Palm Bay: The Rebman Chronicles. (Cont.)

Thomas Redman, of whom we have spoken about previously, decided to make another post on people that he feels are “harassing” him or whatever.

We were sent the location of posts that Rebman had made on Facebook on August 31, 2019. With that information, we went and grabbed a screen shot of the post:

Where to begin?

First, Rebman links us with other Facebook pages. From what we understand, Rebman has been banned from the pages for actions contrary to the group rules. We take no position on the banning other than to note 1) pages can institute whatever rules they want and 2) if you don’t like the rules, work to change them or leave the group. What you cannot and should not do is demand that the rules not apply to you as if you are special.

However, where Raised on Hoecakes comes in is that we are linked administratively with the pages. We are not. Rebman also makes the accusation that the people he shows are somehow linked to or are authors here at Raised on Hoecakes.

They are not.

(Some have left comments in threads here, but that is not the same thing as being an author of an original post. If it were, Rebman himself would be considered a part of the staff here as he has previously left a comment here on this site.)

The false idea that Rebman is putting forth of who writes for us is directly contrary to his statement that “it is not legal to nor is it someones right to post fabricated thing about another person with the specific intent of hurting them. This is bullying plain and simple. The sites and the people pictured constantly cyberstalk members of out community with ill intent.”

We have not “cyber stalked” anyone under any definition or misinterpretation of the law which Rebman wants to trot out.

Furthermore, we have not attacked “spouses, your family, your friends, your profession, anything.”

Instead of proving his claims as to this site, Rebman continues to make outlandish statements in order to garner sympathy.

One is left to wonder if he truly believes that making false statements about people is wrong, or whether he hypocritically believes he can lie about others.

On August 6, 2019, we received an email from Rebman which read in part:

I am done trying to reason with mentally deficient individuals.

In addition, on August 7, 2019, Rebman wrote us saying:

“This is the last acknowledgement of your existance.”

We considered the matter closed but did not ban or restrict Rebman from the site. We never said that we would not discuss anything with him or not be willing to correct anything that he could prove was wrong that we had said.

Instead, he called us “mentally deficient” and then proceeded to make posts saying that we were scared to debate him. He even claimed that he would debate us on any platform we chose.

In a post entitled “We’re Here,” we restated that we would be willing to discuss issues with Rebman, but we never heard from him on the issues. All we ever saw were posts on social media claiming he was a victim. He claimed that we were “cyber bullies” and that we needed to be shut down yet could not and cannot show one instance where we have done anything other than reply to his rantings or comment upon stances he has taken in public.

We were therefore somewhat surprised that after telling us and the world that Raised on Hoecakes needed to be shunned and that he was going to ignore us, we received out of the blue an email from him on August 31, 2019 entitled “Cyberstalking is a crime.” The body of the email was a cut and paste of Florida Statute 784.048.

While the email quotes a larger piece of the statute, Rebman seems to be relying on this section:

(a) “Harass” means to engage in a course of conduct directed at a specific person which causes substantial emotional distress to that person and serves no legitimate purpose.

Our posts have all dealt with Rebman’s stance on the homeless in Palm Bay, his actions with the homeless in Palm Bay and his self-proclaimed “expertise” in the area. Rebman has stood in front of the City Council, made posts, etc., on the homeless issue. Our disagreement with Rebman on several fronts is not designed to “cause emotional distress.” If it does, that may be because he is not used to people disagreeing with him, but our posts are not designed to cause emotional distress.

However, Rebman himself constantly talks about the homeless and how Palm Bay as a community can “do better.” That makes the issue one of public interest which in turn makes our commentary have a “legitimate purpose.”

You can see the problem. He claims we are mentally deficient, claims he will no longer “acknowledge [our] existence,” claims we are “cyber bullies,” and then initiates direct contact with us.

This means that two things were happening on August 31, 2019.

The first is that Rebman initiated contact with us. Several emails went back and forth between one of our staff and Rebman. We repeatedly informed Rebman that the people he had linked with us in his Facebook posts were not on staff here at Raised on Hoecakes. We repeatedly told him that they were not writers for the blog.

The truth did not matter to him.

At the same time, we had taken the step to try and correct his perceptions on the above post on Facebook.

We posted this:

Rebman’s response was telling in many ways. He wrote:

Teresi is not member of the staff here at Raised on Hoecakes. We are willing to swear on a stack of Bibles to that fact. Yet once again we see how facts matter not to Rebman.

