Quantcast

Keanu Reeves’ girlfriend Alexandra Grant granted restraining order against female stalker

Joined
Feb 24, 2019
Messages
130
Reaction score
Reactions
1,791 106 8
2,774
Alleybux
4,248


Keanu Reeves' girlfriend Alexandra Grant has joined the list of celebrity girlfriends being stalked and harrassed by their boyfriend's crazy ass fans.

A Los Angeles Superior Court Judge granted a temporary restraining order against a 67-year-old woman named Cathryn aka Katherine. The stalker was ordered to stay 100 yards away from Alexandra, her home and work and prohibited from contacting Alexandra on social media or posting her photo online.

Alexandra said in the petition, “The harassment commenced after Petitioner was romantically linked to world-famous actor Keanu Reeves, with whom Respondent is disturbingly obsessed. Mr. Reeves is aware and included in Respondent’s numerous social media “hate accounts”, which are comprised of literally thousands of posts.”

Alexandra also says Keanu's obsessive fan has trespassed on her home and took photos of her car that were then posted online, shown up to her events, and was constantly “monitoring and tracking Ms. Grant’s activities, including posting photos of Ms. Grant’s residence online.” These actions are said to have caused Alexandra extreme and substantial distress and she is fearful the harrassment will continue and escalate.

Keanu and Alexandra are currently in Berlin, where Keanu is shooting the next Matrix movie.

https://ohnotheydidnt.livejournal.com/118467316.html

Keanu's fans are crazy
 

LegalizeRanch

Plato was right.
Joined
Jan 28, 2019
Messages
4,656
Reaction score
Reactions
64,989 1,277 245
107,042
Alleybux
16,375
W7VOqJ.gif
'Rona cancelled bridge with the girls, so Katherine said let me get out the house with some stalking instead :cry
 

Honey_17

General Manager
OLDHEAD
Joined
Mar 25, 2006
Messages
4,252
Reaction score
Reactions
19,218 1,898 1,994
17,099
Alleybux
288,222
Omg I looked up Alexandra because I was curious about her work. Im not gonna lie, i only heard of her because of Keanu but that is because I am not really hip to thay particular artistic scene.
In interviews Alexandra comes of smart, worldly and funny but i scrolled down and saw this deranged person posting hate comments. I am convinced it is that person. It was others as well. Its crazy. Unless a celebrity is asexual they will eventually find a companion for goodness sakes. Get over it. This person needs help.
 

SummerSolstice

Starter
Joined
Nov 20, 2013
Messages
405
Reaction score
Reactions
1,800 28 1
1,982
Alleybux
3,086
You're never too old to stalk as long as you have the ability to still climb a fence, out run a guard dog or two, and don't mind getting tased occasionally.
 

Fancypantz222

General Manager
Joined
Jul 30, 2017
Messages
1,831
Reaction score
Reactions
12,721 305 275
13,302
Alleybux
247,991
67 though


I was thinking this old ass woman must be unhinged. Why would you even stalk her? Is she pretending she is Diane Keaton from Somethings Gotta Give and having this older woman fantasy with him and trying to get rid of his girlfriend? We all know she ain't cute. Just be happy Keanu is happy. I will never understand stalkers.
 

PebbleIsland

Good Vibes
Joined
Jul 23, 2017
Messages
3,016
Reaction score
Reactions
37,283 448 173
42,362
Alleybux
70,737
oldlady.gif

Stay away from my man, you hussy! Just wait till I catch you!!!

Does Alexandra have a naturally smug face or is she stunting on all of us?
 

1234567

Team Owner
Joined
Sep 21, 2009
Messages
10,939
Reaction score
Reactions
55,870 446 80
57,648
Alleybux
9,500
At 67, surely, this woman can find something better to do with her time. Jeez.
 

mair

Stop making sense.
Joined
Dec 29, 2019
Messages
10,150
Reaction score
Reactions
58,459 988 220
83,421
Alleybux
17,569
There seems to be a lot of false information in the restraining order documents Alexandra Grant filed with the court.

For one thing, she names multiple social media accounts as belonging to the one person she's accusing, Cathryn Parker. Some of these people also post on LSA so we know they're not all the same people. :no2

Analyses of the court filing have been posted on another thread. Here's one.

