Report: Jeromie Williams, Fired By Playboy for “Inappropriate Behavior,” Harassed Playboy Employees, Lies About Experience

We have noted previously that Jeromie Williams has “boasted,” in his own words, that he “once worked on team ‘Heffner’ [sic.] and pulled the strings behind the scenes for Playboy.com and The Smoking Jacket.” On the other hand, Jeromie also has a well-documented history of embellishing on his resume, and you might think someone who worked so closely with Hugh Hefner would know how to spell his name.

So it comes as no surprise that today we received a report that Jeromie worked for Playboy for only three weeks before he was fired for inappropriate behaviour, not even making it past the company’s probation period:

Jeromie worked at the Playboy website office as a junior social media person for The Smoking Jacket and lasted 3 weeks before being fired for inappropriate behavior and harassed several employees after the firing. His claim of pulling strings for Playboy is completely false and beyond laughable, he didn’t even make it past his probation period.

Nor does it surprise us that Jeromie harassed several employees at Playboy after he was fired, given his months-long cyberstalking and harassment campaign against Kim Johnston and her sons, for which he is still under investigation by the SQ/SPVM. Not to mention his embezzlement of several thousand dollars from animal rescue groups, and all of his harassment and threats against those same groups, and anyone else who dares to criticise him, which led Toronto Pet Daily to describe him as the “Scum of the Earth.”

As we have pointed out, Jeromie also harassed and/or slandered his former co-workers at The Gaily and The Examiner. The Gaily fired him after he threatened Kim Johnston and used homophobic slurs to attack her young sons (one only 16). The Examiner fired him after he was caught making up stories, events and people, and interviewing his own fake personas.

Of course, Jeromie continues to spread lies and slander as the Managing Editor of Pet Pardons News. Most recently, as we have noted, he has violated Google News policy by publishing hoax stories and inciting harassment and death threats against innocent people.

Fairfield Hoaxers Debra Dorst, Kim Gaffney Defend the Criminal Jeromie Williams, Spread His Lies

Debra DorstFive days ago, we exposed the hoax Pet Pardons story about the Fairfield County Dog Shelter burning dogs alive. As I noted, their lies led to many death threats against shelter and county officials Mike Miller, Mike Kiger and Judy Shupe. Naturally the hoaxers are not pleased with this turn of events, and have been harassing Kim Johnston for the past several days, demanding our posts be taken down because we have “writ[ten] stuff about others and think it is okay,” and because suddenly Debra has a “very good source” who can verify everything she said.

Yesterday, I politely asked Debra Dorst and Kim Gaffney to present us with evidence of any inaccuracies on our blog, as we would be more than happy to correct them. Instead, like Jeromie Williams himself, they have simply decided to make disgusting, false and slanderous personal attacks against Kim Johnston, including disgusting and obscene sexual comments that I have deleted.

Like Jeromie Williams, Debra Dorst implied Kim Johnston was running a “male body cleaning product scam.” The reality is that Jeromie demanded “Freebiefacewash products from Kim’s company for one of his parties on December 15, 2011, and, after she refused, he disparaged her company on Twitter, falsely and slanderously describing her products as “rancid.”

Kim GaffneyLike Jeromie Williams, Kim Gaffney complained that Kim Johnston has “cyber stocked [sic.] and harassed alot [sic.] of people” because of a “vendetta against Jeromie Williams.” Once again, the truth is quite different. As I described in January, Jeromie engaged in a months-long campaign of cyberstalking and harassment against Kim Johnston last year, including literally thousands of messages and phone calls, begging for money for his website, a rally in Ottawa (so he could get back on TV), for a dog, for artwork, FOR THE CHILDREN, and so on.

Since then, we have posted warnings about Jeromie’s long history of criminal harassment and death threats, for which he is currently under investigation by Canadian and American police. This is “reporting,” not “cyberstalking.” The only people who have complained about our vendetta are Jeromie Williams himself, and his confirmed sock puppet accounts like this and this.

