Author Archives: Samuel Collingwood Smith

About Samuel Collingwood Smith

Samuel Collingwood Smith was born in the north of England, but his family moved south early in his life and spent most of his early years in Hertfordshire before attending Queen Mary, University of London, where he studied Economics. Sam currently lives in the southeast of England. Smith was employed as a Labour Party fundraiser in the 2001 General Election, and as a Labour Party Organiser in the 2005 General Election. In 2005 Smith was elected as a Borough Councillor and served for 3 years until 2008. In 2009 Smith changed sides to the Conservative party citing division within Labour ranks, Labour broken promises and Conservative improvements to local services. In 2012 Smith started to study a Graduate Diploma in Law, passing in 2014. Smith then moved on to studying a Master's Degree in Law combined with an LPC, receiving an LL.M LPC (with Commendation) in January 2017. During his study, Smith assisted several individuals in high profile court cases as a McKenzie Friend - in one case being praised by Parliamentary petition for his charitable work and legal skills. Smith is also the author of this blog, Matthew Hopkins News, that deals with case law around Family and Mental Capacity issues. The blog also opposes online drama and abuse and criticises extreme-left politicians.

FSU Associate Professor Heather Urbanski, WorldCon Head Listener – Has Been Accused of Inappropriate Conduct by Multiple Students – Failed to Respond on WorldCon Child Torture Materials Complaints

Posted on by
2

Associate Professor of English Heather Urbanski of Fitch State University (FSU) is also the Area Head of Listening at the World Science Fiction Convention 2021. This Orwellian title means she is in charge of the department that handle complaints about breaches of the code of conduct, including sexual harassment and suchlike. It is a title roughly equivalent to, “Head of Safeguarding”. Yet, MHN can exclusively reveal that in her work as a Professor at Fitchburg State University she has, according to RateMyProfessor.com, been accused of of improper behaviour by at least 20 of her students. If true, some of these allegations would appear to meet some definitions of abuse such as bullying or demeaning behaviour. 91% of her students on the site rate her as “Awful”. At the same time this week, she has been condemned by members of an abuse survivor group this week for failing to deal with complaints about distribution of child torture material by reviled z-list author Jason Sanford. Will FSU and WorldCon officials investigate?

Image showing on the left Heather Urbanski's current RateMyProfessor grade of 1.4, on the right her picture with the question, "Enabler?" over it.

Associate Professor Heather Urbanski of Fitchburg State University gets a grade of 1.4/5 (28%) on ratemyprofessors.com. On the site, students have accused her of improper conduct towards them that the university does not appear to have investigated. She has also attracted controversy in her role as, “Listeners Area Head” at WorldCon2021. Members of a group for child abuse survivors have criticised her for failing to take robust action against Jason Sanford, “I don’t think she is a fit person to work in any kind of school […] metaphorically, it [is] like they are holding down a child to be raped and tortured.”, said one.

The current controversy over WorldCon has been brewing for years. There have always been disagreements and kerfuffles in fandom. It is an arena defined by poor social skills combined with extremely passionate interest. In recent years however, vicious political division has erupted throughout fandom such as with the 2014 #GamerGate controversy. Similar concerns have hit WorldCon, with right-wingers feeling they had to organise a slate of candidates for awards to overcome systemic discriminatory bias (archive). Concerns about inappropriate attitudes to paedophilia and child protection have also been an issue for decades and have been well-documented, for example in, “The Last Closet: The Dark Side of Avalon” by Moira Greyland and Vox Day.

The most recent scandal to hit WorldCon is its disgraceful conduct towards respected female publisher Toni Weisskopf. Weisskopf is the publisher of Baen Books, and last month was the subject of a deeply unethical and misleading hit-piece by Jason Sanford, a bad-to-awful amateur science fiction author. In response, WorldCon removed Weisskopf as a Guest of Honour, making a public statement condemning her (archive). The unjust response of WorldCon to the obviously inaccurate and misleading article led to public criticism of WorldCon and withdrawal of top science fiction authors including David Weber (archive). Weber’s withdrawal is a huge blow to Worldcon. He is vastly more famous than nearly everyone else involved. Not only is he one of the few people involved whose name I recognised, I actually own some of his books. Like, actual paper copies.

