Wednesday, 1 June 2022

Congratulations Johnny Depp on his case against Amber Heard!

It's about time that men started to stand up for themselves when faced with false allegations, and I am very pleased that Mr Depp took the risk and won.

Quite frankly, I have had enough of all this me-too nonsense. Every week we have to read how men are the enemy, and how every man is a rapist. No. This is completely wrong.

The truth is Amber Heard is a malicious liar. She tried to ruin Mr Depp's life making false accusations, and it royally backfired.

When I watched Heard give evidence (via live stream) she reminded me of Eleanor de Freitas: Intelligent, yet calculating and utterly wicked.

Throughout Mr Depp's case, Heard tried every trick in the book to twist around the facts, just like Eleanor did to me. It really outraged me, and I am so pleased this innocent man has won. 

Johnny Depp is the real victim.

At the end of the day these liars only have themselves to blame for the mess they created. Remember, they could have retracted at anytime, instead they chose to keep lying. 

And it is lairs like Amber Heard and Eleanor de Freitas that cause major problems for the real victims of abuse, because they are less likely to be believed. Shame on them.

Well done Johnny. Keep on rockin'. Victory to justice and truth!



 




Tuesday, 8 March 2022

How to successfully defend a false accusation of harassment in court.

In 2016 I was falsely accused of 'harassing' David de Freitas. What happened is that Mr de Freitas went to the newspapers saying his daughter had been raped by me.

I was in distress and wrote to him and his lawyer several times protesting my innocence, sending them material that showed his daughter to be a liar. This included cctv of us buying sex toys the day after she said she was raped.
 
The idea was that he would realise he was wrong and stop giving press interviews. I also published that material online to oppose the inaccurate press reports.

According to him and the authorities who prosecuted me: Contacting him, accusing his (dead) daughter of being a liar and publishing photos of her buying sex toys was 'harassment'.
 
So what happened?
 
The trial took place at Westminster Magistrates Court on the 26th and 27th May 2016. A week later I was cleared of harassment with the judge saying I was a man 'wrongly accused' in his 12 page  judgement. But it was not an easy process. Understanding the law was an important part of my case.

Tip 1
There is no statutory definition of harassment, so it is open to (mis)interpretation by the authorities and the courts. Depending on what type of harassment you are accused of, the Harassment Act 1997 itself creates various defences, one of which is: 
 
'That in the particular set of circumstances the pursuit of the course of conduct was reasonable'.

Some lawyers or even the court might  believe that the defendant needs to prove that their actions were reasonable. This is completely wrong. I know of at least two people who were wrongly convicted and then won on appeal because the Magistrates did not understand the law. The burden is actually on the prosecution to show the course of conduct was beyond unreasonable. Your lawyer needs to make this clear to the court, who might otherwise get confused on who needs to prove what.

Tip 2
Text messages, emails or what you said to 3rd parties (during the alleged harassment) might be of relevance to show your innocent state of mind. I.E. In my case I presented to the court messages I had sent to the police that were similar to what I had sent Mr de Freitas, (which showed that Eleanor was a liar and a prostitute). In my case the judge stated: "The fact that he sent them to the police is, in my judgement, significant, as he clearly did not think he was doing anything wrong"
 
Tip 3.
The third most important thing, is to define what 'unreasonable' is, in terms of harassment. I.E. Where is the line between reasonable and unreasonable. Your lawyer will need to explain to the court what that is, or they will make their own interpretation. Never assume the court knows the law. Also don't assume your lawyer knows it either. Make sure they know about the below authorities:
 

Majrowski v Guys and Thomas’ NHS Trusts [2007]
‘Where the quality of the conduct said to constitute harassment is being examined, courts will have in mind that irritations, annoyances, even a measure of upset, arise at times in everybody's day-to-day dealings with other people. Courts are well able to recognise the boundary between conduct which is unattractive, even unreasonable, and conduct which is oppressive and unacceptable. To cross the boundary from the regrettable to the unacceptable the gravity of the misconduct must be of an order which would sustain criminal liability under section 2 ……….. Harassment is not defined in the Act, but it includes causing anxiety or distress. A course of conduct means conduct on at least two occasions …... A great deal is left to the wisdom of the courts to draw sensible lines between the ordinary banter and badinage of life and genuinely offensive and unacceptable behaviour’

