Read Our Monthly Magazine
And support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system
- High Court Judge refuses to overturn anonymity order in new case brought by former colleague
- Wootton allegedly posed as ‘Maria Joseph’ in order to obtain sexual images and video by deception
- It is the first case to stem from a Byline Times investigation into Wootton’s alleged use of fake avatars to trick men into compromising themselves online
The 42-year-old former GB News star was not present at the Royal Courts of Justice in London on Tuesday as Judge Roger Eastman ruled there was “clear evidence of potential adverse and serious adverse effect” if the identity of the man – a former colleague known as YXN – was made public.
It came as first details emerged of a personal injury case Wootton’s former colleague is bringing against him for allegedly using the fake online identity ‘Maria Joseph’ to unlawfully obtain intimate photos and an explicit video of him.
Mr Justice Eastman heard that Wootton sent partially and naked photographs of a woman, as well as a video of a couple having sex, while pretending to be Joseph in Facebook and WhatsApp messages in 2010 in order to deceive the man into sending private material of his own.
Five GB News Men Accused of Sexual Impropriety as Channel Engulfed by Wootton-Fox Misogyny Storm
As GB News goes into meltdown following Dan Wootton and Laurence Fox’s on air comments about Ava Evans, Byline Times reveals the controversial personal histories of five employees – including CEO Angelos Frangopoulos, who enjoys the protection of a non-disclosure agreement over sexual harassment allegations
Barrister Justin Levinson said that Wootton, by hiding behind the fake profile, had “tricked” his client into believing he was exchanging messages with the woman in the images, allegedly causing “injury (including psychiatric injury)”, adding that Wootton had not denied being Joseph.
In written legal submissions, Mr Levinson said: “The Claimant now brings this claim for damages for personal injuries and losses consequent on the Defendant’s intentional infliction of harm, misuse of confidential information, infringement of privacy and deceit.”
He added that by the “very nature of the unusual facts on which the claim is based, the Claimant’s anonymity is necessary to prevent compounding and aggravating the very matters which give rise to the claim”.
Wootton’s barrister Samuel Rowe argued that when the anonymity order was made in January this year, Mr Wootton had insufficient notice to challenge it in court. This was rejected by the judge.
Mr Rowe also claimed the court would not have been justified in granting the order had it been aware of relevant information at the time, including that Wootton had been investigated by the Metropolitan Police and Police Scotland and faced no charges and that the order offended the principle of open justice.
But Levinson told the court that the police investigations did not relate to the claimant’s complaint, but to similar ones, and the judge refused to lift the anonymity order, instead awarding costs against Wootton, with future hearings in the case to be held publicly.
It follows the publication by Byline Times in 2023 of a three-year investigation into the pseudonymous activities of former News of the World, Sun, and MailOnline journalist Wootton, posing as Joseph and another avatar – a fake showbusiness agent called ‘Martin Branning’.
The Truth About Megxit: How Dan Wootton and a ‘Cash-For-Leaks’ Scandal Split the Royal Family
As Scotland Yard probes the journalist Dan Wootton over allegations of blackmail and serial sexual catfishing after a three-year special investigation by Byline Times, this newspaper can now reveal how his payments to the partner of a top royal aide forced the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to run from the UK
This newspaper told how Wootton targeted scores of