Investigation by MHN revealed that Sanford had been openly distributing and selling stories involving harm to minors and minor-bodied fictional creatures. One of these, “The Wheels on the Torture Bus Go Round and Round” involved child torture and what could appear to be grooming. Some of Sanford’s supporters have been trying to minimise the stories, but complaints were made to WorldCon. Heather Urbanski is the “Listeners Area Head” at WorldCon (staff list / archive), the department in charge of dealing with Code of Conduct complaints. As some feared retaliation, I posted my article and the complaint in their Facebook group on the basis that as I am not an attendee, I cannot be banned. I also emailed the official CoC contact email.

Continue reading →

Share Button

Smith v Baker: Baker Agrees to Lifelong Restraining Agreement, are Worldcon Extremists Next?

Posted on by
1
BakerRestrained

Esther Baker has agreed to be restrained for life from repeating her allegations against me. She is also subject to injunctions made against her in favour of John Hemming and a vulnerable victim of child abuse whose name I am keeping confidential.

My High Court case against Esther Baker has ended with her agreeing to a lifelong restraining agreement after her defences to my libel and harassment claims were struck out by Master Lisa Sullivan of the Queen’s Bench in this reported judgement on BAILII. For US readers, strike-out and summary judgement is basically English for demurrer. The terms of settlement are that she agrees to delete the tweets complained of, never repeat her allegations and I do not seek further costs. She still has to pay the costs already ordered (thousands of pounds) and has come to an arrangement via a High Court Enforcement Agency (basically, High Court bailiffs) to pay £5 a week. Forever, basically. The court Order is public and can be downloaded here. Baker has refused to settle her counter-claim despite large chunks of it being struck out by Master Sullivan on the grounds that, for example, her case was “[…] insufficiently particularised for [me] or the court to know the case […]“. That aspect of the case continues.

It would be tempting to use this opportunity to trash Baker, but I am going to do the reverse. Baker is to my mind a tragic figure, by her own admission mentally ill, who was encouraged by others to make allegations. I would salute her tenacity if nothing else and she is to my mind objectively a more competent litigator that some of our other opponents. Obviously that is a low bar given that nearly her entire Defence was struck out even after a second try. Even so, her pleadings were objectively better than some lawyers I have encountered.

Continue reading →

Share Button

We Need to Talk About Jason: Jason Sanford’s Writing, Underage Girls, Torturing Children and Child Abuse

Posted on by
11

On 15 February 2021, Z-List science fiction author Jason Sanford posted a so-called expose on “Baen’s Bar”, the web forum for Baen publishing, and attacking female Publisher Toni Weisskopf. It has been alleged that the article at first assumed Toni was, “Tony” and of the male gender, and the article was later changed. I cannot find an archive of the original article earlier than 16th. However, I was able to find comments in which Toni was referred to as male and “Tony” and where the commenter corrected. This tends to corroborate the allegation the article did misgender Toni. Regardless, it is only a minor issue compared to the horror of Jason’s writing. My analysis quickly found a smorgasboard of material that is, in my opinion, offensive, depraved and vile, including some involving the torture of minors by adults.

Screenshot of a commentor on Sanford's article misgendering Toni Weisskopf

It has been alleged that Jason Sanford misgendered Toni Weisskopf as Tony. The comment in the screenshot suggests this is true (click for full size).

Jason Sanford’s most recent short story is freely available online and it is entitled, “The Wheels on the Torture Bus Go Round and Round” (archive). The (very) short piece follows the interactions of a little girl called ‘Jane’. Jane’s age is not given, but the information that is given makes it plain she is a child. A minor. The story opens with the sentence, “All the neighborhood kids except for Jane cheered when the torture bus stopped in front of Mrs. McKinney’s house”. Jane is a “kid”. Readers will be aware of course that Sanford is not the most successful of authors, but this reads like sub-par fanfic with a disturbing focus.

