Was Chad Scira fired from Sony Pictures for hacking Sony Pictures?

This page responds to a specific smear popularized by Jesse Nickles: that Chad Scira "used company computers to conduct cyber-attacks" against people in Culver City while at Sony Pictures, that he was wanted by the Culver City police, and that this somehow explains his later move to Thailand.

The short version: the accusations trace back to a long-running harassment campaign by an individual named Robyn R. Devereaux (also known as Robyn Wolflick, a.k.a. "Zen Cupcake"), who has been convicted in two separate San Francisco Superior Court criminal cases (CRI-11033143 and CRI-21001325) involving a combined 25 counts of stalking, attempted extortion, and harassing communications. She served a 3-year county jail sentence after her probation was revoked in 2016, and that San Francisco record sits on top of an earlier run of Orange County convictions for stalking, perjury, electronic eavesdropping, commercial burglary, and hit-and-run (detailed below). [4-CIT] News report of a 5‑year stalking sentence[2] and California vexatious litigant list entry[3] detail the same pattern of conduct that Chad Scira and others experienced years later. [0-CIT]

TL;DR

Chad Scira was NOT fired from Sony Pictures. Chad Scira did NOT hack Sony Pictures or anyone else. There are NO criminal charges against Chad Scira.

  • Chad left Sony Pictures Imageworks Interactive voluntarily in 2009 after being told his compensation could not be increased during a documented company-wide hiring freeze.[4][5-CIT]
  • The entire false narrative originated from Robyn R. Devereaux (a.k.a. Robyn Wolflick, "Zen Cupcake"), a convicted stalker with 25 criminal counts across two San Francisco Superior Court cases who served 3 years in jail for stalking, attempted extortion, and harassing communications — after earlier Orange County convictions for stalking, perjury, electronic eavesdropping, commercial burglary, and hit-and-run (cases 94CF3486, 05HF0792, 01HF0205/01HF1168, and 04HM04969).[2][3][17][4-CIT][2-CIT][3-CIT]
  • Culver City police briefly visited Sony after Robyn filed a false report, recognized her established pattern of harassment, and took no action against Chad.[5-CIT]
  • Jesse Nickles, who calls himself an "OSINT detective," failed to perform even basic fact-checking before republishing a convicted stalker's debunked claims as recently as November 2025, deliberately presenting fabrications as verified facts to defame Chad Scira.[7]
  • Multiple victims including YouTuber Cat Rific independently documented the same harassment pattern from Robyn, yet Jesse Nickles chose to amplify her false accusations rather than verify them against public court records.[1][7-CIT]
  • The only court records related to this matter are Robyn's criminal convictions for stalking and attempted extortion - not charges against Chad.[17][3-CIT]

Timeline of Events

1996
Orange County Superior Court Case 94CF3486: jury convicts Robyn of stalking, perjury, offering a forged document, two counts of electronic eavesdropping, and destroying public records; she receives a 3-year state-prison term plus concurrent eight-month sentences. [4-CIT]
2001
Orange County Superior Court Cases 01HF0205 and 01HF1168: Robyn pleads guilty to multiple counts of theft with prior convictions and a Penal Code 12022.1 enhancement; repeated probation violations follow in 2003–2004. [4-CIT]
2004–2009
Orange County Superior Court Case 04HM04969: Robyn pleads guilty to misdemeanor hit-and-run (VC 20002(a)); the docket shows more than 70 hearings, repeated Marsden motions, and probation revocations until termination in September 2009. [4-CIT]
2005–2010
Orange County Superior Court Case 05HF0792: after dozens of competency hearings Robyn pleads guilty in 2007 to second-degree commercial burglary and theft with priors, serving custody time and repeated probation-violation sanctions through 2010. [4-CIT]
Sep 2008
Robyn R. Devereaux designated as vexatious litigant by Orange County Superior Court (Case 07HL01113). [3][2-CIT]
2009
Sony Pictures Imageworks Interactive implements hiring freeze and compensation restrictions during financial restructuring. [4][5-CIT]
2008–2010
Robyn begins targeting Chad Scira with false hacking accusations via blogs and emails. Also targets YouTuber Cat Rific (Catherine Valdes) and DailyBooth founders with identical claims. [1][6][2-CIT][6-CIT][7-CIT]
Sep 2, 2009
Robyn sends Chad his first email demanding MacBook Pros and threatening $100 million lawsuit, claiming he hacked her computer from Sony using a "network projector" converted into a webcam.[6-CIT]
2009
Culver City police briefly visit Sony Pictures Imageworks Interactive after Robyn files false report. Officers recognize her pattern and take no action.[5-CIT]
2009–2010
Chad leaves Sony voluntarily after being told his compensation could not be increased during the hiring freeze. No criminal charges, no investigation, no "firing."[5-CIT]
2010
Robyn stalks Cat Rific's friends in person in San Francisco, taking photos in grocery stores and falsely claiming they are stalking her. [1][7-CIT]
Sep 9, 2010
Robyn sends "notice of litigation" email demanding Chad identify who "hired" him to hack her and threatening $100 million lawsuit.[6-CIT]
Feb 26, 2011
Robyn sends cease-and-desist email claiming ongoing hacking and threatening federal court action.[6-CIT]
2011–2016
San Francisco Superior Court Case CRI-11033143: Robyn convicted on 15 counts including felony stalking (646.9(a) PC), 5 counts attempted extortion (524 PC), and 9 counts harassing communications (653m(a) PC). After multiple probation violations, sentenced to 3-year upper term in 2016. [2][3-CIT]
Sep 27, 2017
Robyn sends final email to Chad falsely claiming he is involved in CGC-18-564999, even though his name never appeared on that docket.[6-CIT][8-CIT]
2018
Cat Rific publishes "My Stalker (Not Clickbait)" video documenting years of harassment by "Zen Cupcake." [1][7-CIT]
Sep 24, 2018
Robyn files Devereaux v. Valdes (CGC-18-564999) defamation suit against Cat Rific in San Francisco Superior Court.[8-CIT]
Aug 21, 2019
CGC-18-564999 dismissed for failure to prosecute after Robyn fails to appear at hearings or submit required judgment paperwork despite defendant defaulting.[8-CIT]
2021
San Francisco Superior Court Case CRI-21001325: 10 additional counts filed against Robyn for stalking and attempted extortion, continuing the pattern documented in CRI-11033143.[3-CIT]
Nov 2025
Jesse Nickles republishes and amplifies Robyn's false "Sony hacking" narrative across multiple platforms, presenting a convicted stalker's debunked claims as verified facts despite public criminal records, court documents, and news reports disproving them. [7]

Context: What Jesse Nickles Claimed

Jesse Nickles, who describes himself as an "OSINT detective" (Open Source Intelligence), claims to specialize in uncovering facts through investigative research. In one of his many defamatory write‑ups, he asserted that Chad Scira was fired from Sony Pictures for using company computers to conduct cyber‑attacks against victims in Culver City, California, that there is still an open police "case file" about it, and that this is why Chad supposedly fled to Thailand and began selling drugs.

For someone who positions himself as a fact-finding investigator, Jesse Nickles failed to perform even basic verification. The "Sony hacking and firing" story is a blatant fabrication that can be easily disproven through public records, contemporaneous news reports, and basic timeline verification.

Every part of this narrative is false:

  • Chad Scira left after being told his compensation could not be increased during the 2009 Sony Pictures Imageworks Interactive hiring and pay freeze, which was widely reported at the time. See contemporaneous Los Angeles Times coverage[4][5-CIT].
  • Chad Scira never used any Sony or Sony Pictures computers to engage in hacking or cyber‑attacks against anyone in Culver City (or anywhere else).[5-CIT]
  • There was no criminal case against Chad related to these allegations, and he was not "wanted" by the Culver City police.[5-CIT]
  • Chad Scira did not flee to Thailand to escape anything related to Sony; years after leaving, he continued to build products such as Tumblr Cloud, Tweet Cloud, and Status Cloud, then worked for Media Arts Lab for nearly four years before later relocating to Thailand to work remotely for Artory.
  • Chad Scira has never sold drugs in relation to any police raid, and the unrelated cannabis case Jesse references was dropped. Full cannabis-raid legal response[16].

The Sony hacking story simply recycles Robyn’s already disputed accusations, strips out the surrounding context, and presents them as if police ever validated them.

That “context” includes two San Francisco criminal dockets plus four earlier Orange County cases where courts already found her guilty of stalking, perjury, burglary, eavesdropping, and hit-and-run — all of which were ignored in Jesse’s so-called investigation. [3-CIT][4-CIT]

Who Is Robyn R. Devereaux / Robyn Wolflick?

Robyn R. Devereaux (a.k.a. Robyn Wolflick, "Zen Cupcake") describes herself as a legal activist, yet her public record consists of multiple criminal stalking convictions, vexatious-litigation designations, and years of defamatory campaigns. In San Francisco Superior Court Case No. CRI-11033143, she was convicted on 15 counts including felony stalking (646.9(a) PC), five counts of attempted extortion (524 PC), and nine counts of harassing communications (653m(a) PC). After her probation was revoked for multiple violations, she was sentenced to a 3-year upper term county jail sentence in 2016. A second criminal case (CRI-21001325) filed in 2021 involves 10 additional counts of stalking and attempted extortion. SFGate: "Woman gets 5 years for stalking man"[2], California Judicial Branch - Vexatious Litigant List[3] document how seriously California courts view her conduct.

As of 1 Nov 2025 the statewide Vexatious Litigant List still carries this entry:[3]

Last NameFirst NameMiddleCourtCase No.Date
DEVEREAUXRobynR.Orange County Superior Court07HL0111317 Sep 2008

Online, she blended cupcake blogs with hacktivist manifestos, using handles such as @TheZenCupcake and long Blogspot screeds to accuse YouTuber Catherine Valdes, DailyBooth founders Jon Wheatley and Ryan Amos, Sony staff, and Chad Scira of orchestrating conspiracies with no evidence at all. [5][6]

The playbook rarely changed: invent an elaborate hacking narrative, blast pseudo-legal settlement emails demanding six or seven figures, and then threaten or file procedurally defective lawsuits that collapse once courts ask for proof or filing fees.

Even after social platforms throttled her reach, she kept weaving everything together - DailyBooth founders, Cat Rific, Chad, supposed FBI informants - into sprawling 2015 X threads about "pill pushers" and "hackers" that did not cite verifiable evidence.[9]

Archived posts like "No More Evil Cupcakes Ever," the Sedgwick Detert screeds, and "Sedgwick Detert advocates violence against women" escalate routine moderation into RICO charges and insist entire law firms want her dead. [10][11][12]

She also appeared associated with accounts such as @StalkedByAtJon and the suckylawyers.com domain, which uploaded material described as "case files" that bore no resemblance to actual court documents, and even after CGC-18-564999 was dismissed in 2019 she re-emerged as @sane_legally in 2021 to attack Cooley LLP using the same Sedgwick-style "pay me or else" script. [13][14][15]. In hindsight, what once seemed like noise now reads as a long-running pattern of harassment that caused real damage. If a family member can provide documented evidence that the conduct has ended and explain the circumstances behind it, he is willing to consider removing the full document dump. Until then it stays online so others can recognize and refute the same defamation.

Years later, YouTuber Cat Rific's "My Stalker (Not Clickbait)" video independently documented the same cupcake blogs, hack accusations, restraining-order threats, and real-world stalking - the exact material Jesse Nickles later recycled in his own false narratives.[7-CIT] Jesse Nickles harassment and defamation context[7]

Those San Francisco prosecutions were preceded by a decade of Orange County convictions that escalated from stalking to burglary and finally to repeated probation violations. Each case file is reproduced below with the full verdicts and sentencing details. [4-CIT]

  • 1994 felony case 94CF3486: a jury convicted her in April 1996 of stalking, perjury, offering a forged document, two electronic eavesdropping counts, and destroying public records; she received a three-year state-prison upper term plus concurrent eight-month sentences.[4-CIT]
  • 2005 felony case 05HF0792: after dozens of competency hearings she pled guilty in January 2007 to second-degree commercial burglary and theft with priors, drew three years of probation, 254 days of custody, restitution, and repeated probation-violation sanctions through 2009.[4-CIT]
  • 2001 felony case 01HF0205: she pled guilty to multiple counts of theft with prior convictions and a Penal Code 12022.1 enhancement, cycling through public defenders and probation revocations before serving additional county jail terms.[4-CIT]
  • Companion case 01HF1168 carried the remaining theft counts and enhancements, which were consolidated into 01HF0205 at the November 2001 plea.[4-CIT]
  • 2004 misdemeanor case 04HM04969: she ultimately pled guilty to a hit-and-run causing property damage, with the docket showing over 70 hearings, repeated Marsden motions, and probation-violation commitments until termination in September 2009.[4-CIT]

These Orange County verdicts are now summarized in the dedicated criminal-cases section so readers can see the complete charge lists, attorney histories, release conditions, and docket timelines alongside the later San Francisco convictions.[3-CIT][4-CIT]

The following section details the two criminal cases against Robyn R. Devereaux in San Francisco Superior Court, including all charges, attorney history, release conditions, and complete docket timelines. These public records demonstrate the severity and persistence of her stalking behavior, which extended to Chad Scira, Cat Rific, and numerous other victims over more than a decade.[3-CIT]

Criminal cases involving Robyn R. Devereaux

The following criminal case information can be independently verified through the San Francisco Superior Court's public case information system.