Lord Justice May in that case said (para 82):

"Thus, in my view, although section 7(2) provides that harassing a person includes causing the person distress, the fact that a person suffers distress is not by itself enough to show that the cause of the distress was harassment. The conduct has also to be calculated, in an objective sense, to cause distress and has to be oppressive and unreasonable. It has to be conduct which the perpetrator knows or ought to know amounts to harassment, and conduct which a reasonable person would think amounted to harassment.
 
Levi v Bates [2015]
The case of Levi v Bates [2015] is also pertinent because it stated that harassment had to targeted behaviour, namely behaviour aimed at someone, rather than behaviour which caused alarm or distress without being aimed at anyone, Thomas explained. Provided that it was targeted at someone, the conduct complained of did not have to be targeted at the claimant, if he or she was foreseeably likely to be directly alarmed or distressed by it; there was no reason why Parliament should have deliberately excluded from the Protection from Harassment Act 1997, persons who were foreseeably alarmed and distressed by a course of conduct of the targeted type contemplated by the word harassment.

Dowson v Chief Constable of Northumbria [2010] EWHC 2612 (QB)
The threshold for harassment was described as being at the point where the torment of the victim is of an order which would sustain criminal liability.

Scottow v Crown Prosecution Service 2020 EWHC 3421
This was a landmark case (with recent press coverage) concerning social media publications in which the Court of Appeal affirmed the right to offend. Paragraph 43 states: "The prosecution argument failed entirely to acknowledge the well-established proposition that free speech encompasses the right to offend, and indeed to abuse another".

Sunday, 6 February 2022

Harriet Wistrich and Julie Bindel: The feminists who mislead the public.

Eleanor de Freitas was a  liar. In 2013 she falsely accused me of rape. In 2012 she falsely accused her parents and landlords of abuse. Even her parents have admitted the latter in court documents.

Both the Attorney General and the Director of Public Prosecutions have made public statements confirming that it was correct to prosecute Ms de Freitas for perverting the course of justice. The DPP noted that her prosecution relied on no less than 10 pieces of evidence. This included witness statements as well as cctv and text messages, including one from Eleanor herself saying that she had "huge fun" with me, sent at the exact time she was supposedly raped.

For the record, I was never charged with  rape. It was Eleanor who was charged with lying, not the other way around.

This month, some nine years after the allegations, an organisation called Centre for Women's Justice is using Ms de Freitas name to promote their cause, implying she was a victim. This organisation is run by Harriet Wistrich, a well-known feminist.

Last week Julie Bindel (Wistrich's partner) wrote an article which appeared in The Critic magazine stating: 

"We live in a rape culture where legions of men feel entitled to commit sex crimes, secure in the knowledge that they will very probably get away with it.". 

The final paragraph ends by saying the Eleanor de Freitas case is "one example" of this, thus implying  I'm guilty of rape. This is not only untrue, it is seriously defamatory.

Even if they don't believe me, then surely they can recognise that both the Attorney General and DPP looked at the case and concluded there was strong evidence that Eleanor had lied? Even the coroner said there were many things on Eleanor's mind before she died. In a psychiatric report, Eleanor complains extensively about her family, not me.

The real truth is that Wistrich and Bindel are seriously misleading the public, and they know it. But they are not alone. There are  other feminist organisations who follow their example.

Back in 2014, when this case hit the press, a huge number of women's groups jumped on the bandwagon, parading Eleanor's name as if she was a hero. I was alarmed because it implied I was a rapist, which is categorically untrue. I contacted the charities, offering to show them evidence that proved I was innocent.

Every one of these charities declined. They didn't want to know. They did not want to see the cctv, text messages or any other evidence. They were prepared to support Eleanor, unconditionally, without looking at the facts and continued to peddle false information.

