As of August 8, 2025, I am suing the Grand Junction Daily Sentinel and reporter Jace DiCola for defamation, false light invasion of privacy, and the reckless public distortion of protected mental health speech. The case is real. The filings are public. The harm was immediate.

And it happened before I ever filed against UnitedHealth Group.

What They Published Was False — and It Wasn’t an Accident

On July 30, 2025, the Sentinel published an article falsely linking me to a mass threat that shut down Rocky Mountain Health Plans for four months. It implied I was echoing the assassination of a healthcare executive, claimed I caused an emergency office closure, and blurred two entirely separate police incidents into a single criminal narrative.

The reporter had the Grand Junction Police report. He knew the truth.

He knew I wasn’t a suspect. He knew I wasn’t investigated in the threat case. And he knew the quotes used came from a private, redacted, medically vulnerable conversation—during a hormone denial crisis following bottom surgery.

Instead of publishing facts, he fused them.
He deleted the context and delivered a stigma bomb.

I Had to Clear My Name Before I Could Fight UnitedHealth

This article was timed with uncanny precision. It dropped just as I was preparing litigation against UnitedHealth Group for PHI misuse, metadata profiling, and surveillance-based retaliation.

I hadn’t even gone public yet. But someone was already trying to silence me.

That’s why this is the first lawsuit I had to file.
Because if you’re framed as dangerous before you speak, your lawsuit dies before it lives.

False Light Was Carefully Framed — From the Start

The complaint filed on August 8 includes a fully developed, strategic Count II: False Light Invasion of Privacy. This count was deliberately revised and fortified before filing to reflect the full scope of editorial misconduct:

• The deliberate fusion of two unrelated incidents into a single threatening narrative
• The stigmatizing portrayal of a trans woman in medical crisis as violent or delusional
• The calculated removal of exonerating facts and context

This isn’t a vague tort. It’s a scalpel-sharp claim written to survive dismissal, expose editorial mechanics, and anchor discovery. It shows how narrative implication—when wielded recklessly—becomes reputational destruction.

This Is Metadata Retaliation — Not Just Media Defamation

The publication didn’t emerge in isolation. It followed a pattern of escalating suppression:

• Medical obstruction
• PHI and metadata profiling
• Welfare check escalation
• Newsroom narrative deployment

That article was Step 4.

It wasn’t just about generating fear. It was about destroying my legal and public credibility—before the real litigation even began.

Timeline Snapshot

• July 30, 2025: Article published falsely tying me to mass threat
• July 30, 2025: Demand for correction and evidence preservation served
• August 1, 2025: Final litigation notice served on UnitedHealth Group
• August 8, 2025: Defamation complaint filed against Grand Junction Daily Sentinel and Jace DiCola
• August 15, 2025: Scheduled public release of civil complaint against UnitedHealth Group

Read the Complaint and Supporting Exhibits

All public legal filings—including the filed complaint, redacted report comparisons, and timeline exhibits—are available here:

👉 View Filed Legal Documents – Google Drive

---

Related Materials

• The Evidence They Can’t Ignore – Metadata Files Explained – HIPAA, metadata, and retaliatory surveillance
• I Told You So – UnitedHealthcare Knew What They Were Doing – Documenting the retaliation timeline and aftermath
• Deny. Defend. Depose. And Then They Tried to Bury Us Both. – The pattern of suppression before litigation

---

Final Word

This is not a past-tense story. It’s happening now.

I am actively suing the media outlet that tried to assassinate my credibility through stigma, distortion, and metadata-laundered implication.

I’m also preparing to sue UnitedHealth Group.
And the public will see both lawsuits together—for what they are: a single coordinated system of reputational silencing.

This is how metadata retaliation travels.
This is how vulnerable people are erased before they can speak.
And this is why I filed this lawsuit first.

I’m not a headline.
I’m not a red flag.
I’m not your scapegoat.

I’m the Plaintiff.
And I’m just getting started.

📁 The Evidence They Can’t Ignore

“If it didn’t happen, where are all these documents coming from?”

This archive was not created from speculation, theory, or emotion alone.
It was built from the paper trail they didn’t expect anyone to follow.

This is where the claims end and the proof begins.
Every page, file, and screenshot in this section exists because it was left behind.

---

🔍 What You'll Find Here

This category contains primary-source documentation of the administrative processes that turned a transgender patient into a police target. It includes:

• 📄 Court filings that detail what was done, how it was done, and what was violated
• 🗃️ Medical records and insurance correspondences showing denial of care without justification
• 🔎 Metadata logs and policy records that expose digital surveillance and profiling
• 🚔 Police reports triggered by healthcare data—without criminal suspicion, emergency, or consent
• 📨 Whistleblower letters that confirm what insiders knew and chose not to stop
• 📋 Screenshots and time-stamped evidence documenting every failed process, every ignored plea, every cover-your-ass maneuver that followed

---

💡 Why This Matters

These documents aren't just receipts.
They’re a living record of harm—proof that this wasn’t a misunderstanding, a glitch, or a single bad actor.

They reveal a systemic process designed to:

• Withdraw healthcare access from transgender people who become “difficult”
• Weaponize HIPAA-protected data under false legal pretenses
• Use law enforcement as a tool of behavioral control—not public safety
• Suppress complaints by rerouting them into risk assessments and criminal profiling

And most chillingly, they show that these acts were not only tolerated—but normalized.

---

🧠 For Investigators and Allies

If you’re here to understand what “administrative erasure” actually means, this is where you begin.

We invite you to:

• Review the timestamps
• Compare redactions
• Follow the metadata
• Read the filings
• Listen to the internal contradictions

This isn’t an accusation—it’s a forensic outline.
One that no institution has yet challenged, because every word is anchored in their own records.

---

🔒 Redactions & Privacy Notes

All exhibits have been redacted in compliance with applicable privacy laws and sealed case protocols.
Nothing here has been altered to create narrative impact. Only identifiers and legally protected names have been removed.

If you are a member of the press, a legal observer, or a representative of a human rights organization:
You may request full document chains with validation hashes via the appropriate contact protocols on our Press or Court Filings pages.