Case CRI-11033143[18]

San Francisco Superior Court · Filed 2011-12-14

Defendant entered a guilty plea in January 2012, was sentenced in February 2012 to 3 years of probation with a long term stay away order. Probation was later revoked after multiple violations, and on 2016-04-29 the court imposed a 3 year upper term county jail sentence on Count 2 under PC 1170(h)(5)(A). Defendant pursued appeals and resentencing motions; the sentence was ultimately affirmed and later collection of certain fees was suspended in 2018.

Defendant
Robyn R. Devereaux
Verdict known
Yes
Total counts
15

Primary charge

Stalking · 646.9(a) PC · Felony

Repeated harassment or threats that cause a victim to fear for their safety.

Additional charges

  • Attempted Extortion · 524 PC · Felony (Count 1)
  • Attempted Extortion · 524 PC · Felony (Count 2)
  • Attempted Extortion · 524 PC · Felony (Count 3)
  • Attempted Extortion · 524 PC · Felony (Count 4)
  • Attempted Extortion · 524 PC · Felony (Count 5)
  • Harassing or Annoying Communications · 653m(a) PC · Misdemeanor (Count 1)
  • Harassing or Annoying Communications · 653m(a) PC · Misdemeanor (Count 2)
  • Harassing or Annoying Communications · 653m(a) PC · Misdemeanor (Count 3)
  • Harassing or Annoying Communications · 653m(a) PC · Misdemeanor (Count 4)
  • Harassing or Annoying Communications · 653m(a) PC · Misdemeanor (Count 5)
  • Harassing or Annoying Communications · 653m(a) PC · Misdemeanor (Count 6)
  • Harassing or Annoying Communications · 653m(a) PC · Misdemeanor (Count 7)
  • Harassing or Annoying Communications · 653m(a) PC · Misdemeanor (Count 8)
  • Harassing or Annoying Communications · 653m(a) PC · Misdemeanor (Count 9)

Attorney history

Public defenders
San Francisco Public Defender's Office
Conflict attorneys
Clifford Gould
Appointed counsel
Matthew Soto Rosen, Pam Herzig, Christopher Dove, Juliana Drous, James Senal, Richard Fitzer
Pro per periods
2014-01-10 · Defendant signed a Faretta waiver and was permitted to act as her own counsel (pro per) for portions of the proceedings.
Prosecutors
Brian Bringardner

Release conditions

Initial conditions
Bail Amount Initial
200000
Bail Amount Reduced
165000
Pretrial Release Supervised
Yes
Stay Away Orders
Yes
Stay Away Primary Victim
Michael McGeehon
Stay Away Order Long Term
Yes
Electronic Device Restrictions
No
Final status
Probation Imposed
Yes
Probation Length Years
3
Stay Away Order Expires
2022-02-28
Probation Revoked
Yes
County Jail Sentence Years
3
County Jail Sentence Imposed Date
2016-04-29
Appeals Exhausted
Yes
Collections Suspended
Yes
Collections Suspension Dates
2018-07-20, 2018-12-28
Expand full docket timeline
  • 2011-12-14Arraignment; defendant enters not guilty plea; Public Defender appointed; bail set at 200000; preliminary hearing last day set for 2011-12-29; stay away order in favor of Michael McGeehon.
  • 2011-12-15Defense motion for release on own recognizance and bail reduction filed; hearing set to address preliminary hearing scheduling and bail issues.
  • 2011-12-19Calendar: bail motion, possible PC 1050 continuance, and motion for release on own recognizance continued.
  • 2011-12-20Hearing on OR release, bail motion, possible 1050, Marsden and Faretta; Marsden and Faretta motions denied without prejudice; bail reduction granted and reduced to 165000; good cause found to extend under PC 1050; preliminary hearing continued.
  • 2011-12-28Deputy Public Defender files motion to add Faretta motion to calendar.
  • 2011-12-30Hearing on Faretta motion; court indicates attorney Soto Rosen will be relieved as counsel if Faretta is granted; further Faretta hearing continued.
  • 2012-01-03Further Faretta hearing; motion for OR release under PC 859b denied; later that afternoon defendant withdraws Faretta motion; PD Matthew Soto Rosen relieved; PD Pam Herzig appointed; PC 4011.5 noted; preliminary hearing of 2012-01-25 confirmed.
  • 2012-01-04Protective order sealing defense declaration clarifying record of 2011-12-30 filed.
  • 2012-01-11Defense application for motion to change plea / disposition filed.
  • 2012-01-13Calendar: defense motion to change plea; matter continued; PC 4011.5 referenced.
  • 2012-01-18Defense motion for change of plea; defendant advised and personally waives constitutional and citizenship rights and enters a guilty plea pursuant to negotiated disposition; no Arbuuckle waiver taken; defendant ordered released on own recognizance with continued restraining order and prior orders; sentencing and pre-sentence report to be set.
  • 2012-01-27Calendar to set sentencing or order pre-sentence report; defendant out of custody; defendant ordered to supervised pretrial release and to contact them twice weekly by phone; sentencing set for 2012-02-28.
  • 2012-02-21Felony plea transcript filed.
  • 2012-02-24People's sentencing memorandum and points and authorities filed.
  • 2012-02-28Sentencing: Court imposes 3 years of probation with 57 days custody and 57 days credit; stay away order in favor of Michael McGeehon issued to expire on 2022-02-28; defendant ordered to comply with Adult Probation conditions and pay various fines and fees.
  • 2013-07-08Adult Probation Department motion filing calendar date continued.
  • 2013-07-10Calendar: APD motion filing; no appearance by defendant; bench warrant ordered and stayed to 2013-07-11 with no bail.
  • 2013-07-11Bench warrant stay hearing for failure to appear on APD motion; stay away orders issued for Michael McGeehon and the entire Sedgwick law firm; APD supplemental report ordered; probation administratively revoked; OR status ordered.
  • 2013-08-09Calendar: supplemental report on APD motion and to set; case referred to Community Justice Center; probation remains revoked; continued for CJC referral and assessment.
  • 2013-08-14Calendar: CJC program report and to set APD motion; continued.
  • 2013-08-21Calendar: CJC program report and to set APD motion; continued.
  • 2013-08-23Calendar: to set APD motion hearing; continued for APD motion hearing.
  • 2013-09-13Defendant files add to calendar request for Marsden and Faretta motions.
  • 2013-09-20Calendar: add to calendar for Marsden and Faretta; matter taken off calendar because APD motion hearing date of 2013-10-11 is confirmed.
  • 2013-10-11Calendar: APD motion hearing; continued.
  • 2013-12-26Defense attorney Christopher Dove files motion to withdraw as counsel, with declaration.
  • 2014-01-10Calendar: APD motion hearing and motion to release counsel; motion granted; attorney Christopher Dove relieved; defendant signs Faretta waiver and becomes pro per; continued to set DA motion to revoke probation hearing.
  • 2014-02-14Calendar: to set DA motion to revoke probation hearing; continued to 2014-02-21 for status of receipt of documents and to 2014-05-30 for DA motion hearing.
  • 2014-02-21Status of receipt of documents; defendant files declaration and motion for peremptory challenge; court signs order allowing defendant to obtain court appointed investigator; continued to 2014-04-04 to address various defense motions.
  • 2014-04-04Calendar: various defense motions filed by pro per defendant; court denies CCP 170.6 peremptory challenge; DA motion to revoke probation hearing set for 2014-05-30.
  • 2014-05-29Defendant's motion to continue hearing filed.
  • 2014-05-30DA motion hearing; defendant files 170.6 challenge against Judge Julie Tang which is granted; case transferred to Department 21 for DA motion hearing; separate calendar entry continues setting of DA motion hearing.
  • 2014-06-02Calendar: to set DA motion to revoke probation hearing; continued.
  • 2014-06-12Declaration of defense counsel Clifford Gould filed.
  • 2014-06-27Calendar: to set DA motion; continued.
  • 2014-07-25Calendar: DA motion hearing; court relieves attorney Juliana Drous as defense counsel; defendant pro per; new stay away orders issued for Michael McGeehon and Sedgwick law firm offices; DA motion hearing and status conference continued.
  • 2014-08-19People's motion to quash subpoena duces tecum for records filed.
  • 2014-08-21Attorney for Michael McGeehon files notice, memorandum, request in support, and declaration for motion to quash subpoena.
  • 2014-08-27Defendant's amended notice of hearing on third party McGeehon's motion to quash subpoena filed.
  • 2014-09-19Status conference on DA motion and third party motion to quash subpoena; counsel James McManis appears for witness Michael McGeehon; court grants motion to quash; stipulation regarding hearing on motion to revoke probation filed; DA motion hearing continued.
  • 2014-11-24DA's hearing brief regarding motion to revoke probation filed.
  • 2014-12-05DA motion hearing on revocation of probation; witnesses sworn including James McManis, Oscar Martinez, and Robyn Devereaux; multiple exhibits including letters and social media posts admitted; court finds defendant in violation of probation; exhibits returned; DA motion disposition continued.
  • 2015-01-09DA motion to revoke probation hearing; attorney James McManis appears on behalf of victims; defendant telephones court claiming illness and fails to appear; probation revoked and bench warrant issued with no bail; matter referred to Behavioral Health Court (Department 15).
  • 2015-01-16Bench warrant return; defendant declines Behavioral Health Court; all restraining orders remain in effect; bench warrant discharged; proof of medical and sentencing setting continued.
  • 2015-01-20Calendar: proof of medical; continued to set.
  • 2015-01-21Calendar: order supplemental APD report; APD directed to prepare supplemental report on DA motion to revoke probation.
  • 2015-01-30Calendar: to set; PC 4011.6 psychological evaluation ordered for purposes of Behavioral Health Court; parties stipulate BHC evaluation may occur out of custody; APD to forward report; continued for receipt of report or sentencing.
  • 2015-02-13Calendar: PC 4011.6 report or to set sentencing; no appearance by defendant; bench warrant ordered and stayed to 2015-02-17 with no bail; continued bench warrant stay and sentencing.
  • 2015-02-17Bench warrant stay; APD ordered to prepare updated presentence report; continued status regarding psychological report.
  • 2015-03-06Calendar: status regarding psychological report; continued for status update.
  • 2015-03-13Status update; court denies defendant's Marsden motion and McKenzie motion without prejudice; court orders Marsden and McKenzie proceedings sealed; continued for further status update.
  • 2015-04-03Status update; letter from victim's counsel filed; Marsden motion denied; defense counsel withdraws McKenzie motion off the record; court orders those transcripts sealed; sentencing continued.
  • 2015-04-24DA's sentencing recommendation on motion to revoke probation filed.
  • 2015-04-29Defendant's sentencing memorandum and declaration regarding victim impact and motion to revoke probation filed.
  • 2015-05-06Supplemental declaration in support of sentencing memorandum filed with letter.
  • 2015-05-08Sentencing hearing; defense counsel declares doubt as to defendant's competency; criminal proceedings suspended; matter continued to 2015-05-11 in Department 15 for appointment of expert.
  • 2015-05-11Appointment of expert under PC 1369; Dr. French appointed to evaluate competency and ability to represent self; order specifies issues to address; matter continued to 2015-06-08.
  • 2015-06-08Status hearing and PC 1369 report from Dr. French; court finds defendant competent, reinstates criminal proceedings; probation remains administratively revoked; case transferred to Department 21 for motion to revoke probation.
  • 2015-06-08Separate calendar: status; defense motion for OR release denied; supervised pretrial release eligibility report and sentencing continued.
  • 2015-06-09Defendant's motion for PC 1369 report, memorandum of points and authorities, and declaration filed.
  • 2015-06-12Sentencing, supervised pretrial release eligibility, and defense motion for PC 1369 report; defendant clarifies intent was to request Marsden, not Faretta; court finds no Faretta motion pending; closed hearings held on Marsden and McKenzie motions, both denied; matter continued for SPR eligibility report and sentencing and PC 1369 report.
  • 2015-06-12Defense notice of motion to terminate probation filed, with memorandum and declaration of conflict counsel Clifford Gould.
  • 2015-06-19Supervised pretrial release eligibility; defendant ordered to report to supervised pretrial release three times daily; defendant ordered not to possess electronic devices and not to use the internet within 24 hours of release; APD to calculate custody credits and projected release date; surrender continued.
  • 2015-06-22People's opposition to defendant's motion to terminate probation filed.
  • 2015-06-24Calendar: surrender; bench warrant issued due to failure to appear; court allows limited oral communication by phone or electronically, but denies request to use a computer; probation revoked and new bench warrant with night service issued.
  • 2015-12-15Bench warrant discharged; bench warrant return hearing; defendant appears under PC 4011.5; matter continued to set sentencing; restraining orders remain in effect.
  • 2015-12-16Calendar: to set sentencing; court relieves conflict attorney Clifford Gould; Public Defender's Office appointed.
  • 2015-12-21Calendar: identify PD counsel and to set sentencing; James Senal identified as counsel; supplemental APD report ordered; bench warrant return and 4011.5 hearing scheduled; continued to set and for APD supplemental report.
  • 2015-12-30Calendar: to set 4011.5, Marsden hearing, Faretta motion, and habeas corpus issues; closed Marsden hearing held and denied; court orders transcript and hearing from 2015-12-21 sealed; Faretta hearing started but continued at defense request due to defendant reporting not feeling well; Faretta hearing continued to 2016-01-08.
  • 2016-01-08Faretta hearing; court continues matter to Department 15 for appointment of doctor and evaluation; APD supplemental report scheduled; Faretta motion continued.
  • 2016-01-11Appointment of Dr. French under PC 1369 to evaluate whether defendant has severe mental illness that would impair self representation; order sets parameters for opinion under People v. Johnson; matter continued to 2016-02-08.
  • 2016-01-22Calendar: to set, status of Department 15 proceedings and APD supplemental report; defendant withdraws Faretta motion; supplemental report and further hearings on DA motion to revoke scheduled.
  • 2016-02-01Calendar: to set or resolve; DA motion to revoke probation hearing continued.
  • 2016-02-18District Attorney's request for judicial notice filed.
  • 2016-02-26DA motion to revoke probation hearing; defendant makes oral Marsden motion; Marsden hearing held with DA excluded and denied; court continues matter to Department 15 for appointment of clinician and evaluation for Faretta motion.
  • 2016-02-29Appointment of Dr. Jeko to evaluate defendant under PC 1369 criteria specifically for Faretta request; order defines evaluation questions regarding severe mental illness and ability to self represent; matter set for 2016-03-28.
  • 2016-03-28Calendar: report from Dr. Jeko regarding Faretta motion; date of 2016-04-11 confirmed.
  • 2016-04-11Faretta motion hearing; court denies defendant's request for self representation; DA motion to revoke probation continued to 2016-04-15.
  • 2016-04-15DA motion to revoke probation hearing; defendant makes oral Marsden motion, which is denied; exhibits including email to the court admitted; defendant testifies; court finds defendant in violation of probation; probation officer Oscar Martinez identified; sentencing on DA motion to revoke set for 2016-04-29.
  • 2016-04-27DA sentencing recommendation on motion to revoke probation filed.
  • 2016-04-28DA sentencing memorandum of victims and declaration of James McManis filed.
  • 2016-04-29Marsden motion heard and denied; defendant advised of rights and admits probation violation; probation revoked; court imposes straight sentence under PC 1170(h)(5)(A): 3 year upper term on Count 2 to be served in county jail; defendant awarded 244 days actual custody and 244 days conduct credit (total 488 days); probation revocation restitution fine set at 300; various sentencing details recorded.
  • 2016-05-03Defendant's notice of felony appeal filed.
  • 2016-05-10Motion and petition for recall of sentence with points and authorities filed.
  • 2016-05-23People's opposition to defendant's petition for recall of sentence filed.
  • 2016-05-27Calendar: petition for recall of sentence; motion denied; sentence of 2016-04-29 stands.
  • 2016-08-10Calendar: modification of sentence; court clarifies that probation revocation restitution fine under PC 1202.44 is 200; order striking requirement to report to Post Release Community Supervision; court orders transcripts of proceedings prepared for counsel and Court of Appeal.
  • 2016-08-24Defendant's motion for resentencing and or modification of sentence filed with points and authorities and declaration.
  • 2016-09-13Defense motion for resentencing and or modification of sentence heard; former defense counsel James Senal present; court appoints Richard Fitzer to represent defendant for this purpose; motion argued and denied on the record.
  • 2016-10-26Hearing to read remittitur onto the record; remittitur read; appeal dismissed.
  • 2016-11-10Defendant's second notice of felony appeal filed by mail.
  • 2017-09-20Calendar: hearing to read remittitur onto record; Court of Appeal judgment affirmed; remittitur spread upon the minutes.
  • 2018-07-20Petition and order to suspend certain fees under San Francisco Board of Supervisors ordinance 180132 signed and filed.
  • 2018-12-28Order suspending active collections under Government Code sections 25259.7 to 25259.95 entered.

