “inform the public,” then he would have informed the public. Instead he contacted the people who are suing Alec Peters in an attempt to sabotage Alec in a lawsuit against him. “Informing the public” my ass!

The rest of the detractors, of course, lined up to defend Shawn like—do I dare say it?—sycophants…attacking Slow Lane (or apparently now I’ve graduated to “Precious” Lane…lucky me!) in every way they could and trying to somehow justify Shawn’s stalking.

They also tried to deflect the narrative by focusing on something that was not me calling Shawn a stalker but calling him a moron. (Heavens forbid the bullied insult the bully, right? The nerve!)

They focused on me leaving out that Alec was being sued not just for declaratory relief but also for $15,000…as if somehow me getting that wrong and using it to call Shawn a moron erased or negated his behavior as a stalker.

As it happened, I had been given a copy of the original lawsuit filed against Alec Peters back on September 27, 2018, which I kept in my records. At the time I was first given it (confidentially), the plaintiffs had not yet re-filed a second complaint on October 9, adding in a claim for $15,000 for defamation. I was unaware of the second filing. So yes, I do apologize for publishing the incorrect information yesterday about the lawsuit.

But I am standing firm on the moron part. That’s an opinion on which I have 100% certainty because Shawn still doesn’t understand how the law works—despite being a “former paralegal.”

To wit…

During the flood of comments to yesterday’s blog post came this one from one of my readers, SCOTT HEDRICK, regarding Alec’s transfer of property:

Illegal? Not only is it not illegal, it’s highly common. It’s not even illegal when being sued for money, since the transaction can be reversed. Indeed, that’s why a lis pendens is filed before suing for money, because it puts buyers on notice that the property is subject to a lawsuit.

One of my jobs involves preparing legal documents, and the number of customers who see something like that and think they have a smoking gun and then argue with me is legion. They really want X, and don’t want to hear that they have not in fact found the magic word that will make the court bow before them and give them what they want.

Alec himself later pointed out to me the following…

Remember, in order for Shawn’s fantasy scenario to come to pass, I would have to lose my ENTIRE case of multiple counts of fraud and tortious interference with a contract (I am suing her for $400,000). She would have to win a dubious defamation claim over a Facebook post that was only up for 2 hours. She would then need to prove that, in those 2 hours, she suffered $15,000 worth of damages. Good luck with that. It ain’t happening.

Also, I am not subject to Nevada law. Plus, only in the event that, even if everything went her way and she was awarded $15,000 in damages, AND I did not pay the $15,000, would the question of intent to defraud even be relevant. It’s not relevant DURING the lawsuit. Only if I lose and do not pay.

So yes, Shawn is still a moron.


Of course, of the two labels, “moron” is mostly meaningless. That’s just something you’re born with and can’t really change. But “stalking” is something that you actually DO. Stalking is a choice, and it’s a choice Shawn has made for himself.

I mean, why is the transfer of ownership of Alec’s house any of our business—Shawn’s, mine, yours? This has nothing to do with Axanar, folks. Why do we need to know why Alec transferred ownership of his house…both in 2018 and previously in 2013? (By the way, I misreported which house that first transfer was. Alec’s LLC took ownership of his Florida house back in 2013, not the one in Valencia, CA…which he rented.)

Anyway, when I asked Alec why he did the transfer for his two houses, he replied: “Why do you need to publish my personal business on your blog?” And he’s right. So instead, I looked up why others might do it. Some people do it to depreciate the value over time for tax purposes. Others want to avoid probate.

But again, I have to ask: why does it matter???

The answer is: it DOESN’T matter—not to us folks who would simply like to spend our time supporting and enjoying Star Trek fan films…including Axanar.

It really only matters if one is a stalker—engaging in repeated surveillance in order to harass and intimidate. And in my opinion, this whole nonsense really just needs to STOP. It actually needed to stop two years ago! The fact that Shawn “Captain Ahab” O’Halloran is still acting like the Energizer Bunny in regards to all things Alec and Axanar is far more damning to him and his fellow detractors than anything they have or could ever say about Alec. At least Alec isn’t a stalker.

I laughed when Shawn posted a selfie of himself with Star Trek‘s ALEX KURTZMAN along with the caption “And, no… he has no idea who the fuck Alec Peters is or what Axanar is.” I imagined the short conversation that took place between them…

SHAWN O’HALLORAN – I need to ask: have you ever heard or Alec Peters and Axanar?

ALEX KURTZMAN – No, I haven’t. Should I have?

SHAWN – Absolutely not! And don’t worry, Mr. Kurtzman I’ve devoted my life to making sure you will NEVER hear of them! I spend countless hours on it…almost every day! I’m on the job keeping Alec Peters from ever being a name that you hear. And I’ll never stop fighting to make sure you never find out who he is!

ALEX – Um, well, that’s…er, that’s….uh, great, I guess. Sounds like, er, an important job?

SHAWN – Oh, it is!

ALEX – Then, um, thanks for the hard work…?

But seriously. Imagine what would happen if Alec started to behave like Shawn. Imagine the detractors’ reaction if Alec looked into the personal and business transactions of Shawn—or Carlos Pedraza—and then used that information to help someone suing them or to simply ruin their reputations in public. Imagine if Alec dedicated his life to stalking Shawn and Carlos the way they stalk him…day after day, month after month, year after year. Heck, imagine if Aled even did it once! We’d never hear the end of it from Detractorville (and well we shouldn’t because it’s just plain wrong)!

But here we are, with the detractors trying to justify their sociopathic behavior because the victim is Alec Peters and they are on some righteous quest to “protect” the public from supporting him.

But it’s not a righteous quest, my friends. It never was. It’s stalking, harassment, and intimidation—plain and simple—and it’s just as wrong today as it was yesterday…and as it will be tomorrow.

(Speaking of tomorrow, come back then to discover the final fate of the TOS sets formerly known as STARBASE STUDIOS.)

91 thoughts on “Follow-up: Yes, SHAWN O’HALLORAN, you ARE stalking ALEC PETERS!”

  1. Few facts you’ve missed, since you don’t like echo chambers…

    Searching public records and posting that information in a Facebook group is not stalking.

    Carlos IS a journalist.

    Carlos and Shawn haven’t acquired $1.5m from donors, sued by CBS and Paramount, settled and permitted to make 2x 15 minute films, waited 2 years – coming on 3 – to finally almost finish a bridge set that isn’t in the script “But don’t worry, it’ll be on the DVD extras.” They also don’t have 1 – almost 2, although was that just posturing? haven’t heard anything since before New Years Day – lawsuits on the go for their other nefarious dealings etc etc etc etc … so they’re not open to the same accountability as Alec “I need $200,000 to make 30 minutes of fan film” Peters.

    1. Oh, are we still debating? Do you have an “OFF” setting, by any chance? I thought you said you were moving on from Axanar. Did I miss a memo, mate? 🙂

      Anyway…

      “Searching public records and posting that information in a Facebook group is not stalking.”

      Searching public records with an intent to surveil, monitor, and potentially harass and intimidate is most assuredly stalking, Matthew. Read the definition I included. Just because the records are public doesn’t mean the person isn’t engaging in the act of stalking.

      “Carlos IS a journalist.”

      And I work for NASA.

