Danesh Noshirvan Serves Richard Luthmann with Frivolous Subpoena to Silence Investigative Reporting and Save His Own Skin in Free Press Harassment Case.
FORT MYERS, FL — Investigative journalist Richard Luthmann, known for exposing corruption and abuse, was served with a subpoena at the Fort Myers federal courthouse moments after Magistrate Judge Kyle Dudek left the bench on a case the reporter was covering.
The subpoena, orchestrated by notorious TikTok influencer and SCOTUS doxxer Danesh Noshirvan and his attorney Nick Chiapetta, is considered a calculated move to intimidate Luthmann and derail his investigations.
“This subpoena isn’t about finding the truth; it’s a weapon to silence me and chill a free press,” said Luthmann. “Danesh is doing whatever it takes to save his skin.”
Luthmann is a contributor to this outlet and provided background and comments on this article.
Free Press Harassment Case: A Desperate Attempt to Silence Critics
Danesh Noshirvan, a self-proclaimed “Iranian anchor baby” with a deep hatred for Israel, Traditional American Values, Christians, and Republicans, is a TikTok influencer.
He purports over 2 million TikTok followers and is notorious for his aggressive social media tactics. Noshirvan has cemented his reputation as a “digital vigilante” who uses doxxing to intimidate and harm. His campaigns target private citizens, public officials, and even top federal judges.
Noshirvan’s tactics are not limited to public officials. He has targeted individuals from all walks of life, often exploiting their vulnerabilities for personal gain. By weaponizing his TikTok platform, Noshirvan has orchestrated harassment campaigns against educators, healthcare workers, and small business owners.
Luthmann has been at the forefront of exposing these abuses. Through detailed reporting, Luthmann has documented Noshirvan’s systematic use of doxxing and harassment to silence dissent and monetize outrage.
Now, Luthmann says Noshirvan is using the courts and an unethical lawyer to further his harassment campaigns.
“This is not just an abuse of the legal process—it’s an attack on the First Amendment,” Luthmann said. “Attorney Nick Chiapetta of West Palm Beach, Florida, is helping Danesh weaponize the courts to cover up his misconduct.”
The latest move in this pattern of harassment is a subpoena demanding Luthmann turn over documents and communications related to his investigative work.
Legal experts have criticized the subpoena, noting that it blatantly violates the Reporter’s Privilege and Rules 26 and 45(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which restricts subpoenas to relevant information and commands compliance within 100 miles of a recipient’s residence or business.
“They want me to appear to comply in Tampa. It’s not that I don’t love Ybor City and The Columbia Restaurant. But that’s 160 miles away, and the rule says 100 miles. This is textbook bad faith, and they know it,” Luthmann explained. “And if they think I’m doing anything but celebrating Big Daddy Trump’s historic Inauguration on January 20, they have something else coming. But it’s hard to read the WOKE mind infected with TDS.”
“They are obsessed with Joey Camp. It’s some “Lifetime Movie” stalker crap. On top of that, they are asking me for a bunch of bullshit they can get from other parties or information that’s publicly available. It’s a transparent attempt to intimidate me and derail my work, but Danesh and his scumbag lawyer won’t silence me.”
Luthmann says giving up his sources could require an order from the U.S. Supreme Court itself.
“While Danesh is a digital terrorist, this isn’t a criminal case seeking the identity of a dangerous individual or group. I’m not disclosing information or giving up my sources. Journalists don’t do that. They can hold me in contempt if they’d like, but I’ll appeal it all the way up to SCOTUS. And they can throw me in jail. That won’t deter me from staying strong for the First Amendment,” Luthmann said. “I can do 90 days in a trash can, and wherever they’d send me, I’ll get everyone on the inside to beat their cases. I’m that good. Amira Fox wouldn’t be happy. But the fact that a journalist has to worry about these things is crazy.”