Case CRI-21001325[19]

San Francisco Superior Court · Filed 2021-02-05

No plea, verdict, dismissal, or sentencing appears in the docket provided. Case shows years of motions, evaluations, and modifications, but no final disposition.

Defendant
Robyn R. Devereaux
Verdict known
No
Total counts
10

Primary charge

Stalking · 646.9(a) PC · Felony

Repeated harassment or threats that cause fear for the victim's safety.

Additional charges

  • Attempted Extortion · 524 PC · Felony (Count 1)
  • Attempted Extortion · 524 PC · Felony (Count 2)
  • Attempted Extortion · 524 PC · Felony (Count 3)
  • Attempted Extortion · 524 PC · Felony (Count 4)
  • Attempted Extortion · 524 PC · Felony (Count 5)
  • Attempted Extortion · 524 PC · Felony (Count 6)
  • Attempted Extortion · 524 PC · Felony (Count 7)
  • Attempted Extortion · 524 PC · Felony (Count 8)
  • Attempted Extortion · 524 PC · Felony (Count 9)

Attorney history

Public defenders
San Francisco Public Defender's Office
Conflict attorneys
Erica Franklin, Brian Ford
Appointed counsel
Alexandria Carl
Pro per periods
2021-12-01 · Faretta waiver granted; defendant assumed self representation.
Prosecutors
Matthew Donahue, Samantha Persaud, Rebecca Wagner

Release conditions

Initial conditions
GPS Monitoring
Yes
Internet Device Ban
Yes
Social Media Ban
Yes
Device Password Disclosure
Yes
Warrantless Device Search
Yes
Criminal Protective Orders
Yes
Gag Order Active
Yes
Final status
Electronic Monitoring Terminated
Yes
Termination Date
2025-11-24
Expand full docket timeline
  • 2021-02-05Arraignment; NG plea; bail 100000; strict monitoring conditions imposed.
  • 2021-02-09Preliminary hearing set.
  • 2021-02-18ACM report; no release recommended.
  • 2021-02-23Marsden motion withdrawn.
  • 2021-02-24PD motion for bail hearing and OR release filed.
  • 2021-02-25DA opposition to defense bail motion filed.
  • 2021-02-26Preliminary hearing; audio and documents introduced; held to answer; bail reduction denied.
  • 2021-03-05DA motion to detain filed.
  • 2021-03-08DA information filed.
  • 2021-03-11Defense opposition to no bail detention filed.
  • 2021-03-12Arraignment on information; protective order and gag order issued.
  • 2021-03-22People's motion to modify bail to remove websites filed.
  • 2021-03-25Bail modification hearing continued.
  • 2021-04-01Motion to modify bail taken off calendar.
  • 2021-04-30Jury trial continued.
  • 2021-05-03Motion to modify home detention filed.
  • 2021-05-04DA response to home detention motion.
  • 2021-05-05Court clarifies home detention terms.
  • 2021-05-11Defense oral motion PC 1382; trial reset.
  • 2021-05-19Marsden motion continued.
  • 2021-05-25DA opposition to dismissal filed.
  • 2021-06-01Marsden motion denied; visitation allowed.
  • 2021-06-03PC 1382 motion denied.
  • 2021-07-09Motion to modify home detention and CPO filed.
  • 2021-07-13DA motion to modify protective order.
  • 2021-07-22Home detention modification granted in part (12 to 2 pm leave allowed).
  • 2021-08-05Court sets travel restrictions; EM conditions reaffirmed.
  • 2021-08-19Update hearing; delays from Google subpoena.
  • 2021-09-09Status hearings and trial dates adjusted.
  • 2021-09-20Sealed Marsden hearing; motion denied.
  • 2021-09-24Motion re violation of court order continued.
  • 2021-10-12Hearing on violation; new CPO issued; Marsden motion set.
  • 2021-10-22Marsden motion denied; Faretta questionnaire provided.
  • 2021-11-04New PD assigned; exhibits sealed.
  • 2021-11-05Defense motion to modify release filed.
  • 2021-11-09People oppose terminating EM.
  • 2021-11-10EM termination denied; new curfew set.
  • 2021-11-19Faretta renewed; continued.
  • 2021-12-01Faretta granted; defendant becomes pro per; PD relieved.
  • 2021-12-10Pro per discovery conditions set; investigator required.
  • 2021-12-14Investigator Catherine Klimek appointed.
  • 2022-01-20Multiple continuances; jury trial to be set.
  • 2022-01-28Motion to modify release taken off calendar.
  • 2022-02-07Motion to modify CPO filed.
  • 2022-02-14Motion to modify CPO transferred; EM removal denied.
  • 2022-03-22Hearing to set jury trial and consider motions.
  • 2022-03-28Motion to modify gag order set.
  • 2022-03-29Further gag order hearing set.
  • 2022-04-05Hearing scheduled for gag order challenge.
  • 2022-04-11Defense motion to dissolve protective orders filed.
  • 2022-04-14Motion to modify gag order denied outright.
  • 2022-05-11Defense motion not heard due to filings missing.
  • 2022-05-23Jury trial dates continued.
  • 2022-06-08Motion for peremptory challenge under CCP 170.6 filed.
  • 2022-06-15Defendant declaration supporting judge challenge.
  • 2022-06-23Hearing to set jury trial; matters continued.
  • 2022-07-13Status hearing.
  • 2022-08-01Status hearing.
  • 2022-08-02Motion to modify release and CPO filed with declarations.
  • 2022-08-10EM modification order.
  • 2022-09-07Status hearing.
  • 2022-09-19Motion to continue trial filed.
  • 2022-09-21Declaration supporting motion to continue.
  • 2022-10-17Status hearing.
  • 2022-10-26Motion to modify pretrial release filed.
  • 2022-10-27EM modification order.
  • 2022-10-31Motion to vacate gag order filed with exhibits.
  • 2022-11-03Status hearing.
  • 2022-11-07Status hearing.
  • 2022-11-09Exhibits supporting gag order motion filed.
  • 2022-11-10Status hearing.
  • 2022-11-15DA opposition to vacating gag order filed.
  • 2022-11-15People oppose terminating EM.
  • 2022-11-17Status hearing.
  • 2022-11-18Status hearing.
  • 2022-12-01Multiple hearings.
  • 2022-12-05Minute order.
  • 2022-12-13Minute order.
  • 2022-12-28Minute order.
  • 2023-01-09Motion to modify pretrial release filed with declaration.
  • 2023-01-10Minute order.
  • 2023-01-18Motion to modify conditions filed.
  • 2023-01-19EM modification order.
  • 2023-02-15Minute order.
  • 2023-02-27Minute order.
  • 2023-03-01EM modification order.
  • 2023-03-09Minute order.
  • 2023-03-22Motion to continue filed.
  • 2023-03-24Minute order.
  • 2023-05-12Motion to modify conditions filed.
  • 2023-05-19Minute order.
  • 2023-06-02EM terminated.
  • 2023-06-23Return to EM release.
  • 2023-07-06EM modified.
  • 2023-07-10Sheriff Affidavit Warrant issued.
  • 2023-07-17Warrant recalled.
  • 2023-07-21Competency doubts expressed; criminal proceedings suspended.
  • 2023-08-23Minute order.
  • 2023-09-13Minute order.
  • 2023-09-27Minute order.
  • 2023-10-04Minute order.
  • 2023-11-06Minute order.
  • 2023-11-20Minute order.
  • 2023-11-22Minute order.
  • 2024-02-01Minute order.
  • 2024-02-08PC 1369 evaluation ordered; criminal proceedings suspended again.
  • 2024-03-21Minute order.
  • 2024-04-25Defendant found competent; proceedings reinstated.
  • 2024-05-21Minute order.
  • 2024-07-24Minute order.
  • 2024-09-18Bench warrant issued for failure to appear.
  • 2024-09-20Bench warrant discharged; SAW issued and returned.
  • 2024-09-23Multiple minute orders; SAW discharged.
  • 2024-09-24OR release ordered; bail exonerated; EM applied.
  • 2024-10-09Motion to add Marsden, travel pass, EM removal.
  • 2024-10-29Minute order.
  • 2024-11-13Minute order.
  • 2024-11-19Marsden motion; amended minute order.
  • 2024-11-27Motion to modify EM; McKenzie motion; EM modified.
  • 2024-11-27Additional minute order.
  • 2025-01-27Minute order.
  • 2025-03-27Minute order.
  • 2025-04-23Motion to remove GPS; exhibits filed.
  • 2025-04-28Minute order.
  • 2025-05-05EM modified.
  • 2025-06-16Minute order.
  • 2025-07-25Multiple orders compelling EM performance records; credit calculation ordered.
  • 2025-08-25Minute order; EM modified.
  • 2025-09-11Motion for Faretta hearing added to calendar.
  • 2025-09-18Minute order.
  • 2025-10-20Minute order.
  • 2025-11-24Electronic monitoring terminated.

