Because you can’t sue someone for telling the truth.

If I’m a terrifying stalker committing malicious defamation, as Stern creatively alleges on her Instagram, then why hasn’t she sued me yet? Surely she must have enough grounds if I’ve been committing such violent harassment for a year?

She sent me a cease and desist in August, just three weeks after the premiere of Shiny Happy People: Teenage Holy War on Amazon Prime. I hadn’t even gone public yet but her series covered my groundbreaking work as a whistleblower who was the first to go public, so she knew it was only a matter of time. After profiting off my work as a whistleblower, which included years of perseverance through harassment and attempts to frame me for a crime, Stern had the audacity to accuse me of multiple crimes and threaten legal action in multiple jurisdictions.

In response, I contacted the head of the law firm and told them Stern was lying and showed my evidence. That lawyer never got back to me again, even when I emailed asking if she still represented Stern. So, I’m going to take that as a “no.”

Stern attempts to take the moral high ground by declaring “it’s deeply sad to see what this technology has done to them” and “Always looking to affirm the user no matter what, ChatGPT told them that I had tricked them, forced them to fall in love with me, and I was a predator.”

Anyone who has ever met me knows I have a mind of my own and I don’t blindly follow anyone or anything, including AI. That’s how I got out of a cult and then led thousands of other people out.

It wasn’t chatgpt that told me Stern was a predator. Weaponizing my deepest traumas and then pelting me with lies, gaslighting, and a smear campaign during a vulnerable time in my life is what tipped me off! I hardly needed an AI to tell me the most obvious thing in the world.

Stern can’t rebut the facts so her only defense is to prevent people from hearing them.

Stern accuses me of psychosis in order to define the lens through which every future event will be interpreted. Once people accept “AI-induced delusion” as the frame, then:

• persistence becomes stalking
• disagreement becomes psychosis
• accusation becomes defamation
• evidence from the other side becomes symptom, not substance

That suggests a strong need to get ahead of reputational threat not a good faith effort to engage with the facts.

One of Stern’s most effective weapons is the ability to present herself as compassionate while still socially destroying her target’s legitimacy.

The first time I saw her do it was when she invited me to her hotel room. She told me she had fallen in love with a cast member from season one, but it had ended badly because her past trauma made her too psychologically damaged. Stern delivered it convincingly, just as I’m sure she has delivered similar stories about me.

This is the tactic of a covert narcissist because psychologically, it reveals someone who wants to look humane, careful, and above the fray while still landing a very aggressive blow. She wants to be the authority on the situation but she uses a sympathetic victim voice rather than an openly combative one. It’s authority without vulnerability and that’s a very dangerous combo.

It’s also a way of warding off scrutiny. If people are busy seeing her as under siege, they are less likely to ask hard questions about her own conduct, escalation, omissions, or inconsistencies.

Stern’s overall message is “Do not evaluate this person’s claims against me on the merits. Their mind is the problem.”

I’ve laid out the facts here and in my podcast so you can decide for yourself.

Between the two of us:

• I’ve never trafficked orphans.
• I’ve never covered up abuse.
• I have no connections to anyone in the Epstein files.
• I’ve never been institutionalized in a psychiatric hospital.
• I don’t have dozens of documented lies littering the internet.
• I have no connections to murderous billionaires financing the genocide in Gaza.