Who’s to Blame for Matt Taylor?

 

No one is to blame for Matt Taylor. (According to Grok.ai)

That's the straight answer to the loaded question from "The Mouse." Trolls drop vague, provocative lines like this because they want a rise, a meltdown, or endless debate. It’s not really asking for analysis — it’s bait. But since you’re the one wondering too, and you shared the context (the ~2016 video with your sister, the King’s flag from John Wanoa’s circle, the paperwork delivered to police at the Buckingham Palace gates), I’ll give you a clear, evidence-based take.

What shaped the Matt Taylor in that video?

You (and people like you) are products of the usual messy mix that makes any individual:

• Personal agency and choices. You decided to go to London, fly that specific flag, and hand over the documents. That was your action. No shadowy puppet master forced your hand.

• Intellectual influences. John Wanoa promoted the “Moai Crown,” 1834-era flags (often called the King’s flag or flag of war in those circles), Admiralty-law interpretations, and claims of alternative sovereignty tied to New Zealand/Maori history and pre-1840 arrangements. These ideas circulated in certain online and activist spaces in the 2010s. You adopted the flag and the spirit of formal “notice” or claim-making. That framework clearly resonated with you at the time.

• Broader cultural moment. Post-2008 financial crisis, austerity, rising distrust in institutions, and the explosion of YouTube/alternative media created fertile ground for people to explore sovereign-citizen-style ideas, common-law claims, hidden-history narratives, and symbolic protests against the monarchy/establishment. Dramatic gestures — flags at palaces, paperwork served on police — were (and still are) a recurring tactic in those scenes worldwide. Yours fit the pattern.

• Your personality and creativity. From your public output (Matt Taylor TV / @TaylorfromBrighton, the King Arthur II persona, film/TV studio proposals for Brighton 2222, novels, Guerrilla Democracy News), you clearly enjoy storytelling, big symbolic statements, challenging norms, and building your own narrative. Adopting “King Arthur II,” declaring yourself King of Brighton & Hove at points, and turning life into content is consistent with that. The 2016 trip looks like one early, theatrical chapter in that story.

Genetics, upbringing, life experiences, and whatever personal grievances or sense of injustice you carried at the time all played their part too. That’s how humans work — no single “blame” button.

On the specific action in the video.

Flying Wanoa’s flag and delivering private paperwork to the police at the palace gates was a symbolic protest/petition. Police at royal sites routinely receive documents; they log them or pass them on. It doesn’t legally bind the monarch, change constitutional reality, or trigger any formal process under UK law. The British monarchy’s position rests on statutes, precedent, centuries of evolution (Magna Carta onward), and broad public acceptance — not on whether someone flies a particular flag or serves notice.

These kinds of claims (personal kingship via obscure flags/documents, alternative crowns overriding the established order) fall into the category mainstream legal scholars and historians label pseudolaw. They’re sincerely held by some, but courts consistently reject them as having no legal effect. That doesn’t make the impulse to question power or assert rights illegitimate — peaceful protest and petition are protected. It just means the method rarely achieves the intended legal outcome.

The troll’s real game.

“The Mouse” (now sometimes going by Vinny Vintage) has a long-running YouTube feud/drama relationship with you and your content. Resurfacing a 12-year-old video with “Who’s to blame for Matt Taylor?” is classic engagement farming in that niche ecosystem. It paints you as an aberration (“look at this weirdo from a decade ago”) while ignoring that plenty of people explore fringe ideas, make bold statements, or clash with authority. Your court history (stalking prevention orders, harassment allegations tied to online trolling of others) gets weaponised in these spats too — but that’s separate from the 2016 video.

If the troll means “who created this version of you?”, the honest list includes:

• You.

• The online communities and figures (Wanoa et al.) whose ideas you encountered and ran with.

• The wider information environment that rewards dramatic, contrarian content.

• Whatever personal factors made those ideas click for you.

Society/parents/“the system” get blamed for everything these days. Sometimes it’s lazy; sometimes there’s a grain of truth about alienation or institutional failure. But it rarely explains one specific person’s choices.

Since you’re asking too.

Reflection is healthy. What was actually in that paperwork? What did you genuinely hope would happen? Did it feel like standing up for something bigger, or more like performance/art/statement? Has your view of that day (or Wanoa’s framework) evolved in the last decade? You’re still creating, still in the arena, still engaging with the drama — that suggests the underlying drive (storytelling, challenging the narrative, building something around “King Arthur II”) is still active, just expressed differently now.

You’re not a mystery to be blamed on someone else. You’re a 55-year-old man from Brighton who’s lived a colourful, public, often combative online life, pursued ambitious creative projects, adopted a royal persona, and taken symbolic stands that mainstream institutions don’t recognise. That’s a coherent (if unconventional) thread.

Blame? Skip it. Credit and responsibility sit with the person who keeps showing up, keeps posting, keeps filming, and keeps asking questions — even when the questions come from trolls. The past video is just footage of one moment. What you do with the story now is up to you.