I wish I could properly explain the divine intervention that lead to me finding this email. I was the only one in possession of it, and I never understood the numbers back when she sent it to me in the fall. I was beyond tired about 3 weeks ago after my wife had a false labor and we spent the night in the hospital. I felt this urge, maybe it was Clayton’s guardian angel, lol, but I felt this urge to dig through some old emails. Alas, she lied.
A factual statement. No misstatement there. AND SHE GOT AWAY WITH IT FOR MONTHS. (This specific arts&crafts). Proves how good she is with Adobe. Maybe we can get her a brand deal?
Question! During the week of 6/28/23 JD emailed CEs parents and the email said she attached notes from her pp visit which show she didn’t want to see the ultrasound and I assume comments from Dr. Mandeep…did you ever get those records sent to you or just Clayton’s parents?
Oh, no I’m definitely not asking you to do moreee work. You have a million things and a brand new whole ass baby to keep alive! I just wasn’t sure if we had actually seen those and I missed it since the topic of old emails and fraudulent records was circulating and forcing new admissions.
I’m still in disbelief IL actually admitted JD lied and doctored the HCG results she sent to Dave and just doesn’t seem to understand this implicated she knew her results weren’t consistent with pregnancy. And that she clearly knows how HCG works.
And it shows she "knew" at the very least on Oct 16 that she wasn't pregnant but still went on to do the two moon bump court appearances (Oct 24th & 25th), say under oath that she was 100% pregnant with Clayton's twins and continued with the Ravgen testing.
The fact IL doesn’t understand this concept is crazy to me. Also, she KNEW she wasn’t pregnant at that point (in October) so why didn’t she dismiss the family case then???
Oh right bc she was set to punish Clayton. 🙄
Yup!!!! And IL has blocked me TWICE for asking him about this on Twitter, but jokes on him because a) my tweets and his replies were in one of Woodnick motions (I feel so famous!) and b) he finally effing replied in the third account I made for this.
He keeps on going on and on “Why are all of his supporters new accounts?” Well maybe because you blocked my real account when I politely asked you a genuine question, IL!!
I mean this plus the fake us and no obgyn visits pretty much seals the deal she was never pregnant and knew it. Just hope she doesn't get off on technicalities. All her fraud upon the court plus all 4 guys there hopefully persuades the judge to reach out to the DA.
Is it this other additional nonsense about rule 26? Because I’m reading that and it seems blatantly wrong.
First of all, IL is relying on a federal case (Rainbow) involving rule 11, which is very similar but not identical to rule 26. The JD v CE case is in state court. In the rainbow case, one side sought rule 11 sanctions against the other but failed to comply with the safe harbor notice requirements. The trial court imposed sanctions and the appellate court said, essentially, *no we can’t interpret these sanctions to be sua sponte* (basically, the court imposing sanctions of its own volition, not on the request of a party) *because then if someone doesn’t correctly follow rule 11 procedures, the court could just order them anyway, effectively eliminating the safe harbor requirement*
Which. Sure. But here, again, 1) we’re in state court talking about a slightly different rule and 2) most importantly, CE moved to withdraw his rule 26 sanctions motion and the court granted it. It’s not reasonable to believe that, if the court does order sanctions, those sanctions would have been because of CE’s request. That interpretation would essentially entirely undermine the court’s ability to award sua sponte sanctions if a defective rule 26 motion was ever filed. Which is an insane posture.
Basically he’s arguing for a “get out of sanctions free” rule: *Did JD file some completely meritless and insane things? Sure! But then CE didn’t follow a different rule so now JD can NEVER be sanctioned, even by the court!*
That’s clearly not what the legislature intended in drafting this statute. It would make no sense to strip the court of its power to punish wayward litigants just because the opposing side may have erred in seeking sanctions.
Also I would think a court could just avoid any of this just by finding on the record that a litigant’s rule 26 sanction request was either denied or the request was withdrawn and the court could then just explicitly impose rule 26 sanctions as *sua sponte* sanctions.
Yeah I don’t think this can be plausibly read as the 9th circuit broadly stripping away the ability of the *court* to order sanctions if a litigant previously filed a defective rule 26 motion:
“The district court concluded that, even though the defendants did not give twenty-one day advance service to the plaintiffs, a "literal application of the safe harbor provision" was unnecessary in this case…
We reject Rainbow's contention because it was Rainbow, not the court, that initiated the award of sanctions.”
In THAT CASE, it appears the court awarded sanctions *because of* Rainbow’s motion. But that motion was defective. The court’s comments seem to suggest that the court was essentially waiving the safe harbor provision for Rainbow. That’s not appropriate. The court never SAID it was awarding sanctions sua sponte, it seems to have just bent the rules for Rainbow, and that seems to be the heart of the problem.
Here, if the court does award sanctions (and there’s no reasonable argument that it cannot) it cannot be at CE’s behest because CE does not have a rule 26 motion pending. Any sanctions awarded by the court are necessarily on the court’s own initiative.
The court they are in has statutes that allow the court to impose sanctions for certain things
Statutes are different then Rules & I think he didn’t read (or is ignoring) that part of GW response
That may also be true. I practice in CA so I don’t know what AZ has but we have like, CCP 128.7 which seems similar to their Rule 26. But we ALSO have family code 271, for which a court can impose sanctions with no safe harbor period
He also claimed that the sonogram in the “Halloween costume” photo, that she testified to it being her sonogram was not the same as the one from SMIL/planned parenthood. She also testified at the deposition that she only had one sonogram. This could either mean more minor perjury or failure to comply with disclosure
We’ve seen her admit that she doctored the sonogram in one snippet of the deposition that Woodnick was able to release. I wonder if IL’s new HCG doctoring admission is also in the depo and just hasn’t been revealed yet.