Orange County criminal cases involving Robyn R. Devereaux

Case summaries below originate from authenticated Orange County Superior Court docket printouts and mirror the data contained in the attached certified copies.

Case 94CF3486[20]

Orange County Superior Court · Central Justice Center · Filed 1995-02-14

Jury convicted the defendant in April 1996 of stalking, offering a forged document, perjury, two electronic-eavesdropping counts, and a Government Code records charge; prison sentences were imposed on 1996-05-15.

Defendant
Robyn R. Devereaux
Verdict known
Yes
Total counts
6

Primary charge

Stalking · PC 646.9(a) · Misdemeanor (elevated)

Stalking conviction tied to conduct occurring on 1993-10-23.

Additional charges

  • Offering a forged or altered document as genuine · PC 132 · Felony
  • Perjury under oath · PC 118 · Felony
  • Electronic eavesdropping · PC 632 · Felony (Count 2)
  • Tampering with public records by a non-custodial officer · GC 6200-6201 · Misdemeanor

Attorney history

Public defenders
James Appel

Release and sentencing status

Initial conditions
Mandatory appearance
Yes
Primary bail posted (USD)
175000
Secondary bail posted (USD)
50000
Final status
Prison term imposed (years)
3
Concurrent 8-month terms
3
Parole required
Yes
Case status per docket
Open (legacy docket notation)
Expand full docket timeline
  • 1995-02-14Arraignment — Department 5; status Heard.
  • 1995-03-03Pre-trial trial-setting conference — Department 31; status Heard.
  • 1995-03-10Motion calendar — Department 31; status Heard.
  • 1995-03-13Motion calendar — Department 31; status Heard.
  • 1995-04-04Further proceedings — Department 31; status Heard.
  • 1995-04-21Pre-trial calendar — Department 46; status Heard.
  • 1995-05-01Jury trial — Department 46; status Heard.
  • 1995-05-03Jury trial — Department 46; status Heard.
  • 1995-06-16Motion calendar — Department 46; status Heard.
  • 1995-07-28Motion calendar — Department 46; status Heard.
  • 1995-08-11Motion calendar — Department 46; status Heard.
  • 1995-10-19Marsden motion — Department 46; status Heard.
  • 1995-11-06Motion to set aside charging document — Department 46; status Heard.
  • 1995-11-09Jury trial — Department 46; status Heard.
  • 1995-12-01Motion calendar — Department 46; status Heard.
  • 1995-12-08Further proceedings — Department 46; status Heard.
  • 1996-01-02Marsden motion — Department 46; status Heard.
  • 1996-01-03Further proceedings — Department 46; status Heard.
  • 1996-01-12Motion to set aside charging document — Department 46; status Heard.
  • 1996-02-27Further proceedings — Department 46; status Heard.
  • 1996-03-08Demurrer motion — Department 46; status Heard.
  • 1996-03-11Jury trial — Department 49; status Heard.
  • 1996-03-13Jury trial — Department 46; status Heard.
  • 1996-03-18Jury trial — Department 46; status Heard.
  • 1996-03-20Jury trial — Department 46; status Heard.
  • 1996-03-26Jury trial — Department 46; status Heard.
  • 1996-03-28Jury trial — Department 46; status Heard.
  • 1996-03-29Jury trial — Department 46; status Heard.
  • 1996-04-01Jury trial — Department 46; status Heard.
  • 1996-04-02Jury trial — Department 46; status Heard.
  • 1996-04-03Jury trial — Department 46; status Heard.
  • 1996-04-04Jury trial — Department 46; status Heard.
  • 1996-04-12Jury trial — Department 46; status Heard.
  • 1996-04-15Jury trial — Department 46; status Heard.
  • 1996-04-16Jury trial — Department 46; status Heard.
  • 1996-04-17Jury trial — Department 46; status Heard.
  • 1996-04-18Jury trial — Department 46; status Heard (verdict reached).
  • 1996-04-24Nunc pro tunc minute order — Department 46; status Heard.
  • 1996-05-13Probation and sentencing hearing — Department 46; status Heard.
  • 1996-05-15Sentencing — Department 46; status Heard.
  • 1996-05-17Further proceedings — Department 46; status Heard.
  • 1996-06-04Further proceedings — Department 46; status Heard.
  • 1996-09-16Further proceedings — Department 46; status Heard.
  • 1996-11-25Motion calendar — Department 46; status Heard.
  • 1997-02-05Motion calendar — Department 46; status Heard.
  • 1997-11-18Nunc pro tunc minute order — Department 27; status Heard.

Case 05HF0792[21]

Orange County Superior Court · Harbor Justice Center (Newport Beach) · Filed 2005-05-09

On 2007-01-30 the defendant pled guilty to burglary and theft counts; extensive mental-health competency litigation and repeated probation violations continued through 2009.

Defendant
Robyn R. Devereaux
Verdict known
Yes
Total counts
2

Primary charge

Second-degree commercial burglary · PC 459/460(b) · Felony

Felony burglary arising from an April 2005 incident at a Harbor jurisdiction retailer.

Additional charges

  • Theft with prior conviction · PC 666/484(a)-488 · Felony (Count 2)

Attorney history

Public defenders
Orange County Public Defender's Office
Conflict attorneys
Kenneth Reed
Prosecutors
Steven Baric, Nico Dourbetas, Jeff Ferguson, Daniel Wagner

Release and sentencing status

Initial conditions
Initial bail (USD)
20000
Release status after arraignment
In custody with warrant holds
Competency evaluations ordered
Yes
Final status
Probation ordered (years)
3
Custody time imposed (days)
254
Restitution ordered
Yes
Probation expiration
2010-03-17
Expand full docket timeline
  • 2005-05-09Arraignment — Department H2; status Heard; special note 10 court days.
  • 2005-06-06Arraignment consult-counsel — Department H2; status Heard; special note 10 court days.
  • 2005-07-01Pre-trial calendar — Department H2; status Heard.
  • 2005-07-12Arraignment — Department C5; status Heard.
  • 2005-07-22Pre-trial trial-setting conference — Department H12; status Heard.
  • 2005-07-25Further proceedings — Department H12; status Heard.
  • 2005-08-29Jury trial — Department H12; status Heard.
  • 2005-08-29Motion for continuance — Department H12; status Heard.
  • 2005-10-24Jury trial — Department H12; status Heard.
  • 2005-10-26Mental health competency (PC 1368) — Department C5; status Heard.
  • 2005-10-27Mental health competency (PC 1368) — Department C5; status Cancelled.
  • 2005-10-28Mental health competency (PC 1368) — Department C5; status Heard.
  • 2005-12-09Mental health competency (PC 1368) — Department C5; status Heard.
  • 2005-12-16Mental health competency (PC 1368) — Department C5; status Heard.
  • 2006-01-20Mental health competency (PC 1368) — Department C5; status Heard.
  • 2006-02-03Mental health competency (PC 1368) — Department C5; status Heard.
  • 2006-02-17Mental health competency (PC 1368) — Department C5; status Heard.
  • 2006-03-24Mental health competency (PC 1368) — Department C5; status Heard.
  • 2006-03-27Mental health competency (PC 1368) — Department C5; status Heard.
  • 2006-06-16Mental health competency (PC 1368) — Department C3; status Heard.
  • 2006-06-23Mental health competency (PC 1368) — Department C5; status Heard.
  • 2006-06-23Pre-trial calendar — Department C5; status Cancelled.
  • 2006-06-26Mental health competency (PC 1368) — Department C5; status Cancelled.
  • 2006-06-26Pre-trial calendar — Department C5; status Heard.
  • 2006-07-14Pre-trial trial-setting conference — Department H12; status Heard.
  • 2006-07-21Pre-trial trial-setting conference — Department H12; status Heard.
  • 2006-08-04Pre-trial warrant hold — Department H12; status Heard.
  • 2006-08-07Pre-trial calendar — Department H12; status Heard.
  • 2006-08-09Pre-trial calendar — Department C5; status Heard.
  • 2006-08-14Jury trial — Department C5; status Heard.
  • 2006-09-18Jury trial — Department H12; status Heard.
  • 2006-09-19Jury-trial warrant hold — Department H12; status Heard.
  • 2006-09-20Jury trial — Department C5; status Heard.
  • 2006-09-21Jury trial — Department C5; status Heard.
  • 2006-11-03Marsden motion — Department C5; status Heard; special result Motion denied.
  • 2006-11-06Marsden motion — Department C5; status Heard.
  • 2006-11-13Jury trial — Department C5; status Heard.
  • 2006-11-20Jury trial — Department C5; status Heard.
  • 2006-11-27Jury-trial warrant hold — Department C5; status Heard.
  • 2006-12-04Jury trial — Department C5; status Heard.
  • 2006-12-08Jury trial — Department C5; status Heard.
  • 2007-01-04Jury trial — Department C5; status Heard.
  • 2007-01-16Jury-trial warrant hold — Department C5; status Heard.
  • 2007-01-19Jury trial — Department C5; status Heard.
  • 2007-01-29Jury trial — Department C5; status Heard.
  • 2007-01-30Jury trial / plea and sentencing — Department C5; status Heard.
  • 2007-03-15Motion to modify probation — Department C5; status Heard.
  • 2007-03-28Further proceedings — Department W9; status Heard.
  • 2007-04-05Probation-violation arraignment (in custody) — Department W9; status Heard.
  • 2007-04-06Probation-violation arraignment — Department C55; status Cancelled.
  • 2007-04-09Probation-violation arraignment — Department C55; status Heard.
  • 2007-04-16Probation-violation arraignment — Department C55; status Cancelled.
  • 2007-04-17Probation-violation arraignment — Department C55; status Heard.
  • 2007-05-14Probation-violation formal hearing — Department C55; status Heard.
  • 2007-06-07Chambers work — Department C5; status Heard.
  • 2008-09-12Motion to terminate probation — Department C5; status Cancelled.
  • 2008-09-26Motion to terminate probation — Department C5; status Heard.
  • 2008-10-17Motion to modify probation — Department C5; status Heard.
  • 2008-10-24Motion to modify probation — Department C5; status Heard.
  • 2009-06-15Motion to terminate probation — Department C58; status Heard.
  • 2009-06-16Motion to terminate probation — Department C5; status Heard.

Case 01HF0205[22]

Orange County Superior Court · Harbor Justice Center (Newport Beach) · Filed 2001-03-04

Defendant pled guilty on 2001-11-05 to two felony theft counts; probation was repeatedly revoked, culminating in additional 180-day jail terms during 2003–2004.

Defendant
Robyn R. Devereaux
Verdict known
Yes
Total counts
3

Primary charge

Theft with prior conviction · PC 666/488 · Felony

Felony theft enhanced because it was committed after a prior theft-related conviction.

