David Piercy Defends How He Obtained His Knowledge of Subpoenaed Twitter Accounts

Warning: There are words in screenshots in this post that some might find offensive.

Kendrick-Johnson-Death-CaseIt was brought to my attention that there is a discussion on the internet forum Topix for Valdosta, and that my name was mentioned.   Some posted links to this blog to support their position, then the following comment was made;

Rich's Topix comment


Well, Rich Kotite, I’ve been blogging since August 2012.  Apparently, what I blog is based on reliable sources because White Supremacists came at me in September 2012 threatening to ruin me unless I stopped blogging.  They progressed in those threats, wanting me to delete my blog, then wanting me to blog solely on “black on black crime.”  In late 2013, they attacked other bloggers who associate with me and threatened their careers and reputations.  It’s all here on the menu under Chronological Posts Documenting History. 

In May 2014, David Piercy, apparently feeling his paralegal Cheerios, decided that since he and his cohorts’ intimidation, defamation, and threats against myself and others failed, that he would file copyright infringement claims against my blog, blackbutterfly7.wordpress.com to have it “legally” taken down.

Piercy's malicious DMCA notices


I’ve not redacted the IP address because it evidences that Piercy uses the computer network of the California State University at Fresno Community College, where he attended, to send abusive comments.

Piercy was not filing the copyright claims against my blog because I violated copyright.  He filed them hoping that Word Press would suspend my blog.  Note what he wrote: “this will keep coming until this slander site is shut down.”

So Rich defended a person on Topix who has a history of harassing and taking malicious actions against me.

Well, as a paralegal, Piercy should have known that he should not file DMCA take down notices as a proper cause of action against “slander.” Word Press denied all but one of his copyright claims.  The attorney for the blog filed a challenge to the remaining DMCA. Piercy did not file a suit for violating his copyright and Word Press restored the photo.

When I write about people, such as the internet extortionists, I use their own words to support what I report.   They are the source. So, here goes ….

As reported on this blog, David Piercy protected his Twitter account in or about July 2014 after the California Superior Court entered a restraining order against him.   He had other Twitter accounts under other handles, but it was on or about October 23, 2015 when he opened his main Twitter account to be read by the public.  On that day, he sent tweets to individuals telling them that their Twitter account information had been subpoenaed in the Johnson v. Bell case.  On October 30, 2015, twenty-two of the individuals whose handles are in the subpoena received notice from Twitter that their account information was subpoenaed.

Recently on Topix, the discussion came up about Piercy communicating with the attorney that represents the Bells, and knowing about the subpoena, and the handles in the subpoena, before the people were notified by Twitter.  A person posted that Piercy admitted to having contact with the Bell’s attorney and giving him Twitter account information.  The person posted a link to the following screenshot;

Piercy gives attorney Twitter handles

On Topix, Piercy posts under the handles oNeSmArTDuDe and OneSmartDude.  David Piercy posted the following, self-authenticating comment defending himself;

Piercy's Topix defense

The subject CNN article was published on October 23, 2015. That was the same day that Piercy unlocked his main Twitter account and tweeted to individuals that their Twitter account information was subpoenaed by the Bells.

Please read the following carefully so you can pick up on Piercy’s deception. The CNN article states in pertinent part;

“On October 16, Lowndes County Court issued a subpoena on behalf of the Bell family’s attorney to the Atlanta offices of Twitter for information that would reveal names and locations of account holders connected to 23 Twitter handles. The subpoena also requested all tweets dating back to January 11, 2013 — the day Johnson’s body was found. “

Deceptively, Piercy is using the date that the subpoena was issued to claim that CNN did a story on the subpoena 7 days before he “said anything”.   Even if Piercy gained knowledge of the subpoena on October 23, 2015, that still doesn’t explain how he gained knowledge of the handles in the subpoena, nor his reason for opening his Twitter account to public to let the people know that their account information was subpoenaed before they were notified by Twitter.

Clearly before our eyes, the CNN article was published 7 days AFTER the subpoena was issued.

