Rupe's Porn Allegation

July 8-14, 2015   This page started when I received the first e-mail in quite a while from Pete Costello. It contained a resignation from the Port St. John Dependent Special District Advisory Board. That resignation? rupeadupe's. I don't know why I did it, but I wrote to the D1 office and asked for a copy of e-mails from her from April 18 to June 18 2015, just to cover all possibilities. They sent me two e-mails without headers. One had attachments: a search engine result and a page from my website.

The first e-mail:

"Commissioner Fisher,

"With great regret, I must resign from the PSJ Dependent Special District Advisory Board. My decision has nothing to do with the Brevard County Staff that does an excellent job. My problem is fellow Advisory Board Member Mr. Pete Costello. For many years we have been political adversaries, but now Mr. Costello’s actions have taken it to another level that has devastated my family and myself, is not something that any decent person would do.

"I cannot work with Mr. Costello and concentrate on the issues. I feel this explanation is necessary as I have never in 30 years, resigned from an obligation to the county.

"Maureen Rupe
"7185 Bright Ave
"Cocoa, Florida 32927
"[Phone number redacted]"

The second e-mail:

"Hi Marcia,
"I see she has taken down a lot of her ranting's about me, lucky I have them.

"Costello has warned her.

"Read what she said when I asked her to take the exposed off. What she accused me off, bottom of page.


"Also a deputy friend told me to find the host and appeal to them .

"Found they are Globe net who are in PSJ, and in the Business report to support.

"Oh well, I have had enough of her slander.

"Cheerio

"Maureen"

"From: Maureen Rupe
"To: Commissioner, D1; Day, Marcia A
"Date: Monday, May 11, 2015 10:11:51 AM"

So, it goes this way: rupester resigns from the PSJAB May 7, 2015 blaming Pete Costello for rupester's resignation and claiming victimhood (but all of rupester's "proof" is against ME). When asked why by Marcia NEWELL in a phone conversation the next morning, rupester claims that my website, MaureenRupeExposed.com, has (allegedly) caused rupester's name to be associated with pornography. This is a claim rupester has been making since 2013. In an e-mail to the then-owner of PSJHistory.com and forwarded to me:

"-------- Original Message --------
"Subject: Maureen Rupe Exposed
"From: "Maureen Rupe" rupe32927@earthlink.net
"Date: Fri, February 15, 2013 7:19 am
"To: editor@psjhistory.com

"Hello Ms Mckinney,

"I don’t know if you have Costello’s permission to put up his website on PSJ History, or SCC.
"I have found out that in the past 4 years, since you have his site, MRE on your SCC website, multiple times.
"Maureen Rupe Exposed has gone to many sites as a porn site. It also has my name, address, and my house on aerial view.
"You may think this is hilarious, due to your nature. I do not, I feel threatened, harassed, cyber stalked and with my present health can not ignore this final insult.

"Maureen Rupe
"I do not have Costello’s email, please pass on."

"From: Maureen Rupe
"Sent: Monday, July 01, 2013 12:04 PM
"To: Lindy
"Subject: Pitiful

"Your problem is, and it will prove to be a very serious one for you, you embellish and turn everything I say into a What you think and What you want me to mean. For example let’s take the “Maureen Rupe Exposed” site. When I said it had gone to porn sites, which it had in the related sites and I have printed proof, you couldn’t leave it there could you? Your diatribe even stated I have nude photos of myself, which you had better come up with, as you will need them. Does your husband know what you wrote about me? How would he feel if someone wrote that about you? I should ask him. This libelous defamation of my character is coming to an end. Plus an attorney who is the son of a friend, saw the site Maureen Rupe Exposed whilst looking at porn sites for a case. He is willing to be a witness in court. That is how I found out."

I also received from Cristina Berrios of the County Attorney's office, the following e-mail sent from D1 County Commissioner, Robin Fisher, to Marcia NEWELL:

"From: Commissioner, D1
"Sent: Thursday, May 07, 2015 9:16 PM
"To: Newell, Marcia
"Subject: Fwd: Resignation

"Tall to her. When is his term up?"

"From: Newell, Marcia
"To: Commissioner, D1
"Subject: RE: Resignation
"Date: Friday, May 08, 2015 10:05:51 AM
"Attachments: image003.png

"Costello’s term is up in 2017.

