Friday, August 26, 2011

John Knapp Blames the Victim (Part 2)

Update (01/26/2012). Currently, Knapp's website does not work. So, all the links to his website are not working.

Update. Knapp made some changes on his website. So, it is currently not accessible at its usual URL However, it is accessible at So, I added the working links to his website in parentheses in bold. In addition, he removed his posts from Facebook. However, they are still available at his website.

Knapp posted the same article about Carol Welch on Facebook: Carol Welch—Cyberstalker. One of his favorite manipulative technique is to play victim games and now he is doing this, trying to gain people's support. Here is a quote from one of his comments:

As you know, along with many, many others, including Carol Welch, I was permanently changed by my 23 years in the Transcendental Meditation organization.

I'll never be the man I was born to be.

I suffer from intermittent depression, moderate-to-severe dissociation, and although only hospitalized once for suicidality 10 years ago, the Abyss is no stranger even today.

First of all, who is the therapist and who is the client? A client hires a therapist in order to get help for his or her (client's) problems, not in order to cure the therapist from his/her problems. From NASW Code of Ethics (which Knapp is supposed to abide by):

4.05 Impairment

(a) Social workers should not allow their own personal problems, psychosocial distress, legal problems, substance abuse, or mental health difficulties to interfere with their professional judgment and performance or to jeopardize the best interests of people for whom they have a professional responsibility.

(b) Social workers whose personal problems, psychosocial distress, legal problems, substance abuse, or mental health difficulties interfere with their professional judgment and performance should immediately seek consultation and take appropriate remedial action by seeking professional help, making adjustments in workload, terminating practice, or taking any other steps necessary to protect clients and others.

So, if Knapp has mental health problems, he has to seek professional help and take the necessary steps to protect his clients instead of trying to use his clients to help him to heal or trying to make them responsible for his mental health condition. This is an ethical violation on his side.

By the way, attacking Carol Welch who is his former client, he made, at least, two more ethical violation. From NASW Code of Ethics:

1.12 Derogatory Language

Social workers should not use derogatory language in their written or verbal communications to or about clients. Social workers should use accurate and respectful language in all communications to and about clients.

4.04 Dishonesty, Fraud, and Deception

Social workers should not participate in, condone, or be associated with dishonesty, fraud, or deception.

He did write many lies about Carol in his article and comments.

As for his legal threatenings, they are completely empty and I do not think they deserve any attention.

After his attacks on Carol Welch, he went on attacking Monica Pignotti, MSW, PhD (for her supporting Carol) and me: ( ( ( ( ( (

He actually posted the private correspondence between Monica and him and added his comments. Well, I think that anyone who reads what he wrote about Monica, will come to conclusion that he does have serious mental problems.

I noticed that, although he got a number of supporting comments under his Facebook post on Carol Welch, there are no comments from his supporters under his Facebook post on Monica. This probably means that he is losing supporters because they see that he has serious mental problems.

Also, his attacks on Monica who is a social worker are another ethical violation. From NASW Code of Ethics:

2.01 Respect

(a) Social workers should treat colleagues with respect and should represent accurately and fairly the qualifications, views, and obligations of colleagues.
(b) Social workers should avoid unwarranted negative criticism of colleagues in communications with clients or with other professionals. Unwarranted negative criticism may include demeaning comments that refer to colleagues’ level of competence or to individuals’ attributes such as race, ethnicity, national origin, color, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, age, marital status, political belief, religion, immigration status, and mental or physical disability.
(c) Social workers should cooperate with social work colleagues and with colleagues of other professions when such cooperation serves the well­being of clients.

Although Knapp publicly announced that he is going to leave his profession, he is still listed in NYS board database as a registered LMSW:

License Information


Address : BURKE NY
License No: 071643
Date of Licensure : 12/01/05
Additional Qualification : Not applicable in this profession
Registered through last day of : 05/14

I do not know when he is going to leave his profession and whether he is going to do that at all. Until now, he is under the obligation to keep NASW Code of Ethics. However, he violated it many times.