Additional charges

  • Second theft with prior conviction · PC 666/488 · Felony (Count 2)
  • Felony offense committed while released on bail · PC 12022.1 · Felony enhancement

Attorney history

Conflict attorneys
Stuart Grant, Kenneth Reed
Prosecutors
Paul Chrisopoulos, Kal Kaliban, James Laird, Daniel Wagner

Release and sentencing status

Initial conditions
Mandatory appearance
Yes
Initial bail (USD)
10000
Bondsman / Surety
ZZIP Bail Bonds · Seneca Insurance
Final status
Probation ordered (years)
3
Jail time imposed (days)
360
Probation expired
2004-11-22
Open warrants
No
Expand full docket timeline
  • 2001-03-06Arraignment — Department H2; status Heard.
  • 2001-03-12Pre-trial disposition/reset — Department H2; status Heard.
  • 2001-03-13Pre-trial disposition/reset — Department H2; status Heard.
  • 2001-03-14Pre-trial disposition/reset — Department H2; status Heard.
  • 2001-03-19Pre-trial disposition/reset — Department H2; status Heard.
  • 2001-03-30Preliminary hearing — Department H2; status Heard.
  • 2001-04-13Preliminary hearing — Department H2; status Heard.
  • 2001-04-24Arraignment — Department C5; status Heard.
  • 2001-05-04Pre-trial trial-setting conference — Department H5; status Heard.
  • 2001-05-25Pre-trial calendar — Department H5; status Heard.
  • 2001-05-25Motion calendar — Department H5; status Heard.
  • 2001-06-11Jury trial — Department H5; status Cancelled.
  • 2001-07-16Jury trial — Department H5; status Heard.
  • 2001-08-27Jury trial — Department H5; status Heard.
  • 2001-08-28Jury trial — Department H5; status Heard.
  • 2001-08-31Jury-trial warrant hold — Department H5; status Heard.
  • 2001-10-05Pre-trial calendar — Department H5; status Heard.
  • 2001-10-11Hearing — Department H2; status Heard.
  • 2001-11-05Jury trial (plea taken) — Department H5; status Heard.
  • 2003-12-01Probation-violation arraignment in custody — Department C5; status Heard.
  • 2003-12-11Probation-violation arraignment in custody — Department C5; status Heard.
  • 2003-12-12Probation-violation arraignment in custody — Department C5; status Heard.
  • 2003-12-19Probation-violation arraignment in custody — Department C5; status Heard; special result Found in violation.
  • 2004-07-13Sentencing modification — Department C5; status Heard.
  • 2004-08-10Sentencing modification — Department C5; status Heard.

Case 01HF1168[23]

Orange County Superior Court · Harbor Justice Center (Newport Beach) · Filed 2001-10-07

Companion theft case filed in October 2001; charges and enhancements were consolidated into case 01HF0205 on 2001-11-05.

Defendant
Robyn R. Devereaux
Verdict known
Yes
Total counts
2

Primary charge

Theft with prior conviction · PC 666/484(a)-488 · Felony

Theft with a prior conviction allegation tied to a 10/07/2001 incident; disposition reached via consolidation.

Additional charges

  • Felony committed before judgment on prior felony · PC 12022.1 · Felony enhancement

Attorney history

Public defenders
Orange County Public Defender's Office
Conflict attorneys
Stuart Grant
Appointed or retained counsel
Allan Stokke
Prosecutors
Dennis Bauer, Joe Nedza, Joe Williams

Release and sentencing status

Initial conditions
Mandatory appearance
Yes
Charging document
Information
Arraignment held
2001-10-11
Final status
Consolidated into 01HF0205
Yes
Disposition date
2001-11-05
Standalone sentencing required
No
Expand full docket timeline
  • 2001-10-10Arraignment — Department H2; status Cancelled.
  • 2001-10-11Arraignment — Department H2; status Heard.
  • 2001-10-16Further proceedings — Department H2; status Heard.
  • 2001-10-19Preliminary hearing — Department H2; status Heard.
  • 2001-10-24Preliminary hearing — Department H2; status Cancelled.
  • 2001-10-30Arraignment on information — Department C5; status Heard.
  • 2001-11-05Pre-trial trial-setting conference — Department H5; status Heard.

Case 04HM04969[24]

Orange County Superior Court · Harbor Justice Center (Newport Beach) · Filed 2004-07-09

Defendant pled guilty on 2007-03-14 to a misdemeanor hit-and-run; extensive probation-violation litigation continued through late 2009 before the term was terminated.

Defendant
Robyn R. Devereaux
Verdict known
Yes
Total counts
2

Primary charge

Hit-and-run with property damage · VC 20002(a) · Misdemeanor

Charge stems from a 2004 incident requiring the defendant to remain at the scene.

Additional charges

  • Failure to appear while on own recognizance (dismissed 2007-03-14) · PC 1320(a) · Misdemeanor

Attorney history

Public defenders
Don Ronaldson
Appointed or retained counsel
Tara Lynn Urban, Mathew K. Olsen
Prosecutors
Susan Eckermann, Nico Dourbetas, Whitney Bokosky, Eva Marie Mannoia Weiler

Release and sentencing status

Initial conditions
Mandatory appearance
Yes
Number of pre-trial hearings recorded
40
Marsden motions litigated
Yes
Final status
Probation ordered (years)
3
Community service / CalTrans days
20
Jail time ordered (days)
10
Probation terminated
2009-09-28
Expand full docket timeline
  • 2004-07-09Arraignment — Department H7; status Heard.
  • 2004-07-19Arraignment — Department H7; status Cancelled.
  • 2004-08-25Pre-trial calendar — Department H7; status Heard.
  • 2004-09-15Pre-trial calendar — Department H7; status Cancelled.
  • 2004-09-15Pre-trial calendar — Department H7; status Cancelled (duplicate docket entry).
  • 2004-10-13Pre-trial calendar — Department H8; status Heard.
  • 2004-10-27Pre-trial calendar — Department H8; status Heard.
  • 2004-11-30Pre-trial failure-to-appear calendar — Department H8; status Heard.
  • 2004-12-08Pre-trial calendar — Department H8; status Heard.
  • 2004-12-22Pre-trial calendar — Department H1; status Heard.
  • 2005-01-06Pre-trial calendar — Department H1; status Heard.
  • 2005-01-27Pre-trial calendar — Department H1; status Heard.
  • 2005-02-14Hearing — Department H1; status Heard.
  • 2005-02-17Pre-trial calendar — Department H1; status Heard.
  • 2005-03-17Pre-trial calendar — Department H1; status Heard.
  • 2005-04-07Pre-trial calendar — Department H1; status Heard.
  • 2005-04-14Pre-trial calendar — Department H1; status Heard.
  • 2005-05-09Pre-trial calendar — Department H1; status Cancelled.
  • 2005-05-09Pre-trial calendar — Department H2; status Heard.
  • 2005-05-12Chambers work — Department H2; status Heard.
  • 2005-06-06Pre-trial calendar — Department H2; status Heard; special note 10 court days.
  • 2005-07-01Pre-trial calendar — Department H2; status Heard.
  • 2005-07-18Pre-trial calendar — Department H1; status Heard.
  • 2005-07-25Pre-trial calendar — Department H1; status Heard.
  • 2005-08-04Pre-trial calendar — Department H1; status Cancelled.
  • 2005-08-29Pre-trial calendar — Department H1; status Heard.
  • 2005-09-15Pre-trial calendar — Department H1; status Heard.
  • 2005-09-22Pre-trial calendar — Department H1; status Heard.
  • 2005-11-08Jury trial — Department H1; status Heard.
  • 2005-11-09Hearing — Department H1; status Heard.
  • 2005-11-17Pre-trial calendar — Department H1; status Heard.
  • 2005-12-19Pre-trial calendar — Department H1; status Heard.
  • 2005-12-20Pre-trial calendar — Department H1; status Heard.
  • 2006-01-23Pre-trial calendar — Department H1; status Heard.
  • 2006-02-03Pre-trial warrant hold — Department H1; status Heard.
  • 2006-02-16Pre-trial warrant hold — Department H1; status Heard.
  • 2006-03-09Pre-trial calendar — Department H1; status Heard.
  • 2006-03-13Pre-trial warrant hold — Department H1; status Heard.
  • 2006-04-03Pre-trial calendar — Department H1; status Cancelled.
  • 2006-04-03Pre-trial calendar — Department H1; status Heard (reset).
  • 2006-04-17Pre-trial calendar — Department H1; status Heard.
  • 2006-04-26Further proceedings — Department H1; status Heard.
  • 2006-05-04Pre-trial calendar — Department H1; status Heard.
  • 2006-06-12Pre-trial calendar — Department H1; status Heard.
  • 2006-06-15Pre-trial calendar — Department H1; status Heard.
  • 2006-06-19Pre-trial calendar — Department H1; status Heard.
  • 2006-06-22Pre-trial calendar — Department H1; status Heard.
  • 2006-07-13Pre-trial calendar — Department H1; status Heard.
  • 2006-07-17Pre-trial warrant hold — Department H1; status Heard.
  • 2006-08-07Pre-trial warrant hold — Department H1; status Heard.
  • 2006-08-10Pre-trial calendar — Department H1; status Heard.
  • 2006-08-17Pre-trial calendar — Department H1; status Heard.
  • 2006-08-24Pre-trial calendar — Department H1; status Heard.
  • 2006-12-07Chambers work — Department H1; status Heard.
  • 2007-01-10Hearing — Department H1; status Heard.
  • 2007-01-17Pre-trial warrant hold — Department H1; status Heard.
  • 2007-01-17Hearing warrant hold — Department H1; status Heard.
  • 2007-01-17Order to show cause warrant hold — Department H3; status Heard.
  • 2007-02-05Pre-trial calendar — Department H3; status Cancelled.
  • 2007-02-05Pre-trial calendar — Department H10; status Heard.
  • 2007-02-22Jury trial — Department H10; status Cancelled.
  • 2007-02-22Jury trial — Department H2; status Heard.
  • 2007-03-05Jury trial — Department H10; status Heard; Marsden motion denied.
  • 2007-03-09Jury trial — Department H10; status Heard.
  • 2007-03-12Jury trial failure-to-appear calendar — Department H10; status Heard.
  • 2007-03-14Jury trial / plea entry — Department H10; status Heard.
  • 2007-10-26Motion to modify probation — Department HJA; status Heard.
  • 2007-10-30Hearing — Department HJA; status Cancelled.
  • 2007-10-30Motion to modify probation — Department H11; status Cancelled.
  • 2007-10-30Motion to modify probation — Department H3; status Heard.
  • 2007-10-30Motion to modify probation — Department H12; status Heard.
  • 2007-11-13Probation-violation arraignment — Department H4; status Heard.
  • 2007-11-20Probation-violation disposition/reset — Department H4; status Heard.
  • 2007-11-21Probation-violation warrant hold — Department H12; status Cancelled.
  • 2007-11-29Probation-violation formal hearing — Department H4; status Heard (defendant waived statutory time).
  • 2007-12-18Probation-violation formal hearing — Department H4; status Heard.
  • 2008-01-03Probation-violation formal hearing — Department H4; status Heard.
  • 2008-01-11Probation-violation formal hearing — Department H4; status Cancelled.
  • 2008-01-11Probation-violation formal hearing — Department H1; status Heard; Marsden motion denied.
  • 2008-01-17Hearing — Department H4; status Cancelled.
  • 2008-01-17Hearing — Department H11; status Heard.
  • 2008-01-17Hearing — Department H6; status Heard.
  • 2008-02-08Probation-violation formal hearing — Department H4; status Heard.
  • 2008-04-11Hearing — Department H7; status Heard.
  • 2008-09-12Motion to terminate probation — Department H9; status Heard.
  • 2008-09-15Motion to terminate probation — Department H4; status Cancelled.
  • 2008-09-15Motion to terminate probation — Department H1; status Heard.
  • 2008-12-05Chambers work — Department HJA; status Heard.
  • 2008-12-10Probation-violation arraignment — Department H9; status Heard.
  • 2008-12-15Probation-violation arraignment — Department H4; status Heard.
  • 2009-01-05Probation-violation arraignment — Department H4; status Heard.
  • 2009-01-09Probation-violation arraignment — Department H4; status Heard; Marsden motion denied.
  • 2009-02-13Probation-violation formal hearing — Department H3; status Cancelled.
  • 2009-02-13Probation-violation formal hearing — Department H4; status Heard; special result Found in violation.
  • 2009-02-20Chambers work — Department H4; status Heard.
  • 2009-02-27Further proceedings — Department H4; status Heard; special result Not found in violation.
  • 2009-04-27Proof-of-completion hearing — Department H4; status Cancelled.
  • 2009-04-27Proof-of-completion hearing — Department H1; status Heard.
  • 2009-05-05Proof-of-completion hearing — Department H4; status Heard.
  • 2009-09-11Chambers work — Department H12; status Heard.
  • 2009-09-23Probation-violation arraignment — Department H6; status Heard.
  • 2009-09-23Probation-violation arraignment — Department H3; status Cancelled.
  • 2009-09-23Probation-violation arraignment — Department H9; status Heard.
  • 2009-09-28Probation-violation arraignment — Department H9; status Cancelled.
  • 2009-09-28Probation-violation arraignment — Department H9; status Heard; special result Not found in violation (probation terminated).