CNN Headline


To be fair, protect my credibility and attacks of not being a reliable source, I noticed on the article that it was updated on October 23, 2015 and so, checked the meta data.  First, it would not be logical to state a date that the subpoena was issued if it was the same day that the article was published. The journalist, Victor Blackwell, could have said. “Today, Lowndes County Court issued a subpoena on behalf of the Bell …“   I checked the meta data to see when the article was originally published.

The meta data shows:

pubdate”><meta content=”2015-10-23T07:07:20Z”

name=”lastmod”><meta content=”http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/23/us/kendrick-johnson-lawsuit/index.html&#8221;

Anyone can check the meta data by right clicking on the CNN article then clicking “View Page Source” then scrolling to the right to see the data. Or, they can right-click and click on “View Page Info”  and look at the meta information section, which in this case shows;

CNN Meta data

Without getting into calculating Zulu time, it is clear that the article WAS NOT originally published 7 days or at any other time before October 23, 2015.

Along with this, Piercy’s most recent defense does not address what he tweeted on November 21, 2015 where he said that he gave Twitter handles to the Bell’s attorney.

His tweet, and his most recent defense on Topix are Piercy’s own words.  I am not the source.

Thanks for reading.


This entry was posted in cyberharasment, Internet extortionists and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

28 Responses to David Piercy Defends How He Obtained His Knowledge of Subpoenaed Twitter Accounts

  1. Poor Rich Kotite, such a dedicated, hard working, totally obsessive, KendrickJohnson supporter troll/harasser gets no respect, ANYWHERE! 😦
    And after all this time you’d think the Bells would give him a cookie or something.

    Oh and BTW just the other day he was trying to convince me he wasn’t as much a schmuck as David Piercy! LMAO I guess among the child murder enthusiasts/racist twitter troll hierarchy, even Rich considers David Piercy beneath him. But at the same time RichKotite defends David’s integrity! Wow! All losers, they belong together. Smh!

    • Xena says:

      Hey Shannon! You know, when it comes to blogging, I generally report and don’t see much of or get involved with debating, especially on other forms of social media. So, I really don’t know who is debating what most times unless someone points them out to me. I can’t say that I know Rich, but his defense of Piercy was to attempt to impugn my credibility. I understand that he has tried explaining that it wasn’t my post about Piercy tweeting that he is giving information to the Bell’s attorney, but his criticism is because of a June 2015 post that I wrote on Blackbutterfly7 about the Justice for Dylan Roof Facebook page. Yeah — right — as if the person on Topix was talking about and linking to that post.

      Well, Rich has not come to either blog to voice his criticisms to my face.

      I’ve found that there are people who make generalized criticism that they cannot support. That is Piercy’s MO and Rich should not adopt it.

      What I do know is that since yesterday, Piercy has given me some great evidence that his harassment and malicious actions are motivated by his racial animus. Even in comments submitted to this blog, he has called me a “Zebra” numerous times. Previous to that, he had no problem using the “n” word in his comments.

      Along with that, he now claims to have a corporation with 4 employees including himself. However, he also claims in the courts that he is indigent and reported his last source of income as Fresno County general assistance for disabled workers. He has a court appointed attorney in one case.

      I don’t think I’ll be returning to lurk on Topix. Yesterday and today when I went there, my virus protection program set off alarms and deleted two threats.

    • Xena says:

      Oh Shannon, I do want to say this about the investigation into the death of Kendrick Johnson. It appears that had the Johnson’s not filed the civil suit, that Piercy and some others would not have anything to post regarding Kendrick. What Piercy does, does not support the Bell’s. His consistent posting of motions and depositions as if they are court orders only shows his lack of understanding judicial procedure.

      Piercy apparently doesn’t understand why people do not respond to his spamming them with those links and screenshots. It’s because papers filed with the court are not factual unless a judge says so. But, let him continue spending money ordering case documents if that makes him happy.

