Sunday, December 8, 2013

Michelle Shaw & Susan Barrett, Cyber Stalkers: First They'll Try to Silence You...

by Nikki Craft, November 15, 2013

When someone shows you who they are,
believe them the first time.
~ Maya Angelou

These screen shots (below) are reproduced from a small private group in August of 2012. They stand as incontrovertible evidence to show who was conspiring against [poor poor] Susan Barret with lies, manipulation, distortion and malicious libel. And surprise surprise it was not--as Ms Barret claims--in all her [poor poor me] pity party emails and public postings on her facebook page the great conspiracy that Barrett always refers to, including me. The names may change, but one thing remains the same and that is that she is the victim of one type of persecution or another.

It was Michelle Shaw who, back over a year ago, accused Barrett of being a dog broker and transporting dogs to Canada, selling dogs to labs that can, she said, "all be traced back to Susan". Shaw posted this on her Facebook page GBU. Why would Shaw post such lies? I have a personal suspicion that she did it to divert from the mess she had gotten into by going after Barrett and realizing Barrett had her criminal behavior. Shaw (and Barrett, too) have diversion and obfuscation down to a fine art. But what Shaw did admit was that she did this to rile Barrett up, to get a response from her. I know she also did it for her own entertainment because she told me once something like "Nikki you know me I like to stir things up." Indeed she does and indeed she has; and she colluded a year later, for at least four months, with Susan Barrett to do some more of the same.

Their collaboration has recently been revealed in a long, intense and conniving email exchange between the two from the beginning of June 2013 until just two weeks ago on Oct 24, 2013 when they were caught in working together to spread a bunch of lies and disinformation about numerous animal rights activists. The wicked web they were weaving is too convoluted to examine thoroughly here. However to list only two of their escapades, Barrett sent Shaw off to report me to IRS for fraud about chipins. Her M.O. is to get other people to do her dirty work. And Ms. Shaw told her how to get this/my website taken down i.e. censored.

To quote Barrett herself from a graphic she just posted on Facebook, "Cyber Stalkers: First they'll try to silence you. Then they'll try to discredit you." I doubt Shaw can spot the absolute hypocrisy but Barrett and her usual obtuse self, lacking much introspective capabilities fails for the umpteenth time to distinguish irony.

Note in the screen shots below that Michelle Shaw writes under the nom de plume of "The Good, the Bad..." and I have replaced mine with my actual real-life legal name so it will be obvious to any reader that I wrote what I did in these threads. Nothing else has been deleted or altered. This conversation took place in August, 2012.

Michelle did say she staked her life on it and contrary to her earlier claim she did publish it on her facebook group The Good, the Bad, the Unforgivable of Animal Rescue. And she removed it early the next morning, probably when she sobered up. Then she lied once again when she denied doing it, hoping that no one would notice. Fortunately I had taken a screenshot (see above) before she quietly deleted her false claims about Barrett on the public page.

This is Shaw's typical M.O. when she realizes she is in error. She does not apologize. She is in no way accountable that I have seen. She just deletes the thread and silences the discussion. She constantly puts the blame on others. On her group she deleted a thread about Barrett's DUIs to protect Barrett and herself as well, then loudly accused her other admins of making the deletion. She maintained that she did not make those deletions for one year and it has only come out just now that she secretly censored the Barrett thread.

She allowed Barrett on GBU to post lies about me and especially vindictively an almost 90 year old man who is no relation to me by blood or legally who has advance diabetes who got DUI's 35 years ago I think and unlike Barret who continues to get DUIs over a decade period with impunity, never drank again after that. He hasn't even driven for five years at all. He lays there now pretty much on this death bed, in fact. So while Barrett seeks all kind of aid and comfort because of illness in her family, that we have all been hearing about for years and in public and private correspondence. She wrote me in email about it just last month asking me for consideration and to remove the website. Where is her empathy for my mom in her 90s and him in his condition? Barrett lacks compassion? Instead she brings their names, addresses and phone numbers onto the internet when they don't even know how to use email. Barrett with no evidence claimed this man was my father and he is not. Then when Barrett threatened to disclose Shaw's criminal past Shaw quickly deleted the thread and closed the discussion off for fear of her own past and criminal behavior being revealed by Susan Barrett.  This destroyed any context for me to respond to the lies that Shaw allowed to be posted, unverified, on her group. Then, due to her own self interest, Shaw censored the complete discussion. The said no discussion would be allowed any further on the topic. That censorship protected Shaw for one year. It looks to me there will not be much that can protect her now.

