Not Over Yet | EP 15

It's Friday, June twenty sixth, and I am heading to
the courthouse right now for hearing on whether or not
they extend this plea deal out again.
Clayton sent me this voice note as he headed to
the Maricopa County Superior Courthouse. He was hoping for a resolution,
one that included jail or prison as part of Laura's sentence,
and Clayton is determined to go to all the pre
trial hearings he can so he can let the judge
know that. At every hearing he's been trying to catch
Laura's gaze to let her know he's not afraid of her.
She usually won't look him in the eye, but at
this specific hearing, Clayton says, she looked right at him.
I made eye contact with Laura, and she looked away
and then looked right back, stared at me for a
couple of seconds, and did that about four times. As
I stared at her for a solid twenty seconds. Look
it felt different. I almost saw in her eyes like
a sadness at what she's done. Maybe it's hit her
that it's very real possibility she's gonna get locked away.
It really felt like she's defeated.
Clayton wasn't the only victim who showed up in court
that day. Greg Gillespie was there too. He's the one
who went on a few dates with Laura back in
twenty twenty one and is now named as the state's
other primary victim.
And I could have let me and Greg showed up
that she realized like, oh fuck, these guys are not
just going to like move on. They're here to make
sure that I face accountability.
I'm Stephanie Young and this is love trapped.
There's no way you'd better be.
I'll be lazy.
Holy Hella, if you ever heaver.
Trastic.
Last week, on Monday, June twenty ninth, Laura was back
in court. She's facing fourteen felony charges, including fraud, forgery, perjury,
tampering with physical evidence, and theft by extortion. She'd been
offered a plea deal by the state, and we thought
that on June twenty ninth, she'd either have to accept
the plea or begin the trial process. Instead, the deadline
for her criminal plea was extended once again. I don't
like to be the person who brings you this news.
I feel like the boy who cried Wolf I believed,
like a lot of my sources in this story, that
we would finally have an answer on Monday, but we didn't.
So I'm going to walk you through what happened. Let's
go back to Friday, June twenty sixth. That's when there
was a settlement conference in her case. It's basically a
meeting where a defendant can have a more transparent conversation
with a judge about how this case can be resolved
without trial. We were told these meetings are typically private
behind closed doors, so I didn't plan to attend, but
to our surprise, this one was opened to the public.
Two of the victims listed in this case, Clayton Eckerd
and Greg Gillespie, were both in attendance. I caught up
with Clayton and his attorney would Nick, right after the hearing,
and you'll hear from them throughout this episode. Thankfully, the
hearing was recorded and posted on YouTube and.
The court well call matter on the calendar.
State v.
Laura Owens case Tomersira twenty twenty five zero zero seven
nine zero five can have appearances please starting with the state.
Good after you or at Lara in Best State after
You're on.
A Christians of Laura owns whose president need to be
set stable.
This hearing was presided over by a commissioner, not a judge,
and Commissioner Jonathan Simon was pretty thorough. Part of his
job is to explain the criminal process to the defendant
in this case, that's Laura.
From this one's.
My name is Commissioner Simon, and I've been asked to
do the settlement conference in your case today.
This is an informal setting rle.
You'll have the opportunity to talk about your case if
you want to, and just see if you can get
it resolved. We're going to discuss and you can ask
questions about the plea agreement that you've been offered in
this case, and the options that you have in this
case and the potential range of penalties.
Commissioner Simon made it clear that he won't be the
one making a ruling on her criminal case, but it's
important to have the commissioner explain all the options on
the table for the defendant. This has to be on
the record. It's part of due process.
I'm just going to help you get as much information
as you can about your case while you still have
some options, and I know that there is the current
plea offer on the table.
He then detailed what would happen if Laura doesn't take
the plea deal.
If you do decide to go to the trial and
you don't want the plea agreement. In this case, there
is a possibility, obviously that the jury finds you not
guilty on these charges, which would be I think your.
Best case scenario, right.
But if the jury finds you guilty on any of
the charges, then the judge would have to impose the
sentence and.
You are probation eligible.
So if the jury finds you guilty on any of
these charges, the judge at sentencing could place you on
probation for each of those counts. With any probation term,
a judge can impose up to twelve months of jail
as a.
Term of probation. Do you understand that, yes, thank you okay?
And if you don't get probation, the judge may sentence
you to prison.
Laura is being charged with fourteen felonies. Here's the breakdown.
Eleven class four felonies, one class six felony, and then
the most serious two class two felonies. Arizona has guidelines
for prison in terms for each kind of offense, and
within each guideline there's a wide range of sentencing you'll see.
