contact@wix.com
+123-456-789
© 2035 by The Clinic.Powered and secured by Wix
WATCHED & INVESTIGATED
The Most Investigated Person—Yet No Evidence
Few people have ever had so many individuals and organizations motivated, deceived, bribed, paid, or threatened to investigate them, only for those efforts to produce nothing. To date, not a single piece of evidence has been presented that:
-
Stands up to scrutiny,
-
Did not originate within the consortium, was manipulated, or was fabricated by it.
At the time of drafting this, News24 had not provided a single piece of evidence supporting the veracity of the allegations. No due diligence was conducted.
Similarly, two and a half years after the campaign began, not a single person has received the gigabytes of evidence that were repeatedly promised by various members of the consortium. The same goes for WDS, ESS, and Mario.
FACT FILE
THE EVIDENCE THAT NEVER EXISTED
News24 conducted no due diligence and has failed to present any supporting proof. Likewise, after two and a half years, the promised “gigabytes of evidence” from the consortium, WDS, ESS, and Mario have never materialized—because they never existed.
Motives: Gains for Some, Destruction for One
Every contribution, without exception, has come from people with something to gain—and many had significant gains.
Equally, the allegations were made by people with a great deal to lose if the truth came to light. That includes their reputations, as it would expose how:
-
Landlords forcibly evicted a tenant who had fulfilled every obligation—purely for financial gain.
-
They weaponized the state to achieve their goals, imprisoning someone for crimes they knew he did not commit.
Frankly, I am tired of hearing:
-
"But they say they have evidence."
-
"They say they saw evidence."
And yet, they have never presented a single shred of it. This is not just a pattern—it is systemic and deliberate. There is no evidence of a scam—because there was no scam.
FACT FILE
ALLEGATIONS WITHOUT EVIDENCE
The reality is simple: landlords carried out illegal evictions for financial gain and weaponized the state to imprison someone they knew was innocent.
Despite repeated claims of "evidence," none has ever been produced. There is no evidence of a scam—because there was no scam.
Every Allegation Has Been Dismantled—Yet They Are Still Treated as Reliable
Every day, I uncover new evidence that refutes each and every allegation. Not one allegation put to me has withstood scrutiny. And yet, after systematically dismantling every claim, these same people are still treated as reliable witnesses.
By contrast, after dismantling each lie, it is clear that they are liars and cheats, manipulating everyone from guests to the media, while deliberately delaying the production of real evidence.
News24 has either been complicit in criminal defamation or its journalism is so appallingly negligent that it should be condemned.
Courts, Prosecutors, and Financial Institutions Found Nothing
I have endured an unprecedented level of scrutiny—not just through targeted investigations but through repeated legal tests. Every time the allegations have been examined—including by multiple courts of law—I have been:
-
Cleared
-
Exonerated
-
Found not guilty
-
Won my cases
-
Proven right
That includes:
-
Twenty-one appearances at Wynberg Magistrates' Court
-
A full two-week bail hearing
-
Multiple full days of court proceedings in August, amounting to a trial in all but name
-
An NPA assessment of the charges
-
Two months of scrutiny and investigation by the Senior State Prosecutor
Yet, somehow, News24 still believes it can make statements and pass judgment, despite the courts, financial institutions, and prosecuting authorities having already discredited every claim.
Had this been at the start of their campaign, before I had compiled evidence, before time and investigations produced nothing, before no victims ever came forward, before the consortium began creating victims because none existed, then perhaps a trial by media might have seemed plausible.
But at this stage, after being investigated, examined, arrested, tried, and after proving that the allegations were fabrications, it is not just inappropriate for the media to continue this charade, it is an outrageous dereliction of journalistic duty.
(A point few seem to grasp: The NPA and Senior State Prosecutor do not easily drop charges. They are loath to do so and will fight to proceed with a prosecution unless there is zero doubt that the charges are baseless.)
FACT FILE
COURTS vs MEDIA
Despite extensive scrutiny, multiple court cases, and investigations by the NPA and Senior State Prosecutor, every allegation against me has been discredited. I have been cleared, exonerated, and proven right in court, yet News24 continues to push a false narrative. Their refusal to acknowledge the legal outcomes is not just misleading but a complete failure of journalistic integrity. At this stage, their campaign is nothing more than deliberate defamation.
News24 vs. The Courts: Who Holds the Real Authority?
And yet, publications like News24 believe they are better positioned to make a judgment than five highly experienced magistrate, all of whom had the actual evidence in front of them.
That includes:
-
The High Court
-
The Magistrates' Courts (four times)
-
My bankers
-
La Collection's bankers
-
The Senior State Prosecutor
-
Multiple platforms
-
The National Prosecuting Authority (on multiple occasions)
Meanwhile, whenever anyone investigates the consortium, they have—and will—be found guilty. PSIRA, the first of what I hope will be many professional bodies to investigate the consortium, has already found WDS guilty of a series of crimes. And since WDS acted on the consortium's instructions and on their behalf, whatever he is guilty of—they are guilty of too.
