Back Story

Back Story


You are guided not to peruse, examine, review or otherwise utilize this website if any of the following conditions exists:

  • you have committed a crime
  • you have reported or filed one or more false criminal or civil allegations or declarations
  • you are Palos Verdes Estates resident Cindy or Dan Dunbar, or have any possible intent of conveying information from or about this website to Cynthia Dunbar or Daniel Dunbar (review the Dunbar Disclaimer below)

(click here)

(click here)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS extends its deepest gratitude to our country's preeminent First Amendment attorney, Gary T. Schwartz Distinguished Professor of Law at UCLA Eugene VolokhEugene's 2013 law review article, "One-to-One vs. One-to-Many Speech" inspired founder's determination to soundly and definitively defeat his false accuser (see below).  Thereafter, Eugene's judgement and opinions have been of immeasurable assistance in designing and structuring's online mission to help others similarly targeted by malicious false accusers and biased, misguided social-justice seeking prosecutors.  In April 2019, coincident with the widely acclaimed victory by's founder over Cindy and Dan Dunbar, Torrance Judge Gary Y. Tanaka, Deputy District Attorney Elicia Stoller, and the entire Palos Verdes Estates Police Department, Volokh launched a video series on First Amendment Law (click here).  Professor Volokh's dedication to thwarting illegal rulings like that of judge Gary Tanaka has led him to form a group that will consider writing an amicus brief to defend your righteous defense (click here). also owes acknowledgements to both the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and Loyola Law School professor Aaron Caplan.  The EFF's exhaustive work defending online free speech has included filing numerous amicus briefs (click here) in a variety of invalid, illegal claims of website-based harassment.  Professor Caplan also has been a tireless defender of online free speech, including his often-quoted 2013 law review article "Free Speech and Civil Harassment Orders."


"Public Safety Risk" & Husband Besiege Neighbor:  The back story of essentially involves alleged malicious prosecution by a one-time convicted felon (Cindy Dunbar, or the "Convict").  The Convict was psychologically evaluated by a police department corporal as "emotionally traumatized" and determined by the California Nursing Board to be a "public safety risk." While calling the police department to report that she could not log into her account (actually did this), the Convict herself admittingly stammered to a confused police dispatcher, "I sound like an insane person, don't I?"  After years of alleged harassment of a neighbor by the Convict, the California Superior Court granted a restraining order against the Convict. In retaliation, submitting false declarations and testimony under the penalty of perjury, the Convict and her husband (Daniel Dunbar, attorney) induced an incompetent, misinformed, biased and/or corrupt judge into granting an illegal civil harassment restraining order (CHRO) against that same neighbor (the "Victim").

Police Department & District Attorney Both "Play Along":  A corrupt and tremendously biased local police department investigation was headed by detective Russell Venegas, who illegally colluded with the Convict.  The Convict's husband had contributed money to an effort to save that same department from being replaced by the local sheriff. The Convict's husband for a period of time had his license to practice law in California suspended by order of the California Supreme Court for "simulating" (forging) his client's signature on a settlement agreement. Together with colluding police department officers including Steve Barber, Sean Tomlins, Erick Gaunt and Ken Ackert, Russell Venegas misinformed and misguided Deputy District Attorney Elicia Stoller into filing invalid charges against the Victim.  DDA Stoller maliciously maintained her soon-invalidated charges despite being in possession of a tremendous amount of exculpatory and false-accuser credibility impeaching evidence.

Local, Conflicted Defense Attorney Misconducts Himself: Hired to defend the Victim, a seemingly conflicted defense attorney J. Patrick Carey came close to causing serious harm to his victim client.  This deceitful attorney falsified and misrepresented settlement communications he had initiated with the District Attorney against his client Victim's explicit instructions.  Pat Carey's goal was simple:  a (failed) attempt to manipulate and pressure his Victim client into a highly conditional, premature and undesired settlement in order to avoid doing legal work that he "loathed" but for which he had been pre-paid. Victim, suspecting something was awry, acutely modified his interaction with the suspect attorney.  By demanding settlement conditions he knew the DA would not accept, Victim successfully delayed and then derailed the settlement discussions in anticipation of an inevitable appellate victory over Cindy and Dan Dunbar (see below).

