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

posted by Roy Schestowitz on Apr 14, 2026

Yesterday we mentioned how Microsoft's Graveley and Garrett filed connected cases to attack our legal budget after we had both sued Garrett for harassment in September 2024 [1, 2]. They're not denying it; their actions only serve to affirm and confirm this. It's as clear as daylight those two cases are basically two tentacles of the same octopus; Garrett admitted under sworn oath (he swore on the Bible) that they had lied about this and since then the Court has updated both cases in tandem.

Do 5RB and Brett Wilson LLP understand what their client did? Does it not bother them? Judging by their past, they don't care as long as men pay them money, even from third parties. Is it worth "investing" a million bucks to silence/censor my articles?

Added below is some background about SLAPPs that began in 2021 very shortly after I wrote about corruption at Microsoft GitHub, potentially resulting in the ousting of its CEO.

---

V.2Appendix II: Short Remarks From the Claimant’s US Attorney

1. A.Contrary to what the Claimant suggests – and it is not clear if any hard evidence was even shared with his UK lawyers at all (they seem unaware, based on the claims) – the US attorney sent only a brief and misleading message (personal opinion about one’s client passed off as if it was a fact). Hence it it reproduced below: 

To Whom it May Concern:

 

Mr. Graveley was charged in Travis County, Texas. Mr. Graveley never pleaded guilty, confessed, or made any admission of guilt. He was never placed on deferred adjudication. Mr. Graveley’s case was dismissed because he is innocent.

 

Sincerely,

Rick Cofer

 

1. B.Notice how generic it is, it was not even addressed to me personally. The message was sent more than 3 years ago! 

    

2. C.Techrights responded to it more than 3 years ago in  

https://techrights.org/o/2022/07/12/false-spin-and-evidence-to-come/

Presented therein was, again, the hard evidence which supports what Techrights had published.

 

1. D.To quote the summary: “We've decided to post a lawyer's letter to us (as text, as image/screenshot as well), sent twice later on a Friday, to a very private address (wonder how they got that!); we also show court files with lots more to come...” 

V.3Appendix III: Messages From the Claimant, 2022

1. A.The Claimant only ever sent two messages. Those are omitted from the case, maybe because they do not favour or support his stance. In case his lawyers were never presented with those messages, they are reproduced in full in this appendix. 

 

1. B.This message is from October 2022: 

Hello Roy, you’ve published upwards of 20 articles about me. I’m writing to beg you to take them down and give me my life back.

 

The person you’ve been working with is my long term stalker - an insane person using lies to hurt me. She has harassed family and friends for years. I wrote about her here: [redacted]

 

Your articles saying I plead guilty to a felony are false and malicious. How can I have plead guilty to a case that was dismissed? I wrote about the case here: 

[redacted]

 

You’ve published my name, phone number, home address, and signature in order to doxx me. This is a crime in your country.

 

I’m a life long open source advocate and contributor. I’m not rich or powerful, I’m just a regular engineer. Your posts have made it impossible for me to make a living. You have caused me extreme stress and trauma. I live in fear of what misinformation you might post next.

 

Please Roy, I’m begging you to take down your illegal accusations so I can live a quiet normal life 🙏🏻

 

-Alex

 

 

 

1. C.The following month he also sent the following E-mail (November 2022): 

 

Hi Roy, I’m begging you to take down this post: 

http://techrights.org/2022/07/01/balabhadra-alex-graveley-pleads-guilty/

 

It is false, I did not plead guilty. You know it’s false - you’ve seen the case dismissal form.

 

Your link shows as a top post for my name and has led to sever character damage and lost business opportunities. You have ruined my personal and professional life. I’ll be forced to take legal action if you’re unwilling to cooperate.

 

-Alex

 

1. D.Notice that the words “begging” and “beg” were used at least 3 times.  

 

1. E.See Appendix II regarding the Attorney. 

 

1. F.He took a “Texas Criminal Defense Attorney” because he knew he had done something very wrong and wanted to escape the consequences.  

    

2. G.As noted in the Defence, it is a matter of public record that this “Texas Criminal Defense Attorney” paid obscene amounts of money to Texas officials. Even whole firms – considerably large firms in fact – did not pass sums as large as his (as an individual). 

    

3. H.Further evidence of systemic failure can be provided in the Disclosure shall this hopeless (abuse of process) case advance any further. Many legal errors and tactless communications were made along the way.  

    

4. I.In Microsoft’s LinkedIn, Cofer also reveals a potential conflict of interest, sometimes known as “revolving doors”. In his own words: “He has served as a felony prosecutor, associate judge, and criminal defense attorney.” 

    

5. J.So Mr. Graveley basically hired a Judge that gives a significant amount of money to local politicians and people with oversight in the court system. 

 

1. He says: “Since entering private practice in 2018, Mr. Cofer has secured acquittal, dismissal, or reduction of charges in over 92% of all cases.”

 

1. K.Giving $11,000 to one official in one year can contribute to such “success rates”. 

    

2. L.The aim of this appendix is not to allege that the lawyer is corrupt, nor does it focus on his professional integrity. It does not resort to ad hominem attacks. It wants not to shift focus to him but rather to illuminate the chain of money from his clients to top officials, including inside the courtroom.  

    

3. M.In this Defence we will also not name allegedly corrupt officials in the US (the US with it political culture is multi-faceted and complicated, more so at the state level as there's "fragmentation"), as it would miss the points or the core aspects most relevant to us. However, if in this "foreign country" (not a Commonwealth nation either) clients can effectively bribe people or hire people who bribed (or will later bribe) key people to walk "scot-free", then there's a wider effect here and even more public interest material, certainly outside the UK as well. 

    

4. N.This sort of reporting, accompanied by hard evidence (like Techrights did) should be encouraged, not brought before a docket in the UK High Court. Worse yet, the UK High Court ought not interfere with allegations - based on proof - that some US politicians, who probably never set foot in the UK, are tainted. 

    

5. O.In short, stop using corruption in another continent as a pretext for opening a case here in the UK. The courts in the UK are already overworked and understaffed; they should not have to waste time dealing with matters of US corruption and documents obtained from the US Government.

   ---

   We've covered this many times before and showed official documents (as original PDFs and screenshots). We may do so again in the future. It's in the public interest.

   That the US legal system isn't functioning as intended is hardly shocking; let's not let that taint the legal system outside the US. █