FACT FILE
MEDIA24 VS THE COURTS
Publications like News24 claim to be better positioned to judge than experienced magistrates who had access to the evidence. Various parties, including the High Court, Magistrates' Courts, bankers, prosecutors, and professional bodies like PSIRA, have been involved in investigating the consortium. PSIRA has already found WDS guilty of crimes, and as WDS acted on the consortium's behalf, they are also considered guilty.
PAULA WHATSAPP CHAT EXPORT.
These chat logs serve as a timestamped record of events, revealing motives, discussions, and actions—just as body cam footage provides critical evidence in law enforcement. Individually insightful, their true power lies in the collective patterns they expose across multiple key players, forming an undeniable digital paper trail of the events that unfolded.
The Pendulum Is Swinging Back
The consortium's fatal mistake was believing that a gay British interior designer would be a pushover. They miscalculated. I will expose every one of their lies and their extensive and cruel criminality.
Why Is the Spotlight Still on Me?
It defies reason that the focus remains on me, while the people making these false allegations have escaped scrutiny entirely. I have demonstrated, over and over, that their claims are fabricated. And yet, they are still afforded credibility.
It is inconceivable that someone can be watched, investigated, and effectively put on trial, only for every single investigation to turn up nothing except the fabrications the consortium created from the start, and yet those responsible are still treated as credible. And with thousands of WhatsApp messages, emails, documents, and court papers, not a single one supports their lies. (See below.)
FACT FILE
ALLEGATIONS AND INVESTIGATIONS
The focus remains unjustly on the speaker, despite their repeated demonstrations that the allegations are fabricated. Multiple investigations have found no evidence to support the consortium's claims, yet those responsible continue to be treated as credible. The speaker has provided a substantial amount of evidence, including WhatsApp messages, emails, documents, and court papers, all of which contradict the false allegations.
The Evidence They Never Provided
At the time of drafting this, News24 had still not provided a single piece of evidence to support the veracity of their allegations. And, as expected, no due diligence was conducted. .In fact, they outright rejected my approach when I attempted to engage with them.
Likewise, two and a half years after the campaign began, not one person has received the gigabytes of evidence that were promised on multiple occasions by various members of the consortium.
-
The same applies to WDS.
-
The same applies to ESS.
-
The same applies to Mario.
This is not just a pattern—it is systematic and deliberate. And it is clear why: There is no evidence of a scam, because no scam ever occurred.
FACT FILE
LACK OF EVIDENCE
News24 has failed to provide any evidence to support their allegations and rejected attempts to engage. Despite promises made by the consortium, no one has received the substantial evidence promised over the past two and a half years. The same lack of evidence applies to individuals like WDS, ESS, and Mario, pointing to a deliberate and systematic effort to create false claims.
The Scale of Investigations: Unrestricted Access, Unlimited Scrutiny, No Evidence
Few people have ever been investigated as extensively as I have. Yet, despite an unprecedented level of scrutiny, not a single piece of evidence has ever been found to support the allegations. The table below demonstrates just how many individuals, organizations, and institutions were motivated, deceived, bribed, paid, or pressured into investigating me—only to come up empty-handed.
These are not just people making accusations. These are individuals and organizations who had:
-
Direct, unrestricted access to all my data, devices, and documents
-
Unlimited resources, expertise, and investigative power
-
Years to search for anything that could substantiate their claims
And yet, after more than 70 people and organizations, spanning two and a half years of active investigations, and the equivalent of nearly 1,000 months of collective scrutiny—
Not one shred of credible evidence has been produced.
FACT FILE
PRECEDENTED SCRUTINY, ZERO EVIDENCE
Few individuals have faced the level of investigation I have. Over two and a half years, more than 70 individuals and organizations—armed with unrestricted access to my data, unlimited resources, and investigative authority—have scoured every detail of my life. Despite nearly 1,000 months of combined scrutiny, not a single piece of credible evidence has ever been found to support their allegations.