      Oh — and I read where he thinks because an attorney said that one of the Bell’s is no longer a person of interest in the government’s investigation,that it means the investigation is closed. That is not however, what the Dept. of Justice recently stated to the media. They said that the investigation is ongoing.

      It amazes me how he and some others think that the DOJ is suppose to issue monthly press releases reporting what they are doing in the investigation. That is an attitude of entitlement that extends beyond ignorance. It’s as if they want to be invited to dinner and given all information and evidence to see if it meets their approval.

      • NavyDad0007 says:

        Truth!! & You Both speak it!

      • Yeah, I wish they’d send out monthly pressers too! LMAO
        Too bad the Feds are so quiet about cases they work. But we know they’re still working on it because it always takes them forever. AND WE NEVER HEAR FROM THE FEDS UNTIL THEY HAVE SOMEONE IN CUFFS!

        But they have to keep it quiet because they do a lot of undercover stuff. If it werent for the uneducated in the way FEDs work, they wouldn’t have shocked the shit out of the Bells with that raid! They wouldn’t have all the info they received from all the computers and phones if they had been advertizing their investigation every day! The targets are supposed to be kept in the dark. They want them to feel comfortable & confident and sloppy enough to say and do things. It’s good that ppl around them think Feds are not doing anything, It’s easier to get everyone to cooperate when they’re left in ignorance & caught by surprise too.

        • Xena says:

          “It’s good that ppl around them think Feds are not doing anything, It’s easier to get everyone to cooperate when they’re left in ignorance & caught by surprise too.”

          Absolutely! The best way to catch someone is to make them think they are not being observed.

          • Hey retard… it has been public knowledge that the DOJ has closed the case since january…..what rock have you idiots been hiding under?

            In the last segment of the interview, Bell’s lawyer said he is “unaware” of a current investigation of his client in connection with the Johnson case. “It has been communicated to me at the federal level that Brian has been cleared by the FBI,” said Jason Ferguson, Bell’s lawyer. – See more at: http://valdostatoday.com/2016/01/exclusive-brian-bell-interview-with-chris-beckham/#sthash.jhbyQJlV.dpuf

          • Xena says:

            This is what you don’t understand David. Just because Brian Bell’s attorney says that he is unaware of a current investigation of his client, does not mean that the investigation is closed. There are others under investigation. Your link is to an January 2016 article. Since then, in March 2016, CNN quoted attorney Chevene King stating;

            “We will be refiling in the coming months,” he said. “We understand the federal investigation is ongoing and this gives us an opportunity to strengthen our case.”

            Along with this, the DOJ said in their October 2015 motion to stay proceedings for 180 days that the investigation is ongoing and has expanded to include obstruction and witness tampering. Just because a Georgia state court judge denied the motion does not mean that the DOJ closed its investigation. A state court judge has no jurisdiction to tell the DOJ to close its investigation.

            Why am taking time to respond to you — a person who cited a federal bankruptcy involving a notice of appeal to support your argument that the restraining order against you issued by a California Superior Court was stayed with your filing a notice of appeal?

            You, a person who thought that you could make a general appearance in a restraining order case, but to deprive the court of jurisdiction to enforce its order, claimed that you were making a limited appearance.

            You, a person who believed that although you have a court appointed attorney, could prepare and file his own papers in the contempt proceeding without them being stricken by the court.

            You, a person who entered a stipulated agreement to vacate his apartment in the eviction case, who turned around and asked the court to vacate the stipulation that you voluntarily entered, then have nerve to file a notice of appeal when the court denied your motion to vacate.

            You, a person who does not understand California statute that defines a paralegal from a legal document assistant, and think that incorporating a company means that you don’t have to comply with the registration and bonding requirements to provide the public with legal document preparation.