I will write a few posts over the next week to clear some falsehoods regarding the RO filing with excerpts from the filing as proof so people who have been targeted by misinformation can relax and those who may be unaware they are involved in this debacle can take appropriate steps to protect themselves.


(1) The file is not sealed. Anyone can order the filing from the LA County Court – for a nominal fee, and they will email the documents within a few minutes. I did with ease. The case number is 20STRO03597.


(2) There were not 100’s of SM accounts named in the filing – there were 11. (Note: I will respond to the "confronting Ms. Grant" allegation in a later post.)

View attachment 1877470

2-sm-accounts-copy-jpg.1877470
 

mair

Stop making sense.
Joined
Dec 29, 2019
Messages
10,150
Reaction score
Reactions
58,459 988 220
83,421
Alleybux
17,569
Alexandra Grant is trying to get a whole bunch of social media accounts to stop posting anything about her without actually notifying the account holders that they need to do that. That's not gonna work.

If those social media accounts have done anything wrong, like harassing someone, they would have been shut down by the social media platforms by now. But they're still there.

For those who think it is disturbing that I purchased a legal filing to determine whether or not truth and justice was taking place in a fair and equitable way and that the court of public opinion was not running amuck with bµllsh!t, uninformed posts - I say, I am much more disturbed by false accusations, wrongful convictions and the mistreatment of vulnerable and marginalized people in our society. Anytime I can help my fellow man by shining a light on truth, I do it. In this instance, I am only interested in the facts.

Having said that above:

The Blast received the filing (they do not say who called them and let them know it had been filed), yet still managed to misrepresent the contents of what they were reporting on.



(1) They used words like “serious girlfriend” and “girlfriend” in their media story even though they were not found anywhere in the filing.





View attachment 1882749


View attachment 1882751


View attachment 1882752


The words used throughout the filing were “romantically linked” in the media.

View attachment 1877815


As a matter of fact, Alexandra Grant, in her Declaration, only characterizes her relationship with Keanu Reeves using business partnership terms.

View attachment 1877823



(2) Another gross error in their reporting was how The Blast characterized the addendum to the TRO. They saw the addendum because they knew to report that it included further protections in the form of restrictions online.

View attachment 1877833



However, they reported falsely on what those restrictions were and how broadly they were defined. In a nutshell, ANY mention of Alexandra Grant or her photo or likeness (including satire and parody which have long been protected forms of speech and expression in this country under our First Amendment) is prohibited under the TRO.

View attachment 1877845
 

mair

Stop making sense.
Joined
Dec 29, 2019
Messages
10,150
Reaction score
Reactions
58,459 988 220
83,421
Alleybux
17,569
How did Alexandra Grant get a professional internet security firm to declare/swear in court documents that all of the social media accounts listed belong to the same person even though they don't? And as a result, a temporary restraining order was issued by the court.

So legally she's accusing one person of stalking and/or harassing her -- only one person has been served with a restraining order and has to appear in court -- yet the social media posts of a number of people have been included as evidence of harassment in the court documents.

Hopefully at the next court date, November 9, this huge inaccuracy will be brought up. I would think the restraining order would have to be canceled since it's based on false information.

RO FILING –

HOW Grant linked all the SM accounts to Parker


Judges rely on experts and give weight to their findings because they are assumed to be knowledgeable in their field and credible in their conclusions. Dishonest experts have been a significant factor in wrongful accusations/convictions for a long time. The entire burden for this sad circumstance does not fall on the expert alone – the lawyers and party who hired them are equally to blame. Especially in a case like this where the science being utilized is data gathering/analysis and common sense.


Grant linked all the SM accounts to Parker by utilizing a company called Screen International Security Services (SISS) and having the VP of Investigations submit a declaration as an expert.


SISS declared that through their investigation they were able to determine that the 11 named SM accounts were all Parker’s.


View attachment 1890397


View attachment 1890402


View attachment 1890426


Grant used SISS
so she could say that Parker, who is described as delusional and obsessed with Reeves, is a threat to her that she fears will escalate because of the volume of posts directed at her from this one person.


This was a major contributing factor for why the judge issued the TRO without notifying Parker in advance to allow her an opportunity to defend herself against the accusations.


View attachment 1890433



This is unfair and unjust for a few reasons.


(1) Subjectively, SISS’s findings are false based on a cursory glance at the named accounts.


Grant stated in her declaration that Parker spoke to her and also that she received a few emails from Parker – so Grant knows that Parker is American and speaks and writes English as her native language.