The Investigators: Who Had Access and What They Found
The following groups had full, unrestricted access to my devices, financial records, business transactions, correspondence, and personal data:
1. Direct, Unrestricted Access to ALL of My Data and Devices
-
These individuals had full control over my physical and digital records:
-
Mario
-
Denis
-
Johan
-
Andre
-
WDS & SAPS (seizing all devices, hard drives, data, and documents)
-
Jess
-
Loris
4. Professional Private Investigators Hired to Find Evidence
-
Benette
-
WDS
-
Mario
-
Denis
-
Johan
-
Andre
2. The Landlords Who Had Access to Everything
-
Paula
-
Peter
-
Keith
-
Inge
-
Schäfers
-
Ragi
5. Law Enforcement and Prosecutors Who Had Every Legal and Investigative Resource
-
Serg Stevens
-
Serg Duna
-
Hout Bay SAPS
-
Camps Bay SAPS
-
Hawks
-
Bellville Commercial Crimes Unit
-
SAPS: ALL DEVICES, HARD DRIVES, DATA, DOCUMENTS SEIZED—providing full access to every piece of data from the last 5 to 8 years
3. Those with Near-Complete Access to My Data
-
Gail
-
Jen
6. Criminal Courts, Prosecutors, and the Legal System Reviewing My Case
-
Wynberg Magistrates' Court (August)
-
National Prosecuting Authority (August)
-
Wynberg Magistrates' Court (September–October)
-
National Prosecuting Authority (September–October)
-
Wynberg Magistrates' Court (December–March)
-
National Prosecuting Authority (December–March)
-
Wynberg Magistrates' Court (April–September)
-
National Prosecuting Authority (April–September)
-
Senior State Prosecutor (June–September)
-
SAPS (June–September)
7. Civil Courts That Had Access to My Financial and Business Records
-
Cape Town High Court (Cases 1–6)
10. Banks That Scrutinized Every Financial Transaction
-
Halifax / Lloyds Bank
-
Mario's Four Banks
-
The Banks of Any Guests
-
FNB Bank
8. Media Outlets That Published Without Evidence
-
News24 & Associated
-
Publications
-
IOL and Others
11. Various Others Who Had Internal Access to My Business and Finances
-
Michael
-
Clem
-
Wellem
-
Housekeepers (1–12)
-
Mercy / Frank
-
Madeline
-
Tanya
9. Booking and Financial Platforms That Reviewed All Transactions
-
Airbnb
-
Boking.com
-
Other Rental Platforms
12. Others Who Acted as Agents with Access to My Transactions
-
Anton
-
Gail
-
Jen
-
Jess
The Reality: They Had Everything They Needed—And Found Nothing
This list is not speculative. These are people and organizations that had unrestricted access to my personal, business, and financial data. They had:
-
Every device, drive, and document seized.
-
Bank records spanning years.
-
Booking and platform transactions.
-
Court cases, legal filings, and financial audit.s
-
Emails, messages, and contracts.
Yet, after two and a half years of investigations, interrogations, legal battles, and financial scrutiny— There is still no evidence of a scam. Because no scam ever existed.
FACT FILE
TOTAL ACCESS, YET NO EVIDENCE
These individuals and organizations had full, unrestricted access to my personal, business, and financial records. They seized every device, reviewed years of bank statements, analyzed transactions, and scrutinized court filings, emails, and contracts.
Yet, after two and a half years of relentless investigations, legal battles, and audits—there is still no evidence of a scam. Because no scam ever existed.
What This Means: The Pattern of Lies and Manipulation
It is impossible to overstate the scale and depth of these investigations. Every financial transaction, conversation, and contract has been examined from every conceivable angle. Still, no evidence has ever emerged—except for what was fabricated, manipulated, or created by the consortium itself.
This is not just a failure to prove their allegations—it is proof that they never had any real evidence to begin with.
Instead, they have relied on:
-
False narratives and media manipulation
-
Fabricated evidence from within their own ranks
-
Deliberate delays and obfuscation
-
A campaign of deception, threats, and media complicity
News24 and its affiliated publications had every opportunity to conduct due diligence—yet they published defamatory accusations without a single verified fact.
FACT FILE
JUST FABRICATION
Every transaction, contract, and conversation has been scrutinized from every angle—yet no real evidence has emerged. Additionally, News24 and its affiliates ignored due diligence, publishing defamatory accusations without a single verified fact.
Conclusion: An Unprecedented Investigation—And an Unprecedented Failure
The table above tells a damning story. More than 70 people, companies, and organizations were involved in the effort to find evidence against me. They had full access to:
-
Every device, bank account, and communication log
-
Every legal and financial transaction
-
Every contract, guest record, and platform statement
Yet, after nearly 1,000 months of collective investigations, they found nothing.
And that is the real story. The only fraud ever committed was against me.
FACT FILE
AGAIN, ZERO EVIDENCE
More than 70 individuals, companies, and organizations had unrestricted access to my financial records, communications, and legal documents. Yet, they found nothing. Because the only fraud ever committed was against me.
THE UNIQUE VALUE OF WHATSAPP CHATS AS EVIDENCE
Why WhatsApp Chats Are Critical Evidence
While searching for email records to confirm rent payments, I came across WhatsApp exports, including those from Paula. These chat logs are one of the most accurate ways to reconstruct past events—providing insight into:
-
The events as they happened.
-
The attitudes and motives of those involved.
-
What was said, what was done, and, just as importantly, what was not done.
If round-the-clock video footage had existed, there would be no debate—the entire truth would be irrefutable. But since no such footage exists, WhatsApp chats are the closest equivalent.
Taken individually, they are already informative and revealing.
But when you have a dozen exports from key players, they become even more powerful.
Just as a police officer’s body cam footage is considered one of the most vital forms of evidence, WhatsApp chats provide a verifiable, timestamped snapshot of events—and crucially, an export cannot be doctored.
-1.png)
The WhatsApp Messages That Expose the Lies
A prime example:
-
The WhatsApp chats between myself and Mercy.
-
Between Mercy and Ollie.
-
Between myself and Ollie.
-
Between myself and Paula.
-
Between Gail and me.
These all directly contradict Mercy’s allegations, demonstrating that there was no truth to her claims. Yet, the fallback argument becomes:
-
"That was her lived experience."
-
If the WhatsApp messages supported their allegations, my "lived experience" would be irrelevant, and they would be presented as absolute proof.
