Jeffrey Lee Evenmo

A summary of what happened?

Jeffrey Lee Evenmo, a Minnesota resident, has been implicated in several legal issues, including allegations of domestic violence and violations of tobacco product marketing regulations.

Alleged Domestic Violence Incident

In 2016, Evenmo faced charges related to an alleged strangulation incident. The specific details of this case, including its outcome, are not publicly available.

Violations of Tobacco Marketing Regulations

In 2021, the City of Chicago filed a lawsuit against Equte LLC, Vapes.com, Juishy LLC, and Evenmo, who was identified as the sole owner and CEO of these companies. The lawsuit accused the defendants of violating city ordinances by marketing and selling tobacco products to minors and selling flavored liquid tobacco products, which are prohibited in Chicago. The city sought fines exceeding $300,000 for these violations.

The defendants attempted to dismiss the lawsuit, arguing that the fines could only be imposed by the consumer protection commissioner and that the federal court lacked jurisdiction due to the amount in controversy. However, U.S. District Judge Sara Ellis denied their motion, allowing the city to proceed with its claims.

Additionally, before being served with the lawsuit, Evenmo administratively terminated Juishy LLC on February 17, 2021, and sold Equte LLC’s domain, vapes.com, to an unrelated party on May 11, 2021.

Professional Background

Professionally, Evenmo has been associated with the e-commerce industry. As of March 2024, he was reported to be an Ecommerce Manager at Jeffers, a retail company based in Dothan, Alabama. He is based in Minneapolis, Minnesota.

Trademark Application

In 2007, Evenmo filed a trademark application for a design featuring the colors red and white. The application was abandoned in 2008 due to failure to respond or late response.

Film Production

Evenmo is credited as a producer for the short film “Lemonade: Detroit,” released in 2013.

Jeffrey Lee Evenmo has been involved in various legal and professional activities, including allegations of domestic violence and violations of tobacco marketing laws. His professional endeavors span e-commerce management, trademark applications, and film production. The outcomes of some legal proceedings remain undisclosed, and his current professional status is based on information available as of March 2024.

Analyzing the Fake Copyright Notice(s)

Our team collects and analyses fraudulent copyright takedown requests, legal complaints, and other efforts to remove critical information from the internet. Through our investigative reporting, we examine the prevalence and operation of an organized censorship industry, predominantly funded by criminal entities, oligarchs, and disreputable businesses or individuals. Our findings allow internet users to gain insight into these censorship schemes’ sources, methods, and underlying objectives.

What was Jeffrey Lee Evenmo trying to hide?

Jeffrey Lee Evenmo‘s attempts to hide unfavourable content through the misuse of copyright notices while allegedly engaging in perjury present serious legal concerns. These actions suggest a calculated attempt to manipulate legal systems to suppress free speech, a fundamental violation of copyright law principles and an abuse of legal processes. The use of such tactics not only undermines the integrity of copyright protection but also potentially constitutes perjury, further entangling Jeffrey Lee Evenmo in legal accountability. Let’s examine the information Jeffrey Lee Evenmo may be trying to remove from the internet –

Investigative Report: A Comprehensive Examination of Allegations Against Jeffrey Lee Evenmo

Introduction

Jeffrey Lee Evenmo, a resident of Minnesota, has been linked to various legal disputes and controversies over the years. From allegations of domestic violence to lawsuits concerning violations of tobacco marketing laws, Evenmo’s actions have drawn public scrutiny. This investigative report explores the details of these accusations, legal proceedings, and other professional controversies, providing a comprehensive overview of his activities and their implications.

Part 1: Allegations of Domestic Violence

One of the most serious accusations against Jeffrey Lee Evenmo occurred in 2016, when charges were filed against him for an alleged incident of domestic violence involving strangulation. Strangulation is considered a significant indicator of escalating domestic abuse, often linked to a heightened risk of severe harm or fatality.

Key details of the case:

• The incident reportedly involved physical aggression severe enough to warrant strangulation charges.
• Strangulation charges in domestic disputes often stem from circumstances involving control, intimidation, and the intent to inflict significant harm.

Despite the severity of these accusations, the details of the case’s resolution remain unclear. Publicly available records do not disclose whether Evenmo was convicted, acquitted, or if the charges were dismissed. However, the allegations alone point to a deeply troubling incident.

