SLAPP Censorship - Part 69 Out of 200: Microsoft's Graveley Strangles, Gets Arrested, Charged, Then Asks for Apology From Those Who Reported It by Recycling Garrett's Plea for Apology
posted by Roy Schestowitz on May 07, 2026,
updated May 07, 2026
Further to
last part's "copypasta" from Microsoft's Graveley and Garrett
(5RB Barristers recycled about 70% of the text; Brett Wilson LLP
speaks of them like they're almost the same person and sometimes
loses track of who's who!), consider how Garrett's Particulars
of Claim (POC) from 2024 became the POC of Microsoft's Graveley
less than a year later:

Imagine being the barrister who put this together; looking back
at one's "portfolio", there's so little originality, just a limited
repertoire of extensive copy-pasting on some Apple Mac. It's a
matter of public interest - something the wider public ought
to be aware of, maybe the regulator (BSB) as well, not to mention
the Court.
Years ago
Microsoft's Graveley begged me to remove articles about him. He
later sent his
US attorney to my inbox (after I had not replied), confirming
that he had been arrested
and charged.
Days after Garrett was ordered by a High Court judge to
put in his defence because my wife and I had sued him [1,
2] I began
receiving threats from the same
hired guns as Garrett's.
This was no coincidence and
they have plenty in common, including
their nationality and
allegiance to Microsoft/GNOME. He - the Serial Strangler - knew
this was meritless, but did this anyway, though it's clear they
just recycled Garrett's claims (see above). When I
counter-sued him he walked away.
Brett Wilson LLP and their 5RB barrister (they aimed low in
order to keep costs low, legal professionals have independently
pointed out) should be ashamed of themselves. Look
what sorts of clients they pick. No wonder they got sued by
their own clients [1,
2,
3] some months ago. They brought this upon themselves
and now
I receive threats to my "existence" (not to be interpreted as
mere "jokes" [1, 2,
3]). This does not go well for them, does it? They have no
(much-needed
at this stage) litigation clients this year, clearly due to
reputation problems, and
nobody can trust anything they say. They try to lecture people
on how amazingly clever their clients are (despite a lack of
concrete and measurable evidence, only big egos), even if one of
them is
so incompetent technically (his spouse says he can
neither code nor hack, as noted repeatedly this year and
last year!) that he cannot even maintain a simple 2-user Mastodon
instance, first it breaks itself (repeatedly), then goes
offline entirely. Pretending to be a techie despite a lack of
relevant background. Mastering Computer Science is a lot more work
than asking "mates" to
write vanity pages in Wikipedia. And if it takes
many months (at least 4 months) to set up a blog, then there is
a competency deficit, surely.
Those lawsuits were, to them,
supposed to be "funny" (or mere "revenge" against me), but
they're not so funny anymore, so now they
send threats to my wife, dox my relatives, and do all sorts of
other likely illegal things.
Regarding the above POC, in the Graveley case this was my
response (notice even the numbering was left unchanged!).
5. There is no obligation to engage with people who abuse the
courts for censorship, so this too is denied.
6. There is nothing to apologise for.
7. This is not correct. The publication named in the libel claim
came a long time after the last communication (begging) from the
Claimant, hence this is an impossibility. The mere belief (of the
Claimant) that repeating a truth is “malicious” is nothing but a
personal opinion.
All the above (1-7) are denied. Please refer to the
Garrett Case, which responds to analogous claims and is formulated
more accurately.
The response to the Garrett POC is to be found in
this page from March (Garrett uploaded it to his site last
year). To be clear, Garrett attempted to settle at least six times,
including twice during the trial; he realised that his "funny"
lawsuit wasn't so funny anymore (not
to his solicitors either) and after I cross-examined him he was
begrudgingly admitting some falsehoods; being evasive was not
sustainable because I kept him "boxed" for two days and asked the
hard questions. He was apparently so traumatised by this
experience that his barrister sought "damages" for it; despite
this, the judge said I was courteous and polite throughout (in her
final decision). █
Previously:
| 2026-03-03 |
Microsofters' SLAPP Censorship - Part 1 Out of 200: Claim No.