Regarding his post about me (, I really do not have much to say. Many people use various pseudonyms and nicknames in Internet, including many people in the anti-cult community. I have never stated that I live in Chechnya, but if he thinks this way, I do not care. Only blog owners, website owners, and webmasters know how many people visit their blogs or websites, unless they make this statistics public which I did not. I already replied him that his accusation of Carol in "sexual harassment" is a defamation and I have nothing to add to this. When we talked on Skype, he said that he had studied NLP because cults use it, but did not use it himself. Now he denies his own words and changes them. Well, it is a very usual behavior for him, by the way.

Update. Carol posted an excellent response on Knapp's accusations: My statements addressing John M. Knapp's allegations & accusations.


oneperson said...

I've had almost a month now to think this stuff over, examine, analyze, etc. Not a day passes that I don't think about it. That day will come, but it may be awhile.

I've been able to finally read through the statements on Knapp's FB thread (some of which have apparently been deleted by the authors since the initial posting...or at least some of which have disappeared).

It appears that people who responded there make assessments of me based on Knapp's description of me. Yet, they don't know me at all. [One guy who comments on that FB thread, in the past falsely accused (1) me of inviting him to an " 'Adult' style internet experience" and falsely accused (2) a discussion board of having TWI loyalists and "get[ting] dirt on Greasespotters and then publically shame[ing] them with the information they got there"...neither of which are true. The person twisted my words and apparently assessed the other board based on someone else's opinion.]

Anyway, point appears that folks who have posted on that FB thread haven't bothered to really read my side of the story and probably not even the complaint. I get that; there is only so much energy and time in a day. Plus they trust Knapp. And Knapp links to no posts on my least that I'm aware of. None, zip, zero, nada. In my opinion, he should have at least posted a link to the complaint and the retraction. I imagine if he decides to add links on his posts directing people to my blog, he'd cherry pick those links.

This morning I spent time perusing the posts I have on my blog that are labeled with Knapp as part of the subject of those posts. Most of the posts are memoir pieces and personal journal entries I wrote over the past year, pennings that had been in hiding before I brought them public beginning around June, 2011. From my perspective, those are more an exposure of my soul than of Knapp's behavior or an assessment of Knapp's character...which I'm not even sure if I engaged in. I'd have to read a bit more of my blog post ramblings to discover if that (assessing Knapp's character) is the case. It's not something I typically engage in.

Someone sent me an email in August, 2011. They had been a former client of Knapp. They stated to me that they had read all my blog posts, but couldn't find what it was that Knapp had specifically done that I considered abusive. Thinking of that now, it impresses upon me that, in my writings previous to mid-August, I shared more about me than about Knapp's actions toward me.

It was due to that email that I decided on August 16, 2011, (or thereabouts) to bring the complaint public and post it on my blog.

oneperson said...

Just for the record and since the FB threads are no longer viewable to the public, following are some of the labels/descriptions of me written by Knapp and others that commented:
sadistic, terroristic, cyber-stalker, cyber-harraser, sociopath, manipulator, sadistic, cruel, needy, cruel, crazier than a shithouse rat, defamatory, manipulator, professional victim, sex propositoiner, destroyer, mud dragger, liar, singer of the same song as the crazies who run The Way International.

There's probably more.

And that doesn't include the labels and or descriptions given to Monica or you.

oneperson said...

Oops. I listed cruel and sadistic twice. Sorry about the typo.

I feel I should also note that the descriptions/labels that others stated were stated with various parts of speech. Such as that I was lying and what I was doing (based on Knapp's statements about me) was what a sociopath does. So technically, I don't recall if anyone used the term "liar"...but rather that I had lied. To me there is a difference between labeling an action and labeling a person.

That said, I wouldn't be surprised if within the diatribe(s) Knapp (or someone else) called me a liar.