MHN had never heard of z-list band, Casual Nausea, currently with the label TNS Records, until he was provided documentary evidence of band members’ complicity in sickening abuse. The band has been trying to secure the cancellation of an innocent man, based on what seem to be unproven and untrue sexual abuse allegations by an obsessed fan who has publicly announced her intention to, “ruin” the victim’s life. What is concerning is the band and their label’s denial, failure to take accountability nor follow any identifiable procedure, together with that of their fellow abuser Ian “Tree” Robinson of the Manchester Punk Festival. This is especially vile and hypocritical given Robinson’s own claimed history of accusations against him. Your author is a proven victim of sex crime, in an actual court not a Tumblr post and MHN feels morally obliged to expose those who misuse such allegations. In your author’s opinion, such conduct amounts to abuse in itself.

In 2016 I was a victim of crime perpetrated by members of a vile terrorist, stalking, forum who created revenge pornography of me and also made false allegations. I obtained a court judgement against them. So I was horrified to learn that members of the band, Casual Nausea, had been part of a similar cowardly campaign to help an openly malicious – in my opinion sexually motivated, false allegator – try to destroy the life of an innocent musician. Worse, the stalker was also helped by Ian “Tree” Robinson of the Manchester Punk Festival and tacitly by Casual Nausea’s label TNS Records, whose founder Andrew Davies has failed to take action over the band’s conduct. Now they face accountability in the form of a campaign to have them excluded from the music industry and to name and shame those who work with them.

Sex crime is devastating to victims and we as a society should ensure it is severely punished. No less serious though is the problem of malicious accusers and those who deliberately waste law enforcement time. Aside from the suffering caused to those wrongly maligned, who have rights too, false allegations take desperately needed resources from actual victims. Specially trained police officers and supporting staff are a scarce, overstretched resource. When their time is wasted, it is likely that somewhere a woman or a child may be raped with no redress. Such people deserve the harshest condemnation. The foreseeable consequence of squandering police resources is the image of a vile rapist or paedophile thrusting into a screaming victim.  Even those who do not contact police but spread or accept gossip discredit real victims and contribute to a growing toxicity in society around sex crime and sex abuse. That is what Casual Nausea, Ian “Tree” Robinson, Andrew Davies and TNS records are accused of assisting.

Our story concerns an innocent musician – let us call him, “Dave” (name changed to protect the innocent). Dave, like most musicians, is not that well off, but he is apparently attractive to women. So much so that an adult, female, fan became obsessed with him. Let us call her, “Alex” (again, name changed due to statutory anonymity). Alex made no secret of her interest. In fact, when Dave was due to play a weekend gig in northern England (well, north of London, anyway) she not only went, but offered to pay for his hotel room so he would stay in the same hotel as her. Unsurprisingly, she ended up in Dave’s hotel room on the Saturday night. That is when she said the rape occurred. She later told police she was too drunk to remember anything, including how many drinks she had imbibed.

Only … that is not what the evidence showed. Alex had indeed been in Dave’s room on the Saturday night. The next day, the Sunday morning after the night she later claimed was a rape, Alex staggered back to her own hotel room and cleaned herself up. Dave messaged her asking if he should join her or go elsewhere. Alex asked him to join her. There was no mention of the rape – that allegation came later. There was only an invitation to come hither. Whilst rape victims do indeed behave in many and varied ways, I will go so far as to say that voluntarily inviting the perpetrator over for round two is not likely to be one of those ways. Alex spent the next day and night with Dave in accommodation she had paid for and invited him to. She then travelled back to London with Dave on the train the next day.

It was weeks later when Alex alleged rape. She would also go on to announce on social media she intended to, “ruin” Dave’s life. In her posts she also revealed she did in fact have some memories, contrary to her police statement. For example, she referred to how many drinks David had. It is to be inferred she remembers how many drinks she had. Dave had to then spend over a year facing an absurdly slow police investigation until I eventually intervened and helped him to draft a police complaint and letter of claim. Not long after, the investigation was terminated. A later police Professional Standards investigation by Norfolk Constabulary found that the police officer investigating, T/DC 2246 Max Fisher should engage in, “Learning by reflection” and have engaged in an, “evidential review” to end the investigation sooner. Aside from the plainly contradictory message history, the police internal investigation noted that there were also, “inconsistencies in medical evidence”.

