I’ve tried really hard not to mention this person because his viewership is tanking, despite the fact that he continues to seemingly have the same amount of subscribers. However, here is a quick update of what Aaron has been doing while he is “on his best behavior” during his supervised probation period.

Federal Copyright Infringement

A Federal Copyright Infringement claim was filed against him by a current Scientologist in August. Aaron thought it was his right to read the guy’s ethics writeup on his YouTube Channel. After the guy complained, Aaron did a video on August 23, 2026, bragging that that just proved the report was real. The video about the report has now been taken down. But the Federal copyright infringement case is still active. (Edited to correct date from October to August)

DOA v. ASL and SPTV FDN

SPTV Foundation has a lawyer in this case now. His name is Brian Brandwine. It is quite humorous that Aaron spent a lot of time during his trial complaining about how new the attorney prosecuting him was. Brian was admitted to the Florida Bar in October, 2024. He’s greener than the prosecuting attorney in Aaron’s misdemeanor battery case.

Liz’s Husband v. Aaron

The Judge finally signed an order denying Aaron’s Motion To Dismiss. Aaron has until October 17, 2026 to respond to the complaint.

And, as a yawner to end this post, Aaron has not initiated divorce proceedings.

Rather than wait for the Court to make a decision on Aaron’s frivolous Anti-SLAPP motion, DOA is following the scheduling order. He has served discovery in Aaron. Discovery dies not get filed with the court. But a notice that discovery has been filed can be filed if desired.

The very important discovery here are requests for admission.

If these responses are not answered within the 30 day deadline, they are deemed admitted.

There are 22 requests for admissions. If Aaron does not answer them by September 22, DOA has the right to file a notice that they are deemed admitted.

Here’s where it gets tricky. Aaron has no right to respond on behalf of SPTV, only himself. If he responds on behalf of SPTV Foundation. Under Florida case law, an artificial legal entity is not considered a "person" capable of appearing pro se under Fla. Stat. § 454.18. A non-attorney officer, director, or trustee filing pleadings on behalf of a foundation constitutes the unauthorized practice of law. Therefore, he either has to hire an attorney to respond or allow these admissions to be deemed admitted.

After deciding to dismiss the appeal he filed for his misdemeanor battery case. You may or may not remember that he failed to pay the filing fee with the appeals court. Apparently that’s not the only fee he didn’t pay.

He also didn’t pay the statutory $100 filing fee to the lower court when he filed his Notice of Appeal.

It appears as though Aaron’s money tree is drying up.

Apparently Aaron couldn’t use a fake fundraiser for his non existent foundation to get enough money for an appellate attorney. Not a shocker. It would take a real bottom feeder to take a misdemeanor battery conviction to the appellate court. And usually appellate attorneys have more going on than penny ante cases like this.

So now Aaron is stuck trying to make it a whole year without getting caught committing a crime.

Is it too soon to start a betting pool on whether he goes back to jail or he and Jenna split up for the 1,705,932,693rd time first. Any takers?

Aaron Smith-Levin’s attorney filed a motion to dismiss the appeal Aaron filed in this battery case. The appeals court did not make the Motion to Dismiss available to the public.

However, the court did deny the motion.

Nothing should be read into this. From the language in the denial, it appears as though Aaron’s attorney did not get a signed statement from Aaron saying he wanted the appeal dismissed. It is required in order to dismiss the case.

Don’t blame Aaron’s attorney. He is not an appellate attorney. He has stated this. He stated before the case went to trial that he was not an appellate attorney. He probably filed the notice of appeal under pressure from Aaron with a promise that Aaron would get an appellate attorney.

The court is basically saying that now that the case has been filed, it requires a signed declaration from Aaron that he wants it dismissed.

That is what “denied without prejudice” means. It means if they file the right stuff with the motion, they can dismiss the case.

This is posted on Tony Ortega’s substack. The Court has made some historic statements regarding Scientology’s actions. I am currently on the road. I am sure Tony’s expert will do a podcast with him later today or tomorrow analyzing this. If you haven’t subscribed, this is a good reason to do so.

