gen_283.1.gif
gen_487.1.gif
gen_599.1.gif
gen_596.1.gif
gen_601.1.gif
gen_602.1.gif
gen_611.1.gif
gen_514.1.gif
gen_615.1.gif
gen_634.1.gif
gen_620.1.gif
e-mail me

Badmouthing


Logo - CABLEINCH -  FINAL.jpg

Badmouthing


Executed Via
Published 
Smear Campaign






"  A Lie Gets Halfway Around The World . . . 
Before The Truth Can Get Its Pants On."
-- Winston Churchill

The "Badmouthing" element of CABLEINCH pertains to a vicious smear campaign through false and disparaging articles appearing in principally four local newspapers whose readership is concentrated in the Triangle region of North Carolina.  It was clandestinely sponsored and instigated by the notorious tandem of Morgan Stanley and Kirkland & Ellis, pursuant to a talking points strategy ("Talking Points") developed by the New York office of Burson-Marsteller, a global public relations firm that has done a great deal of work for Morgan Stanley.  

Importantly, those who wrote the articles would have had no idea who the underlying sponsors were, but were specifically directed to write the repetitive articles, which were edited to emphasize the Talking Points.  The journalism thus practiced abdicated the generally accepted canons of truthfulness, accuracy, objectivity, impartiality, fairness and public accountability. 


Newspaper Logos - 804 x 94.jpg

Cable Guy 1 - 370 x 324_0.jpg

One of Many Smear Campaigns
With a Common Objective

Yet another element of the MorganStanleyGate scandal, are the multiple smear campaigns.  Three separate smear campaigns were launched against Spencer C. Young: (1) in New York (by CMBS industry word of mouth); and (2) North Carolina; (in the form of published newspaper articles) and a (3) national campaign executed by a former Kirkland & Ellis employee turned blogger.   Moreover, they also had a hand in targeted smears to cause divisiveness among Mr. Young's loved ones that emanated in a series of bizarre anonymous emails that originated out of a farmhouse in Potwin, Kansas during the 2009 Thanksgiving holiday.

While different in their form, the objective of each campaign was the same – to marginalize Mr. Young with unrelenting malicious lies, so he not only is perceived as a social outcast, but that he actually becomes as lonely and disturbed as Jim Carrey's character in The Cable Guy.  This way, his claims will never be taken seriously.


Repitition of a Lie to Create Truth - 335 x363.jpg

North Carolina Campaign Format

The smear campaign carried out against Spencer C. Young in North Carolina (The “NC Campaign”) was principally comprised of personal attacks delivered in published form in over sixty false and disparaging articles appearing in four local newspapers serving the Triangle Region of North Carolina:

                                                                         # of Articles
 ⇨      The Chapel Hill News                             15
 ⇨      The Daily Tar Heel                                  14
 ⇨      The Herald Sun                                       17
 ⇨      The News & Observer                            19

       Total                  65


This campaign was concentrated within a 15 month period extending from the end of July 2007 (when the parking lot blockade was erected) through October 2008 (when Wachovia’s foreclosure on The Courtyard of Chapel Hill (“TCoCH”) was proceeding through the courts).


Smear Campaign "Talking Points"

The "Talking Points" are reflected below, and entail FOUR primary themes, with supporting sub-points.  It is important to keep in mind that each and every point is either blatantly FALSE, entirely CONCOCTED, or an EQUIVOCATION of facts, leading to an incomplete conclusion.

 (1) Spencer Young is a Lousy Landlord (in that he)
  a)  Failed to provide adequate parking (and as a result)
b)  The Property was out of compliance (and he should have recognized that)
c)  Valet parking was not a viable option (and therefore)
d)  Commerce at TCoCH has been negatively impacted (which was exacerbated when)
e)  Tenants were locked out of their rental spaces (In addition,)
f)   Redevelopment construction was poorly managed (and he was)
g)  Non-communicative and impossible to deal with (and accordingly)
h)  The Property had a high vacancy rate (which meant that)
i)  The situation was harmful and embarrassing to many