But then the oddest thing happened in the Facebook thread after we replied to him and tried to set the record straight: REBMAN BLOCKED US FROM THE THREAD.

We were unable to reply to his false statement and accusation concerning Rick Teresi.

We found his action quite curious as he was the one making posts saying that he would discuss issues with us on any platform we chose.

We initially chose to discuss issues here, and he has not made another public comment on the blog.

When we responded to his post on Facebook, Redman blocked any discussion at all.

How can that happen? We’ll leave you to make your own conclusion as to whether a person who says they are willing to discuss issues anywhere takes steps to make sure those discussions do not take place is a person who is honorable and keeps his word.

At the same time that was happening, we sent this email to Rebman on August 31, 2019 as he had continued to make illogical statements that were not only wrong, but in our opinion lacked critical thinking skills. He also threatened to take us to court over what is essentially making truthful statements about Redman as a “limited purpose public figure” over an issue of public concern.

What is a “limited public figure” you ask?

The second category of public figures is called “limited-purpose” public figures. These are individuals who “have thrust themselves to the forefront of particular controversies in order to influence the resolution of the issues involved.” Gertz v. Robert Welch Inc., 418 U.S. 323 (U.S. 1974). They are the individuals who deliberately shape debate on particular public issues, especially those who use the media to influence that debate.

Our email that night reads:

Mr. Rebman,

If anything, sir, it is you who are harassing us. We are not the ones making false claims about what we said. You are. You are the one running around making claims against us. We have not initiated ANYTHING other than the posts on your positions on the homeless on the blog. By now, that should be abundantly clear but you seem to be unwilling to deal with the truth that goes against the narrative you create.

It is clear in your blocking us from responding to your false allegations against us in your recent Facebook screeds.

It is also amazing that although we already responded to your lie that we were unwilling to discuss anything with you, you continue to make that same lie out in public.

We have laid out our concerns in our posts on the blog. You are free to respond to them.

We find no need to defend any comment we have made about your military service because we have never commented upon it on the blog. YOU did.

We find no need to defend any comment we have made about your teaching certificate because we have never commented upon it on the blog. YOU did.

We find no need to defend any comment we have made about your wife as an individual because we have not made any such comment and would not stand for it on the blog. YOU continue to assert that we have.

Hopefully this will be the last time we have to say this……the people that you listed in your latest rants are not associated with us. They have never written an original post on the blog. Some have left comments, as have you, but that is not the same thing as being on our staff, within our group or whatever.

Your accusations that they are part of the staff is an outright lie. Is that clear?

You claim that you are an honorable man. We would hope that you would accept our word that we are not who you think we are (save one person) and go from there.

If you will not do the honorable thing, we have legal remedies as well.

A. Afterwit.

Sadly, Rebman’s response shows the same lack of critical thinking:

Thats fine sir. We will let the appropriate judge decide. I have no business with you and will consider any future contact harassment.

He doesn’t seem to realize his own hypocrisy of running around telling people he is willing to discuss anything with people, and then 1) blocking them from a thread in which he makes several false statements, 2) says “future contact” will be considered by him to be “harassment,” and 3) all this after initiating the contact with us on Facebook and here at Raised on Hoecakes.

How can you deal with such a person? How do you respond with one who says one thing and then does another? How do you deal with someone who is not interested in truth? How do you deal with someone who thinks that as an adult, another adult disagreeing with them is “harassment?” How do you deal with someone who thinks that disagreement is an attack on them?

Bottom line is that you cannot.

That won’t stop Rebman from making outlandish claims that are not true.

Just as importantly, that won’t stop us from dealing with his misrepresentations and whatever other hypocrisy he wants to throw out there for all to see.

6 Responses to “Palm Bay: The Rebman Chronicles. (Cont.)”

  1. Carmine Vitale says:

    Well, that pretty much sums it up. Keep up the great work sir.

  2. Randy felty says:

    First and foremost i am not a contributing writer to this blog…lol..I am however concerned that mr rebman is a teacher in our community and as such hold childrens minds in his hands ..scary thought. to me as pointed out in the above article mr rebam does not possess the ability to debate and see anything other than his own side, he tends to have a persecution complex and often seems to act out of this really what we want our kids exposed too?

  3. Rick Teresi says:

    My oh my, where to begin. My first inclination is to state this is clearly the pot calling the kettle black. Since Mr Rebman so adamantly thinks I am a member of the ROH staff, I will yet again, correct one of his false statements.

