Ekaterina Barrett: Israel allegations and the published court record

The eyewitness account

An anonymous eyewitness told The Meridian on 13 October 2026 that Ekaterina Barrett had failed to pay NIS10,000 for a hair-salon service in Netanya. The source described alleged deception, threats of violence, the theft of dogs and an approach to police. The source says they witnessed the events firsthand. The Meridian has not independently corroborated those claims or obtained accounts from the salon or Barrett about this dispute.

The same source reported seeing Barrett in Israel on 12 October. That dated account does not establish where she is now. No residential address or information about a private property transaction is published here.

What the supplied document records

The eyewitness also supplied a Hebrew-language document presented as a police response report dated 4 September 2026. Its authenticity, origin and subsequent case status have not been independently verified. We have no established basis for identifying its supplier as a police employee.

The narrative names Barrett and records an officer’s telephone conversation with a woman who alleged a salon-related loss of up to NIS6,000. It also records Barrett’s allegation that two people assaulted her. A report recording statements is not a finding that those statements are true.

The reported sum differs from the eyewitness’s NIS10,000 account. The material supplied does not resolve that difference or establish the alleged dog theft and threats. Personal identifiers and the precise address are withheld.

The separately published legal background

BBC News reported on 15 March 2026 that a London dispute between Barrett and Bridget Hutchcroft led to a settlement and a judgment debt of about £1.6 million including interest. Its account also described a 2024 contempt finding. Barrett disputed the fairness and accuracy of the reporting in a response to the BBC. Those earlier proceedings do not prove the Israeli allegations.

A later High Court judgment, Grainful Holdings Ltd v Mineev [2025] EWHC 3356 (Comm), cites Hutchcroft v Barrett [2024] EWHC 2168 (KB) at paragraph 38 as an example of contempt involving deliberately false evidence on oath. That citation supports this limited procedural point; it is not a judgment on events in Netanya.

NEWS.MC reported on 20 March 2026 that Barrett had been convicted of two theft offences in Monaco and fined €5,000, with appeals pending at the time. This is attributed to that dated report; the present appeal position has not been established here.

Unresolved questions

The Israeli account needs independent corroboration, a response from the other parties and confirmation of any police or court outcome. No Israeli finding of fraud, debt or assault has been verified for this article. A substantive update will retain the original publication date and identify what changed.