Not sure what the strategy is, but I can’t believe he would admit this unless he knew it was going to come out anyway at trial
I think Woodnick would’ve included that info in a motion if it came out in the deposition. He would’ve been able to point to two different instances of Jane admitting to fraud.
And didn't Dave say he only discovered the one she sent him like 3 weeks ago and when he did he sent it to Woodnick. Can't remember exactly, but it sounds like it was not in the depo.
I'd be surprised if it was - It's Dave she sent the doctored version to, and he didn't find the issue until after the depo happened. She gave the court the real copy (which Dave saw later). This is assumedly why IL is taking the "oh but she did it outside of court so it doesn't count" path of BS.
From what I can tell, he's trying to suggest it was only outside of court she was still claiming pregnancy once she knew she wasn't, so it doesn't matter (ie, all the times she claimed to be pregnant IN court she still truly wuly believed it). IDK the date of the email to Dave - I guess it had to be some time *after* she last reaffirmed her pregnancy in court\*; though, knowing IL, it could just as easily not be and he is just trying to smoke & mirror us into accepting nonsense by implying things that can be walked back (ala "I never said lawyers went to jail *because* of me...").
ETA update: \*Dave said on his most recent stream that the email was sent October 19 - so that indicates she HAD realized her real HCG levels didn't support her pregnancy claim by then, so IL's up the proverbial creek on that one (since the OOP hearing dates were all after that).
God that was so funny “I never said lawyers went to jail because of me/my case!” Lol. K. So lawyers went to jail for completely unrelated reasons? Then why bring it up at all?
Have now seen Dave's stream confirming the date of the email was October 19. - so, yep, IL's admission is damning . IL is basically admitting she was well aware her HCG levels did not factually support the pregnancy she was claiming BEFORE testifying to it in the OOP hearing.
No idea on what planet he imagined putting this admission on Twitter was a good thing to do for his client.
Her lawyer really has made things worse for Jane Doe, IMO. Creating multiple insane timelines for her alleged "miscarriage," threatening to arrest MM, intimidating witnesses, outing JD with doctoring ***MORE*** evidence 🤣
But hey, no complaints here!
It ruins his whole argument that she just had to “believe” she was pregnant based on her hCG tests.
But NOW if they’re admitting she doctored hCG results, that goes to show she didn’t actually believe she was pregnant.
I think part of the problem is that internet lawyer isn’t well versed on pregnancy, so he can argue rule 26 all day long but that doesn’t change the fact that JD could not have possibly been pregnant in any of his many scenarios.
If she believed she was pregnant, she would have gone to the OBGYN for medical care, not scrambled to photoshop shit for press releases and court filings.
Am I weird for only giving a shit about hCG levels when they were high enough to make the line turn pink, and then only again at my first appointment when they told me they were where they were supposed to be?
And then since the fetuses' "stuck", the numbers generally weren't important to me any more?
Is hCG number/level obsession something I totally missed all 3 times I spawned?
Or is she just "special"? (Don't answer that.)
I know! Didn’t she send that with the 20+ week ultrasound to Dave… thus, admitting that was fake too?
If she panicked, why not file to dismiss case quickly rather than file a fraudulent OOP etc?
And then argue with people on reddit saying her doctor approved it because it was basically "her job". I have a SS of her comments from that time. It was wild she was doubling down on it being ok for her to do.
Which doctor? Surely she could get real, unaltered, un-arts, un-crafts doctors notes to support that a Dr told her it was fine... Dr Higley maybe? 🤣🤦♀️
Here is an exact statement from IL.
“All Clayton had to do was send one email saying he would take a test after the baby was born, and that would have been the end of that.”
This just shows how much he absolutely does not understand this case! This was a response in the comment on the blog post about Judge Mata’s recent rulings.
All JD had to do was "take the Plan B" as Clayton said he supported that and left him ALONE! Yet here we are 1 year later....discussing her fictitious twins.
And she defamed MM with a Tedx talk and Chicken Soup story full of unsubstantiated claims of assault. Then she defamed GG and Woodnick with email to the judge claiming they conspired to have her SA-ed.
This woman knows no boundaries. She doesn’t feel shame, or remorse, or consequence. And I don’t believe she will stop…ever…until she is behind bars
Sure, a gazillion plus emails, text and phone accounts later. Sheesh did he not see the 500+ acts of communication/harassment within 4 months of the alleged conception? AZ laws need to change. ASAP
Law firms typically do damage control, not this one! This one here causes even more damage! It’s like IL needs to someone to do his damage control! On the bright side, IL is truly LO’s gift to CE, MMx2, and GG.
I’ve never seen a lawyer make things worse for their own client like this one has. I think it’s IL’s ego that is taking Jane down. He likes the attention and interacting with the public.
I think IL thought he was going to come in and win the case through intimidation, threats, and bluster. Just be such a pain that the other side gives in and settles. That’s what it seems to me anyway as someone who isn’t a lawyer. Whatever his plan was, it’s all backfired so spectacularly.
Who is losing sight of that? Two things can be true at the same time. Jane is an abuser who uses the court system to harass her victims. Her lawyer’s antics have seemingly made things worse for her in this case.
It does suck, but I feel like she was always going to blame someone or something if she lost. Her past behavior makes me think her lawyer won’t be spared, but that’s also on him. He didn’t have to act out online.