    I am no more a member of this blog’s staff than he is conducting “training” at city council meetings. I comment here when I deem it appropriate. I do that as a private citizen (with no association to this publication whatsoever). I do not have a degree in journalism, so my comments are just my personal opinions. Nothing more.

    Mr Rebman does something similar. In his mind, during city council meetings, he claims to be “training” city council and attendees of those meetings. In reality, he is just a private citizen who is allowed three minutes to address council. There is no condoned training involved. Only a private citizen’s personal opinion. Nothing more.

    It would be refreshing if Mr Rebman starts getting his facts straight prior to making ridiculous accusations. I have often stated my disagreement with Mr Rebman’s methods. I have never attacked or bullied him or his spouse. We had discussions in my Facebook group until he broke the rules and blocked an administrator and a moderator. I even tried to stop members from talking about his position as a teacher, by deleting comments about his employment and putting out a request to members to refrain from discussing his position as a teacher. Mr Rebman responded on social media with the pretty collage that is the subject of this post.

    Based on the response to Mr Rebman’s false accusations, all of the groups mentioned in his collage have basically ignored him and have continued to grow. The only thing that members care about when Mr Rebman gets discussed, is his continued method of enabling the homeless in setting up camps on private property without the owner’s permission. That would be illegal, correct? I will continue to remind our citizens of his disregard for the law.

    Don’t even get me started about his “research” where he firmly claims that panhandlers make an average of $1.87 per hour. Just another false narrative from a private citizen.

  4. Renee Felty says:

    Mr. Rebman finds himself on the wrong side of the “facts” yet again. An inquiry into his qualifications and background while “volunteering” within our city is not “harrassment”, it is not “fabrication” nor a source of “emotional distress”. The taxpayers of Palm Bay have the right to be aware of and minimize any source of liability within the city should it exist.

    Mr. Rebman has shouted from the rooftops on many occasion that he is available to “debate”, to answer “any question”, to address “any issue”. Then he blocks anyone prepared to debate, ask or address. Certainly no open line of communication there.

    All I see here are unfounded and false accusations levied by Mr. Rebman against specific individuals and groups. The residents and taxpayers of Palm Bay will protect themselves, their city and their best interests. That’s they way a “community” works.

  5. Momma Dukes says:

    Mr. Rebman puts himself out into public light with his “advocacy of the homeless”. He has a blatant pattern of blocking any constituent whom either a) doesn’t agree with him, or b) questions his motives. His childlike behavior or blocking those who have asked questions he can’t (most accurately doesn’t want to answer) then creating fake profiles to in turn degrade, defame, and bully others exercising their first amendment right is an archaic attempt silence anyone in opposition of his (personal) cause. It is a common emotional reticence of Rebman.
    Mr. Rebman then in turn has filed a SLAPP suit against any person who speaks out, His argument is fallacious, and the fact he would waste the courts time is an egregious abuse of the court system in an attempt to oppress others that are vocal regarding the intent of Rebman. The saving grace, however is that in 2015 Florida enacted the Anti-SLAPP laws. Yet he shows no factual data regarding damage any questions posed to him may have caused. His paronomasia of words can only lead one to believe that his reasons are less than forthright.
    I pray the defendants remember to show how Rebman initially tried to get a PAID position from the city (and a cellphone, Rebman had business cards made up, and tried to insert his “advocating” into city council business until the new city manager had to explicate that relationship. The SLAPP suit is nothing more than trying to silence those who have illuminated his unsavory actions.
    Rebman has been less than forthcoming, and has “unclean hands” (ie using his wife’s social media as well as fake profiles to badger those who have taken a stance against his self motivating behavior.
    I for one have faith in the judicial system, and believe the cases will be heard in favor of those defendants. If Rebman doesn’t appreciate HIS transgressions coming to light, then maybe he should have never put himself in that position that he’d have such a public records trail of negativity behind himself.
    One question I have for Rebman is: since you devote such a prodigious amount of time advocating for the homeless, isn’t the amount of time you are spending trying to silence those who disagree with you and harassing them under fake social media accounts impeding the amount of time you advocate (in actuality the time you give yourself Kudos) for the homeless?????

  6. A "teacher" you say? says:

    The truly scary part of this, is that this attention seeking whiner has the responsibility of molding the minds of our youth. I would imagine his students show more maturity than him.

  7. […] You may remember that Rebman has been making comments and posts about others making false accusations against him, his wife, etc. To some extent, we covered his rants in this post. […]