Speaker 1: After months of avoiding accountability, Laura Owens was finally required
Speaker 1: to answer some questions.
Speaker 2: I'm going to remind you again that you're not really
Speaker 2: supposed to be dishonest in depositions.
Speaker 3: I'm well aware.
Speaker 1: On March first, twenty twenty four, Laura sat for a deposition.
Speaker 1: The audio you're going to hear in this episode hasn't
Speaker 1: been made public before. On the other side of the
Speaker 1: desk was Greg Woodnick, the lawyer who two years earlier
Speaker 1: she'd accused of orchestrating her alleged rape. Wouldn'tick had some
Speaker 1: basic questions about Laura's alleged pregnancy with Clayton Eckerd's twins.
Speaker 2: You're under oath? Are you just going to deny that
Speaker 2: you ever sent this email yesterday?
Speaker 1: Wouldn'tick had come prepared to hold Laura's feet to the fire.
Speaker 2: At what point were you going to tell my office
Speaker 2: or your own attorney that you doctored a medical record.
Speaker 1: The story had been a viral sensation for months, not
Speaker 1: because people thought Clayton was the father, but because people
Speaker 1: thought Laura was lying.
Speaker 2: You knew the world because this is national news. You
Speaker 2: knew the world thought you were bullshitting the pregnancy right,
Speaker 2: there's articles about it. Correct.
Speaker 3: Yes, Clayton has been very persuasive.
Speaker 1: In the deposition. Laura's story would change dramatically once again,
Speaker 1: but this time it was under oath. I'm Stephanie Young.
Speaker 1: This is love trapped.
Speaker 2: There's no way. You'd better believe.
Speaker 4: I'll be raising the hellless if you ever, ever, ever,
Speaker 4: ever tratic.
Speaker 1: By December twenty twenty three, Laura Owens would be seven
Speaker 1: months pregnant. She'd been barred from communicating directly with Clayton,
Speaker 1: but he was bracing for her next move because she
Speaker 1: still had an active paternity case in the Arizona family
Speaker 1: court system.
Speaker 5: I ended up getting a notification that the family court
Speaker 5: case that Laura had opened against me was going inactive,
Speaker 5: which eventually meant if nothing elsewhere to be filed, it
Speaker 5: would be closed completely.
Speaker 1: This happened because Laura and her attorney hadn't followed up
Speaker 1: with the filing. The paternity suit that she'd originally brought
Speaker 1: to the tabloids would be closed entirely without a resolution.
Speaker 2: It wasn't necessarily surprising that she went quiet. We obviously
Speaker 2: suspected exactly what it was, and that was the facts
Speaker 2: in the line with her legal position, and she didn't
Speaker 2: know what to do, and we at this point had
Speaker 2: had a good amount of experience with her.
Speaker 1: But it left a big question. Was she still claiming
Speaker 1: to be pregnant? The last time she'd answered this question
Speaker 1: under oath was about a month prior.
Speaker 6: And how along are you as you stay here today
Speaker 6: with respect the pregnancy?
Speaker 3: I am twenty four weeks a long.
Speaker 1: In Arizona, a pregnancy loss after twenty weeks is legally
Speaker 1: a stillbirth, which would require the heavy step of filing
Speaker 1: fetal death certificates within seven days, which Laura hadn't done.
Speaker 1: So if she claimed a pregnancy loss now, the math
Speaker 1: wouldn't add up. She'd already testified to being twenty four
Speaker 1: weeks along, and now if the paternity suit went inactive,
Speaker 1: there would be no closure, no proof of what happened
Speaker 1: to Laura's alleged pregnancy.
Speaker 5: That didn't sit right with me. I felt it was
Speaker 5: very unfair that she got to make a false accusation
Speaker 5: against me and get away with it without any repercussions.
Speaker 1: Clayton felt strongly about this, so he called Woodnick.
Speaker 5: I said, Hey, this case is going in active here soon,
Speaker 5: and I'm not okay with that. I would like to
Speaker 5: file something to have her prove that she was pregnant,
Speaker 5: because she won't be able to.
Speaker 2: Can we do that?
Speaker 1: Actually, there were a couple things they could do. First,
Speaker 1: they filed a motion to establish non paternity. That means
Speaker 1: that Clayton wanted a court record saying he was not
Speaker 1: the father. Here's one of Woodnick's associates on the case,
Speaker 1: Isabelle Ranny.
Speaker 7: If you have a paternal DNA test that says he's
Speaker 7: the father, then he's the father. But we had none
Speaker 7: of that, and because of this fictitious filing, he was
Speaker 7: entitled to a determination that he was never the father.
Speaker 2: So we notified the court that hey, we're here and
Speaker 2: we're doing this and we need a hearing.
Speaker 1: Two years earlier, Isabelle worked on Greg Gillespie's case with Woodnick.
Speaker 1: Greg was another man Laura claimed had impregnated her with twins.
Speaker 1: Isabelle decided to try and anticipate Laura's next move.
Speaker 8: At that point, we were very familiar with her pattern
Speaker 8: and we knew that she was going to either claim
Speaker 8: abortion or miscarriage, or maybe she was going to allege
Speaker 8: that there was another assault on her that my boss.
Speaker 3: Was involved in.
Speaker 1: After what would Nick had seen on Greg's case, he
Speaker 1: felt like Laura was capable of anything, so he signed
Speaker 1: Clayton up for something called the Putative Father's Registry. It's
Speaker 1: a little known state registry that protects the parental rights
Speaker 1: of unmarried biological fathers, notifying them if their child is
Speaker 1: being placed for adoption.
Speaker 2: We decided to notify the Putative Father's Registry about Clayton,
Speaker 2: not because we thought Laura was pregnant. We didn't, but
Speaker 2: Laura was claiming she was pregnant. What we didn't want
Speaker 2: Laura to do was what we were anticipating, which was
Speaker 2: claim I had the Bachelor's babies and I put them
Speaker 2: up for adoption.
Speaker 1: Clayton didn't know what her next move would be, but
Speaker 1: with wood Nick on his team, he finally felt like
Speaker 1: they had a chance to prove the truth in court.
Speaker 5: I need to hold this woman accountable. I'm tired of
Speaker 5: people stepping all over me and shitting on my reputation.