KB-2024-001270 in a Nutshell |
| 2026-03-04 |
Microsofters' SLAPP Censorship - Part 2 Out of 200: Detailed
Timeline From 2012 (Attack on Reporters That Question Restricted
Boot) to 2024 (Lawsuit Against Reporter and His Wife in Another
Continent) |
| 2026-03-05 |
Microsofters' SLAPP Censorship - Part 3 Out of 200: A More In-Depth
Breakdown |
| 2026-03-06 |
Microsofters' SLAPP Censorship - Part 4 Out of 200: Rianne’s
Version of Events and Narrative |
| 2026-03-07 |
Microsofters' SLAPP Censorship - Part 5 Out of 200: Clearly Not a
Security Professional/Expert, Only Ever Pretending to be
One |
| 2026-03-08 |
Microsofters' SLAPP Censorship - Part 6 Out of 200: Intentionally
Misnaming Women, People Who Offered to Testify That They Too Had
Been Subjected to Similar Abuse |
| 2026-03-09 |
Microsofters' SLAPP Censorship - Part 7 Out of 200: Like With the
Serial Strangler From Microsoft, Misuse of UK-GDPR to Try to Hide
Embarrassing Facts |
| 2026-03-10 |
Microsofters' SLAPP Censorship - Part 8 Out of 200: Gross Misuse of
UKGDPR to Protect the Agenda of American Back Doors (Mass
Surveillance) |
| 2026-03-11 |
Microsofters' SLAPP Censorship - Part 9 Out of 200: 5RB Barrister
Does Not Even Know the Name of His Own Client (That He Was Paid
Well Over $200,000 to 'Speak' or 'Cover' for) |
| 2026-03-12 |
Microsofters' SLAPP Censorship - Part 10 Out of 200: Showing Public
Tweets is Not a Privacy Violation, But This Isn't About Justice,
It's About Censorship |
| 2026-03-13 |
Microsofters' SLAPP Censorship - Part 11 Out of 200: Cannot Censor
His Spouse, Accusations Are Repeated Today |
| 2026-03-14 |
Microsofters' SLAPP Censorship - Part 12 Out of 200: Months Ahead
of Serial Strangler From Microsoft Who Helped Double the Lawsuits
(Funded by Third Parties) as 'Revenge' for Exposing Crimes |
| 2026-03-15 |
Microsofters' SLAPP Censorship - Part 13 Out of 200: Abuse of
Process to Make False Accusations of UKGDPR Violations |
| 2026-03-16 |
Microsofters' SLAPP Censorship - Part 14 Out of 200: The Abusive
Cases of the Serial Strangler From Microsoft and His Litigation
Buddy Garrett Did Cause "Serious Harm" |
| 2026-03-17 |
Microsofters' SLAPP Censorship - Part 14 Out of 200: Men Who
Strangle Women (and Worse) Trying to Force Us to Write Public
Apologies to These Men |
| 2026-03-18 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 15 Out of 200: Background and Particulars
of Truth Regarding Techrights and Tux Machines |
| 2026-03-19 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 16 Out of 200: Detailing the Actors and
Explaining Techrights' Own Internet Relay Chat (IRC)
Network |
| 2026-03-20 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 17 Out of 200: A Long Track Record of
Online Abuse, Then Choosing a Low-Cost Law Firm to Muzzle People
Who Have Illuminated This Abuse for Over a Decade |
| 2026-03-21 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 18 Out of 200: Third Parties Funding
Attacks on the Messengers, Lawsuits Against GAFAM-Critical Voices
That Uphold Real National Security |
| 2026-03-22 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 19 Out of 200: They Were Ill-prepared for
Tough Questions in Cross-Examination |
| 2026-03-23 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 20 Out of 200: All Roads Lead to Rome and
to GAFAM Funding |
| 2026-03-24 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 21 Out of 200: It's About Behaviour Online,
Not How Much Money From Shadowy Third Parties Gets Spent on Lawyers
and Two Barristers |
| 2026-03-24 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 22 Out of 200: When You Complain People
Impersonate You in IRC (But You Yourself Impersonate People in IRC
and Lock Them Out of Their IRC Handles) |
| 2026-03-25 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 23 Out of 200: We Were Right All Along (for
2 Years) About Third Party Funding and Willingness to 'Break the
Bank' in Pursuit of "Revenge" |
| 2026-03-26 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 24 Out of 200: The Failed Effort by Brett
Wilson LLP to Strike Out My Lawsuit and My Wife's Lawsuit Against
Garrett (the Master Allowed Our Lawsuits to Proceed) |