When I read about the same charities making statements on other cases in the press,  I just can't take them seriously. Because I know how they operate. The charities in question are: 

Refuge, Justice For Women, Women Against Rape, Rape Crisis, Eaves, One in four, Nia, Liberty, Centre for Women Justice, Victim Support, Campaign to End Rape, End Violence against Women.

Below: Harriet Wistrich and Julie Bindel.


 


 


Friday, 18 December 2020

My nightmare seven year encounter with false accusers Eleanor de Freitas and her father David explained in one easy to read blog post.

In October 2012 I started to become friends with Eleanor de Freitas. I had known her cousin Lizzie Noel for years. We began to chat daily on Facebook messenger and by December 2012 we had exchanged over 500 messages. In all that time she appeared to be a completely normal and fun person, there was nothing out of the ordinary. She was an intelligent straight 'A' student, very assertive, independent and confident.

On December 22nd 2012 she sent me text messages insisting that we meet for a "massage session" even though I was apprehensive. She told me to "change my sheets" and that we would have "croissants in bed together" the next day.

The next day she came round to my flat and we had some lunch and I accompanied her whilst she did her Christmas shopping. We came back later that afternoon to my flat where we chatted for hours and hours. She called her father and told him where she was (as she was living with her parents at the time). We later had consensual sex that evening and she stayed the night. We were not drunk, we had one small (300ml) bottle of cider each. Not even enough to be over the drink drive limit.

We woke up and had some breakfast, we were getting on amazingly well. She was only meant to come over for lunch (the day before) but now we had been together for almost 24hrs. We were playing music and she was dancing around my living room. (I later learned she messaged a mutual friend that morning and told him she had "huge fun" with me). At 1130am we went shopping to Ann Summers, a shop which sells sex toys. We joked about getting a vibrating egg and during the shopping trip she bought no less than £340 of sex aids whilst I watched.

The excessive shopping trip caused me some concern and also the night before she told me she had depression (even though she seemed the exact opposite to me). I started to have my suspicions she might be a prostitute. At around 6pm that evening I did some searches online and found out she was indeed an escort. It was all a bit to much for me.

She called me up around 7pm after having sent me some very strange text messages. It was only minutes after I found out she was an escort. I did not know what to think. I had a bad gut feeling about her since the Ann Summers shopping trip and decided to end things there and then. I felt manipulated and told her not to contact me.

I did not realise that this sudden rejection after a night of passion would set her off on a spiral of revenge. Later than evening I saw some bizarre Facebook posts. On 26th December her cousin sent me messages accusing me of having done something awful to Eleanor. On 29th December her mother called me to ask what had happened? I answered all her questions but stopped short of saying her daughter was a call girl.

Friends began to avoid me and rumors started to circulate. On 3rd January 2013 I was told by a friend that Eleanor was going round telling people I had raped her, tortured her and didn't let her escape from my flat. I couldn’t believe what I was hearing.

On 4th January I wrote to Eleanor and told her to stop spreading lies or I would report her for harassment. I also called her father to explain the situation (since his wife had contacted me days earlier) although there was no answer so I left a voicemail.

That evening I went to the police station to report Eleanor for harassment. But instead of taking the report the police told me that Eleanor had been to the police station an hour before I had arrived and alleged I raped her. I was arrested and taken into custody.

During my police interview it was alleged that I waterboarded and tortured Eleanor, as well as raping her. It was absurd. However at this stage I no evidence to prove my innocence so it was actually very scary. I did not sleep for weeks, smoked like a chimney and lost a lot of weight.

By the end of February 2013 Ann Summers had given me a copy of the CCTV that showed Eleanor and I shopping for £340 of sex toys the morning after the alleged rape. Not only that but friends provided text messages that showed she told them she had "huge fun together" and that she complained about me rejecting her. The police dropped the case, but thy weren't interested in prosecuting Eleanor for lying. They just shrugged their shoulders as if it was nothing and said "these things happen".