The story follows Jane’s observations of visits by the eponymous “torture bus”, and being assaulted by a boy called ‘Binny’. The bus, apparently a known and accepted institution in the world of the short story, visits members of the public without explanation and literally tortures them with medieval equipment –

“They watched as the torture techs opened the back of their yellow bus and wheeled out an iron maiden stretcher and a satchel of scary tools. The techs wore black coveralls embroidered with a grinning cartoon devil holding a red whip.”

The image of a grinning cartoon devil puts me in mind of BDSM websites. Why is this story about a little girl observing this? Not that the story lasts long. It meanders on, with Jane befriending the “lead torture tech”, whose name is, ‘Leroy’. Leroy is a creepy guy who literally drives up again the next day in an unmarked white van. He is so impressed with Jane that he decides to offer her a “free torture” –

Continue reading →

Share Button

Can Monica Nieporte and William (Bill) Lawhorn’s Careers and Reputations Survive Jason Sanford?

Posted on by
7

In my last article I exposed amateur journalist and z-list science fiction author Jason Sanford’s misleading recent article about Baen Publishing’s webforum, “Baen’s Bar”.  In this second (of at least three) articles, I deal with the aftermath. A third article will deal with some of Sanford’s writing that is, in my opinion, sexually problematic, racially insensitive and offensive to people with some disabilities. There may be a fourth article but I am still investigating. Anyone who has felt that Jason Sanford has dealt with them inappropriately in any way (but especially at conventions), is invited to get in touch in confidence via the email on the, ‘About’ page.

Jason Sanford, the man who temporarily close Baen's Bar

Jason Sanford’s Linkedin images are shown here for the purposes of criticism and review. Sanford, who works for the Ohio News Media Association, is clearly not the snappiest of text writers and either his head is weirdly elongated or the aspect ratio is slightly off. His job is to do … marketing content, including graphics. (Click for full size)

Since Jason Sanford’s article misinformed but zealous readers of his have inundated the organisers of WorldCon 2021, a science fiction convention, with complaints to the extent that Baen Publisher Toni Weisskopf has been uninvited from being a guest of honour. The problem is that the allegations are, largely, just not true. At the same time, darker and darker information is emerging about Sanford. I have received a statement from lawyers for Sanford’s employers, the Ohio News Media Association (ONMA) trying to distance themselves from the scandal. However, given they are a media organisation, given Sanford uses his employment with them to advertise himself and given his followers standard of tenuous-guilt-by-association, that position seems untenable. These events can only reflect badly on ONMA, Sanford’s boss Monica Nieporte (ONMA President) and Discon III Chair Bill Lawhorn.

So, when I put up my first article about Jason Sanford’s unethical behaviour, no response was received. I offered the subjects an extension of time and I know they saw it. I also spoke to Monica Nieporte on the telephone. The day after publication, I received the following statement from lawyers instructed by ONMA –

An official statement from ONMA's lawyers.

This is the official statement from ONMA’s lawyers. Click for full size.

Jason Sanford’s conduct is outside his employment at ONMA, they say, and nothing to do with them. Now, Baker Hostetler is a large law firm but that does not mean I intend to fall over. I set out why I respectfully disagree, below. Now firstly we should make clear why ONMA would want to disassociate themselves from Jason Sanford’s article. It is a shoddy piece of journalism that no reputable media organisation would want to be associated with. The article has been debunked by a stellar list of science-fiction luminaries –

Continue reading →

Share Button

Struck Out! – Update on Smith v Baker – Nearly All Esther Baker’s Defence Struck Out

Posted on by
1
BakerRestrained

Although my claim against her is ongoing, Esther Baker has been handed a life-long restraining Order by Mrs Justice Steyn for defaming former MP John Hemming. She has also been handed a different restraining Order in the County Court for harassing a vulnerable victim of childhood abuse.

On 18 February 2021 Master Lisa Sullivan, sitting in the High Court at a remote hearing, handed down her most recent judgement in Smith v Baker. The judgement is now on BAILII (archive) and the judge has confirmed we can share it as we wish, so a copy can also be downloaded here. There was then a consequent Orders hearing in which Ms Baker was Ordered to pay all of my (very modest) costs. From the past judgement, with the High Court Enforcement Officer’s fees, Ms Baker now owes me £2,275K, so with the new costs she will owe more than 2.5K.

