Saturday, March 12, 2011

Remember Frischling's "Confirmed Cyberstalkers?" Now Not Guilty!

For those who enjoy watching Steven Frischling destroy himself, pull up a chair. It just keeps getting better.

If you recall, he started a counterblog called "Expose the Fish Bullies." His very first post was an instant classic - asking people to let "lose" by anonymously posting dirt on anonymous people! Brilliant.

But his second post managed to top it. In this one he basically admits that the people he openly accused and harassed on the basis of "evidence" are no longer "suspects."

He posts an empty article called "Bullies Exposed!!" and 10 minutes later left the following comment. Nobody believes this is blog is run by anyone except Steven Frischling and/or Susannah Seefeldt (the duo behind the infamous @yuckystalkers) so we will not even pretend this is a possibility.

Wow, what a difference a day makes. In a few short hours we found much more than we had anticipated.

First, thanks so much for the input from numerous sources, we greatly appreciate your efforts. And yes, as promised, your posts have been removed.

So what we have determined that the bully is not:
-Disgruntled bridge/groom who never got photos
-Airline company Frischling investigated
-Scheming jealous ex-girlfriend
-Former business partner out to get him
-Rival blogger who think he's full of it
-Flying with Fish reader/Twitter follower
-Irritated photographer who can't stand him
-TSA/government employee-
-Random person he pissed off somehow
-Steven Frischling himself

What! He has determined who "the bully is not" using the poll results from the FishFraud blog! Yes, "none of the above" won the poll, so he suddenly thinks it must be true. Fantastic.
Regarding the other blog in question, basically our findings lead us to believe the bully behind that blog is a male (father, grandfather or uncle) who is responsible for a bride allegedly "burned" by SF on a wedding. Let's name this bully Chris.
WHAT! Wait a minute. Let's step back here. You now say the person behind FishFraud is a male relative of a bride whose wedding photos you "allegedly" never delivered? But that's impossible. You said earlier you had "confirmed" and "conclusive" proof that tied it to the three people you already accused: the former business partner (who masterminded the plan), and his minions - a former wedding client and an ex-girlfriend of yours!
Initially we thought it could have been a "Former business partner out to get him" but as that blog progressed and we began to read the responses of the numerous baited questions posted in the last couple of weeks, that theory went cold. The answers and tone from the bait lead us down this new path, and recent input only supported that hunch.
Hell no. Not possible. You cannot undo saying you had hard evidence against someone. You either had concrete evidence or you don't. So were you indeed lying? Is that what you are now saying? You never really had this evidence?

Apparently Steven Frischling is still not aware that everything he puts on the Internet, stays on the Internet.

First, here are Frischling's Tweets attacking two women in February. It's unclear what set him off or what evidence he claimed he had, but he suddenly states they are being "outed" as FishFraud.

He Tweets their full names and hometowns, and flat out accuses them of trying to extort him. He even begins Tweeting their respective employers and asks if they wan to see the "evidence" against them, and also saying it's possible they committed crimes on company computers! Yes, he's trying to get them fired or at least in trouble.

Then he created the famously bizarre @yuckystalkers account, which has since been deleted but is still available via Google cache.

After this outright Twitter assault on these two women (and their spouses), he suddenly changed his mind! He then decided they are possibly involved, but now it only makes sense the true "mastermind" was his former business partner, Addison. He claims Addison tracked down these women from his past, in two countries (did he go door to door looking for people who hate Frischling?) and set out to destroy him.

Frischling then Tweeted Addison's address, clearly to threaten him, and for this obvious breech he wound up with his own Twitter account suspended! (Tweets are deleted but still available via Google cache)

Amusingly, Frischling created another new account to pester Twitter support into restoring his suspended account. Note he claims he "may have" Tweeted out an address! May have! He also claims Twitter accounts for 75 percent of his income!

When he got his account back, look what he Tweeted:

Once again, he uses the word "confirmed." Not alleged, not suspected, but confirmed.

Then he emailed out the following letter to people in the travel industry, accusing said mastermind by first and last name, and also put it on his Facebook. One very foolish follower copied it and put it on his own blog.

The #freefish Saga Continues
Hi Everybody!

I don't typically get involved in such bull$h1+, but this has gone too far. Somebody is attempting to slander a great tweep: @flyingwithfish! Their words were: "character assassination!" Can you believe it?

Below is the entire story, as copied and pasted from Fish's Facebook page, with *HIS* permission. He does not want it on his blog, but I figured we might as well put it out there here.

If you have questions, let me know, and I can direct you to the proper channels!

Message unedited below:

OK , here is the break down on the cyber-psycho-stalker

Originally all signs of the stalker pointed to an ex-girlfriend that has a history of stalking and a former client of mine. I could not link the two together, but things being were clearly them and I tied them into this conclusively … however somethings still did not add up, so back to digging I went .

