I wanted to let everyone know where to find the public records on this case. You simply follow these steps:
You have to go to nv.dps.gov. Click on the link at the top “Records Req.” This will allow you to submit an online public records request.
And here is the report number, or you can use my name which I have made very public.
24I000512
They have redacted everything as per the legal requirements to shield the identity of the accused. Just exactly the way I have done it on this website from the beginning.
Now the cool thing about that public records request is it has like cars and financial records and who he pays his car loan and what kind of car he owned 10 years ago and how much he paid for his house.
While that is public record and anyone can get that information if you request it, I chose not to put anything too personal on here for the protection of the accused. But there is still a lot of personal information available.
In recent days, it’s become clear that someone is closely monitoring every time I refer to a certain former Nevada state official by his government job title. To clarify: I do not use that title for effect. I use it because it was the designation assigned to him by the State of Nevada, and it appears verbatim in official state communications and arrest warrants I lawfully received. It is part of the public record—not a personal opinion.
This post is to explain, clearly and with legal authority, why such titles are not confidential, not defamatory, and absolutely protected speech under Nevada law
Nevada Law Protects the Public’s Right to Know
Nevada’s public records law is among the most direct in the country:
“Except as otherwise provided by law, all public books and public records of a governmental entity… must be open at all times during office hours to inspection by any person.”
— NRS 239.010(1)
That includes the names, titles, job classifications, salary ranges, and service history of public employees. These are not private facts. They are presumed public because public servants answer to the public.
Exemptions Are Narrow and Clearly Defined
Some types of records may be withheld—but only under specific circumstances. Under NRS 239.0105, records may be redacted if disclosure would:
• Jeopardize public safety
• Expose critical infrastructure vulnerabilities
• Reveal security protocols or emergency response measures
Titles of public employees—especially administrative or regulatory officials—do not qualify for these exemptions. The statute further mandates that any attempt to restrict access to records must be interpreted narrowly:
“Any exemption… which limits or restricts access to public records must be construed narrowly.”
— NRS 239.001(3)
That means job titles cannot be withheld or erased from the public record simply because someone finds them inconvenient or reputationally damaging.
Why I Use This Title
I reference the title this individual held—Deputy Insurance Commissioner—because the State of Nevada did. That is the phrasing used in state documents, internal emails, and administrative records related to my complaint. I did not invent the title; I am repeating what was acknowledged in official correspondence.
When a person holds a government position, particularly in consumer protection, that title is not a private identity—it’s a public trust.
“The use of private entities in the provision of public services must not deprive members of the public of access to inspect and copy books and records relating to the provision of those services.”
— NRS 239.001(4)
This Is Not Harassment. It’s Public Record.
I am well within my legal rights to reference official government titles in the context of public complaints, legal action, and advocacy. This is not speculative. This is settled law.
And to be perfectly clear:
I use this title only because the government did—and because the law permits, and even requires, transparency when it comes to the roles held by public officials.
To Those Monitoring My Words
If your concern is that I am accurately identifying someone’s former public role in connection with serious allegations—then your issue is with the facts, not with me.
“Truth is a complete defense to defamation.”
— Nevada common law, see Nevada Ind. Broadcasters v. Allen, 99 Nev. 404 (1983)
Truth supported by public records is not just legal—it’s essential to accountability.
In addition to the rights and protections already outlined, please be advised that any attempt to initiate legal action against me in response to my public commentary—especially commentary made in connection with matters of public concern, criminal reporting, or misconduct by a government employee—may constitute a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP).
Nevada law provides robust protection in such cases:
“If an action is brought against a person based upon a good faith communication in furtherance of the right to petition or the right to free speech in direct connection with an issue of public concern, that person may file a special motion to dismiss.”
— NRS 41.660(1)
If such an attempt is made, I will promptly invoke Nevada’s anti-SLAPP statute, seek dismissal, and pursue an award of attorney’s fees, costs, and statutory damages as permitted by:
NRS 41.670(1)(a)–(b) – Mandatory award of reasonable attorney’s fees and a statutory award up to $10,000 against the plaintiff who filed the SLAPP suit.
You have been advised.
What Is Nevada’s Anti-SLAPP Law?
Nevada’s anti-SLAPP statute (NRS 41.635–41.670) protects people who speak out on issues of public interest—including:
- Reporting or discussing criminal behavior
- Speaking about government officials or agencies
- Sharing experiences related to state employment or oversight
If someone files a lawsuit to shut you up, you can file a special motion to dismiss under NRS 41.660. If successful, the court must award you legal fees and can impose additional penalties.
It also stops discovery immediately—so they can’t drag you through court just to intimidate you.
Add comment
Comments