Mr. J, a Former Professor Series – Entry 61: Why I Believe He Has No Real PR or Legal Team
And Why It Matters
Photo by Kolby Milton via Unsplash
Financial Reality Check
People love to imagine that everyone they expose will “lawyer up” or “hire a PR army.” In reality? Most cannot afford it — and he is no exception.
His self-disclosed net worth is around 1.2 million AUD, which sounds large but is modest once you factor in:
Living expenses (especially with medical issues and advanced age).
Potential obligations to children or dependents.
The cost of maintaining even a modest retirement standard.
A serious PR crisis team retainer can easily start at 30,000–50,000 AUD, not including extra services (reputation repair, strategic silence monitoring, international press scanning).
Add legal strategy fees? You’re looking at a six-figure sum — to fight narratives that are, by now, already entrenched and public.
Psychological Profile: The Control Addict
Narcissistic or controlling personalities rarely outsource their narrative. They see themselves as the only one capable of telling their “truth,” even when it spirals into chaos.
Evidence from his repeated emails shows:
Inability to keep “farewell” promises.
Need for direct, personal contact — despite knowing it fuels more public responses.
Continued self-justifying language and pseudo-poetic fragments rather than precise legal statements.
A true PR or legal advisor would have:
Ordered a complete communication freeze.
Coordinated a unified statement or silent period.
Reviewed all public and private correspondence.
He did none of these.
Behavioral Evidence: The Amateur Script
Let’s consider his moves:
Multiple deleted Substack entries.
Contradictory statements (“I won’t contact you again” → new email days later).
Repeated rhetorical backpedaling (“life fragment” → “fiction” → “nobody cares”).
These are classic DIY crisis management signs: panic editing, emotional impulse, no structural strategy.
Why It Matters
When someone acts alone, they think they are winning control. In fact, they:
Reveal more internal contradictions.
Open more forensic entry points.
Erode any remaining public sympathy.
If he had a real PR or legal strategy, the narrative would have been locked down months ago. He would not still be writing hasty, low-context emails or sending shoes as symbolic gestures.
Mini FAQ
What if he suddenly hires a lawyer now?
He can — but it will be too late to fully regain narrative control.
A lawyer can attempt cease-and-desist letters or threats, but:
Public record and timestamps already exist.
His contradictory emails and public writings cannot be scrubbed.
The damage to credibility is irreversible once documented and dissected.
Result: Legal threats only confirm the narrative of fear and panic.
What if he gets a PR team now?
Possible — but any professional PR advisor would likely recommend:
Complete silence → He has already failed this.
Formal apology or statement → He only offered vague, generic lines and cheap symbolic gifts.
Consistent narrative → He’s shifted stories multiple times.
At this point, hiring PR becomes damage limitation, not prevention.
Why do people think they can handle PR alone?
Ego.
They believe:
“No one will care” → Proven false once public engagement rises.
“I can talk my way out” → Ends up creating more evidence.
“I am the master of my story” → Until they realize public perception is its own living organism.
Why don’t they stay silent instead?
Because silence feels like loss of power to them.
When someone is used to manipulating private relationships, they underestimate how permanent and visible public documentation is.
They think if they keep speaking, they can keep controlling the narrative. In reality? They only deepen the crater.
So… will he stop?
Unlikely.
He may pause, but patterns suggest he’ll either:
Try to regain private contact (even subtly).
Seek new audiences to validate his version.
Final Note
No team. No real strategy. No backbone.
All that’s left is a fragile stage, occupied by a man who thought he was directing the play — only to discover he’s the only one still clapping.
Once you’ve opened Pandora’s box of public narrative, you can’t unwrite your past. You can only watch it echo louder than you ever intended.
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
- 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
- Entry 55: A Letter I’ll Never Send
- Entry 56: Outc(L)assed - Critical Race Analysis
- Entry 57: Forensic Breakdown: “A Voidance” by Johnston
- Entry 58: Johnston, Who Raised You?
- Entry 59: Public Financial Terms & Narrative Conditions
- Entry 60: What Kind of Future Do You Think Awaits You?
- Entry 61: Why I Believe He Has No Real PR or Legal Team (you are here)
- Entry 62: Why I Can Legally (and Ethically) Call You a Pathetic Pig
- Entry 63: Tell Me You’re a Pathetic Pig Without Telling Me You’re a Pathetic Pig
- Entry 65: Did Your Mother Teach You To Speak Like This?
- Entry 66: Nobody Cares Anyway
- 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.