Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Christopher Carrie/Archive

31 August 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

At Talk:Tolkien family in the section "Untrue statements about Chris Carrie in Royd Baker entry" a book by Christopher Carrie called Klone'it is discussed and criticized in connection with the article and BLP issues about Baker. 's conduct specifically with regards to that article has moreover been the subject of a debate at the BLP Notice board and he has eventually been blocked for drawing attention to off-wiki legal disputes between himself and a well-known person (Royd Baker aka Royd Tolkien). Now a new user has joined the discussion on the article talk page speaking of "my book" Klone'it and admits to having returned on a new account after now having a new email address. This is block evasion. De728631 (talk) 22:20, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * The previous BLP and WP:LEGAL issues raised by this editor's conduct can be seen by admins at Special:Undelete/User talk:Christopher Carrie. If checkuser finds that User:Klone'it is actually User talk:Christopher Carrie I recommend that he should be indef blocked. EdJohnston (talk) 00:02, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

In no way did I attempt to be deceptive in my registration. Examination of the text I submitted will show I did my best to explain I no longer had access to the original email used to open 'Christopher Carrie' account. Any attempt I made to log in as myself rejected my effort saying 'User Name already in use, therefore I re-registered using todays detail in order to resond to [Solicitr] and his untrue statements. I stated clearly it was ME the original Christopher Carrie however it seems you too readily leap to the use of the term 'sockpuppetry' a term I'm only now coming to understand. As I said in the posting I had not looked at Wikipedia for a long time and only came to the page after submitting a Google search of other issues. I read the comments made by [Solicitr] and was incensed by their complete untruth. I repeat, I never said 'the Inklings were a child-molestation ring' I can send you copy of the book if you wish, nor have I ever claimed to have lied to make money off the Brum archdiocese. Through action in the Royal Courts of Justice I sued the Archdiocese of Birmingham they settled my claim in full with no exceptions. I assure you if I had lied at the time I would have been exposed, plus if I'd made such a claim at a later stage I would have been hauled back to court. I am a layman my adversaries were supported by an army of lawyers and private investigators. If you research the Internet and find any mention of the latter untruth or accusations I am a blackmailer you will find the original source of the postings untracable. I would like my facility on Wikipedia unlocked that I may be given the chance to project the real Christopher Carrie a man who was sexually abused as a child and later in life set out to confront his abuser, and wrote a book about the real harm done to children by a paedophiles fifteen minutes of fumbling. My book Klone'it was only ever intended as a lesson to radically overhaul the way society deals with the subject of child sex abuse. For my sins I have been hounded by some members of my abusers family who because they have the skill post wilful lies about me in a campaign of misinformation. How am I a 66 year old single parent of basic standard education expected to compete with university educated IT experts. I don't even know how to comply with your signature rules, so here is my best offering yours Christopher Carrie Klone'it

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Per WP:DUCK I've blocked and tagged. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 00:53, 1 September 2011 (UTC)