SISS should have seen that all the accounts, with the exception of uiamalgamated, have common grammatical errors found with people who speak English as a second language– such as issues with pronouns and plurals. Notably, some of the accounts post or comment in their native language at times – not English.


Also, SISS mentions emails Parker sent to Grant and says that the names and email addresses match SM accounts – but there is only 1 match = uiamalgamated.


View attachment 1890444


(2) Objectively, SISS’s findings are suspicious because the VP who submitted the expert declaration perjured herself when she stated that the name Gonsalves, one of 74 aliases used by Parker, appears on posts at issue.


There are no posts with the name Gonsalves and none of the named accounts use Gonsalves.


This false statement was made to intentionally mislead the court into believing Parker was tied to the other SM accounts.


To further confuse the court, SISS included an exhibit of the 2015 LA Times article with the photo that has the caption, “Cathryn Parker, a.k.a. Katherine Gonsalves, is accused of stealing multiple identities.”

(Note: typical behavior in the face of being openly criticized would be to start scouring accounts looking for the name Gonsalves to be able to link it – but if it legitimately existed, you would have included it in your original filing Exhibits since you used the phrase “appears on posts at issue” and included the newspaper article. Your believability is gone when you do this after the fact to fill a criticism hole.)


View attachment 1890447


View attachment 1890449


(3) The last example to objectively illustrate that SISS’s believability is non-existent and their conclusion is false:


SISS stated in their expert Declaration that they conducted a “comprehensive investigation that included detailed analysis of… the social media accounts at issue… and criminal records.”


However, SISS’s expert findings contained discrepancies so obvious that any rationale person would conclude that these SM accounts could not possibly be Parker’s.


Discrepancies included posts being made on dates when Parker was incarcerated. These were found while looking at the very first SM accounts named – Catharine**67 Youtube and Facebook account for Catharina Mon***. There are MANY more but I do not need to include them here – this is sufficient to show SISS reached a false conclusion that the 11 SM accounts belong to Parker.

View attachment 1890459

View attachment 1890462


View attachment 1890463

It also clearly shows that SISS is either grossly negligent as the expert or dishonest as the expert. There is no other explanation for this disgusting incompetence.
 

rosescented

General Manager
Joined
Sep 19, 2019
Messages
4,047
Reaction score
Reactions
21,688 310 59
29,865
Alleybux
291,128
Is the stalker a black women?...

The "alleged" stalker is a 67 years old white woman but 10 other accounts are included as belonging to this woman but they are people from around the world and are of different nationality and color. I'm not the 67 years old white woman but my account was included as supposedly belonging to her. Ridiculous and funny that I am mistaken for a native English speaker. If you read my posts, you can see the mistakes i make as a non-Native English speaker.

And some of the other accounts, they have posted and responded to followers in their native tongue. Catherine1967 even posted videos of her villages in the Netherlands somewhere in her YT account, yet, she is being lumped as the 67-year-old L.A. based white woman.

Alexandra Grant just wants to shut down people who questioned her so called philanthropy, charity, and the lies she has told in interviews and on her resume.
 
Last edited:

mair

Stop making sense.
Joined
Dec 29, 2019
Messages
10,150
Reaction score
Reactions
58,459 988 220
83,421
Alleybux
17,569
Alexandra Grant just wants to shut down people who questioned her so called philanthropy, charity, and the lies she has told in interviews and on her resume.
Yes, but Alexandra Grant can't just do that unless she has legitimate cause!

I'm very curious to see how she explains her mistakes to the court.
 

glossygloss

Team Owner
Joined
Feb 5, 2010
Messages
13,131
Reaction score
Reactions
59,144 1,012 1,396
62,279
Alleybux
195,044
The "alleged" stalker is a 67 years old white woman but 10 other accounts are included as belonging to this woman but they are people from around and the world and are of different nationality and color. I'm not the 67 years old white woman but my account was included as supposedly belonging to her. Ridiculous and funny that I am mistaken for a native English speaker. If you read my posts, you can see the mistakes i make as a non-Native English speaker.

And some of the other accounts, they have posted and responded to followers in their native tongue. Catherine1967 even posted videos of her villages in the Netherlands somewhere in her YT account, yet, she is being lumped as the 67-year-old L.A. based white woman.