Unfortunately Eleanor continued to go round and tell people for months and months that she had been raped. My life continued to be a nightmare. I had people contacting me telling me about all these things she was saying about me. Rape allegations never go away. Especially if you are arrested. "That's the guy who was arrested for rape," people will always say.

I decided the only way to clear my name was to prosecute Eleanor myself, through a private prosecution. I hired a team of  specialist lawyers and in  August 2013 we took the CCTV and text message evidence, as well as other evidence and placed this evidence into court. Eleanor was issued with a summons. This is when things got even weirder. Instead of getting his daughter a lawyer David de Freitas wrote to the police to try to have me arrested for harassment…. He was complaining about me putting my evidence in front a judge, who then issued a summons, saying it was “harassment” on my part.

Eleanor eventually appeared in Westminster Magistrates Court in September 2013, charged with perverting the course of justice. The judge refused to throw out the case and sent the case up to the more serious Crown Court for a further hearing. Eleanor's lawyers wrote to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) and asked them to take over my court case and stop it.

In the meantime Eleanor’s lawyers sent us a psychiatric report which said she was fit to stand trial. It was a damning report and probably sent by her lawyers in error. In the report Eleanor complained extensively about her father and family life as having an impact on her mental health. There was no mention of me having an impact her mental health. It was mostly negative comments about her father. 
 
Eventually in December 2013 the CPS decided they would take over and continue with the prosecution. They found it was both in the public interest and there was plenty of evidence to show she had lied to police. In January 2014 at a plea and case management hearing Eleanor kept up the lies and pleaded not guilty. The trial was all set for 7th of April. 
 
On the 4th of April my lawyer called me to her office. It was a Friday and the case was just three days away. I went up to my lawyers office, she told me to sit down and that's when she told me the news... 'Eleanor has killed herself'. I was shocked and of course I felt sorry for her parents, how could one not be.
 
I also was concerned about some form of retribution by her family. I was right. Within a month Eleanor’s mother Miranda de Freitas starting sending threatening messages to witnesses in the prosecution. Eventually she was reported for harassment and the police visited her to tell her to stop.

Seven months later on November 6th 2014 the story hit the press. Eleanor’s father David de Freitas had gone to pretty much every feminist organization, every newspaper and TV broadcaster saying his daughter was wrongly prosecuted and that there was no evidence that she had lied. He also gave my name to the press. Within 24hrs my name was all over the internet.

I contacted his lawyers to tell them there was CCTV and text message evidence to show his daughter had lied about the rape allegation, in the hope he would realise his error and stop spreading lies. I thought he has made a mistake and hadn't seen the evidence. Instead of listening his lawyers reported me to police for “harassment” and continued their false campaign.

Not only was my name in the papers as a supposed rapist, which was all false, I was now back in the police station being interviewed for this latest harassment complaint. It was truly awful to have to be in that situation. I was being falsely accused again and again.

Most newspapers refused to delete inaccuracies and refused to mention the CCTV and text message evidence and my family received death threats. They were all siding with the feminists. So I went to the Mail On Sunday and I told my story and also set up a website publishing the CCTV and other evidence.

David de Freitas went back to the police and reported me for harassment again. Saying it was upsetting to see his daughter on CCTV shopping for sex toys and portrayed as a prostitute. But then why the did he bring this into the public domain then if he did not the actual truth published?

In December 2014 the Director of Public Prosections made a public statement confirming there was evidence which contradicted the account Eleanor de Freitas gave to police. But within minutes of this being published David de Freitas went to the press saying this was not true. 
 
I had had enough and instructed lawyers to start legal action against Mr de Freitas for libel. This was a man who only wanted to fight and not stop his lies. He had libeled me for 6 weeks and there was a limit. Before then I was open to the fact that he might be given some slack but he had now gone too far. All I wanted was peace in my life and to be left alone.