For the class two felony, the lowest sentence is three
years and the aggravated sentences twelve and a half years.
For the class four felonies, that would be a mitigated
sentence of one year, and the maximum would be three
years on those, And for that class six felony, the
mitigated the lowest would be four months and the aggravated,
which would be the highest, would be two years. So
if you found guilty on multiple counts in your sentence,
the judge can have those run concurrently, so those prison
sentences at the same time or consecutively, which means they'd
run one after the other.
Do you understand that as well? Yes, thank you.
I guess if you took this to trial and it
was the absolute worst day that you could have at trial.
But just assuming for today's hearing that they'd all have
to run consecutively one after the other. For the class
four felonies with the eleven of those, that would be
over thirty seven years for those, and for the class
twos it would be over twenty five years for those,
and for that Class six.
It would be two years on that one.
So if you add those up, it would be a
significant amount of time.
The commissioner said he didn't think that was likely to happen,
but wanted to make sure Laura understood what was at
stake here. I asked Clayton's attorney Greg Woodnick about this moment.
Does that mean she's going to prison? No, but it's
really fucking scary. I mean, if I were Laura, I
would have been anxious hearing that read out loud, even
though she's probably read the supervening indictment hundreds of times.
After the Commissioner explained the whole process, the state prosecutor
ed Leider was given the opportunity to address the plea
deal on the table.
Here are the plea agreement which was sent to defense
counsel over a month ago.
It does expire today.
One of the issues and I do want to express,
and I think one of the victims wants to address
the court the frustration and this is often a frustration
that all parties, but often victimscifically feel in terms of
how long.
The justice system often takes.
In this particular case, mister Luters is now her third
attorney whenever additional attorneys come on to a case or
a new attorney that tends to drag the case on further.
And certainly I understand and the victims rightfully so, are
deeply frustrated about how long this is taking.
And then mister Lighter addressed the amount of evidence they're
working with in this case.
One of the issues, and it provides the crux of
the state's case against Ms Owens is the vast majority
of our evidence against her is digital forensic evidence derived
largely from her cloud account self and extractions among others.
As a result, that evidence is voluminous. I think we're
multiple terabytes of data. The state has moved as quickly
as we can to get that information in front of
mister Luters. But as I understand, he can explain in
more detail, but there has been some issues in terms
of his ability to review some of that evidence.
According to the prosecutor, Laura's attorney is having difficulty accessing
some of the digital evidence, which seems to be causing
a delay. Here's how the commissioner responded.
I do understand the frustration.
This case is taking longer than you'd like, but mister
luteris does have an obligation to properly advise his client
on how to proceed, and in order to do that,
I think he has to review all of the evidence.
So if you were going to trial without having.
To review all of the evidence, where the court didn't
give him that proper time to do that, the case
wouldn't be closed as quickly as maybe you would like,
because I think it would open the case up for
potentially an appeal and possibly going back to trial on that.
So I think the idea is that if we.
Can give mister Luthers the opportunity to review all of
the evidence here, he can properly advise Miss Owens and
prepare for trial. Given the terabytes, I would think that
that would take some time to go through, So be
inclined to give and it wouldn't be again me ruling
on this, but any judge.
Of be inclined to give miss Litter's time there to
review that.
Laura's attorney is telling the courts there are terabytes and
terabytes of evidence and he needs more time to go
through it all. We've only heard about a sliver of
what's in that digital evidence, so when I hear there's
so much more digital evidence. My mind is racing trying
to imagine what the state might have found. There was
one moment where the prosecutor revealed more details about the
charges and the listed victims in this case.
I haven't spoken about this, but there's also Stormy Mitchell,
who is the woman whose ultrasound was used.
By miss Owens.
That is actually a third.
Victim, and she feels very strongly about being exploited by
Miss Owens.
Then Laura's attorney asked the prosecutor about the specifics of
the fraudulent scheme charge, and in the middle of that
question he said something interesting.
Listen, you know, the evidence of perjury is strong.
You and I have talked about that.
I was surprised Laura's attorney admitted on the record that
the evidence of perjury is strong. So I asked Greg
Woodnick about it.
I heard Christian's comment on the recording. I don't know
if that's what he meant, but I heard what he said.
Is it possible that he's already looked through some of
it and seen some very damaging data. Yeah, I think
there's probably more than a lot of evidence against Laura.
I think we all think that. I think that's probably
the genesis of a lot of the frustration.