(2) Spencer Young Feuds With Everyone (evidenced by the)
a)  Parking dispute that led to problems with tenants (which was)
b)  A dispute between private parties (and represented a)
c)  Breach of lease causing tenants to withhold rent (It is well known that)
d)  Young owns TCoCH and Craig owns most of its parking (however)
e)  Young won’t lease and Craig won’t sell (at with what's at stake)
 f)  No one can understand Young’s behavior (which included an instance where he)
g) Threatened physical harm (so it should come as no surprise that)
h)  Lawsuits are mounting (against Mr. Young, who keeps)
 i)  Blaming others for his problems (even though)
 j)  Courts consistently ruled against Young 

(3) Spencer Young is Fiscally Irresponsible (which is evidenced by the fact that he)
a)  Failed to pay for parking (for the Courtyard of Chapel Hill, and he eventually)
b)  Defaulted on bank loan (and he has been)
c)  Delinquent on other debt

(4) The Town Tried to Help, (but their efforts proved futile despite)
a)  Involvement of the Mayor, Town Council and Staff (as well as)
b)  Assistance from the Orange County Board of Commissioners (and)
c)  Support of the Chapel Hill Downtown Partnership (who undertook)
d)  Sponsorship of a Mediation (and had sponsored a)
e)  Comprehensive Downtown Parking Study (while)             
 f)  The Town provided parking for employees (and to resolve the impasse, they even)
g)  Considered rescinding the operative Special Use (Parking) Permit


Lack of Journalistic Integrity & Reckless Disregard for the Truth

Those who authored the articles would have no clue who the true sponsors were, or that they even existed -- some were mere pawns who failed to practice fundamenal precepts of journalistic integrity (for there was obvious little effort to check their facts), while others appeared to embrace an evil agenda, and knowingly published false statements in a malicious manner.  Some of the more noteworthy examples are shown below.

 The Published Lie The Truth          
This was a dispute between private parties, and nobody's business but theirs.  False.  This was a violation of a local ordinance [i.e. special use permit ("SUP")], which the Town of Chapel Hill failed to enforce
P.H. Craig owns most of the parking spaces to The Courtyard of Chapel Hill ("TCoCH") False.  The land was fully-encumbered by the SUP, which stated it to be solely for use by patrons of The Courtyard of Chapel Hill.    
Spencer Young and PH Craig have been locked in a contract dispute over parking for 18 months (as of Aug. 2007) False.  Mr. Craig refused to enter into ANY agreement at ANY terms, as documented by Womble Carlyle to Mr. Craig's attorney
The Orange County Commissioners tried to help by leasing their parking lot to Mr. Young. False.  This was a canard to make it APPEAR local government was trying to help, but six months of weekend night parking was useless
The Town of Chapel Hill helped out by bagging 35 metered spaces for the exclusive use of TCoCH employees False.  Also a canard -- offering TEMPORARY spaces was NOT a solution. The Town was obligated to enforce the SUP, but didn't
Leases at TCoCH expressly promised parking, and Mr. Young failed to live up to that promise  False.  Not ONE lease at TCoCH promised ANY parking due to the long cantankerous history with P.H. Craig
Mr. Young won't pay rent for the parking spaces and Mr. Craig won't sell the spaces  False.  Mr. Young made MANY leasing proposals that Mr Craig agreed to, but later reneged on, as documented by Womble Carlyle
TCoCH was out of compliance with the Town's minimum parking requirements  False.  The Town of Chapel Hill rescinded minimum parking standards long before Mr. Craig set up the illegal parking lot blockade
The Downtown Partnership tried to help by footing the bill for mediation False.  A canard: $250 for mediator paled to the $thousands paid to Mr. Young's attorneys, while Mr. Craig would agree to NOTHING 
 Lex Alexander closed his 3 Cups Coffee Shop False.  Lex Alexander and his 3 Cups business were evicted for non-payment of rent -- all claims against Mr. Young were dismissed
 Spencer Young drove Lex Alexander/3 Cups out of its downtown location False.  Lex Alexander/3 Cups drove themselves out by wrongfully withholding rent, and were evicted for non-payment of rent
 Lawsuits in excess of $3 million are mounting against Spencer Young and his Chapel Hill property. False.  Lawsuits predicated on an orchestrated fraud, are exactly that . . . frauds -- had the Town enforced SUP, all would be fine 
 Spencer Young appeared late for a foreclosure hearing. False.  Mr. Young arrived early . . . it was his attorney, Michael Denning of Shanahan Law Group who was late.
 (As of Sept 2007) Wachovia has not received a payment since February False. Mr. Young tendered in May to bring loan current, but Wachovia rejected, he also paid Aug.for forbearance, but Wachovia reneged
 Former owner of TCoCH, Spencer Young went bankrupt False. Spencer Young has NEVER filed for bankruptcy, but he was UNLAWFULLY denied corporate bankruptcy protection for TCoCH  
 A consignment shop tenant , "The Stock Exchange" moved out due to a sewer leak False. Sewer lines were sabotaged with obstructive materials to cause backups, but this tenant remains liable for rent as per the lease 
 Spencer Young often feuded with his tenants False. ALL adverse events were linked with the illegal blockade & Lex Alexander/3 Cups was the ONLY tenant who made an issue of it
 TCoCH was a great spot in Chapel Hill, but Mr. Young's ownership & temperment made it an eyesore False. TCoCH was a tired property, and vast improvements were made & top tenants (e.g., Bonne Soiree) came -- but sabotage started 7/07 
 Paragon Bank foreclosed on Spencer Young's home in Chapel Hill False.  A bank can NOT foreclose on a mortgage that was NEVER late, NOT delinquent and PAID-IN-FULL . . . this was foreclosure FRAUD
 Spencer Young was arrested for resisting arrest and obstructing law enforcement officers False.  Mr. Young was denied inalienable rights to life, liberty & happiness; showing no resistance, he was tasered; bogus charges were dropped 
 The Orange County Sheriff was told Spencer Young had a gun False.  Spencer Young has NEVER owned a gun, and this statement was concocted so they could carry out a planned assassination
 Spencer Young refused to follow Deputies' instructions so he had to be tasered. False.  Mr. Young showed no resistance & they couldn't shoot him (he had CNN & ABC on the line), so they tasered trying to cause asystole
 Magistrate was concerned about Mr. Young's mental stability so he sent to UNC Psychiatric ward  False.  This was concocted in the EXACT manner depicted in the movie, Changling, starring Angelina Jolie
 Spencer Young sent threatening emails to Mayor Kevin Foy. False.  This is a bombastic lie, and The Daily Tar Heel will be called to task on this (you can't fabricate an email) and faces libel claims