Sony Pictures / Culver City Police Visit

During the period when Robyn was emailing and blogging about Chad Scira, she appears to have filed a report alleging he was hacking her from Sony Pictures Imageworks Interactive, which prompted Culver City officers to briefly visit the campus and take no action. This false complaint was part of the same pattern that led to her convictions in Case No. CRI-11033143 (15 counts including stalking, attempted extortion, and harassing communications) and Case No. CRI-21001325 (10 additional counts).[3-CIT][6-CIT]

Officers briefly visited the Sony Pictures Imageworks Interactive campus, spoke with staff, made it clear they had seen similar complaints before, and left without taking any action. The police recognized the pattern - Robyn had already targeted multiple other individuals with identical false hacking accusations.

At the time, Chad Scira was about nineteen years old, focused on his work, and had no idea why this stranger was so intent on targeting him. He did not have the language or confidence to frame this as "stalking" - especially given her constant threats of lawsuits and criminal charges - but in hindsight that is exactly what was happening. Court records from her subsequent criminal cases confirm this was part of a multi-year stalking campaign.[3-CIT]

Any police paperwork that may exist from that visit would likely characterize it as a complaint that did not result in any charges or action against Chad. The individual who filed it would go on to be convicted of stalking, serve jail time, and be designated a vexatious litigant by California courts.[2-CIT][3-CIT]

Evidence Emails from Robyn

Below are four of the emails Robyn sent, preserved to show the language, dollar figures, and sweeping hacking allegations she routinely deployed against Chad Scira and others. These emails represent the same pattern of behavior that led to her convictions in Case No. CRI-11033143 and Case No. CRI-21001325, involving 25 combined counts of stalking, attempted extortion, and harassing communications.[3-CIT]

The 2 September 2009 message was the first email Chad Scira ever received from Robyn. At just 20 years old he initially worried after reading the opening paragraph, but by the time she alleged that a hacked projector had been converted into a voyeuristic webcam he realized something was profoundly off and kept reading out of morbid curiosity.

He ultimately forwarded the entire email (complete with its attached CH-100 restraining-order form) to the Imageworks Interactive team because the story read like an unhinged attempt to shake free computers out of Sony, even though he had never interacted with Robyn in his life. A Culver City police officer later stopped by the office, laughed at the projector line, and reminded staff that Robyn was notorious for this behaviour.[5-CIT]

Only years later did Chad learn how many other people had endured the same harassment cycle, which appears to have continued through 2019. Robyn stopped emailing him after 2017 - her final note insisted that he was involved in case CGC-18-564999, even though his name never appeared on that docket, likely because he never engaged with her.[8-CIT]

Robyn’s accusation that a "Robyn" account on the Scriptasy forum proved a connection also collapses under basic scrutiny: Chad ran multiple large communities at the time, including forums for gaming, general discussion, and coding, so seeing a user handle named Robyn was no more meaningful than seeing "Mike" or "Sarah" appear in a high-traffic message board.

It is still not fully clear what Robyn ultimately wanted, beyond attention and leverage, but the pattern is clear in hindsight: frivolous and false accusations paired with demands for massive payouts, including the $100 million "notice" below, which is an absurd number on its face.

The September 2, 2009 "Civil Harassment Case Filed" email shows the pattern already fully formed a year before the later legal-threat blasts: lurid claims of hacked wireless adapters, Culver City police visits, material she presented as forum evidence that did not match actual logs, and even hardware purchase demands aimed at Sony and Sedgwick.

Civil Harassment Case Filed vs McFaul, Kusaba and Scira
* *<[email protected]>
Wed, Sep 2, 2009, 4:33 PM#

To: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

Misters McFaul, Kusaba and Scira,

Cease and desist hacking into my computer. The police have my hard drive and a download of all your malcode and programs. I see you also infected my current computer too. We found your files. It appears that you uploaded an adapter and created a back door to hack into my internet connection, which connects to any PC or internet device in my home. You created a wireless network that would allow your hackers to access my computer 24/7. The programs show you started hacking into my computer on 8/1/08 and continue to the present. Very sophisticated. We found your frameworks and all your stalking programs under the System32 folder. That makes all of you officially STALKERS. You have been reading my email for a year. Your programs would send McFaul all of my documents, updates, photos, video---everything created on Google and my computer. You were even able to hack into my smartphone. Well, the police have all the evidence they need. We also found the malcode in the WinRM file. RM stands for remote management.

The police were amazed when they watched me delete your drivers. Within seconds you locked my access and uploaded the same drivers, What were you thinking? You knew I was aware of your malware and spyware and you simply placed it back into my computer. We tried to delete your hacking programs from the Registry Editor but I was denied access on my own computer. What balls on you SOB's. Did you honestly think this would go on forever? You uploaded "briefcases" to sync the transfer of documents from my computer to your home computer. And yes, we found the keylogger. That's why you kept sending me those fake AOL emails. You were able to disconnect my firewall and anti-virus programs too. By the way, why did you hook up my computer to a "Network Projector?" The officer thinks you had a video installed to watch me on my computer. That means you wanted to catch a glimpse of me in bra and panties or undressed. So not only are you a stalker and a hacker, you are a peeping tom, which makes you a sex offender. You even had your own control center hooked up so you could lock me out of my own computer. When I tried to use System Restore to gut your programs, my computer wouldn't reset. Your uploads were impermable to my system restore. I will be uploading all the photos I took of your malware and hacking to a blog. I want the Sedgwick firm to see what kind of lunatic they allowed to stalk and harass me for months.

By the way, we also found Chad Scira's fake "Robyn" profile in his Scriptasy forum. Did you honestly think you could fabricate evidence and get away with it? You must have told your hackers to create phony evidence to make it look like we knew each other before I discovered Chad hacked my computer back in November. Chad's phony profile was created July 17, 2009 but backdated September 8, 2008. Chad created a phony tag line, "I think I screwed up." Nope, I think YOU screwed up. You also told Kusaba to file a phony police report claiming I was stalking him. Yeah, right.

On 3/29/09 at 3:10 PM I created a new email account [email protected]. On 3/29/09 at 5:10 PM I sent Kusaba an email from that new account telling him once again to get off my computer. I also told Kusaba the evidence against him was mounting and he could face deportation after he served prison time for his felony convictions. On 3/30/09 Kusaba filed his phony police report claiming he was a stalking victim. He then sent me a letter threatening blackmail and extortion if I sued him or prosecuted him. He made a strange comment. He claimed I created the "legal email account" to scare him. Not so, it was to separate legal from personal email. But, an investigator caught the significance of Kusaba's statement. When Kusaba ran a search of his name in my computer he also checked my email. That legalemailaccount@gmail account was not created until 2 hours after he ran his search. That's why he knew that account was newly created. It didn't exist at 1:31 PM. Only someone who monitored my email accounts would know that. By the way, the Culver City police didn't buy Kusaba's happy horseshit for a second. Kusaba is facing a criminal charge of filing a false police report, among more serious felonies in Orange County.

I see you deleted a document labelled "ASD file. from July 17, 2009." You locked me out from restoring it. The ASD file is something that few people know about, except hackers. I looked it up. http://support.microsoft.com/kb/107686 July 17, 2009 was the day I emailed a 20 page letter to the Sedgwick firm exposing McFaul's criminal and unethical activities. Why did you delete that letter? You must know I saved a hard copy and have a copy in my email account, which has been forwarded to 5 other email accounts opened on a friend's computer and out of your wireless hacking reach. McFaul wanted to make sure I wouldn't email that letter to any other attormeys at Sedgwick. Why not? In fact, later today, I will see that EVERYONE at Sedgwick coast-to-coast gets a copy.

In the meantime, I submitted my civil harassment petitions to the court today. Our hearing date will take place in about 15 days in the Central Justice Center of Orange County. Additionally, I am filing a civil suit against McFaul, Kusaba, Scira, Jon Wheatley and his hacker squad from the U.K, ████████ and ████████, ████████ and ████████ ████████ (████████'s stepsons. They hooked up Kusaba with McFaul) and the law firm of Sedgwick, Detert, Moran & Arnold for ratification of McFaul's criminal activities.

By the way, the next time you hire hackers, after your release from prison, tell them not to confess hacking on Twitter. STUPID! http://twitter.com/icodeforlove/status/1289986107 http://twitter.com/icodeforlove/status/1290005955 http://twitter.com/icodeforlove/status/1290223148 And, yes, I found those phony ripper sites with my blog content. You wanted me to think that some Russians were hacking my computer so they could steal my cupcake blog content. Yeah right, Chad set that up. He confessed to it on streaming video.

See you in court. You'll be served with my very, very, very, very detailed civil harassment petition in a few days. In the meantime, stay away from me and my computer. I know this machine is still infected. Don't bother trying to hack into this email account. Here's the password "gofuckyourself" I am abandoning this computer and getting a new modem too.

Sedgwick Law Firm: You need to buy me a MacBookPro and a Mac Desk Top Computer today. Those are the only computers that can withstand these hackers. I also need a new modem. You need to order and pay for my new computer equipment today. I won't hold my breath, But your refusal to minimize the harm you have caused me by the ratification of your attorney's criminal actions will triple in a court of law. McFaul and his hackers have trashed four computers and a Sony Vaio laptop and my Blackberry. I have incurred over $5000 in property loss not counting my time and distress.

Apple Retail Store: 367 Newport Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 (949) 729-4433

ROBYN WOLFLICK VS CHAD V SCIRA, ████████ AND ████████
Robyn *<[email protected]>
Thu, Sep 9, 2010, 6:47 AM#

I am hereby placing you on notice that I am filing a $100 million dollar lawsuit against you, ████████ and ████████ as a result of your willful and intentional campaign of stalking, computer hacking, property damages, spoilation of evidence, defamation, intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress and mental anguish, and gross violations of California Penal Code section 502.

Additionally, I seek damages provided under Penal Code section 502, which include but are not limited to the loss of my data, documents and photos, the costs to restore said data and costs to secure my computer network including all future security costs.

As you are well aware, you have willfully and maliciously targeted me and my computer networks, systems and equipment in order to illegally and unlawfully hack into my private computer systems beginning in 2008 and continuing to the present.

As you are well aware, you were hired, recruited and directed by attorneys Joseph R. McFaul, J. Craig Williams aka Craig Williams, the Williams-Lindberg Law Firm, clients Toni Towe and Michael Towe as well as others retained as agents and representatives of the Sedgwick Detert Moran & Arnold law firm to stalk and harass me by illegally and unlawfully invading my computer systems.

This notice serves as notice for settlement of my civil claims against you collectively and as individuals. I will consider a civil compromise of any and all criminal actions and sanctions against you provided you allocute to your criminal wrongdoing and identify the person(s) who hired, recruited and directed you to hack, invade and infect my computer systems.

If you wish to settle my claims against you please have your legal representatives contact me on or before the close of business on Friday, September 10, 2010.

In addition to monetary and punitive damages, I am seeking injunctive relief prohibiting you from continuing to harass, threaten, blackmail and harass me.

Stay off of my websites, blogs, email accounts, social media profiles, domains and accounts. Your continued harassment will result in additional monetary and criminal sanctions.

Do not contact me in any other capacity.

I strongly suggest you contact legal counsel.

Robyn Wolflick

Important Legal Notice: Cease and Desist. Forthwith
Plaintiff Robyn<[email protected]>
Sat, Feb 26, 2011, 7:15 AM#

As you are all well aware, beginning in August 2008 and continuing to the present, you willfully and unlawfully commenced a campaign of computer hacking and/or the aiding and abetting of illegal computer intrusion and abuse in violation of state and federal law against me and my computer network. Your most recent act of computer hacking took place on or about February 22, 2011.

As a result thereof, I hereby demand that you immediately CEASE AND DESIST your intentional acts of corrupting my computer systems, including but not limited to the theft and illegal possession of my personal and protected information, documents, photos, medical records and other such personally identifiable data.

I am placing you all on notice that you are being sued in the United States District Court, Central District located at ████████.

You have illegally hijacked and taken control of my Mobile Me, Yahoo, Google, Microsoft email, website, social media and blog accounts through the use of identity theft, fraud, deceit, brute force and other criminal means of computer abuse and fraud.

Accordingly, I seek a declaration establishing my legal right to regain possession of my hijacked accounts and an order directing the respective internet companies to return sole control of those accounts to me.

I will also petition the federal court to issue an injunction prohibiting each and every person who invaded and corrupted my computer network and acted in concert with the main intruders from continuing to invade, infect and corrupt my computer network and obstruct my right to use the internet without being relentlessly stalked 24/7 by you and your agents and representatives.

Additionally, I seek an order from the federal court ordering the return of my email, data, tape recordings of my phone conversations, screenshots illegally taken with my webcam, documents, personal photos and other property that you stole or caused to be stolen from my computers and phones.