      Or rather I did…back in 1993-1994 (which is about the same time as Carlos was a journalist; now he’s just an obsessed blogger). 🙂

      1. No, I’m commenting on your blog. And no, I wasn’t moving on from Axanar… just the daily minutiae, except that I get notifications of your posts and feel the need to correct your mistakes.

        And no, that’s not what stalking is.

          1. Stalking is a crime. It is an offence under the Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007. Stalking is defined under this law and includes:

            ‘the following of a person about or the watching or frequenting of the vicinity of, or an approach to a person’s place of residence, business or work or any place that a person frequents for the purposes of any social or leisure activity’.

            Stalking involves a persistent course of conduct or actions by a person which are intended to maintain contact with or exercise power and control over another person. These actions cause distress, loss of control, fear or harassment to another person and occur more than once.

            Stalking can involve threats or sexual innuendo and the stalker generally tries to intimidate or induce fear in the person they are stalking. The person being stalked may only realise they are being stalked once they identify a pattern of strange or suspicious incidents occurring, such as:

            phone calls
            text messages
            messages left on social media sites such as Facebook and Twitter etc.
            notes left on the their car
            strange or unwanted gifts left at their home
            an awareness that they are being followed
            being continually stared at or gestured to by another person.

            The person being stalked can often develop a sense of loss of control over their lives and can be forced into changing their routine and behaviours.

            The criminal offence of stalking is contained under section 13 Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007. To prove an offence of stalking the police must be able to produce evidence to a court. The police evidence must prove that the accused person stalked another person with the intention of causing another person to fear physical or mental harm.

          2. You’re providing the federal definition of CRIMINAL stalking as a felony or misdemeanor. I never said Shawn was guilty of criminal stalking. If he were, Alec or I would have reported him long ago.

            But yes, Shawn is still a stalker. Think of it like this: Someone can be a liar without necessarily being convicted of perjury or lying in front of the FBI, which is a felony. Just because he or she hasn’t committed the CRIME of lying doesn’t mean he or she should not be considered a liar.

            Have you been properly schooled now, Matthew?

          3. Jonathan, you have to remember, when it’s someone that the detractors like, it can’t be stalking because they are righteous crusaders of truth.

          4. I´d say the Wiki definition fits quite nicely.
            The question is – is it even worth the time to go correcting these deluded individuals? They live in their bubble and nothing will change their mind. I bet even if Peters finishes the 30 minutes and all perks are fulfilled they will be still going on. What a waste of time…

          5. Well, I do plan to return to fan film coverage starting tomorrow. There’s a LOT going on! But I felt like Shawn had crossed a line, and I don’t like to simply ignore such malevolent behavior because then the line can keep being moved.

          6. So you Schooled him again then… Jonathan.

            But then it’s not that hard, By his own admission, he really doesn’t know what he’s talking about…

            Those who continue with these antics day in and out are like vengeful ex-spouses. It’s sad really. and I would say, they have my pity… But instead, I just shake my head at their foolishness.

        1. Matt, What do you consider stalking then? oh wait why do you not ask Gabe? he is an expert.

          Of course this is stalking and many of the detractors do this day in and day out and not only that they continue daily and I have over 2 years worth of evidence that every day they continue to harass, bully, abuse and commit criminal offences and yet YOU champion and excuse that behaviour and even yourself have been a victim of that behaviour.

          Firstly Matt, do some research and actually define stalking, bullying and harassment before you go chiming in on a subject you 1, do not know about and 2 on a subject you obviously do NOT care about.

          You guys make me laugh that you take the moral high ground while using tactics like fraud, bullying and harassment to get that message across.

          1. Matthew is trying to deflect the charge of stalking by using a narrow definition of CRIMINAL stalking. I never said Shawn was guilty of criminal stalking. But there are lots of other aspects to stalking behavior as described by that definition I provided at the start of this blog.

        1. See my answer elsewhere on this page. Working for NASA was really exciting. I got to roam around the JPL campus and even visit the Space Flight Operations control center a few times. The most surreal moment of my time there, though, was the loss of contact with Mars Observer just as it was set to land on the surface of the red planet. You might remember that as the mission where one team used metric units while the other used imperial units, and the probe crashed into Mars at about 6 times the speed of sound because the braking thrusters never fired. My brother and I arrived at work, expecting to see champagne corks popping. Our development team were actually planning on using some of the Mars Observer data and images for our interactive project for the kids. Instead, when we arrived, JPL had been out of contact with the probe for about 85 minutes, and everyone was walking around like there was a woman who had just had a miscarriage in the next room. The dejection and despair at NASA lasted for weeks after that. But the show did go on, and there have been 15 successful missions to Mars since then.

          1. Jonathan,
            No, Mars Observer was lost from either a failure of the propulsion system from any one of three possible failure scenarios, total electrical power loss from a massive short in the power system, loss of both main and backup computers, or loss of both main and backup transmitters. See https://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/text/marsob.txt

            The failures of the propulsion system could have been either:
            — Liquid oxidizer (nitrogen tetroxide) may have migrated
            past a check valve in the pressurization lines; during
            the tank pressurization, the oxidizer could have been
            forced into lines containing the fuel, liquid
            monomethylhydrazine, causing the line to burst;

            — The pressure regulator could have failed, causing the
            oxidizer tank to overpressurize and burst;

            — A small pyrotechnic device, or squib, that was fired to
            open a valve in one of the pressurization system’s lines
            could have been ejected from the pyro valve like a bullet
            and damaged the fuel tank.

            (Personally I’m going with the oxidizer migrating past the check valve into the He pressure lines that then got pushed into the fuel tank, causing the line to rupture. But that’s just me.)

            Anyway, no, the metric-English conversion error was on Mars CLIMATE Orbiter (MCO) in 1999 where we had asked the contractor to use metric (SI) units, they used ft/sec, and the accumulated error only resulted in a misnavigation of a mere 50 km out of 220 million, but that was in the wrong direction toward the planet and it burned up on its first flyby as it went through the atmosphere. (doh!) We’re NEVER gonna live that one down . . . .

            Oh well, back to Mars Sample Return . . .

          2. Oh, poopy! I completely flamingo’d up on that one! You’re right, of course. The metric-English SNAFU was years later…after my brother and I were no longer at NAS-JPL. The probe that was lost while I was there was a different SNAFU. Thanks for providing the correction, David.

    2. Calling Carlos a journalist is a lie. He is a blogger. Big difference. He also lacks journalistic ethics, a hallmark of a professional journalist.

      Searching public records and posting that information in a Facebook group is stalking when put in context of Shawn’s pathological obsession.

      And he may want to revisit Moby Dick. That didn’t work out to well for Ahab.

      1. Oh hey Alec… is Axanar in post production yet? It has been 3 years.

        Nah, that doesn’t fit… Carlos is a journalist.

        1. Let me ask for the record, Matthew, since Axamonitor is a blog site focused primarily on a single subject, is that what you are using to define Carlos as a journalist…or does he do something else at the moment that would qualify him as a journalist?