Most disgustingly, in my view, Dorst questions whether Jeromie actually threatened Kim Johnston:

“I listened to the death threats and he stated he was bringing the police. Why would he mention the FBI or police If he was planning on doing you harm.”

Obviously, she has never heard of swatting. In any case, here is a very small sample of Jeromie’s threats. Read and listen for yourself:

Note that the two audio clips are a threatening voicemail and a telephone conversation with an animal rescue group in Canada from whom Jeromie has embezzled $1,800. This is all perfectly acceptable, apparently, according to Dorst.

More disgustingly, and inexplicably, Dorst compares Kim Johnston to a stripper, and calls her a “hate monger” — even whilst defending Jeromie Williams, the man who, just a few short months ago, told her he was “coming for [her]”, her dogs, and her “faggy sons.”

Just three sentences after again questioning whether Jeromie is “such a threat,” Dorst also implies that Kim is not a “GOOD Mom” because she was “putting [her] kids in harms way”:

Now of course, this is patently ridiculous, for many reasons. For one thing, for someone so outraged about “attacking people you know nothing about,” Debra seems to do this quite often. Back in January, Jeromie posted pictures of Kim’s young sons on his site, including their contact information, and began a “campaign” of harassment against them. Silence was not an option at this point. And for the record, Kim did contact authorities in the U.S. and Canada, and they are indeed investigating Jeromie Williams for criminal harassment, uttering threats and related offenses.

And I don’t understand this incredibly offensive notion that a mom cannot stand up for a principled position whenever she (or her children) are threatened by deranged lunatics on the internet. Kim, with our help, has taken on the burden of holding Jeromie Williams and his Pet Pardons associates accountable for their threats, frauds, embezzlement, and lies.

For this she deserves our respect and admiration, not Debra’s crude sexual insults.

Barring significant further developments, this will be our last comment on the Fairfield hoax. We consider this file closed.

Investigation Demanded on Cayr Ariel Wulff’s Book Marketing

Cayr Ariel WulffAn informed source is raising more questions about Pet Pardons Contributing Editor Cayr Ariel Wulff (email). In recent weeks we have noted that Wulff has defended the criminal Jeromie Williams, attempted a Nixonian coverup of his frauds and embezzlement, and violated Google News policy by publishing hoax articles and inciting death threats. She also admitted committing internet fraud, raising money by ChipIn to “save the life of the next animal just moments away from being abused or killed,” and instead using it for her own dog’s bills.

Our source, who does not want to be named given Jeromie Williams’ long history of criminal harassment and death threats, for which he is currently under investigation by Canadian and American police, has revealed yet another potential scandal.

It appears that Wulff has promised since 2007 to donate “1/3 of the proceeds from sales of [her] books” to “local humane group Valley Save-a-Pet for their humane programs.”

However, when our source contacted VSAP to verify that 1/3 of the proceeds had been donated, an official there said that they were not aware of any commitment to donate any portion of the proceeds to VSAP. They promised to investigate, but could not confirm whether any of the proceeds have been donated since 2007.

In any event, we asked Wulff about this in the comments section of one of her Examiner articles. Curiously, she quickly changed the subject to “taking photos soon of [her] handing … money to Pawsibilities,” an entirely different charity. She later accused us of libel for simply raising these questions, and sent us the following warning by e-mail:

If you want to investigate my donations to Valley Save a Pet, be my guest. I will tell you that I won’t stand by and watch that small, honest rescue trashed by you and your friends. The VSAP people are good good people. If you insist on dragging yet another innocent bystander (VSAP)into this ridiculous fray (and I don’t mean by investigating, go right ahead with my blessing)…I mean in any other way…I will be compelled to sever my ties with VSAP to keep them out of it. And ultimately, Kim, that will only hurt them, because I provide an expensive service for them at no cost. Ariel

Let me be very clear: We are not interested in “trashing” anyone, and certainly not Valley Save-a-Pet, which sounds like an excellent group. Actually, it’s rather unbelievable to us that Cayr would threaten to “hurt” them because of anything we are doing. We are only interested in exposing the truth about any scams, frauds or hoaxes that Jeromie Williams and his Pet Pardons associates are involved in, and we will continue to do so, forever.

