**UPDATE**
Unlike Michelle McKee and Corey Mitchell (editor and founder of ICB, respectively), I’m not averse to fixing information I know to be factually incorrect. Call it having integrity as a writer, call it a preference for having the facts straight, or even just a desire to be right. Despite McKee’s claims on her twitter account (in a posting which has since been deleted) that nobody would ever update a piece after two weeks had passed despite the inaccuracy being brought to the writer/publisher’s attention, McKee *did* recently update an introduction on the ICB web site, removing information she and Mitchell knew to be factually incorrect back in June. While the cause & effect of this sudden reversal are contentious, the fact is, McKee finally caved and took information she knew to be untrue off the site. That deserves to be recognized.
Yet, while McKee finally removed the info on ICB which she failed to fact-check originally, (along with a number of her tweets regarding me on her twitter account), she instead decided to launch a campaign of libel against me, to the tune of posting publicly that I write child pornography. Once again, it would appear that Ms. McKee’s (admittedly) nonexistent editorial and woeful fact-checking skills have come into play. While Ms. McKee correctly cites that I’ve written freelance pieces for the magazine Babyface, it certainly hasn’t been for the past ten years, as that magazine ceased publication in 2000. And, while I’ve freelanced for several men’s magazines over the past decade, none of my work has ever included, as she claims (see below) underage girls.
I eagerly await Ms. McKee’s proof supporting her allegations. If she requires, I’ll even supply her with the names of the magazines, publishers, and editors in question, so she can research to her heart’s content. Since I’ve worked for publishers which have been in business for decades, these well-known and long-established fixtures in the adult industry will be happy to inform her to what lengths they will go in order to ensure that no underage models are used, and how the editorial staff reviews all articles and fiction to prevent even a reference—non-sexual or otherwise—to underage girls. As she will undoubtedly discover (should she bother), the standard practice at companies publishing this material (and I’ve worked as an editor in the industry so I know first-hand), the rule of thumb is, “No girl ever existed before her 18th birthday.” This went for all mags, be it CHERI or High Society or 18eighteen or Leg Sex. By approaching any woman with the idea she never existed until she was of age, you couldn’t get into trouble.
Unfortunately, Ms. McKee didn’t bother to look into this before making the following claims about me, on Nov. 6th, via twitter:
1: @Levi_Page
@KathrynCasey
Joe Monks’ specialty is underage girl porno & U to try 2 make @Corey_Mitchell & I look bad using HIS words? LMAO!
16 minutes ago from web
in reply to Levi_Page
and a short time later:
2: @josephmonks
Don’t get so cocky, douchebag. Just because the ones 2 you R gone doesn’t mean I removed info about the underage porn U write
about 5 hours ago from web
For somebody who comes across as obsessive regarding perceived lies told about her on the internet, McKee not only took five months to correct simple factual inaccuracies about an ICB contributor’s bio info, but has compounded the lies by claiming I write porno fiction featuring underage girls. And, this is the ‘editor’ of a true-crime blog? This person, whose credibility is nonexistent, oversees and manages a site people are supposed to be able to visit to read true crime stories, articles and blogs?
Mitchell should be embarrassed, visitors to the site should take into consideration who is running the show, and McKee should be viewed as much in the context of her conduct as for how she runs the site. For somebody who should be well-informed on criminal matters, to accuse me of criminal behavior with no proof (and to do so publicly) because she’s made so uncomfortable by anybody challenging her inaccuracies, is simply unconscionable. I’ve asked this before, but it’s never been so relevant as today:
If this is Michelle McKee’s idea of fact-checking, what might be up on ICB that’s equally questionable? She couldn’t accept a polite request to fix incorrect info she posted back in June, replying with a vile rant instead. Now, she claims I have engaged in something illegal without any basis in fact. Knowing this…why would anybody believe anything she’s associated with as editor/manager meets even the lowest of standards for accuracy?
I can’t see any reason to, but decide for yourself.
–Joe Monks
Nov. 7, 2009
It’s been a while, and I’d actually been considering retiring the MotW department, not because there’s any shortage of idiots and mental midgets walking around, but simply because I haven’t had the time to keep up with them. But this week’s loser/winner was such an easy pick I figured I’d reward her glorious stupidity.
Couple weeks back, out of the blue, the scumbag who was trying to sell my film behind my back tiptoed on the fringes of libel, making some unfounded claims about me. Following that, I began the time-consuming process of getting my videos yanked from the guy’s various web sites, MySpace, YouTube, etc. Took a while, but we even got his director’s reel yanked (because, while it’s supposed to be *his* reel, it contained several clips of *my* footage. Footage he did not direct, and which never should have been misrepresented as such.) Within a few days, (kudos to YouTube and Myspace), the vids violating my copyright were taken down. I’m still endeavoring to get some other stuff yanked, especially my personal information, which the guy *still* has not removed, despite his claims of having nothing to do with me. I’m hoping those items will be removed soon.