Appellate Court Reverses Trial Court's Incompetence:  Fortunately, before this defense attorney's deceit and duplicity could play out, the Victim's civil appellate attorney prevailed, leading to the illegal order being unanimously reversed by the California Court of Appeal.  Consequently, the maliciously prosecuted criminal case was dismissed.  In late 2019, Victim filed a $20 million malicious prosecution claim against the local city and its police department.

MISSION's mission is to help other innocent defendants in the public - victimized by malicious prosecution - gain perspective and a thorough understanding on how one such victim prevailed over injustice.  Inspired by famed defense attorney Alan Dershowitz's bestseller chronicling and disproving the malicious prosecution of him by Virginia Giuffre, presents the following timeline underlying the back story that inspired this site itself.  As with Dershowitz's "Guilt by Accusation," it is's sincere hope that other public defendants victimized by malicious prosecution may learn how to dodge the myriad landmines laid by your false accuser, corrupt law enforcement officers, misguided prosecutor, and perhaps even conflicted, dishonest defense attorney.'s goal is to eliminate for the public the shock and awe that comes with discovering first hand how the criminal injustice system truly operates.


(Note:  links to more case documents, exculpatory and Dunbar-credibility impeaching evidence forthcoming)
  • Victim's 2007-2014 friendship with neighbor and attorney Dan Dunbar, despite heightened concerns over wife Cindy Dunbar's mental stability
  • Victim's 2014 discovery of wife Cynthia "Cindy" Dunbar's criminal record (including, during the period of 2010-2012, a felony drug conviction)
  • Victim's 2014 discovery that Cindy Dunbar had been determined to be a "public safety risk" by the State of California Nursing Board (click here), which caused the surrender of her nursing license
  • Victim's July 2014 communication to Cindy Dunbar that victim and his family had determined to terminate any relationship/interaction with Cindy Dunbar
  • Cindy Dunbar's 2014-2016 alleged harassment of Victim's wife in reaction to Dunbar's being socially rejected
  • Victim's 2014-2016 six E-mails to Dan Dunbar sent only after each of six separate incidents of alleged harassment and/or defamation by his wife, with the clear, legitimate purpose of imploring him to discourage his wife's deleterious behavior; at no time - until after Cindy Dunbar was served a restraining order - does either Dunbar protest or otherwise discourage any of these E-mails
  • Cindy Dunbar's alleged harassment of Victim on May 31, 2017 serves as "final straw"
  • Temporary Restraining Order granted to Victim vs. Cindy Dunbar by California Superior Court Commissioner Glenda Veasey on June 1, 2017
  • Daniel Dunbar's June 17, 2017 retaliation on behalf of his wife, utilizing provably false declarations under the penalty of perjury to obtain temporary restraining order (TRO) vs. Victim
  • Torrance, California based Superior Court Judge Gary Tanaka's July 2017 failure to understand and/or apply properly California Code of Procedure Code 527.6.   Judge Gary Tanaka's incompetence and/or bias was recognized implicitly when his decision was reversed by unanimous California Court of Appeal decision; click here
  • Cindy Dunbar's 2017-2018 feverish efforts to use the illegal CHRO as a "sword instead of a shield," making false reports of order violations in a failed effort to have Victim arrested.  In the end, Convict was forced by Victim's attorney to spend time in Inglewood courthouse while Victim never set foot in it.
  • Cindy Dunbar's 2017-2019 reported citywide disparagement of Victim, making countless defamatory statements related to having obtained the (illegal and to-be-reversed) CHRO.
  • Victim's 2013-2018 efforts to save Palos Verdes Estates from insolvency by replacing Palos Verdes Estates Police Department with Los Angeles Sheriff's Department at less than half the PVEPD's cost (click here).
  • Palos Verdes Estates Police Department's (see above) 2017-2018 biased anti-Victim misconduct/collusion with PVEPD financial supporter Daniel and Cindy Dunbar, including myriad violations of explicit Palos Verdes Estates Police Department written policy
  • Palos Verdes Estates Police Corporal Kenneth Ackert's October 2017 declaration that Cindy Dunbar's mental state qualifies as "emotionally traumatized"