This is the stark hypocrisy in how the evidence is treated.
FACT FILE
WHATSAPP CHATS AS EVIDENCE
With multiple exports from central figures, these messages provide an unaltered, digital paper trail—much like a police body cam—making them one of the most compelling forms of evidence available. If any messages had supported the consortium’s claims, they would have provided their own exports. Their failure to do so speaks volumes.
The Overwhelming Evidence I Have Produced
Few people can provide as much evidence as I have.
I have presented:
-
Mario’s videos.
-
Videos of WDS in July.
-
Videos of SAPS officers.
-
Thousands of WhatsApp messages.
-
Hundreds of emails.
-
Court papers (in which the consortium’s own submissions contradict each other repeatedly).
-
Recordings of conversations with key witnesses (Chandre, the Leirmans housekeeper, etc.).
-
Bail applications and representations to the SSP.
-
The PSIRA investigation findings.
-
400+ folders of meticulously organized evidence.
If the consortium had real evidence, why has it been necessary for them to fabricate it?
Most importantly, my version of events has never changed.
-
From day one, I have maintained the same, consistent account.
Meanwhile, the consortium’s narrative shifts constantly, depending on:
-
Who they are talking to.
-
What their audience already knows.
-
What evidence they have been confronted with.
Every new piece of evidence I uncover further corroborates my version of events, while further undermining theirs.
FACT FILE
SELECTIVE USE OF EVIDENCE
WhatsApp chats between key individuals—including Mercy, Ollie, Paula, Gail, and myself—directly contradict Mercy’s allegations, exposing them as false. Yet, when confronted with this evidence, the defense shifts to the subjective argument of "lived experience."
Had the messages supported their claims, my lived experience would be dismissed entirely, and the chats would be treated as undeniable proof. This double standard highlights the hypocrisy in how evidence is selectively acknowledged and weaponized.
ANTON WHATSAPP
[01/02/2022, 18:04:53] Anton Agent: Hi Darren
I don’t have the right words…or enough words to answer you correctly...
This is a F****ing nightmare that doesn’t want to disappear! Its there when I go to sleep and even worse when I wake up! I’m sure you feel the same.
As much I have tried to be the mediator between you and keith; (and I’ve really tried my outmost best), it now looks like I’ve sadly failed to succeed! I’ve tried to prevent this from going the legal route, costing both parties a lot of money…. but this is where we are now, all unnecessary!!
The Stark Difference in Transparency
Unlike the consortium, I have:
-
Made every piece of evidence available for scrutiny.
-
Shared folders containing thousands of pages of documentation.
-
Presented an open, transparent account from the very beginning.
Meanwhile, do you think anyone in the consortium would:
-
Offer up all their WhatsApp conversations?
-
Share their communications with their attorneys?
-
Disclose their private discussions with fellow members?
Of course not. Because the disparity in transparency between the two sides could not be more glaring.
-
Giving media interviews (where they repeat lies that have already been debunked) is not transparency.
-
Manipulating dossiers to fit a narrative is not evidence—it is propaganda.
Yet, whenever I present real, verifiable evidence, the reaction is always the same:
"Okay, but..."
FACT FILE
CONSISTENCY VS FABRICATION
I have provided overwhelming evidence—videos, WhatsApp messages, emails, court documents, recorded conversations, and hundreds of meticulously organized folders—corroborating my account from day one.
In contrast, the consortium's narrative constantly shifts based on their audience, the evidence they are confronted with, and their evolving strategy. If their allegations were true, why has fabricating evidence been necessary?
The Manufactured Victim Narrative
The reason they cannot and will not concede the fabrications is simple: If my version of events is correct, then they are the villains, and I am the victim.
-
They conspired to remove a tenant who, by any reasonable standard, was a perfect tenant.
-
They did so purely for financial gain—despite whatever lies they tell others or even themselves.
And because real evidence does not support their claims, their only options are:
-
Fabricate evidence.
-
Repeat the lies so often that they gain credibility.
-
Recycle those lies across different platforms (articles, petitions, media interviews, etc.).
-
Most reprehensibly—create victims to misrepresent as victims of a fraud.
Yet, despite the mountains of evidence proving their deception, their false narrative continues to dominate. Because the truth has no place in the public's consumption of facts.
FACT FILE
THE TRANSPARENCY GAP
Unlike the consortium, I have openly shared thousands of pages of evidence—WhatsApp messages, emails, court filings, and recorded conversations—ensuring full transparency.
In contrast, they conceal their communications, refuse to provide their own WhatsApp exports, and manipulate narratives instead of presenting verifiable proof. Giving media interviews to repeat debunked lies is not evidence—it’s propaganda.
Criminal Acts Committed to Support the False Narrative
The number of crimes committed to create, maintain, and enhance this false narrative is staggering:
-
Drugging someone to gain access to their bank accounts.
-
Embezzling over R1 million of guests’ money.
-
Rigging bail applications.
-
Obstructing justice with falsified dockets.
-
Several illegal arrests (including Ollie and Markus).
-
Secret, illegal SAPS operations under the cover of the main arrest.
