Some Comments on Today’s Bachelor News – April 3, 2024

OKAY, WHEW! No more 140 character Twitter limit. Not gonna lie — trying to explain complicated legal issues in such a limited format was getting tedious. No más. Let the word salad start spinning….

To begin, I want to clear up a few things. First, I’ve seen some people questioning my professional qualifications and implying that I am some kind of fly-by-night low-rent Saul Goodman. Har har kids, if you knew what I knew, you’d punch yourselves in the face for being such idiots. Let’s get that outta the way right up front…

I graduated from law school (University of San Francisco) in May 2000. I took and passed the California bar exam (first try), then I moved to Arizona and took and passed the AZ bar exam (first try).

At the start of my legal career, as a young lawyer, I worked for a small (5-lawyer) firm in Tempe. Two lawyers in that firm handled nothing but family law cases, so I got to do tons of fun stuff like divorce (hell), child custody (nightmare), child support collection (cha-ching), all that crap. I have respect for family law attorneys, but it’s not really my thing — seeing people going through a divorce, ALWAYS accusing each other of some terrible shit, never thinking about the kids….it’s not fun.

In the mid-2000’s, I moved to a larger firm in Phoenix (about 35 lawyers). Still did some family law, including trials, etc. One day, I saw a lawsuit on my boss’s desk with the name “Colin Farrell” listed as the plaintiff.

“Is that the Colin Farrell? The actor?”, I asked.

“Yep,” replied my boss. He made a sex tape with a Playboy Bunny and he is suing to keep it out of the public eye.

OK, screw family law — THAT is the kind of case I wanted to work on.

So I jumped on board, went to work like crazy, and learned the ropes of big-time litigation. I eventually got to meet Colin Farrell when we took his deposition in New York on Easter Sunday, 2005. We  eventually settled that case, and I got to have lunch with the guy. Way nicer than you’d expect. If anyone cares, this was part of the legal proceeding (it moved from state to federal to state court and was eventually settled).

This started my career in what I call “Internet Law”. What this means is that most of the time, I handle cases involving people getting sued over something posted online. This frequently involves defamation claims, but it can also be stuff like copyright infringement, trademark infringement, or any other claim arising from content posted online. I sometimes handle other stuff (suing people for money, etc.), but most of my time is spent on Internet Law cases.

Over the years, I have handled HUNDREDS and HUNDREDS of Internet Law cases. From 2009-2014, I litigated a crazy matter involving a Cincinnati Bengals cheerleader that almost went to the U.S. Supreme Court. I handled two jury trials in that one, and eventually we won 100% victory on appeal. This was (and still is) regarded as one of the most important Internet Law cases in the last 20 years. If you really want to read about the case, here’s the appeal that I won, and here’s an article about the story.

I’ve handled tons of other high-profile matters. Back in 2015, I defended a lawsuit brought by the “King of Instagram”, Dan Bilzerian. More on that case here. Total douchebag.

In 2016, I was hired by none other than fucking Johnny Depp, as part of his break-up with Amber Heard. I wasn’t involved directly in the divorce, and I did not directly represent Johnny. Instead, Amber Heard sued Johnny Depp’s best friend here in Arizona over this article slamming Amber. Notice how that article is still online? Yep – because I kicked the shit out of Amber’s lawyer in court, and she dropped the case about two days after she filed it.

I can give you more examples, but you get my point. If you think I’m not a lawyer to take seriously….you will quickly learn otherwise. And yeah, my style is a little harsh, but I do try to treat people with respect, until they no longer deserve it.

Now, enough about me. Let’s talk about this crazy Clayton/Jane Doe case. And by the way, I have absolutely NO IDEA why people think they aren’t allowed to say her name. SAY IT — her name is Laura Owens. There is no court order restricting the publication of her name, and it is not illegal for you talk about her (looking at you, Dave Neal). Oh, and for some of you Clayton fans out there — NO, THERE IS NO COURT ORDER LIMITING LAURA’S RIGHT TO PUBLISH HER OWN MEDICAL RECORDS. Seriously, try to at least have a 3-grade-level comprehension of how the legal system works before you start claiming to be an expert. You look stupid. Stop.