"Talked to both Costello and Maureen this morning. Costello called first thing this morning.

"Maureen believes that because of the website www.MaureenRupeexposed.com (started by Costello, however he says Linda McKinney owns it now) that her name showed up on a porn site. She wants them to take down this website and they have refused. Maureen was told by a friend in Tampa that he say her name on a porn site. (he is an attorney and was investigating a case). She also said that family members have seen her name pop up on a porn site. She said she has copies of it.

"I searched Maureen’s names and there are pages and pages referencing her, but I did not find a porn site. Could be county computer would not bring that up.

"Costello was looking for direction from you going forward and Maureen wanted everyone to know that she cannot be in the same room with him. Direction?

"Marcia Newell
"Legislative Aide to Commissioner Robin Fisher
"Marcia.newell@brevardcounty.us"

It's also something that has yet to be PROVEN. I wrote the following e-mail to D1, and several other County employees as well as to rupester asking that she provide PROOF of her allegations:

"To: Marcia Newell, Cathleen Cummings, Cristina Berrios, Maureen Rupe
"Date: Fri, July 10, 12:27 a.m.

"Ms Newell,

"I read with great interest the portion of the FL SS 119 request that was completely satisfied today with the headers and the e-mails requested. Thank you.

"I also was surprised by this bit of information:

"'Maureen believes that because of the website www.MaureenRupeexposed.com (started by Costello, however he says Linda McKinney owns it now) that her name showed up on a porn site. She wants them to take down this website and they have refused. Maureen was told by a friend in Tampa that he say her name on a porn site. (he is an attorney and was investigating a case). She also said that family members have seen her name pop up on a porn site. She said she has copies of it.

"'I searched Maureen’s names and there are pages and pages referencing her, but I did not find a porn site. Could be county computer would not bring that up.'

"I had never hear of her name being on a porn site before. That is a totally new allegation to me. She has said that it's "gone to many sites as a porn site." Which, to me, means a link. I asked my hosting company tech to check my site for porn, for links to or from and they can find nothing because it is not, nor has it ever been, there. Ms Rupe claims she has proof and I would not really like to see it because of the porn on it, but I would have to see it in order to even come close to believing that it was out there. Although we know now that Ms Rupe's family surfs porn sites, that does not mean that I or my family do. I will not look for her "proof" myself.

"Also, it may behoove everyone to remember: Website A posts link to Website B. Owner of Website B has no idea Website A has link to Website B nor has owner of Website B given permission for there to be a link to Website B from Website A. Similarly, because I have a link from my MaureenRupeExposed.com website to her campaign website http://home.earthlink.net/~micrhp/index.html. that [sic] does not mean that SHE authorized the link or had anything to do with it being on my site.

"None of the owners of MaureenRupeExposed.com have put a link from any porn sites TO MaureenRupeExposed.com, that I can guarantee you. Her accusations against Mr. Costello are fallacious and false. She is smearing him using MY website and it is in victimhood she is trying to remove him from the PSJAB. She is committing public slander against BOTH Mr Costello and myself and I demand PROOF of her allegations thus, I include her in the "To" line.

"As I have proven the search result she sent was NOT PROOF of her name being on a porn website nor was it proof that ANY of the owners of MaureenRupeExposed.com had anything to do with her name turning up in that search.

"BTW, Admitting that her family members surf porn sites is an odd thing for her actions to put on the public record. Can anyone say "bus"?

"Linda McKinney"

Note that I included rupester in the "To:" list when I sent this e-mail. I have yet to hear from rupester regarding any proof. rupester's family looks at porn (according to what rupester told Marcia Newell) so why is there a delay? I'm sure they can go in and find their browser history (or maybe it's allegedly on their favorite porn sites, I don't know) and find the site they allegedly found it on. Why the delay? If the attorney has seen MaureenRupeExposed.com on a porn site, I'm sure he made notes during his investigation for his case, why not ask him about where he allegedly saw it?

After all, we all know that the so-called "proof" rupester provided to D1's office after the phone conversation is NOT any sort of proof that would stand up in a court of law. I've sent D1 and other County employees the unproving of her "proof". This is what I sent:

"Fifth: The search results she provided you contained nothing but PAID advertisings. Note that at the top of the page it states “Bright House, Road Runner, Web, Sponsored Links”. That means that the search engine she used contracted with that search engine to put those results on the page of anything remotely associated with the actual search. Thus, the acne treatment, the Spokeo results (which may actually have the aerial view of her house on their site, but it wasn’t something any of the owners of MRE.com had anything to do with), and the pornography links.

