How digital provocateurs are hijacking courtrooms and making the public foot the bill
Courtrooms across the UK are witnessing a new wave of legal misuse fueled not by genuine grievance, but by attention-seeking individuals turning personal vendettas into public spectacles.
Take the case of John Robertson, a self-styled whistleblower who filed a doomed employment tribunal case in Glasgow. The judge dismissed it instantly; it was filed years too late, and Robertson had long since signed away his right to sue. Yet, the machinery of justice had already been set in motion: court staff, documentation, legal processing, all at taxpayer expense.
Robertsonβs digital footprint is littered with unproven allegations against everyone from auditors to detectives. Banned from major platforms for harassment, he now leverages legal filings as his weapon of choice. His inflammatory language and baseless claims have real-world effects: reputational damage, emotional tolls, and financial burdens none of which he shoulders.
Heβs far from alone. From discredited Bitcoin claimant Craig Wright to far-right figure Tommy Robinson, modern trolls are increasingly taking their grievances offline and into court. Wright, once claiming to be Bitcoinβs founder, sued critics for billions of cases widely viewed as groundless. Robinson, meanwhile, was ordered to pay Β£100,000 in damages for falsely accusing a Syrian refugee of violence a claim that forced the teen to flee his home.
These legal crusades rarely succeed in court. But theyβre not designed to. Their purpose is disruption: to exhaust, embarrass, and silence opponents. Defendants face steep legal fees and public scrutiny, often long before any ruling is issued.
Weaponizing the Legal System
What makes this tactic particularly effective is how easily the courts can be manipulated. Filing a defamation claim is cheap; defending one isnβt. A single libel suit can cost a target hundreds of thousands even when they ultimately win.
Social media further amplifies the impact. False accusations, once whispered in fringe forums, now echo instantly across platforms. Even if later disproven, the digital stain remains.
And when legal options falter, some trolls exploit technicalities: using anonymous accounts, registering content offshore, or dodging jurisdiction limits. In one case, Robinson sidestepped a UK court injunction by hosting his video content in Cyprus.
The Real-World Fallout
For those on the receiving end, the consequences are life-altering. Volunteers have abandoned open-source projects to avoid lawsuits. Families have relocated to escape online-fueled harassment. Businesses have lost contracts overnight due to viral smears.
In todayβs algorithm-driven world, a single false claim can bury years of credibilityβand clearing oneβs name can take years and a fortune.
Justice at a Cost
The courts were built for fairness, not as a stage for digital performers. But as trolls find new ways to misuse legal processes, the burden quietly shifts to the public. Litigation delays justice for real victims, clogs court schedules, and drains public resources.
Until legal systems adapt, perhaps by introducing stronger filters for frivolous cases or imposing harsher penalties for abusive litigation, online antagonists will keep trading hashtags for hearings.
Their goal isn’t true. Itβs attention. And weβre all paying for it.