Because this settlement hearing is informal, the victims were allowed
to speak. Clayton went first. He questioned Laura's attorney's request
for more time to review the evidence.
The big thing I want to focus on is not
allowing an extension on the play deals simply because she
has a history of delaying and it's just going to continue.
My understanding is he's coming.
Of the case a few months ago, and this feels
like an eleventh hour push to say I can't access
the material. You know, to me, if you couldn't access
the material, you should have accessed a day one and
every single day you should have been following up to
get that evidence. I'm all for due process, but to me,
this just feels like an extension of her tactic, carried
out by him to extend it. And it's been three years.
I'm tired. I know we're all tired. And a ton
of evidence latantly obvious. She's admitted on the stand to
medical frauds, she's admitted to certain lies. It's a clear
cut case she's guilty. There's no reason to drag it
out and say the terabytes of information are going to
somehow change something. When did you come in, when did
you get the material first sent to you? And then
how hard did you really try to access this material?
I just would like to know how much efferty is
put into actually access in the documents. I think that's
important to take into consideration.
Yim's luters, I mean, do you have any idea of
how long it will take you too to get to
that information?
All? Right?
Would be that informa question.
The specific question is how hard I've tried.
Clayton sent me a voice memo after the hearing where
he talked about this moment.
He kind of gave me a smart asked response to
my question as far as like when did you get
the information? And what's he been doing this whole time?
And he just said to the judge, like, what's the question,
like how much I've heard of I put in? That
felt very condescending.
Back in the hearing, Christian Looters had a response to Clayton.
He said he had been trying to access the evidence
at least more so than any of Laura's previous attorneys.
I can safely say, and I've made this clear to
the prosecutor's office for the past month and a half
or so since this was officially disclosed and actually was
this close to her previous attorney. That's not incorrect, but
there was nothing done about that information with any of
the previous attorneys. I can safely say that that we're
the first ones who have actually started to look at it,
and we have done everything we can up to this
point to do that. That's what I'll say.
Before Friday's hearing concluded, there was another victim who wanted
to speak, someone who has his own history with Laura,
But we haven't heard a lot from Greg Gillespie.
If Laura attains new representation, are we going to learning
time frames around that so we're not doing this over
and over and over again.
One of the victims named in Laura's criminal case, Greg Gillespie,
attended the hearing on June twenty sixth. Greg had one
particular concern.
If Laura attains new representation, A, we're going to burning time
frames around that, so we're not doing this over and
over and over again.
Given the circumstances, I would think that if there was
a new attorney on the case, the judge would try
to put some parameters in place. But again, It's really
difficult for me to say what those parameters would be.
But again, I do understand your concerns and your frustrations
in that regard and wanting to get this case moving
and see that justice is done.
Greg Gillespie told the judge he'd been dealing with the
impacts of this since twenty twenty one, and Greg had
a good question. What happens if Laura fires this attorney
and gets a new one, or what if he quits?
I asked wood Nick about this very real possibility.
If she did part ways with current counsel, she would
need enough time to get new council so that they
could get up to speed and handle advising her on
a plea or getting the matter ready for trial. Is
that going to cause delays or would that cause delays? Absolutely?
At some point is the court to say, you know,
we can't do this anymore, we need to move this along. Yes,
but the court is never going to say that in
a way that deprives Laura of the ability to defend herself,
and the court should not do that because it's important
that Laura is adequately represented. It's important that anyone accused
of fourteen felony charges have adequate representation.
Briday's hearing gave us insight into why the state is
considering an extension of the plea deadline, but nothing was
officially decided.
So it sounds like we're not going to be able
to get the case result today, at least this current
version of the plea agramment.
Would that be fair? That's very wrong? Okay? Is there
anything else that we need to address today? I know
we do have.
There is a case management conference. Looks like Monday in
front of Judge Ruter.
I don't think so, not from the defender's perspective.
Someone, did you have any questions for me?
No?
Thank you for your honor.
Okay, well, I appreciate you all being here this action
in and sharing your concerns as well.
After the hearing ended, I talked with Clayton. He told
me something interesting. He and Laura were making eye contact
and he felt like something about her had changed.
There was a moment in the court where I felt
this urge to just stare her down, and in the
past I've done it. It's not so much to intimidate her.
It's more like, I'm not afraid of you. You can't
do anything to me, and I hope you can feel that.