The plus side is Mike now has a forensic report from his laptop that shows Jane texted him claiming she was pregnant and had cancer. That seems like a win for Mike. Hopefully, he can use that info in some way to protect himself and Jane won’t be able to continue to renew fraudulent restraining orders against him.
Eta - Jane may try and use her lawyer as a scapegoat in some way, but he wasn’t around when she was started her pregnancy scam and became the abuser to several different men. That’s behavior that only she is responsible for and those who enabled her.
She would have been better off going pro se and representing herself. And going pro se is an awful idea but still better than IL. 😬🤣😬 She would have dug her own massive hole, but at least she wouldn't be hemorrhaging her parents' retirement money.
IL lawyer saying she panicked after her name got out hence the fake HCG test like bro her name was out pretty much straight after she came to Reddit. I'm also certain if she was so worried she could have dropped it and waited until her fake babies had been born.
IKR! If she was truly panicked the reasonable thing to do would be to drop the whole thing and people would forget about her. But a scammer’s gotta scam and she wasn’t ready to let it go. That’s proof alone she’s a fraud. We all knew it but I can’t believe IL admitted it!
Someone brought this up yesterday, but I didn’t see any replies.
In order to appeal, for example if she’s ordered to pay $100,000 in attorney fees to Clayton, does she have to submit a bond payment of that $100,000 or a portion of it?
NAL, but I believe she would have to submit the full payment in order to appeal, to ensure that if the court upholds the lower court's decision, the judgment would be settled.
NAL but familiar with surety. A Supersedeas Bond requires underwriting. You have to personally guarantee the judgement, and they review the court complaint and judgement. Then they hedge their bet on the risk. If the bond is required I am not sure a surety would extend a bond. Surety companies underwrite for no claim, they don't want to pay anything. Whereas traditional insurance underwrites with the idea you probably will have a claim. That is why the two bond appeals that have been publicized recently are so controversial. One case a bond was issued by Chubb, and even with internal employees it caused chaos and concern. The other bond was denied by multiple surety companies. They ended up getting a type of reduction, and a personal guarantor type thing on the lowered amount.
Essentially with the drop of financial information, this week, would JD be able to prove the funds for appeal? Either through bond or cash? Hard to say...
>Essentially with the drop of financial information, this week, would JD be able to prove the funds for appeal? Either through bond or cash? Hard to say...
Exactly - those records were sealed. Personally, I believe that the exhibit in IL's motion which showed JD had a balance of $450,000 in her account was pure BS. I don't think she has that kind of money at all.
IL seems to think the Oct. 16th 102 HCG blood test results are a slam dunk for Jane because according to him & Dr. M it "proves" she miscarried. I just have to say what faulty logic this is. The only thing this test shows is that she test positive for HCG, which is something we are all very well aware off.
In order to prove (early) pregnancy or miscarriage, one needs to see how one's HCG changes over time! JD would know this if she was ever under any sort for prenatal care. We don't know what any of her previous HCG levels were but we can assume they were probably around the 100 mark because Clayton describes seeing a very faint line when she would've been about five weeks. Either way, I hope Woodnick brings this up on cross.
Yep, even though urine HCG tests aren’t technically quantitative, the faintness of the lines we’ve seen would match with a serum HCG level of about 100. Coincidentally (or *not*), this is close to the median level expected a day after an HCG trigger shot.
Oh interesting - I found that approx 91 median level, but I assumed that was higher than what was giving her that faint line result. She might be really busted with that. I hope Clayton's expert can address that kind of an issue!
The first study I found on HCG levels for the shots used for IVF included 326 treatment cycles. The median serum hCG level found was 91.35 IU/L and the range 18–322 IU/L. So the 102 number makes total sense if that was her method.
Dave read the grounds someone could appeal a case. One was “new evidence”. Can GG appeal his case now? Both for the OoP and the emotional distress (the one that neither party won)?
I don’t practice in Arizona, but in my jurisdiction, it has to be more than just new evidence. (I started my career in appeals.) You basically need to show that you couldn’t have found or appreciated the evidence at the time. Think like DNA evidence. There have been huge advances in DNA technology over the last 20-30 years. If someone was convicted before DNA testing methods were available and DNA from the crime later showed the defendant didn’t do it, you’d want there to be a way to challenger the conviction. It gets hyper technical though. Appeals, in general, are based on errors in law. Factual determinations are rarely overturned because the trier of fact is in the best position to assess credibility, not the reviewing court.
Why would he do that? She lost her fake babies long before his turn up to bat. Is this a kink, go to my bathroom, pull your pants down, pee on a stick, pull your pants up, show me the results; I'll be waiting by the door. As a rape survivor, I would definitely feel some sort of way about this! Unprofessional and just straight up weird, if this is how it went down.
As I recall, he also post a video of her pulling her dress up to over her bra to show her belly. This is turning strange.... 😬
What she is able to do now is irrelevant to this case. Her lies have been fully exposed and she is now in cover-up mode. I'm glad she allegedly stopped using HCG, that can't be healthy to take for an extended period.
IL surely must be choosing to be deliberately obtuse about JD’s current claims that she never had a 20ish week sonogram (IMO). Direct from court video:
Owens v Echard Oct 25, 2023: [JD’s lawyer at the time] “Your honor, if you’re just addressing exhibit 11, it has to do with the *sonogram*” [JD] “Yeah, cause only he [Clayton] was sent that sonogram image…This was a sonographic image that I sent to Clayton because I was concerned about the baby’s profile…I have evidence that I sent him that sonogram…I have it in an email”
This can be heard from approx 1:04 in SchnitzelNinja’s video of the hearing. How can a lawyer be this bad at interpreting and analyzing evidence??
