Latest / The Ben and Ashley I Almost Famous Podcast / Understanding Clayton Echard’s “Love Trapped” Case

Transcript

Understanding Clayton Echard’s “Love Trapped” Case · The Ben and Ashley I Almost Famous Podcast

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: This is the Ben and Ashley I Almost Famous Podcast
• 0:03
  Speaker 1: with iHeartRadio.
• 0:06
  Speaker 2: Hey everyone, welcome back to the Almost Famous Podcast. It's Ashley,
• 0:09
  Speaker 2: and today we're going to do a little bit of
• 0:10
  Speaker 2: a deep dive on the Clayton Eckert fraternity fraud case
• 0:14
  Speaker 2: involving Laura Owens. So she was just, she pled guilty
• 0:20
  Speaker 2: in a criminal case, which is one of the reasons
• 0:23
  Speaker 2: that this case has been brought up again. And simultaneously,
• 0:28
  Speaker 2: Clayton has quite a hit podcast in telling the story.
• 0:33
  Speaker 2: So we have a guest today. He has practiced criminal
• 0:37
  Speaker 2: law for nearly 15 years, and he's served as a
• 0:39
  Speaker 2: legal expert on CNN and KTLA in LA. Please welcome
• 0:43
  Speaker 2: to the podcast, Ryan Kearns, to help us understand this
• 0:47
  Speaker 2: case a little bit better. Hey, Ryan.
• 0:50
  Speaker 3: Hi, Ashley. Thanks for having me on. This is certainly
• 0:53
  Speaker 3: an adventure of a case. For anybody that's been a
• 0:58
  Speaker 3: lawyer and that's practiced in criminal or practiced in family law,
• 1:01
  Speaker 3: I mean, this touches every part of our legal system.
• 1:06
  Speaker 3: And it is PTSD moments, I think, for a lot
• 1:09
  Speaker 3: of lawyers that are listening to this podcast, seeing how
• 1:12
  Speaker 3: far things can unravel and get out of hand. It's
• 1:16
  Speaker 3: been an amazing, amazing story.
• 1:18
  Speaker 2: So there's a lot of parts. There's a lot of details.
• 1:21
  Speaker 2: Just to break down for simplicity's sake, can you tell
• 1:24
  Speaker 2: our audience how there's been two trials now with Clayton
• 1:28
  Speaker 2: and this woman? One has been civil, and that was
• 1:31
  Speaker 2: closed in 2024. And one, she just currently pled guilty during,
• 1:36
  Speaker 2: and that was a criminal case.
• 1:38
  Speaker 3: So there's actually been more than that. So there's the
• 1:41
  Speaker 3: initial civil paternity case, which was how this whole thing started.
• 1:47
  Speaker 3: where Laura filed for paternity. That case ended in a
• 1:54
  Speaker 3: verdict for Clayton and nearly $ 150, 000 in attorney's fees for him,
• 2:00
  Speaker 3: which is pretty remarkable. There's also restraining order cases. So
• 2:03
  Speaker 3: there were dueling restraining orders involving both Laura and Clayton,
• 2:09
  Speaker 3: initially granted for both of them. And then after the paternity,
• 2:12
  Speaker 3: the civil case in the paternity, it was referred actually
• 2:15
  Speaker 3: by the judge in that civil case to Maricopa County
• 2:18
  Speaker 3: prosecutors for criminal evaluation. That led to the criminal charges
• 2:24
  Speaker 3: and the plea agreement that just came out last week.
• 2:26
  Speaker 3: So there's, it's, when I say it's kind of touched everything,
• 2:29
  Speaker 3: it's touched family law, it's touched restraining orders, it's touched criminal,
• 2:33
  Speaker 3: really everything you can get to in a dispute like this.
• 2:36
  Speaker 3: So it's been pretty amazing.
• 2:38
  Speaker 2: The way that I'm trying to simplify it in my
• 2:40
  Speaker 2: head is that the 2024, the one that, like, the
• 2:41
  Speaker 2: big one is that he.
• 2:46
  Speaker 2: Sued her in civil court so that he could clear
• 2:49
  Speaker 2: his name of any things that she was accusing him of, right?
• 2:53
  Speaker 3: Right. You wanted to continue the, you actually filed motions
• 2:56
  Speaker 3: to continue the paternity case even after there was, after
• 3:02
  Speaker 3: she had said there was a non-viable, there was no
• 3:04
  Speaker 3: longer a baby, it was not viable. And so there
• 3:06
  Speaker 3: shouldn't be a paternity case even after she's the one
• 3:09
  Speaker 3: who filed it. And he had filed motions to continue
• 3:12
  Speaker 3: that because he wanted proof. He wanted there to be
• 3:14
  Speaker 3: an actual court decision that said you were never pregnant.
• 3:18
  Speaker 3: And if you were, it was not mine because the
• 3:20
  Speaker 3: saga has, you know, he's never gotten a straight answer
• 3:23
  Speaker 3: or a court decision. That's that's confirmed that despite, you know,
• 3:27
  Speaker 3: all this time trying to get, you know, some real answers.
• 3:30
  Speaker 3: So he's, he pushed really hard for, for all of that.
• 3:34
  Speaker 3: Even after the case was technically moved because there wasn't
• 3:37
  Speaker 3: a baby anymore.
