‘This website makes me look bad!’ she cried, while holding a match to her own reputation.
CLARK COUNTY, NV – In a stunning display of misplaced courage, 48-year-old (but serving early-bird special at 63) Monica Stengel has filed a lawsuit against another woman for the crime of… accurately quoting her own words.
Monica alleges that the website [monicastengel.net] has “irreparably harmed her reputation,” though the site appears to feature nothing but screenshots of her own messages, court filings, and behavior—a wildly defamatory act known in legal circles as “documenting.”
The plaintiff’s complaint, filed by A Local Law Firm (aka The Karens of Litigation), claims the site includes “false, defamatory, and harassing statements,” also known as “Monica’s Greatest Hits: Extended Mix.”
Here’s a breakdown of her truly Oscar-worthy legal claims:
1. Defamation Per Se:
Monica claims her reputation was destroyed by statements that were “false and malicious”—
you know, like direct screenshots, time-stamped receipts, and actual reality.
In my honest opinion, this isn’t a defamation case.
It’s a one-woman PR crisis dressed in a lawsuit, hoping no one notices she’s the one who lit the match.
She’s not being lied about.
She’s just deeply uncomfortable with the fact that someone had the audacity to document what she did while she was too busy performing to think anyone would hit “save.”
“They made me look like a petty, manipulative bully,” said Monica, who wrote all of the messages herself.
Let’s be clear:
No one fabricated her words.
No one twisted her intentions.
No one had to. She tanked her own reputation with the efficiency of a deleted browser history.
She’s not suing because something false was said.
She’s suing because someone refused to stay quiet.
And in my honest opinion? That’s not defamation.
That’s narrative detox.
Monica doesn’t want legal justice—
She wants a court-sanctioned gag order on the truth.
Courtroom Footnote:
Defamation (n):
When someone quotes you accurately and your ego files for a gag order.
2. False Light & Public Disclosure of Private Facts:
An especially rich accusation from a woman who once accused the father of her child of molestation—not because he did anything, but because she felt like it.
And when that didn’t land? She told people he must be gay, because—“who wouldn’t want to be with me? I’m a catch.”
That’s right.
She weaponized one of the worst allegations a person can make out of boredom and bruised ego, and now she wants to cry foul because someone posted the actual receipts of her behavior.
Monica claims her years-long harassment campaign was just casual gossip, but someone else pointing out that she publicly shared porn from 15 years ago to slut-shame another woman?
Suddenly that’s false light and private facts?
You can’t walk around detonating reputations and then sue the fire department for arson.
If Monica didn’t think sharing someone’s old adult content was a violation of privacy, she’s got no business pretending her own court-documented chaos deserves confidentiality.
This isn’t false light.
It’s fluorescent lighting in an unfiltered dressing room—unforgiving, honest, and exactly what she signed up for.
“It’s not fair to show people what I did,” Monica reportedly sobbed into her ring light.
3. Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress:
Monica claims she’s suffering from insomnia, anxiety, and depression—
which is fascinating, because those aren’t injuries. They’re just common side effects of guilt, unchecked projection, and realizing you’re not the protagonist in someone else’s life.
According to her, she’s emotionally wrecked because someone… posted the truth.
But let’s rewind: this is the same woman who spent years shoving someone’s old porn in people’s faces like it was a cursed Tupperware container, not because anyone asked—but because she needed to feel morally superior to the woman her ex actually wanted.
She wasn’t a victim.
She was a full-time chaos intern, flinging slut-shame confetti while pretending it was advocacy.
And now that someone flipped on the lights and held up a mirror, she’s spiraling into a lawsuit and calling it trauma.
This isn’t emotional distress.
It’s the psychic nosebleed that happens when the consequences finally catch up.
Monica isn’t falling apart because she was wronged.
She’s falling apart because the mask slipped, the receipts hit print, and no one bought her victim package.
She didn’t want peace.
She wanted silence. And now she’s learning that truth doesn’t come with a mute button.
_________________________________
4. Negligence & Gross Negligence:
Ah yes—the bold new legal frontier where quoting someone verbatim is now considered “negligence.”
According to Monica, posting her own texts and publicly available information online was so dangerous, it caused her irreversible emotional harm.
