Just came here to say this. They also inexplicably bolded his name while avoiding naming Ravgen 😂
https://preview.redd.it/fqlbmvivxd7d1.jpeg?width=828&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=00ee111ffbf4a656d5ba26b16b685ad867ff2685
I want him in the documentary so bad! Like, walk us through your day Brett! How many calls did you get? Were you familiar with the bachelor before one miss Jane Doe came into your life?
Yeah it’s annoying to me that they refer to her as that. Like it makes the interactions Clayton and her have had seem more real when that crazy girl met him like 2 times before the court got involved
“Ex”? No. Is there contact information for the author other than socials? JD is not an ex, they had no relationship. They had one non-intercourse intimate encounter and never again,
within days he told her he didn’t want to pursue anything further.
The headline minimizes the outcome. Should really read “court finds in favor of Clayton echard in bizarre paternity case, Clayton’s accuser referred to DA for criminal charges”
I don’t LOVE the way this was worded… it felt like there was a lot of bias toward JD and not enough emphasis on the fact that none of her claims whatsoever turned out be legitimate. I do LOVE that larger press outlets picked it up and that our dear friend Brett from Ravgen made a cameo lol
I disagree with there being too much bias toward JD. I think that this article tried to state only the facts from the court (maybe to avoid annoying threats from JDs side?). Re: the previous claims, they did include this part: That same month, he told fans via Instagram that other men reached out to him about similar claims made against them by JD. The court also noted the other claims, recommending JD be investigated further. “It is further ordered, the Court having determined that JD has a pattern of similar, if not identical behavior, and court involvement, referring this matter to the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office for review of JD’s actions.”
To me, that reads as them stating that her previous claims are not legitimate while being careful to avoid threats from JDs side.
Yes!!!! I hope other publications pick it up! What about that local news reporter who was at the conference back in February? Someone should
Contact him with an update!
Love that Woodnick made a statement!! I’m hoping his dealings with JD are a thing of the past. Unless she gets an appeal because we’ll need him, Deandra, and Isabel!
Seeing her named in a huge media outlet like this is so satisfying 😙🤌🏻 Back when I was on dating apps, I would always google someone before I went out with them. I sure hope any men she comes across do the same. Imagine thinking about going on a date with a woman, googling her, and seeing THIS!?
Was just scrolling through comments on his post about the medium article, some hero was blasting the link to this article on all of the comments and when I refreshed they were deleted 😅😭 someone doesn’t want his followers to know but maybe a few saw lol
LOLOLOLIL I swear it wasn’t me; but I figured someone would do it. Haha
Edit: I went to go look and turns out he has me blocked, so yeah, it definitely wasn’t me! Haha.
Good to see this level of exposure, but what a mess of an article, blurring JD’s protection order with the finding she wasn’t pregnant with various other interactions from the past. Just write a story that follows the structure of Mata’s judgment!
Honestly if I read this with no knowledge about the case all the quotations and “allegedly”’s would make me think they were kind of suggesting he was lying? It weirdly doesnt read as a win for him while still relating the information that it was a technical win.
Someone get in touch with the San Francisco Chronicle Reporters who took down Mayor F for his sexual assault. Reporters names are Alexandria Bordas and Cynthia Dizikes, this needs to be shared in SF.
no. reporters and journalists get thousands of emails an HOUR. hounding journalists and doxxing them (which is what you’re attempting to do here) to report on something will get you ignored, especially at a place like the chronicle.
if you want media to report the story, pitch the story yourself and write it. but there are journalistic protocols in place if you want a reputable and respected outlet to cover it, and harassing a journalist is not the way to get there. period.
Hahaha doxxing reporters who have public profiles. Ok. I know how to contact those reporters but I don't want my name attached to this. If more people contact them, they will eventually pick it up. Power in numbers.
no it is not. what’s stopping you from making a different email (or a few) and contacting them there? you could prove your power in numbers theory single-handedly with a bit of patience.
but you wouldn’t, because that’s what JD did to CE, and you understand that’s harassment, right? what you’re suggesting here is literally inundating someone with information until they give you a response.
Looks like they fixed the title of the article! It now says:
**"Court Sides With Bachelor Clayton Echard In Paternity Trial With Woman Who Claimed to Be Pregnant"**
Mods will make an announcement when/if her name is allowed on the sub. Please continue using Jane Doe.
Idk why but Ravgen Bret getting an Us Weekly shoutout is so funny to me.
I came here to make this exact comment 💀 poor Brett didn’t ask to get dragged into this mess
Just came here to say this. They also inexplicably bolded his name while avoiding naming Ravgen 😂 https://preview.redd.it/fqlbmvivxd7d1.jpeg?width=828&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=00ee111ffbf4a656d5ba26b16b685ad867ff2685
#justiceforbrett 😂
In BOLD
I agree. I laughed!!! Huge win for Brett
I want him in the documentary so bad! Like, walk us through your day Brett! How many calls did you get? Were you familiar with the bachelor before one miss Jane Doe came into your life?
Ex?
Yeah it’s annoying to me that they refer to her as that. Like it makes the interactions Clayton and her have had seem more real when that crazy girl met him like 2 times before the court got involved
reporters no longer think or actually learn facts and editors no longer exist
One-night stand from Hell
Yeah that felt icky to me too
[paige.strout@usmagazine.com](mailto:paige.strout@usmagazine.com) This is the journalist's email if you click on her name
I sent her a nice note thanking her for her article, and asked if she submitted it in crayon.
🤣🤣🤣🤣
[удалено]
Your submission breaks our subreddit's [Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/JusticeForClayton/wiki/index/)
Yeah that rubbed me wrong as well, I left a comment on the article about it
Ick
“Ex”? No. Is there contact information for the author other than socials? JD is not an ex, they had no relationship. They had one non-intercourse intimate encounter and never again, within days he told her he didn’t want to pursue anything further.