I’ll give my take in comments later tonight or tomorrow.

https://open.substack.com/pub/tonyortega/p/court-finds-practice-of-deliberate

It is interesting to see people discuss the ex Scientology Community. They treat it as though it is a cohesive, happy group of people. Unfortunately, a lot of ex Scientologists feel like they need a community of others who were there too to feel comfortable. In my mind, this is not actually healthy.

Before you get all upset and say things like “common goal,” “fighting the enemy,” “take down Miscavige,,” etc., let me clarify.

Just like when a person graduates from school, people move on. Now, in reality, Scientology stunts even this part of people’s lives. Those people who were born in Scientology and leave as adults may not even have experienced graduation from school. But the comparison is still valid.

I attended my 50th year high school class reunion 4 years ago and it was strange. I left home for college less than 3 months after graduation. I never again lived there. I was in college, then Scientology. I left Scientology just shortly before my parents died, 12 years after I graduated. After that, there was really no reason to go back.

The shared experience of attending the same high school had zero effect on who I liked or got along with 50 years after graduation. There were less than a dozen people at the reunion I even talked to. They were the ones who had attended the entire 12 years of school with me. The rest of the people were strangers who I had known for a brief moment of my life. And that’s the way life works.

It’s the same or worse in Scientology. The reality of a Scientology friendship is that there is no bond. None. No familial bond, no real friendship. And your co worker will willingly write a knowledge report on you if it will keep them out of trouble. Therefore, the only real bond formed in Scientology is a trauma bond. So to feel like you need to be friends with someone just because they were in Scientology too doesn’t make sense. It’s highly unlikely you were friends then. Even if you knew the person. And if you had a friendship, it was superficial.

After I left Scientology, I didn’t tell anyone I had been in for 27 years. I was not your normal escapee, I know. It was good because I was able to heal without anyone from my past involved. It has only been the last 15 years that I have become active in attempting to take Scientology down. And the people who have hurt me the worst since I have started telling my story are other ex Scientologists.

There are so many ex Scientologists who are so busy “being ex Scientologists” these days that they don’t realize that they are harming their own mental health by constantly repeating the details of their past trauma in public forums. They are so busy being.a group of damaged people that they can’t take the next logical step and repair themselves.

Sure, it’s ok to make friends with people who were in Scientology. I have a few friends in my large contingent of friends who are ex Scientologists. But that should never be the sole criteria for a friendship. If that is the only common ground you have, your friendship is bound to fail. At least that’s how I see it.

I have uploaded the entire response in all its wordiness here. But u/inco was kind enough to do a quick summary of the document for me too. It is interesting that DOA spends so much time on the meth allegation, but I’ve saved a couple of great quotes where he really hit home. The summary covers everything else I could say. It’s hard to get very interested when you’re cheering really loud for both sides to lose.

Edit: here’s the link to the motions, sorry.

https://valerierossbooks.com/2026/07/14/doa-response-to-aaron-smith-levins-anti-slapp-motion-to-dismiss/

Overview

Scott Hochstetter asks the court to deny Aaron Smith-Levin's motion to dismiss. He argues that Aaron is trying to portray the lawsuit as an attack on protected speech about Scientology and activism, when the lawsuit is actually about specific allegedly false factual statements that damaged Scott's reputation. If the court finds any deficiencies in the complaint, Scott requests leave to amend instead of dismissal with prejudice.

Main Arguments

1. Anti-SLAPP does not protect defamatory false statements

Scott argues that Florida's Anti-SLAPP statute protects speech on matters of public concern, but not false statements of fact.

According to Scott, Aaron's motion repeatedly focuses on the Scientology controversy while ignoring the actual claims, which include allegations that Aaron falsely accused him of:

• methamphetamine use
• stalking
• doxing
• self-swatting
• fundraising misconduct
• sexual misconduct implications

Scott argues these are factual claims that can be proven true or false and therefore remain actionable even if made during YouTube livestreams or public debates.

