CT - Husband gets court order to silence his wife’s TikTok, Oct 2023

[imstilla.grandma]

Hillary Sanchez explained what is at stake during an August hearing in Superior Court, at which Nate Sanchez succeeded, over his wife’s objections, in obtaining the restraining order that blocks her from talking about him or their marriage on social media.

“I have, in my hand, and you can review it … a two-million-dollar contract with a national syndicated talk show and a reality show that has been executed,” Hillary Sanchez told the court. “I got approached by the production company. I signed this deal. Our social media posts have reached over 22.5 billion views. We are social media people.”

“People are interested in us,” she said. “I’m 48. He’s 22. We were married. They are interested in how the demographics of this marriage happen, what is going on, was I his sugar mamma, was he a sugar baby. There are all types of questions in the public.

The limited legal filings in the case so far indicate that the Connecticut Supreme Court was unaware of what is behind the online interest in the Sanchez marriage when Chief Justice Richard Robinson agreed on Oct. 18 to take the case under a law that allows aggrieved parties to appeal judicial decisions that involve “a matter of substantial public interest and in which delay may work a substantial injustice.”

Several lawyers have said the case presents a serious First Amendment question. Still, there is no way of knowing how much of the couple’s history could seep into the arguments and deliberations. They also said the court’s involvement in a marriage made famous by TikTok probably would not be opposed by anyone hoping to profit from the couple’s social media notoriety

A CT man got a court order to silence his social media star wife. She says it will cost her millions.

Public interest can be measured by billions of views drawn to Hillary Sanchez’ TikTok channel, called @nateandhillary, her Connecticut lawyer wrote.

www.courant.com

 

[Irishknit]

All in the quest for social media exposure, and money, of course. SMH

 

[neesaki]

All in the quest for social media exposure, and money, of course. SMH

Right? Ridiculousness. JMO

 

[Laughing]

He prevailed in court? Hartford Courant has a paywall.

 

[imstilla.grandma]

“I’m not harassing him. I’m simply doing what I’m contractually obligated to do. I’m posting our wedding pictures, pictures of us when we were on dates. I can have communication. I can talk about my experience with my husband, and what he was doing, and what he was doing to me, storytime, teatime. It’s nothing threatening. It’s nothing harassment, whatsoever.”

“She’s saying all those things, that I’m — I’m lazy, that I’m a bum, that I used her for money, that she supported me, that she — that I’m a cheater, that I’m like screwing everyone that walks. Like, she’s making me out to be this person that I’m not,” he told the court. “It makes me feel bad, cause I have family and friends that just look at me like I’m this crazy person, and they’re like ‘I never seen you like this,’ and it’s — it’s like every — she’s online every day.”

“I made telephone contact with Nathaniel who stated that he met Hillary Sanchez, formerly Hillary Walls-Stewart, online and that they began an online relationship,” the officer wrote. “Nathaniel stated that he believed Hillary was a woman and that he did not find out until he married her legally that she is a male.”

A CT man got a court order to silence his social media star wife. She says it will cost her millions.

Public interest can be measured by billions of views drawn to Hillary Sanchez’ TikTok channel, called @nateandhillary, her Connecticut lawyer wrote.

www.courant.com

 

[Howl]

“Nathaniel stated that he believed Hillary was a woman and that he did not find out until he married her legally that she is a male.”

Whoo boy, is this so 2023 or what? It sounds as though Nate was catfished by Hillary.

Are they in divorce proceedings? Nate could certainly have their marriage annulled.

 

[imstilla.grandma]

*There are half a dozen if not more lawsuits with this person. It’s hard to count them. Just google: Hillary Walls-Stewart, example: from 2011:

A Pierce County sheriff's deputy has been disciplined for failing to properly follow up when a convicted con artist reported being a crime victim.

Walls-Stewart, who has portrayed himself as a woman, gained media attention in 2002 when he claimed he had won a $93 million Lotto jackpot and tried to buy a $141,000 Hummer at a Tacoma dealership.

Wash. Deputy Delayed Follow-Up When Con Artist Reported Crime

A Pierce County sheriff's deputy has been disciplined for failing to properly follow up when a convicted con artist reported being a crime victim.

www.officer.com

2002
Hillary Lee Walls, 27, of Parkland was ordered back to jail yesterday after a bail bondsman revoked the bond he had granted Walls.

“Basically, he was using the winning lottery ticket as the security for the bond,” said Michael Austin Stewart, a lawyer representing C. J. Johnson Bail Bonds. “And obviously, the winning lottery ticket could not be used for the bond.”

Walls was initially jailed after he appeared on television claiming to have the winning ticket in the Mega Millions game, and detectives recognized him as having outstanding forgery and theft charges.

Attorney: Man used lottery ruse to get bail | The Seattle Times

 

[masquerading]

“Nathaniel stated that he believed Hillary was a woman and that he did not find out until he married her legally that she is a male.”

Is Hillary a trans woman or a man who pretends to be a woman to catfish people? Important distinction there

ETA: I say this because I don’t know how PC newspapers have to be, this could’ve been worded better or differently I guess is what I’m saying because I’m confused now!

EDIT 2: I see now that he is a man who catfishes as a woman online. Jeez.

 

[PrairieWind]

Whoo boy, is this so 2023 or what? It sounds as though Nate was catfished by Hillary.

Are they in divorce proceedings? Nate could certainly have their marriage annulled.

That is a good question actually. In the past, certainly an annulment would have been proper since the wife wasn't a woman. But now, I'm not sure that is the case. But it is a good question. What a mess.