          I mean, I’ll grant that Carlos WAS a journalist about a quarter of a century ago. He wrote about garage rock bands for a small, local Seattle paper…and one of his articles even got picked up by the Associated Press. Heck, that’s more than you or I have managed to do, right? But in that same vein, I sold a manuscript back in 2011 for $300,000 that was published by Gotham Books in 2012. That makes me an author, but I don’t really define myself as an “author” by trade at the moment. For six years, I was the creative director on the Willy Wonka Candy Factory website for Nestle. But I don’t call myself an Oompa Loompa either. 🙂

          What I’m getting at here is that journalism is an occupation. It’s something one gets paid to do for news organizations, media outlets, magazines, newspapers, and even some websites. As a profession, it requires a certain level of compensation—either salary or freelance wages. To my knowledge, Carlos is working for himself on a blog that a few dozen or hundred people at most read. Calling oneself a “journalist,” at least to me, seems to imply a slightly higher bar than simply writing a blog in one’s spare time about one single subject.

          But maybe I am uninformed. Is Carlos doing professional journalistic work somewhere else at the moment where he’s getting a byline or some kind of credit? If so, please let me know, and I can start agreeing that he is, at this moment, a journalist and not just a blogger. Otherwise, he WAS a journalist decades ago and now he’s just a blogger.

          1. you don’t stop being something just because you aren’t working at the moment. to suggest otherwise is moronic… to use your term.

          2. So I’m still a creative director? I’m still an art director? I’m still a user experience designer? I’m still a project manager? I’m still a business analyst? I’m still a book author? I’m still a Star Trek licensing consultant? I’m still a data entry clerk? I’m still a delivery boy? I’m still a babysitter?

            No. I WAS all of those things going back to my first jobs as a teenager. I have design training and experience. Carlos has training as a journalist. But he is not currently a journalist. And the fact that he claims to be a journalist in order to give Axamonitor some kind of validity is even more disingenuous. A true journalist would know enough to describe someone as a current journalist or a former journalist.

            As an example, when I watch CNN (a journalistic news channel), I see pundits introduced as “Former Communications Director…” or “Former Senator…” or “Retired General…” in order to distinguish them from those doing those jobs currently. A person who WAS a general might have the training and experience of one, but if he’s retired from service, he no longer issues commands or reports to the secretary of defense.

            So if you want to say “former journalist Carlos Pedraza,” I’m fine with that. I really am. If you want to say “journalist by training,” that’s fine, too. But calling Carlos a journalist now is purposefully misleading, implying a truth that isn’t true…not the first time you or Carlos has done so but still not something I’m going to let either of you get away with.

  2. So if that whole depreciation thing you stated as the reason for Alec selling his property was false and you got your facts wrong on Alec being sued for $15,000, can you see why we think you are the moron? You just wrote yet another 1k plus word article with nothing but wrong info.

    1. I got my information incorrect, admitted to doing so, and apologized.

      Shawn got his information wrong and doubled down.

      I’ll let history decide which of us is a moron. Hey, it might actually be you, Laughing boy. 🙂

      1. “I’ll let history decide which of us is a moron.”

        History doesn’t care about you or Shawn or Axanar or Alec Peters. This whole thing is a shitshow. Shawn comes off as obsessed with a defunct fan film that had horrible management and ended up getting sued because it tried to become a business and you come off as no offense intended but Peters’ boyfriend who is just “defending his man.”

        It would be super interesting to see you not mention Axanar, detractors, Alec Peters, or anything related until Axanar actually puts out its 2 15 min films. At least here. If this page is really about fan films and not a Support Alec Peters Page dressed up to look like one, I challenge you to prove it by not mentioning Axanar or Peters or those going after him until Axanar is out.

        If you want to talk about your friend and detractors do it on some personal blog that’s about YOU, not fan films. But I doubt you will promise to not mention Axanar or Peters or any of those involved in it until the films are out. Because I think you care about it beyond reason just as Shawn whatshisname cares beyond reason. You two are mirrors of each other. Sick, twisted mirrors.

        1. I have a suggestion for you, Randy, as this seems to be really bothering you a lot. And I understand. I actually do wrestle with the question of how much coverage to give to Axanar and the detractor controversies.

          If you look at my twitter feed, you can see that, over the past six months, I’ve published 112 blogs. Of those, 87 have had nothing to do with Axanar. Another 12 were things like Axanar updates and Axacon reports, an interview with JG Hertzler, and spotlighting the latest Axanar Comics release. There were, of course, the three blogs providing links to the 3-part Blogger-Battle podcast with Matt Miller. But out of those 112 blogs over six months only 10 blogs were about the detractors and their antics/controversies.

          Now, is 9% too many blogs about the Axanar controversies? Possibly. It’s hard to say. If other fan films were as controversial, I’d be covering them, too. It’s not like I wait until a fan film is released before I cover it! Tomorrow, I’ll be featuring a new trailer for “First Frontier” (due out in March). Last week, I updated folks on “Constar Chronicles.” The week before, I updated readers on “Temporal Anomaly.” Last month, I brought fans up to speed on “The Holy Core,” “Convergence,” and the DS9 documentary “What We Left Behind.” I also have an blog update coming on “Space Command” (just have to write it up).

          So no, Randy, I can’t simply wait until Axanar is released to cover it. That’s completely NOT what Fan Film Factor is for. I cover the journey (the “trek,” if you will) of getting from there to here. When possible, I update my readers on the progress happening along the way. And once the fan films are released, I don’t discuss the plot of the film itself (folks are welcome to just watch it) so much as the stories behind the production–the people who made it and what it took to turn an idea and a dream into a reality. That’s what Fan Film Factor is all about.

          Okay, my suggestion for you, Randy…

          Don’t read the blogs that have “AXANAR” or “ALEC PETERS” in the titles. I try to include one or the other of those names (or both) in the titles in ALL CAPS so that readers quickly know what to expect. If those specific blogs are bothering you, Randy, rather than having me change my blog content decisions (something I respectfully decline to do), simply don’t read blogs that will upset you because they are about Axanar. You don’t have to avoid Fan Film Factor completely (unless you choose to). But neither do you have to read EVERYTHING that I write! I’m flattered to hear that you do, of course, but the last thing I want is have folks feeling like I’m forcing them to read my blogs just because I write them. If you don’t like the Axanar coverage, please Randy, you have my full permission and encouragement to not read them.

          1. Dude I am just not going to read this blog anymore. you don’t see how you come off. you are too damn wordy too consumed with drama about Axaner and too obsessed with Shawn and “detractors” to hear reason. i’m glad this guy is your friend but why you don’t keep it on your “this is Johnathan Lane and my life blog” and not a fan film blog is a mystery to me, but I’m out.

  3. So you did work for NASA. I suppose that made you a Rocket Scientist at one point? And now you’re a “professional blogger “ – who takes his legal definitions from Wikipedia. Nuff said.

    1. My brother David and I worked for the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory’s Teaching Resource Center near Pasadena from mid 1993 to mid 1994 on an interactive simulation of a space mission designed for 4th-64th graders (primarily) who came on the tour of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory for field trips.

      The CD-ROM “game” had the kids dividing up into groups to plan out a space mission to one of the nine planets (I miss Pluto!) or the asteroid belt, a comet, or the sun. They were given a set budget and needed to plan out what kind of probe to send, what items to put on it, and how big a launch vehicle to use. It was a REALLY fun project to design (I was creative director; my brother lead programmer). For example, if kids were going to Mars, they could put a lot heavier stuff on the probe because the launch vehicle didn’t need as much fuel to reach escape velocity. But then there was the added weight of the probe itself, which needed to be able to survive a landing (unless they wanted an orbiter). Including wheels for traveling on the Martian surface increased both the weight and the cost, but could they save money with a smaller rocket…or would the extra weight be too much? Missions to gas giants had other challenges (since those probes didn’t have to land). To this day, it remains one of the most fun projects I’ve ever worked on…especially sitting for user testing sessions with the kids!

