Laura Michelle Owens - Court Case History

All editors are welcome to contribute any relevant information to Laura Owens' legal cases against Clayton Echard, Dave Neal, or others. Anyone is free to sign up and start editing, but all users must abide by the Wiki Code of Conduct. Please make sure to read the linked code of conduct before editing.

---

Laura Owens is a podcast host in Arizona. She is is at the center of the Clayton Echard paternity scandal and all of the related cases. Owens has falsified pregnancies and alleged abortion coercion and domestic violence in court against at least three different men. Each of these falsified pregnancies were alleged after the three men had tried to either end a relationship with Owens or communicated that they did not want to pursue anything romantic with her.

Quick Facts

• Owens has restraining orders, also referred to as an Order of Protection (OOP) against Michael Marraccini, Greg Gillespie, and Clayton Echard.
• Owens unsuccessfully attempted to obtain an OOP against YouTube personality, Dave Neal.
• Gillespie and Echard each have been granted OOPs against Owens.
• Owens sued Gillespie for abortion coercion and emotional distress (award sought was $40,000). These lawsuits were dismissed by a judge.
• Owens has threatened defamation lawsuits against Dave Neal, Reality Steve, Law Talk with Mike, among many other podcasters who have covered or are considering covering the story, without allowing her a platform.
• Owens filed a lawsuit against Dave Neal for harassment due to his public coverage of these court cases on his YouTube Channel, however she dismissed the suit the day before the court hearing.
• Owens has an active Family Court case suit against Echard. The case was moved to the inactive calendar after multiple DNA tests failed to prove paternity or pregnancy. However, Echard has filed to extend the court case in order to prove a finding of non-paternity. Case is now scheduled for a status conference on 2/21/2024 and a Trial/Evidentiary Hearing on 2/27/2024.
• Owens attempted to quash the motion to be deposed in the family court case against Echard, but the judge dismissed this motion on 2/16/2024.

Laura Owens' Victims:

Victim #1

Victim #1 wishes to remain anonymous, but journalists have been in touch and corroborated their story.

Victim #3

Victim #3 wishes to remain anonymous, but journalists have been in touch and corroborated their story.

Unsubstantiated Allegations, Claims, and Theories

There is a belief that Laura Owens impersonated a Howard University journalism student, by the name of Chase Jay Jones, in an attempt to get Echard canceled for having participated in a TikTok dance challenge featuring a song with the "n-word" in it. After this theory began to circulate, Jones' identity was scrubbed from the internet. The IP address that Chase Jay Jones used was traced back to the region Owens lives in. Source: All Ears Podcast episode with Dave Neal

In a later update on Jones, Dave Neal states, "Chase Jay Jones 100% joined my Patreon October 19th. I have this proof that they were lurking in there for several weeks. We tried to get their billing info from Patreon, who proved to be UTTERLY USELESS. Even with a court ordered subpoena, they weren’t able to find CJJ in their database. This person has vanished from the world. They either had their data scrubbed, or they’re hiding under a different username. All efforts are being taken to find their identity. More on that later."

Greg Gillespie

Greg Gillespie believes that Laura Owens was not actually pregnant with his twins, nor was she ever, despite her claims.

Laura Owens alleges that Gillespie hacked into her iMessage in 2021, sending himself the original faked sonogram. In 2023, Laura Owens alleges that Gillespie hacked her email account - she further alleges that Gillespie had hacked into her email account and distributed the fake sonogram video depicting her alleged twins with Clayton Echard to the press.

Clayton Echard

Clayton Echard, like Greg Gillespie, believes that Laura Owens was never pregnant with his twins, despite her claims.

Echard is still paying for legal representation; he is actively several thousand dollars in debt over this. If you’d like to donate, you can do so here.

Court Documents

Most recent court filings:

2/16/24 - DENIED / RE PETITIONERS MOTION TO QUASH DEPOSITION OF PETITIONER (not yet acquired)

2/12/24 - EXPEDITED MOTION TO SET VIRTUAL STATUS CONFERENCE/(EXPEDITED RULING REQUESTED) (not yet acquired)

2/12/24 - EXPEDITED MOTION TO SET VIRTUAL STATUS CONFERENCE/(EXPEDITED RULING REQUESTED) (not yet acquired)

2/6/24 - EXPEDITED MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL AND MOTION FOR ADDITIONAL TRIAL TIME (EXPEDITED RULING REQUESTED)

2/2/44 - Reply to Respondent's Response to Petitioner's Motion for Confidentiality and Preliminary Protective Order

Additional Sources and Coverage

All public coverage from Dave Neal’s Youtube can be found here: Playlist

Megan Fox Coverage can be found here: YouTube Playlist

Hearings uploaded to Youtube here: SchnitzelNinja — YouTube

Clayton spoke about his case on The Viall Files podcast on Jan 11, 2024.

Clayton also spoke about his case on The Unplanned Podcast on Feb 7, 2024.

Disclaimers

This timeline is now being hosted here on JusticeForClayton.com after the original timeline, posted to Reddit, was taken down along with the subsequent repost of the content on Medium. This page cites public court records and, except for the clearly delimited speculation at the bottom, only includes verifiable facts. We will happily update this page to include any substantive evidence proving a pregnancy and Clayton Echard's paternity, but a screenshot of a doctor's appointment doesn't meet any reasonable standard. The operator of this site claims no authorship over the content below and is simply rehosting it for public accountability.

As of 12/20/2023, the domain registrar has already received one cease and desist for this site. The content below is a collected summary of cited links to independently verifiable sources and we will revise its content in response to credible evidence as more is made available. The intent is not to harass or defame anyone, but rather to preserve important public information that has been repeatedly removed from other sites under abusive takedown notices.

contact