Speaker 5: It's time that I fight back. And I had heard
Speaker 5: that somebody wasn't too happy, and certainly wasn't expecting that
Speaker 5: to be filed. And this was like the fire that
Speaker 5: really was lit under my ass where I was like,
Speaker 5: I don't deserve this, Like I'm a good person. I'm
Speaker 5: not perfect, but i am not a monster, and I'm
Speaker 5: tired of this bullshit.
Speaker 2: It's time to fight fire with fire.
Speaker 1: He wanted an explanation. She claimed in court to be
Speaker 1: twenty four weeks pregnant. She couldn't act like that never happened.
Speaker 1: But on December twenty eighth, she tried. Dave Neil broke
Speaker 1: the news.
Speaker 9: Ladies and gentlemen of Bachelor Nation, we have breaking news
Speaker 9: to present to you right now, an absolutely wild day
Speaker 9: in Bachelor Nation. A source claims she is no longer
Speaker 9: pregnant and is trying to get her case dismissed that
Speaker 9: she has in family.
Speaker 1: Court, Laura filed to dismiss the paternity case, and in
Speaker 1: the filing she claimed she was quote no longer pregnant,
Speaker 1: with no explanation. Did she have the babies? Did she
Speaker 1: have a twin stillbirth? She didn't say. All she said
Speaker 1: in the filing is that she was no longer pregnant
Speaker 1: and therefore asked the courts to dismiss the paternity case.
Speaker 1: But Clayton and Woodnick weren't about to let it end there,
Speaker 1: it was Clayton's turn to go nuclear, and he took it.
Speaker 1: He still had the right to have his portion of
Speaker 1: the case adjudicated established that he was never the father.
Speaker 1: Clayton and Woodnick wanted to go even further to prove
Speaker 1: in court that Laura was never pregnant by Clayton Eckert,
Speaker 1: that she'd been acting in bad faith. An evidentiary hearing
Speaker 1: was scheduled to settle it. That meant the case went
Speaker 1: into legal discovery.
Speaker 2: In Arizona, we've got discovery rules and we've got disclosure
Speaker 2: rules that require each side to give the other side
Speaker 2: all of their information.
Speaker 1: For the first time, Laura's pregnancy would be on trial.
Speaker 1: Prior to this, all their hearings had been focused on
Speaker 1: restraining orders and allegations of harassment. This time the judge
Speaker 1: would be ruling on if Laura was actually pregnant. All
Speaker 1: of her medical records could be subpoenaed as part of discovery,
Speaker 1: and there was another tool in the toolbox, depositions, where
Speaker 1: both Clayton and Laura would be required by the courts
Speaker 1: to give a sworn testimony.
Speaker 2: We try to gather data in cases without demas positions
Speaker 2: in this case, I think it was very necessary.
Speaker 1: Clayton's deposition was scheduled first on February second, twenty twenty four.
Speaker 1: He showed up to Laura's attorney's office. He expected it
Speaker 1: to just be him, wood Nick and Laura's attorney, But
Speaker 1: to his surprise.
Speaker 5: I show up and she's there. But not only is
Speaker 5: she there, She's there with a laptop. She's taking notes
Speaker 5: while I'm talking. We had somebody there transcribing the whole thing.
Speaker 5: All of my words were being documented.
Speaker 1: As you can imagine, this rubbed Clayton the wrong way.
Speaker 1: Why was Laura there if she had an order of
Speaker 1: protection against him?
Speaker 5: Because it was a legal matter, she could. But if
Speaker 5: you were so in fear for your own safety, why
Speaker 5: would you show up.
Speaker 1: Clayton's patience was clearly running thin. He wasn't even trying
Speaker 1: to hide his annoyance once the questioning got underway. Here's
Speaker 1: a clip from Clayton's deposition.
Speaker 10: Did you recently state during your podcast that the real
Speaker 10: reason you asked her to come over was so that
Speaker 10: you could have her conduct a pregnancy test.
Speaker 2: Of your own.
Speaker 10: That was the other part of it in front of you?
Speaker 2: Presumably yes, although she would not be in front of me,
Speaker 2: but yes, understood.
Speaker 10: And did you purchase that pregnancy test?
Speaker 2: I did, And let's call it an ACG test because
Speaker 2: we know that she was never pregnant.
Speaker 10: Well on the box, did it indicate that it was
Speaker 10: a pregnancy test?
Speaker 5: Sure, I guess that's what they marketed as for people
Speaker 5: that are actually truthful and take these tests and don't lie.
Speaker 1: Laura's attorney then asked Clayton if he thought Laura was
Speaker 1: actually pregnant when the test came back positive. Clayton's side
Speaker 1: of the story stayed the same as it's been since
Speaker 1: the very beginning.
Speaker 2: I had a moment of disbelief.
Speaker 5: But yeah, at that moment, I thought maybe she had
Speaker 5: actually successfully trapped me by in submitting herself.
Speaker 2: That was my belief.
Speaker 1: The questioning didn't stop at the pregnancy test. The deposition
Speaker 1: then took a turn into what actually happened or didn't
Speaker 1: happen between them that night.
Speaker 10: Why wasn't their intercourse between you and the songs?
Speaker 5: Because she said she didn't want to Sorry, I said, okay,
Speaker 5: I respected that.
Speaker 2: I didn't push it.
Speaker 1: In this podcast, you've heard Clayton's story, and you've heard
Speaker 1: bits and pieces of Laura's side, but before she went
Speaker 1: under oath, she made one more move. Here's Woodnick.
Speaker 2: I read it and my eyes bugged out, and Clayton's
Speaker 2: on the phone with me, and I'm like, this is
Speaker 2: weird to me. This feels like extortion. I want to
Speaker 2: say to business days before the deposition. Clayton got the letter.
Speaker 1: Two days before Laura was scheduled to sit for her deposition.
Speaker 1: She sent Clayton a letter. Technically, she sent it to
Speaker 1: Woodnick because she's legally not allowed.
Speaker 3: To communicate with Clayton.
Speaker 1: The subject line read comprehensive legal Notice of intent to
Speaker 1: sue for breaches of contractual and fiduciary duties. Laura was
Speaker 1: planning to sue for over one million dollars.