  • Cindy Dunbar's audio-recorded February 2018 admission to confused Palos Verdes Estates Police officer Catherine Placek, "I sound like an insane person, don't I?"
  • Cindy Dunbar, along with biased/corrupt PVEPD, during January-March 2018 misguiding and misinforming the District Attorney into filing five petty, unsubstantiated false charges of order violation (click here and see Pages 5 & 6 footnotes; see Elicia Stoller on's "Lawyers Page")
  • Cindy Dunbar's 2017-2018 frenetic false reporting of order violations to the PVEPD, unsuccessfully attempting to get DA to stack more charges onto the original complaint
  • Cindy Dunbar's 2018-2019 post-CHRO grant multiple video recorded incidents of alleged vehicular assault vs. Victim, including one instance while Victim was carrying his one-year old son
  • Cindy Dunbar's 2017-2019 post-CHRO grant multiple video recorded incidents of solitarily approaching Victim at close proximity despite declaring falsely, under penalty of perjury, to be "terrified" of Victim
  • Cindy Dunbar's 2018 post-CHRO grant multiple incidents of initiating (unanswered) written communication with Victim, despite having obtained court order restraining same non-contacting Victim from making contact with her
  • PVEPD and District Attorney in Summer 2018 are required to turn over mother lode of Brady information and evidence (due to sheer volume, must be posted later).  Brady evidence a) disproved Victim's guilt, b) proved Victim's innocence and c) deeply impeached Cindy and Dan Dunbar's credibility and that of her accomplices
  • Cindy Dunbar's June 2018 inducement of allegedly criminally false testimony to Deputy District Attorney by her friends/neighbors Marilyn Merrill, Sarah Semitekol, Jennifer Laity, Asli Uzumcu and Selin Uzumcu; in June 2019, police department transmits to District Attorney alleged crimes against public justice by all five via violation of California Penal Code §148.5, but statute of limitations precludes further prosecutorial action.
  • Appellate attorney Jeff Lewis's July 2018 filing of Appellant's Opening Brief en route to 2019's CHRO dissolution (click here)
  • Victim discovery in August 2018 that the Convict's husband, who along with Convict had filed false declarations under the penalty of perjury, for a period of time had his license to practice law in California suspended by order of the California Supreme Court for "simulating" (forging) his client's signature on a settlement agreement.
  • Pre-trial Trombetta motion to dismiss filed in October 2018 exposing Palos Verdes Estates Police Department malice, bias, and misconduct in violation of its own formal policy manual
  • Appellate attorney Jeff Lewis's January 2019 filing of Appellant's Reply Brief en route to 2019's CHRO dissolution (click here)
  • Appellate attorney Jeff Lewis's January 2019 filing of a motion for sanctions against Daniel Dunbar and his attorney Casey Olsen for making unwarranted personal attacks and false, inaccurate and/or misleading statements
  • Pre-trial Gonzalez motion to dismiss (click here and here) filed in January 2019, copying Jeff Lewis's appellate briefs that convincingly argued Judge Gary Tanaka's July 2017 CHRO was illegal and thus DA's related criminal charges "cannot stand"
  • Defense attorney J. Patrick Carey's February-March 2019 misconduct in secretly and deceitfully pursuing unfavorable, untimely and undesired pre-trial settlement against his Victim client's explicit instructions (click here)
  • Appellate attorney Jeff Lewis's March 2019 filing of a motion for sanctions against Daniel Dunbar and his attorney Casey Olsen for making repeated false statements
  • Appellate attorney Jeffrey Lewis in April 2019 prevails in reversing Dunbar's illegal CHRO by unanimous California Court of Appeal decision led by Super Judge Gregory Weingart (click here)
  • District Attorney's May 2019 dismissal of all charges following the Court of Appeal's reversal of Judge Gary Tanaka's illegal CHRO
  • Torrance, California Superior Court Judge Gary Tanaka, disgraced by the higher court's unanimous ruling that he essentially had failed as a trial judge, appears to impede his required minute order filing for a full month; Tanaka finally complies on July 26, 2019 (click here)
  • Victim in November 2019 files $20 million malicious prosecution claim against City of Palos Verdes Estates and its police department.