By August 2015 his lawyers had said in writing that he would continue going to the press and that he could repeat his allegations when he wanted. What to do? Let him accuse me of rape again and again? Or put a stop to it? Somehow he had managed to pursued every feminist charity in the UK that his daughter was innocent and I was guilty, this was me against an entire feminist army that would seek to destroy my reputation for the rest of my life. Things on the internet don't disappear. Every person I would ever meet would look me up (e.g. to find me on LinkedIn) and then they would see all this awful nonsense. It was important to clear my name in court.

The libel case was scheduled for June 2016. In the meantime David de Freitas, his lawyers and his feminist charities had written dozens of letters to the Police and CPS asking me to be charged with harassment. Eventually the authorities gave in to his demands and charged me with harassment, even thought I had not had contact since telling his lawyers to stop talking to the press almost eighteen months before. Because the case was in the public eye the authorities were acting under pressure from his feminists groups and had to be seen as not being soft, so they went ahead and prosecuted me.

I was put on trial in June 2016 for harassment and the judge found me not guilty. Judge Tan Ikram even said I was a man wrongly accused. I was relieved someone understood what was going on.

Two weeks later we had the libel case and the result quickly followed six weeks later. In his judgement My Justice Warby agreed that David de Freitas caused serious harm to my reputation and that the rape allegations made by Mr de Freitas were not true. But in a bizarre twist he said that David de Freitas free speech rights were more important than my reputation (also known as the Public interest Defence - Section 4 of the Defamation Act 2013). In other words he said it was more important de Freitas should be able to speak about his dead daughter even if what he was saying wasn’t true. And on that basis I lost the case and was ordered to pay David de Freitas legal bill, starting with a payment of £400,000. And was just the first installment! The full amount I was being asked to pay (at that time) was around £1.5m.

I couldn’t believe it. So here’s what has just happened. I was falsely accused of rape in the press for a six week period, (with the websites quoting David de Freitas defamatory statements to the world for two years). He knew there is CCTV and text messages that proved I was innocent but lied to the press regardless to fit his story. That's what we found out at trial. I asked him to stop at the time of his press campaign, by writing to his lawyers, and he continued. And not only does he get away with it I am ordered to pay all his legal bill. What justice is that? The name of that judge is Sir Mark Warby and he knows he got it wrong. He clearly felt sorry for de Freitas and made him win on a technicality.

So of course I decided to appeal. If I didn’t appeal then I would be bankrupted. So I went to the court of appeal. In December 2016 the court of appeal agreed the judgement was potentially wrong and agreed to hear the case in full. In the meantime just as expected David de Freitas issued bankruptcy proceedings against me, which were stayed pending the outcome of the appeal.

The appeal took ages though, two more years in fact. David de Freitas kept making applications to the court to have me bankrupted (unsuccessfully) and by the time we arrived in the Court of Appeal it was April 2018 - over five years since I was falsely accused of rape. I was exhausted by the court process.

Out of the blue in June 2018 the Attorney General made a public statement confirming again that it was correct to prosecute Eleanor de Freitas for making her rape allegations. It doesn't say I am innocent, but it implies there was a good reason to take her to court for lying.

In November 2018 we got the result of the appeal…. Unfortunately the court of appeal made the same decision as the original judge (Section 4 Defence). Freedom of speech wins over reputation they say. The judgement however does have a couple of pages dedicated to the CCTV and text message evidence which shows I am innocent [see paragraph 45 and 61]. Any lawyer will read the fine detail and see that I am innocent, but the general public are not going to read an entire judgement. To them losing a libel case means something else. However the section 4 defence in no way implies I am guilty, all it means is de Freitas gets a special immunity in the face of his false allegations, but it does mean I am going to have to pay for de Freitas £2m legal bill, and face bankruptcy.
 
[NB The judgement mentions de Freitas did not name me during the press interviews. This is a legal technicality. He actually provided my name to the press in the form of documents, which was a sneaky way for him to get away with naming me, without it being in a press statement, and of course the press published my name].
 
On January 7th 2019 David de Freitas took me to the High Court and  bankrupted me on the back of his demand for £2m. I didn't have £2m so the court bankrupted me. I was a bankrupt for a year, until 7th January 2020.  
 