      Oh, and I never took a legal definition from Wikipedia. I never said Shawn was breaking the law. But he is a stalker.

  4. Hello everybody,

    I am far, very far away (thank God) of this very old battle but I observe 2 things, some people
    rebukes Alec, being a well-off with some success and daring to touch Star Trek.
    Wealth for the poor or modest people has always been seen as a divine injustice, the wealthy it is always considered evil and everyone loves evil. Curious no!
    For the mediocre person success hits because it highlights their mediocrity is almost unbearable
    then you have to attack and destroy to feel better (elephant – true Jonathan).
    Alec is not a perfect man, really nobody is, but that does not make him guilty.
    Everyone collects what he sows and if Alec has sown better than others, I say good!
    The rest is wind talk! If Alec is wrong, Alec pays and if Alec is not wrong, Alec goes
    forward, point! But the point of view of one or some is not the majority !
    Now let’s talk about Star Trek, of course in the US, tap Star Trek and how to touch the bible, BURNS !
    I have read some points of view on several American forums for a few years!
    I realize that Alec made a film about any other scifi series that Star Trek risked less.
    I will be naive but I want to still think that tomorrow will be better than today! My team and I are working to prepare some of the Starfleet costumes for the Axanar project, both for those who love Axanar and for those who not appreciate it.
    Because I love Star Trek, because to give joy is to the most beautiful thing in the world, to hurt is easy.
    If in my small I will be able to give pleasure even for a moment to people who really love Star Trek then Roddenberry was right, creating bridges between countries, different people and different spirit is POSSIBLE!
    Now, sincerly I prefer dedicate my free time for love or beautifull things as Axanar or other projects !
    I have no time to hate, the life is to short !

    1. The fact remains that, for the detractors, whatever crime Alec may have committed, their punishment is a life sentence. I doubt some of them will ever stop hounding and stalking him.

  5. Well, to the dimwit above Im in law enforcement and the activities engaged in by members of the Axamoronitors absolutely qualify as harassment and stalking. What a bunch of mentally malformed emotionally damaged basement dwellers. You create nothing. You contribute nothing. You arenthe very thing that society stereotypes when pointing out the negative aspects of fandom: keyboard cowboy cowards

    1. Actually, if there are ever any legal repercussions for Shawn and the others, it will be for civil harassment, I’d wager, not criminal stalking. I don’t think any of this rises to the level of criminal behavior. It might escalate to that if the detractors get frustrated enough by Alec’s success and see no other option if they want to hurt him in some way. And that’s another reason I am writing these blogs. If there ever is either a civil or criminal case brought against Shawn or one of the other detractors, it’s helpful to have record documenting previous and escalating behavior.

          1. “if there are ever any legal repercussions… it will be for civil harassment… not criminal stalking.”

          2. Again, don’t twist my words. As I said before, it’s possible to be a liar without committing criminal perjury. It’s possible to be a stalker with committing criminal stalking. I never said Shawn was a criminal stalker…otherwise, Alec or I would have reported him long ago. But Shawn is a stalker…even if he never goes to prison for it.

            Look, I can see you’re really trying for a rare win here, Matthew, and I appreciate the mental chess game. I’ve played often with many very intelligent people. It keeps me on my toes while I blog and/or play Lego Marvel Superheroes 2 with my son (which I am about to do). But isn’t it time to admit that you’re simply outmatched here rather than trying to score these really, REALLY minor technical word-play wins…and still failing to do so?

          3. you really cant help but be condescending and patronising can you? you really must be hard wired to talk to everyone who disagrees with you like your son.

          4. Actually, I give Jayden much more respect because I’ve taught him not to lie. Folks who lie, and so do frequently, don’t get my respect. You had you chance, Matthew, but you blew it. Sorry.

          5. Wow, did you really just use the ol’ “I’m rubber and you’re glue…” retort to try and win this, Matthew? Geez, man, I am so sorry this is bothering you so much.

            Okay, I’ll give you the point. You’ve wounded me deeply with your comment, and I regret every nasty thing I’ve ever said to you.

            There, did that sound convincing?

          6. “you also had the chance to earn my respect. You had 3 hours to do so, you did not.”

            Actually, the way it sounded, you came at least to a point of “let’s agree to disagree on what we don’t agree on”, so there appeared to be a modicum of respect.

            Did Hinman really come down on you that hard? SM is right, you either really suck at editing, or you really hid your true thoughts and feeling on the matter when you debated, or you got so roundly criticized by the detractor crowd that you are somehow serving penance.

          7. Actually, I think a lot of it has to do with an earnest attempt to generate Web traffic by looking like a scrapper with Lane. I just learned that Trekzone.org is trailing Axamonitor, Axamonitor is trailing Fan Film Factor, and we’re all trailing the Axanar.com website. But Trekzone is way in the back of the field. And since Matthew is trying to monetize his blog and videos (more so than I, although I also run ads and make a few cents a day), it’s more important to him that he increases his user traffic.

            In Trump language, one might describe Matt’s recent confrontations with me as trying to “shore up to his base.”

        1. “mirrormatt86 says:
          January 13, 2019 at 6:11 pm
          you really cant help but be condescending and patronising can you? you really must be hard wired to talk to everyone who disagrees with you like your son.”

          The only one who is coming off as patronizing is you. I cannot imagine being so bitter – did Johnathan steal your best gal or something?

          1. “mirrormatt86 says:
            “you also had the chance to earn my respect. You had 3 hours to do so, you did not.”

            Wow that’s not how it came across in 3 hours, maybe you suck at editing as well as debating.

            But seriously Matt, WTF is your problem its like since you broadcast that 3 hour debate which I actually thought was good and you came across a civil, reasonable adult…to seeing pretty much a petulant and petty child on these boards? Do you really seek the approval of those in axamonitor so desperately?
            Do they leave you alone if you promise to act like a complete and total childish fool?

  6. Can someone make a fan film about these guys and their obsession? I mean, WOW. So they lost their $20, or maybe they didn’t “lose” anything. I’ve “lost” money on crowd funded fantasy before too, SO WHAT. In the comedic words of The Bill, “get a life”

  7. Anyone who thinks that what Shawn has been doing is NOT stalking is delusional, or an Axamonitor member. Of course we keep track of everything and his antics take a lot of hard drive space. 3 years, tens of thousands of comments.

    Maybe we will get a neutral third party to make the decision on online stalking/harassment/bullying. You would be an even bigger idiot to think they wouldn’t find in my favor.

    Oh and the discovery would be fascinating. All texts and private messages between Shawn and his buddy Carlos and other haters. Would be a fascinating read. And who knows where it might lead. We know CBS was involved with the haters at some point.

  8. I still recall the time that those actual monitor people contacted me on my Twitter account and they were very intimidating indeed trying to convince me that I was wrong about Alec Peters and that I need to start hating him and telling everybody else that they should hate him too. It was all very surreal, very strange. Those people are not well.