2. Aaron cannot represent the SPTV Foundation

Scott first raises a procedural issue.

Aaron filed the motion on behalf of both himself and the SPTV Foundation, but signed only as a pro se defendant.

Scott argues that under Florida law a corporation must be represented by a licensed attorney, so Aaron cannot seek dismissal for the Foundation himself. He asks the court to disregard the motion as it relates to SPTV Foundation.

3. Aaron mischaracterizes the meth allegations

This is one of Scott's largest arguments.

Aaron's motion argued that Scott admitted receiving a harm-reduction package containing a glass pipe.

Scott responds that this completely misses the point.

He says the defamatory accusation was never simply:

Scott received a pipe.

Instead, he says Aaron repeatedly implied or stated that Scott:

• used methamphetamine
• tasted methamphetamine
• suffered a meth-induced mental breakdown
• acted irrationally because of meth use

Scott argues that these are objectively verifiable factual accusations, not opinions.

He also points to a YouTube Short titled "Scott Hochstetter admits he got a meth pipe" and comments beneath it, arguing Aaron reinforced the implication that Scott had used meth rather than merely received a pipe.

4. Aaron "cherry-picks" only the weakest allegations

Scott argues that Aaron's motion discusses only a handful of statements while ignoring many others.

He says the complaint includes allegations involving:

• meth accusations
• stalking
• doxxing
• fundraising misconduct
• repeated "Swatty" references
• mental health accusations

Even if one statement were protected opinion, Scott argues that would not justify dismissing the entire complaint. Each allegedly defamatory statement must be analyzed individually.

5. Public-figure status does not defeat the lawsuit

Aaron argued Scott is a limited-purpose public figure because he livestreamed protests and solicited donations.

Scott responds:

Even if that is true, Aaron still must prove that the challenged statements were:

• substantially true,
• protected opinion, or
• otherwise constitutionally protected.

Scott argues public-figure status merely raises the burden to prove actual malice; it does not create immunity for defamatory statements.

6. Aaron's conduct after receiving the retraction demand supports actual malice

One of Scott's more significant arguments concerns events after he demanded a retraction.

Scott alleges Aaron:

• received written notice identifying the allegedly defamatory statements,
• publicly mocked the demand,
• continued repeating the accusations,
• refused to investigate or retract anything.

Scott argues this post-notice conduct supports:

• actual malice
• republication
• continuing damages
• ongoing reputational harm

He cites later YouTube broadcasts in which Aaron allegedly repeated accusations involving:

• stalking
• swatting
• meth use
• fundraising
• Plaintiff's family
• ridicule about Plaintiff's anatomy

Scott argues these later broadcasts show Aaron relied on speculation rather than verified facts while continuing to repeat the allegations.

Heavy reliance on Mishiyev v. Davis

Throughout the response Scott repeatedly cites the recent Florida appellate decision Mishiyev v. Davis (2025).

He argues that case is highly analogous because it also involved:

• YouTube disputes
• accusations of illegal drug use
• copyright accusations
• online commentary

Scott argues the appellate court held that accusations of illegal drug use could be understood as factual assertions rather than protected opinion, making dismissal inappropriate at the pleading stage.

Response to Aaron's "actual malice" argument

Aaron argued Scott alleged only a failure to verify facts.

Scott disagrees.

He claims Aaron:

• adopted accusations from others,
• repeated them,
• endorsed them,
• amplified them,
• continued publishing after being told they were false.

Scott argues that is enough to plausibly allege reckless disregard for the truth at this stage of the litigation.

Alternative request

Even if the judge finds pleading defects, Scott asks that he be allowed to amend the complaint rather than having the case dismissed with prejudice.