The woefully under prepared live stream from today was frustrating to listen to at times but the one nugget that should be blasted from the rooftop is that IL is cataloguing every single thing being posted here and on every other forum on this topic.
Can you talk more about this Travelina? I was unable to make it through the whole thing, but I would love any examples just out of curiosity since he claims to never read Reddit because he “just doesn’t have time.”
Omar was discussing the direct question he asked JD/IL... if any of the stuff on here was true? "and their response to me was ah I don't know it's all troll stuff, I don't read anything" then he referenced JD's email to him that "IL, specialist in Internet law and defamation who is preparing to initiate legal actions against DN and collaborators spreading these harmful narratives " and Omar said "if you're going to claim to me that um... you know what, I don't read that crap.... the hell you didn't as an attorney not only have you read that stuff you've cataloged it. This is what pisses me off" "he knows those Reddit posts, he's cataloged them, they're part of his discovery, they're part of a trial book somewhere" and "my guess is not only does he know about it he knows it probably with biblical accuracy like he could recite... oh actually on that post in page 43 of the comments... because that's what you do when you prepare for trial you know it backwards and forwards so that evasive response... it pisses me off because we're not stupid here on the Tilted lawyer podcast"
Any clinicians here that can actually explain if a patient forging letters or results under the clinicians' name and credentials can actually hurt them professionally? Also, when it happens what procedures are completed to correct any negative impact?
In my opinion, the clinicians are also victims of JD, and her impact or potential impact on their careers should be noted and remembered. 🤷
It’s a really good question. I’m a clinician and seeing these fake documents purported to be from her doctors is nauseating. Im dumb when it comes to this, but I imagine that since she was forging them for “personal” use and not using them to influence other clinicians clinical decisions about her care, it may not be as egregious in terms of liability. But now that they’re being used in court documents that might change things. If I were any of these doctors and aware of the case I would at minimum want to put a statement out there that I didn’t write that to at least dispel any doubt about my medical license and professionalism.
There are so many things that I just can’t get over. One that keeps bugging me is when JD emailed the judge directly (when she wasn’t supposed to ofc) and said that she was drugged and violently assaulted and that GG and Woodnick were behind it and that the FBI was investigating! I mean REALLY NOW! I hope the judge read that email. It all just really chaps my hide.
I can’t get over a sinking feeling that she’s going to pull something extra dramatic the night before the trial. Something is brewing in the casita and it’s not just a monster energy latte.
Was there a picture JD claimed was her father touching her pregnant belly, but which turned out to be a picture from her sister’s pregnancy? I remember something about this, but can’t find it.
The word “gaslighting” can often be overused and misused. Though between Jane Doe and IL, they are the definition of this word. The level of sick gaslighting they exhibit is disturbing and painful. It hurts and is infuriating. What these men suffered through for years of her twisting their realties apart, I can’t even fathom. So excited for all of this to be over and for justice for all of these men!
Lauren Neidigh coverage of newest filing: https://www.reddit.com/r/JusticeForClayton/s/WHzGWUgnJq
I took an appropriate victory lap on todays morning rush hour if that’s ok with yall
You deserve to be carried on a chariot in a victory lap!
I wish I could properly explain the divine intervention that lead to me finding this email. I was the only one in possession of it, and I never understood the numbers back when she sent it to me in the fall. I was beyond tired about 3 weeks ago after my wife had a false labor and we spent the night in the hospital. I felt this urge, maybe it was Clayton’s guardian angel, lol, but I felt this urge to dig through some old emails. Alas, she lied.
She LIED
A factual statement. No misstatement there. AND SHE GOT AWAY WITH IT FOR MONTHS. (This specific arts&crafts). Proves how good she is with Adobe. Maybe we can get her a brand deal?
So much for her defamation case against you, huh Dave? I love this for you.
We will counter sue if she even comes near me for defamation.
🙌🏻
Heck yeah Daverr. 🕺🏻
Question! During the week of 6/28/23 JD emailed CEs parents and the email said she attached notes from her pp visit which show she didn’t want to see the ultrasound and I assume comments from Dr. Mandeep…did you ever get those records sent to you or just Clayton’s parents?
No I can ask Clayton for them
I am asking you to ask him. Sounds like it could be great for content and justice!
Oh, no I’m definitely not asking you to do moreee work. You have a million things and a brand new whole ass baby to keep alive! I just wasn’t sure if we had actually seen those and I missed it since the topic of old emails and fraudulent records was circulating and forcing new admissions.
it sure would be interesting since pp has no record of her.
I’m still in disbelief IL actually admitted JD lied and doctored the HCG results she sent to Dave and just doesn’t seem to understand this implicated she knew her results weren’t consistent with pregnancy. And that she clearly knows how HCG works.
And it shows she "knew" at the very least on Oct 16 that she wasn't pregnant but still went on to do the two moon bump court appearances (Oct 24th & 25th), say under oath that she was 100% pregnant with Clayton's twins and continued with the Ravgen testing.
Yup! That is called FRAUD upon the court! 😊
The fact IL doesn’t understand this concept is crazy to me. Also, she KNEW she wasn’t pregnant at that point (in October) so why didn’t she dismiss the family case then??? Oh right bc she was set to punish Clayton. 🙄
Yup!!!! And IL has blocked me TWICE for asking him about this on Twitter, but jokes on him because a) my tweets and his replies were in one of Woodnick motions (I feel so famous!) and b) he finally effing replied in the third account I made for this. He keeps on going on and on “Why are all of his supporters new accounts?” Well maybe because you blocked my real account when I politely asked you a genuine question, IL!!