So I did that this last time, and Laura made
eye contact and then darted her eyes away like she
typically does, but this time she darted her eyes away
and then instantly looked back at me, held her gaze
for like three seconds, darted her eyes away, then held
her gaze for like five six seconds, and at that
point I broke my eye contact because like, I was
taken aback, because it was the first time that she's
ever locked eyes with me and held it in that moment,
there was something different resonating from her. She's looked at
me in the past and she's given me like that smirk,
you know, like I've got you and who do you
think you are doing this to me? But this time
was like there was something weird there where it was
like she was looking at me and it was almost
like a scared child. So it was fear, but it
was also a mix of like I'm sorry, I don't
know what I've done, and that was weird. That was
just something on Friday that happened. That was the first
time thing and it was something new. I'll just that
was for sure. It was a new look that I
am like, okay, something is shifted.
On Monday, June twenty ninth, everyone arrived at the Maricopa
County Superior Courthouse once again. This time it was for
a status update in Laura's criminal case.
This is CR twenty twenty five zero zero seven nine
zero five State versus Laura Michelle Owen's time set for
a complex case management conference and a status conference.
I wasn't able to be there in person, but a
few of my sources were there, and they said there
appeared to be extra security in the courthouse that day.
We'd already gotten a preview of what Laura's attorney might say,
which is that he needed more time to review the evidence.
But Monday was Laura's opportunity for a formal answer on
the plea deal, and there was still a little hope
that it could finally be over, that Laura would surprise
us all by taking the plea. Clayton told me the
hearing began in a way he didn't expect the.
Judge wants to meet with the prosecutor and her lawyer
back in the chambers, So I was already kind of like, really, like,
why can't we discuss this openly?
After a few minutes, the judge and lawyers returned to
the court room. But now that they were on the record,
there was very little they had to discuss. Most of
it had already been covered at the settlement conference a
few days earlier. The only thing left was an administrative detail.
All right, there's a pending motion modify release conditions to
permit travel. Mister Lighter, did you want to be heard
on that issue?
On Friday, June twenty sixth, Laura submitted an out of
state travel request. Remember, because she's charged with fourteen felonies
in the state of Arizona, she has to ask for
permission to leave the state. She wanted to go to
San Diego, California, right after this hearing. We've had a
voice actor read from the travel request.
The purpose of her trip is to help her sister,
Sarah with caring for her young children. Sarah has been
away from her home on business, and her husband was
unexpectedly called away next week for work. They have no
one to care for their two young children while they're away.
The couple frequently relies on miss Owens for childcare, and
they do not have another option. In this situation.
The victims have the right to object to travel requests.
In this case, both greg and Clayton said they didn't
want Laura to travel out of state. Afterwards, I asked
Clayton why he feels that way.
She deserves to start feeling the pain of her actions.
There needs to be something inconveniencing her, because as of
right now, there is nothing inconveniencing her. Laura can go
do anything she wants today because she has no restrictions.
You wouldn't even know that Laura is facing felony charges.
You can hear the frustration in Clayton's voice. But in
the end, Judge Ruder permitted Laura's travel request.
I did review the record Miss Owens made all her
court appearances, does not appear to be a flight risk,
so over the victim's objection and permit Miss Owens to
travel to California.
When I talked to Clayton after the fact, he was
still heated about this.
I'm like, that's problematic to me because Laura should have
been already feeling the ratifications for her actions, but yet
the court has just said you want more time. There
you go, Laura have it.
At the end of the hearing, there was some back
and forth about scheduling the next one, and interestingly this
line from the judge, I.
Know there's some I guess there was some recently disclosed
evidence that the defense is reviewing.
We don't know yet exactly what that means, but it's
worth mentioning just in case something comes a bit. Like
we said, most of the substance had already taken place
in chambers. The plea deal was not even discussed directly
in this hearing.
So miss Owens, stay in touch with your lawyer, and
we are in recess this man.
Shortly after the hearing, a new settlement conference appeared on
the docket for August twenty eighth, twenty twenty six. That
looks like the new plea expiration date. After this hearing,
Clayton spoke to the prosecutors directly. They told him about
what happened in the judge's chambers that day, and it
was illuminating for me. It seems like Laura has a
hard line no jail time, no prison time.
He said basically like, look, we're in the chambers and
the judge is trying and everything in his power to
get us to come to a plea. He doesn't want
to take this to a trial, so he's like, what
can we do to make this a plea. Laura's lawyer said,
if there was no jail time or prison time that
could be attached to the plea, she would have taken
the plea already. That is what she's most afraid of.
As we know, Laura's demand is at odds with Clayton's.
