So often we hear of authors behaving badly. They’ll get a critical review and rampage throughout the comments section of the Amazon product page. (I’m looking at you Candace Sams.) But rarely do we hear of the reviewers behaving badly.
Recently, on the Amazon forums, I saw a thread titled “Plagiarism in a review?†This caught my attention because I, too, had been plagiarised by an Amazon reviewer. But before I could chip my two cents in, I was swept up on the roller coaster ride of reviewer infamy.
Back in November, reviewers discussed having been plagiarised by a certain individual, and two and two eventually added up to Amos Lassen, a well-known (former) Top 50 Amazon reviewer.
When the discussion started, it was merely a glowing ember, but now it’s a raging inferno. What was the fuel? A threatening email from Lassen in response to a request that he remove the infringing work from his review; shortly after, a Facebook fan page supporting Lassen went up with negative comments directed at those writing on the Amazon forum thread.
If you’re not inclined to read through all thirty-something pages of the thread, then I’d direct you to pages 22, 24, 26, 29, 30, and 32 where posters published side-by-side comparisons of Lassen’s reviews with their original sources. If even reading those pages seems like too much work, allow me to highlight a few transgressions.
Sources from which Lassen plagiarised includes other Amazon reviews, the product descriptions, personal websites and blogs, and even more well-known sources such as IMDb and the New York Times.
And although Amazon deleted Lassen’s reviews, which may lead some to erroneously believe the evidence has been completely purged (so no harm, to foul), some of the damning reviews are still available* since they had at least one comment.
* Edited 12/16/10: Amazon fixed that little loophole (it seems for Lassen specifically as it still works for other reviewers’ deleted reviews with one or more comments).
There is still one loophole if you wish to see the Amazon reviews yourself: In a Google search, use [site:amazon.com "amos lassen"]–remove the brackets–and click on the “Cached” link that appears. As of now there are 30,000+ pages stored.
Unfortunately, over time they will drop from Google’s cache since Amazon removed the actual links, but one can hope it doesn’t happen for a good long while. Still, I urge you to search quickly if you wish to see for yourself.
(Click images for full views.)
I’ve highlighted the original, by R. Gawlitta, in pink and the copy+pasted version, by Lassen, in yellow. You can even see where he accidentally copied the “(a†(it seems he’s not big on proofreading either). Now, unless Lassen was R. Gawlitta in a previous lifetime, then what he’s done equals plagiary.
Not enough, how about an example from the New York Times?
(Click on images for full views.)
But then, maybe Lassen was also Neil Genzlinger in that previous lifetime, in which case this wouldn’t equal plagiary either. He might have suspected as much because after being called on it, Lassen edited his review to be less obvious, but obviously not enough.
He even plagiarised a review from sources on the same page:
(Click on image for full view.)
The first source from which Lassen plagiarised was Amazon’s product description (highlighted in pink), but that wasn’t enough. He also plagiarised the reviewer preceding him, Michael E. Tatham (highlighted in green). Lassen’s transgressions are highlighted in yellow and purple respectively.
By the way, you are welcome to compare and contrast for yourselves as the review is still up because Lassen “hit the wrong button”, which published it as a child’s review, and it was overlooked in the mass deletion. I don’t know how long Amazon will allow it to stay, though, now that it’s been brought to light.
And a couple other original reviewers weren’t thrilled when alerted:
(Click image for full view.)
A few are crying foul on Amazon because they’ve booted such a wonderful pillar of the GLBT and Judaic artistic communities (mostly the authors who’ve had a book reviewed by Lassen) and that makes me sad. Sad because those people are directing their anger toward the wrong entity (Amazon wouldn’t delete over 3,000 reviews and revoke the reviewing privilege of one of it’s Top 50 reviewers without some damning evidence) and sad because Lassen should have set a much better example.
Lassen should have just said mea culpa and righted his wrongs—it would have been better all around—instead, he became nasty.