And that's my story. I was falsely accused in public for years on end, my case throw out of court even though I am innocent and then bankrupted by my accuser. 
 
And would I do it again? Absolutely. Anyone that says Eleanor is a victim of rape will be sent court papers very swiftly, because it is completely false. Of course I will defend myself.

One small victory though was that I did take the Metropolitan Police to court, myself and with no help from lawyers, for police misconduct during the "rape" investigation (for refusing to prosecute Eleanor or look at my cctv and text message evidence) and won £10,000. Unfortunately the press were not interested in reporting this. 
 

The real shame about this case is that it's individuals like Eleanor de Freitas that cause real rape victims problems because when the real rapists are taken to trial the jury will think: "I wonder if she's not a vengeful liar like Eleanor". Real rape victims are now suffering because of her false allegations.

Mr de Freitas is equally guilty of spreading harmful misinformation around. He has told the world in his press campaign (and continues to do so) that Eleanor was prosecuted on the back of "no evidence" which will make real rape victims scared of coming forward thinking they could be prosecuted if their story is inconsistent.  It is very important that people know there was a mountain of evidence against Eleanor and even two of her own doctors said she was fit to stand trial. It was a rare thing to have such a prosecution, because of the amount of evidence.

Some important facts:

  • Eleanor made her first false rape complaint against another man in 2012, I was her second victim.
  • She falsely accused her own parents of poisoning and imprisoning her in 2012, this is even admitted by her father... who argues it shows she was 'vulnerable' and should never have been put on trial.
  • The case was only ever made public when David de Freitas went to the press in November 2014, and put his daughters (and my) name out there all over the internet.
  • David de Freitas knew about the cctv and text message evidence before he went to the press, but mislead the public to fit his story, and said there was no evidence.
If anyone reading this wants more details please don’t hesitate to contact me although you can read the story in full and see some papers by clicking on archive on the right hand side. You can also read a letter written by the Director of Public Prosecutions answering David de Freitas questions about the case, which was referred to in the libel proceedings as was the psychiatric report and other documents.

Friday, 3 July 2020

Online video of Eleanor de Freitas emerges showing her true colours

Last week I was having a look at the website analytics for this blog. As I was looking through the data I noticed that someone had visited an online video  before visiting my blog. I went online to see why online traffic was coming from this source. 
 
It was in fact a video of Eleanor de Freitas, which explains the connection to my own blog. The video was titled "posh British escort shagged for cash".
 
In the December 2012 blog entries, I explained it was when I discovered Ms de Freitas was an escort that I broke off the relationship. She got angry and then made a false accusation as an act of revenge.
 
For many years, I was accused by her family and various feminists (Julie Bindel,  Harriet Wistrich, Lisa Avalos) that I was lying about this and making it up to upset the family. 
 
Well, now I have video evidence of Eleanor talking into camera confirming that she was indeed a prostitute, proving that I was telling the truth all along.
 
Below: A screenshot from the video I found. 
 
 
Note: I have not re-published the actual video nor have I linked to it. At all times Eleanor de Freitas was aware she is being filmed on the video, consents to being filmed and authorized it's publication online. It is clearly a business transaction in which she was paid. I have no involvement with the publication or any re-publication of this video and am merely speaking about its existence and how it relates to my legal case involving her. This is not entirely new information, Eleanor de Freitas escorting has been discussed since 2015 by the national press, and is already in the public domain for example.

Monday, 9 December 2019

Corrupt police officer Julian King resigns and is found GUILTY of misconduct in his absence.

It was DI Julian King (and DC Phil Dial), from the Metropolitan Police Sapphire unit who investigated Ms de Freitas false rape claims back in 2013. Now DI King has resigned before any action could be taken against him with regards to:

- Withholding evidence form the CPS
- Leaking information about me to the press
- Refusing to watch CCTV or text message evidence

Although DI King resigned the police recorded the allegations made against him as "proven" - in other words DI Julian King has been found GUILTY of misconduct in relation to the above.

