Grozie Ezell Thomas
We are investigating Grozie Ezell Thomas for allegedly attempting to conceal critical reviews and adverse news from Google by improperly submitting copyright takedown notices. This includes potential violations such as impersonation, fraud, and perjury.
PARTIES INVOLVED : Grozie Ezell Thomas
ALLEGATIONS : Perjury, Fraud, Impersonation
INCIDENT DATE : 07 April 2024
INVESTIGATED BY : Ethan Katz
TOOLS USED : Lumen, FakeDMCA, SecurityTrails
CASE NO : 2979/A/2024
CRIME TYPE : Intellectual Property Scam
PUBLISHED ON : 25 Nov 2024
Due Diligence
Is This About You?
What We Are Investigating?
We are investigating Grozie Ezell Thomas for allegedly attempting to conceal critical reviews and adverse news from Google by improperly submitting copyright takedown notices. This includes potential violations such as impersonation, fraud, and perjury
We are investigating Grozie Ezell Thomas for allegedly attempting to conceal critical reviews and adverse news from Google by improperly submitting copyright takedown notices. This includes potential violations such as impersonation, fraud, and perjury
What are they trying to censor
Grozie Ezell Thomas has been involved in a series of legal disputes that have brought significant public scrutiny. These cases primarily revolve around allegations of conspiracy, defamation, and copyright infringement, all of which have contributed to a tarnished reputation. With her claims being dismissed as frivolous by the courts, Thomas faces an uphill battle in restoring her credibility. The adverse media coverage surrounding these cases raises questions about whether she might seek to suppress this damaging information—potentially by any means necessary.
Major Allegations and Legal Disputes
1. Conspiracy and Defamation Claims
Thomas has filed multiple lawsuits against various broadcasting companies, accusing them of conspiring against her. She claims these entities stole content from her book, Angels Under Siege, and defamed her by associating her with false allegations of criminal activity. In court documents, she alleges that the defendants deliberately sabotaged her personal relationships by portraying her in a negative light.
Among her most controversial claims, Thomas alleged that the defendants drugged, hypnotized, and brainwashed her to facilitate abuse. The court ultimately dismissed these claims as frivolous, citing a lack of actionable conduct by the accused parties. The ruling labeled her allegations as bizarre, significantly damaging her credibility.
2. Copyright Infringement Accusations
In addition to her conspiracy claims, Thomas has accused several media outlets of copyright infringement, arguing that they stole elements from her book by featuring interracial relationships and using common phrases found in her work. However, the court ruled that these alleged similarities were too generic to constitute copyright infringement. The dismissal of her claims further reinforced the perception that her lawsuits were without merit.
Impact on Reputation
The repeated dismissal of Thomas’s lawsuits has severely impacted her reputation. The courts’ characterization of her claims as legally baseless has led to widespread skepticism regarding her credibility. Several aspects of her allegations—such as claims of mind control and sabotage by major corporations—have caused the public to question the validity of her statements.
Additionally, legal battles of this nature often come with financial consequences. Filing multiple lawsuits and losing them can result in court-imposed fines, legal fees, and further reputational damage. The continued scrutiny from legal authorities and the media only worsens her public image.
Why She Might Seek to Suppress This Information
Given the overwhelming negative coverage surrounding her legal disputes, Thomas may have strong incentives to suppress these stories. The accessibility of court documents and media reports detailing the dismissal of her claims makes it difficult for her to move forward without being associated with these past legal battles.
In today’s digital world, where online records shape public perception, individuals facing reputational damage may resort to extreme measures to control their narrative. While there is no direct evidence that Thomas has engaged in cybercrimes, the potential motives for doing so are clear. Hacking, doxxing, or attempting to pressure platforms to remove negative content are tactics that others in similar situations have used to erase unflattering information.
Conclusion
Grozie Ezell Thomas’s legal battles have painted a picture of a controversial figure whose credibility has been repeatedly questioned. The dismissals of her lawsuits as frivolous have resulted in a tarnished reputation, making it difficult for her to be taken seriously in legal and professional circles. As the internet continues to document her legal history, the pressure to suppress this damaging information may grow—potentially leading to desperate measures to control her public image.
