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)
So far this year a lot has happened because I got threats to my life [1, 2], my relatives got doxed, and threats of prison sent to my wife by a person whose own spouse calls a "rapist" (several times in public this year). It's surreal. These threats began just a few days before Christmas. It's an aggressive man whose language exposes a pro-violence fetish. When asked about it he would refer to threats of violence as "joke" or "funny" - as he does when he impersonates other people or files notoriously expensive lawsuits:
Maybe it's a "joke" or "funny" to him; but not to other people.
SLAPPs are never funny. It actually began in 2021 and his stalking, harassment, and defamation of me began in 2012 after I criticised his employer for 'secure' boot. I, unlike him, do not net a 6-figure salary and do not work for monopolies, I work in the public interest against these monopolies and monopolists.
So who's funding it? Aside from Microsoft's Graveley (trying to float a languishing, meritless case because the public found out he got arrested for strangling women; it was accessible to all in the public site of the police in Texas and his attorney confirmed he was charged for it) we know from Garrett (MJG) that his legal bills were paid many times using complicated arrangements with third parties. He said this in his own words. He was taking loans and his spouse said he was running out of money a very long time ago (about a year ago).
To be clear, no privacy violations occurred; he made this admission openly, as I've explained to the Court many times before. It was foolish and impulsive to use social control media to boast about an old photograph, only to expose one's lawsuit to much scrutiny and many procedural holes.
What is at stake now?
Probably perjury, too (from what I can gather). It seems like MJG has lied to the High Court under oath. Even loans are legally considered to be third-party funding, as per the practitioners' manuals (latest edition). They should know this, hence the photographs being requested.
Then there is the dodgy assurance of finances/SFC (without any actual evidence produced or shown). I all along challenged them with the SFC (Security For Costs), as those sorts of lawsuits are for millionaires and MJG isn't one. Beating him in Court would result in him paying nothing at all (as he would be broke anyway) and he was already conniving with a man who lives with his dad.
Now he is foolishly releasing transcripts that likely show him lying about this, set aside that he is releasing transcripts, which means we too can release transcripts (he had also uploaded to the public domain our counterclaims).
To be clear, what he posts publicly shows that he evades the question and moreover his claim about being potentially liable for perjury (as a risk) omits the facts that he lives in the US and is therefore not truly accountable, just as he uses the US as a shelter from libel litigation in the UK (if we sued him for libel and won, it would be exceptionally difficult to enforce the ruling against him, an American, according to legal professionals), which makes this asymmetric and disproportionate. In essence, the asymmetry begets inherent injustice (he can libel me, but I cannot hold him accountable).
MJG does not have enough money to pursue this case, even if the Serial Strangler helps him. We expect that some time soon we will have been sent over 100 KG of legal papers. This is not something that he can afford (not even with discounts; his barrister is cheaper than ours, but he hides behind him all the time and rates are hourly).
Other people (or companies) are funding him. He won't say who. █
Image source: Self-Portrait