"According to the website http://lifehacker.com/5461114/fact-and-fiction-the-truth-about-browser-cookies cookies are used by advertisers to send you information related to websites you have visited:

"'Because cookies are always sent back to the site that originated them, an advertiser's cookie will be sent back to them from every web site you visit that is also using that same advertiser. This allows the advertiser to track the sites you visit, and send targeted advertising based on the types of sites that you visit. [my bolding]'"

"Therefore, none of the owners of MRE.com were responsible for the pornography links in the search results. It was whatever computer was used for the search had previously been to porn sites (more on that later) and it was the visits to porn sites that brought about the results. No owner of MRE.com is responsible for porn popping up on a search for MRE.com.

"The search results that popped up the pornography Ms Rupe alleges linked to MRE.com. Ms Rupe told me the search results with the porn were the result of the following (whole e-mail and my entire response available here):

"'For example let’s take the “Maureen Rupe Exposed” site. When I said it had gone to porn sites, which it had in the related sites and I have printed proof, you couldn’t leave it there could you? Your diatribe even stated I have nude photos of myself, which you had better come up with, as you will need them. Does your husband know what you wrote about me? How would he feel if someone wrote that about you? I should ask him. This libelous defamation of my character is coming to an end. Plus an attorney who is the son of a friend, saw the site Maureen Rupe Exposed whilst looking at porn sites for a case. He is willing to be a witness in court. That is how I found out. [my bolding and underlining]” "So, as you can see, “an attorney” who was “looking at porn sites for a case”. Ms Rupe alleges the owners of MRE.com had something to do with PAID PORN ADVERTISING coming up on a search during a porn case investigation. The statement proves that neither the attorney nor Ms Rupe understand how the internet and cookies work. That’s all it proves."

As was pointed out to rupester after rupester's first allegation in Feb. 2013, anyone looking for porn on MaureenRupeExposed.com will be sadly disappointed. I also think that most webmasters would be a bit more diligent in their links. After all, if you have a political website as are my two, you don't link to something without first understanding what it is. If you find a link on rupester's campaign website I bet rupester's webmaster checked the link and made sure it was working, made sure it went to where it was supposed to go, etc. Same with porn sites, I would assume. If you're going to spend the time linking to something you at least check it out first to make sure it's something you want to link to. After all, you don't want to be a porn site that links to the Human Genome Project, MaureenRupeExposed.com or something that would bore porn seekers. They'd never come back to your porn site if your links take them to places they don't want to go. I'm sure porn seekers would not be interested in MaureenRupeExposed.com because there's no porn there and never has been. Just to be certain of this, I talked to a tech support person at my internet hosting company (which is NOT "Globe Net") and they went all through my website and said there is no porn, no links to porn and no links FROM porn sites.

Note two things here: rupester claims that because of MaureenRupeExposed.com allegedly being linked FROM porn sites TO MaureenRupeExposed.com that it

"has devastated my family and myself".

"She also said that family members have seen her name pop up on a porn site."

Another question: Was the alleged link specifically MY site, or was it just the name "Maureen Rupe" (her quote was "family members have seen her name pop up")? IF just the name, how many people are named "Maureen Rupe" in the whole world? The internet covers the whole world and I'm sure there is more than ONE "Maureen Rupe" in the world. If it's just the name how conceited is it to think that every reference to a "Maureen Rupe" is definitely HER? Did they click on the link to see if it goes to a porn site? If not, why not? If so, did it go to my NON-porn MaureenRupeExposed.com site? A simple screen capture print out with their mouse hovering over the link would be the proof. It would have to show that my website, MaureenRupeExposed.com was on a porn site because the address would be at the bottom of the printed page, and the mouse hovering over the link would tell the address of the linked site. If that linked site was my site then maybe I'd believe it.