Clayton wants her to see jail or prison time. In
this meeting, the prosecutors told Clayton they would not take
jail or prison off the table. Clayton also wanted an
answer to another question.
I asked the prosecutor. I said, this deadline on the
twenty eighth of August, is that the absolute last point
at which she can take the plea? He said yes.
I said there is no situation in which that will
get extended. He goes, no, I'll make sure of it.
Okay.
So if she takes the plea on the twenty eighth,
because she will wait, she's not going to take it
on the twenty seventh. She's not going to take it,
you know, a month earlier. She's going to wait until
the last minute because she just wants to drag this out,
because she knows that it only harms us. But I said,
if she accepts that day, what happens from there? He goes, Well,
she accepts, we go to sentencing, which will be schedule
within a month. He goes, and then that'll be it.
You'll go in your day at court and then sentencing
will happen and that'll be it.
I said, okay.
And if she declines it, he goes, then she goes
to trial. I said it realistically, when does that occur?
Trial? He said?
Likely two months from that point. So you're saying probably
sometime in November. Crazy How we just push trial out
four months when it was supposed to be d of July.
That's the court system, though. That's just the business, baby,
that's what we're all supposed to be, okay with.
I've spent about thirty hours interviewing Clayton over the last year.
This interview was different. His emotion was so raw in
this conversation.
I don't feel like I have any power, and again,
I'm just being honest. I'm at the mercy of the court.
You know, there's nothing I can do. So for me,
I'm just going to sit here and go on with
my life and live my life outside of the situation,
try to think about this as little as possible, and
then show up on August twenty eighth, because there's nothing
I can do. I've written a letter to the prosecutor.
They've taken what I've said into consideration, but nothing changed.
It's neither bad nor good. It's just is what it is.
We sit and wait, and we just let the justice
system basically go at a snails pace like it always does.
Maybe do we just see it for what it is,
a system that's broken, that is still moving forward at
a glacial pace, and let's just wait it out.
And that's it.
He sounds defeated, But of course underneath that, it's frustration
and anger.
This whole thing is emotional. So let's show it. Let's
show people what it really is. Let's show all of it,
including some of the stuff that might be perceived as ugly.
I don't care. I'm just human. I'm just trying to
show the human experience, and this is the ugly, unfortunate
part of it. I'm the one that has to carry
this frustration for the next two months.
When I spoke with Woodnick, he took a much more
measured approach. He says, the court has to take reasonable
requests into consideration, because if they don't, and then Laura's
found guilty by a jury, she could have grounds for
an appeal, which would make this process much much longer.
The delays that we've dealt with, I think are very
normal delays involving them professionals and the process and assuring
that there's due process for Laura. I think the court's
doing exactly what the court is supposed to do. Prosecutors
doing exactly what they're supposed to do, as is Laura's attorney,
who's a good lawyer, and doing what he's supposed to do.
Woodn'tick says, the delays we've seen in this criminal case
are all pretty standard so far. We haven't even gotten
to the phase where potential delays are coming from the defendant.
Are there going to be other delays that we haven't
seen yet that are more Laura centric? And is she
going to on the day a jury set to and
panel to start a trial. Is she going to be hospitalized?
Is she going to claim she's got other medical issues
or family emergencies. Maybe, but those are tomorrow problems and
we're not going to be able to deal with them
until that happens, and the court is going to have
to deal with those accordingly.
When they happen.
Woudn'tick has been navigating the Laura Owen saga for nearly
five years, and even he admits he's running low on patients.
I get people's frustration, and candid least that I'm frustrated,
not because I'm frustrated with the process. I'm frustrated because
I want this chapter to come to an end. I
want the book to come to an end. I want
to know what's going to happen in the criminal process.
We all want to know the end of the story.
But would n't it provided kind of a wake up call.
I want this to be over with too, But I
also want it to be over with the right way.
If Laura wants to go to trial, great, go to trial.
Let's make sure it's a very fair trial and there's
no argument that she didn't have access to all the
data she needed or she needed an extra couple weeks.
If those sort of accommodations assured that a defendant, Laura
or anyone else gets a fair trial, then the court
needs to be doing that. And it does seem like
the court did that in the podcast, everyone's kind of
expecting this to come to a head. Your podcast, Love
Trap is kind of in real time, and I think
when you watch a lot of docuseries and people document
in crimes that have happened, have gone to trial, they're
happening after the fact. The story has already been told,
and you're in this very unique situation of being in
the middle of the story. And I think that's why
people feel some level of frustration.
Before we hung up, wouldn't ex stress one more point
that the victims themselves continuing to come to court and
advocate for justice, as difficult as that can be, really
does move the needle.