-
Weaponizing the media to destroy reputations.
-
Using News24 articles to justify arrests, and arrests to justify civil matters, creating a loop of false credibility.
And yet, these blatant, well-documented crimes are not considered newsworthy.
FACT FILE
WHY NOT ADMIT THE TRUTH?
Lacking real evidence, they resorted to fabrications—repeating lies, recycling false claims across media, and manufacturing victims to sustain their fraud narrative. Yet, despite overwhelming proof of their deception, their version prevails because the truth is inconvenient.
Final Thought: The Emperor Has No Clothes
The consortium’s lies are not just false—they are layered in a way that creates an illusion of credibility.
-
They convince SAPS they have evidence.
-
SAPS carries out arrests based on false media reports.
-
News24 then cites those arrests as proof of a scandal.
-
The fabricated narrative gains momentum.
But at its core? There is nothing. They have no real evidence, just a self-perpetuating cycle of lies, one that collapses the moment any real scrutiny is applied.
Meanwhile, every single new WhatsApp export, email, court document, and witness testimony I uncover only further validates the truth:
-
My narrative has never changed.
-
Every piece of evidence supports my account.
-
The consortium has yet to provide a single verifiable fact.
Because there is no evidence of scamming—because there was no scam.
FACT FILE
CRIMES BEHIND THE FALSE NARRATIVE
A web of criminal acts was committed to sustain this fabricated case, including drugging individuals for financial access, embezzling R1 million in guest funds, falsifying dockets, rigging bail applications, and executing illegal arrests. The media was weaponized to reinforce these lies, using News24 articles to justify arrests and vice versa—creating a self-perpetuating cycle of false credibility. Despite clear evidence, these crimes remain ignored.
JOHANNES WHATSAPP CHAT EXPORT.
"They are working as a double act to extort funds by locking me out of the property."
The consortium’s falsehoods were carefully layered to appear legitimate—convincing SAPS they had evidence, prompting arrests based on false media reports, and using those arrests to reinforce their fabricated scandal. This self-perpetuating cycle collapses under real scrutiny, as every document, testimony, and WhatsApp export continues to validate the truth: my narrative remains unchanged, while they have yet to provide a single verifiable fact.
Addendum: The Significance Of Whatsapp Messages As Evidence, And As A Comparison With Lived Experience
The Reliability of WhatsApp Messages as Evidence
WhatsApp messages are among the most reliable forms of evidence, offering an accurate, contemporaneous record of past events, attitudes, actions, and motives. Unlike subjective testimony shaped by memory or personal bias, WhatsApp chats preserve verbatim exchanges, creating an unalterable snapshot of interactions as they happened. These records are inherently trustworthy, as both participants retain identical copies, ensuring authenticity and preventing tampering.
WhatsApp Messages as the Next Best Form of Documentation
In the absence of round-the-clock video footage or audio recordings, WhatsApp exports serve as the next best form of documentation. They capture real-time exchanges that reflect not only facts but also context, tone, and intent—elements often lost or distorted in retrospective accounts.
Comparable to forensic evidence or black box recordings in aviation, WhatsApp chats preserve critical details, ensuring accuracy where oral testimony or reconstructed timelines might falter. Both WhatsApp messages and black box recordings are designed to capture unfiltered truths for accountability, a principle that aligns perfectly with their role in evidentiary proceedings.
FACT FILE
FORENSIC EVIDENCE
In the absence of continuous video or audio recordings, WhatsApp exports provide the next best form of documentation. They capture real-time exchanges, preserving not only facts but also context, tone, and intent—elements often lost in hindsight.
Much like black box recordings in aviation, WhatsApp chats serve as a permanent record, preventing distortion and manipulation. Their timestamped accuracy makes them invaluable in evidentiary proceedings, ensuring accountability where oral testimony or reconstructed timelines might fail.
How Courts View WhatsApp Messages
Courts universally regard WhatsApp messages exchanged near the time of a disputed event as critical evidence. These messages provide definitive snapshots of the periods they cover, offering clarity and coherence to complex disputes.
Unlike "lived experience," which is inherently subjective and varies depending on individual perception or interpretation, WhatsApp messages present concrete facts that can be independently verified.
The Transparency of WhatsApp Exports
The transparency of WhatsApp exports further enhances their credibility. If an individual making allegations refuses to produce their WhatsApp messages, it raises serious doubts about the validity of their claims.
Conversely, a willingness to disclose such records demonstrates both transparency and confidence in the truth. When taken collectively, a body of WhatsApp chats creates a cohesive, interwoven narrative that discredits fabricated allegations and exposes inconsistencies in subjective accounts.
FACT FILE
TRANSPARENCY OF WHATSAPP EXPORTS
WhatsApp exports enhance credibility by providing an unaltered, timestamped record of events. If an accuser refuses to disclose their messages, it raises serious doubts about the validity of their claims.
Conversely, a willingness to share these records signals transparency and confidence in the truth. When analyzed collectively, a body of WhatsApp chats forms a cohesive narrative, exposing inconsistencies and discrediting fabricated allegations.