            You, who claim to be a paralegal but consistently demonstrates your lack of professionalism by starting all comments by personally insulting others. Hurting people hurt others in the same manner they were hurt. Evidently, you’ve been called names such as “retard”, “mentally ill” and “idiot” since your childhood, and it hurt you. You can’t get over that hurt by visiting it upon others, especially since no one is hurt by it. You’ve certainly gained no friends by your name-calling and disrespect for rules. 30 Twitter accounts suspended since October, David? Maybe you should consider learning to behave properly on social media.

          • Hey genius, you claim it’s “public knowledge” the DOJ case is closed then in the next sentence quote Bell’s lawyer admitted ignorance of the DOJ’s investigation as your proof.
            Do you not realize neither of those statements are definitive?
            If anyone would have the proof that the DOJ ‘closed’ its investigation against their client it would BE THE CLIENTS LAWYER!
            Don’t you think he’d provide an official statement from the DOJ as evidence?
            Don’t you realize the language he’s using, is what they call postering? Not to mention just a RUMOR,
            If that info was ‘public knowledge’ he’d have it in writing. And so would the PUBLIC!

          • Xena says:

            Don’t expect for David to respond. He likes submitting comments, but apparently, he cannot formulate a proper response.

            Regarding your comment, he believes that the DOJ’s investigation is closed, and that the Johnson’s have withdrawn their civil case. Then why does he repost links to motions and depositions from the civil case over and over and over? His scribd account was apparently suspended, so he went to another site for uploading documents and has gone overboard posting documents in what he believes is a closed case. It’s like an addiction with him. What he omits is that the judge never ruled on the Bell’s summary judgment, so the motions and depositions are moot at this point.

  2. I think you have things factually incorrect and place causation in a self serving place. Now that i have responded on your blog does that constitute a comment to your face. To correct the record I made no reference at all to Dylan Roof. Dylan Roof was a racially motivated mass murderer.

    • Xena says:

      Hello James. You can generalize all you want. Bring your proof, if you have it. If your complaint that I’m not a reliable source was not based on my article on Blackbutterfly7 about the Justice for Dylan Roof facebook page, then what do you base your opinion on?

      As an aside, I discovered your comment in the trash folder. Since you’ve not commented here before, your comment should have gone into the moderation queue. Have you submitted comments to Word Press blogs previously to the point where their program automatically trashes your comments?

    • Xena says:

      Rich, I’m going to apologize for what I said about your comment being in trash. Turns out that some months ago, a person was signing in with their Twitter account, rather than their Word Press account, and he was spamming this blog with threats and harassment The “@Twitter” was blacklisted to prevent his comments from going into moderation.

      Generally, that sends comments to spam — not trash. So, I still don’t understand why comments are going directly to trash but hopefully, I’ve made the correction.

  3. You should be focused on helping your lemmings retain defamation attorneys

    they are going to need them the moment the attorney fee hearings are done.

    • Xena says:

      Well David, thank you once again for giving us proof that you have, or claim to have, inside information or what the Bells have planned. Now, can you also tell us if they plan to file in the federal court because of diversity, or does your jurisdictional argument for another case also apply to this issue?

  4. Natalie Jackson has been suspended from practice by the Florida bar….. next up… Benjamin Crump

    (Link removed by Administrator. Reason: It is far off topic.)

    • Xena says:

      David, I’m approving your comment for public posting because it supports what I’ve reported in the BGI series.

      Your threat against attorney Benjamin Crump is duly noted.

      By the way, it is a 90 day suspension due to an error in her Trust account, so don’t make it sound as if it is a permanent suspension due to something she did in court.

  5. Xena says:

    I’m not going to approve any more of your comments where you call people names. When you submit comments here, you are asking to come into my internet home. I sure hope that in your personal life, you don’t start off conversations by calling people insulting names.

    Neither am I going to approve your comments where you go off topic.

    Your comment on Topix that you claim I ignored is not an honest comment BECAUSE the CNN article WAS NOT published days before you tweeted to people that their account information was subpoenaed.

    Additionally, you are on record admitting that you communicate with the Bell’s attorney, giving him Twitter handles.