Because apparently, truth without her approval is now a civil offense.
This is the same woman who wandered through Summerlin waving someone’s decade-old porn around like it was a party favor—but she’s the victim now because someone had the gall to respond with… evidence.
Monica’s definition of negligence?
Not letting her lie uninterrupted.
She’s not suing over harm.
She’s suing because someone dared to take screenshots instead of her bait.
She didn’t want privacy.
She wanted control over the story.
Gross negligence?
No, in my honest opinion, the only thing gross is the hypocrisy.
This isn’t carelessness.
It’s clarity.
This isn’t defamation.
It’s documentation.
And Monica?
In my honest opinion, she’s not distressed because someone lied.
She’s distressed because, for once, someone didn’t.
__________
NOTE:
The below definitions are expressed in my most honest opinion and reflect a personal, satirical interpretation of the behavior I’ve experienced firsthand. These are not legal dictionary entries—just emotionally accurate ones. Any resemblance to actual case law is purely coincidental, much like Monica’s relationship with accountability.
Legal Addendum:
Negligence (n):
When someone uses your exact words and you don’t like how they sound outside your own echo chamber.
Gross Negligence (n):
The act of exposing a narcissist’s greatest fear: direct quotes, unfiltered screenshots, and the Internet’s collective memory—in my view, of course.
_________________________________
5. Tortious Interference:
A bold claim coming from someone who spent three years stalking and harassing another woman for simply existing—going so far as to share years-old adult content with people around Summerlin out of pure spite.
She didn’t just interfere in a relationship—she dedicated herself to emotionally waterboarding Adam until it collapsed, turning him into collateral damage in a tantrum she disguised as concern.
Imagine hijacking someone’s relationship with screenshots and slut-shaming, then suing because they documented it.
_________________________________
6. Cyber Harassment & Stalking:
According to Monica, she’s the target of a relentless online campaign of stalking and harassment.
Which is interesting—because in my honest opinion, she’s less of a “victim of cyberstalking” and more like a woman who turned someone else’s life into her search history.
Let’s talk about stalking, shall we?
Monica wasn’t just casually observing.
She was lurking, digging, deep-Googling, and doom-scrolling like it was an unpaid internship in obsession.
According to Adam—and confirmed by a neighbor with ears and Wi-Fi—Monica:
Spent hours trying to find anything on me, combing Google like she was trying to solve a cold case I wasn’t even in.
Sent out porn I made over 15 years ago like she was curating a newsletter called “I’m Still Not Over It Digest.”
Told people she couldn’t believe Adam ‘put it in me,’ which, in my honest opinion, is less of a moral concern and more of a raging case of sexual jealousy.
Interacted with the school I taught at on Nextdoor—even though her child never went there—because stalking is apparently more fun when it’s disguised as “community engagement.”
And now?
Now she claims I’m the one harassing her—because I had the gall to archive her own behavior.
Let’s be crystal clear: the majority of what I posted came from Adam himself, exhausted from her obsession and desperate for someone else to see how far she’d gone.
“The site is obsessively watching me!” she cried,
while refreshing the homepage hourly and filing another ex parte motion.
In my honest opinion, Monica isn’t experiencing cyberstalking.
She’s just upset the digital mirror refused to crack.
She stalked, documented, and distributed—and now she’s furious that someone else kept better records.
This isn’t harassment.
It’s the fallout from years of her own unhinged performance.
__________
NOTE:
The exhibit below reflects what, in my most honest opinion, feels like a spiritual reenactment of Monica’s late-night browser history—crafted from a perfect storm of projection, insecurity, and a Wi-Fi signal she clearly never deserved. While not an actual log, the search themes listed here are a creatively interpreted glimpse into the type of chaotic energy she consistently radiated.
Let’s just say: if Google charged emotional tolls, this is the kind of traffic that would bankrupt a personality. Any legal strategy inspired by this energy is inadvisable and best handled by a therapist, not a judge.