• 3:38
  Speaker 2: She accused him of getting her pregnant, even though they
• 3:42
  Speaker 2: never had penetrative, as I look around for making my son,
• 3:47
  Speaker 2: son in the room, sex. Um, they was, she said
• 3:52
  Speaker 2: that you were a little bit woozy that day. You
• 3:58
  Speaker 2: took a gummy. You don't know what actually happened. And
• 4:01
  Speaker 2: then said that he got her pregnant, um, with twins and,
• 4:07
  Speaker 2: on one night. And then because of that, because she
• 4:12
  Speaker 2: said that she was pregnant with twins, she said something
• 4:15
  Speaker 2: along the lines of, you can't have an in utero
• 4:20
  Speaker 2: paternity test, even though that's initially what he wanted her
• 4:24
  Speaker 2: to have.
• 4:24
  Speaker 3: Yeah, it was pretty, just to try to simplify this
• 4:28
  Speaker 3: as much as possible, because we could spend five days
• 4:31
  Speaker 3: talking about, you know, the details of this case. It's
• 4:35
  Speaker 3: pretty remarkable how we got from this sort of one-night hookup.
• 4:40
  Speaker 3: There's just oral sex. There's no penetrative sex to her
• 4:44
  Speaker 3: sending messages, I want to date you. He breaks it off.
• 4:47
  Speaker 3: Once it becomes clear he doesn't want to date her anymore,
• 4:50
  Speaker 3: she then leverages this idea of a pregnancy, sends a
• 4:55
  Speaker 3: positive pregnancy test, goes to this extreme, extreme lengths, doctoring images.
• 5:01
  Speaker 3: We'll get into those details a little bit later, but
• 5:05
  Speaker 3: really gets into some incredible lengths that she goes to
• 5:09
  Speaker 3: to try to prove that she's pregnant and essentially just
• 5:12
  Speaker 3: trying to say, please stay with me or give me
• 5:14
  Speaker 3: a chance and I'll terminate the baby or if you don't,
• 5:18
  Speaker 3: then I won't. It goes so far and this is
• 5:22
  Speaker 3: where I knew things had gone off the rails. She
• 5:24
  Speaker 3: had sent a dating contract, a dating relationship contract to him.
• 5:30
  Speaker 2: What in the world?
• 5:32
  Speaker 3: Literally, it said if you date me for one week
• 5:37
  Speaker 3: in good faith and give us a real chance going forward,
• 5:42
  Speaker 3: then I'll agree to terminate the baby. It is a,
• 5:46
  Speaker 3: I've never seen anything like it. It's clearly not something
• 5:48
  Speaker 3: that's drafted by a lawyer, no lawyer, whatever, in their
• 5:50
  Speaker 3: right mind, put something like that together. But I mean,
• 5:54
  Speaker 3: just think about how, there's red flags and there's like
• 5:57
  Speaker 3: the ship has sailed. I mean, that was, once I
• 6:01
  Speaker 3: saw that, I knew that we were in for the
• 6:03
  Speaker 3: long haul.
• 6:05
  Speaker 2: Oh, my goodness gracious. So just to go back to
• 6:08
  Speaker 2: my initial thought at the beginning, the 2026 one that
• 6:13
  Speaker 2: she just pleaded guilty towards, that is her basically pleading
• 6:17
  Speaker 2: guilty to the fact that she fabricated a whole bunch
• 6:20
  Speaker 2: of the things that she presented in court.
• 6:22
  Speaker 3: Yes. So the criminal laws where I that's that's what
• 6:26
  Speaker 3: I've been practicing for most of my career. This is
• 6:29
  Speaker 3: a it was a 14 count felony indictment that was
• 6:32
  Speaker 3: filed against involving two separate victims, right? So this was
• 6:38
  Speaker 3: a pattern of behavior that had happened before to a
• 6:42
  Speaker 3: man named Greg Gillespie. And then now it has happened
• 6:44
  Speaker 3: to Clayton afterwards. So they combined both of those two
• 6:48
  Speaker 3: cases into one consolidated indictment. So 14 different felonies. She
• 6:54
  Speaker 3: ends up pleading to four counts and she's looking at
• 6:58
  Speaker 3: a sentencing coming up next month. And it is, she
• 7:01
  Speaker 3: could face up to 12 and a half years in prison.
• 7:04
  Speaker 2: In both situations, she said that she was pregnant with
• 7:07
  Speaker 2: twins and then got so angry because the guys thought
• 7:11
  Speaker 2: that this night together was a casual hookup and she
• 7:14
  Speaker 2: actually wanted to date them. Is there a reason that
• 7:17
  Speaker 2: she would go with, I'm pregnant with twins?
• 7:21
  Speaker 3: Yeah, I think there's a couple of reasons. She's not
• 7:24
  Speaker 3: unsophisticated in how she handles this. She clearly understands which
• 7:28
  Speaker 3: levers to pull, which lawsuits to file, how to threaten
• 7:31
  Speaker 3: with the most impact. Having twins, a couple things. One,
• 7:40
  Speaker 3: there's a shock and awe factor of it's not just
• 7:43
  Speaker 3: one person you're responsible for, it's two. You should really
• 7:46
  Speaker 3: come around to my side of things. Give me a chance.