The victims showing up sends a message that we're here,
we will be here. We will be here no matter what,
whether or not this trial goes in July or November
twenty thirty, we will be here. I think that was
the message that Greg and Clayton were senting.
Right as we pressed publish on the last episodes, we
heard some news. It's about Mike Marraccini's domestic violence restraining
order case in California. As you'll remember, Laura's DVRO against
Mike was dismissed by a San Francisco judge, but Laura
planned to appeal that decision. She had until June twenty ninth,
twenty twenty six, but at the last minute she requested
an extension and it was granted. She now has until
July twenty ninth to appeal the DVRO dismissal. As for
Laura's parents most recent bankruptcy filing, we have quite the update.
Ron and Jan filed for bankruptcy last year in an
effort to keep their house from being foreclosed on, but
they didn't complete their financial paperwork or make the required payments.
Because of that, their bankruptcy filing was dismissed and their
house was set to go to auction on May twenty sixth,
twenty twenty six. But a few days before that, they
filed for bankruptcy again to try to save their home.
This time they filed pro say, meaning without an attorney.
The judge asked them to come with documentation to prove
they qualified for the refiling. Ron and Jan said they would.
That's where we left off at the last bankruptcy hearing.
And so do you intend to complete your schedules due
on the twenty six.
I would like to if that timing doesn't work out.
I am committed to this. We are committed to this.
It turns out Ron and Jan were only committed for
about a week. Six days after that hearing, they filed
a motion for voluntary dismissal of their Chapter eleven bankruptcy filing,
citing they were unable to obtain counsel. Then, on July first,
Ron and Jan appeared virtually to continue their bankruptcy hearing.
Good afternoon, I'll take the appearances and then no one's battle.
Let's first start with the debtors.
I expected some boring bankruptcy dismissal full of technical jargon,
and boy was I wrong. Luckily, a recording of this
hearing was posted on YouTube. The presiding judge, the Honorable
Madeline Wansley, started it off with a bang.
At the last hearing, I heard a lot of information
about ponies and GoFundMe accounts and other potentially non disclosed assets.
Before this hearing, the attorney for the US Trustee, Jennifer Giamo,
and Ron and Jan had all come to an agreement
that their bankruptcy filing would be dismissed. But when they
got to court, Judge Wansley wasn't having it. She'd taken
into consideration the other potential assets, like the GoFundMe account
that was started for Ron's medical issues. The bankruptcy judge
saw some discrepancies that didn't sit right with her.
I guess what concerned me was if we had this
large sum of money within the last year for the
go fundme account, that that seems to be an asset
that could be potentially recovered for the benefit of creditors.
Jan tried to minimize the GoFundMe, which is still active
and to date has collected nearly one hundred and thirty
seven thousand dollars. This was Jan's reply to the judge.
And with regard to the go fundme, which I'm sure
you were notified by the online spare campaign that has
gone against us.
So let me just stir up to you to say
that the court only reviews what is filed with the court.
So I know your referenced an all one smear campaign before.
I really have no idea what you're talking about.
All I have.
All I have is what has been filed on the
dock and what people tell me an open court. I
do not independently go out and it would be unethical
for this judge or any judge to go out and
do background research on people and learn about them. So
just so you know, that's that's the way the court
will operate.
And I'm not suggesting that. I know that the smear
campaign people have said online that they have have sent
information to your office, so I don't know whether you've
received it or not. I know that they also sent
it to the US Trustees' office. But with regard to
the go fundme, as I mentioned before, it was started
in twenty twenty four, it was all virtually exhausted by
I would venture to say by May of twenty twenty five.
Here's the thing. Ron's goofundme is still active and accepting donations.
I did some quick math on the public contributions, and
in the last year they received almost six thousand dollars.
I think Jan believed that she could talk her way
out of not reporting that income, but the judge was
intent on pushing the issue.
Well, transfers that are made shortly before the bankruptcy filing
do have to be disclosed. That it's problematic if you
did not disclose the use of those funds. I'm going
to order and direct that you provide the records concerning
that particular issue to Miss Jaima so that she has
an understanding as to the financial circumstances immediately preceding your
prayer case and this case, so that we she her
office and the court has a full understanding of the
circumstances before the case is dismissed.
Instead of issuing a dismissal, Judge Wansley wanted a full
accounting of their finances.
I'm really asking for a full accounting of the go
fundme account, the monies that were received and the monies
that were spent, and how they were spent, and so,
you know, the whole typical information. You know, what did
you get, when did you get it, what did you
do with it?
