You might remember Ben Radford from the time he took on a four-year-old girl, but more recently he’s branched out into lawsuits. The one he launched against Karen Stollznow was a mixed bag, earning him a watered-down settlement and a lot of enemies. Buoyed by a tolerable amount of failure, he launched another one against Rebecca Watson.


…if you continue to publish with knowledge of the accusations’ falsity, or in reckless disregard of whether the accusations are false, you can be held liable for defamation. I urge you to discuss this with another lawyer knowledgeable in the area of defamation.

Accordingly, please remove from websites and other social media accounts controlled by you all of Stollznow’s accusations…Mr. Radford will not sue you for defamation if you take these steps. Accordingly, taking these steps will…protect you from legal liability to Mr. Radford.

Ah, so Radford wasn’t suing Watson, he just wanted her to remove any false statements she made about him otherwise he would sue her.


Blogger Rebecca Watson, in several recent online posts, has claimed that I threatened her with a defamation lawsuit. I am not currently suing nor preparing to sue, her or anyone else.

So Radford wasn’t threatening to sue her at all, he just wanted her to remove false statements from her blogs otherwise he’d sue her.


No one deserves to be falsely accused of reprehensible conduct. If Rebecca’s goal is to bait me into filing a defamation lawsuit against her, she will surely eventually succeed

So Radford is being goaded by Watson into suing her, but he wants to clarify that he has no intentions of suing her, and if she doesn’t remove the false claims she’s made he might sue her.


Radford alludes to a “handful of false claims,” but for weeks has refused to reveal exactly what I wrote that was false or defamatory, despite being asked by my lawyer several times in my attempt to facilitate a rational discussion.

So Radford has no idea if any of Watson’s statements are defamatory, but her defamatory statements are goading him into suing her, something he has no intentions of doing, so she should remove all her defamatory statements otherwise he might sue her.


Assuming that no further defamatory content is forthcoming from Rebecca or others as of today’s date, I’m willing to drop the matter and move on.

So Radford’s willing to forgive and forget Watson’s defamatory content, which he’s unable to name, but that is forcing him to sue Watson, which he has no intention of doing, and unless she removes the defamatory content he might sue her.

I’m going to contact all my physicist friends, as Radford appears to be in a macroscale quantum superposition. This could be Nobel-prize material!