• 7:50
  Speaker 3: Try this out because this is even more serious than
• 7:54
  Speaker 3: you might think because there's two babies. Also, there's a
• 7:57
  Speaker 3: real legitimate point that A lot of testing for paternity,
• 8:04
  Speaker 3: a lot of programs won't test for twins because there's
• 8:08
  Speaker 3: a chance, a very small chance, but there's two different
• 8:10
  Speaker 3: fathers for the twins. They want to make sure that
• 8:12
  Speaker 3: it's reliable. And so it's this sort of excuse that
• 8:16
  Speaker 3: she can have built in not to do a paternity
• 8:18
  Speaker 3: test or at least to put it off for as
• 8:20
  Speaker 3: long as possible. This is, Ashley, this is, paternity is
• 8:24
  Speaker 3: one thing where there's a ticking clock on it. I mean,
• 8:27
  Speaker 3: at some point there has to be either a baby
• 8:28
  Speaker 3: or a test, right? So it's not- The most provable
• 8:32
  Speaker 3: thing that there is. But she drags it on. She's
• 8:34
  Speaker 3: able to drag it on for months and months and months.
• 8:37
  Speaker 2: What's the point? Do you know her goal here? Was
• 8:44
  Speaker 2: it just to freak them out? Or was there any
• 8:47
  Speaker 2: financial gain that she could have? I just don't understand
• 8:51
  Speaker 2: the overall motive. I understand she was pissed and then
• 8:54
  Speaker 2: she wanted to jerk around with them. But she knows
• 8:58
  Speaker 2: she's going to get caught in the lie eventually. Doesn't
• 9:00
  Speaker 2: she understand that there could be something very bad that
• 9:05
  Speaker 2: she faces legally after it all?
• 9:07
  Speaker 3: Maybe, but there hadn't been any consequences before, right? I mean,
• 9:11
  Speaker 3: she's been able to bully and pressure and lie and
• 9:14
  Speaker 3: kind of manipulate her way through the court system before.
• 9:18
  Speaker 3: The case with Greg Gillespie beforehand, there were no criminal
• 9:21
  Speaker 3: charges she was filed with at that time. In fact,
• 9:23
  Speaker 3: she received a restraining order against him that that had
• 9:27
  Speaker 3: been renewed multiple times after that. So she was, she
• 9:31
  Speaker 3: was very credible in her lies. She doesn't, you know,
• 9:34
  Speaker 3: she wasn't caught previously. So no, there were no consequences
• 9:37
  Speaker 3: for her. So I think that's certainly where she thought
• 9:39
  Speaker 3: that she could sort of rinse and repeat this behavior
• 9:43
  Speaker 3: with more people. The problem she ran into in this
• 9:45
  Speaker 3: case is she picked way too high profile of an
• 9:48
  Speaker 3: individual and the internet, as they say, always wins. And
• 9:52
  Speaker 3: so they, you know, the, the citizen sleuths the the
• 9:56
  Speaker 3: bachelor nation i mean truly you remember in this case
• 9:59
  Speaker 3: you know clayton didn't have the resources to hire an
• 10:03
  Speaker 3: attorney so when this first started he had just got
• 10:06
  Speaker 3: his his real estate license he didn't people think there's
• 10:09
  Speaker 3: a lot of money there coming from the bachelor but
• 10:11
  Speaker 3: he didn't have enough money to hire a lawyer and
• 10:13
  Speaker 3: it really snowballed against him in court until he had
• 10:17
  Speaker 3: a lawyer And if he didn't finally get representation, if
• 10:20
  Speaker 3: he didn't have all this sort of, I don't say
• 10:22
  Speaker 3: public support, but, you know, internet, you know, free internet
• 10:26
  Speaker 3: lawyers that were out there doing the investigation, you know,
• 10:30
  Speaker 3: may have turned out differently. So it really did take,
• 10:33
  Speaker 3: it took all of this online pressure and ultimately resources
• 10:37
  Speaker 3: from a GoFundMe account to help pay for a lawyer
• 10:39
  Speaker 3: to put this all together and give us this remarkable,
• 10:43
  Speaker 3: terrifying story.
• 10:45
  Speaker 2: Well, now he's got Dancing on Cameo making him over
• 10:47
  Speaker 2: 100,000 a year, he says. And then now he's got
• 10:50
  Speaker 2: this podcast, which is top 10. And now he'll probably
• 10:54
  Speaker 2: have a Netflix documentary.
• 10:57
  Speaker 3: Think about how, what is, you know, I haven't followed
• 11:00
  Speaker 3: The Bachelor all too much, but I certainly know his story, right?
• 11:04
  Speaker 3: I certainly know his story and what his reputation was
• 11:07
  Speaker 3: from that season that he was The Bachelor and it
• 11:10
  Speaker 3: was not great. And you want to talk about how
• 11:12
  Speaker 3: you can do a 180 Now, he certainly had to
• 11:16
  Speaker 3: go through the ringer, but if you want somebody to
• 11:19
  Speaker 3: become sympathetic, make them the victim of this kind of madness.
