Esther Baker has been handed a life-long restraining Order by Mrs Justice Steyn. She has had her day in court and the ‘Truth’ has indeed been proven.

Recently, Esther Baker has been making misleading comments about the judgement in her libel case against John Hemming. She claimed on Twitter (archive) that the judgement did not find Hemming innocent. Now High Court Judge Mrs Justice Steyn has made a lifelong restraining Order against Baker as well as another Order giving further directions for what remains of the case.

Key points in the Orders –

• John Hemming has won against Baker on the main points. Hemming did not rape Baker, or anyone else nor did he stalk Baker nor defame her to cover it up. Baker is restrained for life from saying so (however obliquely), getting anyone else to say so or encouraging anyone from saying so. There is a penal notice on the front flat out stating that if she does so, she can go to jail. It is last warning time. It is a part of the general law of the land that it can also be a contempt for anyone to independently try to frustrate the Order by repeating the allegations. There are no exceptions to the Order – (Baker has asked for some and was not granted them).

If Esther Baker breaks the lifelong restraining Order against her she could be sent to prison and so could anyone who helps her or otherwise tries to frustrate the purpose of the Order.

• Supporters of Esther Baker such as Jayne Senior @Jes123Tia456, Jacqui Dillon @JacquiDillon and Alan Goodwin @Ciabaudo have been warned previously  they may be sued for libel. In fact with this Order, they need not even be sued – if they expressly or by implication suggest Baker’s allegations are true then they could be at risk of immediate Committal proceedings. Now is a time for reflection. The legal threats to Goodwin, Dillon and Senior are not bluffs but bringing the claims would be an aggravation we could all avoid. A decision on Baker’s allegations has been made.

The Judge has made very clear that Esther Baker’s allegations are untrue and defamatory. MHN underlining.

• It is noticed that Senior has gone quiet on this. Hopefully if the others take the hint we can all save some money and inconvenience. There are plenty of other alleged victims they could be supporting where their accusations have not been ruled against.
• Whilst Baker’s allegations have been shown false, it is not yet established whether she lied or perverted the course of justice. The libel claim by her against Hemming on those words is ongoing, but will be struck out automatically unless she complies with the terms of an ‘unless’ Order made previously.
• Hemming has dropped an ancilliary claim that Baker’s words also referred to ‘cult’ or ‘ritual’ abuse. As he has won on the main points, it does not matter if the group he was not part of was a rape ‘cult’ or ‘group’.
• Baker has been ordered to pay 90% of the entire costs of Hemming’s counterclaim, 100% of his application to strike out and 100% of his responding to her failed application. Damages are to be assessed at the end of the case.

The judge has included a short set of reasons and as they are not on BAILII and the Orders are public documents I have uploaded them both here. I have redacted both cover sheets with the parties’ addresses.

UPDATE 22 NOVEMBER 2019 – HAVE ADDED SCREENSHOT WITH FINDING BAKER’S ALLEGATIONS ARE UNTRUE WITH UNDERLINING.