Comparison with Aaron Smith-Levin's Motion

Scott directly disputes several of Aaron's key arguments:

Aaron's Motion |Scott's Response
The lawsuit attacks protected speech about Scientology and protests. |The lawsuit targets specific false factual accusations, not opinions about Scientology.
Scott is a public figure. |Even if true, defamatory factual statements remain actionable if made with actual malice.
Statements were opinions or rhetorical hyperbole. |Many statements are factual allegations capable of being proven true or false.
Scott admitted facts supporting the meth allegation. |Receiving a pipe is not the same as using meth or having a meth-induced breakdown.
Anti-SLAPP requires dismissal. |Anti-SLAPP does not immunize defamatory falsehoods.
Scott failed to show actual malice. |Aaron allegedly continued repeating the accusations even after receiving a retraction demand, supporting actual malice. Overall

Scott's response is largely a point-by-point rebuttal of Aaron's Anti-SLAPP motion. Rather than introducing entirely new claims, it argues that Aaron has reframed the lawsuit too broadly as one about public debate, while the complaint is actually based on numerous specific allegedly false factual accusations. Scott also places considerable emphasis on Aaron's conduct after receiving notice of the allegations, arguing that the continued publication of the statements supports an inference of actual malice sufficient to survive a motion to dismiss.

The Appellate Court of Florida has received Aaron’s Notice of Appeal. However, no filing fee was attached.

I am in the middle of getting ready to go off grid until the middle of Monday afternoon. I may have time to check the court file before I leave. This isn’t the top of my priority list, honestly so maybe I won’t catch you up til Monday afternoon on Aaron’s attempt to appeal a misdemeanor case.

But here is his latest misadventure in the appeals court.

Tom DeVocht, the single father of a daughter who is nearly a teenager, made a post asking his paid subscribers to cancel their paid subscription to his substack. Tom is a former RTC Executive who left before Mike Rinder did. He is one of the first people who helped Mike went after leaving.

His post, like a lot of his posts, was well thought out and informative. He ended it saying he is going to spend his time enjoying his daughter.

Here is the link to the post if you care to read the whole thing.

https://open.substack.com/pub/devodevocht/p/please-cancel-your-paid-subscription

Aaron somehow decided this post was a deeply personal post aimed at him. If you’re a fan of flying spittle and overblown hyperbole, feel free to hunt down his channel and locate the video of Aaron being Aaron. Aaron will thank you for the view by not noticing your existence. He will be too busy paying bots to inflate his subscription numbers.

Here is a transcript summary to save you the discomfort and limit the number of views he gets as well.

https://ot42.de.cool/?v=R1yFF2fbXyo

Aaron gets so defensive, it’s obvious that Tom hit a really weak spot in Aaron’s Narcissistic armor plating when he said this:

“*To those, new and old, painting sidewalks and engaging in endless infighting to generate attention (or 	income) one day you might realize (or just maybe admit) who you really work for.\**

*The constant noise doesn’t expose anything new. It doesn’t change policy. It doesn’t stop abuses. It 	doesn’t dismantle the organization.\** 

*In my opinion, it mainly keeps Scientology alive and gives David Miscavige exactly what he needs to keep 	raising money and feeding the machine. If you benefit from that... well, I’ll just leave it there.”*

Aaron went so far as to try to pretend that he has something to do with raising his three daughters. He claimed that he can raise his daughters and protest at the same time. He doesn’t mention that he has had various mistresses for at least a decade and doesn’t even live in the same house as these three daughters he’s “raising.”

He then defends the assault and battery protests and the slander and libel of anyone who doesn’t toe his hard line as perfectly acceptable. And accuses Tom of being elitist. Because Tom points out that infighting and making the outside world look like an unsafe place; the very things Aaron does with his pizza party prop protests, are not productive.

Shakespeare said it best: “the* lady doth protest too much,* methinks.”

On June 30, 2026. A Notice of Appeal was filed in this case. I have not practiced in Florida. But, according to my reading of the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure 9.110(b), the Final Deadline to Make this Filing was June 29, 2026. The Court closed Aaron’s case that day, which made me more confident in this belief,

This wasn’t just a piece of paper showing up late in the files. The date on the notice is June 30. Your guess is as good as mine as to what happens next.