| 2026-03-27 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 25 Out of 200: That Time Matthew J. Garrett
Got Temporarily Banned/Suspended From Twitter |
| 2026-03-28 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 26 Out of 200: Asking for Documents and
Information You Already Have, Even Letters and E-mails That You
Yourself Sent! |
| 2026-03-29 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 27 Out of 200: Using the Tor Network to
Hide From Consequences |
| 2026-03-30 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 28 Out of 200: Facing Consequences for
Impersonation and Worse |
| 2026-03-31 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 29 Out of 200: Violent Language Won't Go
Away When You Use It in Your Site, Blog, and Social Control
Media |
| 2026-04-01 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 30 Out of 200: The Time We Reported Abuse
to Greater Manchester Police (GMP) and It Was Escalated to Its
Cybercrime Unit |
| 2026-04-02 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 31 Out of 200: Speaking About 20+ Years of
Alleged Harassment/Defamation and High-Profile 'Targets' of
Garrett |
| 2026-04-03 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 32 Out of 200: Garrett Made Spurious
Requests (Later Withdrawn) the Same Week Someone He Later Spoke to
by E-mail Sent Threats to Our Webhost |
| 2026-04-03 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 33 Out of 200: Garrett Sued by My Wife and
I, Then His Microsoft Acquaintance Files Another Lawsuit and Our
Webhost Receives Legal Threats Too |
| 2026-04-04 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 34 Out of 200: The Necessity of
Transparency, Illuminating Garrett's and Graveley's 'Tag-Team' Act,
Misusing the British Docket (From Far Away in America) in Efforts
to Hide Bad Behaviour |
| 2026-04-05 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 35 Out of 200: How to Make ~10,000 Pound
Sterling (13,220.50 United States Dollars) by Copy-Pasting and
Editing 10 Pages |
| 2026-04-06 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 36 Out of 200: Claim KB-2024-003529 in a
Nutshell (Microsoft Employee Does Terrible Things, Then Sues the
Reporter in Another Continent) |
| 2026-04-07 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 37 Out of 200: The Correct Suspicion
Garrett and Graveley Were Collaborating in Overseas Litigation
Against Critics |
| 2026-04-08 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 38 Out of 200: Advertisement or £10,000+
Classified Ad in the Form of Court Filing in Another
Continent |
| 2026-04-08 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 39 Out of 200: Recycled Text for Garrett
and Graveley (Buy One, Get One Free?) |
| 2026-04-09 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 40 Out of 200: Putting Forth Frivolous
Claim Only a Few Days Before Running Out of Time (12
Months) |
| 2026-04-10 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 41 Out of 200: More Misuse of UK-GDPR (for
US Citizens), More Copy-Pasting for Garrett and Graveley, Alleging
That Publishing Unflattering Information is a 'Privacy'
Issue |
| 2026-04-10 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 42 Out of 200: Getting the Very Basic
Technical Concepts Very Wrong, or Where Miscomprehension Begets
"Plausible Deniability" |
| 2026-04-11 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 43 Out of 200: Garrett and Graveley
Particulars of Claims Almost Identical and 5RB Needs to Investigate
Its Barristers (Its Reputation is at Stake) |
| 2026-04-12 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 44 Out of 200: Garrett and Graveley
'Copypasta' Sunday (Copy-Paste, Add One Word, Change 'T' to
't') |
| 2026-04-13 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 45 Out of 200: Garrett and Graveley Cases
Inherently the Same, Their Legal Team Can Barely Even Distinguish
(Full Timeline) |
| 2026-04-14 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 46 Out of 200: Alex Graveley's Attorney
Rick Cofer Did Not Deny That Graveley Had Strangled Women; He Did,
However, Pay Local Officials |
| 2026-04-14 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 47 Out of 200: British Courts Are Not