Which brings me to Michelle McKee, the so-called ‘editor’ of In Cold Blog. (I say so-called, because although the title is plastered up there on the site, it’s pretty clear she’s got zero editorial skills. I’m not even sure she can use a spell-check, given some of the content up there. But, anyway, at the time, all I knew was that if you searched for my name, Hart Fisher, The Bunker, and the word ‘editor’, you eventually came up with a link to her introduction of the guy on the ICB web site. And, in that introduction, there’s some information that needs correction. Namely, the claim that Hart is an executive producer and editor of the film.
Now, in a blog I posted shortly after the false claims about me, I referred to this misinformation, mentioning McKee by name. Because frankly, what she’d posted was not only incorrect, she hadn’t gotten it from the source—me. My belief is she just took Hart’s word for it. Not surprising, because while Hart professed to have ‘walked away’ from The Bunker, it took copyright violation complaints to get MySpace and YouTube to remove my vids from his channels. Hart sure wasn’t in any hurry to remove the Bunker trailer, despite my attorney hitting him with a cease and desist notice way back in February demanding he stop misrepresenting himself in regards to the film.
Having gotten the offending vids yanked, I sent Michelle a polite e-mail, requesting that she either revise or remove the misinformation posted on the ICB site. I didn’t make any outlandish demands. I didn’t ask for anything other than for her to make the correction, or to simply clip out the *wrong* information. In response, McKee threw an e-hissy fit. Her reply subject line was: Attn: Mr. Joe Monks.. piss off
Nice, eh? Yep, you sure come across real pro when somebody sends you a note with the *right* information asking for a correction with the subject line: ATTN: Ms. Michelle McKee.
Beyond the trailer-trash aspect of her subject line, you can’t help but notice she can’t count the periods required for an ellipsis, can you? The funniest thing about this immature little girl’s response was that instead of dealing with the actual issue, she went on a rant about how tough she is (well, at least thinks herself to be), in the tradition of every web-yokel who seeks to look like a menacing bad-ass via text. Get this:
“I’ve been waiting for you to grow a pair and actually contact me rather than just throwing my name about on the Internet. Took you a little while to get your balls in hand, didn’t it? Tell me something. Have you done your research so that you know exactly who this beekeeper is, and how dangerous it is to poke my hive with your little stick? My guess is that you haven’t.”
How dangerous? Huh? It’s dangerous to ask for somebody who purports to be an editor to correct misinformation? Wow, was this where I was supposed to shake and tremble? But I have to give the netkook a little credit, the bee analogy is pretty relevant, because it sure seemed she had a bug up her ass.
McKee then prattled on with this winner:
“I am very well aware that you are out on the Internet stamping your feet over some perceived wrong by Hart Fisher, and that it has absolutely nothing to do with me or In Cold Blog. I am also aware that you have your panties in a bunch over the piece I did at ICB in which I introduced Mr. Fisher to our readers.”
Obviously, Michelle has a greater sense of self importance than she deserves. Perceived wrong? Shit, I posted the damned link to Hart openly bragging about turning down an offer from a distributor to buy The Bunker, and even posted the C&D letter my attorney sent. Perceived? Doesn’t this semi-literate bozo know how to read? I mean, true, it’s apparent that she doesn’t know how to fact-check, but really, when you post the proof in the same blog she obviously read because it contained her name, you’d think she’d be intelligent enough to comprehend it. (Guess not.) Even more amusing is the ‘panties in a bunch’ claim. In my e-mail, what I did was ask for a correction. There’s *zero* reason for incorrect info to be out there. If a newspaper does it, they print a retraction. If a magazine does it, they often make note of it in the letters or editorial section of the following issue. This is a pretty standard journalistic practice (but again, I guess I should probably cut McKee some slack. Her journalistic skills seem to be as lacking as her fact-checking talents).
Beyond this, she goes right into assumptions. I’m only writing to create trouble for Hart. That I wanted him dumped from their roster. That I was seeking to cause him distress. I guess had Little Miss Tantrum actually read my column beyond the mention of her name (it would not surprise me whatsoever if McKee’s the type who sits at home running Google searches on herself hoping she’s been referenced somewhere), she’d certainly have known that this had nothing to do with distress or booting. I’d already been endeavoring to have videos yanked off all of Hart’s sites and wherever he’d posted them, in order to protect *my* property. What do I give a shit that he’s writing on ICB? What does that have to do with me? Not a damned thing. My e-mail only sought a correction, because there’s absolutely no reason to leave misinformation out there about my film. I guess this is an editorial concept foreign to McKee—getting it *right.* I should’ve told her that I’d written the screenplay for JAWS and directed the Exorcist, she probably would’ve accepted that as gospel and FWDed it to other people like she did the mail that was clearly labeled for her personal viewing only. Another reason why the dim bulb should’ve understood this was about that *one* issue. I didn’t copy anybody. I didn’t mail Corey, who belongs to one of my Yahoo groups and who I’ve exchanged mails with numerous times before. I didn’t go running down the roster of ICB contribs and mail-blast away. I contacted *one* person, the person whose job it should be to make sure that what’s put up on the site is correct.