So, what precisely did the court decide? I am suing Esther Baker for defamation and harassment, and she is counter-suing. Esther Baker has entered a Defence and Counter-claim in which she contended she would prove the truth of her words. Baker also claimed her publications were in the public interest. All of her defamation defences have been struck out, except she is still allowed to dispute the meaning of her words and also whether the publications caused serious harm. All of the defence to the harassment claim has been struck out except I have to show the the incidents rose to harassment (which will depend on meaning), and loss (as to damages).

Much of the counterclaim has been struck-out, including all of Ms Baker’s pleas of malice and I have now been directed to file a Reply to Defence and Defence to Counterclaim. Baker may then file a Reply (which is mandatory depending on what defences I use). Because Baker’s plea of malice has been struck out, she is likely to have difficulty with any privilege defence whatsoever, meaning that once pleadings close I may have the opportunity for a further application to strike-out / for summary judgement.

Continue reading →

Share Button

Big Tech Unites Planet … Against Them, Over Political Censorship

Posted on by
Reply

I never thought I would see a day when German President Angela Merkel would defend Donald Trump (archive). But, she gets it. Social media is now a key way people discuss politics. So, when a person is banned for their opinions, it is like the phone company saying you cannot talk on their phones, because they do not like what you say. That is not to say some measure of control is important – terrorism is illegal on an old fashioned phone and it should be illegal on social media. However, it is not for Mark Zuckerberg and Jack Dorsey to be deciding what is acceptable speech.

ScaredChild

Social media censors the speech of vulnerable groups but frequently fails to censor child pornography and extremist anti-Semitism.

Imagine you are a politician. You observe, in the middle of a US Election, a group of powerful companies undermine a candidate’s campaign then ban them on contentious grounds. That candidate is the incumbent President of the United States of America. Regardless of party or nation, a chill would hit your stomach. Because, if it can happen to the most powerful politician on Earth, it can happen to you. Boris Johnson here in the UK gets it. He got it in November, according to the Daily Mail (archive). Merkel gets it. the French get it. It is now a priority in nearly every Western Nation. Trump’s ban hit them where they live.

The ban of Parler too was crass. It was as if Dorsey, Jeff Bezos, Zuckerberg put on tutus and, “We am r hav oligarchy an’ monopoly iz sexi” t-shirts before doing a high-kicking song and dance routine about their excessive market power on the front page of YouTube. In the short term it revealed their power. In the long term it all but guaranteed that power will be taken away.

The problem is that Zuckerberg and Dorsey are not politicians. They had a metallic fist that they had hidden in a velvet glove behind impenetrable walls of complexity such as post ranking algorithms. Their soft power, had they kept it soft, would have been hard to challenge and could have stayed obfuscated – at least enough to deter politicians and keep it a lower priority issue. Instead, they made the fatal, politically maladroit decision to take off that glove and reveal the stainless steel cyborg fist by starting banning mainstream commentators and politicians. They had the power but not the wisdom as to use it discreetly.

Big Tech are alleged to have sought to influence elections not just in the United States but in other countries such as Uganda, which has banned them until at least after the election. North Dakota already has legislative proposals (archive).

Every politician in the world now agrees there needs to be regulation to protect speech. In the UK and US this favours the right. Because, as soon as the government becomes the arbiter of who and what the social media companies can ban the 1st Amendment applies. In the UK, whilst our free speech laws are weaker they are still more permissive than Twitter. In a December judgement, British judges held that mis-gendering was protected speech (archive). In the UK, when a private institution is carrying out a public function, it is subject to the Human Rights Act 1998 (which includes the UK equivalent of the 1st Amendment).

Another group likely to benefit is #GamerGate. For years, they complained of social media censorship. Now, nearly every government in the world has rushed it to near the top of their agenda. The politicians have been hit where they live. Suddenly, the arguments of the likes of Zoe Quinn and Anita Sarkeesian seem immeasurably less convincing. Even in defeat, Trump may end up winning one of the most important fights in the free world today.