  9. So, re: the $15k (or more) part of the lawsuit you missed….

    you were ‘given’ a copy of an initial filing way back when, and were never given the more accurate, updated filing that came later, and so you based your faulty information in incomplete/inaccurate information you were given. fair enough, it happens to everyone…Even Carlos, when he was told the wrong City Axanar Productions moved to when they had to abandon L.A.

    but I have to ask….is the source that gave you the info on the lawsuit the same source that explained all the ways that Shawn O’Halloran was ‘still a moron’ regarding the legal stuff? because there are some really big, obvious holes in that explanation–obvious even to me, and I have no legal training–and it seems to me that if that source already presented you with faulty intel before, it is rather foolish to rely on that intel a second time without doing some independent verification. this back-and-forth grudge match between you and Shawn O’Halloran, while entertaining, already exposed some poor research and/or fact-checking before; using the same less-than-reliable source for this follow-up seems likely to land you, once again, on the side of getting it all wrong and ending up reporting more misleading and inaccurate information….did you do any kind of independent research on your own to verify claims your source made, or are you just firing from the hip? because “I still think Shawn is a moron because the guy who gave me bad info before said he was” is an awfully weak position…

    1. As I said, the fact that I said Shawn is a moron is a very MINOR part of the point I was making. I see any effort (like yours) to turn this into a “Jonathan didn’t research this properly” as a someone desperate attempt to distract from my main point and change the narrative…sort of a “Hey, look over there!” kinda move.

      Obviously, I took full responsibility for presenting incorrect information the day before. Mea culpa. My bad. Sorry. Please forgive me. Yadda yadda. But the main point is not that Shawn is a moron, that I said Shawn is a moron, that Alec said Shawn is a moron, or that the reason we called him a moron is because of his fantasy scenario that he’s somehow found a smoking gun to screw Alec in this lawsuit and “protect” others from giving him money.

      If you’d like to continue harping on all of the above, then you are either inadvertently or purposefully trying to avoid dealing with the very uncomfortable truth that Shawn O’Halloran is stalking Alec Peters, obsessively looking into his personal and business records, threatening Alec that he (Shawn) could and possibly has or will do more of the same in the future, and trying to use this information that he zealously collects to damage Alec legally and financially.

      That kind of behavior is, at best, outside the norms of what is socially acceptable and, more disturbingly, calls to mind images of a scorned lover who will stop at nothing to ruin the life and reputation of the person who dumped him. While such actions as Shawn is undertaking now are simply disturbing, one wonders if and how things might escalate in the future to something that isn’t simply disturbing but actually much, much worse. I say this because, with time, Shawn’s obsession and anger concerning Alec Peters don’t seem to be fading. Just the opposite, in fact.

      So I hope you can understand why my main point has nothing to do with $15,000. That’s pretty much an irrelevant distraction.

      1. if it was an ‘irrelevant distraction’, why devote a third of this blog response to it? does that make it a SUCCESSFUL distraction which you fell for and keep falling for?

        and given that this is the first time I’ve commented here in a couple of months, then saying I ‘continue harping’ on it….well, dial back the Drama, Queen.

        in fact, you do tend to have a real problem with abusing the adjectival stockpile through a lot of this.

        for example, his post that inspired this blog was apparently a post in response to your last blog, which was a response to his comment on an earlier blog….if we are going to toss the word ‘obsessively’ about, then that descriptor fits you just as much…after all, a blog titled ‘FAN FILM Factor’ is devoting multiple blog entries to a guy who isn’t making a fan film….how is your ‘obsessive’ comments on O’Halloran better than his ‘obsessive’ comments on Peters?

        Is a love triangle of spurned lovers? are you motivated by jealousy because the ex is getting the attention? (sorry, some of your prior metaphors are a bit strange, but they fit your relationship to O’Halloran as well as they fit his relationship to Peters….

        It doesn’t look like stalking. O’Halloran’s actions do look like a personal grudge, but his ‘obsessive’ research into public records regarding peters’ actions are reasonable, considering that most of this argument over the last few years has been each side accusing the other of lying. when O’Halloran was accused of lying, he decided to look for facts to support his claims, to break the ‘he said/she said’ cycle…he said what he said, she called him a liar, so he went and found supporting information to back up his claims, so she screams ‘stalker!’ rather than presenting other evidence….when he makes an accusation and the accused says the accusation is false, what is he supposed to do? just say ‘well, I believe you, sorry’, or maybe look for something to solidly prove or disprove his claims one way or the other? why is it obsessive and unreasonable?

  10. Jonathan, just to let you know, your fingers, or was it your brain(JK) fell asleep 3 times during the blog. 2 of them were missing single letters, but the third was the horrendous spelling of intimidation. Somehow it came put intimation. Just thought I’d let you know. ;>)
    You’re right about the definition of stalker, though. Shawn DEFINITELY QUALIFIES. :>)

      1. Jonathan. you missed 2 letters. One was ad and the other a p, I think. It’s been a few days so I’ve forgotten which words are involved. Probably should have written them down, and I have to go out so don’t have time to go and them now, but they did stand out so you should be able to spot them when you’re completely awake. ;>)

  11. Well, after seeing this blog this AM, I am amused how much time some of these haters spend commenting.

    Today after helping Crysstal with her photo shoot, I spent about 5 hours at the studio working with some awesome people, recorded a Facebook live video for fans, recorded an Axanar Update for YouTube, I helped rescue a dog, and then Crysstal and I spent the evening at Jazz night at The Federal Coffee and had dinner at Ted’s. Yeah, that was my day.

    And the haters? They spent a lot of time stalking me and commenting on this and in their little hate group. Oh and they stalk me on Yelp. How fucking hilarious is that. Truly pathetic. Jonathan, you have way too much patience!

    Alec

    1. Well, let’s see…

      Jayden woke me up at 8:00 a.m. to show me Wakanda on the new Lego Marvel Superheroes 2 video game that my parents got him for Christmas. Then I watched him play (and dozed) until the Los Angeles Chargers decided to show the New England Patriots how to completely screw up a football playoff game. (So much for an L.A. versus L.A. Superbowl. Go, Rams!) I answered some blog comments, made myself an eggcellent omelette, made Jayden lunch, helped him practice karate and piano (with a little extra video gaming inserted), answered some more comments, felt really bad for Matt Miller (poor guy), finished editing an audio interview for tomorrow’s blog, responded to a few more comments, got take-out for dinner for the family, and we finished watching “The Sound of Music” with Jayden (which we’d started last weekend).

      So I think we’ve both had very productive days, Alec! 🙂

    2. so, let me get this straight….you are being harassed and intimidated because Shawn is publicly tracking every little thing you do, no matter how insignificant, so to counter this, you…..publicly list every little thing you do, no matter how insignificant? Please, explain the logic of this…

      1. I don’t think Shawn is tracking every little thing Alec does, nor is Alec publicly listing every little thing he does. That’s just…well, I don’t like to use the word “lie” when it’s only a purposeful misleading statement of an obviously false claim.

        But Shawn is digging through whatever he can find about Alec in order to do harm to him, tarnish his reputation, intimidate, and harass. Alec, when he reports on his day to his friend, or recounts what he’s been up to in a blog post or comment, is making the choice of what to share publicly and presumedly not doing so with the intent to harm or harass or intimidate himself.

        I’m sure even you can see the differences there, William…right? I mean, this isn’t rocket surgery, dude!

