CyberCriminal.com

Peter Gray

We are investigating Peter Gray for allegedly attempting to conceal critical reviews and adverse news from Google by improperly submitting copyright takedown notices. This includes potential violations such as impersonation, fraud, and perjury.

PARTIES INVOLVED : Peter Gray

ALLEGATIONS : Perjury, Fraud, Impersonation

INCIDENT DATE : 10 Sep 2023

INVESTIGATED BY : Ethan Katz

TOOLS USED : Lumen, SecurityTrails

CASE NO : 5367/A/2024

CRIME TYPE : Intellectual Property Scam

PUBLISHED ON : 25 Nov 2024

Peter Gray
Due Diligence
Get everything we know about Peter Gray in one downloadable PDF document
Is This About You?
We encourage you to share details of the actual perpetrators and get your story straight.

What We Are Investigating?

Our firm is launching a comprehensive investigation into Peter Gray over allegations that it has been suppressing critical reviews and unfavorable Google search results by fraudulently misusing DMCA takedown notices. These actions, if proven, could constitute serious legal violations—including impersonation, fraud, and perjury.

We conducted comprehensive analyses of fraudulent copyright takedown requests, meritless legal complaints, and other unlawful efforts to suppress public access to critical information. Our reporting sheds light on the prevalence and modus operandi of a structured censorship network, often funded and used by criminal enterprises, oligarchs and criminal entities seeking to manipulate public perception and bypass AML checks conducted by financial organisations.

The fake DMCA notices in this investigation appears to have been strategically deployed to remove negative content from Google search results illegally. Based on this pattern, we have reasonable grounds to infer that Peter Gray - or an entity acting at its behest - is directly or indirectly complicit in this cyber crime.

In most such cases, such ops are executed by rogue, fly-by-night 'Online Reputation Management' agencies acting on behalf of their clients. If evidence establishes that the subject knowingly benefited from or facilitated this scam, it may be deemed an 'accomplice' or an 'accessory' to the crime.

What are they trying to censor

Peter Gray, once a prominent partner at a prestigious international law firm, has become a cautionary tale in the legal community. His career, marked by a significant ethical breach, serves as a stark reminder of the importance of integrity in the legal profession. This report delves into the circumstances surrounding Gray’s misconduct, the subsequent fallout, and the alleged attempts to suppress information about these events.

A Fall from Grace

Gray’s downfall began with his involvement in a high-profile case representing a foreign government. In this case, he submitted evidence to a court that was later found to be misleading. Specifically, the evidence included transcripts with incorrect dates, which played a crucial role in the court’s decision to freeze substantial assets belonging to an individual accused of serious crimes.

When the discrepancy in the evidence was discovered, Gray acknowledged the error but suggested that it could be “fudged,” a term that raised eyebrows and questions about his commitment to legal ethics. The court did not take this lightly, and the judge criticized Gray’s conduct, stating that such actions were not befitting of a solicitor of integrity.

Disciplinary Actions and Legal Ramifications

The revelations about Gray’s conduct led to a series of disciplinary actions. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) found that Gray had deliberately misled the court, a serious breach of professional conduct. As a result, he was struck off the roll of solicitors, effectively ending his legal career in that jurisdiction.

Gray appealed the decision, arguing that the findings were no longer supportable. However, the appeal was dismissed, with the court affirming the SDT’s ruling and emphasizing the gravity of Gray’s misconduct.

Attempts at Information Suppression

In the aftermath of these events, there have been allegations that Gray attempted to suppress information about his misconduct. Reports suggest that he, or parties acting on his behalf, submitted copyright takedown notices to remove critical content from the internet. These actions, if true, raise concerns about efforts to censor public information and avoid accountability.

Such attempts at information suppression are troubling, as they undermine the principles of transparency and freedom of information. They also hinder the public’s ability to make informed decisions, particularly in matters involving legal representation and professional conduct.

Implications for the Legal Profession

Gray’s case has broader implications for the legal profession. It highlights the importance of ethical conduct and the consequences of failing to uphold professional standards. The legal community relies on trust and integrity, and breaches of this nature can erode public confidence in the justice system.

