|INTRO: Serge Benhayon has commenced legal action against Esther Rockett for defamation in the Supreme Court of New South Wales after a three year cyber abuse-campaign. Esther Rockett misleadingly describes herself as a ‘health care activist’ and even ‘child safety advocate’, however the reality of her conduct on and offline and the complete lack of any history of contribution in these areas would, to most reasonable people, exclude such descriptors. This blog explores Esther Rockett’s footprint.|
For 3 years Ms. Esther Rockett has been busy writing and producing numerous blogs, and having read them all we can categorically state that not one single blog has been about supporting health or wellbeing, a fact that is not only odd but very revealing for a person who refers to herself as a ‘health activist’ and was recently referred to by one misguided journalist as a ‘health blogger’, apparently willing to accept Rockett’s own misleading self-appointed titles without checking the facts.
Esther Rockett’s Campaign to ‘Bring Down’ Serge Benhayon & Universal Medicine
In reality, Esther Rockett is not a ‘health activist’ or ‘health blogger’, she is a prolific cyber-abuser who has and continues to run an unjustified pretty much one-woman online campaign with one agenda – to “bring down” Serge Benhayon, his business Universal Medicine and anyone associated with it.
She has used blogging platforms and social media to attempt to garner support from anyone who may be sympathetic to her cause, has made numerous false complaints to government bodies and used the media to attempt to discredit and humiliate Mr. Benhayon, his family, young adults and teenagers and participants of his workshops or attendees of his complementary medicine clinic in Goonellbah, near Lismore NSW.
In 2012 Rockett began serial blogging under false names and pseudonyms hiding behind anonymity, at least until her actual identity was exposed by the Universal Medicine Facts site. Seemingly inspired by misleading information she had collected from online connections, her own blog sites were an avenue for Esther Rockett to directly accuse or infer that Serge Benhayon was engaged in all manner of nefarious activities.
Esther Rockett sought to impugn Serge Benhayon’s professional, personal and moral conduct and many of those associated with him including medical professionals, lawyers, dentists and anyone she felt carried too much influence or sway in their support of Benhayon’s work. She established a McCarthy-like list of her targets online, suggesting those professionals she listed were unqualified, incompetent and dangerous; claims she made with no experience (professional or otherwise) of those she has catalogued and attempted to metaphorically tar and feather.
Rockett began by accusing people of being in a cult, brainwashed by Serge Benhayon’s Svengali like ways, further accusing Benhayon of inappropriate touching, sexual predation, grooming, money laundering and more.
When this did not gain the traction she desired – Serge Benhayon’s business and work continued to flourish as the reputation of his work was carried by word of mouth and the quality of service he provided clients carried itself – she made serial complaints to any agency who would listen and when these also failed, with every complaint being dismissed, Rockett sought to garner media attention.
More recently, when the cloak of anonymity was lifted and her identity exposed on social media, she has scurried from behind her anonymous vitriol and attempted to rebadge herself as a ‘child safety advocate’ and/or ‘health activist’. To these titles experts in the field have commented that they are mystified by what Rockett considers ‘child safety’, and indeed health, when she has attacked and vilified those she has asserted she is ‘protecting’, and has made no contribution to either child safety or health and is evidently intent on defending nothing but her own misguided belief that she is justified in spreading lies and vitriol about people that she has never met and knows nothing about.
Her advocacy and activism it seems is limited to plastering lies and vitriol across social media and causing embarrassment and distress to the young people she has falsely asserted are victims.
Esther Rockett’s Campaign to Harass & Accuse Anyone Associated with Serge Benhayon
Esther Rockett has for over 3 years harassed and trolled a huge number of individuals, via her blogs, social media especially on Twitter, accusing them of being recruiters for a cult, in some sort of pyramid scheme with Serge Benhayon, that they are brainwashing clients during treatments, that they are sexual abuse apologists, ‘Nazi death-drive’ doctors and the list goes on and on. Rockett has engaged in serial harassment of certain individuals with the express intention to silence them or shame them, attempting to not only ruin their reputations but to destroy their businesses and livelihoods.
One of her many targets is Rachel Hall, one of the authors of this blog, a holistic dentist with a thriving Brisbane dental practice whom Rockett has mercilessly targeted on Twitter, seeking to rally skeptics and pro-flouridation supporters to join her in her malicious campaign.