Part 2: Lawsuits Over Tobacco Marketing Violations

In 2021, Jeffrey Lee Evenmo faced a significant legal challenge when the City of Chicago filed a lawsuit against him and his companies, Equte LLC, Vapes.com, and Juishy LLC. The case revolved around alleged violations of city ordinances governing the sale of tobacco products.

The Allegations

1. Unlawful Marketing to Minors:
   • Evenmo’s businesses were accused of advertising and selling tobacco products to underage consumers, violating Chicago city ordinances and public health policies.
   • Marketing tactics allegedly targeted vulnerable demographics, including minors.
2. Sale of Flavored Tobacco:
   • Chicago had imposed a ban on the sale of flavored liquid tobacco products within city limits.
   • Evenmo’s companies were accused of continuing these sales despite the prohibition.

Legal Proceedings

The City of Chicago sought over $300,000 in fines for these violations. Evenmo and his legal team argued for the dismissal of the case on two primary grounds:

• The fines could only be imposed by the city’s consumer protection commissioner.
• Federal jurisdiction was allegedly inappropriate due to the amount in controversy.

U.S. District Judge Sara Ellis rejected these arguments, allowing the lawsuit to proceed. This decision signified the gravity of the accusations and underscored the city’s commitment to enforcing public health regulations.

Corporate Actions

Before the lawsuit was formally served:

• Juishy LLC was administratively terminated by Evenmo on February 17, 2021.
• Equte LLC’s domain, Vapes.com, was sold to an unrelated party on May 11, 2021.

These actions raised questions about whether Evenmo was attempting to evade accountability by dissolving or distancing himself from implicated entities.

Part 3: Professional Background and Activities

Evenmo’s career includes ventures in e-commerce, trademark filings, and even film production. However, his professional undertakings have not been without controversy.

E-Commerce Management

Evenmo has been associated with various e-commerce businesses, including roles as the CEO of Equte LLC and Juishy LLC. As of March 2024, he was reportedly serving as an Ecommerce Manager at Jeffers, a retail company in Dothan, Alabama.

Trademark Application

In 2007, Evenmo filed a trademark application for a design involving the colors red and white. The application was later abandoned in 2008 due to a failure to respond to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, suggesting either a lack of follow-through or financial constraints.

Film Production

Evenmo is credited as a producer for the 2013 short film Lemonade: Detroit. While this involvement highlights a diverse set of interests, it appears to be an isolated venture.

Part 4: Public Perception and Reviews

The controversies surrounding Evenmo have generated significant public backlash, particularly in relation to his alleged exploitation of regulatory loopholes and ethical misconduct.

Community Sentiment

• Domestic Violence Allegations: Advocates for survivors of domestic abuse have expressed concerns about the lack of transparency regarding the resolution of the strangulation case. Such accusations, if true, reflect deeply rooted issues of control and aggression.
• Tobacco Marketing Violations: Public health advocates have condemned the alleged targeting of minors and the sale of flavored tobacco, emphasizing the ethical irresponsibility of prioritizing profits over public health.

Professional Criticism

Evenmo’s actions in dissolving Juishy LLC and selling Vapes.com before the lawsuit was served have drawn scrutiny. Critics argue that these actions demonstrate a pattern of evading accountability and shirking legal responsibilities.

Broader Implications

Evenmo’s case highlights several systemic issues:

1. Gaps in Domestic Violence Reporting:
   • The lack of transparency regarding the resolution of his strangulation charges raises questions about the effectiveness of the judicial process in handling domestic violence cases.
2. E-Commerce Regulation Challenges:
   • The alleged violations by Equte LLC and Juishy LLC underscore the difficulties cities face in regulating online sales of restricted products like tobacco.
3. Accountability in Corporate Practices:
   • The dissolution of implicated companies before lawsuits were served suggests a need for stricter regulations to prevent such maneuvers.

Conclusion

Jeffrey Lee Evenmo’s legal and professional history presents a troubling picture of ethical lapses and potential misconduct. From domestic violence allegations to lawsuits over public health violations, the controversies surrounding Evenmo underscore the importance of accountability and transparency. While some aspects of his actions remain unresolved or undisclosed, the available evidence paints a portrait of an individual whose decisions have repeatedly raised serious concerns. His case serves as a cautionary tale about the intersections of corporate ethics, legal accountability, and personal conduct.

