Alison Chabloz

• Update December 16th

Despite a public consultation and 2020 recommendation by the Law Commission that notorious s.127 of the Communications Act 2003 was be repealed, Rishi Sunak’s government has decided to keep the anti-free speech legislation on its books. The about-turn was announced November 28th, just shy of four weeks after my Appeal was due to be heard at Southwark Crown Court, but was (again, for the second time) adjourned – because, apparently, no judge was available to hear the case…

To retain protections for victims of abuse, the government will no longer repeal elements of the Malicious Communications Act and Section 127 of the Communications Act offences, which means the criminal law will continue to protect people from harmful communications, including racist, sexist and misogynisteic abuse.

(For some reason, comments were not enabled for this post, now corrected.)

Original post:

It took almost two years for police to respond, half-heartedly, to reports submitted in 2014 on advice from the Musician’s Union, for harassment of me by Ambrosine Chetrit of “Eye on Antisemitism.” As well as creating sockpuppet accounts to stalk and harass, Chetrit incited her followers to abuse me; hate mail and death threats were sent to my address; my close family members were also openly targeted.

Despite plenty of hard evidence of a vicious smear campaign and deliberate course of action intended to cause me harm, police obviously weren’t interested.

In 2015, Chetrit also colluded with Campaign Against Antisemitism “CAA” Enforcement Officer, Steve Silverman, then trolling under a vulgar nom de guerre, “Bedlam Jones”. As advised by police themselves, I kept reporting the abuse. To no avail.

Presumably, it was the over-excitement of appearing for the first time in Court to testify against me, in December 2016, that caused Silverman to commit a game-changing gaffe.

In a signed witness statement submitted to Court by CAA’s then solicitor, Stephen Gilchrist, Silverman’s comment, in brackets, — that I have “remarkably” correctly guessed the Twitter account he used, — is wholly incriminating. (The account has since been renamed to @SSilvUK.) How many times did I report this account to Derbyshire Constabulary during the previous 18 months? How many times was I told by officers that this campaign of harassment of me was “under investigation by the CPS”? — Too many to count.

As noted above, both Chetrit and Silverman (and their associates) have been reported multiple times to police, initially to Derbyshire Constabulary and more recently to the Metropolitan Police Service.

Why has no action been taken to prevent further abuse of process?

Furthermore, why is the Crown Prosecution Service still failing to disclose the transcript of my very first police interview (at Buxton Silverlands, with PC Martin Hodnett, – as happened at all my police interviews – reading questions off a sheet with the CAA logo)?

Finally, after four years of pestering my solicitor, Kevin Lowry-Mullins, on this issue, Prosecutor Bridget Fitzpatrick in an email dated February 16th 2022 had this to say, almost six years after the interview took place:

Dear Mr Lowry-Mullins

Further to your email of this morning, please find attached documents which were sent to you via email on 3 February 2022 as per the below.

In addition, I have now received a copy of the ROTI of interview that took place with Ms Chabloz on 14 November 2016 and have reviewed the same I do not consider that it meets the test for disclosure. If you remain of the opinion that it may assist your defence, please let me know your reasons and I will reconsider my decision in the light of any further information that you provide. Alternatively, you may apply to the court under section 8 CPIA.

Kind regards

Bridget Fitzpatrick | Specialist Prosecutor | Counter Terrorism Division
102 Petty France | London | SW1H 9AJ

Yet, the interview includes irrefutable facts regarding the history of my case, and my experiences of Chetrit and her associates, beginning 2012, thereafter joined by “Bedlam Jones” and subordinate Jewish Chronicle scribbler, Steve Applebaum, aka “Nemo”, in 2015.

On this same point, why did the Crown mislead its own appointed barristers — and therefore also the various Courts and judges — that my first ever interview under caution had taken place in October 2017, almost a year later?

Moreover, certain people are attempting to further pervert the course of justice, by falsely declaring to their followers, as well as to venue owners whom they pressure to cancel gigs, that I was found guilty for “malicious communications” and for “harassment”.

Both these offences – mal comms and harassment – are “either-way”, meaning a choice for the defendant between the Magistrates Court or the Crown Court with a jury, and (currently?) a maximum two-year sentence.

The Communications Act 2003 is a different piece of legislation. I was found guilty under Section 127(1) for “sending” and/or “causing to be sent” a “grossly offensive” message. It is a summary offence only with a maximum penalty of six months.

Never have I been presented with the choice of a jury trial.

Never have I been convicted of anything, except “causing gross offence” under the hated, soon-to-be-repealed Section 127.

Last Thursday, December 8th, I was due to perform in Vauxhall, London, at the Tea House Theatre (“THT”) for the Keep Talking Group (“KTG”) End of Year Review and Christmas Party. Group leader, Ian Fantom, had asked me to work on a series of satirical songs that he had composed over a decade ago, mostly touching on New Labour and the Blair years. I was also due to perform several of my own (non-controversial) numbers, composed together with Gerard Menuhin, and speak about my cancellation.

The event was advertised by Fantom, early November, at the regular KTG meeting. A THT poster and a website article appeared towards the end of the same month. As stipulated in my post-sentence 12-month Licence terms, I had to accept the further humiliation of first requesting authority to perform from the Probation Service.

