Ex-boyfriend, 46, dodges jail after making solicitor's life 'living hell' with harassment campaign which included leaving her abusive voicemails and following her car
A solicitor was branded 'disgraceful' in a malicious online review and had her LinkedIn profile doctored by an ex-boyfriend who made her life a 'living hell' when she dumped him, a court heard.
Sara Gilak said Richard Ponniah tried to 'emotionally and professionally' break her during an unrelenting seven-week campaign of abuse.
A court heard the 46-year-old tried to smear Ms Gilak's reputation by writing a fake negative review about her conduct on her employers' Trustpilot page which led to Ms Gilak being suspended and her career placed in jeopardy.
Prosecutor Tom Wright said Ponniah also changed the family law specialist's LinkedIn profile photo to one of her making an 'offensive and rude' gesture and edited her page to state 'I pride myself on putting men down.'
The business development manager launched the harassment campaign in April last year after Ms Gilak ended the relationship after discovering Ponniah was using dating apps.
A judge was told that Ponniah's 'disgraceful' conduct included him sending her abusive voicemails and messages, following her vehicle on his electric skateboard and shouting outside the property they once shared while shouting 'whore' in view of the neighbours.
Mr Wright said Ms Gilak had to block him by the end of April because of the 'constant barrage of messaging' but his harassment, which also included pressing her buzzer continually for 45 minutes, continued.
Bournemouth Crown Court heard the victim had to take some time off work for compassionate leave following the death of her brother.
But when she returned to the office in early June, she was suspended over the one-star Trustpilot review which stated she was guilty of 'disgusting behaviour from a family solicitor'.
Mr Wright said that when the solicitor confronted Ponniah about the review he threatened to share videos of her.
In a victim impact statement read out, Ms Gilak described the 'significant harm and distress' he had caused.
She said: 'I was finding it hard to function due to the never-ending abuse and hounding, especially at a time I lost my brother. I was emotionally vulnerable but this was of no concern to Richard.
'His conduct took over the grief of losing my brother. I was living in constant fear as I knew he was out of control.
'I was extremely embarrassed on the occasions he shouted outside my window, neighbours and shopkeepers were witnesses.'
She described the incident where he rang the buzzer continuously for 45 minutes as 'horrendous' and said she felt trapped.
With his escalation to damage her career she said he was 'doing everything to emotionally and professionally break me'.
Ms Gilak added: 'I am more nervous and anxious, I'm currently receiving counselling and attempting to move forward.
'It's hard to comprehend the lengths he went to and had I not called the police I think he would have continued.'
Ponniah's own lawyer, Charles Gabb, called his behaviour 'disgraceful.'
He said Ponniah 'lashed out' because emotions came to the surface and he was unable to deal with it in a responsible manner.
He said: 'That's no excuse. For a grown man in his mid-40s to behave like that was disgraceful and I hope he hangs his head in shame.
'He needs to take a very long, hard look in the mirror.'
Ponniah, of Bournemouth, pleaded guilty to one charge of harassment.
Sentencing him last Friday, Judge Susan Evans said: 'Your efforts to threaten her career were highly embarrassing for her and stressful beyond belief.
'You used controlling and coercive behaviour at a time when her brother died and she was distressed already, you have made it far worse.'
She added that he had been 'dismissive and rude' to a probation officer when they had asked questions to put together a pre-sentence report.
But said she was 'just persuaded' not to send him to prison.
Ponniah was given a 12-week sentence suspended for 15 months and ordered to carry out 120 hours of unpaid work and a three-month alcohol abstinence requirement.
Judge Evans warned him: 'I am not going to give you any second chances, if you breach that you will be going to prison.'
She also made an indefinite restraining order to protect Ms Gilak.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Princess Diana's favourite café risks closure over ‘illegal migrant workers and paying staff in food'
A favourite café of Princess Diana could be forced to close after it was accused of illegally hiring migrants, paying employees in only food, and allowing the unlawful smoking of shisha. Café Diana, which was named in honour of the former Princess of Wales, could lose its licence, after the Home Office applied for a review, with a hearing set to take place on Thursday. Diana and her sons, Prince William and Prince Harry, quickly became regulars at the café, which is near to Kensington Palace in west London, after she made her first visit within days of its opening in 1989. Café owner, Abdul-Basit Daoudr Daoud, recalled the princess's visits after her death. 'She started coming more often, bringing the kids here sometimes for breakfast. The kids used to take breakfast, like English breakfast. Herself, she used to have cappuccino, cake, some croissants, something like this. But she sometimes had English breakfast too,' he said, according to The Times. Shortly before she died in 1997, according to the paper, the princess sent a letter to him, reading: 'I wanted to write personally, to thank you so very much for the beautiful flowers you sent for my birthday.' Café Diana now has dozens of photographs of the princess plastered over its walls, including one given by Diana as a present, and has become a popular tourist spot. But the business is facing the prospect of having its licence revoked after the Home Office said seven illegal employees were found working there between September 2019 and December 2024, who were from countries such as Egypt and Albania, according to a report published by inspectors from Kensington and Chelsea council. In interviews, some of these workers claimed they were 'paid in food' rather than money. Inspectors said this 'raises concerns about labour exploitation taking place at the premises', the report added. It is also alleged that, in May this year, a number of customers were discovered smoking shisha in the basement area of the café. Officers seized 45 unlabelled tubs of shisha tobacco. Mr Daoud told officers that he oversaw the recruitment process, including checking the right-to-work and immigration status of new employees. He said that members of staff were paid in cash, and admitted that some received free food in exchange for working at the café. The report stated: 'Café Diana has been found employing illegal workers. This business has clearly failed to meet the prevention of crime and disorder and public safety objectives.' Previously, the company running the café was ordered to pay a £135,000 civil penalty in April after it was found to illegally be employing three migrants, according to the report. In a letter to the council, lawyers for Café Diana's owners said: 'Immediately upon becoming aware of the reported issues, the licensee took swift and decisive action to evict the tenant responsible for the unauthorised activities.' In the report, the café has suggested that a three-month suspension could be implemented, during which time it said it would ensure right-to-work immigration checks are done for all members of staff. A ruling will be made by the licensing committee of the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea on Thursday.