Jeromie Williams Spreads Fairfield Hoax On Google Plus

For months we have been exposing Pet Pardons Director of Canadian Operations and Managing Editor, Jeromie Williams, and his possible lies, fraud, embezzlement, and threats.

As Kim Johnston just revealed, Jeromie’s Contributing Editor Cayr Ariel Wulff has written four articles about a hoax, falsely alleging that the Fairfield County Dog Shelter near Lancaster, Ohio, was burning dogs alive. (All of the articles were edited by Jeromie Williams.)

As we investigated each article, we could find no evidence to confirm that dogs were being burned alive at the shelter. Local media, including the local paper, the Lancaster Eagle-Gazette, had no evidence it happened either.

Unfortunately, Jeromie has also been using his Google+ account to mislead people about the state of Ohio. In his first post, he disgustingly states This is how they do things in Ohio,right above a picture of a fire in an oven and the words “BURNING DOGS ALIVE“:

Subsequent posts all refer to the shelter as the “Ohio Dog Burning Shelter“:

Of course, this shelter is not “known to burn dogs alive to save time.” This is a lie, spread by Pet Pardons, as Kim Johnston has revealed.

We do not understand (and Pet Pardons has never explained) how “dog composting” could be a “money making scheme.” Perhaps there is some huge demand for composted dog remains that we are unaware of, but we think it’s rather more likely that this is just more sensationalistic nonsense from Jeromie Williams and Pet Pardons.

In his final post, he praises the “grass roots” (i.e., Pet Pardons readers who they incited to threaten shelter workers and County Commissioners). But the change from gassing to euthanasia by injection had been planned for quite some time. As Kim noted, the Ohio SPCA threatened legal action on August 3 if they did not make the switch, but this had nothing to do with the claim dogs were burned alive.

It’s amazing how many Pet Pardons followers believed that the Fairfield County Dog Shelter was burning dogs alive. In the first article they claim two eyewitness accounts were presented to the County Commissioners, but, it seems, no one has any record of this. Who were these “eyewitnesses”? No names were ever released. According to Wulff, they can’t release the names:

As Kim and Topher have explained, this makes no sense. If animal rescuers saw dogs being burned alive, wouldn’t they try to stop it? Why would they be afraid to give their names, so they can be questioned, and the story verified? Why wouldn’t they have told their story to the Ohio SPCA, which has no evidence of any of this? Or local media, like the Eagle-Gazette? None of which, again, have any evidence that any dogs were burned alive.

Wulff was simply lying, which is something that Jeromie Williams has done before.

In another Google+ post, Jeromie asks “who DOES this kind of stuff???” referring to a false story about dogs being tied to train tracks, also in Ohio:

Well as Topher wrote, no one did that. Like many Pet Pardons News articles, that story was simply made up. No dogs were tied to the tracks, and no dogs were killed by the train. This was just another outrageous lie.

So I have a question myself. Jeromie has a long history of criminal harassment and death threats, for which he is currently under investigation by Canadian and American police. He also has a long history of lying in his Examiner articles, on TV, and now in Pet Pardons News. And he has embezzled countless thousands of dollars from legitimate animal rescue groups.

Who DOES this kind of stuff???

EXCLUSIVE: Pet Pardons Source Admits “Ohio Shelter Burning Dogs Alive” Story Was A Hoax

SirenSirenTen days ago, Topher Mackenzie reported that Pet Pardons Contributing Editor Cayr Ariel Wulff and her Managing Editor, Jeromie Williams, had violated Google News policy by posting an obviously false story about an Ohio dog shelter burning dogs alive. Topher and Wray Smith have been all over this story since then.