  6. Xena says:

    I’m not approving your comment because you continue being disrespectful with name calling, but I am responding for the benefit of others. Your argument is that the Michigan court lacked jurisdiction to enter a judgment against Vicki Pate because Pate is not a resident of the State of Michigan. Your argument includes that the Plaintiff cannot enforce the judgment to collect because the Michigan court lacked jurisdiction over the Defendant.

    Yet, you consistently tell people who are not residents of the State of Georgia that the Bell’s are going to sue them for defamation. My question to you is, why does your jurisdictional argument in Pate’s case not apply to what you purport to be future actions by the Bell’s?

    Does your sovereign citizen jurisdictional argument only apply when and where you want it to?

    Now, about diversity in the federal court and the Zimmerman v. Baar case, I was correct. The Zimmerman’s entered no monetary amount that they were seeking. Baar’s attorneys DID IN FACT MOVE THE case to the federal court. The federal court confirmed my position on that — because the Zimmerman’s did not request a specific amount in damages, the federal court said along the lines that they would be lucky to get a hundred dollars, so it would not take jurisdiction. The case was transferred back to the Florida court and the Zimmerman’s lost.

    • Of course you were correct Xena. You understand legal rules& procedures.
      But David has no clue. David finds a few keywords online and copies & pastes them thinking they’re relevant to his objectives. And he can’t even figure out the difference between federal & state, even after you’ve explained it to him! He thinks depositions are legal findings (as long as they’re against the black child victim of course.)

      But i still think the biggest joke is Vicki! I can’t believe she’s dumb enough to let a well known idiot, uneducated wannabe-twitter-lawyer, unhinged Twitter troll, the subject of his OWN permanent stalking/harassment restraining order, do a copy and paste for her answers on a defamation/harassment lawsuit against her!
      While David’s ignorance obviously wasn’t what cost her that $15K judgement but it made her look even stupider than usual.
      The next time Vicki gets sued, my free legal advice is to do her own copy & pasting! Maybe she’ll actually find relevant support for her answers.

      • Xena says:

        Hey Shannon. I heard that someone thought Piercy wrote Vicki’s pleadings for her, and based on what they read to me, it indeed sounded like Piercy’s sovereign citizen jurisdictional argument. As I understand it, she didn’t bother putting her contact information on the pleading so the Plaintiff could serve her with an answer. Omitting that is the same as not filing anything.

        Then as I understand it, after she told the court it lacked jurisdiction, she included a cross-complaint in that same pleading. That defeated her jurisdictional argument and gave the court jurisdiction to rule in the case. Then, based on what was read to me,her pleading also failed to comply with Michigan court rules for factual pleading.

        Before getting into his jurisdictional argument on collecting on the judgment, I ask, how does Piercy know if the Plaintiff is trying to collect on the judgment?


        “David finds a few keywords online and copies & pastes them thinking they’re relevant to his objectives.”

        Yes, and he skips over whatever is not in agreement with what he wants. Here is what is funny — Piercy spends his money getting documents for the Johnson v. Bell case, and spends his time posting them all over the internet, although the case has been dismissed without prejudice. There is absolutely nothing to litigate from the documents he has paid for and posted!

  7. NavyDad0007 says:

    Wow smh. Piercy being the Bell’s Rep isn’t doing them any Favors.

    • Xena says:

      Indeed. David has a bad reputation that proceeds him. It’s not just his social media rants, but that he tells others what the Bell’s are doing or going to do against them. He also represents himself as being the Bell’s social media watchdog and threatens lawsuits against anyone he finds who simply says “Justice for Kendrick Johnson”. Combine that with calling Blacks “feral” and it conveys why he goes on the attack.

  8. Xena says:

    It was brought to my attention that someone is posting on Topix using my name. I have never posted to Topix, nor will post to Topix.

  9. NavyDad0007 says:

    That is pathetic.

    • Xena says:

      Yes, it is pathetic. For years, they tried baiting me to come to various forms of social media to defend myself against their lies. It didn’t work then, and it’s not happening now.

Join the discussion

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s