Speaker 5: When you get a letter from somebody saying I will
Speaker 5: sue you for one point four million, and that is
Speaker 5: a little nerve wracking to get that email and go
Speaker 5: is this person bluffing or are they legit? And do
Speaker 5: they have a case.
Speaker 1: Remember back in episode one, when Clayton first met Laura
Speaker 1: as a real estate client, he told her he wrote offers,
Speaker 1: but he didn't actually send the contracts. Well, Laura was
Speaker 1: dredging that backup and threatening to sue him for one
Speaker 1: point four million dollars over the unsent offers. Her demand
Speaker 1: letter had one stipulation. Laura would agree not to pursue
Speaker 1: immediate litigation if Clayton dropped the family court case to
Speaker 1: prove non paternity, and any future legal actions against each
Speaker 1: other for any claims. Here's Woodnick, it.
Speaker 2: Might have been the first time I read something and
Speaker 2: I knew the damage that chat GPT could cause.
Speaker 1: In her deposition, Laura would admit that chat GPT helped
Speaker 1: her write this demand letter, but it also.
Speaker 2: Had some Laura elements to it. It was just kind
Speaker 2: of like that eleventh hour thing that she would do.
Speaker 1: On Woodnick's advice, Clayton ignored the letter.
Speaker 2: Clayton didn't ruin her life financially because they met for
Speaker 2: a weekend. She blew him twice, and then he decided
Speaker 2: he probably made a mistake and he shouldn't be dealing
Speaker 2: with real estate with her, and he tried to distance
Speaker 2: himself professionally. That didn't cause her financial downfall. Everything she
Speaker 2: did causes her financial downfall, but it had nothing to
Speaker 2: do with Clayton. And then to turn around and say, hey, Clayton,
Speaker 2: I'll walk away from suing you for a one point
Speaker 2: four million dollars in exchange for something else. Was like laughable,
Speaker 2: and we laughed.
Speaker 1: Laura's deposition was scheduled for eight am on March first.
Speaker 1: This was the moment where she would have to answer
Speaker 1: for everything related to the alleged pregnancy on the record.
Speaker 1: Greg wood Nick was ready.
Speaker 2: It's in my office in Phoenix, and videographer and a
Speaker 2: court reporter. And she showed up and I had my associate,
Speaker 2: Isabelle with me, and Isabelle's job was to control the
Speaker 2: media and the exhibits.
Speaker 1: Even though Laura showed up for Clayton's, he had no
Speaker 1: intention of showing.
Speaker 3: Up for hers.
Speaker 5: For me, showing up would show that like she had
Speaker 5: me caught up, like I can't do anything else right now.
Speaker 5: I was like, no, no, no, I want my life to
Speaker 5: look like this little thing. Oh okay, I'll come in
Speaker 5: from my deposition, but for hers, forget it.
Speaker 2: You know you're not gonna catch me there, But you
Speaker 2: raised your right hand with me.
Speaker 1: Laura was sworn in and the deposition got underway.
Speaker 2: Do you solemnly swear or from a testimony you're about
Speaker 2: to be able to be the truthful truth and nothing
Speaker 2: but the truth.
Speaker 3: Yes, thank you.
Speaker 1: Wouldn't. It started out with the question not about her
Speaker 1: alleged pregnancy, but about The Bachelor. In his discovery, he'd
Speaker 1: gained access to hundreds of emails and texts between Laura
Speaker 1: and Clayton. When Laura had first met Clayton, she admitted
Speaker 1: to him in a text quote, I know you were
Speaker 1: the Bachelor, but I don't watch the show.
Speaker 2: Sorry, you completed an application for the Bachelor or Bachelorette?
Speaker 2: Yes or no?
Speaker 6: I don't know if I complained it. I know I
Speaker 6: shot a video, but I think it has multiple.
Speaker 3: Parts that I didn't do.
Speaker 1: Laura admitted that she started an application to go on
Speaker 1: the show. We don't know for which franchise, but it
Speaker 1: stands to reason that if she was applying, she'd probably
Speaker 1: watched the show before. My reporting uncovered a second, even
Speaker 1: more glaring contradiction to her statement that she didn't watch
Speaker 1: The Bachelor. This twenty fourteen clip is from her father's
Speaker 1: radio show.
Speaker 11: So as I said more than once Ron Owens Kgo Radio,
Speaker 11: I live in a house.
Speaker 2: Well it's an estrogen house.
Speaker 5: I've got two daughters, I've got a wife and so
Speaker 5: the Bachelor is something that has never missed.
Speaker 2: In our home.
Speaker 1: Wouldn't it continue the deposition moving onto the striking parallels
Speaker 1: between Clayton's case and Greg Gillespie's.
Speaker 2: Just to be clear, you suggested to Greg Gillespie that
Speaker 2: you would get an abortion if he agreed to date you.
Speaker 6: I didn't suggest it, It was more. I mean he originally
Speaker 6: had suggested it.
Speaker 2: Laura, that's the exact same thing that you did with Clayton. Correct.
Speaker 1: No, I will remind you here that In an email
Speaker 1: to Clayton on June twenty fifth, twenty twenty three, Laura wrote, quote,
Speaker 1: I will not consider an abortion if you don't want
Speaker 1: to date and see if God brought us together for
Speaker 1: a reason. Then again, on July first, Laura states in
Speaker 1: an email, you can't say you haven't been given a
Speaker 1: voice when I have told you that I will have
Speaker 1: an abortion if we try things out for a few
Speaker 1: weeks and have a good reason for aborting a child.
Speaker 1: Wouldn't it pressed her on this?
Speaker 2: You didn't ask Clayton to continue dating you and discuss
Speaker 2: abortion with him if he continued dating you.
Speaker 6: I said, I want us to make the decision together
Speaker 6: and to spend two weeks together.
Speaker 2: Which is Clayton, date me for two weeks.
Speaker 3: I've wanted, But it's not date me and I'll have
Speaker 3: an abortion.
Speaker 2: Well, that's exactly what it is. That's what you said
Speaker 2: in an email.
Speaker 6: Now, it wasn't sat me and I'll have an abortion.
Speaker 6: It was I wanted to figure out how he would
Speaker 6: be as a father.
Speaker 2: And you don't think that that email is eerily similar
Speaker 2: to what you just discussed sending to Greg Lespie.
Speaker 3: Now, I think the situations were very different, wouldn't it?
