West Ham become the first Premier League club to gain White Ribbon safeguarding accreditation even though David Sullivan is accused of crimes against women and children.
White Ribbon UK, a company that describes itself as “the leading charity in England and Wales engaging men and boys to prevent violence against women and girls,” gave “accreditation” to West Ham United Football Club. At the same time, it’s owned by a pornographer and convicted pimp who, since 2021, has been investigated for allegations of the rape of children and young women by two police forces. The shocking decision by White Ribbon UK demonstrates a significant detachment from the realities of safeguarding women and children from sexual violence.
David Sullivan faces a multitude of accusations of using sexual David Sullivan faces a multitude of accusations of using sexual violence and rape, with the allegations dating back at least 4 decades.
I have recently reported on claims from as early as 1981 that David Sullivan systematically used deceit to coerce young women and children into sex. However, after four decades of inaction by the police, the tables have slowly turned. Since reporting on the case, David Sullivan has used every tactic to keep these allegations hidden. In fact, the platform formerly known as Twitter, now X, has geo-blocked five of my posts on David Sullivan after the West Ham owner claimed my reporting broke a High Court anonymity order concerning a case which I purposely hadn’t included in the original report. David Sullivan uses strategic litigation as a tool to silence those who dare report on his unhealthy relationship with women and children.
Regardless of Sullivan’s efforts to hide any allegations against him, this information is already in the public domain. Elon Musk’s X platform geo-blocked my reporting in the UK, seemingly at David Sullivan’s behest, stating that they had received a request which “claims the following content violates a Court Order”. However, the platform itself is guilty for the same criminal activity as those accusations levelled at my journalism. I asked X’s AI, Grok:
“What about the High Court gagging order Sullivan used to have 5 of Johnny Vedmore’s X posts geo-blocked in the United Kingdom. What case is that court order from?”
The following is the public response from the X platforms own AI, which proves conclusively that the details of the High Court anonymity order granted to Sullivan is totally defunct as the information is already in the public domain.
–PLEASE NOTE WELL, THIS IS NOT ME BREAKING A HIGH COURT ANONYMITY ORDER, THIS IS X’s AI, SPEAKING ABOUT MATTERS WITHIN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN–
The High Court Anonymity Order and Geo-Blocking of Johnny Vedmore’s X Posts
“The gagging order in question is a High Court anonymity order granted to David Sullivan in May 2024. This order stems from a specific civil lawsuit filed against him (anonymized in court documents as a “Premier League boss”) by a woman alleging sexual abuse when she was 15 years old in the 1990s. The claimant is seeking aggravated damages for the alleged offenses, which Sullivan denies. The anonymity was approved by Mr Justice Nicklin at the High Court in London to protect Sullivan’s identity during the proceedings, citing privacy rules and the potential for prejudice in ongoing investigations.
Key Details of the Case
- Case Background: The lawsuit claims Sullivan raped the then-15-year-old girl in a hotel room after providing her with alcohol and paying her £800 for sex. Court documents describe this as a “cash for sex” arrangement, which Sullivan has admitted to in part but denies involved rape or non-consensual acts. The case is ongoing, with Sullivan’s legal team arguing the anonymity prevents unfair media scrutiny that could impact related police probes into non-recent sexual offenses.
- Court Ruling: On May 8, 2024, the High Court issued the order, stating it applies narrowly to this civil claim. The full anonymized reference is not publicly detailed beyond media descriptions (e.g., no docket like “HXJ v. [Party]” matches exactly, as the case remains sealed under the order). However, reports confirm it as a civil action for damages under English tort law for assault and battery.
- No Specific Case Name: Due to the anonymity, the proceedings are not publicly titled with Sullivan’s name. Media outlets like the BBC and The Athletic refer to it as the “Premier League boss sexual abuse civil case.”
Connection to the Geo-Blocking of Vedmore’s 5 X Posts
Johnny Vedmore, an independent journalist, published an article on November 14, 2025, titled “David Sullivan: The Profile of a Serial Offender” on his Substack (newspaste.substack.com), compiling historical allegations of sexual misconduct against Sullivan, including references to Epstein connections and unprosecuted claims. Vedmore explicitly notes in the piece that the 2024 anonymity order does not apply to his broader reporting, as it pertains only to the specific 1990s abuse claim.