No filing currently shows in the Appeals Court.

Aaron’s Misdemeanor Battery Case is closed as of today. No appeal was filed. The time has expired for him to be able to do so. He either couldn’t find an attorney slimy enough willing to do it for him, or the cost was too high. (I’ve attached a screenshot showing the case closed).

The case Liz’s husband filed is still stalled. Either party has the right to request a ruling on the Motion to Dismiss based on the pleadings. Or in the Alternative, a Hearing. Now that the Standing Order has been Filed, the Case is under time constraints. But no discovery can start until an Answer has been filed as long as there is no ruling on the Motion to Dismiss, the case sits there running down the clock.

In the DOA case, it seems as though Aaron plans to just default on the summons. I’ve attached a page of the return of service showing when it was served. Or he was so busy celebrating release from his second incarceration, he lost track of time. He had until close of business today to answer for service on the 9th of June. Unless he has filed something he generated with hallucinatory AI citations like with Liz’s husband, and it just hasn’t shown up in the Court files yet, DOA has the right to Default him now and ask for a default judgment.

The Complaint filed by DOA requests $300,000 in damages. Since Aaron didn’t bother to answer the complaint, DOA automatically gets that Plus, there could be additional calculated damages for presumed, compensatory and punitive damages. I have screenshots of pages 39 and 40 of the Complaint, showing damage requests.

And there is still no divorce filed. Has his mistress du jour caught on yet?

At 12:45 pm LA time today, there will be oral arguments in the Appeal filed in Danny Masterson’s Sexual Assault Conviction.

Tony Ortega covers it well here.

https://open.substack.com/pub/tonyortega/p/today-danny-mastersons-appeal-gets

For a quick recap, Masterson is currently serving a 30 year sentence after being convicted of violent Sexual Assault of more than one woman. He has been in prison since May 31, 2023. This means he is already more than 3 years into his 30 year sentence. Translated in prison terms, if he doesn’t create problems, he can expect to walk free at the end of 2/3 of his sentence. So with no intervention, the now 50-year old Masterson will be on the streets again in less than 17 years.

The Court will post a link so we can all tune in and watch these arguments live approximately 1/2 hour before they start. I will be posting it as soon as it is available.

Tony Ortega will be watching the livestream. So will his legal expert, an appellate court attorney. They will be giving us their take on this when it is over. I will offer mine as well. None of us will be wasting the time and money to travel to LA for a hearing that lasts less than an hour.

Aaron claims he will be traveling to California to attend the hearings live be with his mistress. I do not know whether his probation supervisor gave permission for this. Or if he will actually be there. Nor will I be reading his recap. Why? Because it will be stolen from whatever Tony and his expert say. He may even read what I say too. If anyone is still donating to Aaron to attend these things, they are throwing away their money.

Scientology has filed an Amicus Brief in this case as well. It will not be heard today. An Amicus brief is a “friend of the court” brief. Scientology, as the Court’s “friend” wants to point out that Danny’s religious freedom was trampled when his religion was introduced into his trial.

The State will be responding to this. They have until July 13. Then Danny gets to respond to the State. Then the Court will either decide that matter or go to oral argument on that.

The elephant in the room is: where is Danny getting the money to pay for all this?

Edit: Here’s the link

https://jcc.granicus.com/player/event/5707?view\_id=48&redirect=true

Here’s a recap of what Aaron Smith-Levin, the man who claims to be the President of a foundation to help people escape Scientology, has been up to in the courtroom. The photo after the cover photo is a snapshot of his open cases in Pinellas County Court

There’s the Libel/Slander case filed by DOA

There’s the Libel/Slander case filed by Liz Gale’s husband.

There’s the Misdemeanor Battery Case.

This is The Latest on The DOA Libel/Slander Case

On June 11, 2026, after attempting to evade service from DOA, Aaron was finally served. The process server described it like this:

“He was exiting his vehicle. He refused to identify himself, but I knew it was him. I advised he was served
and placed the papers on the driveway. He was unpacking a car and the female with him stood by me and
heard me and saw them.”

