The “BGI” Theory, The Internet Extortionists’ Plan To Destroy It, And The Kendrick Johnson Investigation – Part 5

Alert! There is language in some of the screenshots on this post that some might find offensive.

(The court documents presented in this post via embedded links do not provide personal information. The civil restraining order case referenced in this post was denied and its denial affirmed on appeal.   The Answer, Affirmative Defenses and Cross-Complaint is a public document available on ScribD. The subpoena was provided to me by a person whose Twitter handle is included. It does not provide personal information. )

There is a thread, and that thread first appeared in calendar year 2013 when certain bloggers were accused of being the “BGI,” (Black Grievance Industry).  The persons who believe in that theory hold White Supremacy ideologies and have plans to destroy the “BGI” including what they call “social justice warriors”.

Picking up the thread …

On or about May 2, 2014, David Piercy filed a petition for a civil restraining order in the Fresno County Superior Court of California.   The pages pertinent to this post can be seen here.

In it, he alleged that the respondent had 14 accomplices, and that the stalking and harassment was encouraged by attorneys Natalie Jackson and Benjamin Crump.   As reported in Part 2, these are the two attorneys who, in October 2013, Annette Kelly posted on her blog of wanting to see how they could get them out of the practice of law.

Also in the petition, David Piercy made it known that he had obtained the names and addresses of 6 persons who he alleged were accomplices in harassment. This leads to 5 questions;

  1. These people are on Twitter and do not tweet using their real names. How did Piercy obtain not only their real names, but also their addresses?
  2. Why did Piercy obtain their names and addresses?
  3. With Piercy having the names and addresses of the 6, if he truly believed that they harassed him, why didn’t he file for civil restraining orders against them, rather than accusing the respondent of having accomplices?
  4. Did he allege that attorneys Jackson and Crump encouraged internet harassment to further the agenda to destroy the BGI by tainting their reputations?
  5. Was he hoping that had the court granted his request, that he would use it as intimidation and to cause the non-parties extreme emotional distress?

The court denied his petition for a plenary restraining order. Piercy appealed. The Fifth District Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court’s order that found that it was Piercy who harassed the respondent.

Similar Pattern Appears In October 2015

In January 2015, Kendrick Johnson’s parents filed a wrongful death lawsuit against certain members of the Bell family and others, and on March 14, 2015, the Bell’s responded by filing a cross-complaint alleging defamation.  The cross-complaint begins on page 22 of the 41-page document.

In or about July 2014, after a California Superior Court entered a restraining order against him, David Piercy made his Twitter account protected. A contempt of court proceeding is currently pending in that case alleging that Piercy violated the court’s order. On or about October 13, 2015, Twitter released Piercy’s account information for that proceeding. Piercy is the named defendant in that proceeding, and no motion to quash the subpoena was filed. Piercy then opened his Twitter account to the public and tweeted to certain individuals that the Bell’s subpoenaed their Twitter account information. He also tweeted to certain individuals that they were being sued.

Although I do not have screenshots of those tweets, many who witnessed it would be able to testify that they received the subject tweets from David Piercy, or that they read the subject tweets.  I personally read the tweets.  How did he obtain that knowledge? Is it true that he and/or others involved in destroying the “BGI” gave the Bell’s attorney Twitter handles to subpoena?

Piercy gives attorney Twitter handles


James Moran Re Twitter Handles


If it is true that the Bell’s attorney received Twitter handle information from others, is the Bell’s attorney knowledgeable that some of the handles are those of people who Piercy harassed prior to 18 months ago, and that Piercy listed in a May 2014 court proceeding unrelated to the death of Kendrick Johnson?

On Friday, October 30, 2015, approximately 22 people received notification from Twitter that their identifying information and locations were subpoenaed in the subject case.

The subpoena was issued on October 16, 2015 – 7 months after the Bell’s filed their cross-complaint, and 3 days after Twitter released Piercy’s account information in the contempt proceeding.

Among the 23 handles listed in the subpoena is the person who Piercy claimed that he had silenced since 2012.  As reported in Part 1, silencing “BGI” social justice warriors is among the instructions on how to destroy them.