Views, thoughts, and opinions expressed in's website comment sections belong solely to each comment's author, and not necessarily to the author’s employer, organization, committee or other group or individual. explicitly disclaims any agreement or disagreement with, or endorsement of such views, thoughts and opinions.'s founder engaged in discussion with America's preeminent First Amendment lawyer, Los Angeles's Eugene Volokh, in assessing legal issues relating to its comment sections.  Please click here and here for more information on Mr. Volokh's constitutional work. You may click here to watch a 2020 interview with Professor Volokh entitled, "Civil liberties in an epidemic."

Relevant Case Law:  "[Courts] as well have recognized that online blogs and message boards are places where readers expect to see strongly worded opinions rather than objective facts. "  Summit Bank v. Rogers (2012), 206 Cal. App. 4th at 697; see also, Chaker v. Mateo (2012) 209 Cal. App. 4th 1138, 1148)


44 thoughts on “Back Story”

  • For some unknown reason I could not help myself and read all the public briefs in this harassment case. California trial courts truly have become the big joke in the justice system. The judge who granted Dunbar the restraining order should be stripped of his robe. It must have been the easiest decision in the appellate court’s existence to reverse his opinion. I feel very bad for the guy who was on the other side of that lower court judge’s horrible judgment. God bless appellate courts for providing a means to rectify bad judge’s mistakes.

  • This is a very, very interesting case study in the modern relationship between crime and mental illness. I am seeing more and more courts giving mentally ill criminals a pass while their victims remain injured by their crazy and often illegal antics. Is this just a liberal California phenomenon? Are angry crazy people now free to destroy the lives of others with impunity?

    I don’t mean to be insensitive, but it seems pretty obvious that even this Dunbar woman knows herself that she suffers from mental illness. Her illegal abuse of the family in her neighborhood may just be one of a long line of trouble she’s caused before and after being convicted of felony drug charges. Being called a “public safety risk” by a state nursing board and then having her license suspended all occurred before she went after her neighbor.

    • Why should someone get special privilege because she is mentally ill? I don’t get it. She doesn’t need protection from society. Society needs protection from the “public safety risk”!!!!

  • This story is sickening. What this woman did to this guy should lead to jail time. How is it that judges don’t seem to give a damn when perjury is committed in their courtrooms? If they feel sorry for the perjurer because her life is a disaster, why should that matter?

  • What a DISGUSTING display of disrespect for the court system and law enforcement. I want to feel sorry for this woman, but her assault on the family down the street is the worst thing about which I’ve EVER, EVER read. She must be a terribly unhappy person. Thank God and the appeals court that she was driven into a humiliating defeat. Justice was served.

    • Disgusted – Though it may be hard to believe, our family too in part feels sorry for this troubled soul. This is the case even though she lied over and over again in a failed effort to get a father of young children arrested, and to deceive Judge Tanaka and DDA Elicia Stoller into working to punish this same father-with-a-perfect-record for his 100% legal behavior. This troubled woman has gone through a divorce, marital problems with her next husband, the State of California Nursing Board suspending her license after declaring her a “public safety risk,” her husband’s license to practice law in California being suspended for a period of time, for a period of time was a convicted drug felon, and recently had the California Court of Appeal rule unanimously against her in this Back Story case after highlighting that she reported something that did not “actually occur.” This is a horrible list of outcomes in one’s life, and there are many more that is choosing not to list here. However, every item just listed was the result of her choices or her husband’s choice (to simulate his client’s signature on an agreement). Even this morning when I was reading to my young kids, we are taught to tell the truth. Somehow, this lesson is long lost on Cindy Dunbar.

