SLAPP Censorship - Part 74 Out of 200: The Basis of My Lawsuit Against Alex Graveley, Who Helps Garrett Stack the Docket in Another Continent
posted by Roy Schestowitz on May 12, 2026
As noted in the previous part, today we show the counterclaim, seeing that Garrett and Balabhadra (Alex) Graveley continue collaborating against me because they aren't getting their way and their hired guns hardly get any business anymore (the only active clients are from past years and they're very few). They seem to have made it a hobby to harass my wife and I - as they've done for well over 2 years already. It has gotten so absurd that I get sent threats to "shut down" my "existence" - a serious matter which is still being deal with by British Police. They basically try to censor me and the subject of censorship is their business, so it's not hard to guess who's behind those threats. They may be legally liable for other things too, with potential prison terms (of up to 2 years) because their reputation laundering efforts didn't go as well as they had hoped. They ended up working for men from Microsoft who spent time in jail for attacking women. And it's not like they tolerate women either, judging by their history of attacking women victims who cannot afford legal representation. As of this month, they're being sued by a woman [1, 2, 3] (Alla Yanpolsky). The law firm being sued by this woman is 100% dominated by men (the women are merely assistants who 'lick stamps' and suck up to their masters; the exception to this left days after the Garrett trial, perhaps recognising what sort of incels she had served for a living).
Shown below is my counterclaim dated July 2025 (claim against the Serial Strangler from Microsoft):
COUNTERCLAIM
-
1.The Course of Conduct of Mr. Graveley amounts to harassment of the Defendant contrary to ss.1(1), 1(A), 3(1) and 3A(2) of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997.
-
2.The Claimant will continue to harass the Defendant unless restrained by an
Order of the Court.
-
3.As a result of the Claimant’s conduct the Defendant has been caused anxiety, alarm and distress.
Particulars of harassment
-
1.This Claim was not brought for any genuine concern by the Claimant for any damage to his reputation, and herein the Defence is repeated. It was advanced not for legitimate reasons, but as a tactic to harass and to force the Defendant to settle the claims responded to above – claims that are of no actual merit. The Claim, Defence and Counterclaim (but not Reply and Defence to Counterclaim, which was sloppily prepared by Mr. Garrett’s legal team in a hurry and contained serious lies – signed with a statement of truth! - probably because they hoped I would settle a few days before the deadline), and Schedule of Harassment are annexed for the Garrett Case, which is extremely and obviously connected to this one. It is totally unacceptable conduct by the barrister and the law firm, which is under an advanced investigation by the SRA. The legal team is exactly the same in both cases, constituting not only a potentially conflicting overlap but also ethical breaches.
-
2.The Defence, hitherto, has already set out the reasons - the coincidence that both use the same lawyer and barrister, as well as their personal connections, their professional connection, the timings since 2021 and so on.
-
3.AND the Defendant claims
(1) Damages for harassment.
(2) Interest pursuant to section 35A of the Senior Courts Act 1981 at such rate and for such period as the Court thinks fit.
(3) An injunction to restrain the Claimant whether by himself, his servants or agents or otherwise howsoever from pursuing a course of conduct amounting to harassment of the Claimant contrary to sections 1, 1A, 3 and 3A of the Protection form Harassment Act 1997.
(4) Further or other relief.
(5) Costs.
A note on the sum:
-
1.In the Garrett Case, the Defendants counterclaimed damages up to £25,000 each - the fee being £1,250 for each person (so £50,000 total; a lot more should have been put it, but the court fees are significant and Garrett lives in a forest in another continent, so enforcing that or any such ruling can be challenging). Since there is a clear attack here in the Defendant's budget, in this case and other, although the counterclaim should be for a sum much higher the Defendant counterclaims damages £10,000, as per FEE0209 in https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/67e692b58ac59d1882eaddbb/EX50A-civil-and-family-court-fees_April_25.pdf
-
2.It should be stated clearly that the Defendant is entitled for much more for enduring an abusive lawsuit - even a pair of such lawsuits - for merely reporting correctly on crimes or arrest in the US. However, due to relatively low budget, a low "band" in the damages spectrum is chosen.
-
1.It is unfair that by attacking my budget with a "twin" case - not just one single meritless case with many claims in it and hundreds of pages that overwhelm the recipient's lawyer (the fees associated with merely reading the material) - they limit the Defendant's ability to properly pursue compensation, set aside the difficulties associated with forcing them to pay (if they lose, as they inevitably should) when they are based in another continent.
-
2.I also understand that when issuing a counterclaim there will be a fee, 5% up to £10,000. A claimant can counterclaim for a limit, possibly the limit of the claim or an arbitrary figure based upon a realistic estimate.
When I put in this counterclaim they failed to put (or formulate) a defence and failed to meet a deadline set by a Judge only weeks earlier. Instead, they asked for more time. Later they lied, repeatedly, about the connection between Graveley and Garrett. When questioned under oath (at risk of perjurious statements) Garrett 'broke down' (after he swore on the Bible) and confessed he had spoken to Graveley about suing me. █
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 |
| 2026-05-08 |
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!) |
| 2026-05-09 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 71 Out of 200: 5RB Barristers Made Tens of Thousands of Pounds by Changing From Plural to Singular for Microsoft's Graveley and Garrett |
| 2026-05-10 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 72 Out of 200: Microsoft's Graveley and Garrett Signed Documents That Hold Them Accountable to Truth and Liable for Lies |
| 2026-05-11 |
SLAPP Censorship - Part 73 Out of 200: Microsoft's Graveley and Garrett Remain Closely Connected in May 2026 ("Tag-Teaming" Against Bloggers in Another Continent) |