The subpoena represents a dangerous escalation in Noshirvan’s efforts to silence his critics. Legal analysts argue that targeting a journalist with such overreach undermines press freedom and sets a chilling precedent for investigative reporting.
By leveraging the courts to stifle legitimate journalism, Noshirvan is turning legal protections into weapons of harassment, further cementing his role as a disruptive and dangerous figure in the digital age.
Free Press Harassment Case: Courtroom Ambush
The subpoena’s delivery was nothing short of a theatrical ambush, staged mere seconds after Magistrate Judge Kyle Dudek exited the courtroom.
In a move that stunned onlookers, U.S. Federal Court Officer Pena stood by as attorney Nick Chiapetta, with calculated precision, arranged for a process server to hand the document to investigative journalist Richard Luthmann. The timing and location of the service—a federal courtroom—underscored the premeditated nature of the act, raising serious questions about the misuse of judicial resources.
Witnesses noted that Officer Pena did not intervene to prevent what many saw as a blatant affront to the dignity of the courtroom, courthouse, and the judicial process. Instead, Pena seemed more concerned with Luthmann’s verbal reaction.
“Officer Pena was more concerned with chastising [Luthmann] for calling Chiapetta a ‘cocksucker’ in the heat of the moment,” said a source who was present in the courtroom.
“This ambush tactic is an affront to the dignity of the judiciary,” Luthmann said. “It turns the courtroom into a theater of harassment instead of a forum for justice. One of the Judges should have a word with Officer Pena. I’m not sure he knew what was happening, and I don’t blame him because it all happened so fast.”
The confrontational atmosphere was set even before the hearing began. In a moment laced with symbolism, Luthmann handed Chiapetta a provocative image of President Donald Trump alongside terrorists, captioned with Trump’s pointed question: “Why are you showing me a picture of my house?”
The photo, an apparent dig at the fear tactics used by individuals like Noshirvan, was Luthmann’s way of highlighting the recklessness and danger of such harassment campaigns.
“Danesh Noshirvan is a dangerous digital terrorist. He has a body count. But he messed with the wrong one. I will give him the legal and media equivalent of a bunker-buster,” Luthmann explained.
This dramatic escalation of hostility in a federal courthouse has fueled criticism of the tactics employed by Noshirvan and Chiapetta. The deliberate choice of venue and timing turned what should have been a dignified judicial proceeding into a spectacle, leaving observers to question the broader implications for judicial integrity and courtroom decorum.
Free Press Harassment Case: The Victims of Danesh
Luthmann’s investigative reporting has brought to light the devastating toll of Danesh Noshirvan’s digital vigilantism, exposing a pattern of harm that spans hundreds of victims. Among them is Jennifer Couture, a Florida mother whose life was upended after being falsely depicted as an aggressor in a parking lot altercation.
Noshirvan selectively edited a video of the incident to create an incendiary narrative, which he amplified across his TikTok platform to his millions of followers. The fallout was swift and severe: Couture, her family, and her husband’s medical practice, Garramone Plastic Surgery, became targets of relentless harassment, including threats and online abuse.
The financial repercussions were staggering, with the practice suffering hundreds of thousands of dollars in lost revenue, coupled with the crippling expense of security measures to protect the family.
Couture’s case is far from unique. Luthmann has documented over 200 victims of Noshirvan’s campaigns, a grim roster that includes healthcare professionals, educators, small business owners, and even grieving families. Each campaign follows a similar pattern: Noshirvan weaponizes selectively edited videos and inflammatory rhetoric to incite online mobs. These targeted attacks result in reputational damage, emotional distress, and financial ruin.
One of the most tragic examples is the case of Texas high school football coach Aaron De La Torre. After being falsely accused and smeared in one of Noshirvan’s campaigns, De La Torre faced unbearable online harassment. The relentless attacks drove him to suicide, underscoring the lethal consequences of Noshirvan’s actions.