• 11:23
  Speaker 3: It's such a personal, sensitive, really dirty scheme to pull
• 11:31
  Speaker 3: somebody in, to try to pull somebody into a relationship,
• 11:34
  Speaker 3: to fake sonograms and and pregnancy tests, it's such a
• 11:40
  Speaker 3: personal thing that it triggers anybody, anybody who's a parent
• 11:43
  Speaker 3: or has thought about being a parent, the idea of
• 11:45
  Speaker 3: using that against somebody, no matter who they are is,
• 11:49
  Speaker 3: I understand that it's triggering. One of the text messages
• 11:52
  Speaker 3: or comments from this girl, Laura, was something like, she's
• 11:58
  Speaker 3: trying to prove that she's actually pregnant and that it's his,
• 12:02
  Speaker 3: and she says, If it turns out that I'm not pregnant,
• 12:04
  Speaker 3: I'll pay you $ 100, 000 or something like that, trying to
• 12:07
  Speaker 3: tell him that I'm really serious. And at the end
• 12:10
  Speaker 3: of the day, she ends up paying him like $ 150, 000.
• 12:12
  Speaker 3: So the only thing she said that was true was
• 12:15
  Speaker 3: that she's going to pay him all that money. Just
• 12:17
  Speaker 3: not the way she thought she was.
• 12:29
  Speaker 2: I have a stupid question. But when somebody sues somebody
• 12:32
  Speaker 2: for money that say they don't have in the bank,
• 12:35
  Speaker 2: where does the money come from?
• 12:36
  Speaker 3: If you're what we call judgment proof, right in the
• 12:40
  Speaker 3: legal world, it doesn't really come from anywhere, right? There's
• 12:42
  Speaker 3: not money to get. So you'll have a default judgment,
• 12:46
  Speaker 3: or a civil judgment, sorry, in a civil case. And
• 12:49
  Speaker 3: that's something that can be, you can get future wage garnishment,
• 12:54
  Speaker 3: or she has property, you can get a levy on it,
• 12:56
  Speaker 3: or if they have There's all kinds of ways to
• 12:59
  Speaker 3: try to collect, but if the money is not there,
• 13:00
  Speaker 3: it's not there, right? You can just sort of collect
• 13:02
  Speaker 3: on it over time with whatever resources are there. If
• 13:05
  Speaker 3: she comes into money later, you know, she inherits money
• 13:08
  Speaker 3: from her parents or something like that, you can execute
• 13:11
  Speaker 3: that judgment a little bit later. In the criminal case,
• 13:14
  Speaker 3: there's restitution. So there'll be criminal restitution and she'll be
• 13:19
  Speaker 3: through probation or parole. She'll have to, you know, We'll
• 13:23
  Speaker 3: find out what she can pay per month, and then
• 13:25
  Speaker 3: she'll be required to pay it. Sometimes if they don't
• 13:27
  Speaker 3: have any money, it's $ 20 a month, $ 100 a month,
• 13:30
  Speaker 3: whatever it might be. There's no way to really fully
• 13:32
  Speaker 3: pay off the judgment entirely. But it's always there. And
• 13:36
  Speaker 3: if she doesn't make any effort to pay, she can
• 13:38
  Speaker 3: go back into custody. So there's two different ways to
• 13:41
  Speaker 3: collect on it.
• 13:42
  Speaker 2: Okay. What is she sentenced to right now after taking
• 13:46
  Speaker 2: this plea?
• 13:47
  Speaker 3: Great question. So her sentence is coming up. So we
• 13:50
  Speaker 3: don't have an actual sentence yet. I think her sentencing
• 13:55
  Speaker 3: date is October 23rd. And she's pled to four felonies.
• 14:00
  Speaker 3: Three of them are already... There's an agreement where she's
• 14:04
  Speaker 3: going to get probation on three of them. So there's
• 14:08
  Speaker 3: really only one count of the sentencing that the judge
• 14:11
  Speaker 3: is going to be considering a custody sentence. And that
• 14:14
  Speaker 3: has a... Um, that's the fraudulent schemes and artifices. It's the,
• 14:19
  Speaker 3: it's count one. It's the first one against Clayton. And
• 14:22
  Speaker 3: it's generally for the whole shebang, right? This is an
• 14:25
  Speaker 3: entire fraudulent scheme. Let's consider everything that she's done over
• 14:29
  Speaker 3: all of this time, which gives the judge a lot
• 14:31
  Speaker 3: of discretion. And there is no agreement between the parties
• 14:35
  Speaker 3: on what the sentence is going to be, meaning that
• 14:38
  Speaker 3: her attorneys can come and ask for probation. His attorneys
• 14:41
  Speaker 3: can ask for 12 and a half years, up to
• 14:43
  Speaker 3: 12 and a half years, which is the maximum if
• 14:45
  Speaker 3: there's a bunch of aggravating factors. And so when we
• 14:47
  Speaker 3: get to the sentencing, the probation department will have a recommendation.
• 14:51
  Speaker 3: The defense will have a recommendation. The DA's office will
• 14:53
  Speaker 3: have a recommendation. And the judge is going to have
• 14:55
  Speaker 3: to make a decision. I mean, the presumptive on that
• 14:57
  Speaker 3: charge is five years in state prison. That's the presumptive.
• 15:01
  Speaker 3: If the judge thinks there's enough mitigation, it can go
• 15:03
  Speaker 3: down to three years. If there's a lot of aggravating factors,
• 15:07
  Speaker 3: it can go up to 12 and a half. And
• 15:08
  Speaker 3: the judge can kind of go anywhere in between. Mm-hmm.
• 15:10
  Speaker 2: Very interesting.