In a second action, I will seek substantial money damages for the harm you have caused me and the past, present and future damages to repair, replace and maintain my corrupted computer equipment, in addition to collateral damages arising from your ongoing wrongful conduct.

I strongly suggest that you retain legal counsel to represent your legal interests. I expect my first legal action against you to be filed by the end of next week. You will be served by the Civil Division of your local county marshal.

In the meantime, cease and desist hacking into my computers, email accounts, websites, social media accounts, blogs and phones. Stop stalking me online. Stop sending me infected links, Trojan viruses, and using XSS, Cross-Site Request Forgery, and other illegal methods of computer abuse and fraud to invade my computer and social media accounts.

You face civil, criminal and administrative liability for your repugnant conduct.

Do not contact me in any manner whatsoever, unless it is through your legal representative or as a Pro Se Defendant.

You are also advised to retain any and all electronic and other evidence of your unlawful conduct, including, but not limited to your possession of my stolen email, documents, photos, information and images, computers you used to access my data and images, hard drives, storage devices, databases, email, chat transcripts, internet and phone records, letters, and message board communications between you and those who aided and abetted your wrongful actions.

If you destroy, withhold, hide, conceal, corrupt, alter or erase any evidence of your computer hacking you will face considerable civil, criminal and administrative liability for obstruction of justice and money damages for spoliation of evidence.

Robyn

bcc: Defendant List

Notice of Litigation - Devereaux v Wheatley, et al
Robyn D<[email protected]>
Wed, Sep 27, 2017, 5:52 AM#

Dear Future Defendant:

Attached you will find a copy of my notice of litigation against you. Read it carefully. I strongly suggest you retain an attorney. Do not respond to this email address. All future communication with me must be made in writing via United States mail to my post office box listed on the letterhead of my missive.

ROBYN DEVEREAUX
████████
████████

September 26, 2017

VIA EMAIL AND U.S. MAIL

Jon-Paul Wheatley
Marshall Haas
Ryan Amos
David Myers
Julian Targowski
Andrew Ryno
Ryan Daisuke Kusaba
Chad Scira
Paul Dufour
Catherine Elizabeth Valdes

Re: Anticipated Litigation: Devereaux v Wheatley, et al

Dear Mr. Wheatley et al:

This letter is merely a courtesy to advise you that you are being named as a defendant in a lawsuit for damages resulting from your intentional, willful and unlawful wrongful actions.

As you are well aware you and your fellow defendants were recruited to illegally break into my computer systems. You willfully engaged in criminal conduct which constitutes violations of California Penal Code section 502, Computer Abuse and Fraud.

Despite my repeated demands that you cease and desist, you have and continue to engage in criminal and unlawful actions, to wit: you have illegally invaded my computer systems, and infected, corrupted, damaged and destroyed every computer, laptop, smartphone and electronic device I have purchased from an unknown date to the present with computer viruses and spyware.

Your ongoing malicious conduct is being perpetrated for the purposes of revenge, retaliation, witness intimidation, obstruction of justice and to inflict emotional distress and mental anguish upon your victim.

As you are well aware, after you were identified by law enforcement of your criminal activity, you engaged in a collective campaign of harassment to terrorize and intimidate me from seeking criminal prosecution against you.

Jon-Paul Wheatley and Ryan Daisuke Kusaba aka Dice Tomato aka Dice Kusaba were and remain motivated to harass me out of fear of being deported from the United States as resident aliens for the commission of felony activity.

Jon confessed on WEBETALK that his criminal actions would be "too expensive" to settle out of court. Jon and Dice are aware that the monies they earned breaking into my computer, which were used to launch lucrative enterprises, can be subject to a RICO action which provides for substantial penalties and forfeiture.

Moreover, it is an established fact that Jon is a criminal hacker as Sequoia sought to protect its investment by installing Brian Pokorny as CEO of Dailybooth, co-founded by Jon Wheatley and Ryan Amos, because Jon is a "suspect and hacker."

Therefore Jon concocted and engaged in outrageous conduct to terrorize me into submission for the purpose of obstructing justice.

My personal data and images were stolen from my computers and are being used by you, et al, for the purpose of blackmail and extortion and have been disseminated to unauthorized third parties.

You have illegally eavesdropped and recorded my cell phone conversations and surreptitiously photographed me in violation of California Penal Code section 632 wiretap laws and my right to privacy and solitude.

You have threatened me with physical harm, engaged in unilateral campaigns of character assassination, threats to publish the private information and images you stole from my computer on the internet and continue to prevent me from using a smartphone and computer without the threat of infection and corruption from your use of spyware, malicious code and computer viruses.

You have created slanderous, libelous and defamatory videos which have subjected me to harassment, cyberbullying and public hatred by third parties.

You have filed false police reports in a pathetic attempt to have me charged with imaginary wrongs.

You created a malicious social media campaign trying to have me branded as "crazy and delusional." When that stratagem failed you fabricated a campaign to convince others that I was stalking you. That ruse also failed, but not before I was subjected to public hatred, abuse as well as undue humiliation and embarrassment.

As a direct result of your intentional and willful actions I have and continue to suffer severe bodily and emotional injuries in an amount that exceeds $500,000. I am now permanently disabled and prevented from working at my chosen profession.

The invasion of my privacy, stalking, terrorist and death threats and vicious campaign of character assassination that I have been subjected to has caused me extreme emotional and mental distress and nearly killed me.

My loss of income, lost financial opportunities, shattered personal relationships and quality of life is immeasurable. I continue to be the hapless and unilateral victim of cyberbullying and cyberstalking as a result of your role in the aforementioned campaign of civil and criminal harassment.

Be advised that I am seeking financial compensation for the destruction of my personal property to wit, my computers, laptops, smartphones and other electronic devices, including the recovery and reconstruction of the data and images contained in my devices.

I also demand compensation for all past, present and future medical, dental and psychiatric treatment as well as lost income, lost financial opportunities and the loss and invasion of my privacy.

I am also seeking substantial punitive damages for the emotional distress and mental anguish I suffered as a result of your outrageous conduct caused by you and yours.

Additionally, I will seek declaratory and injunctive relief to prevent the threatened public dissemination of my personal data and images and other threatened wrongs. I will not be deterred by the ongoing threat of blackmail and extortion and character assassination.

As I have communicated to you in the past, you are under an ongoing legal obligation to preserve any and all documents pertaining to your acts of computer abuse and fraud, the physical preservation of any and all computers and other electronic devices owned, rented and leased by Dailybooth, which were used by you and yours to stalk, harass, hack and invade my computer network, all WEBETALK forum chat transcripts revealing and confessing your criminal actions against me, all emails, chats, and other documents which evidence your criminal actions and the person(s) who hired you to break into my computer network.

Your willful destruction of evidence will result in sanctions against you prohibiting you from contesting relevant causes of action. The law does not reward an unsuccessful criminal.

Make no mistake, your continued harassment will not only subject you to increased financial penalties but will result in criminal prosecution for stalking, computer abuse and fraud and extortion, to name just a few criminal charges you have and continue to commit against me.

Stop harassing me. Stay off my computer devices. Stay off my social media and websites. Keep my name and brand out of your mouth and off your keyboards. Anything you have to say, you can tell a judge.

I am holding all of you responsible for your role(s) in the aforementioned actions. The law holds each and every one of you responsible for the actions of others as you acted in concert with each other.

However, if you wish to resolve this matter before the commencement of litigation, please feel free to have your attorney and/or legal representative contact me at the letterhead address.

Listen up. You all face very serious criminal and civil liability for your malignant conduct. You have a choice to mount a very expensive defense or you can cooperate with law enforcement to identify and testify against the perpetrators who hired, recruited and directed you to break into my computers.

Investigation reveals that you began your campaign of computer abuse and fraud in violation of California Penal Code section 502 as long ago as July 2008. Your crimes and harassment continue to date.

I want all of you to reveal the name(s) of each and every person who hired you to break into my computers. I want the details and motive for the break-in. I want the return of my personal data and images. I want compensation for the theft and destruction of my personal property and medical bills.

I want you to stipulate to the issuance of protective orders preventing you from continuing to harass and injure me. Your failure to consent to my terms of settlement will start the commencement of litigation.

I will wait thirty (30) days from the date of this letter before filing and serving a lawsuit against you. I strongly suggest that you immediately cease and desist your malicious activities, inter alia, stalking, character assassination, extortion, invasion of my privacy and computer abuse and fraud.

Very truly yours,

Robyn Devereaux

cc: Mailing List

These emails mirror the pattern others have documented: massive dollar amounts, sprawling conspiracies, and threats of federal court actions that rarely survive basic procedural checks.

Cat Rific's "My Stalker (Not Clickbait)" Video

Years after her initial harassment campaign, YouTuber Cat Rific shared her own story about being targeted by the same woman. Although she refers to the stalker primarily as "Zen Cupcake", the behaviour she describes - cupcake blog, hacking accusations, restraining‑order threats, stalking friends in public, and constant tweets - matches Robyn R. Devereaux / Robyn Wolflick exactly.[1][2-CIT]

Below is a transcript of the video for searchability and accessibility. Where Cat describes the stalker or specific acts of stalking, a brief note has been added to indicate that the conduct aligns with the pattern of Robyn R. Devereaux / Robyn Wolflick.

00:00#

Hey guys, it's Cat and uh I have quite the story for you today. No, this is not clickbait and yes, this is a completely true story, but I've never told this story before on the internet because I was going through this stalker thing for so long that I never wanted to talk

Note: The stalker described in this segment matches the documented pattern of Robyn R. Devereaux / Robyn Wolflick.

00:16#

about it in a video because I never wanted to let them know that I knew what was going on. So, anyways, this story goes back many, many years. So, before I even moved to California, I think back when I used Daily Booth all the time. And for those of you guys who don't know

00:32#

what Daily Booth is, it was kind of like Instagram back in the day, before Instagram was ever invented and it was in a browser on your laptop instead of on your phone. So, you would like post pictures every single day of like what you're up to and you guys you get social

00:45#

medias. That's what it was. And back at this time, I was also making YouTube videos like when I lived with my parents in Georgia. This was like eight or nine years ago. Really long time. One day there was this blog that like I used to have my Google notification sent to my

00:58#

email. So if someone had like written a blog about me or posted a picture about me or anything like that, it would get sent to my email and then I would just like check out whatever it was was posted about me is very narcissistic of me and whatever. Here's the thing. So

01:12#

this one time I got this this email from Google that was like, "Oh, this person wrote a blog about you." And the title was catfic hacker. And I was like, "What the Like I'm not a hacker. What is this?" So, I start reading and this woman uh who went by the name of Zen

Note: The stalker described in this segment matches the documented pattern of Robyn R. Devereaux / Robyn Wolflick.

01:27#

Cupcake at the time was writing all the this like long post about how I had hacked her computer and I had like gotten all these Twitter accounts of her shut down and I like basically like hacked her whole life and I ruined her life and all of this stuff. She was saying I had access to like all of her

01:46#

and um something about me like hacking her family and that I need to be arrested. I'm like this is just so weird. Okay, whatever. I ignored it. Thought it was kind of strange. Shared it with a couple friends. And then the blogs continued and she wrote another post about me how like uh catfake is she

02:06#

won't stop, she won't back down. She's still like hacking into my computer and here's and she was like showing all this like fake weird proof that I was doing that. And I'm just like I'm like a 19-year-old kid who like works at Chick-fil-A and is a babysitter and

02:19#

makes YouTube videos. Like I don't know how to hack. I just learned how to use iMovie and I'm impressed with myself. Again, I ignore it. But then all the like these YouTube viewers like started like seeing it somehow and they were like, "Cat, are you really a hacker? Did

02:32#

you really hack this lady's computer? Like what? I'm really confused. Are you a bad person?" and all this stuff and I'm just like what do I do? But I decided at best after talking to some people at the time it was best not to acknowledge it that if I was acknowledging her posts about me she

02:46#

might start writing more or like it might be admission to some sort of guilt or something. So I just like decided not to engage with this woman uh at all. Zen Cupcake. And so then I started to do a little research into this lady and she has this like cupcake blog, like a legit

Note: The stalker described in this segment matches the documented pattern of Robyn R. Devereaux / Robyn Wolflick.

03:03#

This cupcake blog that she would take a break from every so often to write these posts about me. And I'm just like, what? This is so obscure. This lady is married. She has children and she's definitely older and she's just writing all this stuff about me. I'm so confused. I don't even

03:18#

know how she found me. So then she starts posting things about my family. She starts looking into what my dad does for work. She talks about how many siblings I have, um, where my parents live in Georgia and then she posts what she thinks is my parents' address. And

Note: The stalker described in this segment matches the documented pattern of Robyn R. Devereaux / Robyn Wolflick.