Manure Meter - 804 x 390.jpg


Analysis of the Articles

The lies and equivocations contained in these articles were so bombastic and malicious, they have been evaluated pursuant to a “Manure Meter” which measures the degree of falsity of the statements in these libelous articles, whose scale ranges from 1 (“white lie”) to 10 (an outright “apostasy”).  Now keep in mind EVERY article was predicated on the Cornerstone to the entirely orchestrated smear campaign in North Carolina, described below.  And there would have been no parking lot imbroglio, and not one of the 60+ articles would have been written if the Town of Chapel Hill had merely enforced the operative parking permit, which it had dutifully done for 28 years since its inception in 1979, and for the prior two years Mr. Young had owned The Courtyard of Chapel Hill.  This ruse was orchestrated by Chapel Hill Town Attorney, Ralph Karpinos, who was corruptively influenced from an operative working for Kirkland & Ellis to fraudulently and maliciously classify the parking lot impasse he orchestrated and timed as a "civil dispute between two private parties", which "as a matter of policy, the Town did not get involved in, nor take sides on".  This is utter BULL $#!+ . . . for The Town of Chapel Hill was mandated and bound to enforce the Special Use Permits it issued and required to take prompt action to correct any violations . . .  They failed to do so . . . it's that simple.

The analysis is thorough, in that it links the more audaciously false statements appearing in the articles with each of the four themes in the North Carolina smear campaign.  Each analysis can be accessed by clicking on one of the themes listed below:


The Cornerstone to the North Carolina Smear Campaign

The cornerstone of the North Carolina smear campaign stemmed from a bizarre parking lot blockade erected over the last weekend of July 2007, which was deliberately structured to be unresolvable and intended to economically destabilize one of Mr. Young's investment properties, The Courtyard of Chapel Hill.  The establishment of this impediment to commerce was timed to coincide with a secretly rendered divorce judgment in New York in order to create the most overwhelming set of circumstances for their target (Mr. Young) -- for as was the case in ALL legal proceedings since MorganStanleyGate began, the associated papers were NEVER served.  This deceitful tactic is standard operating procedure of Morgan Stanley's profoundly deceitful law firm, Kirkland & Ellis, who had overseen and administered much of the corruption-laden legal matters Mr. Young was confronted with.

