Whats your problem?
erasmus
Score/Scoreland, really get your goat so much?
I think good luck to her, any woman who can make a success of her
career in the porn industry deserves respect, and if she wants to try
to protect herself from being ripped off thats her business.
peace_li...@yahoo.com
1. Chloe Vevrier / Andrea Fischer lost her trademark lawsuit because
she lied to the U.S. government under penalty of perjury, probably in a
manner consistent with fraud. If she can do that, then it seems NOTHING
she says can be believed. Dishonesty is not my problem, but her's.
2. Chloe Vevrier / Andrea Fischer broke her contractual business
agreements with Score. If she can act without any business integrity
towards a MAJOR customer, who is willing to take legal action, just
imagine what she can do to the little guy. Have you -- Ever been
threatened by her for criminal prosecution, because she doesn't like
what you say? Ever "paid" $4500 for a personal meeting advertised on
her website, just to get ripped off? Ever been threatened that her
friends in the Russian mob would come after you, if you didn't give her
the money? Ever seen the evil twinkle in her eyes and self gratified
smile as she takes money out of your hand and walks away? Ever had your
email accounts terminated by her husband? Ever had your account on her
website closed for no reason (it is right there in the terms of
service), and no refund given? Ever had charges appear on your credit
card, after she terminated your account? Ever had your email address,
that is on her spam list, publicly disclosed -- these people have (and
that's just her B-list):
bhod...@yahoo.com, bigbobb...@netscape.net, Bigd...@aol.com,
bigd...@comcast.net, biggs...@yahoo.com, BIGGS...@aol.com,
bighe...@yahoo.com, bigun...@hotmail.com, Bikro...@ameritech.net,
billg...@yahoo.co.uk, bills...@yahoo.com, billy...@yahoo.com,
Bisho...@hotmail.com, bjhas...@comcast.net,
bjoern....@mail.dk, blac...@plum.plala.or.jp,
BLACKM...@AOL.COM, blad...@hotmail.com, blakk...@hotmail.com,
bla...@8bc.com, BLK...@hotmail.com, block...@hotmail.com,
blub...@gmx.net, bluebe...@msn.com, blued...@yahoo.co.jp,
blueimp...@poppy.ocn.ne.jp, bluesma...@yahoo.com,
Blues...@aol.com, blue...@yahoo.com, blu...@libero.it,
bmajch...@free.fr, bobbe...@juno.com, bobby...@comcast.net,
bobnich...@hotmail.com, bob...@aol.com, boc...@hotmail.com,
bod...@yahoo.co.jp, bohan...@hotmail.com,
boissier...@wanadoo.fr, bond...@gmail.com, bor...@yahoo.de,
boru...@post.cz, bou...@infonie.fr,
boys-2-ma...@r9.dion.ne.jp, BPPadd...@aol.com,
bradb...@expn.com, bradk...@hotmail.com, brand...@sasktel.net,
bran...@yahoo.com, Br...@AOL.COM, br...@briantuckercpa.org,
bri...@msn.com, br...@web-integrations.net, bri...@adelphia.net,
brow...@yahoo.com, Bru...@hotmail.com
3. Chloe Vevrier / Andrea Fischer violated her agreement and an
explicit COURT ORDER to keep secret certain business information of
Score. It would seem to me that she has so much disrespect for the U.S.
legal system, and her word is so lacking of integrity and honesty, that
she simply cannot be trusted in anything -- even when her wrongdoing
could result in imprisonment.
4. Chloe Vevrier / Andrea Fischer did not take on Score. Score simply
opposed HER attempt to register "Chloe Vevrier" as a trademark, to
protect its business interests and prevent her from shutting down their
ChloesWorld website, in violation of her contractual business
agreements for Score to run a website with the name Chloe Vevrier.
Chloe Vevrier / Andrea Fischer possibly tried to use her lies or fraud
on the government, to reverse her prior agreements for which she had
gladly accepted lots of money, or to coerce Score to pay her even more
than she had agreed.