The Limitations of "Lived Experience" as Evidence
"Lived experience," while valid as a personal perspective, cannot hold the same weight as WhatsApp messages when determining objective truth. Lived experience is often influenced by:
• Emotions
• Selective memory
• Personal bias, which may distort reality
In stark contrast, WhatsApp exports are impartial; they are not influenced by external factors, nor can they be manipulated to suit a narrative.
When comparing the two, it is clear that WhatsApp messages stand as a superior evidentiary tool, providing unambiguous facts where subjective accounts often muddy the waters.
Why WhatsApp Messages Must Take Precedence in High-Stakes Disputes.
In disputes where the stakes are high, reliance on WhatsApp messages over subjective recollections is not just preferable but essential. They anchor the narrative in facts, ensuring that truth prevails over perception.
FACT FILE
THE CONSORTIUM
While "lived experience" reflects personal perspective, it is often shaped by emotions, selective memory, and personal bias—factors that can distort reality.
In contrast, WhatsApp messages provide an impartial, timestamped record that cannot be manipulated to fit a narrative. In high-stakes disputes, they serve as an essential evidentiary tool, ensuring truth prevails over perception.
Adding the Critical Role of Email Evidence
The Enormous Volume of Emails Exchanged (2021–2022)
Beyond the thousands of WhatsApp messages, there exists an overwhelming volume of email correspondence exchanged between all relevant parties throughout 2021 and 2022. These emails are just as valuable as evidence, both in terms of what they prove and what they disprove.
They substantiate my position—one that has remained unchanged and consistent for over four years.
They disprove entirely the consortium’s shifting narrative—a narrative that has constantly evolved depending on:
-
Who they are speaking to.
-
What their audience already knows.
-
What they have been caught lying about previously.
Emails are not just witness statements—they are time-stamped records of exactly what was said, when it was said, and how those involved responded at the time.
The Emails: A Devastating Blow to the Consortium’s Credibility
One of the most damning aspects of the email evidence is not just what is said, but what is missing.
In the hundreds upon hundreds of emails exchanged, there is a glaring absence of any reference to:
-
The supposed "fraud" they later claimed was taking place.
-
Any mention of double bookings beyond the three already acknowledged.
-
Any accusations of scam-related wrongdoing.
-
Any concerns raised in real-time that align with their later allegations.
If the allegations were genuine, these accusations would have appeared in email correspondence at the time. Instead, their total omission proves that many of the allegations were fabricated after the fact.
Emails Prove My Consistency vs. Their Manipulation
Unlike the consortium, my position has never changed.
-
From the very beginning, I laid out my version of events.
-
Every email, WhatsApp message, and official document aligns with that version.
-
Every new discovery in the email records further validates my account.
By contrast, the consortium’s narrative is fluid.
They have:
-
Shifted their accusations depending on who they are trying to convince.
-
Changed key details as more evidence has surfaced.
-
Manipulated information depending on what their audience already knows.
The email evidence exposes this deception—they were not raising these concerns in real-time because those concerns did not exist at the time.
This is not just a lack of evidence for their claims—it is evidence that their claims were actively fabricated well after the events in question.
FACT FILE
WEIGHT OF EMAIL EVIDENCE
Beyond thousands of WhatsApp messages, an extensive volume of email correspondence from 2021 and 2022 further substantiates the speaker’s position. These emails disprove the consortium's shifting narrative and serve as time-stamped records of events, clearly showing the lack of any mention of fraud, double bookings, or scam-related wrongdoing at the time. The absence of such references in the emails proves the allegations were fabricated after the fact, severely undermining the consortium's credibility.
Conclusion: Emails + WhatsApp = A Devastating Case Against the Consortium
-
The WhatsApp exports provide real-time insight into what was actually happening at the time.
-
The email evidence confirms this further, while simultaneously exposing the fabrications of the consortium.
The combination of these two forms of evidence is a devastating indictment of the consortium’s dishonesty. While I have made all my evidence publicly available, the consortium refuses to do the same. Because they can’t.
If their emails and WhatsApp messages supported their claims, they would have released them immediately. The fact that they haven’t speaks volumes.
Once again, the conclusion is clear: ❌ There is no evidence of a scam—because no scam ever took place.
FACT FILE
WHATSAPP & EMAIL EVIDENCE
The combination of WhatsApp exports and email evidence provides a clear and real-time account of the events, further exposing the consortium's fabrications. While the speaker has made all their evidence publicly available, the consortium has refused to release theirs, suggesting their claims are unsupported. The absence of such evidence reinforces the conclusion: no scam ever occurred.
THE DOZENS OF TESTS THAT PROVE THE EVIDENCE NEVER EXISTED
Evidence Was Necessary—Yet It Never Materialized
The consortium, particularly Mr. de Swardt, Paula Disberry, and Keith/Inge Broad, alongside SAPS (especially Sergeant Stevens), repeatedly made extreme and categorical allegations—insisting that they had substantial evidence to support them.
And yet, at every critical moment where producing evidence would have been beneficial, necessary, or even essential, none ever surfaced. If their claims were true, why was evidence never presented when it mattered most?
