Mr. J, a Former Professor Series – Entry 37: A Sexual Abuser
From Rape to Birthday Gift
Have you ever seen a man 33 years older than you?
One who first threatens to end things, then harasses you for months when you don’t beg him to come back.
Who sends suicide-baiting love letters laced with fake inheritances.
Email sent on 22 June 2025 – Day 109 of documented harassment
After QPS had already closed the case with a formal warning to cease contact.
Who tells you to write for him — or he’ll reveal your sex life to your parents.
Received: 20 March 2025 – Day 15 of documented harassment
Who says things like: “I miss licking you to sleep” — without consent, without a proper relationship.
Received: 15 April 2025 – Day 41 of documented harassment
I’ve seen one.
Still hunting.
Want his contact? Happy to provide.
From rape to birthday gift
Email received: 26 June 2025 – Day 113 of documented harassment
Nope, abuser. Go away.
Your performative decency looks a lot like post-crime rebranding.
From rape to birthday gift – what a twisted definition of love and responsibility and masterclass in hypocrisy.
Intent on sending a gift without a proper address or phone number?
You don’t send birthday gifts to someone you raped.
You don’t ask for their number after legal no-contact.
If your aim is truly to ‘honour a promise’ — as you say — then perhaps the most respectful gesture would be a direct bank transfer.
It avoids confusion, requires no contact, and closes this properly.
You’re not a forgotten promise — you’re a filed report.
I’m sharing this because memory fades fast — and what we don’t name gets buried.
What happened in the article happened to me, too.
Sustained harassment.
Screenshot from The New Yorker article “What Happened to the Women of #MeToo?” by Alexis Okeowo, June 16, 2025. Used for commentary only.
Full article: The New Yorker
One message I received read: “I miss licking you to sleep.”
I nearly vomited. It was vile.
Now imagine this came from a man 33 years older than you.
He’s 56. I’m 23.
A man who first threatened to end the relationship, then harassed you for months when you didn’t beg to return.
A man who tried to extort you.
Who sent suicide-baiting love letters laced with fake inheritances.
Who told you to write for him — or he’d reveal your sex life to your parents.
It took me 90 days of legal reporting and institutional resistance to be able to say this:
Patrick James Johnston. You are an abuser.
Like Roy Moore, Patrick Johnston is a sexual abuser.
And like Tina Johnson, I was retaliated against — my family was insulted, my private life was threatened with exposure.
Consent under fear, imbalance, or manipulation is not real consent.
It’s not love. It’s coercion.
I have evidence — and authorities have it too.
If this happened to your daughter, or any 23-year-old, would you call it love?
Photo by Joel Muniz via Unsplash
Publications for reference:
- Entry 13: QUT and The Man Who Raped Me
- Entry 22: YOU’RE AN ABUSER. STOP CONTACTING ME
Email sent on July 3, 2025 – Day 119 of documented harassment
After QPS had already closed the case with a formal warning to cease contact.
Full Name, Waybill No., Delivery Address redacted for privacy
On July 3, I have been notified that a parcel was sent to me without my consent. I do not accept it.
Any unsolicited transfers are non-refundable but do not imply any emotional or personal acceptance.
I maintain no contact and accept no delivery.
This excerpt is quoted from official correspondence received from Queensland Police Service. Officer name and personal identifiers have been redacted to protect privacy. The quote is presented as-is, without modification, for the purpose of public interest commentary and survivor documentation.
Email received: June 3, 2025
Disclaimer:
This post is a public documentation and response to sustained harassment. It does not constitute personal communication.
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.
Image Credit:
Photo by Joel Muniz via Unsplash
Photo cover by Steward Munro via Unsplash
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 37: A Sexual Abuser (you are here)
- 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.