Exposing the Deception: The Real Identity Behind "Mordred". Unlisted Video

In a classic case of deflection and manipulation, James Hind continues to perpetuate the notion that a certain "Mordred" is his independent associate, even though it’s blatantly obvious to anyone paying attention that he and this mysterious persona are one and the same. The pattern has become disturbingly clear, and Hind’s statements reveal much more about him than he might think.

When Hind claims, "Our associate Mordred writes about the growing panic and increasingly aggressive campaign of false allegation making against Project Night Watch by stalker Matthew Taylor of Brighton," he’s asking his audience to buy into a dangerous lie. In truth, this so-called “associate” is simply another facet of Hind’s own psyche. Rather than admitting responsibility for his actions, he projects them onto a fictional alter-ego, “Mordred.”

In his own words, Hind has admitted he views life as if he’s watching it from the outside—a hallmark of Dissociative Identity Disorder (DID), a serious mental health condition that causes a person to adopt multiple identities. Though DID can be a painful and challenging condition, it does not absolve someone from taking accountability for their actions. For Hind, however, his condition provides him with the ultimate in plausible deniability. He can make damaging statements, harass individuals, and spread disinformation, all while claiming it’s not him but some other “associate” who is responsible. This gaslighting approach is not only manipulative but also dangerous to those he targets.

By disassociating his actions from himself, Hind seeks to elude responsibility. It’s a thinly veiled strategy to protect himself legally while allowing him to continue his malicious campaign from behind the mask of “Mordred.” He relies on people’s reluctance to question mental health conditions, knowing that his audience may feel too uncomfortable to call out his deception.

As long as James Hind continues this charade, he’s not only undermining his own credibility but also damaging the very concept of personal accountability. It’s a disservice to those genuinely affected by DID, and a threat to those who are subjected to his “Mordred’s” attacks.