The Complaint About Brett Wilson LLP - Part III - Spying on Reporters' Families, Chaining Cases for Microsoft Employees Who Demand Censorship of Facts (Even Politely Expressed)
Now that Brett Wilson LLP are formally sued by their own clients the time seems right to wrap up this introductory series (there will be plenty more about this in the future). In Part I as spoke about the sorts of clients that Brett Wilson LLP is "pooling". In Part II we focused on the rogue modus operandi, which may in some contexts resemble a Mafia, not a licensed law firm.
We hypothesise they are desperate for clients (this year has been exceptionally slow for them, based on UK litigation databases) and moreover suppose they're not attentive or caring about the merit of cases they undertake. A local law firm in Manchester told us this about Brett Wilson LLP early last year. It said they're considered notorious for taking up some of the most ludicrous cases, where the chances of success or prospects of recovery (costs) are slim to none. In this case, their modus operandi is to attack the Defendants' wallet rather than actually win a case. We have clearly and meticulously documented evidence of this. They keep pushing to settle on terms unfavourable to us while threatening us with costs. This was repeatedly happening in 2024. They never really intended to take this to Court (nor could the client afford). They dig into the worth of our assets (via the HM Land Registry) and deliberately add costs to leave us more vulnerable. Our Barrister and Lawyers (at the time) have witnessed this and deem this abusive.
There are several parameters here: the firm, the clients, and their demonstrable actions.
In summary, the firm is doing what our (former, when we could afford him) lawyer calls "tag-team", wherein two cases that have no prospect of success are combined to attack our Defence budget. The lawyer at Brett Wilson LLP clearly doesn't know who the clients really are and their financial means (they apparently lied about being able to afford such High Court cases; we showed them official evidence of this and they didn't dispute that). Their clients also lack credibility for a whole bunch of factual reasons and a plethora of clearly documented instances of abuse, set aside a wide range of relevant factors/reasons. One of them has a history of sending pre-action letters for intimidation purposes, as noted above and in Part II, going back many years (he had already threatened or sent ultimatums not acted upon in the form of pre-action letters since 2021, so he merely gamed the system while residing outside the UK! He also lied about this with a "Statement of Truth", knowing this was clearly problematic).
In short, Brett Wilson LLP is advancing a baseless couple of cases** for a person who got arrested for strangulation of women and who also got exposed as directly implicated, using hard evidence, in even worse things. I published original documents (from the US authorities) to prove everything, so the SLAPPs are merely attempts to muzzle or retaliate against journalists, using the British docket for "revenge" and even resorting to abuse of lawyers not on file***. It ought to be added that as recently as this summer (for the seventh time by my count!) the timing of the letters sent by the same lawyer for two people and two cases was a giveaway. It's perfectly clear to everyone who saw these documents (3 law firms so far) that those cases are intertwined and as they are perfectly aware, we're dealing with the same lawyer (who seems to be leaving Brett Wilson LLP now), same barrister, same country, two professionally and personally connected Claimants, always strategically timed, including the many attachments they threw at my wife and I less than one working day after acting for the above-mentioned serial strangler (Balabhadra Graveley), who got arrested and charged. The Masters in both cases always ruled favourably (in our favour) since they can see why this overlap is both relevant and necessary, not to mention the nature of both cases showing signs of abusive litigation (they just try to cover up abuses). The Masters would be unimpressed by such abusive litigation, however it is strongly advised that SRA takes prompt actions as costs are spinning out of control, impacting two modest people who run non-profit specialist sites and work on them pro bono (since almost 25 years ago). █
______
** These are actions of coercion; since the pre-action letters (Feb. 2024) until almost 6 months later (we filed counterclaims [1, 2, 3]) they kept threatening financial consequences - repeatedly even - for not settling (over unjust claims brought forth in bad faith). Only when belatedly we countersued (counterclaim for harassment, we'd also sue him for libel, but libel verdicts are hard to enforce in the UK against people who reside in the US) and shortly afterwards the second SLAPP came, and moreover it from the exact same lawyer and same barrister, both acting for Americans who aren't disjoint and put forth similar claims, likely based upon similar templates and not even a distinct modus operandi. For instance, they falsely claim privacy breaches, citing GDPR, where the law is entirely inapplicable and the sole purpose seems to be making the Defence longer and thus more expensive.
*** When they sent me meritless claims, or a case of SLAPP from another person in the US (back in October 2024), personally and professionally connected to the first, they didn't proceed with a POC until February of this year and only after many repeated, strident, empty threats (threats not acted upon), sending threats at strategic times (overlap) to leverage one case to help another, targeting inappropriately also a lawyer not on file so as to intimidate him too (I have hard proof, Mark Lewis openly complained to them for doing so).