Esther Rockett has a personal agenda to attack her target, thinly veiled as taking a stance against ‘mysticism’, which is somewhat rich coming from an Acupuncturist who believes in mythical energy meridians that traverse the body.
One of her multitude of posts as a small example of her vitriol:
One might fairly conclude that Dr Hall’s ‘good business’ arises from her dedication to client care, impeccable practice and clients who are well satisfied with her professional services, and perhaps Esther Rockett could learn a thing or two here.
Esther Rockett has taken her online antics into the real world by contacting people at their places of work via emails and phone calls, even resorting to making lying complaints to peoples’ employers and professional governing bodies, threatening to have people sacked or to have medical and dental practitioners hauled up before their professional conduct boards with a view to having their licences to practice revoked.
She also would use the threats of complaints to ensure that those she was stalking online would feel the constant threat of her presence, as seen in this Tweet:
As for her threats to employers and professional associations, she has never met the professionals concerned, never received their services and has no material to support her vicious complaints. Esther Rockett has widely publicised her complaints against some of her targets, and Irish General Surgeon Dr Eunice Minford was a particular favourite – Rockett widely publicising the complaints she had made about the doctor, and curiously her own manifest failure in presenting anything worthy of complaint, Rockett posted the following on Twitter:
And where has this gotten Esther Rockett? It has lead to an unhealthy obsession that has ruined her acupuncture practice, as she is by her own admission almost bankrupt, and it has afforded her a handful of followers on her blog and some notoriety on Twitter for being some kind of Activist or Advocate – words that she has adopted to cover her vile behaviours and online footprint and are a poor fit when her activities outlined above are considered.
A child safety advocate does not endanger the health and wellbeing of young women who do not need her ‘advocacy’ and have in fact publicly requested that she stop her abuse of them by way of falsely asserting that they are the victims of sexual abuse. And whilst her 3 years of relentless pursuit of revenge may have gotten her a few headlines in a couple of newspapers, it has led to her facing numerous police complaints and has now landed her in front of the Supreme Court of NSW facing a claim for defamation.
Esther Rockett – a Defendant in Legitimate Legal Proceedings, not a Victim
Esther Rockett seems unaware of legal process and even though it is she who is now asked to face the music and answer for some of the material she has spewed out on social media, she has tried to create her own spin and has attempted to turn it around to make it look like this is her victory.
She is misguided in her assertions that the defamation proceedings, where she has to establish the truth of what she has asserted with real evidence that can actually be put before a court of law, are in her perverse view of the world, an action where she will be putting Serge Benhayon on trial and it is he who will be facing cross-examination, not her. Rockett in a recent online blog asserted:
“a trial will take place in the second half of 2016 – perhaps August or September. It will be a lengthy and very substantial trial. Serge will be on the stand for a significant part of that.
The trial is likely to run for 4-8 weeks, with Benhayon on the stand for a good part of that.”
In this, Esther Rockett appears to miss the critical point that only proven facts will support a finding before a court. And that is proven facts, not an imagined description of what Esther Rockett thinks the facts might be as spewed forth in her extensive blogsites, with no concrete evidence to back her claims. Leaps of imagination are not facts worthy of a court’s time.
Esther admits to colluding with the media – she knows that her best bet at defending the indefensible is to set this up to be a trial by media, as she boasts on a recent blog post:
“If I can get this to trial it will get an enormous amount of media coverage, very likely internationally. It will be a huge and high profile trial.
I am determined to have all evidence put to the court, and to have Serge and others on the stand answering to it – on the public record, in front of media and the general public.”
Curiously she appears to be under a misapprehension that it is she who is taking ‘this to trial’, not perhaps dealing with the reality that it is she who is being taken to court for her defamatory posts. In essence, Rockett intends to turn the defamation action into a media circus if she can, as her first defiant Tweet which emerged after being served with the defamation action suggests:
Perhaps a word of caution might be that courts are cautious of those who try to turn their process into a circus.
Esther Rockett is open about her collusion with the press – seemingly a way of making more threats. All too often we have seen that the press can behave and act in any way they see fit so long as it sells newspapers. Rockett is banking on putting Serge Benhayon on trial, not in court, but by those of the media who choose to be fed on the frenzy of words Esther Rockett has manipulated and introduced into the arena – words such as cult, sexual predator, child groomer and inappropriate toucher – while they circle like vultures ready to pick over the carrion in a vain attempt to resurrect their floundering and hollow careers.