Where are your receipts?
Okay?
Okay? The who, what, when, where, why and how? Okay okay.
But again that was all prior to a chapter thirteen
that if we'd had those funds, we wouldn't have needed
to file Chapter thirteen or chapter eleven.
Okay, Well, I hear what you're saying. Some transfers can
be recovered despite the passage of time. This case was
filed on May twenty second, of twenty twenty six, and
it could be that if there were funds that were
transferred in a particular period, they would be of.
Interest to the US Trustee's office.
Okay, it seems like one of the reasons the judge
was so firm with jan is because the court previously
asked for documentation and it wasn't submitted to the US Trustee.
Jennifer Giamo, I know that I had directed you to
email to Miss Jimo the information required, and I don't
know if that's occurred.
I believe that that should happen.
Before this case is dismissed. I think we should have
a fullsome understanding of your financial circumstances. So i'm again,
I'm in order and direct that you provide that information
to Miss Jimo's office. Everything that you're so supposed to
be providing, you need to provide. So whatever that office
is asked for, I'm ordering and directing you to cooperate
and to provide that to.
Her, Your honor, we were unable to do that. I
had presumed that we would be able to get counsel
to help us. This was never my intention to file
pro SAE, and I'm very aware of the fact, the
Chapter eleven is a very exhaustive chapter to go into
as a pro sae litigant, and that was not our intent.
Our intent was to be able to get counsel. And
we have been unable to obtain counsel.
Well, you know your financial circumstances best, and so you
should be able to reconstruct that information and gather those
records to provide it to Ms.
Jiamo, Your honor, I'm unable to without without adequate counsel.
If I had been able to do that on my own,
we would have continued this on our own right.
But you filed this case. You filed a Chapter eleven
bankruptcy case. You have not yet paid the full filing fee.
And once you're under the jurisdiction of this court, you
have to abide by the United States Bankruptcy Code and
its rules and requirements. And I'll tell you one of
the most important things about the Bankruptcy Code is it
requires absolute transparency. And that's the concern of the court
is that the schedules and statements here, compared to the
prior Sedgele statements, seem to indicate a lack of transparency.
And so, as a participant in the system. You have
certain obligations that I'm directing you to fulfill those obligations.
It's not appropriate to file bankruptcy and park in bankruptcy
and obtain the protections of bankruptcy and yet not fulfill
the obligations.
And so again, that is your obligation.
You filed this case, you undertook these duties and responsibilities,
and now I'm directing you to cooperate.
I've heard that the judges and lawyers and bankruptcy courts
don't mess around. This was my first time really seeing
what that means.
You were previously ordered to provide them, you haven't provided
them from where the court sits.
You're currently in contempt, ma'am.
Oh I understand, I understand, Okay.
Okay, any other questions you're concerned, okay, thank you.
It's worth mentioning that those are the only words Ron
spoke during the whole proceeding, aside from announcing his name
at the very beginning. He sounds like he doesn't want
to be there. But Jan has another question for the judge.
I'm sorry, did you have a question.
Well, the foreclosure date has been set for July the
twenty eighth, and I have filed some objections with the lender,
and I would like to hire an attorney to handle
the foreclosures. So I'm just wondering about how those dates coincide.
So with this date be said of August the sixth.
I'm a little unclear about the overlapping.
I don't really understand your question.
I mean, the court has set a hearing on August sixth,
and you said you have a foreclosure on July twenty eighth,
So I bet I don't understand what your question is.
You stated the facts, but what is the question.
The question is if the hearing is set on August
the sixth, how does that impact foreclosure on the twenty eighth.
To try and translate, Jen is asking if their home
will be protected from foreclosure. When they filed for bankruptcy,
an automatic stay was put in place. It instantly freezes
all debt collection, lawsuits and foreclosures. That stay was extended
until July first, the date of this hearing.
I see, what you're asking is if the court would
be inclined to extend the state that's temporarily in place.
Correct? Is that what you're asking? Okay?
Correct?
Miss Jeimo's to allow us to sort through all of this,
Miss Johnmo, do you have an opinion yes, jar or the.
US Trustee objects to the extension of the stay. I mean,
this is precisely one of the reasons that the US
Trustee considered the case to be filed in bad faith
and an abuse of the system. I believe that the
debtors have not paid their mortgage to the tune of
one hundred and ninety one thousand dollars of arrearages, and
while they are seeking the benefit of the state, they
haven't complied with the obligations of the bankruptcy court to
justify getting the benefit of this day, I do you
wish to respond?