Speaker 1: Then turns to the ultrasound video Laura email Clayton.
Speaker 2: The still that I'm showing you is dated September fifth,
Speaker 2: twenty twenty three. That says it's from SMILE. Do you
Speaker 2: see that?
Speaker 1: Yes, SMILE refers to Southwest Medical Imaging, a medical practice
Speaker 1: that does ultrasounds in Arizona. You'll be hearing that name
Speaker 1: often when it comes to Laura's ultrasounds. Wouldn't it pulled
Speaker 1: up the ultrasound video she'd send.
Speaker 2: Okay, is this yours?
Speaker 3: This is not mine?
Speaker 2: Hey, on for a second, this is an email from
Speaker 2: you to Clayton. Correct. Yes, you sent Clayton an email
Speaker 2: on October six, twenty twenty three. Correct. Correct, And you
Speaker 2: said here is my one hundred million percent real video
Speaker 2: and then you attached a video? Correct, yes or no?
Speaker 3: That's my email?
Speaker 2: I truly don't, Laura, does it have your name on it?
Speaker 3: It has my name on it. I don't even see
Speaker 3: what email across it's from.
Speaker 2: Hang on for a second, and I'm going to remind
Speaker 2: you again that you're not really supposed to be dishonest
Speaker 2: if depositions.
Speaker 3: I'm well aware.
Speaker 2: If you pulled up your Scent account and you looked
Speaker 2: at October sixth, twenty twenty three in an email Exchangel Clayton,
Speaker 2: and you saw in your sent account that you attached
Speaker 2: this ultrasound image, you would agree you sent it then? Correct.
Speaker 3: I'm positive I did not send this ultra sound video?
Speaker 2: Is this ultrasound yours?
Speaker 3: It is not my ultrasound? It says it's from Smile,
Speaker 3: but it wasn't the same date. It wasn't the same date.
Speaker 6: I was asked the same question by Dave Neil if
Speaker 6: this was mine, and I never when he was trying
Speaker 6: to think he could trap me, and I've never said this.
Speaker 2: Was mine, Laura, whose is this?
Speaker 3: It's not mine?
Speaker 2: But in October. Is your suggestion that Clayton, like Greg,
Speaker 2: faked an ultrasound.
Speaker 3: I'm not saying that.
Speaker 6: I'm saying that people have commented online that my passwords
Speaker 6: have not been changed in more than three years on discord,
Speaker 6: and I.
Speaker 3: Don't know what has happened.
Speaker 2: With my Laura, you're email, you're under oath? Are you
Speaker 2: just going to deny that you ever sent this email yesterday?
Speaker 2: Think you bat it? Is it yours or not?
Speaker 3: This is not my ultrasound?
Speaker 2: No, okay?
Speaker 1: To recap, Laura now claims the ultrasound video she emailed
Speaker 1: Clayton wasn't hers. She also claims she never sent the
Speaker 1: email at all, even though she'd emailed Clayton on the
Speaker 1: same day before and after this from the same email account.
Speaker 1: Then Wouldn'tick asked about the inconsistencies on the ultrasound.
Speaker 2: Exhibit number nine is from Scottsdale Medical Labs. This is
Speaker 2: an ultrasound dated July seven, twenty twenty three. Yes, okay.
Speaker 2: Is that your name on the top and your birthdate
Speaker 2: next to it?
Speaker 3: That is my name and birthday?
Speaker 2: Yess okay? And this is the ultrasound that you received
Speaker 2: at Smile that was presented in the prior proceedings.
Speaker 6: Correct, Yes it was, it was, but this was actually
Speaker 6: a plan Parenthood.
Speaker 2: Okay, I'm gonna make sure I clarify that. Let's start
Speaker 2: off with the basics. On exhibit nine, is this your ultrasound? Yes? Okay.
Speaker 2: Did you go into a smile facility because it is
Speaker 2: your mark smile to get this ultrasound?
Speaker 3: I did not.
Speaker 2: Okay, where did you get this ultrasound?
Speaker 3: Plain Parenthood and Mission Vieh?
Speaker 2: Okay, so I don't know Mission Vieh. Well, but is
Speaker 2: what you're suggesting that Scottsdale Medical Imaging has a branch
Speaker 2: in Mission Villehill, California. No, I'm totally confused here. I'll
Speaker 2: give you a chance just to explain how there's a
Speaker 2: Scottsdale Medical Imaging ultrasound that you claim came from Mission Villehle, California.
Speaker 3: There's not.
Speaker 6: This was actually taken and this was taken in Mission Vieho.
Speaker 3: This was not taken out smile.
Speaker 2: Why does it say smile on it?
Speaker 6: I did change the top of that from plane Parenthood
Speaker 6: to smile because I didn't want him to contact a
Speaker 6: Doctorate's all.
Speaker 2: Right, I'm showing you real clearly an ultrasound image that
Speaker 2: you are admitting to having changed information on. Is that true?
Speaker 3: Just the top left?
Speaker 1: Yes, this was a jaw dropping moment. Under oath, Laura
Speaker 1: admitted to doctoring a medical record. She says she's changed
Speaker 1: the name of the doctor's office, and that's it. But
Speaker 1: her admission opens up a world of possibilities. If she
Speaker 1: altered this, did she alter anything else? Now her credibility
Speaker 1: and the credibility of her ultrasounds was in question. The
Speaker 1: significance of this admission wasn't lost on Woodnick.
Speaker 2: Other than changing the word smile on that exhibit. Did
Speaker 2: you change anything?
Speaker 12: No?
Speaker 2: All right, Laura, I'm going to give you an opportunity now,
Speaker 2: because you're three years into this and a year into
Speaker 2: this case. Is this the only document you've altered? Yes,
Speaker 2: So every exhibit in this entire history of Famed, of
Speaker 2: our position, which is feigned pregnancies. The only document that
Speaker 2: you're acknowledging having touched the arts and crafts is CE
Speaker 2: zero one eighty three marked for today's deposition is exhibit
Speaker 2: number nine.
Speaker 6: Yes, this is the only This is the only one.
Speaker 6: And I would hope that the fact that I'm admitting
Speaker 6: that would mean something.