To recap, Topher has highlighted all of the death threats against shelter and county officials Mike Miller, Mike Kiger and Judy Shupe. Wray has noted that Cayr’s story makes no logical sense, and that no local media (such as the Lancaster Eagle-Gazette) have seen any evidence to support the claim that dogs were burned alive at the Fairfield shelter.

I would add that the Ohio SPCA wrote a letter to the shelter on August 3, 2012 threatening legal action, which actually led to the decision to switch from euthanasia by gassing to a policy of lethal injection. You may note that their lawyer does not mention dogs being burned alive at Fairfield, and indeed, the SPCA subsequently confirmed that they have no evidence this happened either.

As we have said all along, there is evidence some dogs were gassed twice. There is no evidence that they were burned alive.

So where did this story come from?

We asked Pet Pardons why they couldn’t just report on the facts and not make up emotionally devastating stories to get attention for themselves and boost donations. As usual my comments were deleted (screenshot here), but not before Missy Tee (a.k.a. Missy Uod), of Ohio Urgent Dogs, revealed that she, like Wulff, had two affidavits (from former deputy warden Bobbi Glass and a WEP worker). But this is beside the point, since according to the original Pet Pardons story, neither affidavit claims dogs were burned alive. The source of that claim is two unnamed “witnesses.”

Missy also passed along Topher’s post to Cassandre Miller, the creator administrator and co-creator of a bizarre and offensive Facebook group which compares the Fairfield shelter to a Nazi concentration camp (and pit bulls to Jewish Holocaust victims). Cassandre’s group, in turn, begged its 386 fans to “attest to the fact that what we reported in the three articles about Fairfield [i.e., dogs were being burned alive] was true and factual … in their entirety” (in other words, to lie) to Google News, because “we need those articles to stay up and as proof of the autrocities [sic.] that have happened at Fairfield”:

Well, this little effort at deception and manipulation was unsuccessful. I am happy to report that their original article has been de-listed from Google News on the grounds that it was “not news,” and the rest of their articles will surely be de-listed soon.

And I’ll tell you why.

You might remember that both Cayr Ariel Wulff and Cassandre Miller claimed that Channel 10 reported that dogs were burned alive. Well, as you can plainly see here, Channel 10 reported nothing of the sort. On August 14, they interviewed one of the “witnesses,” Deborah Dorst, who complained that the shelter was “throwing [dogs] in the incinerator when they’re not dead… It’s like a third world country.” No doubt she had read this in Cayr’s August 10 article, and is less a “witness” than a victim who has been deceived by Cayr’s outrageous article. The fact that Cayr or Cassandre would point to this interview as evidence dogs were burned alive really tells you all you need to know about them.

But also note that standing right beside Dorst is Kim Gaffney, who quite articulately and reasonably commented that “we need people in here who can cut nails… these dogs are coming in here with nails as long as their fingers.”

So, Kim decided to reach out to Ms. Gaffney, and find out for herself whether there really was evidence of Third World, Nazi-style burning of live dogs in Fairfield, or (more likely) just a need to modernize their euthanasia procedures and add staff to deal with more mundane (but still important) issues like trimming long nails. Here is the relevant part of our conversation:

Kim Johnson: we need confirmation that there were dogs being burnt alive. I have a witness contradicting the story and saying that they would suffer the horrific gas procedure a second time, but not burnt alive. I cannot take the chance of running with it if it is not factual. I will contact the commissioners. Thanks so much

Kim Gaffney: the sad part is they can not prove they did not.. The only things they did was to look to see if the dogs were breathing…no other steps were taken to make sure the dogs were actually dead..this was plainly stated at the commissioners meeting with over a 100 people there. There are several steps that must be taken under the shelter of american veterinarians and Morris vet in Lancaster. ohio stated they take 4 steps to make sure cause they can go into a coma for up to 2 hrs after gassing..with out taking these steps they can not prove that the heart is NOT in cardiac stand still…

Kim Johnson: That makes sense. We were just concerned about the conflicting reports about witnesses viewing dogs being thrown into incinerators alive. I believe there was a picture of a puppy sitting in the oven in the story – very sensationalistic and not pleasant. I like to stick to the facts – as you mentioned above – rather than sensationalize … readers take that on board more seriously and the story lasts for a lot longer in peoples minds.