5. Chloe Vevrier / Andrea Fischer, IMHO has such a cold and greedy
heart, that she was available to see incall clients in New York city on
9/11/01, a mere 50 blocks away from where many thousands of people had
just died in agony.
6. Chloe Vevrier / Andrea Fischer seems to me to be the perpetrator,
not the victim. She once wrote on Chloev.com, "it is so difficult to
find men who fit into my prey-pattern." Preying upon others is not
protecting one's self. See these comments about other people's real
world experiences with her in person:
"I took juan for the teem, my seshon with her was a dissaster IMHO. ---
The Doctor SW (6/21/2005)"
-- My problem is that my experience of her psychosis, her dishonesty,
her hatred, her greed, her false judgments, her frigid heart, her
darkness, her fraud, her predation, have become real world problems for
many people.
Beware of Chloe Vevrier!
Ball4
> How gullible some people are when lost in the delusion of
> fantasy...
>
> 1. Chloe Vevrier / Andrea Fischer lost her trademark lawsuit
> because she lied to the U.S. government under penalty of
> perjury, probably in a manner consistent with fraud. If she can
> do that, then it seems NOTHING she says can be believed.
As a lurker her who hasn't posted, I find it amazing that no one has
called you for what you seem to be: a front man for Score. I've
read enough fan rantings (in entertainment from sports to music to
mainstream movies to porn), and I've NEVER seen someone present such
a carefully-worded argument by themselves.
I have, however, assisted and participated in a few civil lawsuits,
and this tirade looks exactly like the statements made by one party
against another during a civil lawsuit, whether they are fact or not.
If you have problems with the lady, so be it. I don't know her and
have seen neither her site nor Score's, but you're not just some fan
angered by what you view as a betrayal of trust; this sounds like a
calculated attack by Score itself.
> Dishonesty is not my problem, but her's.
Really? Then why are you so hot to spread the word against her? Did
she sneeze while giving you head?
peace_li...@yahoo.com
ta tellin the raight truth be.
> but you're not just some fan angered by what you view as a betrayal of trust
Unfortunately, I was stupid enough to have been preyed upon by Chloe
Vevrier / Andrea Fischer, suckered in by her admittedly fictional
writing about tantra,spirituality, and service to Inanna as a love
priestess. Since you admit to having never spent personal time with
her, how can you judge me, who has done so, and my experience? How do
you know that I am not an attorney, who simply does not put up others
fraud?
Score has made over $1.3 million in revenue from their chloesworld.com
website, whereas Andrea Fischer only makes $75K a year from her's.
Obviously, there is a reason. Any business person knows that in the
long run there is more to gain from taking the high road. How would my
words really benefit Score's bottom line? Having participated in
litigation, you might have preemptively addressed that matter in
support of your position. Neither me nor my words have any relation
whatsoever to Score Group -- notwithstanding your false judgment.
Hot to spread the word -- because people who have dealt with her in
person have apparently felt defrauded and threatened into silence, in
both nefarious and prosecutorial contexts. Anybody that says anything
to her, or about her, is well advised to VERY carefully choose their
words, or potentially suffer consequences at the hand of her or her
husband.
What I find amazing is how you can come to the defense of somebody you
admit having never met, and presumably know nothing about. Perhaps
intelligence and literacy is simply too incredulous for you to imagine,
therefore, it must be false. I remember something like that happening
several weeks ago at FEMA. Did you ever see the movie "Finding
Forrester?"
Ball4
had this to say on 12 sept. 2005:
> Gosh Darn It, uh huh. Been seems like I is just ain't too
> stoopeed nuff ta tellin the raight truth be.
>
No, your responses seem a bit too polished and researched to not be
part of a coordinated effort. If you are an individual who has
done that kind of research, you'd already be in litigation, and
either couldn't talk about it or would be done with it and be able
to share details of your information freely; you not talking about
your personal grudge against her, simply SCORE's grudge against
her.
> Inanna as a love priestess. Since you admit to having never
> spent personal time with her, how can you judge me, who has done
> so, and my experience? How do you know that I am not an
> attorney, who simply does not put up others fraud?