In response to being revealed as a plagiariser, Lassen wrote a review entitled “I Spit On Your Grave†directed at those who exposed him—a review which included these choice words: “The only good thing about this is wishing that all of them would die as soon as possible and the rest of the world could give a collective spit on each and all of their graves. I am sure God is crying over the way these creations turned out and we are crying for having had to deal with them.â€
(Click the image for the full size view)
Called one accuser an evil, disgusting reprehensible piece of sh*t:
(Click the image for full size view.)
And mocked another accuser’s product choices:
(Click the above images for full views.)
To which I say: at least Jason Kirkfield reviews those “bunnies, turtles, and truckers(sic)†with integrity using only his own words and proper attribution when necessary.
To further his cause, some of Lassen’s supporters have insinuated that those who’ve exposed him as a plagiarist are homophobic anti-Semites.
Having read through all 33 pages of the forum thread (I simply could not tear my eyes away), I noted not one person expressing any dislike or hatred for Lassen’s sexual preference or religious leaning. The only thing I got was that they went after him because he stole other peoples’ words and claimed them as his own—it’s an unfortunate coincidence that most of his reviews were for homosexual and Jewish art.
I have to wonder if Lassen studied politics because he is quite adept at deflection. On the Facebook support page, rather than post entire quotes from the Amazon thread in their context or provide a full link to the Amazon thread, he only publishes the most inflaming parts. And even those who ask where and why these people would do this are given a deflection, but not an answer.
One follower even challenges Lassen’s accusers to publish the proof directly on the Facebook page:
Unfortunately, anyone who seeks to provide the supporters with links to outside sources which may incriminate Lassen have their posts immediately deleted. (It’s probably a safe bet that a link to my little ol’ blog won’t make it there either.)
(Click images for full size views.)
Throughout this entire Lassen-is-above-reproach tirade, it’s not been suggested by Lassen’s followers that someone else should simply start writing proper, honest Amazon reviews for homosexual and Jewish art to replace what’s been removed. However, it’s been suggested by those who’ve exposed Lassen’s farce and therefore, by default, is an unacceptable suggestion.
As a customer, this is maddening. I rely on Amazon’s review system to help me make informed buying decisions and I expect the reviews I’m reading to be those of the independent reviewer. If I wanted the New York Times opinion of a book or an IMDb user’s opinion of a movie, I’d visit those respective sites. When the reviewers aren’t honest on Amazon, trust in the system is lost. And when consumers lose trust in the system, it’s a bad thing all around from Amazon to the publishers to the authors themselves.
As a reviewer, this is maddening. I write to help others make informed decisions and I work hard to craft my opinions in a way that others will, I hope, understand. When someone takes those words to pass off as his own, it’s like he’s stealing a bit of who I am. Others may feel differently about their work, and that’s all right, but they should put up their reviews with an appended stamp saying free for the taking. Until then, people should keep their grubby mitts off of someone else’s work. It’s simply ethical, not to mention common courtesy.
All of those who rely on Lassen for reviews should seek out those from whom Lassen stole words and see what those people recommend because they are the true reviewers, the true (untarnished) pillars of the community.
Update: Amos Lassen Admits Plagiarism, Calls It Paraphrasing
# Muzzlehatch wrote on December 14, 2010 at 8:26 pm:
Great job! Now I know who this “Barbara Barclay” person that Mr. Lassen has referenced a couple of times – it’s me! Funny, I didn’t know that that was my name, that I used to be married, or that I was female – apparently Mr. Lassen’s talents with internet searches are no greater than his talents at spinning (original) words.
Keep up the good work.
# E. Jacobs wrote on December 14, 2010 at 8:44 pm:
All I can say is thank you.
# Terry wrote on December 14, 2010 at 9:06 pm:
Thanks for putting this all in one place, along with links and screen shots to the stolen reviews, etc. I sincerely hope this entire matter cools down once supporters of Mr. Lassen at least have a chance to see why Amazon took the action they did.