Two Reasons No Evidence Exists
There are only two possible explanations for why, despite their repeated promises, no evidence ever materialized:
-
It does not exist—because the allegations were fabricated, manipulated, or misrepresented.
-
It was never needed—because the goal was never conviction or trial, but rather incarceration, destruction, and reputational ruin.
The method was simple:
-
Fabricate an extreme allegation
-
Deliver it with absolute conviction
-
Assure everyone that evidence will follow
-
Use media outlets like News24 to "launder" the lies into seemingly legitimate allegations
-
Use those media reports to justify SAPS involvement, arrests, and objections to bail
And on this basis, they were very successful. They relied on repetition and recycling—not evidence—to create the illusion of truth.
FACT FILE
THE STRATEGY
There are two possible reasons why no evidence ever materialised: either it doesn't exist because the allegations were fabricated, or it was never needed, as the goal was never conviction, but rather destruction and reputation ruin. The consortium employed a simple method: fabricate an extreme allegation, deliver it with conviction, promise evidence, use media outlets like News24 to legitimise the claims, and then justify legal action. This strategy relied on repetition and recycling of lies, not evidence, to create the illusion of truth.
How They Exploited the Legal System
In South Africa, the evidentiary threshold for arrest and remand is dangerously low.
-
Unlike in the UK, where the Crown Prosecution Service requires a strong likelihood of conviction before a case proceeds, in South Africa, a mere suspicion of wrongdoing is often enough to:
-
Arrest someone
-
Lay charges
Remand them to prison for months while a case is “built” after the fact
-
They did not need real evidence—they only needed:
-
A complicit Investigating Officer willing to misrepresent the facts
-
A media willing to amplify the lies uncritically
-
Enough smoke and mirrors to create the illusion of wrongdoing
The goal was never to prove a case—the goal was to destroy me before a case could ever be tested.
FACT FILE
SA LAW
In South Africa, the evidentiary threshold for arrest and remand is dangerously low, allowing for arrests and charges based on mere suspicion, without the need for real evidence. Unlike the UK, where strong evidence is required before proceeding with a case, South Africa’s system allows for wrongful imprisonment, especially with the support of a complicit Investigating Officer and uncritical media amplification. The goal was never to prove guilt, but to destroy the speaker's reputation before any case could be tested.
Where Is the Evidence They Promised?
If the consortium had genuine evidence, it would have been produced at:
-
The civil hearings where Keith Broad attempted to reclaim the property
-
The two arrests where they attempted to keep me in Pollsmoor for months or years
-
The various civil cases launched by Paula Disberry
-
The multiple legal filings where they fabricated affidavits instead of providing proof
-
The media reports, where instead of evidence, they relied on blatant misrepresentations
-
The booking platforms, where they could have used real evidence instead of demonstrably false claims about unauthorized rentals
-
Instead, at every stage, they failed to produce anything.
Instead of providing actual proof, they:
-
Fabricated statements (e.g., Keith Broad’s protection order application)
-
Used illegal tactics to suppress opposing evidence (e.g., ensuring I was in prison while they pushed appeals through)
-
Fed demonstrable lies to the media about rent arrears and property damages
The pattern is unmistakable:
-
Create a false claim
-
Assure everyone that evidence will be provided
-
Let time pass while the damage is done
-
Ensure that, by the time people realize no evidence is forthcoming, it no longer matters
Even when they were directly challenged to provide the evidence, they never could—because it never existed.
FACT FILE
THE CONSORTIUM FAILURE
The consortium failed to produce any real evidence at critical moments, such as civil hearings, arrests, legal filings, and media reports. Instead, they resorted to fabricating statements, using illegal tactics, and feeding lies to the media. The pattern is clear: they created false claims, assured evidence would follow, and allowed time to erode the truth, knowing no real evidence ever existed. Despite being challenged to provide proof, they never could, as the evidence was fabricated or non-existent.
The Desperation to Delay and Manipulate Legal Proceedings
One of the most blatant examples of their bad faith tactics was the postponement of the hearing by six months to November 2022. Why was this done? Because they knew that if the June hearing proceeded, they would lose.
At that point:
-
I had paid nine months of rent in full and on time.
-
I had renovated the property at my own expense.
-
I had 4.5 years remaining on my lease—a contract that explicitly justified and permitted the rental operations.
Had they had genuine, explosive evidence, they would have used it then and there.
Instead, they stalled for time—because they had nothing real to present.
FACT FILE
POSTPONEMENT OF THE HEARING
The consortium’s postponement of the hearing to November 2022 was a deliberate tactic to delay the inevitable. By that time, the speaker had paid nine months of rent, renovated the property, and had 4.5 years remaining on their lease, which permitted rental operations. Had the consortium possessed genuine evidence, they would have presented it immediately, but instead, they stalled for time because they had no real proof.
DISPARITY IN THE BURDEN OF PROOF
The Unfair Playing Field
I am constantly challenged to prove X or Y, and the evidential bar is always set extremely high. Others appear to accept their word. I keep hearing what person A or B said, but they only offer their words. That would not be acceptable to me, nor should it be accepted by others. There is very little that cannot be investigated or given credence.