>
I don't know those things, but we only have your word that you were
stupid enough to spend your money on a scam, yet you go through a
laundry list of her offenses that have nothing to do with your
"issues". You don't mention any of this in your list of her
offenses; your points one through four are ENTIRELY related to
legal battles between her and Score, and your points five and six
are simply personal attacks. Wow, a New York call girl worked on
9/11. How shocking.
I think her clients, who paid to see her "a mere 50 blocks away
from where many thousands of people had just died in agony" were
pretty damned callous too, thinking of their dicks instead of the
destruction around them. Were you one of them? If not, how did
you come up with such a juicy piece of gossip?
And you suggest that you MIGHT be an attorney, but only suggest it.
If you are, say so; if not, admit it. Don't play games about it.
You have a large list of her offenses that I've seen repeated here
a few times, attacks that cover a wide range of things that don't
interest the ordinary fan, but seem to be added to make your
"case" weightier.
> Score has made over $1.3 million in revenue from their
> chloesworld.com website, whereas Andrea Fischer only makes $75K
> a year from her's.
Which couldn't interest me less. If I were a fan checking
websites, I wouldn't care how much they make. The best moneymakers
are not necessarily the highest quality producers: AOL and
Microsoft as examples.
> What I find amazing is how you can come to the defense of
> somebody you admit having never met, and presumably know nothing
> about. Perhaps intelligence and literacy is simply too
> incredulous for you to imagine, therefore, it must be false. I
> remember something like that happening several weeks ago at
> FEMA. Did you ever see the movie "Finding Forrester?"
>
>
Yeah, right. That's it. I just can't believe a fan of porn could
have a highschool diploma. Let's just reduce it to absurdity and
be done. And BTW, it's "incredible", not "incredulous". Common
mistake.
No I just find it extremely out of place in this forum, and
smacking of corporate efforts.
If I'm passing judgment here, it's because you are giving ALL SORTS
of negative information without revealing your source or
connection. You hide behind a made-up name, where it is easy to
libel without consequence. You give a hard-to-believe story of how
you were personally screwed by her, but only when called on it. If
you are so seriously pissed at her, go file your lawsuit and
publish the details. So far, you've only been anonymously
publishing what SCORE would want to see published. This is the
mark of a troll, and a sponsored troll at that.
Here's my problem with your ranting:
Annette Haven was well known during her career to be an
opportunistic bitch, not well-liked by most of her co-stars. She
refused to work with particular actors and actresses, she refused
to do certain acts, and despite the fact that her personal sexual
and emotional preferences strongly favored women, she quit the
business to marry a rich (male) fan who could keep her in the style
she wanted. She was still one of the most popular of the
"classic" porn stars, and her movies are still popular. No one
cares if she was a bitch (I know I don't, because she was one of my
favorite porn queens), because her movies do not reflect that.
Hyapatia Lee has been involved in scams that make your accusations
here pale. She faked her own death once to avoid debt, while
earlier scamming her public with a fake claim (IIRC) that she had
diabetes and asking for their financial help. While I would never
want to meet her personally, she still put out a series of highly
erotic films, and they're still fun to watch. People don't care if
she's a scam artist while they are watching her fuck.
The point is that Chloe Vevrier (and I always wondered how a German
girl got a French surname, so you've at least helped me there) is a
very attractive woman with gigantic tits who puts out some great
nude spreads, and also does lesbian and occasional straight porn,
ant that's all that most casual and serious fans care about, other
than how they can get their hands on it cheaply or for free. Most
of us are not going to meet her personally and therefore don't care
about these issues. We just want to see her naked and spread.
Personally, I'd like to see more photos of her here. If everyone
is pissed off at her, then post some of those damned copyrighted
photos that she and Score charge so much for. 'Specially the ones
of her and Autumn Jade.
peace_li...@yahoo.com
husband, protecting your business interests. Why hide behind this
anonymity? Why not directly communicate and resolve our issues?
Instead, you try and bait me into a slander cause of legal action.
Hey there Chloe fans, as I said -- "Anybody that says anything to her,
or about her, is well advised to VERY carefully choose their words, or
potentially suffer consequences at the hand of her or her husband."