Share Button

40,000 Reasons to Praise the Lord: Smith v Whitbread Group PLC

Posted on by
1

A case update. I am suing a local pub in Welwyn Garden City, the Stanborough, pursuant to the Equality Act 2010 in the County Court. The named Defendant is the owner Whitbread Group PLC. On 6 January 2021 the court heard an application in public (with a member of the public in attendance), by the Defendant to strike out my claim. The application failed, leaving Whitbread to sip up most of their costs bill of over £38,000. They were instead ordered to pay my costs of £2,012 within 28 days, making a net loss of around £40,000 – perhaps a little less as some costs may apply to the trial. The costs of the interlocutory application are extinguished, meaning barring appeals, they will never get most of the £38K back even if they win at trial. Oops.

Picture of the Stanborough Pub

The Stanborough Pub, Welwyn Garden City, under darkened skies.

There are a number of legitimate public interest concerns about the case, the pub and the way the Defence has so far been conducted. For example, the average costs of an entire fast track county court case are around £15,000. The Defendant in this case tried to claim nearly £40K for a 3 hour hearing then when they failed, actually tried to argue it was unreasonable of me to seek my costs of legal advice! The judge, DDJ Octavia Knox Cartwright Ordered them to pay my costs instead and did not subtract a penny from my costs schedule.

The judge rejected the application by Whitbread to strike out my original pleadings, and their application to grant summary judgement on those pleadings. She also gave me permission to modify the pleadings by adding three half sentences. As the other side resisted my application, they were ordered to pay my costs. They can claim costs of replying to the three new half sentences, but reasonable costs arising from these are likely to be de minimis and as with all costs these can be assessed by a judge if Whitbread try to claim more. The judge held my claim has a, ‘realistic’ prospect of success.

As readers will know, I am legally qualified and have passed the LL.M LPC with a Commendation. Although I have not sought to use my LPC to practice as a solicitor, I have 10 years experience as a McKenzie Friend. In this case however, I sought a second opinion from a barrister as a sanity check on my work. I cannot share that advice as it would waive privilege, but what I can say is that I have been indemnified by a kindly philanthropist. This is a wealthy individual who considers the case has merit and is in the public interest, and has signed an agreement to pick up the tab if I lose. They have seen the advice, and are not feeling very concerned.

I am preparing a much longer article about the case because the effect of a public hearing is to put the entire bundle into the public domain under the collateral use rule. As a Christian I felt I should share this article with gratitude, but before publishing an article with more detail I want to give the Defendants pause to think this through and seek an amicable resolution.

Share Button

Raw Report with Sonia Poulton Fails to Take Off

Posted on by
1

[Update 20 November 2024 – Minor Edits and Update that Sonia Poulton was Eventually Dropped by the Platform]

In an episode of the Raw Report not so long ago, Sonia Poulton called this blog, “little read”. In some ways is fair comment, in relative terms MHN has a low circulation. At times, however, articles have had vast numbers of views and I have been surprised by the influence I have exercised. Even so, MHN is not my day job – it is a pastime that allows me to do some good but these days I have little time for. In recent years I have posted far less than once a week. Unlike myself, Sonia Poulton claims to be a professional journalist – so it is only fair to scrutinise the performance of her viewer figures.

A chart of Raw Report views by episode.

The Raw Report with Sonia Poulton was launched in September 2020. Since then, it has failed to take off, with views as measured from replays trending down to around 3,000 views per video. Picture used for the purposes of criticism and review.

Every Friday, Sonia Poulton livestreams the Raw Report. Shortly afterwards, a replay of the full episode is posted. The viewing figures for each episode are published. This can give a rough idea of viewership and trends. There are obvious caveats of course. Most views of livestream archives usually occur around the time of an episode but views can occur indefinitely so older videos will generally have an advantage. The number of views of an archive is not the same as the number of live viewers. There was a gap in the series when Sonia’s brother died.