Both women had been contacted by "Michael Whirrlie", my wife has been harassed by "Michael Whirrlie" on Facebook. Looking at all of this and tracking IP addresses that had hacked my wife's email … coupled with specific comments make, phrases used in comments to my blog, and posts not occurring during sabbath (some were back dated, but in real time, none during the sabbath) , everything lead me back to Addison Schonland.

Addison and I had worked together at IAG (Innovation Analysis Group) which he founded. In Dec '09 I developed a concept for KLM Royal Dutch Airlines. I created it, pitched it,negotiated it, sold it, executed it, with no assistance from anyone at IAG. My deal was to put $3k of the project back into IAG, then they wanted $5k, then $7K and I said no.

I offered the $3k, but Addison insisted on $7k … $3k was a lot considering the project was 100% mine.

Addison threatened to sue me, however his lawyer never followed through as there was no written contract and all the communications with KLM was me … including KLM listing my name on their global blog as "We've invited Steven Frischling … " no mention of IAG because they were not involved.

After Addison's lawyer didn't sue me, he contacted the Connecticut State Police Major Case Squad claiming I had embezzled $22k from IAG. The State Police investigated and found that I hadn't embezzled anything, determined there was no merit to the claim. Addison's complaint needs to be dealt within a civil court ,and then it is up to a court to determine what he is and is not entitled to.

Following the CT State Police closing the investigation being closed, Addison went to KLM. KLM told him they were not getting involved, as far as they were concerned the project was mine, not IAG's and he needed to settle the case in a US civil court.

Following that I got a cryptic threat from Addison via Twitter. The CT State Police didn't see it as a real that, but I have it saved anyway.

Yesterday on the blog he writes about me, he names people at Lufthansa by name, mocking them for taking me to Frankfurt (I was just off the plane when it was posted) … most people would not know the names of the internal Lufthansa USA staff…unless you deal with airlines directly and in an in depth manner…further pointing to him.

Add in that the attacks go silent from sundown Friday to sundown Saturday, as he is Orthodox, along in that Addison's personal email is, (his PayPal had been tied to it and it appears in my KLM stats) and that one IP that had hacked my wife's email goes to an ATT wireless data device that was coming off a cell tower that is in a direct line of sight of Addison's home, along with other minor details … and it all points to Addison

Addison contacted the women and fired them up. Then let them loose … but left some traces behind that have been dug and his constant references to business fraud, initially saying he was an angry bride, then attacking my TSA coverage, etc etc etc.

So … in short who is Addison Schonland. An former business associated who had a tantrum when his lawyer, the CT State Police and a client all told him he had no grounds to demand what he was asking for.

I have multiple emails where he is threatening vile things, stating clearly that his goal is character assassination (stated exactly like that) and making threats that would impact my kids.

Hope that answers your question.


Now, let's sum up. Frischling states again that his former wedding client and ex-girlfriend are "tied into this conclusively." Conclusively means this is not a guess or suspicion, but that he has proven it. Then he states his evidence against Addison came from "tracking IP addresses" emails that "hacked" his "wife's email" (although he has no wife), "specific" comments and phrases left on his blog, and posts not occurring during the Jewish Sabbath (because Addison is an Orthodox Jew).

Frischling's claim that FishFraud "goes silent" during the Sabbath is patently false, as anyone can see we've had plenty of posts and Tweets that went out after sundown Friday/before sundown Saturday. He then claims "some were back dated, but in real time, none during the sabbath." While you can change the date and time of posts, how can you explain that FishFraud has quite often left comments and Tweets during this time?

Frischling states that Addison is a former business "associated" who "had a tantrum" because of some sort of sour negotiations over the KLM blog that Frischling wrote for a few short weeks in January 2010. He states Addison was so upset that his company didn't get its cut that he went to the Connecticut state police and accused Frischling of embezzlement. (Frischling does not explain this accusation of embezzlement, which is a rather curious and specific charge. Surely we need to revisit this in the future.)

He points out our blog laughing at Lufthansa USA's PR people for taking him on the trip to Germany while his Twitter account was suspended, and says most people wouldn't know these people's names ... even though the names of their PR people are posted publicly on Lufthansa USA's own website and also come up when Googling Lufthansa USA and press contact, etc.

Frischling further states "that one IP that had hacked my wife's email goes to an ATT wireless data device that was coming off a cell tower that is in a direct line of sight of Addison's home." Yes, he claimed he had evidence that specific.

So why is it that now Steven Frischling says his new "suspect" is a male relative of one of his upset wedding photography clients? How can that be if he has all this supposed "confirmed" and "conclusive" evidence against Addison and the two women? Are they all related? Is Addison, the Orthodox Jew from California, secretly the father, grandfather or uncle of Jasmine, the Canadian bride of Asian descent? Or did this relative of the unhappy bride also live within direct line of sight of the AT&T cell tower that was used to hack into Steven's wife's email? (Do we need to mention again that he is not married?)