        Another schooled customer. 🙂

        1. That’s true; Alec isn’t doing it to harm himself; he’s just stalking shawn the same way shawn is stalking him.

          “we keep track of everything and his antics take a lot of hard drive space. 3 years, tens of thousands of comments.”

          then ,after threatening to sue: “who knows where it might lead”…..

          so, you are correct, Jon. Alec isn’t foolishly undermining his complaint against shawn Stalking him. he is stalking shawn, and has been for at least three years, and is dropping threats regarding potential lawsuits to try and intimidate him into silence.

          1. Keeping records of attacks and harassment attempts against you is very different than stalking, William. I think you know that, but you’re just desperately trying not to lose an argument you’ve already lost. I’ll give you one more try, but then I’m calling the game citing the mercy rule.

  12. Shawn seems to fail to understand that there is a difference between what one might consider “typical” stalking vs. cyberstalking. He is most certainly cyberstalking Alec. Cyberstalking laws are evolving and Nevada does have one (and cyberstalking is a felony there, carrying penalties of 1 – 5 years in state prison, and up to $10,000 in fines. And that doesn’t even include defamation/slander/libel considerations. But regardless of whether or not criminal or civil action is taken, Shawn is clearly obsessed to the point of sounding unhinged/dangerous. I have had an unhinged person I “knew” only through the web show up on my street, two states away from his home. And he had not exhibited such severe behavior as Shawn. If I were Alec, I’d be scared that Shawn’s behavior will escalate. And if he does feel concerned for his safety, that makes Shawn’s behavior qualify as a felony under Nevada law. Now, some crimes must be prosecuted in the victim’s state … Georgia’s laws require a restraining order first, but cyberstalking is also considered a felony and the prison sentence can be up to 10 years.

    1. I actually think Alec is aware of much of this, Anonny. As I said, legal action against Shawn and some of the other detractors hasn’t been taken off the table. It’s just not a priority right now for Alec.

  13. Well the Axamonitor page came up on my FB feed I presume because of the link with FFF so I went over to see what the fuss is about and still can’t see why anyone would be interested in it. Less than a thousand members just a few people posting and the tone was both nasty and dull at the same time. No wit, no intelligence displayed just some not very high quality vitriol.

    These people are not worth your time nor are any who get sucked in by their blandisements their motivations are fueled by jealousy and envy and you are not going to change their minds. As much as you desire to set the record straight it is not going to happen.

    The meme “Arguing with idiots is like playing chess with a pigeon. No matter how good you are the bird is going to shit on the board and strut around like it won anyway” seems apt.

    Just ignore them they will either die on the vine and those that don’t well you would not want to be seen in public with them anyhow. By responding to them you validate there little fantasy and if you do or not they hard core morons will continue anyhow.

    From the sound of it Mr Peters is going full stream ahead so their efforts have achieved nothing and it is a dubious testament that his work has stirred up so much jealousy from these “fans” None as far as I am aware who have actually contributed anything to the ST fan community let alone made a fan film.

    1. While I could ignore them, Glenn, the fact remains that this is, in fact, Fan Film news. And truth to tell, people want to know about it. How can I be so certain? Take a look at my web traffic stats over the last three days…

      Also, I’m not writing these anti-detractor editorials to change the minds of those who hate Alec Peters with every fiber of their beings. I might as well try to stop the rain from falling for all the good it’ll do me.

      Instead, I write to rally support for Alec and Axanar from both the supporters and those on the fence. The worse the detractors look (and as you commented, they look REALLY bad to anyone outside the dysfunction of the echo-chamber), the better off Alec and the whole Axanar movement look. Y’know how, when Donald Trump says something really insulting to this or that Democratic candidate during a campaign that the supporters of that Democrat suddenly start donating to that candidate’s campaign fund in anger over Trump’s comment or tweet? It’s kinda the same thing here. Shawn’s antics could ultimately put a few extra bucks in the coffers once Alec starts trying to fund raise again. Sure, he’s not allowed to use Kickstarter or Indiegogo to publicly crowd-fund, but private fan funding is totally allowed buy the settlement. And if Axanar fans think that donating a few extra dollars will make detractors like Shawn even more pissed off, then there’s the justification for my blogs, which are getting thousands of views.

  14. Jonathan,

    I’m scoring this one 4-3 to you.
    Whilst I’m not an American lawyer- I’m admitted to practice in several other jurisdictions- I’m familiar with the principles of disposal of assets to defeat creditors, having taught- amongst other things- property law for many years. In this instance, the relevant statutes are almost certainly those of Georgia, where the property is located, not Nevada, because no action has been taken in Nevada to dispose of property.
    Even then, there is an enormous difference between ‘evidence’ of something i.e. fraud and the determination that fraud has occurred. There can be evidence which tends towards something without it being the case. Rarely is there a rule of law that says that a particular occurrence is determinative. This means that the mere fact that something MAY be evidence of fraud does not mean that it is PROOF of fraud. There can be many, many legitimate reasons for transferring a property. The most common in the US is to allow a person to ‘rent’ the property from their own corporation, and hence claim the tax deduction. Good, legal, tax planning.

    So, on the substantive question- has Mr Peters done anything wrong by transferring a property for a nil value (which does not put it out of reach of creditors in any event)- I’m awarding this one to you.

    However, you’ve scored several own goals here. I think almost any observer reading your last blog, and much of this one, would have concluded that your intention was to suggest that Mr O’Halloran’s actions were either illegal or to be sanctioned i.e. he was a ‘stalker’ not just a ‘moron.’ I understand the position you are putting now, that your point has nothing to do with the law; fair enough. However, the self-same definition of stalking you’ve provided also covers journalists, detectives, gossipy neighbours and many, many others whom society has chosen not to sanction. I think we would all agree that this is a far less severe charge; in essence, your complaint is that Shaun is a ‘detractor.’ So, whether by poor phraseology or over-reach, 1-1.

    Where I really challenge your logic, though, is with regards to the conclusions you draw from Mr O’Halloran spending money. I’ve looked at the fee schedules for Georgia counties- it’s not a great deal of money to conduct searches and document retrieval. A person who, in other contexts, spends a few dollars on what they consider to be important doesn’t fall into a unique category by virtue of that act. If it did, Jonathan, we’d have to acknowledge that all of those who are funding FAN FILMS are in that same category of illogically spending money on something that they care about… Heck, those spending hours on writing a blog, which as you’ve told us pays next to nothing, would be just as obsessive. We are a culture that spends money on things that we value. Pitching $50 isn’t unreasonable in the context of the public positions of each of the parties.Again, overreach. 1-2 against.

    On the other hand, Jonathan, you do yourself no favours with publication relying on only the older version of the suit. given your close relationship with Mr Peters I think Joe Public would expect you to get that one right. Your credibility does take a hit. Take your lumps on that one. 1-3 down.

    That brings us to the central question, which actually isn’t anything new. How should we evaluate the continuing ‘axamonitor’-type conduct? Is it obsessive, irrational, unreasonable and pointless? Well, given that the goal seems to be to ensure that Mr Peters faces ridicule and can’t ever raise money, I think that’s been well accomplished. The ongoing vitriol is clearly because some people can’t let go. The axamonitor pages are classic solipsistic group verbal violence. It has become a culture, a commitment, which I don’t think will stop, becase it has gained a meaning of its own. To paraphrase, if Axanar didn’t exist, they would need to invent it to hate. If Axanar died, they would need to resurrect it to kill it again. That’s a brace to you, though again nothing new.