I am not ashamed of my complaint to Amazon over the plagiarized reviews, however I take no pleasure in another man’s downfall, even if he orchestrated it himself. I am especially sorry for the people who were victimized by the theft of their work or the association of their books or films with plagiarized reviews.
# Ann-Kat wrote on December 14, 2010 at 10:19 pm:
You’re welcome, and I hope other bloggers will write about this grossly underrepresented side of the story as well.
And Terry, like you, I take no pleasure in seeing his downfall even if it was his own fault. It deeply saddens me because the GLBT and Jewish communities are also included in his string of unfortunate victims, even if they don’t yet know it.
# Terry wrote on December 14, 2010 at 10:38 pm:
Exactly, Ann-Kat. We have been accused of carrying out a vendetta by Mr. Lassen in his effort to bully his way out of the mess he created through his dishonesty. I never cared what Mr. Lassen thought of me, but the people in the GLBT deserve to know that there is no effort by the reviewers involved to damage in any way their literature, film or art. I hope that they can draw some measure of peace in finding that this is not a hate campaign, and that Mr. Lassen is guilty of the things Amazon took action on.
# Nick Brett wrote on December 15, 2010 at 6:16 am:
This is a great summary and record of events – thanks.
Nick
# R.W. wrote on December 15, 2010 at 4:11 pm:
I am a GLBT writer. Thank you for your excellent write up and comprehensive documentation. Level-headed writers are out there who can see facts. There’s just a tiny vocal tribe of self-interested egos.
.-= R.W.´s last blog ..There’s a weird micro crisis going on in GLBT lit =-.
# Ann-Kat wrote on December 15, 2010 at 6:38 pm:
Rob, thank you for stopping by and commenting. It’s good to know that some authors realize there’s more value in an honest four-star review than a hollow five-star one. Also, thank you for doing a write up, which was quite an entertaining read.
Wishing you much success in the future.
# Ann-Kat wrote on December 15, 2010 at 7:11 pm:
Edit 12/18/10: Since my comments were being deleted from the “You Fight Like Anne Rice!” blog, I wrote a follow up post: Amos Lassen Responds to Plagiarism Allegations, Sort Of.
# Terry wrote on December 15, 2010 at 8:47 pm:
Two of mine were deleted also, Ann-Kat, within minutes of posting them. I don’t know why, either. I was posting evidence of plagiary in Lassen’s review of Eulogy for a Vampire.
# Brent Butler wrote on December 15, 2010 at 9:15 pm:
Ann-Kat, I also commend you on the job you did with this blog. I also just found out about this situation today. Being interested in the facts of the matter, I also accessed forty pages full of Mr Lassen’s reviews from Google’s cache. I then googled phrases from 10 reviews, at random, from various of the 40 pages. All 10 of the reviews I googled appeared elsewhere, predating Mr. Lassen’s review, under different authorship (and word for word) … 10 different authors, in fact.
I also reviewed the posts on Mr. Lassen’s FB page. Material he quotes from the Amazon thread is edited to slant things to his own purposes, in virtually every instance. His assertion that a large group of people from an Internet discussion group would somehow suddenly band together and form a collective vendetta against him for no good reason is both laughable and pitiable on its face. You don’t have to have 25 years of experience on message boards (as I and others do) to realize that keeping a large and diverse a group of people to a goal for as long as this has gone on doesn’t happen unless there is some real meat behind the enterprise. Mr. Lassen’s own supposition about the size of his group of detractors only lends credibility to their substance. You might get two or three people to cooperate on something like this for that long, but not as large a group as participated in the Lassen expose.
Lassen’s accusations about that “group” going after other top reviewers is just malarkey. You also read the thread. The only other reviewers mentioned are Harriet Klausner and a top 500 sci-fi reviewer. HK does write volumes of sham reviews, but there is no uprising against her. She’s regarded by serious reviewers as a joke, not a cause. The mention of the top 500 sci-fi reviewer was a passing aside, but he is also regarded as a joke by serious reviewers, as all he does is pander to fans for votes. He’s never written a serious review.