BBC News
an hour ago
- BBC News
Millwall fined £15k for homophobic Chilwell chants
Millwall have been fined £15,000 for homophobic chants aimed at Crystal Palace left-back Ben Chilwell during their FA Cup tie in Championship club, who admitted the charges before an independent regulatory commission disciplinary hearing, have also had an extended anti-discriminatory action plan imposed on them until the end of the 2025-26 season.A Football Association statement said Millwall "failed to ensure its spectators and/or supporters (and anyone purporting to be supporters) conduct themselves in an orderly fashion and don't use words or behave in an improper, offensive, abusive, indecent, or insulting way with either express or implied reference to sexual orientation."Palace beat south-east London rivals Millwall 3-1 in the FA Cup fifth round match at Selhurst Park. Millwall said in a statement, external that, through its action plan, the club will "continue to do all it can to proactively tackle discriminatory abuse"."The club reaffirms its zero-tolerance policy towards all forms of discrimination - such behaviour has no place in society and is entirely at odds with the values Millwall stands for," the statement Lions were charged in April by the FA for chants in the fifth and 20th minutes of the England full-back Chilwell, on loan at Palace from Chelsea for the second half of last season, was involved in passages of play around the times of both incidents.A "sufficient" number of individuals were said to be involved in the chanting, the regulatory commission determined, although none have been identified nor had action taken against commission considered this incident a second offence when deciding Millwall's sanction for the offence, after the club was also handed an action plan in December 2023 for discriminatory chants by the commission acknowledged the previous action plan had in large part been "very effective" at achieving the purpose for which it was imposed."Since the 2023 action plan was imposed the club has experienced no discriminatory chanting at home fixtures - save for the [Crystal Palace] match, the same can be said about the club's away fixtures," the commission's written reasons added.
BBC News
an hour ago
- BBC News
Swansea men deny £1.5k hitman plot to kill one's wife
There was "no agreement" between two men accused of conspiring to hire a hit man to kill the estranged wife of one of them, their barristers have Lewis, 54, and Dominique Saunders, 35, who both live in the Maritime Quarter in Swansea, both deny conspiracy to murder Joanne Atkinson-Lewis between February and April prosecution alleges Mr Lewis paid Mr Saunders £1,500 to arrange the murder of his estranged wife Mrs Atkinson-Lewis, although she was never men chose not to give evidence in their trial at Merthyr Tydfil Crown Court. Judge Justice Nicklin told the jury they should be sure that both men entered into an agreement to kill Mrs Atkinson-Lewis and there was an intention for that plan "to be carried out".The jury was also told if they believe either man to be innocent of the conspiracy, both must be found "not guilty".Defending Mr Lewis, John Hipkin said the prosecution had ignored that Mr Lewis was mentally ill and had spent some of the time in question on a psychiatric Hipkin said Mr Lewis had paid £1,500 to Mr Saunders but that he had been "scammed" and the money had been spent by Mr Saunders on a holiday to said if the money had been paid to hire a hit man it would be "absolutely ridiculous" that Mr Lewis had contacted the police to complain he had been Hipkin reminded the jury of previous evidence from one witness that Mr Saunders had scammed Mr Lewis in the said the evidence in the case surrounded a "mentally unwell man and a scammer, a fraudster". Defending Mr Saunders, John Harrison said his client was known as "dippy dominique" and incapable of arranging a hit said if the case "wasn't so serious for the defendants it would be funny"."There is no evidence he was a hit man full-time, part-time or any time", he Harrison told the jury his client had taken advantage of Mr Lewis when he was vulnerable by scamming him and taking the said Mr Saunders "may be worthy of condemnation" but it was not evidence of an agreement to kill Mrs Harrison said Mr Saunders did not do anything "because there was no agreement between them and he had no intention to do anything about killing Joanne Atkinson-Lewis".He said "it has always been a scam, never an agreement and he's trying to get away with fifteen hundred quid". Prosecutor William Hughes directed the jury to messages which had been exchanged between the two men and claimed they "clearly state the defendants had entered a criminal agreement to kill Joanne Atkinson-Lewis". Mr Hughes said there had been regular requests from Mr Lewis asking if there was "any news?", alongside asking to be able to view the contents of a go-pro message sent by Mr Lewis said "death becomes her".Mr Hughes also referred to messages which stated Mr Lewis had "seen Joanne on Aberavon beach and she looked ok".Mr Saunders replied asking if he was later messages, Mr Lewis said "I paid £1,500 in good faith" and "I'm starting to wonder if I've been scammed out of fifteen hundred pounds".When Mr Saunders asked "how have I scammed you?", he received a message saying "she is still breathing".Mr Hughes also reminded the jury of evidence heard from Mr Lewis' son asking if he had "taken out a hit on Joanne" to which he had nodded. The judge told the jury they needed to consider if there was an agreement "that both intended to honour".He asked "did both defendants intend Joanne Atkinson-Lewis to be killed?" and "are you sure Saunders ever intended to carry out his side of any bargain?".The jury in the trial have retired to consider their verdict.
