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 that there are “no witnesses”, “no medical or forensic evidence” and “no one else has come forward with a similar complaint”.

In fact, since then we have discovered that police had ample evidence it was not true. One man Baker accused was a prominent Labour Lord. But, he was in his late 60’s or 70’s (depending on which of Baker’s shifting dates one accepts) and had prostate surgery, most likely also having had his testicles removed. Hemming did not have a birthmark Baker claimed her assailant had. Baker’s father was abroad at the time of the supposed rapes, including an impregnation and abortion for which there is no medical evidence whatsoever. She claimed she was forced to have a violent abortion, then changed the date and the alleged method to a pill.

Suffice to say if I do not have her revised pleadings struck out, then I am happy to go to trial. I obtained a distinction on my litigation exam. I have not sought to use my qualification to become a solicitor, but I have a Master’s Degree in Law, an LPC and roughly 10 years experience as a McKenzie Friend. I have the CPS documents and I have information, in some cases statements, from a number of potential witnesses.

So how is this tragic woman still litigating? Why is she being given the time of day, by anyone? I flat out blame Exaro News whose repugnant alumni still cluster around Baker, despite the fact that their involvement has led her to ruin. Mark Watts and David Hencke attended the last remote hearing at the invitation of Baker – just as Mark Watts attended the hearing on 15 April 2019 and sat behind Baker offering her advice. I also blame Jess Phillips for her opportunistic encouragement of Baker – although she at least has had the wisdom to distance herself from this travesty after the libel ruling last year and adverse media coverage.

Esther Baker is a wreck of a woman. She is a dysfunctional inadequate pushed into the limelight by Exaro on the strength of allegations that most contemporary observers found to be absurd, and which forensic police investigation has found to be utterly without foundation. As an example, notorious Labour MP John Mann, in private correspondence with Hemming in October 2015, stated that the allegations made “no coherent sense”. Mann also said that Baker’s allegations had made sense then he would have been duty bound to ensure they were investigated and it was, “significant” that he had not. Mann also said that he had warned media not to treat her story as credible because a false story would be, “damaging and dangerous”.

Exaro however, either did not notice or did not care about the warning signs others found to be obvious. Jess Phillips was also remarkably credulous. “[…] my heart breaks for you. I’m always here […]”, and she stayed in contact with Baker until at least early 2018. She invited her to meet despite not being Baker’s MP. Exaro journalists later did not find it necessary to report on the findings of harassment against Ms Baker.

Baker says she needs donations to pay for food. If this tragic woman does not eat for a week or so, I blame those who put her on this path and continued to offer encouragement. I blame Jess Phillips. I blame Mark Watts. I blame David Hencke. I blame people like Sonia Poulton. Sonia Poulton was still referring to Ms Baker’s desire for an investigation last year – long after the police investigation reached a conclusion. Poulton’s video (for which Hemming is suing her) was published after the libel judgement of Steyn J in Baker v Hemming!

If each of those people donated just £300 to Ms Baker her debt would be pretty much cleared. In my opinion, that would be the decent thing to do. For be in no doubt, I am sending in High Court Enforcement Agents to her home to seize such chattels as can be found to make good on her debts. I will be challenging each of these persons to make a donation, and following up with an article if they do not.