Speaker 2: Well, it means that you lied in an exhibit. You
Speaker 2: understand that. So this is where we go back to
Speaker 2: this issue of you being able to plead the fifth
Speaker 2: You acknowledge you had a medical document that you changed,
Speaker 2: and you're telling me right now that's the only one
Speaker 2: that I have to think about. Yes, okay, what software
Speaker 2: did you used to change it?
Speaker 3: Adobe? Acrobat?
Speaker 2: At what point were you going to tell my office
Speaker 2: or your own attorney that you doctored a medical record?
Speaker 3: I mean, as I said, it's my ultrasound, it is
Speaker 3: my sound.
Speaker 1: Wouldn't it pressed her further? And it seems like Laura
Speaker 1: got caught in her own lie.
Speaker 2: How many sonograms have you had for this alleged pregnancy one?
Speaker 2: Where was it?
Speaker 3: Plan? Hearent hook mission via hip?
Speaker 2: If I were to want the original source of the sonogram,
Speaker 2: the only sonogram you took in a six or seven
Speaker 2: month pregnancy, I could only get it from the source
Speaker 2: at mission Viejo planm parenthot.
Speaker 3: Yeah, and I did go ononymously.
Speaker 2: Oh so if I issue a subpoena to them, because
Speaker 2: you're going to sign a consent when we bring this
Speaker 2: to Judge Motts's attention, they're not going to know it
Speaker 2: was you that was there.
Speaker 3: I self paid. I mean, I don't know.
Speaker 2: Okay, So I'm going to give you an opportunity again
Speaker 2: because you've got statements under the oath that we're about
Speaker 2: to get to from the prior proceedings. You do not
Speaker 2: have to answer my questions. You can always plead the fifth.
Speaker 2: Your testimony now is that the sonograms that I just
Speaker 2: presented to you are not your correct.
Speaker 3: The one sonogram was mine.
Speaker 2: And it came from Mission Viejo. But Mission Vieho's not
Speaker 2: gonna have any idea it was you because you did
Speaker 2: it anonymously. But then you went back and you added
Speaker 2: your name to it.
Speaker 6: No, I didn't have my name to it. My name
Speaker 6: was on it. I okay, changed the Smile thing. Your
Speaker 6: name was on it, and I changed Smile. I hang
Speaker 6: on for a second.
Speaker 2: You just told me, Laura that you were anonymous at
Speaker 2: Planned Parenthood.
Speaker 3: But I changed Smile on there.
Speaker 2: So when I get the subpoena where the records release
Speaker 2: from Smile, this isn't going to be there because they
Speaker 2: didn't do this test, correct, because you just put their
Speaker 2: name on the test.
Speaker 3: Correct.
Speaker 2: Okay. This test, according to you, was originated in California. Correct,
Speaker 2: And you went in there anonymously.
Speaker 3: Correct?
Speaker 6: And I yeah, I added my name in the in
Speaker 6: the facility name.
Speaker 2: Okay, so we're changing your testimony. So it's not just
Speaker 2: that you You originally said you just changed and added
Speaker 2: the word smile, but now under oath you're saying you
Speaker 2: added your name to it too. Correct.
Speaker 3: Correct.
Speaker 1: Now she was admitting to another photoshopping edit she'd made
Speaker 1: on the ultrasound.
Speaker 2: When you submit records to a court, you understand that
Speaker 2: you're signing a verification with them and that there's an
Speaker 2: expectation of honesty.
Speaker 3: Yes, and I don't believe this was ever submitted to Quirk.
Speaker 1: Once Laura admitted to altering it, the damage was already done.
Speaker 2: You understand what people may think you're lying about this
Speaker 2: exhibit number nine, right, Yeah, let's move on.
Speaker 1: Then the deposition turned to the big question what happened
Speaker 1: to Laura's pregnancy? If you remember, she'd told the courts
Speaker 1: into December filing that she was quote no longer pregnant.
Speaker 1: Here's Isabelle Ranny would nix legal associate.
Speaker 11: Okay, so does that mean she was never pregnant? Does
Speaker 11: that mean she miscarried? Does that mean she had the baby,
Speaker 11: and where's the fetal death certificate?
Speaker 3: What does that mean?
Speaker 1: Just a warning to listeners here, the Position is about
Speaker 1: to go into graphic detail about Laura's alleged pregnancy loss.
Speaker 1: In January, Laura submitted another filing with a single line
Speaker 1: stating that she'd miscarried the pregnancy.
Speaker 11: There's no other information given, but it just says she miscarried.
Speaker 1: Wouldn't It had to press her on this because, as
Speaker 1: we've said before, Laura had previously admitted under oath to
Speaker 1: being twenty four weeks pregnant.
Speaker 11: So if you're past twenty weeks, or if the fetus
Speaker 11: is under a certain amount of grams, you do have
Speaker 11: to file a fetal death certificate, and I believe you
Speaker 11: have seven days to do that.
Speaker 1: This was a huge inconsistency that Laura couldn't explain away.
Speaker 1: If there were actually babies, it wouldn't be a miscarriage,
Speaker 1: it would be a stillbirth, and legally there had to
Speaker 1: be a paper trail like death certificates and presumably hospital records.
Speaker 1: But instead of producing medical records, Laura came to the
Speaker 1: deposition with a whole new timeline.
Speaker 2: I'm going to move you to exhibit number fifty six.
Speaker 2: This is the mom doc records correct?
Speaker 3: Correct?
Speaker 2: And that was on November fourteenth? Yes, okay? What did
Speaker 2: you find out on November fourteenth.
Speaker 3: In this exhibit that I was no longer pregnant?
Speaker 2: Okay? And you claim you had your miscarriage somewhere between
Speaker 2: twenty and twenty three weeks correct.
Speaker 3: I don't know quite when the miscarriage was.
Speaker 2: Well, at some point your body discharged something if you
Speaker 2: were actually pregnant, correct? Yes, when did that happen?
Speaker 6: I was having spotting on and off throughout, which is
Speaker 6: why I ended up going in.
Speaker 2: The getting When was the flood level? When was the
Speaker 2: first time you had spotting during your pregnancy?
Speaker 3: I think it was August or September. I didn't an
Speaker 3: online doctor's visit.
Speaker 1: An online doctor's visit. Laura claimed that when she started
Speaker 1: bleeding during her high risk twin pregnancy, she didn't go
Speaker 1: in person to the hospital or a doctor's office. She
Speaker 1: made a telehealth appointment and adopted a weight and see attitude.