These officers (along with Eleanor) probably thought I wouldn't follow up on their misconduct. It's been seven years, but I am glad I didn't give up. People who break the law must face the consequences.



Thursday, 21 February 2019

Metropolitan Police pay me £10,000 in compensation.

The Metropolitan Police have paid me £10,000 in general damages with regards to the very serious misconduct of Detective Inspector Julian King and Detective Constable Phil Dial in which they:

- Both refused to watch CCTV evidence I provided them with, and never looked at text messages that showed Eleanor de Freitas had made a false allegation of rape.

- Both knew that Eleanor de Freitas had a history of making false rape complaints, but let her get away with it again and again.

- Detective Inspector King also breached the data protection act releasing my confidential information  to the de Freitas family without my consent.

Last year, the Daily Mail briefly reported the Police Misconduct. Click here to see the article. The officers are still under investigation by the IPCC and are facing a misconduct hearing at some point in the future. The outcome of that investigation is not yet known and that procedure is separate from my case against the police.

As well as receiving compensation from the police, it is possible that the officers will face disciplinary action if they are found guilty.

Watch this space.


Monday, 7 January 2019

David de Freitas bankrupts me.

Six seeks weeks ago I lost my appeal (in the court of appeal) which meant I had to pay David de Freitas legal costs. The judge ordered me to pay an "interim payment" of £400,000 by the 19th December 2018, but I had run out of money.

Mr de Freitas legal bill is probably somewhere around £1.8m. I didn't make the payment of £400,000 so David de Freitas applied to have me bankrupted and that's what has happened. It's no secret, the bankruptcy is being advertised in the Gazette as with all bankrupts, so might as well put it here as part of the narrative.

I've moved out of my flat I lived in for 19 years and now living in a rental. That flat will be sold to pay off Mr de Freitas legal bill. It's all a bit sad, but it can't get any worse than this. There is nothing to lose at this stage.

Overcoming setbacks and making comebacks are what makes life interesting, so even though I should be depressed I am actually pretty upbeat and excited about the future. It only gets better from here.  Bring on 2019!

Wednesday, 21 November 2018

Defamation Appeal: Judgement Day: Court affirms freedom of speech is more important than reputation, even though I was the victim of a false accusation.

PRESS STATEMENT ON TODAYS COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

Four years ago David de Freitas made a series of defamatory allegations in the national press implying I had raped his daughter. At the time my family received death threats and my life was turned upside down.

I asked him to stop and threatened legal action but Mr de Freitas continued to repeat his allegations. It was after the fifth defamatory statement that I commenced legal proceedings.

Several months later his lawyers stated that he would continue going to the press and that nothing could prevent him from repeating the 'words complained of'.

I had two choices: Do nothing and be labelled a rapist for the rest of my life, or go to court, clear my name and get an injunction preventing repetition.

A trial date was set for June 2016. Three months before trial I made a 'without prejudice' offer asking for nominal damages of £1 and 25% of my legal costs to settle the case, on condition Mr de Freitas accepted liability. All I ever wanted was to clear my name.

I never received any response to my settlement offer and the trial went ahead. The judge accepted that David de Freitas had caused serious harm to my reputation but ruled that his free speech rights were more important and gave him a special immunity known as the 'public interest defence'. My defamation claim was dismissed.

I appealed the judgement and today, after a further two years of legal battles, the court of appeal dismissed my claim.

I am incredibly disappointed. In a nutshell this judgement says that it was perfectly legal for Mr de Freitas to wrongly accuse me of raping his daughter, on five separate occasions and in the face of evidence which showed I was innocent. Mr de Freitas never advanced a defence of truth or honest opinion.

This is the first time the 'public interest defence' has been successfully deployed. It is not without controversy because it allows the innocent to be wrongly accused, whilst the accuser is given complete immunity.

Thursday, 26 July 2018

Still awaiting the result of the appeal, as the Summer legal term comes to an end on the 31st July.

The appeal was heard on 17 and 18th April and was reserved for judgement. There is unfortunately no way of telling when it will be handed down. Being a complicated case I anticipated several months.