As you make abundantly clear, my message is directed at those who may
be interested in what I recall her admitting to me to be completely
fictitious writing about tantra, yoga, spirituality, and being a "love
priestess." I also make clear that I am warning those who consider
paying $4,500 to meet her -- BEWARE OF CHLOE VEVRIER! I do not try and
dissuade those pornophiles who simply want to see skin images.
Your reply indicates that you have not read the material posted by
others, at the links I provided. Honesty, integrity, respect, good
faith, fair dealing, are germane to my contentions. I believe those
traits do interest many fans, who may erroneously believe that her
fictional writing reflects her real persona. Just as you cannot believe
that my words come from a regular individual, you also seem to
disbelieve that there are people out there who have an interest in more
than mere images of skin. While I cannot convince you, many people have
a sufficiently broad perspective to comprehend my message.
Prior to experiencing the true nature of Andrea Fischer, I was
genuinely concerned that she may have perished, while in N.Y. on 9/11.
I sent an email to her booking agent asking if she was alive, and was
informed that she was accepting incalls at their W. 64th St. location
in Manhattan. Unlike Andrea, I didn't have the heart to work on that
day.
Again, your entire position seems based on the premise that nobody
could be smarter than you, and present a well reasoned, "researched,"
and "polished" argument. You fail to state why you believe that Score
has a grudge against you and your wife Andrea. The deposition testimony
by John Fox, executive of Score Group, clearly shows that they do not
assert any exclusive right and do not oppose Andrea from using her
stage name or running a website with you. Your reply sounds of ongoing
unfounded paranoia about Score, which Andrea indicated in her last
Juggs interview, and expressed in our meeting. What is your motive to
attack the integrity of Score?
You make a weak attempt to conduct discovery over a newsgroup, and
further request that I reveal work product on future litigation. If you
have litigation experience as claimed, then shouldn't you know better
than that?
Perhaps someday somebody will defeat your Digimarc copy protection (the
easiest way being to overwrite with a second Digimarc watermark), then
post some images here.
Jon Eric
Andrea/Chloe stalker who has soured on his target. Get a life, man!
Jon
peace_li...@yahoo.com
which Chloe Vevrier / Andrea Fischer has made in retaliation against
those ardently idolizing or even deifying fans who express something
that she does not like. This would seem to indicate a polarized
love/hate relationship with her own body and chosen profession. Like I
previously said: "Anybody that says anything to her, or about her, is
well advised to VERY carefully choose their words, or potentially
suffer consequences at the hand of her or her husband."
My conduct has never risen to the level of stalking. To the contrary,
she seemed to resent how respectful I was toward her. Others have
commented how she only relates to men forcing themselves on her, as a
kind of rape.
She lives in California, and that state's stalking law provides in
pertinent part:
CPC 646.9.
(a) Any person who willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows or
willfully and maliciously harasses another person and who makes a
credible threat with the intent to place that person in reasonable fear
for his or her safety, or the safety of his or her immediate family is
guilty of the crime of stalking, punishable by imprisonment in a county
jail for not more than one year, or by a fine of not more than one
thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment, or by
imprisonment in the state prison. ...
(e) For the purposes of this section, "harasses" means engages in a
knowing and willful course of conduct directed at a specific person
that seriously alarms, annoys, torments, or terrorizes the person, and
that serves no legitimate purpose.
(f) For the purposes of this section, "course of conduct" means two or
more acts occurring over a period of time, however short, evidencing a
continuity of purpose. Constitutionally protected activity is not
included within the meaning of "course of conduct."
(g) For the purposes of this section, "credible threat" means a verbal
or written threat, including that performed through the use of an
electronic communication device, or a threat implied by a pattern of
conduct or a combination of verbal, written, or electronically
communicated statements and conduct, made with the intent to place the
person that is the target of the threat in reasonable fear for his or
her safety or the safety of his or her family, and made with the
apparent ability to carry out the threat so as to cause the person who
is the target of the threat to reasonably fear for his or her safety or
the safety of his or her family. It is not necessary to prove that the
defendant had the intent to actually carry out the threat. The present
incarceration of a person making the threat shall not be a bar to
prosecution under this section. Constitutionally protected activity is
not included within the meaning of "credible threat."