Speaker 1: Wouldn't it wanted to know exactly what this online doctor
Speaker 1: told her. Laura's answer was vague.
Speaker 2: Would you tell him?
Speaker 6: I told him I was having very light spotting, and
Speaker 6: they said it probably was nothing to worry about.
Speaker 2: And was this a gynecologist or was this some nurse
Speaker 2: on call?
Speaker 3: It was.
Speaker 6: It was technically a gin ofcologist, but it was an online.
Speaker 2: Doctor, okay. And he did not tell you to go
Speaker 2: get an ultrasound and get checked.
Speaker 6: He said if I was concerned, that I could, but
Speaker 6: he thought it was probably fine as monitorrific all work.
Speaker 2: So you obviously weren't concerned.
Speaker 6: I didn't know what I wanted to do with the
Speaker 6: pregnancy at that point.
Speaker 1: Even if Laura was still processing her options regarding her
Speaker 1: alleged pregnancy, it's difficult to see her overlook her own
Speaker 1: well being during such a high risk moment.
Speaker 2: I'm going to turn your attention to the off of
Speaker 2: the first page of Exhibit fifty six patient reports. She
Speaker 2: passed two sacks which appeared to have a membrane, but
Speaker 2: denies having much bleeding outside of that. When did you
Speaker 2: pass sacks?
Speaker 3: It was September or October?
Speaker 2: Where were you? I was at home and you didn't
Speaker 2: call nine one one.
Speaker 3: I did not call nine one one?
Speaker 2: Did you call your doctor?
Speaker 3: I did do another online?
Speaker 2: Who was that way first?
Speaker 3: Was the same service? I just don't know their name.
Speaker 2: You just said you passed two sacks in October or September.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I mean, I don't remember exactly what it was.
Speaker 2: Seems like that would be a very traumatic experience and
Speaker 2: that you would remember the date.
Speaker 6: It was a traumatic experience, but the when life was traumatic.
Speaker 6: Class here for six months and I didn't leave the house.
Speaker 1: It's a recurring theme. According to Laura, she was experiencing
Speaker 1: a major medical emergency, but instead of rushing to the er,
Speaker 1: she just hopped back online, and once again, the details
Speaker 1: of who she actually talked to were blurry.
Speaker 2: When it happened, did you think you were having a miscarriage?
Speaker 6: I thought there was a very good chance I was
Speaker 6: having a miscarriage.
Speaker 2: And there is no medical record of that from any
Speaker 2: Arizona based obstetrician.
Speaker 3: Correct, not in person.
Speaker 2: Where were you when this happened.
Speaker 3: I was at my house when it happened.
Speaker 2: Who was with you?
Speaker 3: I called my mom over.
Speaker 2: Did your mom see them? Yes? She did, okay, And
Speaker 2: your mom was okay with you just calling a TELEDOC appointment.
Speaker 6: I was not having heavy bleeding with it, and so
Speaker 6: she said to see what they had to say. She
Speaker 6: did want me to go to the emergency room originally,
Speaker 6: and I was getting fresh up to.
Speaker 2: Say that, and you didn't. Correct, I did not, And
Speaker 2: you knew at that point that everyone was saying you
Speaker 2: weren't pregnant.
Speaker 6: Correct now, not everybody was saying that, because I was
Speaker 6: told it could have been cloths that I passed. So
Speaker 6: sheted pregnant for a long time after that.
Speaker 2: So your testimony is two sacks came out of you
Speaker 2: sometime in September or October. Correct. Correct, you don't know when, exactly.
Speaker 3: Correct.
Speaker 2: The only witness is your mom.
Speaker 3: Right, Oh, I'm my sister. I sent her photos at
Speaker 3: the time, photos of what the sacks, which I feel
Speaker 3: lead it.
Speaker 2: Okay, No, I just said you sent Sarah pictures. Why
Speaker 2: did you delete them? Because that would be evidence foliation.
Speaker 3: Because it was extremely upsetting at the time.
Speaker 2: Now you're telling me there was a photo who took
Speaker 2: the photo of the sacks? I did with what I
Speaker 2: phone and your iPhone?
Speaker 3: Yes, And now.
Speaker 2: You're claiming you don't have the same iPhone.
Speaker 6: Well no, but I mean I I don't, but I
Speaker 6: deleted it. It wouldn't have mattered. I deleted it immediately after.
Speaker 2: And then you never followed up with a physician regarding
Speaker 2: whatever that was. There's no subsequent ultrasound.
Speaker 3: No I did not. I followed up in November.
Speaker 1: During the deposition, Laura wouldn't provide a firm date of
Speaker 1: her alleged pregnancy loss, and there are zero medical records
Speaker 1: to back it up, at least not from a doctor
Speaker 1: she saw in person.
Speaker 2: This deposition has concluded. We are off the record at
Speaker 2: eleven thirty four am.
Speaker 1: Nearly three hours of deposition, and it was a total rollercoaster.
Speaker 1: It was confusing and exhausting, and more than anything, it
Speaker 1: was shocking to see how much Laura was willing to
Speaker 1: say under oath. But if you think this was a lot,
Speaker 1: just wait because in a few months there would be
Speaker 1: a courtroom trial and Laura would change her story yet again.
Speaker 1: Laura's deposition happened behind closed doors. It wasn't live streamed,
Speaker 1: and no one online had access to the recording, but
Speaker 1: the online community remained vigilant and glued to the story,
Speaker 1: monitoring every digital footprint and collaborating in real time to
Speaker 1: question her narrative.
Speaker 13: One morning, I wake up. It was the morning of
Speaker 13: December thirteenth, twenty twenty three, and I'm playing with my
Speaker 13: son and I see that our Laura Owens has been
Speaker 13: banned from Reddit, and I just thought, how how is
Speaker 13: she able to just keep getting this stuff removed from
Speaker 13: the Internet.
Speaker 1: That's Schnitzel Ninja. She's the mom turned to internet detective
Speaker 1: who is making public records available on her YouTube channel.
Speaker 13: It was unbelievable to me, and it pissed me off.
Speaker 13: And I was like, I don't even know how to
Speaker 13: start a sub reddit, I don't know what it takes,
Speaker 13: I have no idea, but I'm going to start one
Speaker 13: because no one had started one yet that I could see.