And what made this cornerstone possible?  It was an "adjacent and fully-encumbered landholder" who locals referred to as a "cantakerous old coot", who called himself "PH  (for Pleezy Harbor) Craig" whose bad faith was profound and astonishing to behold.  This being the case because, during his Investment Banking career, Mr. Young had successfully negotiated hundreds of complex business contract agreements, and never encountered a counter-party who would agree to terms one day and renege the next . . . and replicate this behavior to the point it became clear he would not agree to ANY contract at ANY terms. Importantly, Mr. Craig had no right to charge rent for use of the parcel which the Town of Chapel Hill encumbered for the sole and exclusive use of The Courtyard of Chapel Hill.  

Evidence of PH Craig's unprecedented bad faith negotiations was documented in a Sep. 22, 2005 letter issued by Womble Carlyle senior partner Bill Matthews, and evidence that Mr. Craig had no legal basis to charge rent was articulated in an April 7, 2006 letter issued by Womble Carlyle senior partner John Cooke.  And for roughly two years after the first notice of bad faith was served on PH Craig, the Town of Chapel Hill thwarted ALL attempts by PH Craig to blockade the parking lot, and Mr. Craig never filed a civil claim for rent he erroneously felt he was due . . .  because he had no legal basis.  So what changed this?  In a word . . . stifling corruption instigated by MorganStanleyGate.  And when Mr. Young engaged a variety of top law firms to: (1) compel the Town of Chapel Hill to enforce its parking permit (and compel the removal of the blockade); (2) file for an injunction against Mr. Craig (to also compel removal of the blockade); and (3) file civil claim against PH Craig for tortious interference, they each dragged their feet and DID NOTHING.   And these were respected firms in North Carolina and included: (i) Womble Carlyle; (ii) K&L Gates (Kennedy Covington); and (iii) Shanahan Law Group.  This is further covered in a MorganStanleyGate blog posting.




Logo - Chapel Hill News.jpg

Articles Published In The Chapel Hill News

CHN-00 - Changes Are In Store For The Courtyard - Dec 20, 2005
CHN-01 - Parking Lot Stalemate Needs Resolution - Aug 5, 2007
CHN-02 - County Weighs In On Dispute -  Dec 16, 2007
CHN-03 - In Review -  Jan 12, 2008
CHN-04 - Courtyard Dispute a Battle of Wills - Jan. 30, 2008
CHN-05 - In Review -  Apr 29, 2008
CHN-06 - Roses & Raspberries -  Apr 30, 2008
CHN-07 - In Review -  May 31, 2008
CHN-08 - Chapel Hill Coffee Shop Owner Closes Store, Plans Move -  Jun. 7, 2008
CHN-09 - In Review -  Jul 8, 2008
CHN-10 - In Review -  Sep 21, 2008
CHN-11 - Courtyard Parking Deck Proposed - Jun. 2, 2010
CHN-12 - Signs of Life at the Courtyard - Jun. 6, 2010
CHN-13 - Council Likes Courtyard Plan - Jun. 20, 2010
CHN-14 - The Buzz - Sep. 19, 2010


