Motion 6: Stop the Threats and the Rumor Machine — Motion for a Protective Order

A misdemeanor accusation has been turned into a public death sentence. People online have escalated a disputed church parking-lot encounter into "he pulled a gun," and that false escalation has produced real threats against my life. I am presumed innocent — and I should not have to live under threats and a runaway rumor while this case plays out.

This motion is narrow and evidence-focused. It does not silence truthful testimony, good-faith police reports, or lawful criticism. It targets threats, doxxing, witness pressure, evidence destruction, and unsupported violence-rumor escalation.

The motion as filed — page one.

What I'm asking the court to do

Order that no person with notice may:

• Threaten me, or encourage violence against me.
• Dox me — publish my private address, phone, family information, medical information, or a minor's information.
• Pressure any witness to change, delete, hide, or alter statements.
• Delete or alter relevant posts, comments, videos, messages, or screenshots.
• Repeat the claim that I pulled, pointed, brandished, or fired a gun without identifying the source and preserving the underlying record when that claim is taken to law enforcement, Pretrial Services, the court, church leadership, or employers.

It expressly protects truthful testimony, lawful police reporting, and lawful court filings.

Why it matters

I am presumed innocent. A misdemeanor accusation should not become a public-safety rumor, a pretext for threats, or a tool to take my liberty. The court can preserve everyone's lawful speech while still stopping threats and witness pressure. That balance is exactly what the Constitution requires.

The law behind it

• U.S. Const. amends. I, V, VI, XIV and Tex. Const. art. I, §§ 8, 10, 19 — speech, due process, confrontation, and fair-trial protections.
• Counterman v. Colorado, 600 U.S. 66 (2023) — true-threat analysis requires at least recklessness about the threatening nature of a statement.
• Near v. Minnesota, 283 U.S. 697 (1931); Nebraska Press Assn. v. Stuart, 427 U.S. 539 (1976) — prior restraints are disfavored and must be narrow.
• Davenport v. Garcia, 834 S.W.2d 4 (Tex. 1992); Kinney v. Barnes, 443 S.W.3d 87 (Tex. 2014) — Texas constrains injunctions against future speech.

The facts, and how I've classified them

• FACT: RealRyanNichols.com documents public death-threat-style comments and threat rhetoric directed at me.
• RYAN STATEMENT: I am receiving credible threats, and false public allegations place my life and liberty at risk.
• RYAN STATEMENT: The church allegation escalated from "hand on grip" language into claims that I pulled, pointed, brandished, or shot a firearm.
• NEEDS AUTHENTICATION: Native platform URLs, account IDs, screenshots, timestamps, and report confirmations are needed.

My declaration

My name is Ryan Nichols. DOB December 6, 1990. I am the Defendant. Under penalty of perjury (Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 132.001):

• I am not asking the Court to stop truthful testimony or good-faith police reporting.
• I am asking the Court to stop threats, doxxing, witness pressure, retaliation, and deletion or alteration of evidence.
• I believe public statements about this case have escalated beyond the actual allegation and have endangered my safety and liberty.

Executed June 1, 2026, in Harrison County, Texas. /s/ Ryan Nichols

The threats are documented: every day, they tell me to die and when I asked for a comment to come down. (Exhibits EX-005, EX-006; platform records need authentication.)

The proposed order

• No person with notice shall threaten, dox, harass, retaliate against, intimidate, or pressure the Defendant or any witness.
• No person with notice shall delete, alter, destroy, or conceal relevant posts, messages, videos, screenshots, or communications.
• No person shall repeat new violence-related claims about the Defendant without preserving the source and basis when used with law enforcement, Pretrial Services, the Court, church leadership, employers, or witnesses.
• Nothing in this Order prohibits truthful testimony, lawful police reporting, lawful court filings, or cooperation with law enforcement.

The bottom line

Tell the truth. Report in good faith. File whatever you want in court. But the threats, the doxxing, and the "he pulled a gun" rumor — with no source and no proof — have to stop while a presumed-innocent man defends himself.