Even so, after 8 episodes and 3 months, 5 days after the most recent episode it had 3,090 views. On 8 November 2020 episode 4 (uploaded on 6 November) had 3012 views. So it is not a huge change. Furthermore, not every view represents a person and not every view represents a person who watched the episode to the end. On 8 November Poulton had 8,473 subscribers and today she has 9,375. That is an increase of under 250 a week. It is not insignificant but it is not going viral.

Continue reading →

Share Button

Esther Baker: Please Give Generously, the Shame of Jess Phillips, Sonia Poulton, Mark Watts and David Hencke

Posted on by
3
BakerRestrained

Esther Baker was been handed a life-long restraining Order by Mrs Justice Steyn in her claim against John Hemming, which backfired spectacularly. She was handed a second lifelong Order when a child-abuse victim sued her. She has had her day in court and the ‘Truth’ has indeed been proven.

Esther Baker has been Ordered to pay my costs of applying to strike out her Defence to my libel claim and her ‘Counterclaim’. The judge has given her one last chance to rewrite it but she has to pay my interim costs. Orders in the Queen’s Bench are public, so you can download your own copy here. Baker is now begging for money on GoFundMe.com, claiming she needs the food to eat. Please give generously.

Many people have been unsympathetic to Baker, who has of course made untrue allegations of rape against one of my friends (which she is now restrained for life from repeating, and for which police are still investigating her). Baker’s crowdfunding campaign (archive) has only raised £70 in the last 24 hours. So, I have decided to put Baker’s case better than she ever could – because it amuses me and I might see some of the money.

Esther Baker is a tragic victim. No her rape allegations are not true. A court already decided that the ones against John Hemming are not true. Furthermore, I am simply willing to prove on primary fact that the Lord she accuses of rape is also innocent (he did not sue her ‘cuz he is dead) and her father too.

Esther Baker however, is very seriously mentally ill. Based on documents which have passed into the public domain after being used at public court hearings, she hears voices and suffers from command hallucinations. That is, the little voices in her head tell her to do things. Sometimes, she obeys their commands – for example by attempting suicide. Baker also continually makes spectacularly poor judgement calls and repeats those mistakes time and again, having learnt nothing. The most recent court sanctions were the 6th time she has botched attempted civil proceedings in exactly the same way. Bear in mind she is a second year law degree student.

Ms Baker holds unusual beliefs and maintains those beliefs in defiance of those facts which can be established. Her allegations to police were that she was raped by a cult (she does not like the word cult, preferring something along the lines of, “faith related abuse group”) including VIPs. She accused Hemming, a Labour Lord and her father as well as sundry police and users of her local church.

These events simply did not happen. The CPS summarised all of the evidence collected in the case relating to all of the alleged rapes by saying Continue reading →

Share Button

Hemming v Poulton: Sonia Poulton Begs for More Time

Posted on by
4

A few weeks ago I reported on a public statement by Sonia Poulton. In her video she responded bullishly to a threatened claim in damages by John Hemming. In her video Poulton seems to refer to at least one defence which has been abolished. Since then Hemming has filed his claim in the High Court and served Poulton. Despite her public bravado, her confidence seems to have wavered. Today, her third solicitor since the matter began obtained an Order for an extension of time to serve a Defence.

Sonia Poulton Video Statement

Sonia Poulton talked tough and issued an inflammatory and misleading ‘official statement’ on the dispute. Now, she is on her third solicitor and has begged the High Court for more time to serve a Defence. Extracted still used for the purpose of criticism and review.

Of course, there would normally be nothing wrong or unusual about asking the court for an extension of time except that per the video above Sonia had already prepared her defences. So … why not just write them up? Why ask for more time? The Order the court has made is public, so I can say that it was made on the basis of CPR 23.10 (without notice / hearing from John) and costs lie in the case (the winner of the libel claim will get the costs arising from the application and resistance to it).

Because the Order was made under CPR 23.10 Hemming now has the option of applying to set it aside or pointing and laughing at the other side’s frantic antics. What he does is a matter for him but he is unlikely to be feeling especially stressed.

Share Button