Lassen’s contention of another top ten reviewer as a target is just a lie.
At least HK and the sci-fi reviewer mentioned do some actual work with the keyboard, not just cut and paste as is Lassen’s habitual method.
# AuthorReadsFacts wrote on December 15, 2010 at 11:58 pm:
I first became aware something was up with Lassen’s reviews when I started getting a ton of friends on Facebook urging me to join the “support AL” page. I had no idea what was going on and it seemed that over of FB, when anyone would ask Lassen what was going on or where the “attack” on him was happening, he’d be evasive. So I didn’t join because, frankly, the FB page really didn’t illuminate what the problem was. And I don’t blindly defend or condemn anyone without knowing the facts. And I couldn’t find them out because no one would really say exactly what was going on. It very much was an issue of “Amos is being attacked…take up arms.” Well, why? “They just are and we must defend him.” No one would really say.
I first became aware of Lassen’s reviews a couple years ago when he reviewed a book of mine. When I saw the review was a five star, I was naturally very happy with that.. But then I read the review and realized it was just a slight reworking of the PR materials the publisher always sent with the book. It was pretty clear he’d not read the book and simply re-wrote parts of the PR materials.
Regardless, I started following Lassen’s reviews kinda informally as we seemed to have a lot of mutual friends and my pub sent another book to him. Same thing…rehashing of provided materials. One day I wrote an Amazon review of a book and I noticed that a few days later Lassen had written a review of the same book. I read it and found it was amazingly similar to my own review. It was not a copy-paste, but “borrowed liberally” would not be a bad phrase to describe it. So that was my first inkling that things were not right. Then I noticed his other reviews really lacked any kind of substance and I stopped following.
What finally led me to what was going on is when I got an email from a friend outraged that Lassen’s reviews had been removed from Amazon and how horrible it was and how it was an attack on the GLBTQ community. So I checked reviews of my books and sure enough they were gone. I figured it must have something to do with plagiarism so I did a search and finally found my way to the Amazon thread. And I’ve spent the last few days reading every single post there.
Given my past experience with the review I had written, the accusations didn’t surprise me at all. What surprised me was the sheer scope. The samples on the Amazon thread are damning and apparently Amazon thought so also or they wouldn’t have removed them.
A couple of the things said on the Amazon thread stand out that I wanted to comment on.
Not all authors are blindly following. Many are seeking out the facts and that seems to be more evident as the story spreads to other blogs. But, like with all internet groups, most will not even question Lassen’s version of the story because (a) he’s their friend, (b) he’s given them rave reviews, (c) they really don’t care about facts (ironic considering they’d be up in arms if someone was plagiarizing their own work) or (d) they’re worried about certain people within his circle who, in defending him, are not above giving negative ratings or reviews to the books of any authors who speak out about it or directly harrassing them.
On authors profiting from Lassen’s reviews: I can’t imagine people read his reviews and it convinces them to buy the book. I could be wrong, but the reviews are so usually so empty I doubt they actually have much impact monetarily for the authors. Where I do think it comes into play is some of the authors might never get a 5 star review otherwise and that’s where I think some authors might get their zeal for defending him and not seeking out facts.
The biggest thing that angers me about this issue (other than the plagiarism) is the email I got from a friend couching this as “an attack” on the GLBTQ community and homophobic in origin. I’ve read every post on the Amazon thread…it most certainly is not an anti-gay attack…or an anti-Jewish attack. I didn’t find any anti-gay or antisemitic sentiment in any of the posts on Amazon. It’s all about truth and the blatant theft of other people’s words. And those who are spreading the line that this is homophobia or antisemitic in origin should be ashamed of themselves. They gay and Jewish communities face enough real hate and discrimination, that trotting this out as a way of deflecting attention from the real issue is horrifying. Anyone whose is pushing that line should really be ashamed of themselves.