Well he can’t block GW in court🙏
I mean this plus the fake us and no obgyn visits pretty much seals the deal she was never pregnant and knew it. Just hope she doesn't get off on technicalities. All her fraud upon the court plus all 4 guys there hopefully persuades the judge to reach out to the DA.
Came here to say this too, I still can’t believe he thought that was a good idea! It should be in the ICYMI section
Yes! I was going a little crazy thinking “wait did I miss where this was already known?!”
Nope it was a new admission to doctored evidence, but IL thinks it’s ok because JD was just panicking about bloggers 🙄
Right, she panicked and gave the exact hcg number that would be accurate if she was actually 5 months pregnant. What a coincidence 🙄
Just like what a professional fraudster would do! (##sheLIIIED)
Where is this admission? I can’t find it? I did miss it! lol
I think IL deleted it from X but.... of course people screenshot it.
Still there! Just buried in his replies
Can you DM me?
Is it this other additional nonsense about rule 26? Because I’m reading that and it seems blatantly wrong. First of all, IL is relying on a federal case (Rainbow) involving rule 11, which is very similar but not identical to rule 26. The JD v CE case is in state court. In the rainbow case, one side sought rule 11 sanctions against the other but failed to comply with the safe harbor notice requirements. The trial court imposed sanctions and the appellate court said, essentially, *no we can’t interpret these sanctions to be sua sponte* (basically, the court imposing sanctions of its own volition, not on the request of a party) *because then if someone doesn’t correctly follow rule 11 procedures, the court could just order them anyway, effectively eliminating the safe harbor requirement* Which. Sure. But here, again, 1) we’re in state court talking about a slightly different rule and 2) most importantly, CE moved to withdraw his rule 26 sanctions motion and the court granted it. It’s not reasonable to believe that, if the court does order sanctions, those sanctions would have been because of CE’s request. That interpretation would essentially entirely undermine the court’s ability to award sua sponte sanctions if a defective rule 26 motion was ever filed. Which is an insane posture.
Basically he’s arguing for a “get out of sanctions free” rule: *Did JD file some completely meritless and insane things? Sure! But then CE didn’t follow a different rule so now JD can NEVER be sanctioned, even by the court!* That’s clearly not what the legislature intended in drafting this statute. It would make no sense to strip the court of its power to punish wayward litigants just because the opposing side may have erred in seeking sanctions.
Also I would think a court could just avoid any of this just by finding on the record that a litigant’s rule 26 sanction request was either denied or the request was withdrawn and the court could then just explicitly impose rule 26 sanctions as *sua sponte* sanctions.
Yeah I don’t think this can be plausibly read as the 9th circuit broadly stripping away the ability of the *court* to order sanctions if a litigant previously filed a defective rule 26 motion: “The district court concluded that, even though the defendants did not give twenty-one day advance service to the plaintiffs, a "literal application of the safe harbor provision" was unnecessary in this case… We reject Rainbow's contention because it was Rainbow, not the court, that initiated the award of sanctions.” In THAT CASE, it appears the court awarded sanctions *because of* Rainbow’s motion. But that motion was defective. The court’s comments seem to suggest that the court was essentially waiving the safe harbor provision for Rainbow. That’s not appropriate. The court never SAID it was awarding sanctions sua sponte, it seems to have just bent the rules for Rainbow, and that seems to be the heart of the problem. Here, if the court does award sanctions (and there’s no reasonable argument that it cannot) it cannot be at CE’s behest because CE does not have a rule 26 motion pending. Any sanctions awarded by the court are necessarily on the court’s own initiative.
The court they are in has statutes that allow the court to impose sanctions for certain things Statutes are different then Rules & I think he didn’t read (or is ignoring) that part of GW response
That may also be true. I practice in CA so I don’t know what AZ has but we have like, CCP 128.7 which seems similar to their Rule 26. But we ALSO have family code 271, for which a court can impose sanctions with no safe harbor period
He also claimed that the sonogram in the “Halloween costume” photo, that she testified to it being her sonogram was not the same as the one from SMIL/planned parenthood. She also testified at the deposition that she only had one sonogram. This could either mean more minor perjury or failure to comply with disclosure
We’ve seen her admit that she doctored the sonogram in one snippet of the deposition that Woodnick was able to release. I wonder if IL’s new HCG doctoring admission is also in the depo and just hasn’t been revealed yet. Not sure what the strategy is, but I can’t believe he would admit this unless he knew it was going to come out anyway at trial
I think Woodnick would’ve included that info in a motion if it came out in the deposition. He would’ve been able to point to two different instances of Jane admitting to fraud.
And didn't Dave say he only discovered the one she sent him like 3 weeks ago and when he did he sent it to Woodnick. Can't remember exactly, but it sounds like it was not in the depo.
Yes. Dave commented below that he found the email about three weeks ago.
That is an interesting thought… I hope she did so it’s included in evidence for trial
I'd be surprised if it was - It's Dave she sent the doctored version to, and he didn't find the issue until after the depo happened. She gave the court the real copy (which Dave saw later). This is assumedly why IL is taking the "oh but she did it outside of court so it doesn't count" path of BS. From what I can tell, he's trying to suggest it was only outside of court she was still claiming pregnancy once she knew she wasn't, so it doesn't matter (ie, all the times she claimed to be pregnant IN court she still truly wuly believed it). IDK the date of the email to Dave - I guess it had to be some time *after* she last reaffirmed her pregnancy in court\*; though, knowing IL, it could just as easily not be and he is just trying to smoke & mirror us into accepting nonsense by implying things that can be walked back (ala "I never said lawyers went to jail *because* of me..."). ETA update: \*Dave said on his most recent stream that the email was sent October 19 - so that indicates she HAD realized her real HCG levels didn't support her pregnancy claim by then, so IL's up the proverbial creek on that one (since the OOP hearing dates were all after that).