    Looking forward to the next substantive article.

    1. Wait, my bitching about the detractors being bitchy was worth THREE POINTS by itself??? Man, I could have saved so much blogging time! 🙂

      Anyway, well argued in a very lawyerly way, Nadav. Let’s see how I do on cross and rebuttal…

      So my first point “lost” was about Shawn’s behavior being outside of the socially acceptable norms. While I fully acknowledge that such behavior is typical of journalists and detectives, who are paid professionals expected to dig through background records to get to potentially hidden truths, Shawn is neither.

      Your next example, however, “gossipy neighbours,” brings me pause. I would not equivocate Mrs. Kravitz living across the street to a professional information gatherer. And honestly, I don’t think society is quite as accepting of that sort of behavior as you assume. If my neighbor were to look through my mailbox each day (not open my mail, which is illegal) to see who was sending me stuff, I would be creeped out. And if he or she went to look up permits for my home to see if there was anything amiss (not for any specific reason like my tree was too tall) but simply trying to find something to report me for, I’d be pretty pissed…and so would most people, I’d wager.

      And the fact is, Shawn is NOT Alec’s neighbor. I’m not even certain he’s ever met Alec in person. The two share no other connection beyond stalker and stalkee, based solely on Shawn’s perceived “crimes” that Alec has committed. If anything, this relationship brings to mind a scorned lover who can’t let go and resents the success of his ex. And I doubt society views that in the same way as they do the “gossipy neighbor”…and even a gossipy neighbor comes close to crossing a line of social acceptability. I feel Shawn jumped over the line and then proceeded to run another 100 meters or so.

      As for your “…many, many others whom society has chosen not to sanction…” I’m not certain I can respond to that without specifics. A teacher who is concerned about a student and looks beyond their school records into their parents’ financial records to see if there are issues at home? In that case, it’s a professional situation again. A person who is attracted to a co-worker and checks out her Facebook page and follows her on social media, talking to a few of her friends? That’s fine. If he looks into her business records, though? Y’see, Nadav, I don’t think I can give you the point for this one. Perhaps I don’t “win” the point either, but I’d place the score at 1-0, not 1-1. 🙂

      As for Shawn spending money, that simply goes toward underscoring his obsession, whether he is spending $5 or $50 or $500. The fact is that this individual went through this kind of hassle to look up the financial records of someone he’s never met–without being a journalist or detective–simply desiring to find a way to harm Alec Peters in some way. And perhaps that is the real point that I need to underscore here. It’s not that Shawn spent money. It’s that Shawn spent money with the intention of finding something to DAMAGE Alec Peters in some way…or at least to publicly embarrass, harass, or intimidate him. After all, what other reason does Shawn have to do such a thing? He says it’s to “protect the public,” but that seems to be a dubious claim based on him passing the treasured nugget of information he found along to the plaintiff in the lawsuit and her attorney. Also, isn’t the goal of keeping Alec from raising more funds to complete his fan film a form of harming him in a financial way?

      On this one, Nadav, I actually think I get a point. So 2-0…at least on my score card. 🙂

      As for relying on the wrong document, that is totally on me. When Alec was first sued, I got a scanned copy of the complaint. Honestly, I never even knew that Alec was filing a counter-claim, let alone that the plaintiff had added to her claims in response. That was, admittedly, quite sloppy on my part…and I do apologize for the misinformation. That said, Shawn is still a moron, just for reasons other than those I stated in the first blog but for the reasons cited in the follow-up blog.

      So certainly take off a point for that. 2-1.

      Now, if you’re still giving me three points for your second-to-last paragraph–points which I shall happily accept!–I would say my final score should be 5-1.

      Thoughts? 🙂

      P.S. – I hope Matthew Miller has read this response. That’s what it looks like when I have respect for the person I am debating. I’m not condescending to everyone…only to those who try to lie on my blog and elsewhere. Sorry to have inserted that in my response to you, Nadav. I simply felt this was a good example to point out to Matthew.

      1. Jonathan,

        A thoughtful and concise rebuttal.

        In terms of rescoring:

        1. I understand your point, and I apologise for the imprecise language- ‘sanction’ is legal slang for making something a crime, a civil wrong or otherwise capable of giving rise, off its own bat, to a tortious cause of action. Put another way- I did not mean to suggest that people don’t think it may be bad, but society has not chosen to make it illegal. It’s open season on public records, and Axamonitor-style issue groups. At least, in the US. (We antipodeans have a different standard and approach.)

        So, I’ll definitely take the hit for mixing legalese and plain English, but that doesn’t help your score either. I think anyone reading the first blog would have reached the same conclusion- that you were calling Mr O’Halloran a stalker in the legal sense. I think the comments conveyed that. Still an own goal.

        2. As to the financial matters, I think we will agree to disagree. I’m sure it causes Mr Peters harm, whether measurable or otherwise, each and every time someone posts something negative- if for no other reason that google search algorithms. But I really don’t see this as being much different from the normal standard of ‘detractor’ -type behaviour. These kinds of records searches are not a big deal- I do them all the time. As an aside, I’d wager that Mr O’Halloran had an account for the relevant county, and just pressed search. I think the comment about passing this on to an attorney is again, over-reach. It would hardly be unusual- at least in the world of litigation- for someone to send through a ‘tip’. If your argument here is that Mr O’Halloran falls into a different class because he opened up his pocket book, I don’t think you’ve succeeded. If your argument is that he is in a different class because he wants to cause Mr Peters financial harm, again, I don’t think you’ve moved very far forward. I think we would all agree that the ‘detractors” position would be much stronger if there were a judgement against Mr Peters for something fraud-related. Sending this off to an attorney seems to be a very cost-effective way of furthering their goal.

        What this comes back to, though, is this. You get three points for making the same, clear argument: The ‘axamonitor’ mission has already been accomplished, not by them but by CBS. Mr Peters can’t raise funds. The ‘public’ is ‘protected’ from the possibility of being ‘duped’ into donating money towards a fan film. The continued efforts are, on any reasonable assessment, somewhere between vindictive and the sign of an unhealthy and addictive obsession. I think you could just repeat that- in many ways you are at that point, reiterating the same narrative.

        1. Fine points, all, Nadav. I do wish to clarify one thing. I never meant to imply that Shawn is guilty of criminal stalking. If that were the case, I or Alec would have reported Shawn to Nevada law enforcement long before I ever wrote a blog about it. And if that wasn’t made clear in the blog itself, it certainly came up in the comments.

          So I am not calling Shawn a stalker in the legal sense but only in the factual sense (like calling someone a liar even if they have never lied criminally…such as lying under oath in court). So after having clarified that, would you agree that Shawn O’Halloran has stalked Alec Peters if the definition of stalking (non-criminal) is “unwanted or repeated surveillance by an individual or group towards another person, behaviors interrelated to harassment and intimidation and may include following the victim in person or monitoring them”?

          1. I would agree that, by that definition, he is a stalker. I don’t think, though, as we lawyers would say, much turns on that classification.

          2. Much didn’t have to turn on it, my friend. I found the definition on a widely used website (Wikipedia) and cited it to make my argument. I’m not dragging Shawn into court to prove it in front of a jury.

