A Tampa woman claims that a cable installer who engaged in alleged inappropriate sexual conduct has left her traumatized for life, and she may end up moving to cope with the bad memories that she cannot escape.

Katelyn Breadmore broke her silence Tuesday in an exclusive interview with WWSB-TV in Sarasota-Bradenton, Fla.

Breadmore told the station she has trouble sleeping at night and dreams that the installer is hiding in her closet.

Since Stop the Cap! originally reported this story, new facts have come to light:

Comcast has released a statement indicating the accused installer, Shane Wheatley, is not a Comcast employee.  He is a contractor working for FTS Communications, a third party company hired by Comcast to handle installations and other customer service work.

“We are appalled by the alleged behavior of Mr. Wheatley and can confirm that he is no longer working on any Comcast accounts. Comcast is prepared to cooperate fully with authorities in their investigation if asked,” said Bill Ferry, Regional Vice President of Government Affairs, Comcast Cable.

The Sarasota County’s Sheriff Office also reported Wheatley was charged after a lengthy investigation which included at least one failed lie detector test — a test Wheatley demanded.

A trial date for Wheatley has not yet been announced.

[flv width=”360″ height=”290″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/WWSB Tampa Victim speaks about cable man’s lewd behavior 9-20-11.mp4[/flv]

WWSB aired this exclusive interview with a Tampa-area woman who says a contractor working for Comcast left her traumatized for life.  (3 minutes)

A similar group in Baltimore placed bus advertising complaining about the lack of FiOS in that city in 2010.

A Buffalo group backed by the Communications Workers of America is demanding a federal and state investigation into whether Verizon is intentionally bypassing urban, ethnic, and economically-challenged neighborhoods for its fiber-to-the-home service, FiOS.

The Don’t Bypass Buffalo Coalition has stepped up the pressure on Verizon with a new billboard campaign that accuses the company of exacerbating the digital divide in western New York.

“The Verizon FiOS deployment in Buffalo is a corporate redlining scheme undermining the City of Buffalo with intentional discriminate design,” said Coalition member Jim Anderson.

Verizon suspended FiOS deployment during the height of the economic downturn, leaving some cities with a patchwork of FiOS service in some locations, traditional copper phone wiring in others.  In Buffalo, suburban areas that quickly approved the FiOS network with few franchise pre-conditions were among the first to get the fiber network.  Other suburbs, and the city of Buffalo itself, were effectively bypassed when franchise agreements and negotiations were left uncompleted at the time Verizon suspended further expansion.

The Coalition released a letter signed by two dozen local officials and community leaders that suggests Verizon may be up to something more sinister, suggesting possible racial and economic discrimination by the company over its choice of areas to deploy the service.

Coalition members note that in the 10 suburbs where Verizon offers FiOS, the proportion of African American residents in those areas is more than 13 times lower than it is in the city of Buffalo, and the Hispanic population is nearly four times lower. Even more telling, the Coalition writes, is that the network infrastructure is already in place to deploy FiOS within Buffalo city limits.

The Coalition is among the most vocal among local pressure groups Verizon has faced since its decision to suspend further FiOS expansion.  Other cities, especially Baltimore, have their own coalitions to complain about Verizon’s apparent lack of interest in restarting fiber projects.

Verizon rejects most of the charges the Buffalo-based Coalition has made.

“As Verizon has told the Coalition and local officials countless times, our focus these days is meeting the buildout commitments in the 182 municipalities across the state where we currently have TV franchises,” a Verizon spokesman said in a statement. “The allegation of discrimination with respect to FiOS deployment is just plain wrong…period. The coalition simply needs to look at other FiOS deployment areas in New York and other states to see those allegations are off base.”

[flv width=”640″ height=”380″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Is Verizon Redlining Baltimore City 3-16-10.flv[/flv]

In March, 2010 Progressive Maryland held a public rally protesting the lack of Verizon FiOS in Baltimore.  (8 minutes)

A lawsuit accusing Verizon of defrauding creditors of Idearc, Inc., Verizon’s telephone directory publisher can proceed to trial, a judge ruled Monday.

U.S. District Judge A. Joe Fish in Dallas denied a request by Verizon’s attorneys to dismiss the suit, which claims Verizon sought to “hinder, delay, or defraud” creditors of its former directory publishing business, spun-off in 2006.

“These detailed and particularized allegations show that Verizon had a motive and opportunity to commit the alleged actual fraudulent transfers, and they permit the court to draw a reasonable inference of Verizon’s intent,” Fish ruled.

Creditors are upset that Verizon may have breached its fiduciary responsibility when it sold off Idearc, keeping nearly $9.5 billion in assets for itself while ultimately leaving the newly-independent publisher insolvent.

Verizon used a legal maneuver called a Reverse Morris Trust that left Idearc with enormous debt, but a tax-free sale for the phone company.  A federal class action lawsuit called that “a massive, Enron-style debt off-loading spin transaction” and accused the company of fraud.

The track record for Verizon’s spinoffs have not been good.  Three of them resulted in quick bankruptcy for Hawaiian Telcom, Idearc, and FairPoint Communications.  The last — a spinoff of landlines to Frontier Communications, has left Frontier with substantial debt.