Furthermore, the alleged attempts to suppress information about Gray’s misconduct underscore the need for vigilance in protecting the public’s right to access information. Transparency is essential in holding professionals accountable and ensuring that similar breaches do not go unchecked.

Conclusion

Peter Gray’s story serves as a sobering reminder of the importance of ethical conduct in the legal profession. His actions not only led to personal consequences but also raised significant concerns about attempts to suppress information and avoid accountability. It is imperative that the legal community and regulatory bodies remain vigilant in upholding professional standards and protecting the public’s right to information.

  • https://lumendatabase.org/notices/35994438
  • https://lumendatabase.org/notices/35948280
  • https://lumendatabase.org/notices/35948157
  • https://lumendatabase.org/notices/34592589
  • https://lumendatabase.org/notices/34585988
  • https://lumendatabase.org/notices/34561234
  • September 10, 2023
  • September 8, 2023
  • September 8, 2023
  • June 22, 2023
  • June 21, 2023
  • June 20, 2023
  • Winger M e dia Corp.
  • Brusktoi & Sons
  • Varsanki Media
  • Rehman Media International
  • Litt Media International
  • BR Law & Co.
  • https://nycchronicles.com/2015/03/02/djibouti-gibson-dunn-apologises-to-court-and-refersitself-to-sra/
  • https://www.deccanlive.in/2021/05/ex-gibson-dunn-dubai-partner-struck-off.html
  • https://www.deccanlive.in/2015/03/disgraced-gibson-dunn-partner-teaches.html
  • https://wardheernews.com/djibouti-gibson-dunn-apologises-court-refers-sra
  • https://globalarbitrationreview.com/ex-gibson-dunn-partner-struck
  • https://www.legalcheek.com/2015/03/disgraced-gibson-dunn-partner-teaches-lawyers-a-valuable-lesson-play-straight-with-the-court/
  • https://www.globallegalpost.com/news/ex-gibson-dunn-dubai-partner-struck-off-for-deliberately-misleading-londons-high-court-42936929

Evidence Box

Evidence and relevant screenshots related to our investigation

Targeted Content and Red Flags

wardheer news

Djibouti: Gibson Dunn apologises to court and refers itself to SRA

  • Adverse News
Visit Link

global arbitration review

Ex-Gibson Dunn partner struck off

  • Adverse News
Visit Link

deccan live

Ex-Gibson Dunn Dubai partner struck off for deliberately misleading London's High Court

  • Adverse News
Visit Link

About the Author

The author is affiliated with TU Dresden and analyzes public databases such as Lumen Database and Maltego to identify and expose online censorship. In his personal capacity, he and his team have been actively investigating and reporting on organized crime related to fraudulent copyright takedown schemes.

Additionally, his team provides advisory services to major law firms and is frequently consulted on matters pertaining to intellectual property law.

Escalate This Case
Please enable JavaScript in your browser to complete this form.
Checkboxes

Learn All About Fake Copyright Takedown Scam

Or go directly to the feedback section and share your thoughts

How This Was Done

The fake DMCA notices we found always use the 'back-dated article' technique. With this technique, the wrongful notice sender (or copier) creates a copy of a 'true original' article and back-dates it, creating a 'fake original' article (a copy of the true original) that, at first glance, appears to have been published before the true original

What Happens Next?

Based on the feedback, information, and requests received from all relevant parties, our team will formally notify the affected party of the alleged infringement. Following a thorough review, we will submit a counter-notice to reinstate any link that has been removed by Google, in accordance with applicable legal provisions. Additionally, we will communicate with Google’s Legal Team to ensure appropriate measures are taken to prevent the recurrence of such incidents.

You are Never Alone in Your Fight.

Generate public support against the ones who wronged you!

User Reviews

Website Reviews

Stop fraud before it happens with unbeatable speed, scale, depth, and breadth.

Recent Reviews

Cyber Investigation

Uncover hidden digital threats and secure your assets with our expert cyber investigation services.

Recent Investigation

Threat Alerts

Stay ahead of cyber threats with our daily list of the latest alerts and vulnerabilities.

Threat Alerts

Client Dashboard

Your trusted source for breaking news and insights on cybercrime and digital security trends.

Client Login