Mr. J, a Former Professor Series – Entry 31: Open Letter to the Person Who Tried to Break Me with Defamation
You think I don’t know it’s you?
You think I wouldn’t notice.
You thought that when logic failed you, you could switch to character assassination — a classic last resort when your narrative collapses.
But let’s unpack this properly and with clarity.
It’s deeply disappointing — but not surprising.
You think I don’t know it’s you running those campaigns?
If you want to pretend to be a local, at least do it properly. Say my address correctly — like a real local.
Don’t act anonymous and then claim I have “more enemies than I could imagine.” Only you know my address. Only you know enough about my father to weaponize it in your defamatory campaigns.
Read my related publication here:
Mr. J, a Former Professor Series - Entry 19: The Coward Behind the Clone
You wrote that Outc(L)assed piece mocking and racializing my dad. You insulted my parents simply because I refused to return to your toxic relationship.
Don’t you remember how many times you walked out that fucking door when we argued? How many times you threatened to leave?
Why would you even care about coming back? You already ruined it — multiple times.
And I will not stand for that, Johnston.
That was such an insult to my intelligence.
You know I want to be with someone I can brag about, not someone I have to make excuses for like you.
It isn’t difficult for me to say it was you behind those defamatory tax evasion claims. You even followed that account. You only deleted it after I exposed you with video evidence connecting you directly to it.
Only you would frame those pathetic campaigns in that way, Johnston.
Everyone around me is disgusted by you now. And that disgust is louder than any apology you could ever fake.
⸻
I gave you. Johnston. A chance — and trust.
I didn’t just let you tag along for some meetings or projects.
I shared my networks, my professional circle, my name.
But… it is a betrayal when it involves not only resources but reputation.
You didn’t just step on my trust; you tried to fracture my credibility — the most sacred currency in any professional or personal space.
It’s when someone can’t fight your logic, they attack your identity.
This is called character assassination.
When they have no arguments left, they turn to:
Attacking your identity.
Attacking your reputation.
Planting legal fears or trying to create institutional doubt.
At that point, it stops being an “argument conflict.”
It becomes psychological warfare — a desperate attempt to break your sense of self.
Because the more articulate the victims are, the more the abusers try to silence you.
When you’re articulate, strategic, and unafraid to archive every receipt, you become harder to control.
They can’t debate you on facts, so they target the only thing left: your reputation and privacy.
Why do they play dirty?
Because you’ve already won the narrative war.
When someone jumps to defamation, doxxing, and threats — they have officially run out of logic and legitimate tactics.
What does this say about you?
It means you’re solid.
It means you’re so unbreakable they had to resort to the only tool they had left — fear.
It means they’re not playing to win anymore; they’re playing to destroy. And ironically, they can’t even do that effectively.
Johnston, you betrayed every role you ever claimed in your life.
You betrayed the role as an academic.
You betrayed the role to be anyone’s partner. You betrayed your former wife, you betrayed the Indonesian girl you tried to pursue before me.
And you betrayed me.
You didn’t just betray partners — you betrayed the father role they needed. You. Betrayed the father your children need you to be.
I only claim to be your former partner here. Elsewhere, I don’t even mention it — because it’s humiliating to acknowledge any association with someone like you, Johnston.
You’re so ugly, no one wants to save you.
You’re so pitiful, no one wants to sympathize.
You’re so shameless, no one even wants to touch you.
I wouldn’t call you a “pussy.” But you are certainly not a man to me.
I live with shame and regret for not leaving you sooner, back when you started showing emotional abuse toward me. I thought about leaving you every single day while I was with you. I know now that I should have, and I deserve to be with someone far better.
He may never feel shame himself, but it might make others feel ashamed for him — and that’s how social death begins.
Note on Naming:
The subject of these verses is identified by name due to the severity of the public threats made during that period.
Naming is not intended to humiliate, but to preserve the integrity of the record and reflect the seriousness of the documented behavior.
While the individual has since responded publicly, the response has not addressed the core evidence. In such cases, visibility remains necessary. Selective rebuttal is not accountability.
Full evidence archive submitted to QPS, TEQSA, AHRC, and Ethics Australia: View here.
