The former Bachelor Clayton Echard reacts to Laura Owens’ fraud

PHOENIX – – A woman from Scottsdale is accused of taking pregnancy with a former bachelor star.

On May 7, the investigator of Fox 10, Justin Lum, sat down with Clayton Echard to hear what he had to say about the charges.

What we know:

A Grand Jury from Maricopa County charged Laura Owens for several crimes, including fraudulent plans, falsification and meinheid on May 1st.

The prosecutors say that Owens Clayton Echard has “extreme length to manipulate”.

This was almost a one -year investigation by the public prosecutor’s office, which was triggered by the judge of the Supreme Court, which is available due to a case of paternity with Echard and Owens.

In June in June, the judge described her certificate in court as “uncritical” and accused her of wasting the time of the court.

Originally, she submitted an action for a paternity that were looking for child support, but later dropped her claim and said that she had a miscarriage.

The judge dismissed the case, but the district’s public prosecutor alerted what happened.

Owens is manipulated because of fraudulent systems, falsification, four mone and finally physical evidence.

Echard says he is relieved that charges were submitted.

Investigators believe that Owens changed an ultrasound picture between May 2023 and June 2024, invented a pregnancy video and lied several times in court.

What you say:

Echard says he has never had sexual intercourse with Owens.

The judge, who has the paternity claim, found that Owens knowingly “presented a false assertion” and acted inappropriately when she submitted the lawsuit “without the basis or earnings”.

After a two -year legal dispute, he is ready to take over the public prosecutor.

“A great weight is from my shoulders. I am grateful that justice is served. This is the first time that this is coming to an end. Of course, she still has to face these accusations, and maybe she will be able to take a plea deal, but for me and the previous victims we were overjoyed last night.

Last year, the court found that Owens had a similar behavior and similar behavior and a participation of the court, whereby this case refers to the district’s public prosecutor.

The other side:

In an explanation, according to Owens, “these fees seem to be the product of intensive public pressure, not the impartial judgment. They reflect a system that reacted to online impairment, ignored the protection of procedures and was progressed on the basis of narrative and not on facts.”