Logo - Daily Tar Heel - 150 x 150.jpg

Articles Published In The Daily Tar Heel

DTH-01 - The  Stock  Exchange  Holds  Sale Before Move - Feb 16, 2007 and Jul 2, 2008
DTH-02 - West End  Maintains  Local  Flair - Mar 30, 2007 and Jul 2, 2008
DTH-03 - Town May Settle Lot Dispute - Sep 27, 2007 and Jul 2, 2008
DTH-04 - Rift About Courtyard Parking - Oct 10, 2007 and Jul 2, 2008
DTH-05 - Parking Dispute May  Resolve - Feb 19, 2008 and Jul. 2, 2008
DTH-06 - Parking Disputes Cause Shop's Move - Jun 4, 2008 and Jul 2, 2008
DTH-07 - Two Way Street - Sep 10, 2008
DTH-08 - Bank May Take  Over - Oct. 28, 2008
DTH-09 - The Courtyard Complex's Future Is Uncertain - Oct. 30, 2008
DTH-10 - Bliss-ful Bakery Takes 3 Cups Location - Feb. 2, 2009
DTH-11 - Locopops Open Next To Cosmic Cantina - Mar 19, 2009
DTH-12 - Spencer Young in Court Today - Feb. 24, 2010
DTH-13 - New Vision for The Courtyard - Jun. 10, 2010
DTH-14 - The Courtyard Revival, A New Concept Plan Could Revamp Franklin Street - Jun. 17, 2010


Logo - Herald Sun.jpg

Articles Published In The Herald Sun

HS-01 - Parking Dispute Heats Up; Owner Cuts Off 54 Spaces -  Jul. 31, 2007
HS-02 - Non-Profit Enters Parking Fracas - Aug. 16, 2007
HS-03 - Shopping Center Parking In Limbo - Sep. 24, 2007
HS-04 - Town Could Step In To Settle Property Feud - Sep. 25, 2007
HS-05 - Owners Try To Resolve Parking Conflict - Oct. 10, 2007
HS-06 - Courtyard Valet Parking Allowed - Dec. 16, 2007
HS-07 - Chapel Hill Parking May Improve - Jan. 21, 2008
HS-08 - Council to Speed Parking Solution - Feb. 20, 2008
HS-09 - Courtyard Businesses Reopening - Apr. 30, 2008
HS-10 - Parking Dispute Continues to Embarrass - May 2, 2008
HS-11 - 3 Cups Dispute May End in Moving - May. 29, 2008
HS-12 - Quotes From The Past Week -  May 31, 2008
HS-13 - Property Owner Facing Lawsuits -  Jul. 10, 2008
HS-14 - The Rise and Fall of The Courtyard -  Jul. 11, 2008
HS-15 - Coffee Shop Drops Suit Against Landlord - Sep. 24, 2008
HS-16 - Ex-Owner of The Courtyard Charged - Feb. 5, 2010
HS-17 - Big Plans For The Courtyard - Jun. 16, 2010


Logo - News & Observer.jpg

Articles Published In The News & Observer

N&O-01 - Retail Plans Please Tenants- Dec 5, 2005
N&O-02 - Franklin St. Parking Tightens- Jan 12, 2006
N&O-03 - Coffee Shop Owner Threatened by Email- Mar 2, 2007
N&O-04 - Landowner Barricades Parking Spaces- Jul 31, 2007
N&O-05 - Parking Lot Feud Turns Mysterious- Aug 3, 2007
N&O-06 - The Courtyard Gets County Parking Help- Dec 14, 2007
N&O-07 - Nearby Land May Ease Parking Woes- Jan 11, 2008
N&O-08 - Chapel Hill Parking Lot Now No Man's Land- Jan 28, 2008
N&O-09 - Coffee Shop's Customers Locked Out- Apr 29, 2008
N&O-10 - Businesses Reopen After Lockouts- Apr 30, 2008
N&O-11 - Coffee Shop Moving Over Parking Dispute- May 28, 2008
N&O-12 - 3 Cups Coffee Shop Faces Eviction- May 29, 2008
N&O-13 - Parking Feud Closes Coffee Shop in Chapel Hill- Jun 2, 2008
N&O-14 - 3 Cups Coffee Shop Leaves Downtown- Jun 3, 2008
N&O-15 - Lawsuits Pile Up Against Landlord- Jul 4, 2008
N&O-16 - Courtyard May Face Foreclosure- Sep 7, 2008
N&O-17 - Chapel Hill Owner Late For Foreclosure Hearing- Sep 9, 2008 
N&O-18
 - Project Squeezes Downtown Parking Nov. 30, 2009

N&O-19 - The Courtyard May Get New Apartments, Parking DeckMay 28, 2010


Other Forms of Media

WCHL-01 - PH Craig Interview - Circa Aug 2007