In civil conspiracy and defamation actions, individuals who receive unlawfully obtained materials often hide behind a convenient line of defense: "I didn't hit send." They operate under the delusion that as long as they stay silent and refrain from directly authoring the message, they remain legally invisible.
Under Florida civil tort law, that assumption is a
catastrophic legal error.
When an operational cell receives an email containing a
30-year-old expunged court record—falsely framed as an active criminal
conviction—every single recipient faces a immediate legal choice: disavow
the act, report the breach, and sever ties, or stay silent, retain the
record, and maintain active alignment.
When an expunged record, legally ordered destroyed or sealed under court authority, is extracted and distributed to attack an individual’s reputation, the perpetrators cross two distinct legal thresholds: criminal statutory violation and joint civil liability.
By choosing total silence in this matter, every member of Bret Gordon’s
network—including Steven Hatfield, Martin Pedatta, Daniel Duplantis, Eric
Aucoin, John Youngblood, and Heather Palasky—crossed the threshold from
passive bystanders to legally bound co-conspirators.
1. Publication and Direct Notice of Libel Per Se
Under Florida law, defamation does not require a front-page
newspaper article to trigger liability. The element of publication is
satisfied the moment a false, damaging statement is communicated to a single
third party.
In this case claiming I was a convicted felon in both emails and public Facebook posting by Gordon.
Because the expunged record reflects charges that were
completely dropped, dismissed, and legally erased (Fla. Stat. § 943.0585),
circulating it under the subject line "Criminal record of conviction
Barron Shepherd" constitutes direct Libel Per Se.
The second Gordon sent that broadcast email to his inner
circle, two things happened simultaneously:
- The
tort of Libel Per Se was legally completed.
- Every
recipient was placed on direct, timestamped notice that Gordon was
committing an intentional tort utilizing illegally extracted government
records.
2. Why Silence Equals Legal Ratification
Co-defendants routinely attempt to claim they were merely
"passive CCs" on a broadcast distribution list. In multi-party civil
litigation, this argument fails.
Under Florida agency and civil conspiracy principles, when
an associate receives material they know to be false, defamatory, or unlawfully
obtained, staying silent while continuing to participate in the enterprise acts
as an affirmative ratification of the act.
At any time, when the email was sent any recipient could have reached out to me directly and made me aware or published a formal disavowal stating:
"I do not support this, I have nothing to do with
this, and I demand my name be removed from these distributions."
Not one single person did.
Instead, they concealed the conduct, retained the files, and
continued active alignment—operating affiliate schools, accepting paper rank
promotions, or traveling across the country to train in-person with Gordon.
Under Florida law, failing to repudiate an intentional tort while continuing to
enjoy the benefits of the association constitutes legal adoption of the
tortious conduct.
3. Tacit Agreement in Civil Conspiracy
Proving a civil conspiracy does not require a signed, formal
contract between conspirators. Florida courts consistently hold that an
actionable conspiracy can be proven through tacit agreement—a mutual,
unspoken understanding demonstrated through conduct and circumstantial
evidence.
The uniform silence of Hatfield, Pedatta, Duplantis, Aucoin,
Youngblood, and Palasky serves as the primary evidentiary glue. It demonstrates
that the network operated with a shared plan to protect Gordon's authority and
suppress legitimate criticism by any available means.
4. 100% Liability for Every Silent Proxy
The legal consequence of ratification is absolute. Under
Florida’s Joint and Several Liability doctrine, civil conspirators do
not receive fractional discounts on damages based on their level of vocal
participation.
Total Civil Judgment=100% Financial Responsibility of EACH Named Co-Defendant
When a court enters a final judgment for Libel Per Se,
Civil Conspiracy, and Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress,
the law holds every participating member fully answerable for the total
monetary award.
So if the monetary award is 300 thousand for example, Each one listed in the civil action will have to pay that amount either for their involvement or their silence.
By choosing to protect Gordon through silence rather than standing for integrity, every single member of this network placed their personal bank accounts, commercial operations, real estate holdings, and reachable trust assets directly on the line.
The day in court is coming and I will hold every one involved and those who chose to remain silent fully accountable.