# Brent Butler wrote on December 16, 2010 at 12:32 am:
AuthorReads, you are right on the money. All “Crying Wolf” does is inure the general public to real issues. When all they hear from a group is constant “Oh Woe is Me”, they eventually tune out everything the group has to say.
Every time a multi-millionaire black athlete gets upset about some imagined slight and plays the race card, he makes it that much harder for a less fortunate person with a real problem to receive a fair consideration of his circumstance.
The same is true in this case. Seeking to hide a real transgression behind the skirts of a cause marginalizes that cause to all outside observers. The outside observer quite rationally begins to wonder; “If they are willing to lie about this, what else are they lying about?” Maybe nothing, but those seeds once planted are difficult to unearth. Many minority causes have lost credibility because of a lack of wisdom in deciding which situations are really worth making an issue of, even when deciding among actual slights. Defending a fraud like this profits no one. Not even the fraudsters fragile ego profits in the end, because they know the truth. They are just desperately hoping no one else sees it.
# AuthorReadsFacts wrote on December 16, 2010 at 2:02 am:
Thanks, Brent.
I do want to point out — as a member of the GLBTQ community–that anti-gay and anti-Jewish attacks do happen far more frequently than does people crying wolf, though sometimes it is hard to discern the difference. But this case…it is so clear-cut that homophobia is being shouted to deflect from the real issue that such claims are ludicrous. As a gay writer, I resent someone shouting homophobia in order to protect themselves.
As a gay writer, I’m not willing to support someone who promotes GLBTQ fiction with empty and plagiarized reviews. It only serves to weaken the GLBTQ lit community, not promote it. Because, 4000 empty 5 star reviews will only cheat readers. And, as an author, an empty/plagiarized 5 star review is far less satisfying than a legitimate review, even if that legitimate review is less stars and less flattering.
# E. Jacobs wrote on December 16, 2010 at 12:33 pm:
AuthorReadsFacts:
Thank you for weighing in on this. Of all of the egregious things that Mr. Lassen has done over the last 2 months, I think trying to deflect this into a GLBTQ issue was the thing that almost did me in. Earlier this week, it truly seemed that that was the way it was going to go; that somehow he was going to be able to turn everyone away from the truth. And it wasn’t just his plagiarism that was the issue, it was his absolutely revolting threats to ‘destroy’ other reviewers followed by constant harassment of anyone who spoke out against his actions. It has been exhausting, I can tell you.
Mr. Lassen plagiarized one of my reviews. That is an incontrovertible fact and was one of the observations that created the glowing ember that the incomparable Ann-Kat writes about in her original post. However, this would have gone largely unnoticed if not for the almost incredible behavior of Mr. Lassen after the fact.
Of all the things he did, including calling me a c*nt at Amazon, posting my personal email address at Facebook without my permission, and subjecting me to constant harassment as well as threatening to see me destroyed and wishing for my impending death, the worst thing was the claim that this is a GLBTQ issue. Believe me when I say I can understand that harassment (and worse) of the GLBTQ community does take place. I can also understand the desire to band together when there was a perceived attack on someone who was considered (or who considered himself) prominent in the community. I was thoroughly dismayed that a few from the community appeared to very hastily choose up sides and did not look further into the matter before branding me and many others as homophobes. Perhaps even worse, some kept up with these assertions even after being presented with undeniable evidence to the contrary. I cannot even tell you how ridiculous these allegations are, though it appears that you have discovered this on your own, because you took the time to look into it. To me, being called a homophobe was worse than being called a c*nt, and that is saying something. So, I thank you for your diligence, and that of Mr. Wolfsham as well.