In my opinion, Alex lied, wasted police time, devastated the life of, and openly announced her intent to harm, an innocent man. I believe that she should be in prison.  The case is now with the Independent Office of Police Conduct (IOPC). In light of the evidence, I am willing to consider assisting in a judicial review, and / or even a private criminal prosecution of Alex once the IOPC investigation is complete, and possibly in civil or criminal litigation against police officers involved. The fact she has not yet been interviewed or charged does not mean she will not be if the IOPC orders an investigation, if a court orders an investigation or if I help Dave file the papers to prosecute her himself.

I put an early draft of this article to Norfolk Police, asking if they disputed any facts. They did not dispute my opinion that the rape did not happen and was a false allegation, nor my account of the facts giving rise to that opinion, nor the way I had anonymised the so-called victim. However, they did dispute the recommendations to Fisher, which seems to me to splitting hairs, saying that although there was, “learning” identified the findings of the complaint outcome were that there was an acceptable standard of service by police. I include the quotation from Norfolk Police press office in full:

“We do not agree that the draft article accurately reflects the learning by reflection provided to the detective during the complaint investigation. The service was deemed to be acceptable in response to the allegation that officers failed to progress the investigation swiftly. There was identified learning for the detective recorded as ‘More streamlined approach to CPS action plan without necessarily having to complete entire action plan before evidential review’”

Regardless, the police investigation was over and there it should have rested. Step forward Ian, “Tree” Robinson of the Manchester Punk Festival. Manchester Punk Festival bills itself as a not-for-profit festival organised by a collective, including various groups, Ian and the TNS Records label. Ian had already cancelled Dave’s booking for the Manchester Punk Festival, but even after the police investigation was over, MPF still refuse to deal with Dave. Robinson simply says the allegation came from a, “close friend” of his. One of the most sickening things about the whole situation is the behaviour of Robinson. During his conversations online with Dave, Robinson admitted to having previously been, “[…] falsely accused of things […]“. In the context of the conversation they were having about allegations of rape against Dave, Ian’s admission would appear to be an admission he had been accused of some sexual wrongdoing. When I put it to him, suggesting it was rape, he replied but refused to comment. Ian did not reply to follow up questions asking if the, “things” he was accused of were rape or sexual assault. That makes him a hypocrite. If he is to be believed, he is in exactly the same position as Dave – he has been the subject of unproven allegations which were never charged. Ordinarily, I would treat this as private information, but have decided to publish because of the overwhelming public interest in Ian’s hypocrisy and unfairness. He know that allegations can be false, but unlike other promoters decided not to deal with Dave and not allow him first to give his side of the story. He maintained that position even after the police investigation was over and after being provided transcripts of the key parts of the social media conversations between Alex and Dave. If he was treated the same way, he would be out of the Manchester Punk Festival and the music industry.

Most recently, members of the non-entity band Casual Nausea tried to have Dave dropped from a gig, citing a “court case” in a particular time period. Entirely reasonably, Dave shared the details with the gig organiser including the police letter with the NFA decision and the redacted message logs. He pointed out there had not in fact been a court case. The police investigation had been dropped because Alex’s account was, “inconsistent” with the medical evidence and social media messages. The gig organiser kept Dave on. Horrifyingly, Casual Nausea told the gig organiser that they did not want to see the evidence – “they do not wish to have it”. If Casual Nausea did not know about the evidence pointing to Alex being malicious, it is because they did not look very hard and refused to read it when offered.

When I approached the band’s label, TNS, via Andrew Davies and “Bev”, they claimed they had not passed my inquiry on to the band and ignored questions as to whether they would investigate the concerns about Casual Nausea band’s behaviour. They did not identify or follow any procedure for dealing with concerns or complaints about bands on their label. It is to be inferred they have no such procedures.