Especially when there is a fundamental and insurmountable difference between the two positions. When I am asked to sift through emails, data, photos, and other sources to find something that may prove or disprove a statement made by any individual, it is often like looking for a needle in a haystack.
If the question is about a specific booking, there will be hundreds; however, the guest will only have one. If the question is about a specific client, there will be thousands; however, the client will only have one claim, one refurbishment, or one holiday. And if they are being questioned in the context of a complaint, it is clear that one serious incident has come to their attention, and they will have gathered and stored evidence at the time.
I don't have that luxury. If I’m being asked to recall events, there have been hundreds of discussions about relationships, work, personal matters, romantic encounters, transactions, and so on over the last 30 years. The same principle applies.
So, even if the evidential burden were the same for both, I would start at a minor disadvantage. If the evidential burden is greater for me than for them, it becomes completely unfair. You clearly have more faith in the honesty of the average guest or client than I do, and you are probably less experienced in listening to lies that result in them getting what they want.
Take Tshimbi’s complaint as an example. What she complained about at the time differs from what an attorney wrote to us two days later, which in turn differs from what she has told you. For someone who was supposedly so upset about:
-
The inadequate airport transfers
-
The unusable kitchen
-
Other grievances
And who was having a disagreement about checking out, where she was told her complaints were invalid and no refund would be issued—are we really suggesting that if she was reasonable and we were unreasonable, she would not have taken any videos or photos? There were several adults in their party. The first thing I and most people would do if unsatisfactory cars appeared would be to take numerous photographs.
Although Tshimbi is pretty sure she didn't complain at the time, she only brought it up as an issue once inside the property. And she certainly didn't complain about the cars when they were chauffeuring her to a luxury villa for free—a villa she was only using because she had booked an early flight and didn’t want to pay for the previous day.
FACT FILE
DISCREPANCY - EVIDENCE & COMPLAINTS
I was being asked to sift through vast amounts of data, emails, and records to disprove statements made by others, while others only need to provide their words. This imbalance becomes even more apparent when examining specific complaints, such as Tshimbi’s, where her narrative changes over time—from complaints about airport transfers and the kitchen to later statements from her attorney and further discrepancies. The lack of photos or videos from her, despite the severity of the complaints, further highlights the inconsistencies in her claims, raising doubts about the validity of her accusations.
The Complete Absence Of Proportionality, Replaced With Absolutism
Once, I had an argument with Airbnb when they paused our listings for a week due to our declining too many bookings.
The reason? The party crowd. When I spoke with Airbnb, their threshold was seven declined bookings per X period per host—not per property. So a host with six or eleven properties was 6x or 11x more likely to be paused, which gave them 80% to 95% less wriggle room. Airbnb acknowledged this was unfair, and I believe they later changed it.
The same principle applies to any business or person:
-
If 100% of your transactions result in complaints, you are running a fraudulent business.
-
If 75% do, something is deeply wrong.
-
If 50%, it’s still serious.
-
If 25%, there’s a major problem.
-
If 10%, it’s concerning.
-
If 1%, that’s normal business variance.
I challenge anyone to argue, with a straight face, that a business with complaints running at under 10%, let alone 5%, let alone 1% is doing anything unethical.
FACT FILE
BUSINESS COMPLAINTS
Airbnb’s listing pause policy, where hosts with multiple properties faced greater scrutiny due to a threshold of declined bookings. The speaker argues that similar principles apply to any business—if complaints consistently make up more than 10% of transactions, the business is facing serious issues, but if under 10%, it is within normal business variance and should not be considered unethical. The speaker challenges the notion that businesses with low complaint rates are engaged in unethical practices.
The Reality Of The Luxury Villa Industry And The Manufactured Fraud Narrative
In an industry like luxury villas, where:
-
Guests are actively encouraged to complain, lay charges, and allege fraud,
-
A narrative of fraud has been carefully constructed,
-
Petitions, online articles, and attorney communications prove nothing beyond what is already known, proportionality is everything.
Of those involved, many have misrepresented events.
Of the genuine complaints that remain, they form a tiny fraction of a tiny fraction.
And all of this occurred during:
-
An expansion of 5000%,
-
Omicron’s chaos,
-
Major refurbishments,
-
Archaic systems that were overwhelmed,
-
Staff struggling to cope.
Yet, despite this extraordinary context, these factors are deliberately ignored, and a false narrative is sustained.
The Ongoing Lack Of Evidence
To date, not one shred of evidence has been provided that:
-
Stands up to scrutiny
-
Did not originate from within the consortium, was manipulated, or was fabricated by the consortium.
-
At the point of drafting this, News24 has not provided a single shred of evidence to support the allegations they have amplified.
-
It appears that zero due diligence was done.
FACT FILE
LACK OF EVIDENCE AND DUE DILIGENCE
To date, no evidence has been provided that holds up to scrutiny or is free from manipulation or fabrication by the consortium. Despite the amplification of allegations by News24, they have failed to present any supporting evidence. It is apparent that no due diligence was conducted in the process.
"At his best, man is the noblest of all animals; separated from law and justice he is the worst."
- Plato