Self-confessed misogynist Andrew Tate raped and strangled two women before telling them ‘good girl’, shocking court documents claim.
Toxic influencer Tate, 37, who is under investigation in Romania for rape, sex with a minor and people trafficking, is named in a 25-page High Court document obtained by .
In it four British women, identified only as AA, BB, CC and DD describe in harrowing details the nightmare ordeal they claim they went through at his hands.
The group are suing Tate in London’s High Court and their claims – which Tate denies and has filed a defence to court – are separate to the ones he and his brother Tristan, plus two other women, currently face in the Romanian capital of Bucharest.
The UK-based quartet say they were abused and raped between 2013 and 2016 while two worked as webcam girls for Tate and the other two were in a relationship with him.
Three of the women reported Tate to Hertfordshire police – as some of the attacks allegedly happened in Hitchin, but they Crown Prosecution Service dropped the case in 2019.
The women are seeking damages of £100,000 each and say they were traumatized by what happened to them in around 2015.
has exclusively obtained the particulars of claim filed at the High Court which sets out the quartet’s claims and it makes shocking reading.
It highlights how Tate ‘publicly espouses that men have become weak and lost and women should be subservient to them’.
The claim also highlights a controversial 2019 You Tube video Tate made in which he said of women’ choke her so she can barely f***ing breath’.
In her claim AA says she was working as a webcam girl at the Hilton Hotel in Luton in 2015 when she alleges Tate raped her.
She claims as he attacked her, he choked her and then whispered ‘good girl’ in her ear.
In a later attack she claims she was left with blood shot eyes, a medical condition known as petechiae and common in cases of strangulation.
AA also described how she was threatened with a gun and that Tate said terrified her by saying he would post videos of her online.
The claim outline alleges AA and BB – who does not say she was raped but instead says she was the victim of abusive coercive control – were supervised during webcam work not only by Tate, but others close to him.
BB says that Tate made her cry by punching her arm on the arm, before being very loving, and regularly strangled her, sometimes to the point where she nearly blacked out.
Both women say they contracted chlamydia from him and BB accuses him of manipulating her, monitoring her use of the phone, and of imposing a schedule on her as to when she could eat, sleep, get up, and when she should work.
Consequences for failing to comply were often unpleasant and sometimes violent, she says.
CC claims that Tate attacked her in 2013 when she was 21 years old – telling her ‘I’m just debating whether to rape you or not’.
She says that during the attack he told her she too was a ‘good girl’ and asking her ‘who do you belong to?’
She became intensely afraid of him, and he called himself the ‘mafia’ and the ‘messiah’, and convinced her that he had killed people, court documents claim.
The fourth woman, DD, claims Tate assaulted and battered her after she had cooked dinner for him at his flat in about November 2014.
They began to have consensual sex before he strangled her so that she struggled to breathe before passing out.
About a month later, he asked her to cook him a steak dinner, and as they had sex, he strangled her until she became unconscious, making a blood vessel eye burst, she says.
In his 67 page defence Tate dismissed the claims – as he does the Romanian investigation – saying the four have waited too long to file their complaints.
He insists that both AA and BB were willing webcam workers and that sex between him and both women was consensual.
Tate also goes on to dismiss the four women’s claims as ‘lies and nonsense’ adding the allegations are ‘devoid of context’ and he refuted the claims of choking.
When contacted by a spokesperson for Tate said: ‘Thanks for reaching out, we won’t be commenting at this time.’
No date has been sent for a hearing and the documents emerged just days after teachers called for better support to deal with ‘alarming’ misogynistic influencers.