Everything I have written in this post can be verified with screen captures, google cache, and extensive documentation by myself and others over the past two months. I am writing about what happened to me specifically as these are events that I can write about with evidence and authority. However, it must be said Mr. Lassen harassed, threatened and maligned many, many other reviewers, culminating with the infamous “I Spit On Your Grave†review in which he fervently wished for our collective deaths. I cannot speak for the other reviewers, and will not put their names here out of respect for them if they would like some privacy after all of this, but I will say I am equally outraged on their behalf. I assume that Lassen at times had perhaps a wiser friend with a cooler head, because the record of some of his threats was deleted. However, it has all been captured by the wronged parties to protect ourselves in the event of something happening such as what occurred this past week.
Again, I want to thank those of you who took the time to do the research and see what really happened here.
# Terry wrote on December 16, 2010 at 5:28 pm:
Thank you so much for checking out the facts and being courageous enough to speak up, AuthorReadsFacts. I sincerely hope you, or your books, do not suffer any backlash as a result.
# AuthorReadsFacts wrote on December 17, 2010 at 1:56 am:
@E: I’m sorry for what you’ve gone through. And Lassen calling anyone homophobic over this is insane. There are plenty of legitimate reasons to call out homophobia when it actually does happen and claiming it when none exists just to cover his ass is inexcusable. Does a huge disservice to the GLBTQ community.
@Terry: Always my pleasure to check out facts. I hope others check out the facts as well, but I fear the majority will not. Instead they’ll post long posts in support of Lassen on blogs owned by people sympathetic to him.
As for me and my books, I’m sure it’ll be fine. That’s one of the reasons I can’t post over at Amazon is I don’t want to lead them to my books. They get very few reviews as is, and vendetta reviews are the last thing they need. I don’t mind legitimate bad reviews, but a rash of 1 star reviews from people who’ve never read the books..well, I’m not so fond of those. LOL. And I’ve seen it happen to others.
# Amos Lassen Responds to Plagiarism Allegations, Sort Of. wrote on December 18, 2010 at 7:38 pm:
[...] writing an expose-esque post on Amos Lassen, a former Amazon Top 50 reviewer who habitually plagiarised his reviews, Lassen offered a response, [...]
# Amos Lassen Admits Plagiarism, Calls it Paraphrasing wrote on December 29, 2010 at 5:10 pm:
[...] you’re new to the Amos Lassen plagiarism scandal, I’d recommend reading Amos Lassen Falls from Grace, then Amos Lassen responds to Plagiarism Allegations, and then come back here. Up to speed? [...]
# Wandrwoman wrote on March 22, 2011 at 12:41 pm:
Terrific, impressive work! Plagiarism is stealing. Stealing is wrong……even on the Internet! Thank you for creating this page.
# Stu Maddux wrote on June 4, 2011 at 12:03 pm:
Thank-you for this terrific work. I am a small filmmaker who Amos turned on when I no longer wanted to communicate with him. I try to feel sorry for him even though he is so hateful. He uses pen to vent his personal issues and as a filmmaker it really was best just to step away from the flame. I had the unique experience of spending a weekend with Amos as my host at the Little Rock LGBT Film Festival several years ago. It ended with me writing him from the airport not to speak to me again. This is the first I have ever spoken to anyone about my Amos experience so its good to hear what you wrote. I know that he is probably out there lurking on this page too. Hey Amos, glad you’ve gotten a lot of mileage out of that pic I took of you.
# John wrote on June 9, 2011 at 8:35 pm:
Thanks for your comments, Stu. Out of sheer morbid curiosity I’m wondering if you could expand on this a little. If not, I’ll understand of course.
# Stu Maddux wrote on June 10, 2011 at 9:25 am:
I know! If only we could all have coffee and talk! It was not any one thing that led to the above just a very toxic weekend that you can probably imagine after reading much of his work. In fairness, he did his best to make me feel welcome and I met many nice people there. My experience walking in Conway, AK Pride that weekend was something I will never forget. Getting down to details about Amos would actually just be him taking me down to the that crazy level with him. I just wonder if any other filmmakers have had the same experience?