Alexandra Grant just wants to shut down people who questioned her so called philanthropy, charity, and the lies she has told in interviews and on her resume.

You have an entire Instagram centered on stalking and hating on her relationship with him. That’s why your account is listed. Plain and simple.
 

rosescented

General Manager
Joined
Sep 19, 2019
Messages
4,047
Reaction score
Reactions
21,688 310 59
29,865
Alleybux
291,128
You have an entire Instagram centered on stalking and hating on her relationship with him. That’s why your account is listed. Plain and simple.

so to you, plain and simple, she listed me because she doesn't like what i write. it doesn't matter that I am not Cathryn Parker, her alleged stalker. You just confirmed it. She used Cathryn Parker as a scapegoat to name ANY and all account she doens't like.
 

rosescented

General Manager
Joined
Sep 19, 2019
Messages
4,047
Reaction score
Reactions
21,688 310 59
29,865
Alleybux
291,128
What? Why would he be involved with a scammer?! Smh

a few easy thing to prove that she's a liar. In her July 2019 resume, she puts that her art was at the Art Gallery of Ontario. Some people couldn't find her name listed on the Art Gallery website so they contact the museum. The museum said they have never heard of her. We called her out on it. She updated her resume in March 2020 and she removed the art Gallery of Ontario from her resume.

Criticism with a legitimate purpose: Alexandra Grant is a Con Artist, Reason #3

In an LA time interview, she claimed that she help found the WCCW. Their website listed the founders and she is not one of them. Email was sent to WCCW and they confirm that Alexandra Grant is not a founder.

Criticism with a legitimate purpose: Grant Lying about WCCW

In those posts, I provided link to the articles and the website and her resumes so you can compare them for yourself.

Just imagine, if she doesn't have a conscience or any concern about lying on her resume and about founding a woman organization that she did not found, what kind of person does that make her? My analysis is Sociopath. a total lack f conscience so I will speak up against this woman pretending to be someone "born to love."
 
Last edited:

mair

Stop making sense.
Joined
Dec 29, 2019
Messages
10,150
Reaction score
Reactions
58,459 988 220
83,421
Alleybux
17,569
@rosescented is not stalking anyone. She's just calling Grant out on all her shady public relations.

You can't just randomly name people in a restraining order. You have to officially name them as the respondent to the court. Only Catherine Parker is named as the respondent. Rose and all the others named in the description of harassment have not been served with anything, have not been formally accused by a court of law, nor have their Instagrams been closed for harassment.

What a frightening thing it must be to have your name listed in court documents when you've done nothing wrong.
 
Last edited:

Kitiara

MVP
Joined
Apr 6, 2015
Messages
633
Reaction score
Reactions
2,154 8 1
4,015
Alleybux
520
a few easy thing to prove that she's a liar. In her July 2019 resume, she puts that her art was at the Art Gallery of Ontario. Some people couldn't find her name listed on the Art Gallery website so they contact the museum. The museum said they have never heard of her. We called her out on it. She updated her resume in March 2020 and she removed the art Gallery of Ontario from her resume.

Criticism with a legitimate purpose: Alexandra Grant is a Con Artist, Reason #3

In an LA time interview, she claimed that she help found the WCCW. Their website listed the founder and she is not one of them. Email was sent to WCCW and they verify that Alexandra Grant is not a founder.

Criticism with a legitimate purpose: Grant Lying about WCCW

In those posts, I provided link to the articles and the website and her resumes so you can compare them for yourself.

Just imagine, if she doesn't have a conscience or any concern about lying on her resume and about founding a woman organization that she did not found, what kind of person does that make her? My analysis is Sociopath. a total lack f conscience so I will speak up against this woman pretending to be someone "born to love."

Wow, what a liar! That’s shameful
 

mair

Stop making sense.
Joined
Dec 29, 2019
Messages
10,150
Reaction score
Reactions
58,459 988 220
83,421
Alleybux
17,569
It's not against the law to hate someone (it's just not nice) and you're not harassing someone if you're just telling the truth about them and they don't like it.

I don't know if the Respondent on the restraining order, Cathryn Parker, has actually stalked or harassed Alexandra Grant. I think only one of the exhibits in the court docs is of Parker's social media account -- the rest belong to other people! :oops: There's no proof!
 

Similar Threads

Trending Threads

News Alley

Ask LSA

General Alley

Top Bottom