Ian Robinson and Andrew Davies have no excuse. They know the facts. I told them the facts in a historic letter (before this year). The only thing that has changed since that letter is that the police investigation into Dave has ended.

Spreading or acting on malicious gossip is bad enough. Refusing to look at the evidence is vile. More importantly, in legal terms, refusing to consider alternative evidence and check the facts is evidence of recklessness or malice and amounts to a breach of the GDPR principles of fairness and accuracy. So, Casual Nausea can expect a legal letter from Dave, drafted with my assistance in due course and if they do not settle, a visit from the process server fairy.

Regardless of their supposed intent, Casual Nausea should be treated as what they are, people whose actions were vile and abusive. Refusing to look at exculpatory facts harms innocent people and encourages those who make false allegations and waste police time. It bears repeating. Where police resources are wasted, somewhere a rapist or paedophile is likely to be violating an innocent victim with impunity.

I asked Andrew Davies, TNS Records, Ian Robinson and the Manchester Punk Festival the following questions, as well as providing an early draft of this article and asking them to forward it to the band:

1. How do you justify secretly sharing allegations of criminal conduct on behalf of a woman who has announced her intention to destroy a man’s life?
2. Do you accept that people who make or support false allegations, like you, waste police resources and so risk putting real victims in danger from rapists and paedophiles?
3. Do you think it is acceptable for Casual Nausea to point blank refuse to look at the evidence?
4. Will Andrew Davies and TNS Records apologise for their complicity in abuse?
5. Will Andrew Davies and TNS Records drop Ian Robinson and Casual Nausea?

The responses were grimdark comedy gold. TNS records and Robinson / the Manchester Punk Festival denied any involvement in spreading the allegations. They did not respond to questions 2, 3 and 5. TNS claimed that, “[…] Both MPF and TNS are not contractually linked to Casual Nausea or the promoter. We have not seen the emails you refer to. We were not aware of them until your email. We were not aware that Casual Nausea pulled out of th[e] gig until your email […]”. Casual Nausea is, for now, named as an official band on the TNS website (archive). They obviously have a commercial relationship. By failing to open an investigation into Casual Nausea’s conduct, TNS have tacitly condoned their behaviour. By failing to drop Robinson, the Manchester Punk Festival has applied a very unfair and sinister double standard.

TNS and MPF also claimed they could not forward my inquiry to Casual Nausea because, it “contains the personal information of another individual”. In the context, this is laughable. MPF, TNS and Casual Nausea had all previously processed personal information about both individuals, Alex and Dave.

My email had not mentioned that Casual Nausea withdrew from a gig. So, I formed an opinion that TNS had not been candid with me and had in fact been speaking to the Casual Nausea band. When this discrepancy was put to them, they claimed that they had deduced it from changes to promotional posters for the gig. I had not said which gig, or even which year. So, either TNS monitor band events with Sherlock Holmes’ levels of skill or they … just spoke to the band on their label about the serious allegation in my letter they had received. Readers can draw their own conclusions.

Regardless, I then contacted the Casual Nausea directly via their website and Facebook. Eventually, Casual Nausea responded via their band account on Facebook claiming, “This is the first we’ve heard of this”. Obviously, Casual Nausea had in fact at the very least already discussed it with the gig organiser and withdrawn from the gig. They had declined to look at Dave’s evidence. The posters had been redone and published. So, aside from all that, their statement was truthful.

Casual Nausea also suddenly became fans of due process. They asked for 28 days to take legal advice and also refused to give an email address. They asked instead that documents be uploaded via Facebook. Now, I am not unreasonable and my standard letter does offer an extension of time to take legal advice. However, 28 days is excessive for a current news article and a more usual amount of time is 7 days. I offered an extension of time of 7 days instead of the 28, if Casual Nausea would provide an email address for contact and identify who I was speaking to. They chose not to take it up. It is worth mentioning that they did not give Dave 24 hours, and refused to look at his evidence. Once the story was about them, then they wanted a month and documents to look at.