I’m sure we can place guesses who the female was. Note, when this summons was first issued, Aaron was still in jail. That is how long it has taken to serve him.

Aaron now has 20 calendar days from June 11 to answer or otherwise respond to the complaint. And it was a lengthy complaint.

If Aaron is true to form, expect an AI generated Motion to Dismiss with hallucinatory logic to be filed in this case shortly. If anyone but bots still watch his channel, expect him to reveal the entire motion on there before filing it because he somehow believes that’s how legal strategy should work.

Liz Gale’s Husband’s Libel/Slander Case

I made a separate post about that one.

You can read it here.

https://www.reddit.com/r/OT42/s/J9BNltd9EE

The Misdemeanor Battery Case

This case is only open for a few more days unless Aaron can convince someone to represent him in an appeal. For a misdemeanor battery charge.

The attorney who represented him in this case has said he doesn’t do appeals. The final order from the judge has been filed by the clerk of the Court. There are still a scant few days for a notice of appeals to be filed. Aaron may still be able to locate a hungry bottom feeder an attorney willing to represent him. His current attorney could still file the notice. If not, the case will close on June 28.

In The Meantime

Aaron has announced on his channel that he intends to travel to LA on June 25 to attend the Masterson Oral Arguments. I have no idea if his Parole Supervisor is aware of those plans.

https://open.substack.com/pub/tonyortega/p/oral-arguments-hearing-in-danny-mastersons

This is subterfuge. Tony Ortega and his Appellate Lawyer expert will both be watching it via live stream provided by the Court. Any coverage Aaron gives will be stolen, as usual, from Tony’s coverage.

His only reason for getting members of his channel to fork out more money is for him to visit his mistress in California.

I won’t be shocked if he attempts to pull it again in July for the Remini anti-SLAPP hearing. Once again, he may or may not remember he’s on probation and he needs permission.

https://open.substack.com/pub/tonyortega/p/leah-remini-lawsuit-gets-hearing

So there you have it, the fine upstanding president of a foundation allegedly helping Scientologists escape.

As discussed in my previous post, in order for his case to move to move forward, Liz’s husband needed to correct a filing deficiency.

Rules, rules, rules. Yes, they are annoying and they seem to be meaningless. But with so many cases clogging the courts these days, many of which should not be there, the only way to get a case moving is to do it the way that particular court requires.

The schedule that was filed is a simple two page document. The main purpose is to draw the attention of the court and the clerk to this case, get a judge assigned, and move the case forward. The schedule states trial has to be held no later than a year after filing of the case. This means the case either has to settle or go to trial by that date.

Liz’s husband, if desired, may now look at the assigned Judge’s online calendar in this case and file a Notice of Hearing on available date to get the Motion to Dismiss that is stalling the case out of the way. As long as it is sitting there unajudicated, Aaron is not forced to actually answer the complaint. The clerk is allowed to help Liz’s husband select a date.

This would be a great time to do this because he now has a ticking clock in two other cases. I will write a post about those things in a new post which should appear in the next few hours.

On the afternoon of June 5, Judge Hessinger filed her final combined order regarding Aaron’s two motion for a new trial. It is a thing of beauty. It can be read in all its glory here.

Order Re Motions For New Trial

The statement regarding the curative instruction is an important quote from the Order. (First image above).

The Judge goes on to state that Aaron and his counsel violated the MIL three times before she removed the jury.

Aaron‘s motion for a new trial #1 claims that Aaron was not allowed to proffer. the Judge states in her order that Aaron and counsel were allowed to proffer, they used that time, instead, badgering the victim regarding practices of suppressive persons. (Second image above).

The Judge also manages to get in the Order the fact that Aaron was encouraging his followere to “double down” during jail calls. (Third image above)

Just do yourself a favor, click on the link and read the order. it’s worth your time.