During Bret Gordon’s failed defamation lawsuit against Dale
Dugas, the malicious, slanderous blog articles Gordon authored in 2020
targeting my reputation, background, and credentials were formally submitted as
official court exhibits. That litigation completely imploded—resulting in a
final dismissal with prejudice and an enforced court cost judgment
exceeding $60,000 against Gordon and Steven Hatfield.
In plain terms: Gordon LOST his lawsuit.
Because Gordon failed to challenge or refute those
exhibits before his case was thrown out, those docket filings regarding his
lies and defamation now stand uncontested as a permanent matter of public
judicial record. Gordon’s collapsed lawsuit against Dale Dugas—and
everything it exposed—will be brought directly into court as
self-authenticating evidence against him and his co-conspirators.
Evasion, Copyright Takedowns, and Voluntary
Re-Publication
Gordon’s conduct following the termination of his USAMA blog
further solidifies his civil liability. After his original hosting platform
permanently deleted his blog due to repeated Digital Millennium Copyright Act
(DMCA) and copyright infringement violations, Gordon never issued a retraction.
Instead, he actively hunted down archived links via the
Internet Archive’s Wayback Machine and re-posted them publicly across the web,
boasting that his defamatory articles were "meticulously archived"
for all to see.
Under established defamation law, this maneuver creates severe legal consequences. Actively retrieving, posting links to, and directing public traffic toward archived defamatory material constitutes an independent act of voluntary re-publication, effectively resetting legal clocks and confirming continuous, intentional harm.
Bypassing a host platform's copyright termination to re-distribute harmful material proves a deliberate, active intent to maintain public damage. Gordon’s actions demonstrate calculated malice at every stage of his campaign. The 2020 blog post proves the underlying motive behind his later escalation—specifically, the illegal procurement and weaponization of a sealed, expunged state record to destroy my physical dojo and commercial standing.
Furthermore, statements from those wishing not to be sued establish that Gordon's
own attorney acknowledged under no uncertain terms that the record was legally expunged. This confirms beyond doubt that
Gordon operated with full, actual knowledge of his illegal conduct. Also an attorney
who receives materials that are legally confidential, sealed, or expunged has a
professional obligation to report the crime and was een obligated to notify the court of Gordon's illegal action in thier lawsuit against Dugas.
Expunged
records are sealed by court order under state statute (such as Fla. Stat. §
943.0585). Possessing, reviewing, or retaining an illegally leaked expunged
record without court authorization places the attorney in direct conflict with
state privacy statutes and court orders.
Destruction of Affirmative Defenses and Denial of
Knowledge
By actively hunting down the archived links, copying them,
and publicly encouraging people to visit the Wayback Machine to read them, Bret
Gordon created a direct, unassailable chain of custody and personal adoption.
If Gordon attempts to claim in court or depositions that "someone
else wrote those articles," "my account was hacked,"
or "I didn't know those posts were still floating around," his
own digital footprint utterly destroys him. Under the rules of evidence, when a
party distributes, links to, and endorses a document with commentary like "my
articles can still be found there for all to see," they legally
adopt the statement as their own.
Gordon’s own words—including his emails sent directly to his
students spreading false claims regarding what he knew to be an expunged
record—place him squarely in the center of the distribution chain.
Why Proxy Abandonment Arrives Too Late
The named network co-conspirators—Steven Hatfield, Martin
Pedatta, Daniel Duplantis, Eric Aucoin, John Youngblood, and Heather Palasky—were
well aware of his articles and subsequently last year, received the leaked
expunged record. Yet, they chose to remain silent. Under civil conspiracy
doctrine, their silence and continued organizational alignment equal full legal
ratification of an ongoing tort.
These co-conspirators may believe that quietly running away
from Bret Gordon or scrubbing their public association with him in 2026 (or
even last year) insulates them from the incoming lawsuit.
They are mistaken.
Under established Florida tort law and civil conspiracy
doctrine, severing ties after the damage has been attempted and or inflicted
is legally meaningless.
Receipt of Sealed Record + Silence/Continued Alignment = PERMANENT
LEGAL RATIFICATION
Retreating after the fact does not erase past acts, undo
legal ratification, or grant retroactive immunity. Every member of that network
remains 100% jointly and severally liable for years of bad-faith claims,
digital manipulations, and the illegal weaponization of sealed records were
used in an attempt to undermine my reputation, credentials, and commercial
enterprise.
As of November 1, 2026, the sixty-day countdown officially begins. Every node in the network, primary actors and ratifying co-conspirators alike, will be held accountable under full joint and several liability for the complete economic and reputational destruction brought upon my business.
On January 1, 2027, legal notices and civil summonses will begin to be served to all involved. The court takes over. There will be no mercy, no backchannel settlements, and no second chances. Whether this litigation strips you of every asset, forces you onto the streets, and leaves you financially ruined is of zero concern to me—it is simply the exact consequence of your own deliberate actions.