The Summer legal term comes to an end on July 31st, and Autumn term resumes on October 1st. So there won't be a judgment handed down during that period. 

Although the wait is a little frustrating, it's nice to know that no 'life changing' judgement will be arriving in my email inbox for a couple of months. 

It could go either way. And the result could be potentially be very scary.

And now, it's time to relax and forget about the case for a couple of months.

Tuesday, 26 June 2018

Attorney General Jeremy Wright QC MP says: It was right for the prosecution of Eleanor de Freitas to go ahead.

After careful consideration, the Attorney General Jeremy Wright QC MP has decided not to order an independent inquiry into the prosecution of Eleanor De Freitas.

The request for a new inquiry or review was made by Ms De Freitas’ father David De Freitas. Ms De Freitas was charged with perverting the course of justice by the Crown Prosecution Service in 2014.

The Attorney concluded that there has already been a sufficient review of the case within the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), including by Alison Saunders, the Director of Public Prosecution. The internal review process carefully considered the points that Mr De Freitas and others have raised, and reasonable conclusions have already been reached.

Commenting on his decision, the Attorney General said:

I recognise that this was a difficult case with a tragic outcome and I extend my deepest sympathies to Mr De Freitas and his family. However, I have carefully considered the concerns raised by Mr De Freitas and I am satisfied that this case has already been subject to extensive scrutiny within the CPS, and that it was right for the prosecution to go ahead.


Attorney General Jeremy Wright QC MP

Friday, 22 June 2018

I have a stalker called Lisa Avalos who keeps spreading lies about me on the internet.

For the last four years a woman based in America, has become obsessed with my case. Her name is Lisa Avalos. She also goes by the name "Professor Avalos", a supposed law professor.

I first spotted her at the harassment trial. She had flown all the way from Arkansas, USA to be there. On the day of the verdict, before the judgement had been handed down I saw her  giving out her business cards to the press, saying "call me". She was sure I was going to be found guilty.

She was wrong. I was found not guilty, and she has been mad ever since. Ever since I was found not guilty she has done everything to try to show the opposite.

It's like a dog that won't let go of a bone.

I later found out that she became friends with David de Freitas and his wife, and they have had several dinners together and even visited the family home in Fulham.

Since 2014 Miss Avalos seems to be constantly writing about me on the internet. It is amazing how a person can become obsessed with you and it certainly feels (from my perspective) like stalking. She visits my blog at least once per day. I know this from the i.p. logs.

She has visited this site hundreds of times. Sometimes even sending me anonymous messages, that unknown to her come from her i.p. address.

When you take the unsolicited messages, travelling 5000 miles to see me in court, and her repeated allegations about me - I would call that a clear case of stalking. 

It seems I am not the only one who has made complaints about her though. A quick search on the internet will find other articles alleging that she is a liar, and a busy body in other people's cases.

This is the first time I am writing about her on my blog because to me she is a nobody who has a chip on the shoulder, so why would I want to write about such a person?

Today I am writing because Miss Avalos has again this month written about me, stating that I am guilty of the rape of Eleanor de Freitas, and this time she contacted the press trying to push her story which is based on a web of lies.

I have in the past asked her to stop writing about me, but she refuses. In America that's  called: The First Amendment aka "freedom of speech".

Professor Lisa Avalos has repeatedly stated that there was no evidence that Eleanor de Freitas lied and says that I raped her, which is totally false. Click Here to see the evidence that Lisa Avalos doesn't want anyone to know about.

For the last few days I've been dealing with a large media organisation called Buzzfeed who were proposing to re-ignite the story on me, saying they would publish "things you won't like".

In fact it was Lisa Avalos who contacted them, trying to push a false story about me which says I'm a guilty of rape.

An exhaustive two days was spent dealing with lawyers, sending out letters and documents to Buzzfeed showing them that I am in fact innocent. This is all very tiring. Especially when you've been dealing with this for four years. 

Lisa Avalos, if you're reading this please stop stalking me and move on.

Professor Lisa Avalos from the United States.