“This isn’t just about social media drama,” Luthmann said. “Danesh’s actions cause real harm—emotional, financial, and physical. People have lost their livelihoods, their peace of mind, and sometimes their lives. Danesh is dangerous.”
Noshirvan’s list of victims includes law enforcement officers, educators, and healthcare workers who were unjustly vilified. Dr. Edith Del Mar Behr in Pennsylvania, Dr. Ryne Paulson in Wyoming, and a host of other professionals were targeted with baseless accusations, leading to personal and professional devastation. In many cases, Noshirvan’s campaigns extended to victims’ families, amplifying the emotional toll.
“These are not isolated incidents,” Luthmann added. “This is a calculated pattern of exploitation. Danesh profits from outrage while leaving a trail of destroyed lives behind him.”
Fighting for the First Amendment
Richard Luthmann is taking a stand for himself and for the principles underpinning a free and independent press. He plans to file an emergency motion to quash the subpoena served by Danesh Noshirvan and Nick Chiapetta, arguing that it flagrantly violates the Qualified Journalist’s Privilege. The motion also seeks over $100,000 in sanctions against the pair, asserting that the subpoena is a retaliatory measure aimed at silencing constitutionally protected reporting.
“This case is bigger than me,” Luthmann said. “If Danesh and Chiapetta can abuse the legal system to target journalists, it sets a dangerous precedent. A free press isn’t just a privilege—it’s the cornerstone of democracy.”
Luthmann will outline how the subpoena undermines First Amendment protections by attempting to coerce a journalist into divulging sources and materials related to ongoing investigations. He argues that this overreach is a clear attempt to chill investigative reporting, particularly on controversial figures like Noshirvan, whose actions have drawn public outrage.
Beyond quashing the subpoena, Luthmann is calling for disciplinary action against Chiapetta. He alleges that the subpoena is not just frivolous but part of a calculated campaign of harassment.
“This isn’t lawyering—it’s bullying,” said Luthmann. “The courts are meant to serve justice, not be weaponized against journalists doing their job.”
Luthmann says his motion will also underscore the broader implications of this case for press freedom. Legal experts have expressed concerns that allowing such subpoenas to proceed unchecked could have a chilling effect on investigative journalism, discouraging reporters from tackling sensitive or controversial subjects.
“This fight is about preserving the integrity of the press,” Luthmann added. “If we allow these tactics to succeed, we’re paving the way for powerful individuals to suppress the truth and silence dissent.”
By challenging the subpoena, Luthmann aims to send a clear message: the judiciary must protect journalists’ rights and uphold the First Amendment’s principles. As he prepares for this legal battle, Luthmann is unwavering in defending press freedoms against those who seek to undermine them.
Free Press Harassment Case: Judges Under Fire
The judiciary’s handling of the case has come under intense scrutiny, with growing concerns that the courts are failing to rein in SCOTUS Doxxer Danesh Noshirvan’s brazen tactics. The criticism stems from the courts’ perceived inaction and the broader implications of allowing Noshirvan to harass and assault public officials unchecked, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 115, which makes it a crime to threaten the federal judiciary.
Judges John Steele, Sheri Polster Chappell, and Magistrate Judge Kyle Dudek face criticism for what some perceive as a lack of decisive action against Noshirvan, who continues to exploit the legal system to intimidate and harass.
“The apparent leniency toward SCOTUS Doxxer Noshirvan’s conduct undermines public trust in the judicial system,” said Richard Luthmann. “If I were a member of the federal judiciary, I probably would give Danesh no quarter. They’re giving him a long leash despite knowing the death threats to Justice Kavanaugh came directly after he doxxed the SCOTUS Justices by publishing their home addresses.”
Luthmann’s warning was stark, suggesting that the judiciary itself could be at risk if Noshirvan’s actions go unchecked.
“This is about the institutional survival of the federal judiciary as a venerated institution. If they don’t contain him, they will be next. History shows Danesh cannot control himself if he doesn’t get his way.”