Also, remember that "she said she has copies of it" writes Marcia Newell about the phone conversation. I have yet to see the copies of rupester's alleged proof. I wrote to rupester on July 10, 2015 asking for it, but have received nothing in response. IF rupester actually has a printed copy (copies?) of the proof, I request that rupester scan it and send it forthwith, ASAP, immediately, toot-sweet. rupester says she has it. rupester says her family has seen it, too. Let them send me proof. Get them all looking for the proof. They already surf porn sites according to what rupester told Marcia Newell. Let's see how well they work together as a team and provide me some PROOF. IF rupester had PROOF she could send it now. But I have received NOTHING. Are they all still swarming those porn sites and searching, searching, searching for the alleged link to MaureenRupeExposed.com? Or maybe they got sidetracked and they're busy looking at the porn instead of FOR PROOF? I don't know but IF they've seen it, too, as she alleged to Marcia Newell then where is the PROOF?

rupester's allegations are meant to make her as big a victim as possible without actually claiming that I killed her (which would be a difficult claim considering she's still alive and complaining). That's all this is about to rupester but to me it's about much, much more. It's about the TRUTH and it's about rupester's controlling ways. rupester sending the portion of my website page and the PAID SPONSORED LINKS search engine results that used cookies already on the computer (apparently on rupester's family's computers, too) to D1's Commissioner's office as "proof" proves that rupester had intent to smear my name and to try to influence the County AGAINST myself and AGAINST Pete Costello. rupester was trying to get Costello thrown off of the PSJAB via alleging a link between MaureenRupeExposed.com (which Pete Costello started during rupester's campaign to become D1 Commissioner -- running against Robin Fisher, no less) and pornography. rupester was alleging some sort of misconduct on Costello's part and that it was "devastating" to her family and herself. rupester put it on public record that MaureenRupeExposed.com was linked on porn sites and that Costello and I knew about it because rupester had told us and that we refused to take it down, thus upsetting her deeply and devastating her family (that looks at porn). That's slander. It's not just slander, it's slander on official County e-mail, public record.

There are a few more little things to consider. To wit: AFTER rupester resigned the PSJAB May 7, 2015, she suggested one Gary Musselman to replace her and in writing to Gary Musselman about the position, rupester wrote:

"On Jun 19, 2015, at 5:07 PM, Maureen Rupe rupe32927@earthlink.net wrote:

"Gary,
"This is the Planning and zoning Board, I enjoyed being on it.
"Couple of hours a month and that is if there is business.
"Let me know if you are interested.

"Cheerio
"Maureen"

When asking rupester if she could suggest a replacement for her, Marcia Newell wrote the following to rupester:

"From: Newell, Marcia
"Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2015 5:18 PM
"To: mailto: rupe32927@earthlink.net
"Subject: Port St. John Dependent Special District Adv. Board

"Good afternoon, Maureen.

"Do you have a suggestion of someone to replace you on this board. Well, we know that no one will be able to replace you but we need another appointment. (smiley face)

"Thanks,

"Marcia Newell"

Now what's going to upset rupester even more is that the ruse did her no good. The County did not step in and release Mr. Costello from the PSJAB, as rupester wished. The County did not step in and reprimand me and encourage me to take MaureenRupeExposed.com down, as rupester wished. The County did -- although it took a while to get them the way I wished -- deliver the e-mails I requested and they did give me the TRUTH and rupester's own words and I use the TRUTH and rupester's own words on my website all the time. The fact that rupester won't be happy about the TRUTH being written here and that her words told the world that her family looks at porn is not going to make rupester happy, either. That's her problem and her doing. rupester's the one who told Marcia Newell that tiny tidbit of useful information. rupester's the one who revealed it. IF it's not the truth, then either rupester LIED AGAINST HER FAMILY, or rupester's GOING TO BE accusing Marcia Newell of lying about it. Which is it? Personally, I believe Marcia Newell.

So, next time rupester makes an accusation that is so disgusting I hope rupester has more than a single search engine result to "prove" anything she chooses to next allege. If rupester wants me to ask questions about something she sent me, then she may wish to be more careful about what she sends. I asked questions after rupester's first allegation and then I asked questions when I heard about her resignation because I had no idea of what Pete Costello had been accused of. In requesting the e-mails, I opened a whole lot of new information up and I was forced to ask even more questions. Now I have another, perhaps final, question in this alleged porn connection. That question is: Maureen Rupe, WHERE IS THE PROOF?

Remember the older stuff is on Page Deux or on the Storage pages. There's more info on rupe-a-dupe here.