Ball4
giving no further ID blathered on:
> To me, you seem most likely to be Chloe Vevrier / Andrea
> Fischer's husband, protecting your business interests. Why hide
> behind this anonymity? Why not directly communicate and resolve
> our issues? Instead, you try and bait me into a slander cause of
> legal action.
Gods, this would be funny if it weren't so pathetic. I think Jon
Eric might right: this guy are just some obsessive former fan turned
obsessively the other direction.
While hiding behind his own anonymity, he wants everyone else to drop
theirs. Do you think if we changed "Chloe" to "Government", the rest
of the discussion would change much? I've had conversations very
much like this one with people who really believe there's a "face" on
Mars and that we're just covering it up.
A quick google search on "peace_light_truth"'s postings reveals that
he's posted the following original topics, all of them this year, all
posted to this newsgroup unless otherwise noted:
31 May "TRUE CHLOE VEVRIER INFORMATION"
2 Jun "TRUE Chloe Vevrier Information" (alt.sex.breast)
11 Jun "Is Chloe PREGNANT?"
21 Jun "Chloe Vevrier Dishonesty Breaches Confidentiality Agreement"
18 Aug "Chloe Vevrier's Website - www.chloevevrier.com"
17 Sep "BEWARE CHLOE VEVRIER!"
The "Is Chloe Pregnant?" thread, while trying to start that
discussion, also included a link back to the legal documents. While
the last thread was in response to another thread titled "Whats your
problem", he changed the subject and led off with his old tired
"Chloe/Andrea vs. Score" crap.
He has posted nothing else except the one subject: Chloe, Chloe,
Chloe. Evil, Evil, Evil. Beware, Beware, Beware. Chloe Evil Beware.
> Hey there Chloe fans, as I said -- "Anybody that says anything
> to her, or about her, is well advised to VERY carefully choose
> their words, or potentially suffer consequences at the hand of
> her or her husband."
As he has said ad nauseum by now. This is a newsgroup where people
post pictures of beautiful, big-titted women spreading their legs and
occasionally having sex with each other, and even more occasionally
with men. And he's interrupting that. If he thinks that chasing
people from this newsgroup will hurt Chloe Vevrier, he's mistaken.
Keeping the copyright violations down can only help her.
> As you make abundantly clear, my message is directed at those
> who may be interested in what I recall her admitting to me to be
> completely fictitious writing about tantra, yoga, spirituality,
> and being a "love priestess." I also make clear that I am
> warning those who consider paying $4,500 to meet her -- BEWARE
> OF CHLOE VEVRIER! I do not try and dissuade those pornophiles
> who simply want to see skin images.
$4,500.00??? FOUR THOUSAND, FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS??!?!?? Jesus H.
Christ on a Bicycle. I am 50 years old, and I'm not certain I've
spent that much money on the sex industry in my entire life! Forty-
five hundred dollars at one go? If he's not so extremely rich that
he can throw that kind of money away, this should be the equivalent
of me dropping $50: it's an annoying rip-off, but I won't spend my
life bitching about it. If the $4,500 was a LOT of money to him,
then he's simply REALLY letting his dick think for him, and probably
got what he deserved. He would have better spent the money on the
"Boob Cruise".
> Your reply indicates that you have not read the material posted
> by others, at the links I provided. Honesty, yadda yadda yadda
No, I didn't read the material, yet he still thinks I'm Chloe's
husband. Just for the record, my wife is good looking, but she's a
bit older than Chloe, doesn't know a word of German, and wears a 35C
bra. Believe me, I'd know the difference, and so would she.
The problem I have again with all his claims are that he's been here
since late May making these attacks, ALL of them about the legal
battle with Score, and has NEVER mentioned his own personal problems
with her until forced to now.
Also, he quotes legal documents quite well and quite articulately,
but when he gets off-script (attacking me, for instance), his grammar
and vocabulary change, as if it was a different person who wrote the
first half. If this all wasn't fed him, he's just quoting it without
attribution (and no, before he changes the subject again, I am NOT
accusing anyone of plagarism, merely of not admitting that most of
his work was ghost-written).
