and the fact that he was deliberately chosen,

among all the people 'qualified' (no one should have been)

(it was in many ways, violation of human rights)

to dilute/dismiss what he's done initially and proceeding.

no. please clearly differentiate what was done by authorititative order,

what was clearly psychological, and social abuse.

he intended harm in many ways, and took this as a chance for

cyber-bullying.

 

 

he was initially convicted,

then new people came to dismiss his charges(?)

 

please bring up my writing on Adam from before.

What he's done and doing to me. All of it.

 

One of them is a list of cyber-related offense,

in a numbered list. Written by someone else, under a different topic,

but I am relaying. These are from his own shares.

 

He should have been charged for many of these things,

authoritative order? No there is a line drawn to this,

yet there was no moral obligation drawn by this person.

 

He went on to create CHAOS in my life.

 

And he should be clearly charged.