Speaker 1: She wasn't about to sit around and wait, so she
Speaker 1: got to work making sure there was a public place
Speaker 1: where everyone could get together and share what they were
Speaker 1: digging up.
Speaker 13: I was thinking about, what do you do for the name?
Speaker 13: What the other one was?
Speaker 12: Are Laura Owens?
Speaker 3: So it's about her?
Speaker 13: And I was thinking, this isn't about her. It's about,
Speaker 13: in my opinion, the people that she's victimized. And the
Speaker 13: person who brought this to the forefront was Clayton. And
Speaker 13: I had heard Dave in a video say all we
Speaker 13: need is justice for Clayton something like that, and I
Speaker 13: was like, that's it. It's Justice for Clayton, that's the name.
Speaker 1: With the Laura Owens subreddit gone, everyone was looking for
Speaker 1: a new place to land. She gave them one, and
Speaker 1: once Justice for Clayton was live, it only took a
Speaker 1: minute for the whole crew to show up and pick
Speaker 1: up exactly where they left off.
Speaker 13: And this is the thing I tell everybody, this has
Speaker 13: been such a group effort. I don't even know how
Speaker 13: many people I could say have contributed in different ways.
Speaker 13: The sabreddit has over six thousand members, but there have
Speaker 13: been hundreds who have been involved, like getting documents, sharing things,
Speaker 13: like helping uncover things, doing research online. Hundreds, hundreds and
Speaker 13: hundreds of people.
Speaker 1: One of those people was Megan Fox. And no not
Speaker 1: the actress Megan Fox. This Megan is a journalist and
Speaker 1: a podcaster on YouTube.
Speaker 12: I got into Laura Owens because I saw what was
Speaker 12: going on with Dave Neil and how an independent journalist
Speaker 12: was being attacked for telling this story and I wanted
Speaker 12: to help.
Speaker 1: She initially didn't set out to cover the Clayton and
Speaker 1: Laura saga. For Megan, the real story was what was
Speaker 1: happening to another content creator. You've heard about Dave Neil.
Speaker 12: Dave was being horrifically misused by this person who was
Speaker 12: using the legal system as a weapon to get what
Speaker 12: she wants, which is to silence her critics. She was
Speaker 12: trying to get a protective order against Dave Neil for
Speaker 12: just talking about this story that was very public that
Speaker 12: she had gone to the media about.
Speaker 1: Dave welcomed the support from Megan. He was navigating a
Speaker 1: situation he never prepared for. He was sailing through uncharted waters.
Speaker 1: Here's Dave Neil.
Speaker 14: Megan was one of the first people that knew how
Speaker 14: to deal with someone coming after you. She's been sued
Speaker 14: in the past, and she really helped guide me.
Speaker 1: Dave and Meghan became fast friends. They took to social media,
Speaker 1: going live to analyze every shred of evidence they could find.
Speaker 1: The timing was serendipitous because Clayton and Laura's trial was
Speaker 1: set for June tenth, twenty twenty four. This would be
Speaker 1: the trial where a judge would hear evidence on both
Speaker 1: sides about Laura's alleged pregnancy. In advance of the big day,
Speaker 1: a witness list was announced to the public. On the
Speaker 1: list of Clayton's witnesses was Greg Gillespie, the man who
Speaker 1: experienced something similar with Laura back in twenty twenty one.
Speaker 1: You heard his story in the last episode, and at
Speaker 1: this point the Internet's Loose had Greg Gillespie's name on
Speaker 1: their radar.
Speaker 10: Two.
Speaker 1: Luckily, Dave and Meghan had already been digging into past
Speaker 1: evidence from Greg's case.
Speaker 14: We were doing a live stream together where we were
Speaker 14: looking through some of this information and we were taking
Speaker 14: the evidence that Laura had used in putting it on
Speaker 14: my computer where you can look at it on a
Speaker 14: bigger screen.
Speaker 12: He was doing this thing that he does where he
Speaker 12: pulls up an image and he's just like, okay, let's
Speaker 12: to zoom in, let's change the colors, let's put maybe
Speaker 12: the contrast. And he's really good at photoshop.
Speaker 1: They poured over evidence that on the surface seemed trivial,
Speaker 1: but they operated on a hunch that the devil is
Speaker 1: always in the details.
Speaker 14: We noticed that this ultrasound image that she used to
Speaker 14: claim she was pregnant with you wings with Greg Gillespie
Speaker 14: had like sort of a circle mark on it, like
Speaker 14: an orb.
Speaker 1: The ultrasound looks pretty normal, but on the left side
Speaker 1: they noticed what looks like a smudge It's small, but
Speaker 1: not something you normally see on an ultrasound. They were
Speaker 1: zooming in on it during a YouTube live stream. Thousands
Speaker 1: of people were watching them analyze the ultrasound, and then
Speaker 1: they caught something that would change the entire case. Here's
Speaker 1: the audio from that live stream.
Speaker 9: What are we seeing here?
Speaker 2: What's this? H EVN? Is this a? Are you seeing this?
Speaker 9: The hell's going on here?
Speaker 10: What is that?
Speaker 7: You know?
Speaker 6: What?
Speaker 10: Go back?
Speaker 4: Never?
Speaker 9: I never noticed it, and now I can't unsee it.
Speaker 2: What the hell is that?
Speaker 1: It looked edited in some way, but they couldn't figure
Speaker 1: out how, so they started manipulating the image.
Speaker 3: Here's Dave.
Speaker 14: We expand into the image in a forensic tool where
Speaker 14: you can sort of shift the colors and see if
Speaker 14: anything pops out, and we start to see letters. It
Speaker 14: felt like Greek. We don't know what we're looking at.
Speaker 12: I go, well, it's a watermark.
Speaker 3: That's a watermark.
Speaker 12: He's like, it does it looks like letters?
Speaker 6: What does it say? H ev is it n?
Speaker 12: We're trying so hard. We're both looking at it, and
Speaker 12: I'm not looking at the chat because I'm looking at
Speaker 12: this image and I'm like, what is that? And I
Speaker 12: happened to look at the chat for like a second,
Speaker 12: and the chat is going off there like it says Fiber.
Speaker 12: It says Fiver. I looked at it. I'm like, oh,
Speaker 12: oh my god, Dave, it says Fiver.