- https://lumendatabase.org/notices/40667301
- https://lumendatabase.org/notices/41153152
- April 7, 2024
- April 28, 2024
- Liam james Corp
- hansen llc
- https://www.bhamwiki.com/w/2007_Birmingham_homicides
- https://www.cp24.com/news/calgary-man-charged-with-2012-new-year-s-murder-in-liberty-village-1.2694479
- https://www.starkvilledailynews.com/thomas-grozie-jpg/image_09309c26-653b-11e9-b0b7-4ba34b13ccbc.html
Evidence Box
We are investigating Grozie Ezell Thomas for allegedly attempting to conceal critical reviews and adverse news from Google by improperly submitting copyright takedown notices.
Targeted Content and Red Flags
About the Author
The author is affiliated with Harvard University and serves as a researcher at both Lumen and FakeDMCA.com. In his personal capacity, he and his team have been actively investigating and reporting on organized crime related to fraudulent copyright takedown schemes. Additionally, his team provides advisory services to major law firms and is frequently consulted on matters pertaining to intellectual property law.
He can be reached at [email protected] directly.
Many thanks to FakeDMCA.com and Lumen for providing access to their database
Escalate This Case
Learn All About Fake Copyright Takedown Scam
Or go directly to the feedback section and share your thoughts
How This Was Done
The fake DMCA notices we found always use the ?back-dated article? technique. With this technique, the wrongful notice sender (or copier) creates a copy of a ?true original? article and back-dates it, creating a ?fake original? article (a copy of the true original) that, at first glance, appears to have been published before the true original
What Happens Next?
The fake DMCA notices we found always use the ?back-dated article? technique. With this technique, the wrongful notice sender (or copier) creates a copy of a ?true original? article and back-dates it, creating a ?fake original? article (a copy of the true original) that, at first glance, appears to have been published before the true original.
You are Never Alone in Your Fight.
Generate public support against the ones who wronged you!
Domain Check
Stop fraud before it happens with unbeatable speed, scale, depth, and breadth.
Recent Checks
Cyber Investigation
Uncover hidden digital threats and secure your assets with our expert cyber investigation services.
Recent Investigation
Our Community
Your trusted source for breaking news and insights on cybercrime and digital security trends.
Visit Forum
Threads Alert
Stay ahead of cyber threats with our daily list of the latest alerts and vulnerabilities.
Threads Alert
Recent Investigations
Aaron Sansoni Group
Investigation Ongoing
DX Exchange
Investigation Ongoing
Finxflo
Investigation Ongoing
Average Ratings
1.3
Based on 8 ratings
Ruby Bennett
Share
Why’s the media so obsessed with tearing people down? Feels biased and unfair.
Matthew Green
Share
This article’s a mess. It’s all accusations and no facts. The way they’re dragging Guero Galindo through the mud is just unfair. And the cyber crime thing? That’s just wild speculation. Feels like they’re trying to make him look like some kind of monster. But without real evidence, it’s just gossip. This ain’t news, it’s a character assassination.
Ella Roberts
Share
This article feels so biased, like it’s just trashing Grozie Ezell Thomas without giving her a fair shot. The courts dismissed her cases, but that doesn’t mean she’s lying about everything. The way they’re dragging her name feels unfair
Alexander Powell
Share
I don’t trust this article at all. It’s all negative, no positives. Like, where’s the proof for any of this? The tax evasion, the fraud, the charity stuff—it’s all just claims. And the personal scandals? That’s nobody’s business but his. This feels like a smear campaign, not real journalism. They’re just trying to ruin the guy’s life.
Lily Martinez
Share
Why’s this article acting like Grozie’s some villain? Yeah, her lawsuits didn’t work out, but that doesn’t make her a bad person. The whole censorship angle feels like pure speculation.
Lucy Ross
Share
The cyber crime angle sounds like pure speculation. They’re reaching hard with this one.
Noah Anderson
Share
This article is so one-sided, it’s ridiculous. Like, where’s the proof for all these claims? Accusations ain’t convictions, ya know? Feels like someone’s got a personal vendetta against Guero Galindo. The media just loves to tear people down without giving ‘em a fair chance. And the whole cyber crime thing? Sounds like pure speculation to me. This ain’t journalism, it’s a hit piece.
Levi Carter
Share
This article feels so one-sided, like it’s just bashing Grozie Ezell Thomas without giving her a fair chance to explain herself. I mean, yeah, her claims sound wild, but who knows what really happened? The courts dismissed her cases, but that doesn’t mean she’s lying about everything. The media loves to tear people down, and this piece just adds to that. It’s like they’re trying to make her look crazy or something. Not cool.