SLAPP Censorship - Part 70 Out of 200: Microsoft's Graveley Injunction Request 100% the Same as Garrett's (Pure 'Copy-paste', Not Even a Word or Single Character Changed!)
posted by Roy Schestowitz on May 08, 2026
Find the differences: (or don't bother)
Not so funny at all. Their aim was to drain out our legal budget, which was needed to bring forth half a dozen witnesses to testify for us.
'Funnily' enough, both Graveley and Garrett work in slop companies, so 'copy-paste' or "copypasta" - to borrow online slang - won't bother them. They are normalising plagiarism for a living (using buzzwords).
In the previous part we continued showing that not only did Microsoft's Graveley collaborate with Garrett (then, later on, he repeatedly lied about this to several judges and can be held accountable with potential jail sentence for it; even though they can hide in the US and Graveley was already in jail there), they also recycled their lawsuits in an effort to saddle us with legal bills while issuing many threats to us. It happened twice, both in 2024 and in 2025, always shortly after Garrett got in trouble (first because we sued him [1, 2] and then because a High Court judge ordered Garrett to put a defence).
This coming weekend or next week we'll show that both Microsoft's Graveley and Garrett signed statements of truth that render them potentially liable for contempt of court. Garrett is a 'repeat offender' in that regard. He thinks this while lawsuit is "funny" (like a meme). Maybe he also thinks that "threats to kill" sent to me (while also mentioning my wife) are "funny"; his name is in the subject line. Maybe when he sobers up he'll change his mind and realise that his "hired guns" and litigation buddy from Microsoft and GNOME are a huge liability. For the uninitiated, a detailed timeline is available.
Regarding the above text, my reply from my 2025 counterclaim:
30. Paragraph 30 is denied on the basis that there is no defamation and hence repeating words of reusing old images is permissible and proportionate.
31. Paragraph 31 asserts that telling what happened is impermissible. It puts at risk the lives of many other women. This has nothing to do with “personal data”; the aim here is censorship and it is an effort to delete the past.
To better understand the misuse of UK-GDPR, consider how in Microsoft's Graveley & Garrett v Schestowitz & Schestowitz (both cases; twin cases) they used lawyers and barristers whom less than a year ago a High Court judge blasted for it. We wrote about it last June: UK High Court Blasts Brett Wilson LLP for Misusing "GDPR" After Failed Efforts to Censor Critics Using 'Libel' Claims
In this case, they're doing it for Americans [1, 2] who are really bad people. How did this pass "quality control"? Have they got any? █
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) |
| 2026-05-07 |
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 |