Speaker 1: Fiver is an online marketplace where you can hire freelancers
Speaker 1: to do pretty much any digital task you can think of.
Speaker 1: The livestream chat was.
Speaker 14: Blowing up, and soone goes, oh my gosh, we zoom
Speaker 14: in further and we noticed that essentially there was a
Speaker 14: Fiver logo fiv er r. And I grabbed that logo
Speaker 14: off the internet. I looped it right over the image
Speaker 14: and it fits dead on. It was the Fiver logo
Speaker 14: on this ultrasound.
Speaker 1: This was their reaction in the moment as they realized
Speaker 1: what they'd stumbled upon.
Speaker 3: It says Fiver.
Speaker 14: Oh yeah, hold on, hold okay, hold on, hold on.
Speaker 14: This is why you do it live.
Speaker 1: The reality sunk in that they were looking at a
Speaker 1: doctored ultrasound photoshopped by a hired freelancer on Fiver. Laura
Speaker 1: had sent this ultrasound to Greg Gillespie in twenty twenty one.
Speaker 14: Oh my gosh, it's so apparent to see how.
Speaker 12: The hell, oh my god, are we.
Speaker 9: I am losing? Now, hold on a second, does the
Speaker 9: original have this? Because now the original doesn't have.
Speaker 1: The original was a sonogram that Greg had reverse image
Speaker 1: searched and traced back to an unrelated twenty fifteen blog.
Speaker 12: It fits like a glow of It's unbelievable. This is
Speaker 12: the greatest programming in the history of YouTube. It was
Speaker 12: like the smoking gun of the entire case discovered live.
Speaker 12: This woman actually took someone's sonogram, went to fiver to
Speaker 12: have them do something to it, but then couldn't pay
Speaker 12: the money however much it was to get the watermark removed,
Speaker 12: and she thought that was good enough to send to Greg.
Speaker 1: The online detectives had found something that was news to
Speaker 1: Clayton and his legal team. It got back to them quickly.
Speaker 1: Woudnick was impressed by what people like Dave and Meghan
Speaker 1: were able to uncover, and he credits the online detectives
Speaker 1: as a major catalyst in how this case unfolded.
Speaker 2: I'd see them calling the information with the community online
Speaker 2: and it was dynamic. They've found information that I don't
Speaker 2: think any private investigator could have found, and certainly if
Speaker 2: they could have found it, it would have cost hundreds
Speaker 2: and hundreds of thousands of dollars in resources to get there.
Speaker 1: If Greg Gillespie was called to the stand during the
Speaker 1: upcoming trial, he could now confirm that the sonogram of
Speaker 1: twins sent to him by Laura was watermarked and altered
Speaker 1: by a freelancer on fiber.
Speaker 12: That has always been the thing that has blown my
Speaker 12: mind in this case, is this sheer audacity of it.
Speaker 12: I've never seen anything like it ever.
Speaker 1: Heading into the June tenth trial, Woodeneck's team was feeling
Speaker 1: pretty good. They had the evidence, the depositions were done,
Speaker 1: and frankly, the case scened cut and dried. Laura had
Speaker 1: admitted to altering medical records, her timeline was constantly shifting,
Speaker 1: and she never provided medical documentation about what happened to
Speaker 1: her pregnancy. Now I need you to think back to
Speaker 1: the beginning of this story, the night when Clayton and
Speaker 1: Laura hooked up. The exact details of what happened that
Speaker 1: night are only known to two people, Clayton and Laura.
Speaker 1: Since the beginning, they both stated that the hookup was consensual,
Speaker 1: but Laura was about to reveal something in the upcoming
Speaker 1: trial that no one saw coming.
Speaker 2: Your testimony now nine months into this process, is that
Speaker 2: Clayton had penetrative sex with you against your will Laura.
Speaker 1: Coming up on the next episode of Love Trapped, Laura
Speaker 1: and Clayton finally go to court.
Speaker 3: Zoon As you recognize you've been accused of faking records
Speaker 3: in this case, right, yes, and.
Speaker 12: You expect the court to accept a picture of a
Speaker 12: portion of an alleged record.
Speaker 3: You guys got the results yourselves, So these are yes
Speaker 3: or no questions.
Speaker 2: That you're a public figure, You're the bachelor, that's why
Speaker 2: everyone's watching today. Are you embarrassed to say who you've
Speaker 2: had sex with? Clayton?
Speaker 5: I think I'm the last person to about who I've
Speaker 5: been intimate with.
Speaker 2: Tracks.
Speaker 1: Thank you so much for listening. Please be sure to
Speaker 1: follow Love Trapped on Apple Podcasts, the iHeartRadio app, Spotify,
Speaker 1: or wherever you get your podcasts, and please leave us
Speaker 1: a review. A five star rating helps others find this show.
Speaker 1: We're grateful for your support. If you would like to
Speaker 1: reach out to the Love Trapped team, email us at
Speaker 1: Love Trapped pod at gmail dot com. That's Love Trapped
Speaker 1: Pod at gmail dot com. Love Trapped is a production
Speaker 1: of Glass Podcasts a division of Glass Entertainment Group in
Speaker 1: partnership with iHeart Podcasts. This show was executive produced by
Speaker 1: Nancy Glass, Andre Gunning and Ben Fetterman, written, produced, and
Speaker 1: hosted by me Stephanie Young. Our story editor is Monique
Speaker 1: la Boord. Producer on this episode is Sidney Glaudoux. Additional
Speaker 1: production support from Todd Gans. Our production manager is Kristin Melchirie.
Speaker 1: For iHeart Podcasts, Ali Perry was our executive producer. Audio
Speaker 1: editing and mastering by Anna McLain, additional editing support by
Speaker 1: Tanner Robbins and Matt Delvecchio. This podcast was developed in
Speaker 1: collaboration with Danny Passman and leb Abramoff at Crybaby Media.
Speaker 1: The Love Trapped theme is composed by Oliver Bains. Music
Speaker 1: library provided by Mobe Music. A special thanks to Carrie Lieberman,
Speaker 1: Will Pearson, Jessica Crincheck, Ali Canter and the entire iHeart
Speaker 1: podcast team. And for more podcasts from iHeart, visit the
Speaker 1: iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.