Now, here’s where it gets good. Turns out that McKee *did* actually look at the links provided, because before closing her note, she admits it:
“If you think throwing information about your bullshit lawsuits my way is going to win you intimidation points your are mistaken. I don’t intimidate. The piece will not be pulled or altered.”
Uh, why would anybody be intimidated by the link to the C&D where my attorney put in black and white the facts about Hart *not* being an executive producer and *not* being the editor of The Bunker? That’s not intimidation, Michelle, that’s simply something to illustrate that your information is incorrect. Now that you know this, you pretty much set yourself up as utterly and completely discredited as any sort of editor, because the sad fact is, you know what’s up there is false, but you’d rather leave it than be embarrassed by having to acknowledge your mistake. For somebody who began her reply with the sad and pathetic tactic of trying to shake me by asking if I knew about the danger of your beehive, you should recognize the difference between intimidation and supplying a document attesting to the facts. (Oh, and by the way, a cease and desist letter is not a lawsuit. Shouldn’t you know the difference?)
Okay, saved the best for last. Ms. Freedom of speech! concludes her whiny rant with this gem:
“do not contact me or anyone else associated with In Cold Blog, again! If you ignore this request and contact me or anyone associated with ICB further I will consider it harassment of myself and / or my writers.”
LOL. Harassment? Requesting a correction is considered to be, by the *editor* (and I do use that term loosely) of ICB, harassment. Yep, what a true champion of free speech good ol’ Michelle turns out to be, huh? “Can you fix this mistake?” turns her into a nutter who thinks if I bring my request for a correction to anybody else associated with the site I’ll be harassing them. Of course, like the typical net drama queen, McKee then goes on to lament the time it took to respond, when really, all it should have taken was fixing the *one* sentence in her blog that’s untrue. Makes me wonder how much other info on ICB is bogus. Who knows what else she’s got up there that readers should be questioning?
Eventually, I figured, rather than contact Corey, I’d grant Michelle’s wish. She can keep information she knows to be factually untrue on the site, and I can draw attention to her willingness to damage ICB’s credibility and reputation.
That more than earns the Moron of the Week dishonors, don’t you think? Oh, for an added bonus? I couldn’t resist tossing in an example of Michelle’s hypocrisy. This same bimbo who says that it’d be harassment to try and get a fact corrected, makes her own demand of criminal profiler Pat Brown:
“Now, *I* am telling YOU to cease and desist and remove your libelous remarks about me post haste. As you are well aware one of us can prove slander, libel, harassment, defamation and stalking -”
This can be found at:
http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.ListAll&friendID=48471144
where Michelle whines about being a victim, demands content be taken down from somebody’s site, again brings up claims of harassment, and, if you have the stomach to crawl through the piteous woe-is-me drama, you’ll find even more hilarious examples of her threats, questioning somebody’s credibility, etc. It would be humorous in a Yahoo-group-troll sort of way if it weren’t so pathetic. I wonder if she’ll stamp her feet and demand I take down my assessment of her conduct, integrity, editorial ‘skills’, etc. Given what I’ve seen thus far, I wouldn’t put it past her. If you really want to see a public meltdown, though, you ought to check out her Twitter page. Not only does she seem to be obsessed with bestselling true crime author Diane Fanning and some other alleged tormenters, (to the point of hundreds of tweets about them), she has the nerve to claim:
“at the very least Diane and Pat have proven that they do not do their own independent research”
Talk about Pot+Kettle=Black . (Or is that Gray?) The Twitter line is hysterical, from her threatening Fanning’s career to ranting about her frail mental state and needing meds, to her mantra of demanding an apology, then stating she’d refuse to accept it, then returning to ask somebody, “Why didn’t you just bloody apologize?” Overall, it reminds me of the brilliant scam Full Force Frank pulled on netkook Jason Pope using the Joe1Orbit screen name on the alt.true-crime forums several years ago. All the same trollish claims are being made. There’s stalkers around every corner; somebody’s interfering in a federal investigation; somebody’s FBI friend/contact said such-and-such; somebody’s going to be sued; somebody’s writing career was going to be ended (back then it was Jack Olsen and Sondra London and Michael Newton being bandied about) etc.
Pope turned out to be one heckuva moron. Since July is here, I guess McKee is the embodiment of the summer rerun.