> Prior to experiencing the true nature of Andrea Fischer, I was
> genuinely concerned that she may have perished, while in N.Y. on
> 9/11. I sent an email to her booking agent asking if she was
> alive, and was informed that she was accepting incalls at their
> W. 64th St. location in Manhattan. Unlike Andrea, I didn't have
> the heart to work on that day.
Wow, it is just so touching that on a day that 3,000 Americans died,
his first thoughts went to Chloe, so much that he sent an email to
her booking agent on that same day, and got a reply on that same day
. . . no, I don't want to go there, just too creepy.
> Again, your entire position seems based on the premise that
> nobody could be smarter than you, and present a well reasoned,
> "researched," and "polished" argument.
Attacking the person instead of their argument. I've mentioned that
there was a major difference between the style of his initial posting
and his replies. It is not a matter of intelligence or education,
but the two portions just seem obviously written by two different
people.
As he said in his first post in this thread:
> How gullible some people are when lost
> in the delusion of fantasy...
Look in the mirror, pal. Look in the mirror.
DOES ANYONE HAVE SOME GOOD SHOTS OF CHLOE THEY WANNA POST? If there
are photos to download, this discussion will go away of its own
accord.
Preferably some of her with Autumn Jade . . .
peace_li...@yahoo.com
shining armor," so be it. The rest of you considering giving your time
or money to her may wish to know about other's experiences, and avoid
the possibility of being defrauded or perhaps wrongfully prosecuted for
stalking. This has been particularly true for her offer to sit in at a
photo shoot for $4,500.
>This is a newsgroup where people post pictures
False. This newsgroup is not a binaries newsgroup. It is a fan
newsgroup, for discussion. If you want photos, go to a binaries
newsgroup, and stop flaming about the lack of binaries here.
>first thoughts went to Chloe on 9/11...
Ball4 presumes that I neglected to try to contact and express concern
for other people I knew in NYC, some of whom did die. Ball4 is grossly
insensitive to my heart, my pain for loss of friends and family -- a
true flaming A-hole. Any reader of this who had friends or family die
on 9/11 knows exactly what I mean. That alone shows where Ball4 is
coming from: that it was wrong to actually express concern for Andrea
Fischer / Chloe Vevrier as a real human being, because to Ball4 she is
merely a pornographic sex object.
Ball4 further presumes to know what interactions I have had with her,
and how I was invited by her to express myself and meet her. Ball4
seems to emotionally repress or deny my words, and the legal record.
Chloe has offered to let fans sit in on photo shoots for $4,500. Ball4
magically assumes I was such a client, because I pointed to others who
have felt defrauded by Andrea / Chloe.
Sorry Ball4, you sound a lot like Chloe's husband, Jason Seifert,
flaming anything to protect your business interests. That is the most
logical conclusion. (Analyzing grammar and vocabulary? -- puhleese)!
Why do you hide behind an anonymous facade, for which you so strongly
criticize me -- Ball4? You attack me, then criticize me for responding
in kind.
The legal record speaks for itself. Andrea Fischer has engaged in a
pattern of dishonesty that is probably consistent with fraud and
perjury; and in any person's decision to interact with her, one should
carefully consider her deceit upon the government made under oath. That
is, if Andrea Fischer can lie to the government under penalty of
perjury involving prison time, then just imagine what she can say to
you...
Hey Ball4, I need not state the obvious. Chloe has big boobs. Happy
now? Too bad I am tarnishing your apparently beloved fantasy about her
by implying that she may have a forked tongue.
Get a life...? I have been thanked by people for having the courage to
express my experience of the true nature of Chloe Vevrier, and saving
them the trouble of learning it the hard way.
Just as you imply that no one should care whether thousands died on
9/11, so too you imply that others should suffer at the hand of Chloe
Vevrier and her husband.
In the end, you criticize my motive of protecting others from fraud.
But, you conceal your motive for attacking me -- Jason.