Piercy's boast of silencing The Hood Report

There is genuine concern that with the involvement of the internet extortionists, or what they allege as their involvement, that if Twitter gives their personal information to the Bell’s attorney that it will be given to the internet extortionists.  It is already being represented on Twitter that the information returned by Twitter in response to the subpoena will be made public.

Ali Hurry and Twitter handles


Directed Harassment

Twitter Handle @NavyDad0007

That handle is one of the 23 in the subpoena issued by the Bell’s attorney.   It is also one of the handles that Piercy listed in his May 2, 2014 restraining order petition. In May 2014, the same month that David Piercy filed a petition for a civil restraining order, Annette Kelly, on her blog, opened a password protected post with “NavyDad0007” as its title.   The password protected post was not FOR NavyDad0007 but rather, ABOUT NavyDad0007.

Nettle's password protected post

If NavyDad0007 desires, he might come here and share how, around the same time as Annette’s password protected post was created, that he put forth efforts to have Facebook remove a page where the content consisted of the personal information of himself and his family, including photos, photoshopped photos to degrade them, and his address.

NavyDad0007, along with others whose Twitter account information has been subpoenaed, continues to be harassed.  Piercy misrepresents the subpoena as a lawsuit, or in the alternative, that their personal information from Twitter will lead to lawsuits. He has also threatened at least three of the persons whose handles are in the subpoena with criminal charges.

Harassment 1

Harassment 4

Harassment 2

Harassment 3


Harassment 5

Harassment 6

Harassment 7

Harassment 8


Twitter Handle @Poste112010

The handle @Poste112010 is that of Robin Postelll.   Google “Robin Postell” and “Kendrick Johnson” and you will find that Vicki Pate, on her blog Re-newsit, wrote about Robin in April 2014. You will also find that in June 2014, someone on Topix alleged that Robin Postell also uses the name Phoebe Weatherfield. The Bell’s subpoena wants the account information for both handles.

Twitter Handle “Mr Negro Militant (NegroMilitant)

The death of Kendrick Johnson is very controversial, so much so that the Anonymous group recapped findings in a video. The video was uploaded to the site Vimeo.

The subpoena requests the account information for “Mr Negro Militant (NegroMilitant).” He is also known as Jueseppi Baker.  In what Vimeo says is “10 months ago,” he posted a comment to the video on Vimeo. Just under his comment is one posted by a “Karen Bell” stating that the person who uploaded the video is “going to be sued.” Ten months ago would be about February 2015, and before the Bell’s filed their cross-complaint against the Johnson’s alleging defamation.  The person who uploaded the video uses the handle “AnonDad.” His handle is also in the subpoena.


Harassment 9


The Comparison

The petition for a restraining order filed by David Piercy alleged that the respondent “… has had several accomplices assisting him stalk and harass including but not limited to:” and the respondent’s “… stalking and harassment of individuals has been encouraged and supported by the following Florida attorneys who represent the estate of decedent Trayvon Martin and have been very manipulative of their supporters in the wake of the not guilty verdict and failed attempt to achieve their desired outcome of the case State of Florida v. George Zimmerman.

David Piercy represented that the harassment that he sought to enjoin was because of dissatisfaction with a jury verdict.   Please note some of his tweets above where he makes a similar allegation; i.e., that the people whose identifying information has been subpoenaed is because they will not “accept facts”.

The counter-claims alleges;

“Since January 12, 2014, the Johnsons used others as their authorized agents to post messages on various social media, including Facebook, Twitter, blogs, instant messaging, and the like, to post messages that were defamatory of the Bells.”

Further allegations include that the Johnsons used authorized agents to post to social media that KJ’s murder was covered-up and that Brian Bell murdered KJ with the assistance of others, or words to that effect.

In both, the moving parties allege that others were encouraged to help the actual named party in the alleged civil offense. Accomplices and/or authorized agents are not named parties to the action, but the moving parties want information about them.