• 15:11
  Speaker 3: It'll be really interesting to see what happens because this
• 15:13
  Speaker 3: is such a... Judges don't look favorably upon people who
• 15:18
  Speaker 3: abuse the court system. And there's already been judges that
• 15:22
  Speaker 3: have found that she lied during her testimony on her oath,
• 15:27
  Speaker 3: that she's fraudulently doctored documents. They even tried to get
• 15:32
  Speaker 3: one of the judges removed from the case because they
• 15:34
  Speaker 3: said there was prejudice. When you start going after the
• 15:37
  Speaker 3: judiciary and the credibility of the court system, judges really...
• 15:41
  Speaker 3: They really take offense to that. So I can't imagine
• 15:43
  Speaker 3: this will be a overly sympathetic courtroom.
• 15:47
  Speaker 2: She also pleaded guilty to taking the identity of another.
• 15:50
  Speaker 2: What is that from?
• 15:51
  Speaker 3: That's from the doctored ultrasound or sonogram.
• 15:58
  Speaker 2: That's what I figured.
• 15:59
  Speaker 3: It's a pretty personal thing.
• 16:03
  Speaker 2: Because it's somebody else's sonogram she stole.
• 16:06
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 16:06
  Speaker 2: It wasn't an AI creation. It was somebody else.
• 16:09
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 16:09
  Speaker 3: So there's a couple of different types of sonograms and
• 16:12
  Speaker 3: documents that she doctored and used. But one of them
• 16:14
  Speaker 3: was a, you know, one was taken from a YouTube
• 16:16
  Speaker 3: video six or seven years ago, something like that. And
• 16:20
  Speaker 3: she just changed, you know, she just put her name
• 16:23
  Speaker 3: instead of the other person's name. And, you know, so
• 16:26
  Speaker 3: she just took it as her own, right? And that's
• 16:28
  Speaker 3: proof that it's hers. And most of what she's done is,
• 16:30
  Speaker 3: you know, just internet research. You're not diving, right? And
• 16:34
  Speaker 3: just trying to find ways to pretend to prove that
• 16:36
  Speaker 3: this is there. But she has been chips all in
• 16:41
  Speaker 3: from the beginning. And it took a criminal conviction and
• 16:47
  Speaker 3: a restraining order to get her to stop. It's pretty wild.
• 16:51
  Speaker 2: Do you know it's another penalty or another ding that
• 16:55
  Speaker 2: she's going to have on her? Honestly, I don't know
• 16:57
  Speaker 2: if she's ever going to find a husband or a
• 17:00
  Speaker 2: family after all of this. And it seems like, so
• 17:02
  Speaker 2: that's something she is desperate for. And I don't think
• 17:06
  Speaker 2: Eddie's going to, anybody will give her the time of day.
• 17:09
  Speaker 2: Our producer is texting me. You'd be surprised.
• 17:13
  Speaker 3: Look, I have, I have clients that are, you know,
• 17:15
  Speaker 3: in custody or in prison or whatever. And some of
• 17:18
  Speaker 3: them get letters from, from fans and from people that
• 17:21
  Speaker 3: have followed their stories and they offer romance in whatever
• 17:26
  Speaker 3: ways that you, that you might think. And so, you know,
• 17:29
  Speaker 3: she may, She even in custody, who knows people, there
• 17:33
  Speaker 3: are all kinds of people out there.
• 17:35
  Speaker 2: Clayton did, uh, he did, he took a step where
• 17:39
  Speaker 2: he made sure throughout her entire craziness to document everything,
• 17:45
  Speaker 2: every text, every email I get, I don't know if
• 17:49
  Speaker 2: there was any voice calls. When would you suggest that
• 17:54
  Speaker 2: somebody start documenting if they're ever in a situation like this.
• 17:59
  Speaker 3: Right now? Yeah. Like at the very, very.
• 18:02
  Speaker 2: Beginning, like the second the guy says, she goes, I'd
• 18:05
  Speaker 2: like you to sign this paper that tells you that
• 18:09
  Speaker 2: I just want one week of a chance.
• 18:12
  Speaker 3: One week, one week trial relationship, but it has to
• 18:14
  Speaker 3: be in good faith. You have to be a good
• 18:18
  Speaker 3: faith attempt. I mean, that sounds like a reality show
• 18:23
  Speaker 3: in and of itself.
• 18:24
  Speaker 2: Unbelievable.
• 18:25
  Speaker 3: Or you have to keep the baby. It's pretty remarkable.
• 18:28
  Speaker 3: But no, keep the receipts. That's the first thing that
• 18:31
  Speaker 3: any lawyer would tell you, right? Keep the receipts. Don't
• 18:34
  Speaker 3: delete messages. First time there's a red flag or anything
• 18:36
  Speaker 3: like that, you start recording. You find out when they're calling,
• 18:40
  Speaker 3: how often they're calling. Screenshot. Clayton did the right thing,
• 18:44
  Speaker 3: and it's made all the difference in this case. Because
• 18:46
  Speaker 3: when you read the emails, you read the text messages,
• 18:48
  Speaker 3: the story comes into a full picture.
• 18:51
  Speaker 2: Did the other guy.
• 18:54
  Speaker 3: A lot less. A lot less. In his case, it
• 18:58
  Speaker 3: got really aggressive and really serious, and there were rape
• 19:03
  Speaker 3: allegations and domestic violence allegations, and it really went pretty far.