Censorship Offices for Americans Funded by Affluent Third
Parties |
| 2026-04-16 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 48 Out of 200: Brett Wilson LLP and 5RB
Copy-Pasting Bogus Claims for Violent Americans (Microsoft) Who
Tell Women to Kill Themselves |
| 2026-04-17 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 49 Out of 200: Two Americans, One Case,
Recycled for Low Budget at Brett Wilson LLP and 5RB
Barristers |
| 2026-04-18 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 50 Out of 200: The Time Staff of Law Firm
Burgess Mee Was Showing Up in Letters Sent for a Serial Strangler
From Microsoft |
| 2026-04-19 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 51 Out of 200: On Perjury and What It Means
to Take Third-Party Funding to Attack Reporter and His Family (in
Another Continent) |
| 2026-04-20 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 52 Out of 200: Phil Golding Appointed Bar
Standards Board (BSB) Chief, Misogyny Must End |
| 2026-04-21 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 53 Out of 200: The Lying Solicitor of Alex
Graveley Left Brett Wilson LLP Only Days or Few Weeks After the
Garrett Trial (Attended by Almost Their Entire
Office/Team) |
| 2026-04-22 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 54 Out of 200: Alex-Matt/Automate Twin
Cases, Separated at Birth, Drafted by Brett Wilson LLP and
5RB |
| 2026-04-23 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 55 Out of 200: Strangled Women, Charged for
Strangulation, Cannot Find a Job Now (After Microsoft) |
| 2026-04-24 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 56 Out of 200: 5RB and Brett Wilson LLP's
Copy-Paste Machination for Garrett and Graveley |
| 2026-04-25 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 57 Out of 200: 5RB and Brett Wilson LLP
Made the Garrett and Graveley Particulars of Claims a Lot Like
Photocopies! |
| 2026-04-26 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 58 Out of 200: 5RB and Brett Wilson LLP
Helped Garrett and Graveley Make Equivalent of GAFAM NDAs
Superficially 'Enforceable' in the UK, Using Threats |
| 2026-04-27 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 59 Out of 200: Mentioning the Fact Alex
Graveley Arrested and Charged for Strangulation in Texas is
"Reckless" and "Malicious", According to His 'Hired Guns' in
London |
| 2026-04-28 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 60 Out of 200: Talking About Corruption at
Microsoft and Arrest for Strangulation is "Malice" |
| 2026-04-29 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 61 Out of 200: Garrett and Graveley Must
Understand That Reporting Women's Issues in the United States of
America (“the US”) is Not Impermissible |
| 2026-04-30 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 62 Out of 200: Garrett and Graveley Issue
Astounding Copy-Paste Masterpiece Asserting Publicly-Accessible
Embarrassing Facts Must Remain Hidden |
| 2026-05-01 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 63 Out of 200: Graveley as a Stripped-Down
Version of Garrett in the Particulars of Claim (5RB Barrister Could
Do This in One Minute) |
| 2026-05-02 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 64 Out of 200: Not Amused by Repeated
Threats (to "Shut Down" My "Existence" While Mentioning My Wife
Too) |
| 2026-05-03 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 65 Out of 200: Graveley and Garrett Claims
Are Word-by-Word Similar (They Also Collaborated All
Along) |
| 2026-05-04 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 66 Out of 200: Alex Graveley Did Illegal
Things, Then Asserted Mentioning Those Illegal Things is Privacy
Violation |
| 2026-05-05 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 67 Out of 200: Graveley and Garrett Claims
Against My Wife and I Assert 'Distress', But It Was Just a
Copy-Pasted Template (Mechanical Crocodile Tears) |
| 2026-05-06 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 68 Out of 200: Based on Their Particulars
of Claims, Microsoft's Graveley and Garrett Seem Like the Same
Person (Exactly Same Words Used, Sloppily Recycled) |