However, three days before the Party, CAA was again up to its old tricks. Nowadays, since my convictions and therefore without further need to hide their real identities – as they did previously in order “to get” me – it took only minutes for THT boss, Hal Iggulden, to acquiesce to their demand that I be silenced.

• Just as had happened in 2014 when Chetrit wrote a defamatory letter to my German employer, resulting in me being unceremoniously dumped, with all my gear, alone at night, on the side of the quay at Hamburg docks.
• Just as happened in 2015 with Glossop Labour Club where I was also a regular performer and campaigner.
• Just as happened in 2016 when my Edinburgh Fringe show “Tell Me More Lies” – co-authored with Menuhin – was pulled for being “too political”.
• Just as happened in 2019 when I was barred from entering France on grounds of causing a danger to the public – with more songs!

And so the strategy to subvert continues, this time at a venue whose owner is a self-proclaimed Champion of Free Speech. Which begs the question: why was Iggulden in such a hurry to dump his own principles? – Was he swayed by the misleading slurs and ritual defamation used to describe me and my music by CAA and other government-sponsored troll-farm operatives?

Above: three days before the Christmas Party, CAA was again up to its old tricks. Nowadays, without further need for hiding behind anonymous trolls accounts, – as CAA Enforcement Officer did previously, in order “to get” Alison Chabloz – it took only minutes for THT boss, Hal Iggulden, to acquiesce to their demand that she be silenced.

Even disgraced solicitor Mark Lewis piped up, his worsening medical condition perhaps affecting his memory, making him forget the slap-on-the-wrist and fine, as doled out by the Solicitors’ Regulatory Tribunal – for a series of tweets sent to me.

This reprimand came shortly after Lewis had been identified, sitting in Court next to Silverman at my sentencing in June 2018, in the hope that John Zani would be sending me to prison.

In the weeks that followed, I showed the same screenshots of Lewis’ tweets to me to my supervisor with Derbyshire Probation Service, and to an affiliated Prevent officer.

Likewise, I have shown more recent evidence of the organised witch-hunt against me to my current supervisor, together with the list of crime numbers referenced at the top of this post.

The delays, arrests, gagging orders, bail conditions, prosecutions and jail sentences have all taken their toll. But what have they – CAA and other militant Zionist proponents of lawfare – achieved? More donations, for one. Seemingly, however, the only “precedent” they boast of relates to me and my own case. No one else gets done for posting my songs. Especially not the poor beleaguered victims of hurt feelings themselves.

Despite being a “shit” musician, it seems I must nevertheless be silenced. If I’m that bad, then why not allow my performances to go ahead? Censorship fanatics could pelt me with rotten tomatoes or with out-of-copyright editions of Diary of A Young Girl or, better still, Irene Zisblatt’s The Third Diamond – if they’ve read it first, that is.

At the outset, THT persuaded Fantom that the Party should still go ahead, just without the main act, – me, whose satirical songs clearly pose a threat to the democratic process in Vauxhall. – At least, that’s according to “anti-fascists” including local Labour councillors and MP, Florence Eshalomi. Iggulden’s attempts to still hold the event (in the hope of minimising losses) were later foiled when Hope Not Hate and Unite Against Fascism activists threatened to turn up, masked, and ready to fight. – Note, no outcry from the same politicians when these menacing tweets showed up. Is anyone surprised?

I believe CAA et al have known about the event for weeks. They deliberately waited until almost the last minute before setting in motion a tried-and-tested scheme that is, in itself, another clearly visible manifestation of Jewish-Zionist power, privilege and influence. It is Christmas, after all! This latest cancellation is also well-timed as far as the fake charity’s latest fundraiser is concerned. Whose favour, I wonder, will be sought this time by way of an offering from the substantial sum of money raised?

Do these “charity” bosses really want to live in a world where people are cancelled and jailed, simply for holding the wrong opinions?

Prior to shape-shifting into Chief Cheerleader For Censorship, Silverman wrote several hit-pieces on singer, Katherine Jenkins – said to be the late Queen’s favourite performer, – criticising Jenkins when she complained to the tabloids about being trolled on Twitter by “an obsessed opera fan”. According to Silverman, by way of her own hysteria, Jenkins was on a mission “to subvert democracy”. When the “obsessed” troll account was eventually removed from Twitter, Silverman called it “a pyrrhic victory” for Jenkins. – Little wonder that these blog posts have now been relegated to the Archive, here here and here. Hypocrisy isn’t a good look, especially not for the boss of a charity supposedly out to protect the vulnerable.

Both Campaign Against Antisemitism and Eye on Antisemitism NGOs have tried to take credit for my most recent conviction, apparently in the hope of gleaning a record number of donations. Their initial witness statements make for entertaining reading, particularly now in light of both organisations’ links to Tommy Robinson and, thus also to the far right. Quelle horreur! Although, as it’s only the Je suis Charlie Islamophobic far right, everyone else including the media and controlled opposition free speech campaigners such as Toby Young can safely turn a blind eye.

Such organisations, in my opinion, reflect poorly on Jews as a group – not to mention the risk of further stoking the very antisemitism that they then complain about. These small-but-vocal, well-funded groups are dangerous. By dint of their own constant clamouring for cancellations and convictions for non-violent speech, such groups are to blame for Jews now being widely seen as the main driving force behind the suppression of free expression.

They – the groups – should be stopped.