In case I might have thought what I had said might have mattered in some way and I wasn't just wasting my breathe, this graphic (above) was posted on Michelle's wall minutes after I left the group and moments before I signed off her facebook page.

So now a little over a year later Michelle Shaw plots in facebook PM's, privately behind my back in a duplicitous and pretty shitty (imho) way to conspire with Susan Barrett to censor my website and instructs her how to misuse the DMCA complaint against me. Nice to have that in writing, to verify, just in case she (Barrett) attempts it (censoring my website) that she is fully aware of the potential fine she can receive when she knowingly breaks the law and complains against the legal publication of her criminal record; her attempts (according to North Carolina law enforcement) at leaving the scenes of accidents, her multiple refusals to take breathalyzer tests, and her problems with alcohol and her multiple convictions for driving under the influence. And Michelle Shaw with her own drug and drinking problem, where she and Barrett both will throw anyone under the bus; that Shaw was apparently paid by the state to narc on her fellow druggies to get off lighter; just like with Barrett--who throws people under the bus on a daily basis for one reason or another as it suits her. These problems of theirs bleed over into the AR and rescue movement and cause immeasurable harm and damage to this movement and dare I say, with great trepidation, "community"; and that is what makes their criminal convictions relevant to this discussion and this website.

So they both can use screenshots and do exposes on bad behaviors until the cows come home, but they are going to try to censor me when I do? Self-serving hypocrites of the worst kinds. Make no mistake Susan Barrett does not own the copyright to screen shots of her criminal record; nor does Michelle Shaw either. My website is not an "attack" site, as Barrett complains to anyone who will listen. It is a public warning to others about her and now her colleague Michelle Shaw, and it is warranted. It's a place where I can put up my side of the events, and as I have said for years now, this website will not be taken down by me no matter how she libels me to others--no matter how she bullies and threatens.
                                                                               ~Nikki Craft, November 15, 2013

P.S. please feel free to post in appropriate forums and share freely.


  1. Well this clearly shows Michelle Bell/Wolff/Shaw's lack of ethics. She defames someone with the most vile of charges just to get them to react. Why wouldn't the proper reaction be to punch her in the neck, or slap her with a lawsuit? Thanks for exposing the dangerous trash that this monster is. No one should ever give her a second of their time again.

    1. Thanks for your comment. I understand your anger, and "slapping" her with a lawsuit is just what she deserves when she defames someone, and I believe she has. In fact I think it will be the one thing and perhaps the only thing that will stop her. However I want to go on record that don't appreciate your comment about punching her in the neck. Please refrain from this sort of violent trash talk on this blog. Thanks.

  2. Fair enough. You are right. It's people like her that bring out the worst in others. She feeds off off it. Obviously, as beautifully depicted by this well written post. She wants people to be angry and she is. Angry. Ugly. No reference on her physical appearance, although I've seen her rip others' appearance without hesitation. Just angry and ugly...inside. I would never wish violence on another. But for a moment, she brought out the worst in me. I apologize to you and her. I don't wish harm to her. I do wish her stopped. And I wish that her life implodes and that everything she has caused to others comes back to her in equal amounts.

    1. Very well stated. You're articulate and I hope you will post on this blog often, to hopefully add light and thoughtfulness to this subject instead of just more hate and ranker. Thank you for your clarification <3 Nikki

  3. Well written, you present the facts and evidence to back up what you've stated without making it sound like a personal attack, makes a change to read a blog that is informative that hasn't resorted to personal attacks, opinions without evidence or the manipulation of truths to suit a target audience. Thank you for a very refreshing blog. It has been shared and will continue to be shared.