Kim Gaffney: I don’t know that anyone actually seen dogs being burned alive..i think it was those statements that lead people to believe that it could be a true fact…and they ran with it..because like I said they can not prove they did not….and Kiger(commissioner) said to everyone when asked the question..”how did you know the dogs were dead? when you watched the gassing…He answer “we just looked to see if they were breathing”…then it was asked..did you take any other steps?..he said NO..thats when someone said well according to the shelter laws of America…etc..

In other words, one of the Fairfield “witnesses” admits that no one actually saw dogs being burned alive. But since the shelter did not use stethoscopes to check for cardiac standstill, they reasoned, it was at least conceivable that the dogs were still alive — “it could be a true fact” — even though staff always verified that the dogs had stopped breathing.

You don’t need me to explain that this is, shall we say, significantly at variance with the August 10th Pet Pardons story written by Wulff and “edited” by Jeromie Williams, which included a disgusting picture of a fire in an oven and the words “BURNING DOGS ALIVE.”

As it turns out, not really.

We’re sympathetic to the goal of ending gassing (and, indeed, all euthanasia) in shelters as much as possible, but we cannot see how making up fake witnesses and phony stories can help advance those goals.

In fact, these sensational lies will almost certainly be counterproductive, as they divert much needed attention and resources away from the more mundane but very real animal rights abuses in other shelters, away from the (very real and legitimate) horrors of gassing animals (even if the proper procedures are followed), and even away from their own ostensible mission of ending all euthanasia in shelters by January 1, 2015.

In other words, with its demonstrably false, tabloid-style “reporting” of these ridiculous, sensational stories, Pet Pardons is harming the very animals it claims to be helping.

It’s actually quite easy to guess what happened here. Sometime after the County Commissioners’ meeting on August 7, 2012, between 11:44 am and 3:03 pm, local activists, including Missy Tee/Uod, and perhaps Cassandre Miller, decided that they couldn’t wait two more weeks for the County Commissioners to study the issue. They wanted immediate action, so, as Kim Gaffney said, they “ran with” a false story about dogs being burned alive, because it could not be disproven, and they figured it would force the Commissioners to act immediately to switch to a policy of euthanasia by lethal injection.

They “ran,” it seems, straight to Cayr Ariel Wulff and Jeromie Williams, who were apparently only too happy to print their lies.

What is scariest about this, though, is that they all appear to justify their lies on the basis that the end (of euthanasia by gassing in Fairfield County) justifies the means (of knowingly publishing false stories and inciting harassment and death threats against government officials).

Cayr, for example, is pleased that her article helped get “gassing banned at this shelter within three days”:

She also succeeded in inciting countless death threats against government officials, and shelter employees, very possibly putting their lives in real danger.

Of course, this is nothing new at Pet Pardons. Cayr’s own editor Jeromie Williams, for example, has a long history of criminal harassment and death threats, for which he is currently under investigation by Canadian and American police.

UPDATE: Cassandre Miller and Kim Gaffney have responded to us by demanding we delete this page, and insisting they have now found witnesses who presented evidence to the Commissioners that the shelter was burning dogs alive.

As far as we can tell, they are simply lying. As Jeff Baron of the Lancaster Eagle-Gazette wrote on August 18,

[County Commissioner] Kiger said there is no evidence to prove that [burning dogs alive] ever happened, and dog warden Mike Miller denied the accusations. The Eagle-Gazette found no record of that allegation being made to the commissioners, despite claims to the contrary.

[County Commissioner] Shupe said she is angry people won’t listen to the facts and believe only one mindset. But she said after being in politics for 20 years, some things come with the job.