The ACLU’S Brief

On or about November 18, 2015, the ACLU and the ACLU of Georgia filed an Amici Curiae (friend of the court) brief in the subject case. Since that was reported, David Piercy has gone on Twitter posting arguments, including leave of the court arguments. He even submitted comments to Blackbutterfly7 attempting to argue about the ACLU’s brief.   On the day this is posted, and to the best of my knowledge, the Bell’s legal counsel has not filed a Rule to Show Cause against Twitter. For those who know correct discovery procedures for failure to comply with subpoena, I’ll leave it at that. For those who do not and want to know, please consider contacting a lawyer or a law professor. For all others, I ask that they consider that the ACLU knows what they are doing, how to do it, and the person claiming otherwise on Twitter has yet to earn his 2-year degree as a paralegal, has no Bachelor’s degree, interned for a bankruptcy attorney, and has not taken the LSAT to pass or fail to qualify for law school.

Continued in Part 6 – Evidence of Following Instructions to Destroy BGI Social Media Warriors By Taking Their Money and Silencing Them.


This entry was posted in cyberharasment, Internet extortionists, The BGI Theory and The Internet Extortionists Plan To Destroy It, White Supremacists and tagged , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

17 Responses to The “BGI” Theory, The Internet Extortionists’ Plan To Destroy It, And The Kendrick Johnson Investigation – Part 5

  1. for the last time you (profane personal attack removed by blog Administrator) the ACLU has NOT filed a brief in the matter and there is NOT even anything from the ACLU even on the docket in this matter. Listen to my conversation directly with the clerk of the court (profane personal attack removed by blog Administrator)

    • Xena says:

      I edited your comment because I’m not going to allow you to come into my blog home and verbally abuse me. You either show respect in my blog house, or your comments will be edited or not approved.

      I’m approving your comment and responding to show others concerned about your misrepresenting your call to the circuit clerk. You asked a clerk of the circuit court if there was an order granting the ACLU leave to file. In a comment that you submitted to my other blog, you claimed that you spoke with the “judge’s clerk.” Anyway, the clerk answered your question about an “order.” Ask your teachers, or a lawyer, or a law professor, what the procedure is for the court to enter order regarding a Amicus or Amici brief when the moving party for discovery has taken no action to enforce the subpoena.

      I recommended in my post that people contact a legal professional if they want to understand the proper procedure. If not, they can trust that the ACLU lawyers know more than you do about procedures and what they are doing.

      Since you voluntarily came here, maybe you will answer the following questions for everyone. How did you know the handles in the subpoena BEFORE Twitter notified the account holders that their account information was subpoenaed? Why are you representing the subpoena as a lawsuit? And, why are representing the subpoena as a lawsuit to intimidate others whose information has not been subpoenaed, to silence them or be sued?

  2. NavyDad0007 says:

    He leaves such comments because he’s a craven coward LOL No one wants to hear his “tape” ACLU Brief Got him that worried LMAO

    • Xena says:

      NavyDad, I think you are right. I deleted the link in his comment to his recording, and did it for several reasons. One, he spammed Twitter with that link, then deleted his tweets. Twitter suspended that account but he has another.

      Two, he and his co-conspirators have a demonstrated pattern of trying to drive activity to their blogs and other social media by putting links to them in comments submitted to my blogs. They do not have enough people interested in their material.

      Three, he recorded that conversation and did so without telling the person on the other end that the conversation was being recorded. Piercy lives in California which is a two-consent state. I will not be an accomplice to that.

  3. NavyDad0007 says:

    Wow he recorded that Clerk without permission with intent to harass uh oh

    • Xena says:

      Yeah. He definitely used the recording to harass and intimidate people on Twitter, which is probably why he deleted his tweets.

  4. Piercy should’ve known not to record someone w/o permission, especially a court clerk, if he’s really a ‘paralegal Student’
    But he didn’t know it because he isn’t a paralegal student. He isn’t even a clever liar.