• 19:07
  Speaker 3: But it wasn't until people were able to see this
• 19:12
  Speaker 3: pattern of behavior that you can make a determination. When
• 19:16
  Speaker 3: you're in court and a woman is in there saying,
• 19:19
  Speaker 3: I've been choked, or I am pregnant, here's my, here's
• 19:24
  Speaker 3: the sonogram of my baby and I'm a victim here. Everybody,
• 19:28
  Speaker 3: I think everybody's reasonable belief is to, is to trust
• 19:32
  Speaker 3: that person because who would come in and lie about that?
• 19:35
  Speaker 3: And so it's, and she was in court under oath
• 19:38
  Speaker 3: testifying to these things. And I don't blame any judge who,
• 19:42
  Speaker 3: who hears that, who listens to her statement and, and
• 19:44
  Speaker 3: sides with her. It's, you know, if you don't have
• 19:46
  Speaker 3: all the other information, you're just going off of that.
• 19:49
  Speaker 3: Of course, I think you'd defer to protecting someone in
• 19:52
  Speaker 3: that position.
• 19:53
  Speaker 2: When did the other guy come out of the woodwork
• 19:55
  Speaker 2: when he saw a public figure being faced with the
• 19:58
  Speaker 2: same situation?
• 20:00
  Speaker 3: The lawyer for Greg, when the story first broke about Clayton's,
• 20:07
  Speaker 3: one of the... I think the employees in his firm
• 20:13
  Speaker 3: showed him the story and said, look at this. Can
• 20:15
  Speaker 3: you believe, doesn't this remind you of, of our other case?
• 20:18
  Speaker 3: And he said, doesn't just remind me that's the same person.
• 20:22
  Speaker 3: And he put those together right away when it came in,
• 20:25
  Speaker 3: he reached out to Greg and they said, we, you know, we,
• 20:28
  Speaker 3: we know what the, what the, what the MO is
• 20:30
  Speaker 3: here and what Clayton's going to be in for. I mean, they,
• 20:33
  Speaker 3: they knew it was a battle and this is, It
• 20:35
  Speaker 3: was pretty incredible. And Clayton couldn't afford to bring him
• 20:38
  Speaker 3: in right away, right? It would have been pretty incredible
• 20:40
  Speaker 3: if he could have just got him in to help
• 20:42
  Speaker 3: with the case right from the beginning. But it wasn't
• 20:45
  Speaker 3: until they had the GoFundMe that he could actually hire him. Wow.
• 20:49
  Speaker 2: And then I also think that there was some communication
• 20:52
  Speaker 2: between Greg's girlfriend and Clayton via DM.
• 20:56
  Speaker 3: Yeah, that's the first person that reached out to Clayton.
• 20:59
  Speaker 3: So Greg's girlfriend sent him a message. He thought, okay,
• 21:03
  Speaker 3: now this is in some of his interviews, Clayton has said,
• 21:07
  Speaker 3: you know, a light bulb went off, right? This was
• 21:09
  Speaker 3: a moment that he thought, okay, now I'm pretty convinced
• 21:12
  Speaker 3: that this is a pattern of behavior and not just,
• 21:14
  Speaker 3: you know, I'm not alone in this battle. So he,
• 21:18
  Speaker 3: that she reached out to him first, then there was
• 21:21
  Speaker 3: some communication that he ended up talking to Greg and
• 21:23
  Speaker 3: they realized how similar these situations were.
• 21:37
  Speaker 2: Because Laura took a plea deal, do you think that
• 21:40
  Speaker 2: she'll have a lighter sentence? Is that an automatic thing usually?
• 21:44
  Speaker 3: She'll have a lighter sentence than if she is convicted
• 21:46
  Speaker 3: of 14 felonies after a trial and how horrendous her
• 21:52
  Speaker 3: behavior is. And good luck finding an impartial jury in
• 21:55
  Speaker 3: a case like that. I mean, it's pretty incredible. And look,
• 21:58
  Speaker 3: what she did was she pled to the four felonies
• 22:01
  Speaker 3: with probation on the table. And that's the most important
• 22:04
  Speaker 3: thing for her lawyer, for her, she has a chance
• 22:07
  Speaker 3: to argue for probation, meaning no prison time. A judge
• 22:11
  Speaker 3: can give her probation and up to 365 days in
• 22:15
  Speaker 3: county jail, but that's if the judge decides to give
• 22:18
  Speaker 3: her probation. If she's convicted of all these other felonies,
• 22:22
  Speaker 3: there's no way she's avoiding prison time. So at least
• 22:24
  Speaker 3: now she has a fighting shot. She can come in,
• 22:26
  Speaker 3: she can argue for probation. She has no prior criminal history.
• 22:30
  Speaker 3: And maybe there's I'm going to take a wild guess here.
• 22:34
  Speaker 3: Maybe there's some mental health issues that she's going through.
• 22:38
  Speaker 2: Wild guess.
• 22:40
  Speaker 3: Without knowing her personal situation, I feel pretty comfortable with that.
• 22:45
  Speaker 3: So they'll come in. They'll argue for all of those reasons.
• 22:49
  Speaker 3: It's better to have her get treatment or whatever it
• 22:52
  Speaker 3: might be. And so now she has a shot. But
• 22:55
  Speaker 3: it's hard to imagine her avoiding some present time here.
• 22:59
  Speaker 2: Her parents... aren't, say, involved, but she did live with
• 23:04
  Speaker 2: them during this time. Does that mean anything for them?