EXHIBIT M: Monica’s Late-Night Search History
(handcrafted in bitterness, fueled by browser cookies and delusion)
“is it stalking if i’m right”
“how to sue a website for hurting my feelings”
“adam torgison girlfriend + school employment”
“nextdoor post not about me but definitely about me”
“can i legally ruin someone if they’re prettier than me”
“how to be the victim without being victimized”
“lawsuit templates for when i embarrass myself”
“does emotional damage count if i caused it”
“how to file ex parte motion with no evidence, just vibes”
_________________________________
7. Civil Conspiracy:
Monica alleges this was all part of an organized plot. A calculated takedown.
A full-scale, multi-player, deep-state-level conspiracy to… show people what she actually said and did.
In reality?
The website was made by one person.
One woman with a WordPress login, a receipt folder, and a strong Wi-Fi signal.
And almost every single source came from Adam—her ex, who, in my honest opinion, deserves hazard pay for surviving her emotional hostage situation.
If quoting your ex and uploading screenshots is now a conspiracy, then Monica should be reporting 90% of Twitter to the FBI.
She insists “multiple people were involved,” but conveniently is only trying to sue me.
Not Adam, who gave me the material.
Not Google, who delivered her digital footprint on a silver platter.
Not her own screenshots, which did the heavy lifting of exposing her.
Just me.
Because let’s be honest—this isn’t a conspiracy case.
It’s a jealousy tantrum in legal cosplay.
“This is a coordinated attack,” she whispered into the abyss, as the judge checked the clock for lunch.
In my honest opinion, this “civil conspiracy” is less of a legal matter and more of a delusion spiral with a filing fee.
She’s not the target of a plot.
She’s the architect of her own PR disaster—furious someone else dared to publish the blueprint.
________
NOTE:
The following exhibit below is presented in accordance with Monica’s perception of reality, which has been heavily filtered through projection, delusion, and untreated main character syndrome.
Any resemblance to actual conspiracies is purely coincidental and entirely self-inflicted. In my honest opinion, the only thing Monica has proven is her own commitment to misinterpretation.
EXHIBIT O: Suspected Co-Conspirators
(According to Monica’s imagination and absolutely no evidence)
[REDACTED]: The Google Search Bar (charged with aiding and abetting truth discovery)
[REDACTED]: Adam’s Screenshot Folder (armed with facts and emotional exhaustion)
[REDACTED]: The Website Host (guilty of not crashing under the weight of her bullshit)
[REDACTED]: The Judge’s Facial Expression (conspired with patience to survive this hearing)
[REDACTED]: The Truth (caught in possession of receipts with intent to distribute)
[REDACTED]: My Memory (accused of being too detailed and not gaslit into submission)
[REDACTED]: Her Own Text Messages (labeled domestic terror threats to her reputation)
A Brief Intermission While Monica Climbs Atop Her Inner Soapbox (and Immediately Falls Off)
Then came the real show: Monica climbing onto her dollar store soapbox and swearing under oath that she was the real victim—as though accountability was just another fad she’d outlived.
She sat before the court on Zoom like an expired gallon of 2%—sour, bloated with self-righteousness, and sealed tight with denial.
Her hair hung lifelessly at her shoulders, no longer fried by box-dye bravado, but now just… defeated.
Her overplucked ‘90s brows arched with the tension of a woman realizing that evidence can, in fact, be printed.
And her eyeshadow? A shimmer of delusion so intense it should be submitted as Exhibit B.
She called herself a mother.
We assumed she was someone’s grandmother using FaceTime for the first time and accidentally suing herself.
Her bedroom lighting wasn’t doing her any favors—but let’s be honest, neither were the last twenty years.
She looked like karma was finally cashing the check.
In short?
She didn’t look like someone who was defamed. She looked like someone who finally saw what the rest of us have been seeing for years—and tried to sue the mirror for emotional distress.
Conclusion:
At the end of her 9-count tantrum, Monica is demanding over $50,000 in damages, the website domain, and possibly the last word—despite having spent the last three years ensuring that never happens.
If awarded, experts say the money will likely be spent on legal fees, new throw pillows, and Botox to erase the frown lines caused by reading the truth online.
And now, back to her original complaint—because apparently the courtroom wasn’t done being held hostage by her delusions just yet.
8. Injunctive Relief:
Monica is asking the court to forcibly transfer the domain [monicastengel.net] to her.
