Cyberharassment and Legal Fees

This is a continuation of showing support for my friend, Xena, who is being viciously harassed, smeared, lied upon, and demeaned by @sofambro90 on Twitter as directed by Santiago Rodriguez.   Through Soroya Fambro, Xena is also being wrongfully accused of being someone else, which is something that Santiago has done to others.

For some history on the cyberharassers, see my post at this link.

There’s no doubt that Santiago is directing Soroya Fambro, aka @sofambro90.  On 10/09/2016, she tweeted this:

Soroya’s knowledge of Santiago’s case in “Washington State” and defending him tells us plainly that she is being fed that information by Santiago Rodriguez.    Soroya is also taunting David Piercy (DP) with things that only Santiago would know, or that Santiago is telling Soroya to tweet for the purpose of intimidation.

Also on 10/09/2016

And another on 10/09/2016.

This is how Santiago rolls.  He gives a surrogate information and hides behind that surrogate, in this case Soroya Fambro, to do his harassment and taunting for him.

Soroya Fambro took a break from harassing Xena in March 2016.  Soroya started again in a vicious, accusatory manner on September 10, 2016 and claims knowing how much Santiago has paid or is paying for legal representation.   Soroya tweeted this strange tweet on September 13, 2016.

Soroya says that “you”, meaning Xena, didn’t pay a dime.  Soroya makes a strange accusation that Xena knows Santiago’s case is “on going” and she falsely accuses Xena of blogging about it.

The case Soroya is talking about is between Santiago Rodriguez and David Piercy, number GS015518, in the California Superior Court in Pasadena, California.  Santiago has a restraining order against David and in January 2015, he alleged that David violated the restraining order.

The link in Soroya’s tweet that she retweeted to herself is to a blog post that Xena wrote on September 9, 2016.  That must be the post that Soroya thinks is about Santiago’s case.

THAT POST HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH SANTIAGO’S CASE.

Did Santiago intentionally misrepresent that Xena wrote about his case on 9/9/2016, and if he intentionally misrepresented this to Soroya so she could harass Xena under the guise of defending Santiago, did he intentionally misrepresent it to his lawyer also?   Xena referred Santiago to the lawyer who is representing him.  Beginning in November 2015, as Xena stated on one of her blogs,

“Indeed, I can barely post “Good morning” on Twitter or this blog without him calling his attorney complaining that I am interfering in his “cases,” or talking about “his business” or “bad-mouthing” him.

On the other hand, while I am restrained from sharing certain information, he has no restraints and has gone public with his lies, harassment and the carrying out of his threats. “

Somewhere within the minds of Soroya and Santiago they have associated Xena with what Santiago is paying for legal representation.  That’s as asinine as Soroya accusing Xena for a lawsuit against Ebony/Johnson Publications for something that the lawsuit does not allege!

What I see happening sounds very similar to the narcissist method of isolation.  An excerpt from the article  The Narcissist Wants To Turn You Against Your Friends and Family says,

“The narcissist wants to turn you against, or at least separate you from anyone who can help you or see that something is wrong. It is easier for a narcissist to brainwash you, abuse you and control you when there is no one looking out for you and you have nowhere to turn. They like to poison relationships in general so they can have all of your attention and use all of their power over you.”

There is something strange about Santiago telling Soroya about his legal bill and his association of the bill with Xena and what she writes on her blogs. Strange.  Very strange.  While Santiago has Soroya targeting Xena and some people who support her, maybe Santiago is targeting the lawyer for isolation from Xena?

What does Xena blogging about ANYTHING have to do with what Santiago is paying for legal representation?

I suppose that Santiago has not told Soroya that he has a Facebook page and on that page, he had a Paypal button asking people to donate money to his legal fund.  Around the time that Soroya tweeted about Santiago’s legal bill, he removed the Paypal button from his Facebook page.

In November 2014, Santiago was still paying his Fresno attorney for his only court appearance in May 2014 in Fresno. Santiago was fine with Xena using her blog to ask for donations directly to the law firm that represented him in Fresno.   Xena wrote,

“To help scrodriguez defray the costs, his attorney has a website with a Paypal button so those who can afford to, and are willing to help scrodriguez, can contribute directly to the law firm; Rusca & Rusca law firm.  Use “scrodriguez” as the client’s name. By using the Paypal button, your information is not publicly posted.”

On May 13, 2015, Santiago was fine with Xena using her blog to ask people to donate money to him.  Xena wrote:

“Santiago is now in debt for legal fees and costs and the case is still pending. Mr. Stalker’s use of dilatory tactics with continuing hearings have cost Santiago approximately $5,000. He would appreciate your help, if you can.

I’ve put a Paypal button on the border of this blog for that purpose. If 100 people donate $10, that would be a thousand dollars to help defray the costs.”

Xena subsequently removed that Paypal button from her blog.  The only thing she would tell me about why she removed it is that the original button went to Santiago’s wife’s account. Santiago said he opened his own Paypal account .   Xena would only say that the total picture didn’t set right with her so she removed the Paypal button so Santiago would stop hounding her about replacing it with one to his personal account.

When David Piercy went to court in Fresno for a restraining order against Santiago, David did not have a lawyer.  Santiago did. David lost.

When Santiago went to court in Los Angeles County for a restraining order against David, neither had an attorney.  David did not appear in court.  David lost.

Santiago filed for David to be held in contempt for allegedly violating a civil harassment restraining order. Because a violation of a restraining order can result in jail time, respondents who are unable to afford a lawyer are appointed a lawyer by the court.  David was appointed a lawyer.  Santiago decided that he needed a lawyer.   No one forced Santiago to hire a lawyer.

I can’t be sure why Santiago has complained to his lawyer about Xena and is associating Xena with his legal bill because I’m not in Santiago’s head and do not want to be.  One thing is VERY OBVIOUS.  As long as Santiago was using Xena, he had no complaints about her blogging about his case and Xena said she never heard one complaint from his lawyer accusing her of getting in Santiago’s business.    After November 22, 2015, that all changed.

I have my suspicions why Santiago associates his legal bill with Xena and falsely accused her of writing about his case in September 2016.

On 10/6/2016 Soroya tweeted

Has Santiago led Soroya to believe that his case will conclude this week and his attorney will then be free to represent her in her various threats to sue others?  Is that what this is all about? Isolate friend (Xena’s lawyer friend)  from friend (Xena) to try to influence who the lawyer represents next?

If that’s Santiago’s plan, then Soroya will be very disappointed.   There are things about the legal profession that apparently  Soroya doesn’t know and Santiago does not understand when a lawyer has previously represented a client.

Soroya, are you playing into Santiago’s scheme of being co-dependent on him?  Can you not see that he creates conditions causing you problems, and then promises to help you get out of the problems he created?

Soroya, all you have to do is leave Xena and her friends alone.   The more you allow yourself to be used as Santiago’s mouthpiece, the deeper you are burying yourself into his murky games.