            In the end, I’m just one blogger with a few thousand readers. What I say doesn’t make much difference in the world as a whole…and it’s not intended to. I’m not even trying to change the minds and behaviors of the detractors (I wish I could, but I know my advisories to them fall mostly on deaf ears). But those thousands of other readers are mainly Axanar supporters and fence-sitters…and soon they may become donors once again. So by calling attention to the malevolence and nefarious actions of the detractors, I’m simply helping Alec to raise more money. So thanks, Shawn, for the assist. 🙂

  15. Jonathan, I wanted to add a further comment, but deliberately as a separate comment.

    Speaking not as a lawyer but as an academic (my other life), I’ve long had an interest in transformative fiction and associated fan communities. My first thesis, back before my Phd, was on ‘The Influence of Bram Stoker’s Dracula on the development of the modern vampire trope.’ I take a keen professional, and personal, interest, in the resolution of ways that old, sidereal IP can be used to create new stories, and how publishers respond. Your blog can be a fascinating way of documenting that transformation, and that tension, in action.

    However, I think when you switch from debating ideas to debating personalities, things slip. I don’t think that calling out someone for being a moron is as productive as even documenting the ‘detractor’ phenomenon. (I think that this would be a valuable activity, actually, and have been hunting for a pysch professor who wants to work with me on the topic.) We lawyers, and academics, encourage playing the ball, not the man. I think you will get better results with a war or ideas than personalities.

    I say that, also, because in many ways it seems that the cross-conflict between ‘axanar supporters’ and ‘detractors’ is a clash between an idea on the one hand, and a personality on the other. Everyone seems to love Prelude to Axanar. Everyone seems to love the ‘Vulcan Scene.’ What- or who- people dislike seems to be Mr Peters, and his supposed method of accomplishing his fan film. I’d love to meet Mr Peters. I have enormous respect for him. However, he does seem to have a polarising personality. I do too. As such, though, by making this about people, rather than ideas, you allow for a conflict where it’s ‘Carlos v Alec,’ or ‘Shaun v Jonathan.’ Wouldn’t you rather keep this as ‘Axanar v Axamonitor’ and see which one is worthy of posterity? Whether you opponents go down that road is up to them, but I think the high road is better all round.

    Just my opinion.

    1. Point taken. Although I like to keep a balance here on FFF of covering Axanar updates and covering the occasional detractor shenanigans (or Shawnanigans lately), in recent months, that balance seems to have shifted. And that’s on me.

      It’s a tough balance to find, though. Ignoring the detractors completely never worked. Alec and I both tried that back in 2017. So when such shameful (and Shawnful…okay, I’ll stop) behavior happens, how can men of conscience simply stand by and say nothing? I find that approach morally dissonant for me personally.

      On the other hand, the old saying is also correct: “Never wrestle in the mud with a pig; you’ll just end up filthy, and the pig actually likes it!”

      And so I try to find my way, doing the best that I can with following seas behind me but barnacles clinging onto my hull along the way. I don’t always get it right, but I still keep on keepin’ on.

  16. There are literally more definitions of stalking than there are States in the Union…
    But a ‘moron’ who is by many a legal definition of the crime of ‘stalking’ a ‘stalker’ would likely point to a selected definition they felt provide them cover for their actions.

    The thing is… when like Alec you don’t have just one stalker… but an entire organized group dedicated to the continued harassment of you, your family and your friends and associates it becomes more than simple stalking… but it doesn’t matter if you are being stalked by one or one-hundred… stalking is still stalking.

    …here’s a ‘legal definition’ that would clearly include these self-appointed ‘investigators’

    DEFINITION OF STALKING
    Tutorial on the crimes of stalking and harassment for New Mexico judges
    “Stalking” is the term commonly used to refer to a pattern of behavior directed towards an individual by another that results in the person to whom the behavior is directed fearing for themselves and/or others. The behaviors can involve overtly criminal behavior or seemingly non-criminal, innocent behavior or both. Stalking can escalate and ultimately result in actual physical harm to its intended subject.

    In contrast to many other criminal offenses, stalking involves repeated victimization of the targeted individual. Stalking, therefore, is a series of acts or a course of conduct and never a single incident. Another contrast between other criminal offenses and stalking is the attention placed on the impact of the actions on the victim in stalking situations.

    Examples of Stalking
    The series of events or acts that comprise stalking can involve a mix of criminal acts and acts which, when viewed in isolation, could be seen as perhaps being innocent or non-threatening. Generally, stalking can include:

    Vandalizing the victim’s property
    Stealing from the victim or burglarizing his or her home
    Threatening the victim
    Killing or harming the victim’s pet(s)
    Following the victim
    Waiting outside the victim’s home and/or place of business
    Visiting the victim at work
    Sending the victim cards or gifts
    Sending the victim photographs of him or her taken without consent and/or knowledge
    Leaving telephone, text, e-mail or hand-written messages for the victim
    Annoying phone calls or other forms of harassment
    Monitoring the victim’s internet history and/or computer usage
    Using technology to gather information on and/or images of the victim
    Disclosing to the victim personal information the stalker has learned about him or her or their daily activities and interests
    Disseminating personal information about the victim to others
    Violating the terms of a protective order
    Assaulting the victim

    http://jec.unm.edu/education/online-training/stalking-tutorial/definition-of-stalking

  17. Looks to me like stalking…

    “”Stalking” is the term commonly used to refer to a pattern of behavior directed towards an individual by another that results in the person to whom the behavior is directed fearing for themselves and/or others. The behaviors can involve overtly criminal behavior or seemingly non-criminal, innocent behavior or both. Stalking can escalate and ultimately result in actual physical harm to its intended subject.

    In contrast to many other criminal offenses, stalking involves repeated victimization of the targeted individual. Stalking, therefore, is a series of acts or a course of conduct and never a single incident. Another contrast between other criminal offenses and stalking is the attention placed on the impact of the actions on the victim in stalking situations.

    Examples of Stalking
    The series of events or acts that comprise stalking can involve a mix of criminal acts and acts which, when viewed in isolation, could be seen as perhaps being innocent or non-threatening. Generally, stalking can include:

    Vandalizing the victim’s property

    Stealing from the victim or burglarizing his or her home

    Threatening the victim

    Killing or harming the victim’s pet(s)

    Following the victim

    Waiting outside the victim’s home and/or place of business

    Visiting the victim at work

    Sending the victim cards or gifts

    Sending the victim photographs of him or her taken without consent and/or knowledge

    Leaving telephone, text, e-mail or hand-written messages for the victim

    Annoying phone calls or other forms of harassment

    Monitoring the victim’s internet history and/or computer usage

    Using technology to gather information on and/or images of the victim

    Disclosing to the victim personal information the stalker has learned about him or her or their daily activities and interests

    Disseminating personal information about the victim to others

    Violating the terms of a protective order

    Assaulting the victim”

    Really, I can see multiple things listed here I’ve seen both reported by Alec… and in claims made by his stalkers.

    http://jec.unm.edu/education/online-training/stalking-tutorial/definition-of-stalking

  18. Looking forward to Axanar! Had no idea all this nonsense was going on. Shows how little I care for toxic people. Just befuddles me as to how people can live life being such toxic, miserable, sad sacks of human beings. Life is short and precious, and yet wasted on such nonsense that 99.99% of the world’s population could give two fig newtons about. Didn’t William Shatner make a documentary, or write some book called “Get a Life!”. Seems appropriate here. XD

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.