Yes.
She wants to legally acquire the website that documents her own behavior—so she can erase it like a failed first marriage and pretend the Internet is her diary.
Because in Monica’s world, accountability is an act of violence, and posting facts is defamation unless she gets a cut of the narrative rights.
In my honest opinion, this isn’t about legal relief.
This is about control.
Control over the story. Control over the spotlight. Control over the digital obituary of her reputation.
She’s not seeking justice—she’s throwing a legal tantrum with a filing fee attached.
And for what?
So she can rebrand her digital graveyard into a Pinterest board of denial?
“Hi, welcome to monicastengel.net.
Today’s post is a step-by-step tutorial on how to ruin your ex’s life, re-traumatize a woman you’ve never met, and file a lawsuit because you’re allergic to mirrors.”
This isn’t injunctive relief.
This is unmedicated PR damage control dressed in a pantsuit and powered by Chardonnay and audacity
She doesn’t want the site taken down because it’s false.
She wants it silenced because it’s accurate.
And in my honest opinion, giving her control of that domain is like handing the black box from a plane crash to the pilot who nose-dived it on purpose.
Monica doesn’t want to fix anything.
She wants to erase the evidence, set the building on fire, and sue the smoke for defamation.
If she had it her way, that website would be wiped clean and replaced with a bio that says:
“Empath. Advocate. Spiritual bully. Here to teach you how to weaponize healing, misquote Brene Brown, and emotionally implode in 3–5 business days.”
She’s not looking for relief.
She’s looking for revenge—but make it legally admissible.
And if the court actually gave her what she wanted?
We’d all wake up tomorrow to monicastengel.net plastered with stock photos of hands holding coffee mugs, pastel affirmations like “I release what no longer serves me (unless it’s your nudes)”, and an FAQ section that just says “I don’t recall.”
See Below ⬇️ ⬇️ ⬇️
Welcome to: MonicaStengel.net
Gaslight. Gatekeep. Girlboss.
(formerly a truth archive, now a crisis in HTML)
Header Image:
A soft-focus photo of Monica staring off into the middle distance, holding a glass of white wine and the last shred of her credibility.
Navigation Bar:
• Home
• Passive-Aggressive Wellness Tips
• Litigation Lifestyle
• Manifesting Restraining Orders
• Defamation Detoxes
• Ask Me About My Ex (I Dare You)
Featured Blog Posts:
1. “Healing Through Harassment: Why Holding Grudges is Self-Care”
A guide to projecting your insecurities onto others, publicly and legally.
2. “Your Honor, I’m the Victim (And I Brought My Own Printer)”
An inside look at how to file ex parte motions when you’re out of arguments but full of screenshots you sent yourself.
3. “How to Weaponize a Screenshot and Still Cry on the Stand”
The fine art of claiming victimhood while being the actual source of the drama.
4. “Slut-Shame Sunday: Why Her Old Porn is Still Your Entire Personality”
A journey through projection, repression, and why no one’s impressed.
5. “Six Passive-Aggressive Phrases That Count as Emotional Intelligence”
Including:
– “I just find it funny how…”
– “Some people need to heal, clearly.”
– “It’s giving desperate.”
– “I’m not mad, just disappointed.”
– “Sending light.”
– “You should be ashamed (but I’m the one crying in court).”
Exclusive Download:
Free eBook: “The Ultimate Guide to Making Everything About You”
Includes bonus chapter: “How to Sue a Website for Being Too Accurate”
Testimonials (100% Real and Not Typed by Monica Herself):
“She’s an inspiration to emotionally unstable plaintiffs everywhere.” – Anonymous burner account
“Finally, someone brave enough to play the victim and the villain.” – Her therapist, probably
“I blocked her in 2019 and she’s still suing me in spirit.” – Everyone
Footer:
© 2025 MonicaStengel.net
All facts denied. All receipts ignored. All responsibility deflected.
And let’s be real:
Chances of winning a defamation suit while unemployed, unverified, and universally exhausting?
Less than the odds of Monica being emotionally well-regulated on a Tuesday.
She didn’t file this lawsuit to fix her reputation.
She filed it because someone finally turned the lights on—
and she didn’t like what she saw.