Now as for the case itself, this is where I’m going to be more careful. It is NOT appropriate to try a case like this in public. I can’t share EVERY fact and detail with you because the rules don’t allow that, and it wouldn’t be fair to Clayton.

Yes, I know Laura already went public with WAY too much info, and yes, I know Clayton tried to punch back with his own press release. They were both dumb to do that. Or at least it’s not what I would recommend.

Also, YES — I am NOT fully up to speed on everything. Stop reminding me of that. I know it. I’m working on it. Give me a f-ing chance guys. It’s barely been a week, and this is NOT my only case.

Having said that, a LOT has happened in this case over the last EIGHT days since I got involved. I am going to post a few comments about this moving forward, but only because I actually want you guys to BE INFORMED SO YOU CAN SPEAK INTELLIGENTLY ABOUT THIS STUFF.

I don’t care, not even in the slightest, whether you love Clayton, hate Laura, or are indifferent. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions. Don’t care which side you are on.

What I DO care is that you have an accurate understanding of the facts, and (if possible), I want you guys to understand how the law works….because Jesus fucking Christ…..this group needs some SERIOUS help in that department (I don’t mean that disrespectfully). Before I was a lawyer, I worked at fucking Taco Bell for Pete’s sake, and I, too, did not know a freakin’ thing about this complicated, messy system. It takes time, so please try to realize that maybe you don’t know everything, and maybe you should ask questions before rushing to a conclusion. You may just learn something.

This post is already too long, so let’s leave it there for now. We can talk again soon. I will update when/if necessary, not because I want to “earn the big bucks” (this page is not monetized, and I am NOT charging Laura for writing this). This is purely a public service message.

Until then, please stick to some basic ground rules — ask any questions you want, but BE NICE and RESPECTFUL. I am getting too old to tolerate pricks, so don’t be a prick, and I will do my best to reciprocate. Pricks and people acting in bad faith will get blocked. All others are welcome to talk.

More to come soon….

This Post Has 6 Comments

  1. Jane Doe

    Where are the fetal death certificates?

    DSG – There is info about the end of her pregnancy that is documented with medical records. Situation did not require a fetal death certificate. You are being fed a line of bullshit by people who are selling half-truths for clicks. Sad and fucking sick to exploit this situation for ad revenue, but that’s life and it is what scumbags do, TBH. Just wait for the trial. It will happen June 10th, and you will hear everything you need to know by then.

  2. Paul

    Thank you, David!!!

  3. Steve Simpson

    Your said “If I come to the conclusion that Ms Owens has lied, I will either withdraw from this case and/or take appropriate action”

    What’s your current comment to your previous statement?

    1. David Gingras

      Sorry, I don’t really understand what you are asking here? OF COURSE I will exit this case immediately if I find any proof that Laura has lied about ANYTHING.

      So far, that has not happened (and my review of the evidence is about 75% complete). So far, every single thing Laura has told me has been checked, re-checked, and verified to be 100% true. So yeah, looks like I’m not leaving anytime soon.

      Is that what you were asking?

  4. Steve Simpson

    Your client admitted that she altered a sonogram. So she herself admits she lied. That was in a deposition, so I’m confident you have read that.

  5. Tim Lin

    It sounds like before you just insulted people to make them (especially if they’re female) lose representation – like what some do to intimidate as “fixers strong-arming” instead of have evidence.

    Have some decorum – you also clearly keep re-emphasizing what the detractors of your client want, “love Clayton, hate Laura” WHO SAYS THIS ABOUT THEIR CLIENT? This is horrific and seriously makes one question your conflicts of interests.
    What kind of lawyer truly protecting their client even bothers to answer them?

Leave a Reply