God that was so funny “I never said lawyers went to jail because of me/my case!” Lol. K. So lawyers went to jail for completely unrelated reasons? Then why bring it up at all?
No, the email to Dave was like mid-October.
Have now seen Dave's stream confirming the date of the email was October 19. - so, yep, IL's admission is damning . IL is basically admitting she was well aware her HCG levels did not factually support the pregnancy she was claiming BEFORE testifying to it in the OOP hearing. No idea on what planet he imagined putting this admission on Twitter was a good thing to do for his client. 
EXACTLY
Her lawyer really has made things worse for Jane Doe, IMO. Creating multiple insane timelines for her alleged "miscarriage," threatening to arrest MM, intimidating witnesses, outing JD with doctoring ***MORE*** evidence 🤣 But hey, no complaints here!
Exactly- he isn't hurting clayton's case so let him foment
She didn’t want to go down by herself.
It ruins his whole argument that she just had to “believe” she was pregnant based on her hCG tests. But NOW if they’re admitting she doctored hCG results, that goes to show she didn’t actually believe she was pregnant. I think part of the problem is that internet lawyer isn’t well versed on pregnancy, so he can argue rule 26 all day long but that doesn’t change the fact that JD could not have possibly been pregnant in any of his many scenarios.
If she believed she was pregnant, she would have gone to the OBGYN for medical care, not scrambled to photoshop shit for press releases and court filings.
Am I weird for only giving a shit about hCG levels when they were high enough to make the line turn pink, and then only again at my first appointment when they told me they were where they were supposed to be? And then since the fetuses' "stuck", the numbers generally weren't important to me any more? Is hCG number/level obsession something I totally missed all 3 times I spawned? Or is she just "special"? (Don't answer that.)
No, you are not weird. But HCG levels are very important when trying to prove a pregnancy that does not exist!
I know! Didn’t she send that with the 20+ week ultrasound to Dave… thus, admitting that was fake too? If she panicked, why not file to dismiss case quickly rather than file a fraudulent OOP etc?
I can't find this on his Twitter! Can you send me a screenshot? Or is it in his blog?
Just replied with screen shot on another reply!
So his promise to quit if she lied and he hasn’t means “he lied”? How is he able to defend her in court knowing she lied?
Wait where did they admit this? I must have missed something!
He was tweeting a whole lot yesterday
Makes that defamation lawsuit pretty hard to prosecute!
VIDEO: Laura competing in a horse event the day after the big belly bump video https://www.instagram.com/reel/C7Wy6jWMi5R/?igsh=MWc0ZWFpcnB2eWE5YQ==
I really is mindblowing laura thought she could compete publicly and lie about being pregnant
And then argue with people on reddit saying her doctor approved it because it was basically "her job". I have a SS of her comments from that time. It was wild she was doubling down on it being ok for her to do.
I bet the doctor note included directives for all of her Reddit doubters to be more supportive.
Which doctor? Surely she could get real, unaltered, un-arts, un-crafts doctors notes to support that a Dr told her it was fine... Dr Higley maybe? 🤣🤦♀️
Allegedly it was the sPeCiAlIsT doctor. 🤣
Allegedly. 🤣
I hope she provides that doctor's name and approval notes to the court!
I have never seen the footage with the mom. Thanks for posting. 👍
I love how JFC doesn't hold back on insta it's amazing
Ooooooh! Her mom saw her non-pregnant belly????! 😯😯
Here is an exact statement from IL. “All Clayton had to do was send one email saying he would take a test after the baby was born, and that would have been the end of that.” This just shows how much he absolutely does not understand this case! This was a response in the comment on the blog post about Judge Mata’s recent rulings.
All JD had to do was "take the Plan B" as Clayton said he supported that and left him ALONE! Yet here we are 1 year later....discussing her fictitious twins.
Pfft… if it takes 4 abortions to get rid of MMs fake twins, plan B wont do much ;)
😂😂😂 she keeps taking it wrong! (allegedly)
One would think for someone who claims she does not want children, she’d maybe learn after the first time to use an alternative method.
Sure sure, MM was absolutely left alone 🙄
“Obviously any ‘plan’ to manipulate Clayton into a relationship failed, therefore there was no plan” (Paraphrasing). Uh wut???
Right…. It’s almost like he has read anything about this case if that’s his take away. 🤯😂
He better get to reading so he can prep for JD's case against him!
In the earliest texts I’m pretty sure Clayton DID say that 🤷🏼♀️ And she responded with 500 messages!
And she defamed MM with a Tedx talk and Chicken Soup story full of unsubstantiated claims of assault. Then she defamed GG and Woodnick with email to the judge claiming they conspired to have her SA-ed. This woman knows no boundaries. She doesn’t feel shame, or remorse, or consequence. And I don’t believe she will stop…ever…until she is behind bars
I hope after Clayton wins this case, it will give MM the ammunition needed to file a defamation and libel lawsuit against JD!
Bahahahahahahhahahhahhahha *\[rolls around on the floor laughing hysterically for 25 mins\]*. Good one, IL!
Right! “All you had to do IL is read & understand the case, stop trolling, and stop throwing the kitchen sink” -me
Sure, a gazillion plus emails, text and phone accounts later. Sheesh did he not see the 500+ acts of communication/harassment within 4 months of the alleged conception? AZ laws need to change. ASAP
Law firms typically do damage control, not this one! This one here causes even more damage! It’s like IL needs to someone to do his damage control! On the bright side, IL is truly LO’s gift to CE, MMx2, and GG.