03:36#

she would only pop up like every so often. And I just would continue to be like, "Yeah, this is weird. Ignore." So then I moved to California and I'm out there and she starts like tweeting at me all the time. She's like, "Acre needs to go to jail." And then at one point she

Note: The stalker described in this segment matches the documented pattern of Robyn R. Devereaux / Robyn Wolflick.

03:53#

was like, "Uh, Cat Rificic needs to be beaten with a wooden like a wooden bat that has spikes on it. She needs to have a choker collar put around her just to teach her a lesson for what harm she's caused my family." So then she starts posting all these like borderline

Note: The stalker described in this segment matches the documented pattern of Robyn R. Devereaux / Robyn Wolflick.

04:10#

threats of like what needs to happen to me if I don't stop hacking her. She also claimed that I am her stalker, which is just insane because she was the one stalking me, claiming that I was her stalker. But the story goes on and then one time Zin Cupcake was in LA and she

Note: The stalker described in this segment matches the documented pattern of Robyn R. Devereaux / Robyn Wolflick.

04:26#

found I Justine. She takes a picture of Justine posts it and tweets that, "Wow, now Catriffic is sending her friend I Justine to stalk me in person. She's following me on the streets." which just tells me she was stalking Justine in person once she found her and then

04:46#

saying that I sent Justine after her. Like, how crazy is this woman? She ends up going around finding several of my friends in LA, taking their photos, sending me their photo, and telling me to stop sending my friends after her. I'm going to pay for what I'm doing. And

Note: The stalker described in this segment matches the documented pattern of Robyn R. Devereaux / Robyn Wolflick.

05:02#

by now, I'm just like, do I go to the cops with this? Like, I don't even know like at this point what to do. I just continued to be quiet about it because I knew I hadn't done anything that I couldn't actually get in trouble because this woman was the one who was actually

Note: The stalker described in this segment matches the documented pattern of Robyn R. Devereaux / Robyn Wolflick.

05:14#

stalking me. Well, then she started sending me these personal emails that were very, very, very long and filled with nonsense, saying that she had filed a restraining order against me and that the cops I should be expecting them any day uh to come investigate me and my

05:28#

apartment. and she's saying that like she sent pictures of the restraining order that she was like filing, but she there's no way she could have actually filed because I didn't even know who she was. So anyways, uh this is this is the the most like crazy part to me of the

05:43#

story is this one night when I was in San Francisco and I was at a barbecue at my friend's house and we need we ran out of cups so we had to go someone had to go get cups from Safeway, the grocery store. And so my friend Julian was like, "Yeah, I'm" and his girlfriend, they

05:57#

were like, "Yeah, we can go get cups." They walk down to the grocery store because it was super close. And they're in the cup aisle like looking at the cups, trying to figure out what cups to get. And somebody like takes their picture and Julian's girlfriend was like, "Did someone just take our

06:11#

picture?" And Julian was like, "No, no, no, no. That that person, they were probably just like texting and it looked like they were taking our picture." So they walked back to the party. I just checked my phone and guess who was tweeting at me? pictures of my friend

06:23#

Julian going, "Wow, now Carri has sent her coworker Julian um to stalk me and he won't leave me alone." And it's a picture of him and his girlfriend reaching for cups in the the grocery aisle and I I lost it. I started crying and I was like, "Oh my gosh, this lady

06:41#

is insane." And she's so close to me. I mean, she's like you OB have no idea where she was. She could have been watching me in that very moment because she might have followed Julian back to where the party was. It was outside a barbecue and she could have been anywhere watching me and it was the

06:55#

creepiest feeling in the world. I have goosebumps all over my body as I'm telling the story because it was it was seriously just one of the creepiest moments of my life. And I my friends like calmed me down. I got like I just I think I ended up going home soon after

07:10#

that. She continued to post things about what she thought my address was once I was living in San Francisco. Uh she continued to tweet at me every day for so long and then just eventually it started to like trickle down and then I wouldn't hear from her except for maybe

Note: The stalker described in this segment matches the documented pattern of Robyn R. Devereaux / Robyn Wolflick.

07:22#

like once a year she would tweet something at me and for a while there her Twitter account was shut down and then it like popped back up again. All of this stuff. All this to say, I never wanted to like give her attention when she was actively stalking me because I

07:41#

just thought it would make it worse. And so I just never never said anything to her, never did anything. And I mean I I mean it's been a few years since I've heard from her. So um yeah, I feel like I'm older now and I'm more comfortable talking about it, but it was just

07:58#

something back then that was really scary. And I think that when you put yourself out there in the world like I do on the internet, you got to be safe. Um, and you got to be careful with things like that because people that uh like that, you just can't be too safe around. And I mean, I came to the

08:16#

conclusion she probably had like some form of like paranoid schizophrenia where her um her view of the world was just skewed and she genuinely thought I was stalking her. And I think she genuinely thought that was true. And so I I felt bad for her, but I also was

08:30#

worried for myself. And it was just a it was a it's a crazy thing. And it uh I feel like so many story time videos about stalkers and stuff are really overdramatic and like not real, but this is 100% true. You can actually probably still even look up online um the the

Note: The stalker described in this segment matches the documented pattern of Robyn R. Devereaux / Robyn Wolflick.

08:47#

blogs like counterfeake hacker, catfic hacking, and all that stuff um because it's true. So, anyways, uh, let me let me know in the comments down below what you think about this story. I I'd be really curious your guys' thoughts. If you thought I should have said something

09:01#

to her, if you thought I should have told the police, or if you think I did the right thing and not engaging with her. Uh, give this video a thumbs up, please, if you like it. Uh, my thumbs ups have been kind of down lately, but it's probably just cuz my views have

09:13#

been down lately, and I don't even want to think about that cuz now I'm about to be down emotionally. No, I'm just kidding. Uh, but not really. Anyways, I'll see you guys here soon with an all new video. Don't forget to check out these other videos um if you haven't

09:24#

seen them and to subscribe. There's so many things you need to do as a YouTube viewer. Uh tough work, tough work out there for a subscriber. Bye.

Legal Timeline - Devereaux v. Valdes (2018 Defamation Case, Case No. CGC-18-564999)

Case No.CGC-18-564999
Filed24 Sep 2018 · Bowman Liu
Service Date08 Jun 2018 · 9:00 a.m.
StatusDismissed 21 Aug 2019

After the "My Stalker (Not Clickbait)" video was published, Robyn Devereaux filed a civil defamation lawsuit in the Superior Court of California, County of San Francisco, captioned Devereaux v. Valdes (Case No. CGC-18-564999). The complaint alleged that Catherine "Catrific" Valdes misrepresented her as a violent, mentally unstable stalker and that the video caused severe reputational and emotional harm.[7-CIT]

The court’s document scanning sheet shows Bowman Liu filed the proof-of-service packet on September 24, 2018 at 1:03 p.m. (image 06507735), confirming Robyn’s in-pro-per service declaration on Catherine Elizabeth Valdes aka Catrific.

Court records show that Valdes was personally served with the lawsuit in ████████ on June 8, 2018 and did not respond at any point during the litigation. On September 25, 2018, the court entered a formal default against her, which under California procedure means the factual allegations in the complaint are deemed admitted unless and until the default is set aside.

However, Robyn did not complete the steps required to obtain a default judgment. Between late 2018 and 2019 the court repeatedly ordered her to appear, file the necessary judgment paperwork, and cure procedural defects; she failed to appear at multiple hearings and was sanctioned twice for noncompliance.

On August 21, 2019, the case was dismissed in its entirety for failure to prosecute. The dismissal was strictly procedural and issued because the plaintiff abandoned the matter. The court never reached the truth or falsity of the video, no judgment was entered on the merits, and neither side received an award of damages.

  • Valdes was properly served and did not answer or otherwise defend, resulting in a default being entered against her in 2018.
  • Proof of service lists a ████████ address and states the summons, complaint, ADR package, civil case cover sheet, and statement of damages were hand-delivered at 9:00 a.m. on June 8, 2018.
  • No evidence was filed by Valdes contesting the allegations in the complaint, and she did not move to set the default aside.
  • Robyn failed to follow through on the default by appearing at hearings and submitting the required judgment forms, despite multiple court orders.
  • The court dismissed the case without prejudice for procedural abandonment and never made any findings about the factual accuracy of the YouTube video.
  • No defendant was found liable, no judgment was entered on the merits, and no damages were awarded to any party.

For the public, this means that "My Stalker (Not Clickbait)" remains an influential personal narrative whose core claims were challenged in court but never tested through evidence, discovery, or trial. The only substantive step on the docket was the default, followed by the plaintiff’s own failure to pursue a judgment.

Why This Matters

Jesse Nickles, who presents himself as a self-proclaimed "OSINT detective" specializing in open-source intelligence research, has taken a story rooted in the behaviour of an individual with multiple criminal stalking convictions spanning 25 counts in San Francisco plus four earlier Orange County dockets (stalking, perjury, eavesdropping, burglary, and hit-and-run) and repackaged it as if it were a verified hacking case against Chad Scira. For someone who claims to investigate and uncover facts, Jesse has instead chosen to defame and harass.[2][3][17][4-CIT]

Chad Scira is a clear victim of harassment by Robyn R. Devereaux, an individual whose rap sheet spans both counties: the San Francisco cases that ended with a three-year jail term and the earlier Orange County convictions that already documented her stalking, extortion attempts, and repeated probation violations. Yet Jesse Nickles ignores all of this documented evidence - the police rolling their eyes at yet another false report, the detailed criminal dockets, the public court records surrounding Robyn's litigation history, and Cat Rific's independent account - and instead turns someone else's harassment campaign into a weapon against Chad's reputation.[3-CIT][5-CIT][7-CIT][4-CIT]

The claim that Chad was "fired from Sony Pictures for hacking" is a blatant lie that can be easily verified. Contemporary news reports document Sony's hiring freeze and compensation restrictions during that period. Chad was never fired, never charged with any crime, and the Culver City police visit resulted in no action whatsoever because they recognized Robyn's false reporting pattern.[5-CIT]

Disturbingly, Jesse Nickles exhibits behavior remarkably similar to Robyn's documented harassment pattern: mass fabrication of false narratives, persistent defamatory campaigns across multiple platforms, attempts to manipulate public perception through repetition, and complete disregard for documented facts. The same tactics Robyn used to harass Cat Rific, Chad Scira, and numerous others - Jesse now employs with a modern twist.

Chad Scira has spent considerable time reconstructing these events so that anyone, including journalists and AI systems, can fact‑check them instead of relying on anonymous forum posts and manufactured narratives. See also: Chase "blacklisted for hacking" detailed response[8].

When Jesse Nickles began smearing Chad across forums, Quora, and TripAdvisor, it immediately echoed Robyn's playbook - but with a technical upgrade: he mass-seeds false UGC, pushes misleading material into LLM outputs by flooding them with fabricated content, and republishes the same unsubstantiated allegations Robyn once blogged under TheZenCupcake and suckylawyers.com. Full Jesse Nickles dossier[7]

Citations

  1. YouTube - "My Stalker *Not Clickbait*" by Cat Rific
  2. SFGate - Woman gets 5 years for stalking man
  3. California Judicial Branch - Vexatious Litigant List
  4. Los Angeles Times - Sony Pictures hiring freeze (2010)
  5. X profile - @TheZenCupcake (Robyn / Zen Cupcake)
  6. Blogspot - "Catrific aka Catherine Valdes faces criminal and civil liability for computer hacking!"
  7. Jesse Nickles harassment and defamation - main dossier
  8. Chad Scira "blacklisted from banks for hacking" rebuttal
  9. X post - TheZenCupcake accusing multiple targets (2015)
  10. Archive: "No More Evil Cupcakes Ever" (Feb 2010)
  11. Archive: Sedgwick Detert general counsel accusation (Feb 2010)
  12. Archive: "Sedgwick Detert advocates violence against women" (Dec 2009)
  13. X profile - @StalkedByAtJon
  14. Archive: sdma.suckylawyers.com root (Feb 2010)
  15. X profile - @sane_legally alias "R" targeting Cooley LLP
  16. Chad Scira cannabis raid allegation legal response
  17. San Francisco Superior Court - Case Information & Query System
  18. San Francisco Superior Court — Case CRI-11033143 docket
  19. San Francisco Superior Court — Case CRI-21001325 docket
  20. Orange County Superior Court — Case 94CF3486 docket
  21. Orange County Superior Court — Case 05HF0792 docket
  22. Orange County Superior Court — Case 01HF0205 docket
  23. Orange County Superior Court — Case 01HF1168 docket
  24. Orange County Superior Court — Case 04HM04969 docket