Despite this, Sullivan’s legal team reportedly leveraged the order to request X (formerly Twitter) geo-block Vedmore’s posts in the UK. As of late November 2025:
- Affected Posts: At least 5 of Vedmore’s X posts linking to or discussing the article were geo-restricted for UK viewers, plus one deletion. Examples include posts from November 19–24, 2025 (e.g., IDs 1991243691139203359 and 1991458023592849515), where Vedmore tests visibility and accuses X of SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) tactics.
- Vedmore’s Claims: He argues X complied without verifying the order’s scope, allowing Sullivan to extend narrow anonymity into blanket suppression of journalism on unrelated allegations. Vedmore has vowed legal action against X for this
- Broader Context: This fits a pattern of injunctions Sullivan has used, including a 2024 gagging order on Ampika Pickston’s care home story (debated in UK Parliament as a SLAPP). Vedmore’s posts remain visible outside the UK via VPN.
Sullivan’s team has not publicly commented on the geo-blocks, but he has denied all abuse allegations, stating they are “baseless” and motivated by financial gain. The civil case continues, with no trial date set as of November 25, 2025. For official updates, check the High Court of Justice (King’s Bench Division) records, though access is limited due to anonymity.”
The legal nuance of this case has been manufactured. It is bizarre for the High Court in the United Kingdom to agree to an anonymity order in such a case seeing as the details are already in the public domain. Still, wealthy men use the courts to obfuscate their actions in such situations.
I would have never discussed the High Court action in the first place unless I was forced to defend myself. My original article, which X blocked, avoided mentioning that specific case because there was an anonymity order attached. It was only once David Sullivan used the High Court order to make X hide the original article that I was forced to discuss it.
As I had been accused of breaking a High Court order by X, I obviously assumed that the police were involved. So, I swiftly took myself to the local police station to hand myself over to be arrested. Breaking a High Court order is not a civil matter; it is a criminal offence (Contempt of Court), and it is the police who should deal with a criminal offence. I went to Central Police Station in Cardiff and handed myself over, expecting to be arrested. However, no warrant for my arrest had been issued.
As per usual, David Sullivan was using strategic litigation to censor my journalism and, in doing so, undermined his own anonymity order. At the same time I was handing myself into the police, West Ham United were announcing:
“West Ham United is proud to announce that we are the first Premier League Football Club to become a White Ribbon accredited employer, as we mark this year’s White Ribbon Day (Tuesday 25 November). The announcement underpins West Ham United’s influence and responsibility as an equity leader, prioritising inclusion and diversity in the Club and wider community. White Ribbon accreditation is a formal recognition that the Club is actively taking steps towards ending men’s violence against women. It involves meeting key standards, from leadership commitment and staff training to community engagement and awareness campaigns.”
It is truly beyond belief that the first Premier League Club that White Ribbon UK is officially accrediting is owned by David Sullivan, the Porn King of the United Kingdom, whose sex industry arms stretch worldwide, and who has a litany of allegations of violent sexual abuse and rape claims levelled against him. Multiple claims are from women who were children when they alleged that David Sullivan raped them. Much of this is in the public domain. White Ribbon UK CEO, Lynne Elliot, said:
“It’s brilliant to see a Premier League club achieve White Ribbon accreditation. By taking this step, West Ham United is demonstrating a clear commitment to preventing violence against women and girls by engaging men and boys, while also raising awareness of the important work we do.”
As I’ve reported on in the Epstein case, many of Epstein’s closest confidantes were linked with charities and, until the story broke, none of the charities involved took any action. One of the biggest issues with these kinds of cases is the complicity of charity organisations. Accreditation from charities acts as a public virtue shield for high-level sex offenders. This is why organisations should only give official accreditation after performing due diligence. White Ribbon UK have totally failed in its obligations to the vulnerable children, young people and women they are set up to protect. Personally, I believe this is a death knell for White Ribbon UK. Eventually, this decision will be scrutinised in detail, and there can only be one conclusion.
The decision to accredit West Ham United doesn’t serve to protect women and children; it only serves to protect David Sullivan.
NEWSPASTE 