17 Oct 17th-Oct 23rd, 2024 phoenixnewtimes.com PHOENIX NEW TIMES | NEWS | FEATURE | FOOD & DRINK | ARTS & CULTURE | MUSIC | CONCERTS | CANNABIS | footnote, the complaint states that “Plaintiffs are informed that a police reports (sic) states that a sixth grader at Maryvale Preparatory Academy made this bomb threat to RLG.” However, the foot- note continued, “the police report contained inaccuracies.” It did not specify what those inaccuracies were. The footnote plays up Negrete’s associa- tion with Maryvale and attempts to tie him directly to the bomb threat by citing IP addresses used to log into the @LawyerFiles account. “The IP address included in one of the bomb threat communications matches the geolocation of at least two of the IP addresses used to log into the Lawyer Files,” the complaint states. However, according to Loehrs Forensics owner Michele Bush, that allegation rests on particularly shaky ground. For one, the complaint alleges that there was a login to the Instagram account from the bomb threat’s origin, but it does not claim that the login occurred at the same time. Furthermore, Bush said, “geolocation” — which the complaint does not define — can be a nearly meaningless metric. It can mean “a thousand miles,” she said, or as little as “3 miles, maybe 5 miles.” “There are probably a million people who are using an IP address within the same geographic location,” Bush said. “If that’s all they’re doing, saying, ‘This is a (Maryvale) IP address and so is the swat- ting event,’ that to me is a very loose associ- ation and in no way identifies any particular individual or entity.” Negrete forcefully denied any association with the bomb threat, the police response to which was photo- graphed and posted on the @LawyerFiles account. “I said this then and I say it now: To still stand by that accusation is fraudu- lent,” Negrete said. “There’s no evidence I was anywhere near that school.” Rafi’s latest complaint seemed to recog- nize the shakiness of the claim. In the same footnote that claimed there were “inaccu- racies” in the police report about the bomb threat, the complaint signaled it could drop the bomb threat accusation altogether. “Plaintiffs maintain Defendant Negrete’s involvement,” the footnote concluded, “until discovery proves otherwise.” What happens next The next step in the case will be for Negrete and his attorney, Geoffrey Sturr, to file an answer responding to the new alle- gations. When asked if there had been substantive settlement talks between him and Rafi, Negrete said, “No. Well … um … not really, no.” Negrete also is still trying to determine who is behind the website WhoIsGilNegrete.com, which chronicles the run-ins with the State Bar of Arizona that left him suspended as well as a 2011 misdemeanor conviction for facilitation to commit money laundering. Negrete said he and Sturr want to unmask who is running the site and “can’t get further in a subpoena until disclosures” in the case with Rafi. Since New Times last reported on it, the website has added a grainy video of Negrete yelling at someone at a car show and text threads and photos of what the website claims was Negrete’s “side chick.” When asked if he had any comment on those allegations, Negrete said, “No. Nothing.” But Negrete was willing to opine on his opponent’s legal strategy. While much of the intrigue about the case concerns who was doing what, Negrete thinks Rafi’s attorney “is doing him a disservice” when it comes to the defamation claim itself. At several points, the complaint underscores Rafi’s fame in the Valley, calling his busi- ness a “massive success” and noting that Rafi’s “brand name and image are widely known throughout Arizona” due to Rafi’s advertising campaigns. That would seem to cast Rafi as a public figure, for whom there is a higher legal standard to prove defamation. Public figures, which can include businesses, must prove defamatory statements were made with “actual malice” — meaning whoever made the statement knew it was false or made it with “reckless disregard for the truth.” “He would be doing right by him if he were to say, ‘You know what, Brandon Rafi is not a public figure. He’s a normal guy, a normal private citizen, and Gil defamed him,’” Negrete said. “Instead, he’s like, ‘Gil defamed this guy who’s wrapped all over Phoenix.’” As a suspended lawyer, Negrete cannot offer legal advice. But maybe that one will sneak by. Suspended attorney Gil Negrete maintains he is not behind the anonymous Instagram account that Brandon Rafi says defamed him, even though one of Negrete’s cellphone numbers was used to log into it. (Courtesy of Screenshot via Instagram) Lawyer Feud from p 14