    BTW. Why did he unlock his account? Did he really think he could intimidate ppl? LMAO Smh
    His pathetic delusions of grandeur aren’t quite workin out like he planned. Every time he fucks with someone, they keep smacking him back down! 😦 😀

    • Xena says:

      Hey Shannon!
      A serious paralegal student in their last semester would or should know about discovery procedures when an Amici brief is filed pertaining to discovery. I think that Piercy has limited his knowledge to Amici briefs filed in appeals. If he is in college to be a paralegal, he has an extensive resources available to him and should use them.

      He unlocked his account to tweet to individuals to tell them that their account information was subpoenaed from Twitter. This was several days before those individuals received notice from Twitter, which begs to question how did Piercy know?

      By the way, I see that his Twitter account has been suspended AGAIN. That makes what? 8 accounts now since November?

  5. shyloh says:

    shannoninmiami you are so right. Love it

  6. NavyDad0007 says:

    What’s even More HILARIOUS are the Fools who believe His Every Word

    • Xena says:

      NavyDad, that is true. Some people become afraid because he generally makes good on his threats. However, he then lies about the outcome or becomes silent. For example, he did lots of boasting on Twitter about having my blog “legally” taken down by Word Press. He threatened that he was going to keep the copyright infringement complaints coming until the blog was suspended. What he did not think about is that an attorney would counter his challenges. Word Press decided that 3 out of 4 of the complaints constituted fair use. He had a certain number of days to file suit against me for the one. He didn’t. Word press restored the photo to the blog.

      I’m pretty sure that he assumed, and hoped, that Word Press would suspend the blog based solely on his complaints, and before receiving the counter-challenges. So, the blog remains and Piercy never publicly told his co-conspirators what happened.

  7. Two sides to a story says:

    .LOL – wasn’t he also certain that GZ’s NBC lawsuit would fix everyone once and for all?

    If anything, DP is an expert at setting up sock accounts on social media and harassing, doxing, and covertly hacking or attempting to hack the accounts, websites, blogs, etc. of people he disagrees with.

    Dave’s a good example of someone who takes their limited education and twists it to nefarious ends. Rather like those who express allegiance to a religious or spiritual doctrine and then twist it to harm others rather than uplift themselves. He is an internet terrorist, basically. Those who support him and his actions are misguided as well.

    We are probably his real friends, but he hasn’t figured it out yet. If I were him, I’d run, not walk to his college library, stay off the computers, and start reading up on compassion and mindfulness. I said the same thing about GZ and even TO GZ. *smh*

    • Xena says:

      Since he opened his Twitter account to public in late October, he raised his suspensions from once a week to everyday. In the past three days, he’s been @robertseale4; @davidsilva672; and is now @DavidHern72. He thinks that he’s accomplishing something on Twitter by attacking Black Lives Matter, which I’ve recently noticed is that he/they associate with the “BGI.”

      David and Zimmerman seem to think that scamming and deceiving others is not anything bad but rather, being mentally superior.

      • Two sides to a story says:

        “David and Zimmerman seem to think that scamming and deceiving others is not anything bad but rather, being mentally superior.”

        Typical of narcissistic and sociopathic personalities, even if borderline.

        • Xena says:

          Two sides,
          I watched a video about psychopaths and am looking for other videos. I figure that the more we are able to identity those with personality dysfunctions, the better we are prepared to protect ourselves.

          • Two sides to a story says:

            Yes! Not all people with these disorders are as toxic as these examples, but even with milder types, you must be aware prepared to avoid manipulation by setting firm boundaries, and even avoid contact. A good example is the caution to avoid playing into the hands of ISIL psychopaths and reacting the way they want us to. They feed off fear and hostility and twist everything to their own ends.

          • Xena says:

            Two sides,
            I recently learned that once you have had the great pleasure of communicating with a psychopath, (snark) it is best to cut off all communications. Their next stage is to contact those having access to the person. We saw this in how Zimmerman used his girlfriend’s children to get his message to them to give to their moms.

            I feel awful for people with those dysfunctions. Eventually, they find themselves alone. People avoid them and no one trusts them, but they blame the people rather than waking-up and admitting that they are toxic.

Comments are closed.