Or is Frischling just finally admitting that none of the people he harassed are involved in FishFraud, and that he lied about evidence he claimed he had? And if so, will they be getting apologies as public as the accusations he leveled?

Let us remind that Addison works in the travel industry, and Frischling sent this email to people in this same industry, as well as putting it on Facebook. Surely, if the letter's content is not true and he is lying about this supposed evidence, Frischling is guilty of libeling Addison. We state for the record that Addison is not involved with this blog in any way, but we certainly feel sorry for him and anyone who was ever involved with Steven Frischling.

So, what is going on here? Will these people be getting apologies? Or will they be seeing Steven Frischling in court?

Happy Lying!


  1. but he said those things BEFORE! Don't you know things he's said and done before don't count? It's only what he's saying and doing NOW that you should care about!

  2. The focus of the blog is on lies. That means what Steven Frischling said BEFORE are fact checked NOW.

    More great work from the Social Media expert.

  3. want to help your blog go viral with real Social Media experts? Make a post that the #SWSX people want to read!

  4. "social media meltdown case study - don't let this happen to you. Worst-case practices on managing your personal online brand"

  5. I second the use of the #SXSW twitter tag.

    the reason that frouchebag is constantly naming and renaming suspects in his quest to find who is behind this blog is because unlike the stuff that he posts on his travel site, there is no press release to copy from and he actually has to do some research other than going to the press page on an airline website or looking to see what real travel journalists are writing about. it should also be noted that real journalists never publish a piece without 100 percent verification of sources and facts on investigative pieces. clearly, frouchebag is anything but a journalist.

  6. Steven Frischling - Socially Inept Media Consultant.

  7. He backtraced it and consequences will never be the same:

  8. Another great Frischling story that bends the truth and makes him out to be a master of high intensity combat and civil unrest photography. Too bad there are no real photos to back up his claims of extensive knowledge on the subject.

    "Being a photojournalist who in the past calender year has been to two riots over seas this year (both in London, UK), to Iraq, Kuwait, and a bunch of other assignments domestically where things were time constrained, action happened fast, and violence was a possibility (as well as major sporting events, and political situations). I can tell you NO photog should go into these situations if they can't compose, meter, and fire off thier photo with the confidence that they will get their photo.

    Like most photogs working in harsh situations, experience teaches you when to duck, where the action is headed, when to run, and how to get in and out safely (most of the time).

    It is somewhat insulting to think that you think photogs just go in with a wide-angle lens, shoot in program at f8, and deal with the composition later."

    As a real photojournalist, I am insulted that you pretend to be one of us. Maybe you should look at your photos because for the most part they are more often than not shot with the widest lens possible without any consideration of light, composition or actual content.

  9. "He backtraced it and consequences will never be the same"

    We have to find a way to make it big like Jessi Slaughter. It would be awesome to have a video to remix. There must be something out there that can be used.

  10. Please make an xtranormal video from his crazy rantings...

  11. "Please make an xtranormal video from his crazy rantings...

    I see we have some newbies here

  12. LOL thanks for posting! I watched again and laughed my ass off

    what is #swsx? I assume different than music festival #sxsw?

  13. Amazing. Thank you.

  14. Just when I don't think he can get any more delusional, he does...

  15. WTF is he talking about?

    Anonymous said...
    Wow, we must have hit a nerve - (Nobody believes this is blog is run by anyone except Steven Frischling so we will not even pretend this is a possibility.) - says that other blog.

    Just as we had said:
    "Theory? Hunch? No doubt. Depending on what is said, or not said (posted) on this blog and/or their blog, will provide even more support and reassurances to our findings."

    Chris' own people have turned on him and WOW is he pissed now. Read it and weep.

    Oh BTW, we are not SF for the umpteenth time. But Chris, for some reason, sure wants you to believe we are. So his stories can cover his ass? So he can yet again try and discredit?

    So much time spent trying to defend against someone we are not. Why is that Chris? You know we are not SL but yet you try and convince others we are. Wonder why Chris?

    BINGO, looks like we did indeed hit that nerve. Need we say more? Ironic, nowhere in his whole rambling did he deny what we said. Chris, if you are NOT who we claim, who the hell are you? Why not really make us and our findings look bad and tell us who you really are. What are you afraid of Chris? The truth hurts doesn't it Chris. Again, prove us wrong.

    Spinning may work for records, there your spin means nothing.

    Please stay tuned, we are sure Chris will yet dig himself even deeper into his bully-ass behavior.

    And again thank you. Yet again our page hits are skyrockting. But why no links this time, Chris?
    March 13, 2011 5:21 PM

  16. ^Most likely he thinks talking in circles will "confuse" FishFraud.