I have considered the public interest issues with care. I have checked my facts and approached subjects for comment. I have obtained responses from the police, the record label TNS and the Manchester Punk Festival. None of them asked for an extension of time. They did not object to the original two working days I gave, which suggests it was a reasonable period of time. I did offer Casual Nausea a week, but they did not accept the offer. I consider it is a current story and 28 days is not reasonable. As far as the story contains any private information, there is an overwhelming public interest in repeating it. It highlights Robinson and the MPF’s hypocrisy and despicable behaviour and provides useful example of the injustices of amateurs dealing with unproven allegations that should never have been shared. I have considered the IPSO, IMPRESS and ICO codes of practice and / or guidance per the MHN legal page. I have therefore formed a view that posting this article is in the public interest.

It is worth summarising the allegations I am making and what I intend this article to convey. No one is accusing Casual Nausea, MPF, TNS Records or Andrew Davies of personally assaulting anyone, sexually or otherwise. MPF and Ian are being accused of abuse by dropping the falsely accused, even in light of the Ian’s own experiences of allegations. In the case of Casual Nausea they are accused of abuse by spreading the information which has nothing to do with them, trying to have Dave cancelled and refusing to look at the evidence during that attempt.

I have reported Ian’s own claims to have been, “falsely” “accused” of, “things” and his relevant non-denial it was rape or sexual assault, but it is important to remember that he has not been charged and people who are accused are innocent until proven guilty. If only, “Tree” had embraced that view when it came to someone else’s case.

TNS including Andrew Davies have failed to take any action over their band’s conduct, if the label are to be believed, to even speak to them about it. They have tacitly condoned, or at least tolerated the behaviour and are complicit. TNS have failed to do anything about the conduct of Ian and MPF towards Dave, MPF being an event partly organised by the label.

In my opinion Alex lied and made false allegations, which squandered police resources. It is my opinion that this type of behaviour leads to real victims and those in need of safeguarding, missing out. It is a serious issue that often does not get wrongdoing because it can usually only be an inferential meaning – you cannot generally draw a line between the maker of false allegations and victim(s) who received a poorer police service because of those allegations.

Overall, my opinion is that I would never deal professionally with MPF, TNS Records, Andrew Davies nor Ian “Tree” Robinson. I would encourage the music industry to shun them. It deserves better.

I was pleased with the police approach to my media inquiry. Of course, Norfolk Constabulary were aware of my experience helping people sue other forces, such as John Hemming’s successful judicial review of the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) which he did as litigant in person with my help. There is also a marker on my address with my local police relating to previous upheld complaints I have made, relating to inappropriate attempts to interfere with legitimate journalism. Case law, such as the High Court case of McNally v Saunders [2021] EWHC 2012 (QB), has held that even amateur or fringe journalists have the full protections of the European Convention on Human Rights. Journalism is not a regulated profession and anyone can do it. Police are also aware that I have successfully defended libel claims, not only by litigants in person like Esther Baker, but also by people with very good lawyers. For example, My Media World Limited, who operated a YouTube competitor website, and its CEO tried to (counter)-sue me for libel and harassment, represented by Simon Muirhead Burton solicitors and a barrister from 5RB Chambers. MMW and its CEO’s claim was discontinued with no remedy for them and they bore my costs. In my claim against MMW and its CEO, they agreed to settle in a Tomlin order imposing a permanent restraining agreement on them.

The next step in this case is likely to be litigation against Casual Nausea. However, suing the band is not enough. Their victim, and horrified uninvolved victims of proven sex crime like me, are now going to hold them accountable publicly, along with those of anyone who is amoral enough to give these vile creatures a platform. That may include naming and shaming people who book the band, deal with their very small label or advertise at TNS events. Sexual abuse is a messy topic. Much like the body fluids concerned, when you throw allegations around unfairly, recklessly or maliciously they can prove toxic and clinging to all concerned.