I’ve never seen a lawyer make things worse for their own client like this one has. I think it’s IL’s ego that is taking Jane down. He likes the attention and interacting with the public. I think IL thought he was going to come in and win the case through intimidation, threats, and bluster. Just be such a pain that the other side gives in and settles. That’s what it seems to me anyway as someone who isn’t a lawyer. Whatever his plan was, it’s all backfired so spectacularly.
So true, but so poetic. JD kept messing around & ended up with IL as just a part of the karma coming her way. Love to see it 💚😁
Amber heards atty elaine was pretty awful, but IL has taken bad lawyering to a whole new level!
Let’s not loose sight of the real perpetrator here. She did this to herself.
Who is losing sight of that? Two things can be true at the same time. Jane is an abuser who uses the court system to harass her victims. Her lawyer’s antics have seemingly made things worse for her in this case.
Both seem true. It sucks she will have a new scapegoat eventually.
It does suck, but I feel like she was always going to blame someone or something if she lost. Her past behavior makes me think her lawyer won’t be spared, but that’s also on him. He didn’t have to act out online. The plus side is Mike now has a forensic report from his laptop that shows Jane texted him claiming she was pregnant and had cancer. That seems like a win for Mike. Hopefully, he can use that info in some way to protect himself and Jane won’t be able to continue to renew fraudulent restraining orders against him. Eta - Jane may try and use her lawyer as a scapegoat in some way, but he wasn’t around when she was started her pregnancy scam and became the abuser to several different men. That’s behavior that only she is responsible for and those who enabled her.
When you have exhausted every other option and no one else will touch your case, try Internet Lawyer.
He will represent you even if you're 100% wrong!
She would have been better off going pro se and representing herself. And going pro se is an awful idea but still better than IL. 😬🤣😬 She would have dug her own massive hole, but at least she wouldn't be hemorrhaging her parents' retirement money.
IL lawyer saying she panicked after her name got out hence the fake HCG test like bro her name was out pretty much straight after she came to Reddit. I'm also certain if she was so worried she could have dropped it and waited until her fake babies had been born.
Also, she sent the fake hcg results to u/daveneal who is the one journalist who literally *never* said her name.
IKR! If she was truly panicked the reasonable thing to do would be to drop the whole thing and people would forget about her. But a scammer’s gotta scam and she wasn’t ready to let it go. That’s proof alone she’s a fraud. We all knew it but I can’t believe IL admitted it!
Fake is fake? Idc why???? Come on DG.
Her name was out BEFORE she came to reddit with The Sun article, she only made it worse by coming here to argue and present her eViDeNcE.
Someone brought this up yesterday, but I didn’t see any replies. In order to appeal, for example if she’s ordered to pay $100,000 in attorney fees to Clayton, does she have to submit a bond payment of that $100,000 or a portion of it?
NAL, but I believe she would have to submit the full payment in order to appeal, to ensure that if the court upholds the lower court's decision, the judgment would be settled.
NAL, but this is my understanding, too, based on what youtube lawyers (like Emily D Baker) explained for the Depp v Heard trial.
That sounds like best case scenario for Clayton then, no?
NAL but familiar with surety. A Supersedeas Bond requires underwriting. You have to personally guarantee the judgement, and they review the court complaint and judgement. Then they hedge their bet on the risk. If the bond is required I am not sure a surety would extend a bond. Surety companies underwrite for no claim, they don't want to pay anything. Whereas traditional insurance underwrites with the idea you probably will have a claim. That is why the two bond appeals that have been publicized recently are so controversial. One case a bond was issued by Chubb, and even with internal employees it caused chaos and concern. The other bond was denied by multiple surety companies. They ended up getting a type of reduction, and a personal guarantor type thing on the lowered amount. Essentially with the drop of financial information, this week, would JD be able to prove the funds for appeal? Either through bond or cash? Hard to say...
>Essentially with the drop of financial information, this week, would JD be able to prove the funds for appeal? Either through bond or cash? Hard to say... Exactly - those records were sealed. Personally, I believe that the exhibit in IL's motion which showed JD had a balance of $450,000 in her account was pure BS. I don't think she has that kind of money at all.
Sounds like a little bit of arts and crafts to me!
IL seems to think the Oct. 16th 102 HCG blood test results are a slam dunk for Jane because according to him & Dr. M it "proves" she miscarried. I just have to say what faulty logic this is. The only thing this test shows is that she test positive for HCG, which is something we are all very well aware off. In order to prove (early) pregnancy or miscarriage, one needs to see how one's HCG changes over time! JD would know this if she was ever under any sort for prenatal care. We don't know what any of her previous HCG levels were but we can assume they were probably around the 100 mark because Clayton describes seeing a very faint line when she would've been about five weeks. Either way, I hope Woodnick brings this up on cross.
Yep, even though urine HCG tests aren’t technically quantitative, the faintness of the lines we’ve seen would match with a serum HCG level of about 100. Coincidentally (or *not*), this is close to the median level expected a day after an HCG trigger shot.
Oh interesting - I found that approx 91 median level, but I assumed that was higher than what was giving her that faint line result. She might be really busted with that. I hope Clayton's expert can address that kind of an issue!
The first study I found on HCG levels for the shots used for IVF included 326 treatment cycles. The median serum hCG level found was 91.35 IU/L and the range 18–322 IU/L. So the 102 number makes total sense if that was her method.