    Frischling, don't play cat and mouse games if you are the mouse.

  17. "it should also be noted that real journalists never publish a piece without 100 percent verification of sources and facts on investigative pieces. clearly, frouchebag is anything but a journalist."

    Excellent point!

  18. "About a month ago I was sitting in Union Station waiting for my train back to BWI simply looking through my view finder tryingto figure out how to get rid of annoying dust speck and two Amtrak cops got in my face about shooting Union Station. Not even paying attention to what the cops were saying yet (Amtk cops are Federal Officers by the way) they saw my Senate press card and said something along the lines of "sorry" and walked off."

    Steven Frischling, 7/23/05

  19. On the one hand the DC PJ corps have way better things to do...on the other hand can they see if SF ever had had a Senate gallery press card?

    Specifically this part of Section 4, part B: "The applicant must reside in the Washington, D.C. area"

  20. "Oh BTW, we are not SF for the umpteenth time."

    I think that's actually the first time "they" have said they're not Steven Frischling...

    as if anyone believes that

  21. you've gotta wonder if he's rethinking the blog. Not very many posts at all. He announces "Bully exposed!" but there's only this crappy Uncle Chris theory with nothing to back it up

  22. ^what is odd about the Chris theory is his wording:

    "Regarding the other blog in question, basically our findings lead us to believe the bully behind that blog is a male (father, grandfather or uncle) who is responsible for a bride allegedly "burned" by SF on a wedding."

    Why would a bride have a male relative "responsible for" her?

    Is she mentally retarded? An underage Gypsy bride? The daughter of a mafia Don?

    As usual, nothing he says makes any sense but invites more questions.

  23. new comment from his blog. Why would anyone believe it's not Frischling or his "wife"?

    Anonymous said...
    ....Fish said he confirmed Addison was the cyberstalker. Which is it?
    March 13, 2011 5:50 PM

    You are asking the wrong blog. Ask that other blog as they have all the answers or ask SF if need be.

  24. why does he say he has a wife if doesn't have one? Is she imaginary?

  25. ^That's his baby mama/"partner in crime" Susannah Seefeldt.

    No, they're not married but both will say they are if it suits their purpose at the moment.

  26. "what is #swsx? I assume different than music festival #sxsw?"

    Sorry, got it mixed up. Its music, but there is a strong social media component to it:

    A lot of the "who's who" of social media are there.

    Do the hash tag with an article "Top Ten things every blogger should avoid"

    Please its going on now the hash tag will get you a lot of views.

  27. ^thanks, just sent out some Tweets with #SXSW!

  28. "A lot of the "who's who" of social media are there."

    is Steven Frischling attending or did the earthquake in Japan cause him to postpone his trip?

  29. Just incredible that he basically cut and pasted the joke poll from this site. WOW!

  30. its shocking that Steven Frischling actually thought that the poll on FishFraud would provide a clue.

  31. ^This appears to be a joint Steven Frischling/Susannah Seefeldt production. If you put the two of them together, it appears you get twice the stupidity.

  32. what's really funny is that they feel they are OWED an answer because they took a half-assed guess! look at this comment

    "Why? This blog supposedly exposed him, has asked him whether or not the findings here are correct. One would assume he would want to set the record straight, unless of course the findings are right on and he is afraid of the truth."

  33. you need to post again at #SXSW. Its very active and I even saw some similar post. They are looking for things like FishFraud.

  34. ^OK, will send out some more Tweets with #SXSW

  35. 2:22, it is quite shocking they think they are suddenly owed a response from us because they set up their own blog. Why would we confirm or deny anything to those losers? It is entertaining, however, to see them do the exact opposite of what an intelligent person would do.

    However, we suspect they are making a lot of noise about this fictitious "Chris" person to distract from the very real legal problems they may be in because of their libel/defamation/harassment of Addison and the two ladies. It is notable that this blog and its new, very vague suspect appeared suspiciously quickly after Frischling was Tweeting and putting things on Facebook about letters/conversations with lawyers. If Steven is taken to court by any of them he will lose, it doesn't matter if he suddenly decides FishFraud is actually a man named "Chris" who does not match any of the three he accused. Everyone saw his vicious harassment of these people - and they are innocent.

    However, considering their intelligence, it is possible they decided it is "none of the above" based on the results of our very own poll. But a male relative "responsible for" a bride? What does that even mean? How did they come up with something so stupid?

    We are looking forward to their next stupid guess though! Perhaps Colonel Mustard in the billiards room with the candlestick?

  36. good point about the lawyers. I'm sure his defense in court will be, "You can't sue me because now I don't think it's them anymore. I think it's a guy I'm calling Chris, but that's not his real name and also I don't know who he is. You can't sue me because I changed my mind."