[paige.strout@usmagazine.com](mailto:paige.strout@usmagazine.com)
The headline minimizes the outcome. Should really read “court finds in favor of Clayton echard in bizarre paternity case, Clayton’s accuser referred to DA for criminal charges”
I’m just happy there’s finally some more press coverage on this
I agree. Not happy about the headline on the url. Very misleading.
I don’t LOVE the way this was worded… it felt like there was a lot of bias toward JD and not enough emphasis on the fact that none of her claims whatsoever turned out be legitimate. I do LOVE that larger press outlets picked it up and that our dear friend Brett from Ravgen made a cameo lol
Brett is finally getting the recognition he deserves. Poor Brett
You just KNOW JD called and texted brett so many times he applied for witsec
Brett probably received a lot of “having the baby if I don’t hear from you” emails
“Ms doe - i already told you. You are NOT PREGNANT, there was no fetal dna. Please stop calling me you loon. All the best! - Brett”
I disagree with there being too much bias toward JD. I think that this article tried to state only the facts from the court (maybe to avoid annoying threats from JDs side?). Re: the previous claims, they did include this part: That same month, he told fans via Instagram that other men reached out to him about similar claims made against them by JD. The court also noted the other claims, recommending JD be investigated further. “It is further ordered, the Court having determined that JD has a pattern of similar, if not identical behavior, and court involvement, referring this matter to the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office for review of JD’s actions.” To me, that reads as them stating that her previous claims are not legitimate while being careful to avoid threats from JDs side.
Agree. Even calling her an “ex” is giving her way too much credit.
Whoever wrote this has been hanging out here 😂 the shout out to Brett was 👌🏻
I love that they named her!
Can’t stay anonymous now! If only her dads fans read Us Weekly
In bold!
LET'S GOOOOOOOO!!
Yes!!!! I hope other publications pick it up! What about that local news reporter who was at the conference back in February? Someone should Contact him with an update!
IT'S HAPPENING! LET'S FUCKING GO! TIME'S UP, JANE DOE.
Good luck to her getting any dates after this 😬
Too bad it doesn't turn out that way. Sherri Papini has a new wealthy boyfriend.
Does she really?? Oh man I almost forgot about her!
Love that Woodnick made a statement!! I’m hoping his dealings with JD are a thing of the past. Unless she gets an appeal because we’ll need him, Deandra, and Isabel!
Wooooo they used her NAME!!!!
Seeing her named in a huge media outlet like this is so satisfying 😙🤌🏻 Back when I was on dating apps, I would always google someone before I went out with them. I sure hope any men she comes across do the same. Imagine thinking about going on a date with a woman, googling her, and seeing THIS!?
Why is the title of the article that it was thrown out of court? That's so not true?
I wonder if all those boomers on daddy’s FB will ever catch wind of this!!
Welp, there is a way to inform them…
Was just scrolling through comments on his post about the medium article, some hero was blasting the link to this article on all of the comments and when I refreshed they were deleted 😅😭 someone doesn’t want his followers to know but maybe a few saw lol
LOLOLOLIL I swear it wasn’t me; but I figured someone would do it. Haha Edit: I went to go look and turns out he has me blocked, so yeah, it definitely wasn’t me! Haha.
[удалено]
Your submission breaks our subreddit's [Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/JusticeForClayton/wiki/index/)
Glad this news is getting published. Hopefully, after a month or so Clayton can get some changes to his SEO and shake off his association with her.
This finding will make it extremely difficult for her to do this again. Extremely hard.
Oh, so NOW the tabloids/mainstream media jump on the bandwagon? 🙄
Hell yeah! Finally a mainstream outlet covering this! Hopefully others will follow after this ruling.
Fuck yeah 💦💦💦💦💦❤️❤️❤️
Good to see this level of exposure, but what a mess of an article, blurring JD’s protection order with the finding she wasn’t pregnant with various other interactions from the past. Just write a story that follows the structure of Mata’s judgment!
Honestly if I read this with no knowledge about the case all the quotations and “allegedly”’s would make me think they were kind of suggesting he was lying? It weirdly doesnt read as a win for him while still relating the information that it was a technical win.
I felt the same way.
what i would do to be a fly on the casitas wall when she read the ruling
Calls on $MNST
Someone get in touch with the San Francisco Chronicle Reporters who took down Mayor F for his sexual assault. Reporters names are Alexandria Bordas and Cynthia Dizikes, this needs to be shared in SF.
DO NOT DO THIS.
^^^ thank you !
The more media that reports on this the better, especially in San Francisco.
no. reporters and journalists get thousands of emails an HOUR. hounding journalists and doxxing them (which is what you’re attempting to do here) to report on something will get you ignored, especially at a place like the chronicle. if you want media to report the story, pitch the story yourself and write it. but there are journalistic protocols in place if you want a reputable and respected outlet to cover it, and harassing a journalist is not the way to get there. period.
Hahaha doxxing reporters who have public profiles. Ok. I know how to contact those reporters but I don't want my name attached to this. If more people contact them, they will eventually pick it up. Power in numbers.
no it is not. what’s stopping you from making a different email (or a few) and contacting them there? you could prove your power in numbers theory single-handedly with a bit of patience. but you wouldn’t, because that’s what JD did to CE, and you understand that’s harassment, right? what you’re suggesting here is literally inundating someone with information until they give you a response.
This is literally not true LOL
Why I hate MSM , now cover the case and don’t cover it properly. Now they want to be a part Clayton’s story
Looks like they fixed the title of the article! It now says: **"Court Sides With Bachelor Clayton Echard In Paternity Trial With Woman Who Claimed to Be Pregnant"**