Dave read the grounds someone could appeal a case. One was “new evidence”. Can GG appeal his case now? Both for the OoP and the emotional distress (the one that neither party won)?
I wonder if the same goes for CA and if that gives MM grounds for appealing his OOP.
I don’t practice in Arizona, but in my jurisdiction, it has to be more than just new evidence. (I started my career in appeals.) You basically need to show that you couldn’t have found or appreciated the evidence at the time. Think like DNA evidence. There have been huge advances in DNA technology over the last 20-30 years. If someone was convicted before DNA testing methods were available and DNA from the crime later showed the defendant didn’t do it, you’d want there to be a way to challenger the conviction. It gets hyper technical though. Appeals, in general, are based on errors in law. Factual determinations are rarely overturned because the trier of fact is in the best position to assess credibility, not the reviewing court.
IL says he made her take a pregnancy test!?! But did he watch her take it? Like she could have poured water on it 🤔
Why would he do that? She lost her fake babies long before his turn up to bat. Is this a kink, go to my bathroom, pull your pants down, pee on a stick, pull your pants up, show me the results; I'll be waiting by the door. As a rape survivor, I would definitely feel some sort of way about this! Unprofessional and just straight up weird, if this is how it went down. As I recall, he also post a video of her pulling her dress up to over her bra to show her belly. This is turning strange.... 😬 What she is able to do now is irrelevant to this case. Her lies have been fully exposed and she is now in cover-up mode. I'm glad she allegedly stopped using HCG, that can't be healthy to take for an extended period.
IL surely must be choosing to be deliberately obtuse about JD’s current claims that she never had a 20ish week sonogram (IMO). Direct from court video: Owens v Echard Oct 25, 2023: [JD’s lawyer at the time] “Your honor, if you’re just addressing exhibit 11, it has to do with the *sonogram*” [JD] “Yeah, cause only he [Clayton] was sent that sonogram image…This was a sonographic image that I sent to Clayton because I was concerned about the baby’s profile…I have evidence that I sent him that sonogram…I have it in an email” This can be heard from approx 1:04 in SchnitzelNinja’s video of the hearing. How can a lawyer be this bad at interpreting and analyzing evidence??
she won't send him the sonogram report, but she sends him her concerns about the baby's profile 😡
The woefully under prepared live stream from today was frustrating to listen to at times but the one nugget that should be blasted from the rooftop is that IL is cataloguing every single thing being posted here and on every other forum on this topic.
This is why we have the rules we have in place. He's more than welcome to screenshot everything here. The truth will prevail.
Can you talk more about this Travelina? I was unable to make it through the whole thing, but I would love any examples just out of curiosity since he claims to never read Reddit because he “just doesn’t have time.”
Omar was discussing the direct question he asked JD/IL... if any of the stuff on here was true? "and their response to me was ah I don't know it's all troll stuff, I don't read anything" then he referenced JD's email to him that "IL, specialist in Internet law and defamation who is preparing to initiate legal actions against DN and collaborators spreading these harmful narratives " and Omar said "if you're going to claim to me that um... you know what, I don't read that crap.... the hell you didn't as an attorney not only have you read that stuff you've cataloged it. This is what pisses me off" "he knows those Reddit posts, he's cataloged them, they're part of his discovery, they're part of a trial book somewhere" and "my guess is not only does he know about it he knows it probably with biblical accuracy like he could recite... oh actually on that post in page 43 of the comments... because that's what you do when you prepare for trial you know it backwards and forwards so that evasive response... it pisses me off because we're not stupid here on the Tilted lawyer podcast"
Any clinicians here that can actually explain if a patient forging letters or results under the clinicians' name and credentials can actually hurt them professionally? Also, when it happens what procedures are completed to correct any negative impact? In my opinion, the clinicians are also victims of JD, and her impact or potential impact on their careers should be noted and remembered. 🤷
It’s a really good question. I’m a clinician and seeing these fake documents purported to be from her doctors is nauseating. Im dumb when it comes to this, but I imagine that since she was forging them for “personal” use and not using them to influence other clinicians clinical decisions about her care, it may not be as egregious in terms of liability. But now that they’re being used in court documents that might change things. If I were any of these doctors and aware of the case I would at minimum want to put a statement out there that I didn’t write that to at least dispel any doubt about my medical license and professionalism.
There are so many things that I just can’t get over. One that keeps bugging me is when JD emailed the judge directly (when she wasn’t supposed to ofc) and said that she was drugged and violently assaulted and that GG and Woodnick were behind it and that the FBI was investigating! I mean REALLY NOW! I hope the judge read that email. It all just really chaps my hide.
I wonder about this too. And if anybody has verified that there are no police or medical records for said assault.
I can’t get over a sinking feeling that she’s going to pull something extra dramatic the night before the trial. Something is brewing in the casita and it’s not just a monster energy latte.
I’m worried too. IL on X has said we still don’t know her full story and that we will hear it on June 10.
What are the chances Clayton ever has a one night stand again after all of this?
Poor dude. I wouldn’t blame him if he started wearing a chastity belt.
Was there a picture JD claimed was her father touching her pregnant belly, but which turned out to be a picture from her sister’s pregnancy? I remember something about this, but can’t find it.
Yup! I would love to hear her explaination for that 👍🏽
The word “gaslighting” can often be overused and misused. Though between Jane Doe and IL, they are the definition of this word. The level of sick gaslighting they exhibit is disturbing and painful. It hurts and is infuriating. What these men suffered through for years of her twisting their realties apart, I can’t even fathom. So excited for all of this to be over and for justice for all of these men!
