Buppha Witt

Incident 1: At a hostel where I stayed at from 23-30 April 2025

1. On 28 April 2025, at approximately 10:00 pm, I attempted to use the bathroom facilities at my hostel. However, I discovered that all bathrooms — the one on the ground floor, the first floor, and the second floor — were unusually simultaneously occupied.

2. When I knocked on the door of the first-floor bathroom, a male voice responded, indicating occupancy. Upon ascending to the second floor, and just as I approached the second-floor bathroom door, I immediately heard loud, deliberate flatulence from inside the bathroom. Based on the sound, I reasonably believed it was made by a male occupant.

3. Given the precise timing — occurring just as I reached the door — and considering previous incidents where bodily functions have been used deliberately to harass and humiliate me, I believe this act was intentional, orchestrated as part of the ongoing harassment campaign against me.

4. This fits a broader pattern of behaviour where my real-time movements appear to be closely tracked and individuals are instructed to engage in degrading or disrespectful behaviour to cause distress.

Similar incidents have occurred previously, including:

1. Individuals deliberately called my phone while I was using the bathroom.

2. Individuals pretending to defecate loudly in adjacent bathrooms while I was showering at other hostels.

3. Bathrooms being consistently and unusually occupied to inconvenience me, particularly since I began preparing my urgent injunction application.

Incident 2: At my current address

1. The Defendants, and/or those acting on their behalf or under their instruction, continue to engage in a systematic pattern of surveillance, harassment, and intimidation, designed to cause severe distress and obstruct my pursuit of legal remedies.

2. On Monday, 1 December 2025, at approximately 2:23 pm, immediately after I had been working extensively on my Witness Statement, adding crucial information relevant to these proceedings, I observed a clear instance of this ongoing surveillance and retaliation. Upon opening my door to use the shared bathroom (due to my own toilet being clogged), an elderly male housemate immediately entered the bathroom just before me. This incident, while seemingly minor in isolation, is part of a well-established pattern of behaviour observed across multiple accommodations and locations, including shared hostels, where individuals are seemingly instructed to occupy shared facilities precisely when I attempt to use them, thereby causing inconvenience, distress, and overtly signaling continuous monitoring of my movements. This pattern has consistently occurred following periods where I have made progress on legal documents, such as my injunction application, or documented instances of misconduct. These individuals and housemates have no idea that they could be called to testify under oath to disclose crucial information, such as who instructed them to harass me and to convey surveillance. If they deny being instructed but the evidence suggests otherwise, they risk committing perjury.

3. Shouting at Light Bulbs: Upon returning to my room, I verbally expressed my distress and frustration, specifically addressing the light fixtures in my room, as I reasonably believe these locations have been used for the illegal installation of hidden cameras, which also record audio. I stated that the perpetrators were ‘racist’ for continuing their abusive conduct despite pending legal actions / court proceedings. 

4. Ambulance and Police Vehicle Sightings: Immediately following this verbal expression, at approximately 2:33 pm, I observed an ambulance driving past my window. Subsequently, at approximately 3:02 pm, I observed a police vehicle driving past my window. 
5. Pattern of Sightings: These sightings are not isolated incidents but form part of a consistent pattern. Almost every time I document or expose the defendants’ alleged conspiracy and misconduct in my private legal documents, I subsequently and almost immediately observe emergency service vehicles (including police, ambulance, and sometimes fire trucks) driving past my window. This pattern appears to be a deliberate tactic to convey ongoing physical and digital surveillance and intimidation.
6. Evidence of Ongoing Surveillance and Monitoring: These incidents provide further evidence of the defendants’ alleged continuous and pervasive surveillance of my private activities, both within my personal living space and online communications. The immediate timing of these events following my legal work strongly suggests that my movements, communications, and legal preparations are being monitored in real-time.
7. Retaliation and Intimidation: The deliberate occupation of shared facilities and the subsequent appearance of emergency vehicles immediately after I engage in legal activities or express distress are interpreted as acts of retaliation and intimidation. These actions are designed to cause severe distress, disrupt my daily life, and discourage me from pursuing legal remedies. They serve to reinforce the message that my actions are constantly observed and that the defendants possess the means to exert control and inflict psychological harm.
8. Breach of Privacy and Harassment: These actions constitute further breaches of my right to privacy under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights and are consistent with the pattern of harassment and cyberstalking previously detailed in my previous blog posts. The use of emergency vehicles in this manner is particularly distressing, as it co-opts symbols of public safety for purposes of intimidation.
9. Conspiracy and Influence: The coordinated nature of these incidents, particularly the immediate response to my private legal work and verbal expressions, suggests a sophisticated and organised effort involving multiple individuals. The alleged influence over the appearance of emergency vehicles further supports the claim that the defendants are powerful individuals capable of orchestrating such events to convey their pervasive reach and control.
10. Impact on Well-being: These incidents cause severe emotional and psychological distress, contributing to the ongoing harm, as I said earlier. They create an environment of constant fear and anxiety, undermining my sense of safety and ability to live a normal life.
11. This tactic, obstruction of basic needs, has been employed repeatedly, particularly following periods when I have made progress in my legal preparations, such as drafting legal documents, adding crucial evidence, or preparing for court proceedings. The timing of such incidents strongly suggests that the Defendants, and/or those acting on their behalf, are monitoring my activities, including my legal work and online communications, and are using these incidents as a form of immediate retaliation and psychological intimidation. The clear message conveyed is that my movements are constantly monitored, and that access to basic facilities, much like access to legal representation, can be obstructed as ‘punishment’ for asserting my rights.
12. I believe this continued harassment, occurring after I initiated steps to pursue legal action, constitutes retaliation, degrading treatment, and interference with my Article 3 and Article 8 rights under the Human Rights Act 1998.
13. It also exemplifies predatory stalking tactics involving humiliation, obstruction of daily life, and psychological intimidation designed to deter me from pursuing justice.