Noshirvan’s campaigns have already caused significant harm to private citizens and public officials alike, and the failure to hold him accountable sends a troubling message about the court’s ability to protect the integrity of the judicial process.
“Danesh and his WOKE Cancel Culture mob already victimized Sheriff Carmine Marceno and State Prosecutor Amira Fox, and their public decisions were affected,” he said. “Danesh is a dangerous, rabid animal quickly becoming cornered.”
Observers argue that the judiciary’s credibility is at stake. By permitting Noshirvan to use subpoenas and other legal tools as weapons of harassment, the courts risk being seen as complicit in his efforts to undermine justice and silence critics. The judges now face a critical moment to reassert control and demonstrate that bad actors cannot hijack the legal system.
A Champion of the Free Press
Richard Luthmann has quickly built a distinguished investigative journalism career rooted in uncovering corruption, exposing systemic failures, and championing transparency. His fearless reporting has brought him both accolades and adversaries.
Through national and local Florida outlets and his co-hosted platform, The Unknown Podcast, he amplifies underreported stories of government misconduct, institutional failures, and the misuse of social media to harass and silence dissenting voices. His in-depth investigations have shed light on how individuals like Danesh Noshirvan exploit digital platforms to target and destroy lives, often with the tacit support of enabling institutions.
“Danesh is fighting for relevance, but his methods are indefensible,” said Luthmann. “I won’t back down because truth and accountability matter.”
Luthmann’s commitment to the public interest is evident in his willingness to take on powerful figures and institutions. His reporting has exposed egregious abuses in the family court system, where judicial bias and institutional failures have left vulnerable families without justice. Luthmann highlights the dangers of unchecked cancel culture, where public outrage is weaponized to silence opposition and ruin lives, often with little regard for truth or fairness.
Despite the risks, Luthmann remains steadfast in his mission.
“Journalism is more than a profession; it’s a responsibility,” he said. “A free press is the foundation of democracy, and if we let intimidation tactics succeed, we jeopardize that foundation.”
Luthmann’s work serves as a beacon for truth and justice in an era of misinformation and WOKE digital vigilantism. His resolve to hold the powerful accountable and protect the principles of a free press underscores his role as a true hero of investigative journalism.
Free Press Harassment Case: The Fallout
The unfolding case is quickly becoming a flashpoint in the ongoing debate over press freedom, judicial accountability, and the abuse of legal processes. Luthmann’s fight to quash the subpoena is more than a personal battle—it stands as a critical test of the protections afforded to journalists against harassment through the courts. The outcome could set a powerful precedent, safeguarding investigative reporters from being targeted by frivolous legal actions designed to stifle their work.
“This isn’t just my battle,” Luthmann emphasized. “It’s a fight for every journalist, whistleblower, and citizen who values transparency and accountability.”
Luthmann says his next step is a motion to quash the subpoena.
“I have to comply with the local rules and file a motion to let the Court set aside the subpoena under Rule 45, and I am proceeding Pro Se,” Luthmann said. “I already filed documents with the Court last night asking for permission to submit a 40-page motion instead of a 25-pager because of the complexity and the crucial legal and constitutional issues involved.”
Luthmann says he doesn’t expect “static” from the clerks and the court, but if he does, “you’ll hear all about it.”
The implications extend far beyond the courtroom in Fort Myers. The case highlights the growing threats to journalistic integrity in an era where influential individuals and entities exploit legal tools to suppress inconvenient truths. A decision in Luthmann’s favor could reinforce the Qualified Journalist’s Privilege and send a clear message that the judiciary will not tolerate the weaponization of subpoenas against the press.
The case is a stark reminder of what’s at stake: whether the courts will uphold their duty to protect the foundational pillars of democracy or allow bad actors like SCOTUS Doxxer Danesh Noshirvan to undermine them with impunity.
For now, all eyes are on Fort Myers, where the battle for press freedom is fought with courage, resilience, and an unwavering commitment to justice.
Leave a Reply