Former San Antonio lawyer Phil Ross is one of the defendants who is on trial for allegedly defaming the guardian of a one-time San Antonio businessman in a Netflix documentary. He told jurors free speech is more important than a person’s reputation. He is shown in 2019.
San Antonio Express-News file photo
Laura Martinez and her children Brittany Martinez and Joe Martinez are also defendants in the trial. Laura and her son have not appeared in court, while Brittany is following the proceedings via Zoom. They are shown in 2019
San Antonio Express-News file photo
Charlie Thrash, shown in 2018, was the subject of a Netflix documentary that sparked a defamation lawsuit. Thrash is now 88.
Courtesy
A defamation trial over a Netflix documentary began Wednesday, with a court-appointed guardian alleging she was falsely portrayed as exploiting an elderly man.
Tonya Barina of Seguin says Phil Ross, Jo Ann Rivera and another defendant interviewed for “Guardianship Inc.,” a 2020 episode of Netflix’s “Dirty Money” documentary series, made false statements that portrayed her as financially exploiting Charles Thrash, whose guardianship became the subject of years of litigation.
Article continues below this ad
Netflix and the documentary’s producers settled with Barina, Thrash’s grand-niece, in October, leaving Ross, Rivera and several others to defend the remaining claims. Ross, a former attorney who surrendered his law license in lieu of discipline stemming from his role in the Thrash guardianship, and Rivera are representing themselves at trial.
READ MORE: Risk-taking attorney Phil Ross resigns from practice rather than face discipline for misconduct
Barina’s attorney, Carl Kolb, told jurors the evidence would show the remaining defendants intentionally damaged his client’s reputation, destroying her banking career and causing severe emotional distress. He said Barina would seek more than $2 million in lost earning capacity, along with damages for mental anguish and reputational harm.
Opening arguments
Kolb told jurors the remaining defendants knowingly made false statements about Barina and promised the evidence would prove they intended to damage her reputation.
Article continues below this ad
San Antonio Express News Logo
Make us a Preferred Source on Google to see more of us when you search.
Add Preferred Source
“Every single one of them knew when they got on Netflix that they were lying about Tonya Barina,” Kolb said during opening statements. “We’re going to show you the Netflix episode. You’re going to see the lies.”
Kolb said Netflix removed the episode because “even Netflix knows it’s garbage,” but Ross and Rivera have continued to criticize Barina. She received “hundreds and hundreds of despicable messages” from people who viewed the documentary, Kolb added.
Ross told jurors the case is about the constitutional right to speak on matters of public concern, arguing that he and Rivera had no control over how their interviews were edited or used in the finished documentary.
Article continues below this ad
“To me, reputation is not as important as freedom of speech,” Ross said.
SA INC.: Get the week’s top local business stories in your inbox
Ross also defended his involvement in the underlying guardianship dispute, accusing the court-appointed guardians and their lawyers of depleting Thrash’s estate by about $2 million.
Rivera, who said she previously had a relationship with Ross and worked with him on matters involving the Thrash guardianship, told jurors she created a Facebook page called “The Journey of Charlie Thrash” that linked to the Netflix documentary. She denied defaming Barina.
Article continues below this ad
“This whole case, it’s emotional,” Rivera said during her opening statement. “I really think all this is about emotion. Guardianships are hard. They’re like divorce, child custody cases. Everybody is fighting for what they think is the right thing.”
The guardianship dispute
The case stems from a yearslong legal battle over the guardianship of Thrash, now 88, who owned a San Antonio automotive shop and amassed an estate of about $6 million.
The lawsuit also names Laura Martinez and her children, Joe, Michelle and Brittany, as defendants. Laura Martinez married Thrash in 2015, but a probate judge later annulled the marriage. Ross represented the Martinez family during the guardianship litigation.
Article continues below this ad
Laura Martinez, who also was interviewed for the documentary, and her son did not appear for trial Wednesday. Michelle and Brittany Martinez observed the proceedings by Zoom but did not make opening statements. Barina alleges members of the Martinez family republished the documentary as part of the ongoing defamation campaign.
READ MORE: San Antonio millionaire marriage annulled after abuse, exploitation and ‘abduction’ claims
As the first part of Barina’s case, jurors watched the 54-minute documentary.
Barina alleges the documentary portrays guardianship abuse as “the crime of the 21st century” and falsely implies she committed it.
Article continues below this ad
About 10 months before the documentary aired, a probate judge sanctioned Ross and Laura and Brittany Martinez in connection with the guardianship litigation. Barina contends the documentary omitted those findings, making it misleading.
Testimony is expected to continue through next week. The trial is being held in state District Judge Nadine Nieto’s court.