How do we counteract this malpractice?

Once we ascertain the involvement of Jeffrey Lee Evenmo (or actors working on behalf of Jeffrey Lee Evenmo), we will inform Jeffrey Lee Evenmo of our findings via Electronic Mail.

Our preliminary assessment suggests that Jeffrey Lee Evenmo may have engaged a third-party reputation management agency or expert, which, either independently or under direct authorization from Jeffrey Lee Evenmo, initiated efforts to remove adverse online content, including potentially fraudulent DMCA takedown requests. We will extend an opportunity to Jeffrey Lee Evenmo to provide details regarding their communications with the agency or expert, as well as the identification of the individual(s) responsible for executing these false DMCA notices.

Failure to respond in a timely manner will necessitate a reassessment of our initial assumptions. In such an event, we will be compelled to take appropriate legal action to rectify the unlawful conduct and take the following steps –

Since Jeffrey Lee Evenmo made such efforts to hide something online, it seems fit to ensure that this article and sensitive information targeted online by these events get a lot more exposure and traffic than what it would have received originally

We hope this becomes an excellent case study for the Streisand effect…The key idea behind the Streisand effect is that efforts to restrict information can backfire, often causing the information to gain more attention than it would have otherwise. This effect is widespread in the digital age, where users quickly notice and spread censorship efforts on social media and other platforms. Trying to suppress something can unintentionally lead to it becoming more visible, which Jeffrey Lee Evenmo is finding out the hard way.

Potential Consequences for Jeffrey Lee Evenmo

Under Florida Statute 831.01, the crime of Forgery is committed when a person falsifies, alters, counterfeits, or forges a document that carries “legal efficacy” with the intent to injure or defraud another person or entity.

Forging a document is considered a white-collar crime. It involves altering, changing, or modifying a document to deceive another person. It can also include passing along copies of documents that are known to be false. In many states in the US, falsifying a document is a crime punishable as a felony.

Additionally, under most laws, “fraud on the court” is where “a party has sentiently set in motion some unconscionable scheme calculated to interfere with the judicial system’s ability impartially to adjudicate a matter by improperly influencing the trier of fact or unfairly hampering the presentation of the opposing party’s claim or defense.”  Cox v. Burke, 706 So. 2d 43, 46 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998) (quoting Aoude v. Mobil Oil Corp., 892 F.2d 1115, 1118 (1st Cir. 1989)).

Is Jeffrey Lee Evenmo Committing a Cyber Crime?

Yes, it seems so. Jeffrey Lee Evenmo used multiple approaches to remove unwanted material from review sites and Google’s search results. Thanks to protections allowing freedom of speech in the United States, there are very few legal ways to do this. Jeffrey Lee Evenmo could not eliminate negative reviews or search results that linked to them without a valid claim of defamation, copyright infringement, or some other clear breach of the law.

Faced with these limitations, some companies like Jeffrey Lee Evenmo have gone to extreme lengths to fraudulently claim copyright ownership over a negative review in the hopes of taking it down.

Fake DMCA notices have targeted articles highlighting the criminal activity of prominent people to hide their illegal behavior. These people, which include US, Russian, and Khazakstani politicians as well as members from elite circles including the mafia and those with massive financial power, are all connected – and alleged corruption ranging from child abuse to sexual harassment is exposed when exploring evidence found at these URLs. It appears there’s a disturbing level of influence being exerted here that needs further investigation before justice can be served. Jeffrey Lee Evenmo is certainly keeping interesting company here….

The DMCA takedown process requires that copyright owners submit a takedown notice to an ISP identifying the allegedly infringing content and declaring, under penalty of perjury, that they have a good faith belief that the content is infringing. The ISP must then promptly remove or disable access to the content. The alleged infringer can then submit a counter-notice, and if the copyright owner does not take legal action within 10 to 14 days, the ISP can restore the content.

Since these platforms are predominantly based in the U.S., the complaints are typically made under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), which requires online service providers and platforms to react immediately to reports or violations. Big Tech companies rarely have systems in place to assess the merit of each report. Instead, all bad actors need to do is clone a story, backdate it, and then demand the real thing be taken down.