It does not take much imagination to predict the jostling as each seeks to be the one to deliver the scoop sold to them by Rockett of how a multi-millionaire businessman preyed upon a poor defenseless acupuncturist and self-proclaimed ‘health blogger’ turned Advocate and Activist who imagined she was taking a stand – a stand that in fact had no substance to it.
What is fascinating is that Rockett and her collaborator Lance Martin have suggested for some time that the proper place to deal with their lies is in the courtroom, and have been calling for Serge Benhayon to take them to court to prove them wrong for quite some time – “take us to court and prove us wrong” has been their catch-cry. Of course now this has been done their response has been predictable: that they are now the ‘victims’ of what they have characterised as a ‘multi-million dollar organisation’ trying to silence them.
This was already foreseen – as Alison Greig noted in a blog of 14 February 2015:
“Although of late we have noticed a certain pattern in their limited reasoning – if you stand up against their lies, Esther Rockett and Lance Martin claim ‘victimisation’, but if you do not and ignore their lies you are, according to Lance and Esther, conceding that they are correct. In this regard, according to their strained logic, if legal proceedings were taken by Serge Benhayon against them to vindicate his position (as indeed such proceedings would do), then Universal Medicine would be painted as the big bad cult ‘victimising’ them, but if Serge Benhayon declines to take such action, then he inevitably will be considered by Lance and Esther as failing, since they argue that if the matter is not put before the courts then Serge Benhayon must have something to hide. Damned if you do, damned if you don’t is the sly tactic here.”
The press will not it seems look behind Rockett’s story and ask what has she taken a stand against. What exactly is she complaining of?
If they looked at the backstory it is not a tale of abuse at all but a tale of ‘imagining’ something might have happened if she let it – more than ten years previously. And then many years after that suggesting that this imagined harm could be something that others must have experienced. And from this an escalating preoccupation with imagined harm to young women – a harm that never occurred – and this is the material she is being sued upon. Not a vexatious claim or a SLAPP action as she claims, but the serious matter of slandering someone’s reputation with utter filth with not a skerrick of truth to the vile imputations.
The Flaw in Esther Rockett’s Tale – There are No Victims
The flaw in Esther Rockett’s tale is that there is not a single person who has come forward that fits Esther Rockett’s version of ‘victimhood’, in spite of her calls for it.
No one in the media (or her handful of Twitter followers) have questioned that Rockett has based her entire campaign of vilification on an imagined risk of being abused in a healing session over 10 years ago where she was fully clothed, and even stated about the sessions that they were ‘quite relaxing’. What is key is that Esther Rockett made no complaint and further that the type of healing session that she claims to have been offered did not exist. Nor have the press, or her few followers, examined the fact that after this experience, that in later revisions she described as ‘sleazy’ (of which she remained silent for years), she went on to attend a weekend healing workshop run by Serge Benhayon – hardly the behaviour of someone concerned about their own safety.
The silence is not explained away by claims of ‘victimhood’, particularly as for 2 years Serge Benhayon took no action against the virulent and malicious cyber war Esther Rockett launched. Rockett herself has said she was not at all influenced by Benhayon and that she is a very strong person, and there was no risk to her despite her claims of ‘victimisation’. In her 3 year dedicated cyber-abuse campaign, if the facts are examined, Esther Rockett was left to her prolific blogging until a group affected by her antics decided to out her.
The point here is that nothing happened, and even Esther Rockett has stated she only ‘imagined’ something could have. Nor was there any risk to her.
From this series of events she then leapt to the lewd suggestions 10 years later that there was a threat posed to women and young girls. This background would at least be something that the media might investigate and question. Esther Rockett’s fictional stories of imagined victims does not mean abuse of any kind has occurred – it just means she made up a story.
By Alison Greig and Rachel Hall
|Alison Greig BA LLB (Hons) LLM (Hons), Grad Dip Psych, is a writer, researcher, mentor and presenter and an advocate for true freedom of expression.
You can follow Alison Greig on Twitter @AlisonGreig36
|Dr Rachel Hall (BChD, LDSRCS(Eng) works as a dentist writer, speaker, leader in holistic health and wellbeing. She is also an avid guitarist, photographer, family woman and lives by the maxim “say it like it is”.|