“You don’t ever know what someone may do,” Shupe said. “You don’t take it personally, but you do wonder what someone may be capable of.”

As we responded to Kim, there were no witnesses there – full stop – who saw dogs being burnt alive. Jeromie Williams and now Ariel Wulff have been fabricating witnesses, events and stories for over a year, with the full knowledge of Pet Pardons. Also stealing thousands of dollars from chip in funds.

Needless to say, this post will stay up. We will continue to expose Pet Pardons and anyone involved with them who is not being 100% honest.

Jeromie Williams Posts Vicious Anti-American Screed

Jeromie WilliamsToday one of our associates, who will remain nameless, pointed out that Jeromie Williams, the Director of Operations for Pet Pardons Canada, and Managing Editor of Pet Pardons News, has posted outrageous anti-American comments.

Back in January, I noted that Jeromie has posted derogatory comments about the Canadian province of Alberta, disparaging nearly four million Albertans as “rednecks.” His apparent misogyny has also been welldocumented here.

And now, on August 15, Jeromie smeared all Americans as racists, homophobes, and anti-Canadian:

Of course, it is not 1960.

Jeromie appears to have forgotten that Americans elected an African American as their president in 2008, and that he appointed an Hispanic Supreme Court justice. A rather odd thing for a nation of anti-black, anti-Hispanic bigots to do, isn’t it? Which is not to suggest that racism no longer exists, just that smearing all Americans in this way is unacceptable.

And with respect to Canadians and gays, or gay Canadians, I have to say I think Jeromie is confused. Americans don’t object to gays or Canadians per se, only the criminal ones, like Montrealers Rocco Luka Magnotta and Jeromie himself. No, they don’t want someone guilty of killing animals and people (Magnotta), or even of threatening to kill animals and people (Jeromie) in their country, let alone their backyard. But for the record I’m fairly certain this has nothing to do with either nationality or sexual orientation.

As we have noted many times, Jeromie has a long history of criminal harassment and death threats, for which he is currently under investigation by Canadian and American police.

UPDATE (August 23, 2012): Well, perhaps Jeromie was right after all. His associate, Pet Pardons Contributing Editor Cayr Ariel Wulff (email), has just written yet another disgusting post, this time utterly Sinophobic and xenophobic. Wulff acknowledges that while dog food imported from China helps to “feed the 78.2 million pet dogs in the U.S.” (nearly 100 million pounds are imported per year), there have been “2,000 reports of illnesses or deaths in U.S. dogs that ate jerky treats made in China.”

Inexplicably, based on this, Wulff claims that:

“To date, they have still not been able to pinpoint a specific toxin to blame, although a link between illness and ingestion of the treats has been proven.”

Either Wulff is simply ignorant of basic laws of statistics and logic, or she is knowingly and dishonestly conflating a correlative/temporal link with a causative link. As Wray Smith has explained, while there may indeed be evidence of the former, there is no evidence of the latter, and to infer otherwise is to commit the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy (“after this, therefore because of this”).

Nevertheless, Wulff quotes fringe Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, saying that he “would pull them all off the market.”

The comments show that if Wulff was trying to stir up public alarm and outrage against the Chinese, well, Mission Accomplished. Many ask why any imports from China are allowed. Tina Robershaw takes it a step further and asks why any imports from China are allowed, since “they have tryed [sic.] to kill us our children and our pets”:

Terie Vass illustrates the post hoc fallacy in her post. I am sorry her dog died, but the fact that it happened four days after eating a single Chinese treat does not prove that the dog died because of the treat, or that it came from an “obviously poisoned bag!”

The other complaints about imports of Chinese clothing give you some indication of what this is really all about: American dog treat manufacturers want to destroy any competition from China, and how better to do that than by spreading false stories about dangerous toxins in Chinese treats?

Pet Pardons, of course, is associated with the American dog treat manufacturer Rosie’s Barkery, which no doubt would benefit if Chinese treats were banned.

I’m sure that’s just a coincidence.