# Stu Maddux wrote on June 10, 2011 at 12:44 pm:
OK John I wasn’t going to wade into it but: I just got this bizareness from Amos on my Facebook page apparently in response to my comments on your blog:
“Did you forget that you came to Little Rock to cheat on your lover?
I guess I will post the real story of what happened in Little Rock now that I have all the facts and I do have them. You were much better when you were quiet. Vengeance does not look good on you and pettiness looks even worse. I can also play your game but I bet you’ll lose if I have to totally destroy your reputation and I will if I must. What happened in Little Rock was the same in several other places that you visited alone with set up meetings ahead of time and I have records of all of that. Just say the word and I will publish it all. You do not scare me.”
So I’m thinkin…is this what they call cyber bullying? Or blackmail or….now I TOO have sheer morbid curiosity to hear about this life he’s got me living. I am also really feeling concerned for that person out there he really CAN hurt.
# John wrote on June 11, 2011 at 9:26 am:
Yeah, I’d call that cyber-bullying. It’s his MO; always attacking and libeling others to bolster his own ego. If you’re really interested in sharing your story with us we might be able to figure something out.
# E. Jacobs wrote on June 11, 2011 at 11:05 am:
Sorry you are having to deal with this, Stu. Unfortunately it’s likely that this will continue to escalate.
I’d love to have coffee and talk with all of you cats though.
# Stu Maddux wrote on June 11, 2011 at 12:12 pm:
Sure. I’ve got nothing to hide. Should we take this off-line?
# John wrote on June 16, 2011 at 6:34 pm:
I don’t see why we should. Our hostess Ann-Kat might be willing to post your side of the story in its entirety. As an indie filmmaker I wonder if you ever thought about making a documentary or something out of this?
# Stu Maddux wrote on June 16, 2011 at 9:47 pm:
I think that’s a great idea. If anyone wants to write it then I’m happy to talk. I just wanted to take that writing process off-line and post when it’s complete rather than have bits and pieces here for Amos to gyrate on. E Jacobs, I am sorry that I haven’t had a chance to reply yet to your kind email. We are getting ready to screen our film, Gen Silent, at Frameline and it’s really crazy here.
# john gury wrote on July 28, 2011 at 2:36 pm:
Fantastic job and thank you so much. This guy and his pals have been behaving like a bunch of little Red Guard Savonarolas on Amazon and god knows where else in cyberspace. Many people have good reason just to get this over with and give him a basic good punch out that he deserves.
# PA wrote on September 2, 2011 at 8:09 pm:
I apologize for reviving this old thread, but I nearly fell out of my chair this evening when I heard Derek Hartley mention Amos Lassen’s review of his latest book.
This scandal is hardly surprising, as it appears that he has been up to his very old tricks once again.
I have known or known of Amos Lassen for nearly fifteen years. We met in the mid-90s, and I thought he was intelligent and engaging, if bitter. We had mutual acquantainces who were quick to inform me that he was not exactly the paragon of virtue. When his father died, he tried (and nearly succeeded) in defrauding his two siblings of their sizable inheritance when their father died. This was possible at the time due to Louisiana’s inheritance laws, which tended to favor male heirs.
When I cut off contact, he threatened to take (vague) action through my university against me. However, he went away, as the reality was that he was a semi-disgraced instructor at this particular New Orleans university with few connections of substance.
In the very early 2000s, one of his siblings informed me that Amos served a stint in prison for kiting checks. When I saw him walking in the French Quarter one day in ’03 or ’04, I knew I once again had to avoid him, which was made all the easier in 2005, when I left New Orleans for good post-Katrina.
Amos is an exceptionally intelligent, engaging and well-read individual, and were he not a con man, we would perhaps be friends to this day.
# black hound wrote on November 11, 2011 at 7:36 pm:
I had the misfortune to meet Lassen a few years back and initially found him charming and intelligent. His other personality issues came through pretty quickly, though, and, I stopped associating with him. In short, he’s a user.