Idearc filed for bankruptcy in 2009.  In renamed itself SuperMedia in 2010 after exiting bankruptcy proceedings and still does business from its headquarters in Dallas.

Phillip "Frontier DSL is Too Slow and Expensive" Dampier

Frontier Communications occasionally sends me mailers promoting their latest offer for DSL and/or satellite service.  The price on the front of the letter looks good — usually around $20 a month — despite the fact the best Frontier can deliver my area less than one mile from the Rochester, N.Y. city line is 3.1Mbps.  But Frontier’s fine print is infamous for bill padding extra fees, charges, and service commitments that makes the out-the-door price literally higher than Time Warner Cable’s Road Runner service, which actually delivers substantially faster speed at a lower price.

I’m not alone.

Customers in several Frontier service areas are openly wondering why they should do business with the phone company when they are charging more for less service.

In Ohio, Frontier Communications competes in some areas with Buckeye Cablevision.  Frontier sells DSL Internet in northwest Ohio for $29.99 a month.  For that, customers like Inquiry receive 6.2Mbps even though they bought 7.1Mbps service.

“Their [Internet prices] are significantly higher when comparing the other providers in northwest Ohio,” Inquiry writes. “Buckeye Cablevison has 10Mbps service for $24.95/month. And they actually give the customer 10.8Mbps.”

In areas where Frontier often finds itself the only game in town, that price is downright cheap.

Frontier's "High Speed" Fantasies

Nialis in Aliso Viejo, Calif. doesn’t know what Inquiry is complaining about.  He pays $30 a month for 1.5Mbps DSL service from Frontier.

Eric McDaniel from McDavid, Fla. found small relief when he complained about the 2.2Mbps DSL service he was paying $39.99 a month to receive.

“I now pay $29.99, and that is only because I threatened to cancel my service,” McDaniel says. “Now they give me a $10 recurring credit.”

“What are you going to do when they’re the only show in town?”

Even Charter Communications, one of America’s lowest rated cable companies, has prices and service that beats Frontier hands-down.

In some Charter areas like Wausau, Wisc., Frontier DSL comes with a two year service commitment, a $14.99 monthly Wireless Router Fee, and comparatively slow service:

Frontier Communications Pricing - Wisconsin

Customers can pay $29.99 a month (before fees) for “up to 3Mbps” DSL service from Frontier or spend $29.99 and get 12Mbps from Charter:

Charter Communications Pricing - Wisconsin

So how does Frontier Communications keep offering service at uncompetitive prices?  They have much greater success in the rural markets they favor, where cable competition rarely exists.  Plus, many consumers may not understand the impact of the speed differences they receive from different providers, tending to blame “the Internet” for slowdowns more than the provider delivering the service.  Some customers may also be attracted to valuable customer promotions that include free netbooks or television sets, and forget about the fine print service commitments that come with the deal.

As dwink9909 from Clintonville, Wisc. shared on the Frontier Broadband Reports forum: “Frontier Communications Inc. is free to charge the maximum the market will bear primarily because they are the only provider in most of the areas they serve. That’s certainly true here in Wisconsin. Six miles south of me you can get dial-up service from two dozen ISPs and broadband via wireless, cable or DSL, but here there is only a single provider for telephone and broadband. We are among the “under-served” millions who are just glad to have high speed Internet at any cost.”

Frontier is only too happy to oblige.

AT&T flipped the switch Sunday on its new 4G-LTE wireless data network, and the resulting next-generation wireless speeds now available to customers in Atlanta, Chicago, Dallas, Houston and San Antonio, Texas are impressive, averaging 23.6Mbps on the download and 15.2Mbps for uploads during a three-day test.

Mobile World reports initial testing by Signals Research in Houston delivered a peak data rate of a massive 61.1Mbps.  The researchers transferred nearly 90GB of data back and forth during the weekend tests, almost always at data rates above 5Mbps.

AT&T intends to compliment its existing “4G” HSPA+ network with a gradual rollout of LTE service in their major markets, eventually covering 44,000 nodes over a three-year period.

AT&T will first introduce its LTE service to wireless mobile broadband customers who will find the USB modems on sale with a two-year service commitment.  Support for the network on smartphones will come later.

A few important points to consider before becoming too excited with AT&T’s speed ratings:

1. Signals Research conducted the tests on an effectively empty network.  Since AT&T hasn’t started selling LTE-capable smartphones yet, the only ones using the network are AT&T’s mobile broadband customers, most of whom are using AT&T’s older HSPA+ service.  AT&T doesn’t guarantee any particular speed, and it’s a safe bet speeds will slow considerably when smartphone customers eventually pile on board.
2. That speed comes at a significant price.  AT&T is charging $50 a month for mobile broadband service with a 5GB usage cap.  Each additional gigabyte runs $10.  Signals Research is lucky they didn’t pay AT&T the going rate during their tests.  That 90GB of data would result in a bill from AT&T amounting to $50 for service, and $850 in overlimit penalties.