Michael Roberts and Rexxfield accused of illegal hacking in Fox News article

Print Topic | Close Window

By Anthony Roberts - 1/24/2012 1:27:54 AM
Less than a year ago,  Fox News (of LA) ran a segment featuring then-CEO of Progenex Darren Meade and Rexxfield owner Michael Roberts. New information has been uncovered by Fox News that now brings to light the fact that these two were involved in an illegal online hacking scheme.

The original segment in question featured my blog and alleged that information I had published was false (it wasn't). The information I'd published, all of which was 100% true, was about the nutritional company Progenex and their various executives, most of whom are either engaged in criminal activities, or who have already been convicted of various criminal offenses. The reason I wasn't simply sued for libel or defamation is that there would have been no case for them - because the truth is an absolute defense in libel/defamation cases.

During original Fox the story, clips of my blog were shown, with Michael bragging about how he "found me" - which is a total joke, since my website not only has my name in the URL, it has pictures of me, and my entire background on it. He didn't find anything, he simply tried to make it appear as if he'd done something that he really hadn't. He tried to make it appear as if he'd stopped me...and he didn't. He tried to make it appear as if he was the good guy in this story, when really he was engaged in illegal activity.

Meade was soon removed from Progenex (he says he quit, they say he was fired, I say I don't really care), and Adam Zuckerman (who runs Progenex) essentially bought Rexxfield out from under Michael Roberts - the Progenex cabal now allegedly own 60% of the company (under one of their many aliases). And they also own the intellectual property for an illegal hacking program that has been used to clean up the online reputation of Progenex and it's products & employees. After leaving the company, jilted-lover Darren Meade immediately began turning over information about their illegal activities to anyone who would listen. Let me be clear that I don't trust Darren or believe a word that comes out of his mouth - but I believe evidence - and because I've seen much of this evidence, I can say that I find it to be not only highly credible, but incontestable - and I believe 100% of the evidence I've seen, which supports Darren's claims (*which I'd otherwise have not believed). 

What I find most interesting in this story is that Roberts has chosen to respond on Rexxfield's blog, attacking the reporter who penned the story about him. He also claims that the reporter is back peddling and retracting portions of the story, which is also untrue - in fact, what I've seen is that the title of the story now reflects a direct accusation against Roberts and Rexxfield, instead of the original title. None of the damning statements against Roberts have been removed, although some of the multi-media files have been (a PDF of a contract and an audio file, both of which I have in my possession). Predictably, the Rexxfield blog denies all wrong doing and attributes the story to a reporter with a grudge; the words "paranoid" and "delusional" both spring to mind. And of course, Michael Roberts not only tries to place the blame on everyone but himself (his ex-business partners, the reporter who wrote the story, etc...), but he denies all wrong doing.  

However, as far back as September of last year, I accused Michael Roberts of illegally hacking my site, in a message left on his voicemail. He text messaged me to deny the allegation and I told him that I was unconvinced - and as you'll see from the following text messages, it is Roberts himself who does the back peddling, attempting to blame everyone (Adam, his ex partner, the editor who cut the program, etc...):



Lulz at "I didn't cut that tape" - see how he tries to say that it's not his fault?
Notice how he tries to shift the blame onto Darren and Adam?
And that last one is my favorite because he now says he "found Adam" (his own partner) and again, blames the editors for making it appear that he was saying something that he wasn't. This is exactly what you get when you deal with guys like Michael Roberts - they act tough on camera and in their little blog, but when you confront them, they drop their nuts and start crying about how nothing is their fault.
By ITDept - 1/24/2012 4:17:55 AM
It is going to be very interesting to see where this goes.  Especially after your article comes out.  It's pretty explosive!
By Anthony Roberts - 1/24/2012 4:28:30 AM

He's attacking the journo who wrote the piece about him - that's out of bounds as far as I'm concerned.