Read the full series
- Entry 1: The Man Who Taught Me Ethics by Failing All of Them
- Entry 2: The Disappearance of the Public Poet
- Entry 3: The Hanging Tree Case Study
- Entry 4: Hidden Like Accountability
- Entry 5: The Collapse of Assumptions
- Entry 6: The Ethics of a Tinder Bio
- Entry 7: How He Ate Told Me Everything
- Entry 8: What Makes a Scholar Dangerous
- Entry 9: Fragment of Life, Fragment of Accountability
- Entry 10: Anatomy of Disappointment
- Entry 11: Legal Defense Challenges: A Framing Statement
- Entry 12: Six Years After Ronell – What Academia Still Doesn’t Get
- Entry 13: QUT and The Man Who Raped Me
- Entry 14: Why Sarcasm Toward Institutions Can Backfire
- Entry 15: P*ssy or Toxic Masculinity?
- Entry 16: Who is Your Favorite Comedian?
- Entry 17: And What is Your Favorite Song?
- Entry 18: Grant Proposal — Narrative Ethics as Survivor-Led Forensics
- Entry 19: The Coward Behind the Clone
- Entry 20: [URGENT HIRE] CRISIS COMMUNICATIONS SPECIALIST
- Entry 21: [URGENT] Legal Counsel Needed for Complex Reputation Rehabilitation
- Entry 22: YOU’RE AN ABUSER. STOP CONTACTING ME
- Entry 23: Seeking Counsel for a Fallen Academic
- Entry 24: Internal Legal-PR Briefing
- Entry 25: For Journalists – Legal & Ethical Clearance Summary
- Entry 26: Symbolic Prostitution, Transactional Intimacy, or Just a “Loan”?
- Entry 28: Why He Simply Cannot Shut Up
- Entry 29: Forensic Commentary on “LARGE Language Muddle”
- Entry 30: Don’t Just Threaten My Future. Because I’m Going To Archive Your Present
- Entry 31: Open Letter to the Person Who Tried to Break Me with Defamation (you are here)
- Entry 32: Defamation, Harassment, Doxxing Class 101
- Entry 33: Confidential Crisis Recovery Proposal
- Entry 34: Forensic Behavioral-Somatic Report
- Entry 35: Forensic Commentary on the Tattoos
- Entry 36: QUT and the Abuser They Once Had
- Entry 38: When Poetry Becomes Revenge Porn
- Entry 40: A Man Built for Applause, Not Accountability
- Entry 41: Neurobehavioral Addendum
- Entry 43: Why Does It Sound Like a War Metaphor?
- Entry 44: Forensic Commentary on Racialized and Fetishizing Language in “Hidden Like Rice”
- Entry 45: Public Misuse of Former Academic Affiliation
- Entry 46: The Two Things That Didn’t Leave a Bad Impression
- Entry 47: When Affection is Just an Alibi (A Bundy-Inspired Reflection)
- Entry 48: Humbert, Lolita, and the Fetish of Fragility
- Entry 49: The Fetish of Smallness as Symbolic Violence
- Entry 50: Motif Risk Analysis
- Entry 52: Can an Abuser Be a Good Father?
- Entry 53: Who Protects the Children?
- Entry 54: From Blackmail to Children
- Reflection: The Miscalculation
(More entries coming soon)
→ [Back to Start: Introducing Mr. J, a Former Professor Series]
© 2025 Linh Ng. All rights reserved.
This publication is intended for educational and reflective purposes only.
Sharing the original link is welcomed and encouraged.
Please do not reproduce, redistribute, or translate this content — in whole or in part — without written permission.
This piece reflects both lived experience and critical analysis. It is not meant to be detached from its author or reframed without context.
Misuse or decontextualization may lead to formal clarification or takedown requests.
This work has been reviewed and quietly followed by scholars, educators, and ethics professionals across multiple sectors.
If your institution is engaging in critical discourse around narrative justice, symbolic coercion, or representational ethics, feel free to connect via Substack DMs or formal channels.
A regulatory case regarding this matter has already been classified under a protected status within national education integrity systems.
Should any reputational countermeasures or distortions arise, I reserve the right to publish the documented timeline, behavioral patterns, and contextual metadata.
All relevant documentation has been submitted through formal legal and regulatory pathways.
Photo cover by Annie Spratt via Unsplash