Jan spends the next three minutes explaining that they've been
trying to get in touch with their mortgage lender, but
they're having a hard time figuring out who to contact
and how to get a reply.
So we really have been trying very, very hard for
a long time to get this resolved and to get
something in play so that we can move our lives forward.
And as I say, we have uncovered things that we
feel our violations that really need to be addressed before
a foreclosure could take place.
I can't really speak to your situation with your mortgage
service here. I think you'll have to continue to deal
with that and find a way to connect with the
appropriate individuals or to assert those claims in a proper forum.
This is generally not that forum in bankruptcy court. So
I'll answer you that with respect to the pendency of
the automatic stay, the court did take the extraordinary step
to temporarily extend that stay so that you could perfect
the papers, and unfortunately those things have not occurred, and
so this court can no longer continue to extend the
automatic stay. The Court's going to deny that requested relief.
They concluded the hearing by setting a deadline for Ron
and jan to submit their paperwork that includes a full
accounting of the GoFundMe. You'll hear Jennifer Giamo asking for clarification.
Jar and I just want to clarify for the record
the deadline by which the debtors need to provide our
office with number one, the accounting of all the GoFundMe
funds and to all of the documents that they are
on notice of being required to produce. May I suggest
that the deadline be set in the later than Friday,
July tenth, because that gives me sufficient opportunity to review
the documents before.
The meaning that is a week from this Friday, which
seems like it should be a sufficient amount of time. Okay,
all right, anything further from the parties, No, all right,
that'd be.
From the USST. Thank you, Erna, all right, thank you.
Weird journed to good luck.
As you heard, the month of July is going to
be a bumpy ride for Ron and jan They haven't
ntil July tenth to submit paperwork about the GoFundMe. Internet
detectives have been clamoring for transparency around that fundraiser for
years plus. Their house looks like it will be up
for foreclosure auction again at the end of July twenty
twenty six, and their due back in Judge Wansley's court
on August sixth. One of the questions that's gotten lost
in this story is the true status of Ron's health.
According to the GoFundMe, he has severe health problems, Parkinson's
cancer and heart issues. In many of the latest bankruptcy hearings,
he sounds very frail. Then on July fourth, just a
few days before I recorded this episode, Ron Owens posted
this patriotic message on Facebook.
Hey guys, my buddy here and I are hoping you
are enjoying the fourth of July. What you're doing, Maybe
going on out a bar you maybe going to a
baseball game, Go Giant, Maybe just sitting back and watching
TV and remembering this is the greatest country. Honor Happy
to fifty usday.
At the time I'm recording this, Laura's still living in
the Casida at her parents' house, the one they might lose.
And Laura's also got some big decisions to make this summer,
because at the end of August she'll be due in
court again for another settlement conference to discuss her plea
deal and hopefully come to a resolution on her fourteen
felony counts. If that all goes to plan, I'll be
there in person at the courthouse in Arizona with Clayton.
You'll hear from me after that, unless, of course, Laura
has something else in mind. Trat, Thank you so much
for listening. Please be sure to follow Love Trapped on
Apple Podcasts, the iHeartRadio app, Spotify, or wherever you get
your podcasts, and please leave us a review. A five
star rating helps others find this show. We're grateful for
your support. If you would like to reach out to
the Love Trapped team or have a similar story to share,
email us at Love Trapped pod at gmail dot com.
That's Love Trapped p o d at gmail dot com.
Love Trapped is a production of Glass Podcasts, a division
of Glass Entertainment Group, in partnership with iHeart Podcasts. This
show was executive produced by Nancy Glass, Andrea Gunning and
Ben Fetterman, Written, produced and hosted by me Stephanie Young.
Our story editor is Monique laboord producer on this episode
is Sidney Gladou. Additional production support from Todd Gans. Our
production manager is Kristin Melchiri. For iHeart Podcasts, Ali Perry
was our executive producer. Audio editing and mastering by Anna McClain.
Additional editing support by Tanner Robbins and Matt Delvechio. Thank
you to our voice actor Olivia Hewitt. This podcast was
developed in collaboration with Danny Passman and leb Abramoff at
cry Baby Media. The Love Trapped theme is composed by
Oliver Bains. Music library provided by Mybe Music. A special
thanks to Carrie Lieberman, Will Pearson, Jessica Crincheck, Ali Canton,
and the entire iHeart podcast team. And for more podcasts
from iHeart, visit the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever
you get your podcasts.