• 23:09
  Speaker 3: The family's been remarkably silent during this whole process. Her
• 23:12
  Speaker 3: dad's a public figure. He's a Radio Hall of Fame broadcaster.
• 23:17
  Speaker 2: Oh, okay.
• 23:18
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 23:18
  Speaker 2: Because when I typed in her name earlier just to
• 23:21
  Speaker 2: see a picture, it was like the daughter of so-and-so.
• 23:24
  Speaker 3: Right. He's a Radio Hall of Famer. He's a a
• 23:28
  Speaker 3: very well-known person in the Bay Area. And her mom
• 23:33
  Speaker 3: is a podcaster too. And they have just been very,
• 23:37
  Speaker 3: very quiet during this entire process. And whether that comes into,
• 23:44
  Speaker 3: can they be financially responsible for some of the things
• 23:46
  Speaker 3: that she's doing? That's a little bit of a leap
• 23:48
  Speaker 3: for these kinds of cases, but it doesn't mean that
• 23:50
  Speaker 3: they're not concerned about that. I mean, I certainly would be.
• 23:54
  Speaker 2: Do you see, I see Clayton has already won his
• 23:58
  Speaker 2: civil case against her back in 2024. Has Greg done anything?
• 24:03
  Speaker 2: Is Greg trying to seek justice in any way? Or
• 24:06
  Speaker 2: is there any other way that Clayton can?
• 24:08
  Speaker 3: Well, Greg is the victim in the criminal case, right?
• 24:11
  Speaker 3: So he is getting justice in terms of the criminal case.
• 24:16
  Speaker 3: There'll be a restitution order for him as well for
• 24:19
  Speaker 3: all the expenses that he's had to pay in defending himself.
• 24:21
  Speaker 3: So he is getting justice that way. But He's really tried,
• 24:24
  Speaker 3: I think, not to be involved in this litigation with her.
• 24:28
  Speaker 3: You know, not even, you know, as far as I
• 24:31
  Speaker 3: know right now, hasn't contested even the restraining order that
• 24:33
  Speaker 3: was filed against him. Because to do that, you would
• 24:35
  Speaker 3: have to go bring her back into court and be
• 24:38
  Speaker 3: in court with her again. And he's, I think he's
• 24:41
  Speaker 3: tried to keep his, just to try to stay away
• 24:44
  Speaker 3: from her as much as possible. But the district attorney's
• 24:46
  Speaker 3: office has handled that for him, thankfully. Yeah.
• 24:49
  Speaker 2: Anything else from a lawyer's point of view that you
• 24:52
  Speaker 2: think is super interesting about the case and worth putting
• 24:55
  Speaker 2: out there right now?
• 24:56
  Speaker 3: Besides everything about this, I mean, there are a couple
• 25:01
  Speaker 3: of things that I found interesting. The sheer volume of communications, right?
• 25:09
  Speaker 3: Hundreds and hundreds of text every day, 1, 2, 10, 20,
• 25:14
  Speaker 3: over time, probably thousands of messages that were sent. her
• 25:17
  Speaker 3: calling from 12 different phone numbers after he blocks her.
• 25:21
  Speaker 3: These are all things that we look for in a
• 25:22
  Speaker 3: restraining order. They're kind of black and white. I mean,
• 25:24
  Speaker 3: if you start calling somebody from 12 different numbers because
• 25:27
  Speaker 3: you've been blocked 11 times, that's telling you pretty quickly
• 25:30
  Speaker 3: that the person doesn't want to talk to you. So
• 25:33
  Speaker 3: that's enough in most restraining order cases to get it granted.
• 25:37
  Speaker 3: And so the sheer volume in and of itself is
• 25:40
  Speaker 3: pretty shocking. Another thing is she went after, right when
• 25:44
  Speaker 3: this started, he was her realtor. That's how this kind
• 25:47
  Speaker 3: of started. She reached out to him. She said she
• 25:49
  Speaker 3: was looking for some commercial property or investment property. And
• 25:53
  Speaker 3: it was his first ever client, right? He just got
• 25:57
  Speaker 3: his real estate license. Imagine your first day on the job, right?
• 26:00
  Speaker 3: Your very first client. I can't. And it turns into
• 26:03
  Speaker 3: this like, it's his very first client. He's thinking he's
• 26:06
  Speaker 3: going to get his very first sale. It gets crazy
• 26:08
  Speaker 3: just from the get-go. And then she goes after his
• 26:10
  Speaker 3: real estate license. And so she actually, for anybody that
• 26:13
  Speaker 3: has a professional license, any doctor, lawyer, real estate, whatever
• 26:17
  Speaker 3: you might be, nurse, teacher, somebody goes after your credential,
• 26:22
  Speaker 3: it's about as scary and terrifying as it gets, right?
• 26:24
  Speaker 3: You put so much time and energy and money and
• 26:26
  Speaker 3: resources into getting that license. And she went after his
• 26:30
  Speaker 3: real estate license right from the beginning and not really
• 26:33
  Speaker 3: set the tone for what she's capable of, right? If
• 26:35
  Speaker 3: she's willing to go after your career right off the bat,
• 26:38
  Speaker 3: she's willing to go anywhere. So I found that to
• 26:40
  Speaker 3: be you know, terrifying.
• 26:43
  Speaker 2: She obviously set this networking date up because he was
• 26:47
  Speaker 2: the bachelor too. And there has been findings now that
• 26:50
  Speaker 2: she had been a viewer.