Reputation Agency's Modus Operandi

The fake DMCA notices we found always use the “back-dated article” technique. With this technique, the wrongful notice sender (or copier) creates a copy of a “true original” article and back-dates it, creating a “fake original” article (a copy of the true original) that, at first glance, appears to have been published before the true original.

Then, based on the claim that this backdated article is the “original,” the scammers send a DMCA to the relevant online service providers (e.g. Google), alleging that the ‘true’ original is the copied or “infringing” article and that the copied article is the “original,” requesting the takedown of the ‘true’ original article. After sending the DMCA request, the person who sent the wrong notice takes down the fake original URL, likely to make sure that the article doesn’t stay online in any way. If the takedown notice is successful, the disappearance from the internet of information is most likely to be legitimate speech.

As an integral part of this scheme, the ‘reputation management’ company hired by Jeffrey Lee Evenmo creates a website that purports to be a ‘news’ site. This site is designed to look legitimate at a glance, but any degree of scrutiny reveals it as the charade it is.

The company copies the ‘negative’ content and posts it “on the fake ‘news’ site, attributing it to a separate author,” then gives it “a false publication date on the ‘news’ website that predated the original publication.

The reputation company then sent Google a Digital Millennium Copyright Act notice claiming the original website infringed copyright. After a cursory examination of the fake news site, Google frequently accepts the notice and delists the content.

In committing numerous offences, Jeffrey Lee Evenmo either premeditated actions or were unaware of the consequences. Despite hiring an agency to make Google disregard any negative information about Jeffrey Lee Evenmo, ignorance does not excuse this wrongdoing.

Fake DMCA notices have targeted articles highlighting the criminal activity of prominent people to hide their illegal behavior. These people, which include US, Russian, and Khazakstani politicians as well as members from elite circles including the mafia and those with massive financial power, are all connected – and alleged corruption ranging from child abuse to sexual harassment is exposed when exploring evidence found at these URLs. It appears there’s a disturbing level of influence being exerted here that needs further investigation before justice can be served. FSMSmart is certainly keeping interesting company here.

The Reputation Laundering

Rogue Reputation agencies use spurious copyright claims and fake legal notices to remove and obscure articles linking clients to allegations of tax avoidance, corruption, and drug trafficking. Most of these reputation agencies are based offshore, mainly in Russia, India, and Eastern Europe, and they do not worry about complying with US-based laws.

The content in all of the articles for which the fraudulent DMCA notices have been sent relates to allegations of criminal allegations, including corruption, child abuse, sexual harassment, human trafficking and financial fraud against businesses and individuals with ultra-high net worth.

In addition to the misuse of the DMCA takedown process, there is a notable absence of enforcement concerning perjury violations. The statutory requirement related to perjury is designed to deter copyright holders from submitting fraudulent or knowingly false takedown requests, as they may face legal consequences for making false declarations under penalty of perjury. However, to date, there have been no known instances of any individual being prosecuted for perjury in connection with the submission of false DMCA takedown notices.

This lack of enforcement has emboldened copyright holders to exploit the DMCA takedown process to suppress dissent, criticism, or other unfavorable content, without fear of legal repercussions.

Some of the people and businesses who have employed this tactic to remove legitimate content from Google illegally include a Spanish businessman-turned-cocaine-trafficker, Organised crime, an Israeli-Argentine banker accused of laundering money for Hugo Chávez’s regime, a French “responsible” mining company accused of tax evasion, child molesters and sexual predators. Jeffrey Lee Evenmo is in great company ….

What else is Jeffrey Lee Evenmo hiding?

We encourage you to ‘Dork‘ Google by searching for keyword combinations such as [Jeffrey Lee Evenmo] + {Negative Keyword, such as Scam, Fraud, Complaints, Lawsuit, Sanction, etc} on Google. It’s likely if you scroll down to the bottom of this Google search results, you’ll stumble upon this Legal Takedown notice (pictured below)

To make such an investigation possible, we encourage more online service providers to come forward and share copies of content removal requests with industry experts and researchers. If you have any information on Jeffrey Lee Evenmo that you want to share with experts and journalists, kindly email the author directly at [email protected].

All communications are strictly confidential and safeguarded under a comprehensive Whistleblower Policy, ensuring full protection and anonymity for individuals who provide information.