In the middle of August, Melanie Byng and Andrew Lewis served a claim on us to try and get even more money for their lying and evidence tampering than they had previously undertaken verbally and in writing. Quelle surprise.
They had already changed their minds, first requesting we make the deeds of our home over to them, but then going back on that because they didn’t want to pay stamp duty. Then they asked us if we would mind if they applied for an order for the sale of our family home instead.
When we went down to court to hear the charge be put over our home back in early April, their local agent had advised us that the way to avoid consenting to anything was simply not to object when they applied for that sale order. So when they asked, we merely said we would object to anything they did before the end of August which was as much time as they had undertaken to give us, i.e. right at the end of the school holidays.
While it must be true that there is no optimum time for your children to have to give their home to perjurious stalkers, when they served this claim in the middle of August, it was certainly obviously intended to harass.
As well as being before their original deadline, the claim they served was simply vexatious, with another one of those characteristic witness statements by soit-disant free speech hero, solicitor Robert Dougans of Bryan Cave – trying to twist the facts to make the judge willing to throw us out of our home.
Artfully ambiguous about money, his deceitful witness statement claimed that they were only after the house, but the draft order attached to the claim included interest on the whole amount of nearly £50 per day since February, clearly hoping as usual that the judge would be too stupid or lazy to read it properly.
“Look at all Melanie Byng and Andrew Lewis’ reasonable attempts to settle” it all said (we’re paraphrasing, of course), “Steve Paris and Angel Garden are the ‘architects of their own misfortune’, and you should overcome your natural antipathy to such a crass action as to award my supremely slippery clients their family’s home!”
To prove this, there was a long bundle of exhibits including mediation letters, previously shrouded in “confidentiality”.
For some reason they had included letters they’d sent us when we were being forced to try and “negotiate” a settlement, including the letters where they had admitted the use of Professor Byng’s medical credentials to achieve ostracisation, by insinuating he had diagnosed Angel when he met her when her mum was dying, with a mental illness that made her actually “dangerous”.
This admission was frankly made but it was denied to us to have it available for our own use. She was basically just going to just send it to Alicia Hamberg and Diana Winters, supposed Steiner critics whose rabid venom towards our family has not yet been fully exposed.
As such, it was worse than useless as a remedy for this admitted harassment in spite of all the many many comments about “there are lots of people who know about this now and they will tell each other” etc,. This is why the admission didn’t even figure in later drafts of the super secret gag they were trying to fashion, and was replaced by attempts to silence us about Lewis and Bing’s involvement in any “alleged mobbing to date”.
Last week, looking at this admission, a police officer told us that he wouldn’t have settled for that and neither could we. The admission of conscious harassment and of malice was privately given and the means to correct it denied outright.
This was the reason we had to go back to court and try and include the harassment claims, as this is the exact course of conduct described by the judge when refusing that.
In court therefore, when we had to listen to her lying to the Judge about not using Prof Byng’s credentials to fuel this smear, we were not allowed to tell the judge that this had been privately admitted.
This was the context in which he commented on Angel: “the impression became irresistible that in truth the Second Claimant finds it extremely difficult to accept that others may rationally form any view different from her own; and naturally, repeatedly, and very rapidly leaps to the conclusion and settled belief that if they do, they can have done so only out of personal hostility to her.”
Yeah right! Now the people who have done this are being rewarded by being given our and our children’s home.
During the new case, they just continued to lie and we stood our ground seeking a strike out on the basis that the substantives were in dispute and that if they went against their evidenced undertaking to leave it at “just” our home, we would fight to stay where they already knew our address as Melanie Byng has made a death threat towards Angel and Lewis has clearly sought, while claiming to want nothing to do with us, to solicit information for a dossier with which to threaten her liberty.
There was NO WAY we would both move out of this address and give them another one to harass us further. Our correspondence ended with them claiming that:
This easy lie, on top of all the other lies and threats you and your clients have made, more than justify our fear of you having a forwarding address. You do know where we live now with our children, and you are taking it from them, in spite of supposedly “honestly believing” Ms Garden to be mentally ill! Anyone would be right to be scared of such people.”
They backed down but not without finally throwing our free speech into court because they really cannot risk putting their point of view into the open market place of ideas.
Free speech heroes? Britain, you can do better!