• 26:53
  Speaker 3: Yeah. She's, she, his like profile photo on LinkedIn or
• 26:57
  Speaker 3: whatever it might be was his bachelor photo. Right. So
• 27:00
  Speaker 3: it's not as if there's a big secret to who
• 27:02
  Speaker 3: he was. I mean, his bachelor photo was, was his
• 27:05
  Speaker 3: LinkedIn profile. So, you know, she was, she sought him out.
• 27:08
  Speaker 3: She reached out to him, She said, you know, let's,
• 27:12
  Speaker 3: can you help me with this? I know that you're
• 27:13
  Speaker 3: in this profession. So it's very, it's not that they
• 27:16
  Speaker 3: met on the street, you know, at her bar or
• 27:18
  Speaker 3: something like that. I mean, he, she sought him out. So,
• 27:21
  Speaker 3: you know, this is, this is definitely a plan they had.
• 27:25
  Speaker 3: There's also some, some interesting things that have, that have
• 27:28
  Speaker 3: happened throughout. I just want to talk briefly about the
• 27:30
  Speaker 3: difference between having an attorney versus not having an attorney.
• 27:34
  Speaker 3: He had two back-to-back hearings. He had written the restraining order.
• 27:38
  Speaker 3: He tried to go in on, When on his own
• 27:41
  Speaker 3: restraining order without an attorney, the judge gave him a
• 27:45
  Speaker 3: week to get counsel. The next day he was in
• 27:48
  Speaker 3: court on her restraining order against him. He goes unrepresented
• 27:52
  Speaker 3: pro se and just doesn't understand what the judge is
• 27:57
  Speaker 3: asking for. Right. She had an attorney. He didn't. What
• 28:00
  Speaker 3: the what the judge is asking for, what kinds of
• 28:02
  Speaker 3: questions to ask. And he ends up losing that with
• 28:05
  Speaker 3: all this rage. avalanche of evidence and all of these
• 28:08
  Speaker 3: messages and all these emails and this clear behavior, he
• 28:11
  Speaker 3: loses that hearing. It's a difference between having a lawyer
• 28:14
  Speaker 3: and not having a lawyer. And the next time he
• 28:17
  Speaker 3: went into court for his restraining order, he had done
• 28:19
  Speaker 3: the crowdfunding. He has his own lawyer. Not only does
• 28:22
  Speaker 3: he win the restraining order, but the lawyer he had hired,
• 28:26
  Speaker 3: she comes in and grills Laura on cross-examination. And part
• 28:31
  Speaker 3: of that testimony is what's used to convict her later on.
• 28:33
  Speaker 3: So it's between him losing and her being convicted of
• 28:36
  Speaker 3: a crime later on was the difference between having a
• 28:39
  Speaker 3: lawyer and not having a lawyer. And it's just, you know,
• 28:41
  Speaker 3: even when the facts are stacked in your favor, it just,
• 28:47
  Speaker 3: it was so clear to watch it. And it's just unfortunate, right?
• 28:49
  Speaker 3: Because not everybody can afford to have counsel in restraining
• 28:52
  Speaker 3: order hearings. You're not entitled to a public defender. And
• 28:55
  Speaker 3: so you have to pay for your own attorneys and
• 28:56
  Speaker 3: think how many people are out there getting restraining orders
• 28:59
  Speaker 3: filed against them. They can't hire a lawyer. They walk in,
• 29:02
  Speaker 3: they've never been in a courtroom before. They don't know
• 29:04
  Speaker 3: what to say or do. And they're going up against
• 29:06
  Speaker 3: a buzzsaw. And, you know, even the wackiest, most outrageous
• 29:10
  Speaker 3: kinds of cases can lead to, you know, restraining orders,
• 29:13
  Speaker 3: loss of your rights, whatever it might be. So it
• 29:15
  Speaker 3: was tough to see, but I'm glad that, you know,
• 29:18
  Speaker 3: the truth came out.
• 29:19
  Speaker 2: Ryan, you just made me feel so much better about
• 29:22
  Speaker 2: paying my lawyer bill yesterday because it was hefty. And
• 29:26
  Speaker 2: that's just a contract. That's just an entertainment contract, lawyer.
• 29:29
  Speaker 2: But thank you. Thank you for making me feel better.
• 29:33
  Speaker 2: All right. Well, thank you so much for joining us.
• 29:35
  Speaker 2: This was fascinating. And if you guys are observant, with this,
• 29:40
  Speaker 2: make sure to go listen to Clayton's podcast. Love trapped.
• 29:46
  Speaker 2: Go listen to Love Trapped. It's wherever you find podcasts.
• 29:49
  Speaker 2: We're very happy for him for getting vindication on all
• 29:53
  Speaker 2: of this, justice, and then also a hit podcast. So,
• 29:57
  Speaker 2: and Ryan, thank you so much for your expertise. It
• 29:59
  Speaker 2: really did clarify some things.
• 30:01
  Speaker 3: You're welcome, Ashley, anytime.
• 30:02
  Speaker 2: All right, see ya.
• 30:04
  Speaker 1: Bye.
• 30:04
  Speaker 2: Until next time, guys, I've been Ashley. Toodaloo.
• 30:09
  Speaker 1: Follow the Ben and Ashley Eye Almost Famous Podcast on
• 30:12
  Speaker 1: iHeartRadio or subscribe wherever you listen to podcasts.