      Book  Cover

      Don't Lie to Get Others In Trouble

  • I don’t know if the laws are different in US vs here in Canada, but this back story is unbelievable! Can someone just perjure herself, get caught when the falsely accused plays a tape proving that, and walk out of the courtroom scott free? What the hell?

  • First of all, I wish this website were better organized because I found myself jumping all over the site trying to find the legal docs.
    Second, one thing I wonder if this Dunbar lady understands is how she made herself something of a public figure by volunteering to be interviewed by CBS news in July 2018, right in the middle of her attacks against her neighbor.

    She is going to have a lotta trouble down the road if she tries to claim she’s a really private citizen when she went on CBS to attack another neighbor flying a Civil War flag. Seems like she runs around her neighborhood causing trouble for anyone who she finds offensive for whatever reason. I think I would label her as a public gadfly or public activist rather than some poor ol’ housewife minding her own business.

    Dunbar Cindy CBS News 07-2018

    • Especially since the other lady who spoke to news showed how easy it was to maintain her privacy. She only allowed her hands to be shown. But Dunbar, probably seeking to signal to public how “virtuous” she [thinks she] is, gave her name and face.

  • Here I am across the planet from the States, but me ol’ cobber has a crazy sheila neighbour making life hell for him too. That’s how I found this beaut of a site. I should tell you if he doesn’t win like the guy on this website, he’ll have to shoot through his home very soon. Anyhow, my mate says ‘thanks’ for putting this information on the web.

    I should tell readers of an ever worse story of a pathological liar who succeeded in ruining an Aussie’s life. Watch this story about a poor bloke who was the victim of a sociopath who doesn’t seem too different than your lying Cindy Dunbar. One big difference is this liar got a three year laggon when caught for making up charges.

  • I hope everyone’s ok during COVID-19 in Palos Verdes. I am off work cause of all this virus stuff and a friend told me he had been reading this website.

    So relating to this case. There’s some real karma boomeranging to this Cindy Dunbar. I happen to know her and know people who know her victim neighbor and let’s just say I wasn’t surprised that she has a criminal drug record and also went nutzo on her neighbor. I heard he is loaded and has a hot young wife and a bunch of kids. Successful American family thing. I hear this guy doesn’t pretend to be a saint, but he is supposed to be a straight shooter but he was at odds with local police cause he campaigned to have them replaced by sheriff in RPV to save the city like over 1/2 the cost or something. Maybe too courageous or honest to a fault as it’s said he’ll give it right back to bitter, angry sh*t talkers like Cindy Dunbar. Someone told me “She picked the wrong guy to start a war with”. Yeah you can say that again. If you read the court filings, she marched down the street to yell at him when he was gardening by himself in front of his house. I think that was when he was granted a TRO against her. Some people just are not happy if others around them are happy. Typical social justice warrior.

    I just went to the winning lawyer’s website. Jeff Lewis, who is a great guy, and seems to win a lot based on his site. I read how his client, Dunbar’s neighbor who got the TRO against her, never even “spent a minute in court” or something like that. So this “public safety risk” Dunbar and her husband, who I read once had his license to practice law suspended by the state bar assn., went through a few years of making up silly petty accusations, crying about all the made up stupid stuff to the colluding police , but the neighbor recorded her and caught her lying and just paid his lawyers to get rid of her by exposing her and hubby’s lies to the DA and court of appeal. Don’t forget that these lies were made by Dan and Cindy Dunbar under the penalty of perjury. The guy is a lawyer! Nice family.

    • Ronny – fortunately for the Victim, Dunbar attorney Casey Olsen and Torrance Superior Court Judge Gary Tanaka made a series of tactical errors while pursuing of their shared goal of social vs. legal justice. Casey Olsen, Dunbar’s lawyer, fumbled throughout the trial and then unanimously lost the appeal. At trial, Olsen somehow forgot to ask Daniel Dunbar during testimony the obvious, simple question that would have given Dunbar the opportunity, even if dishonestly, to buttress his flimsy, fabricated case. That question is, “Can you describe how you purportedly suffered?” That was a critical error by both Olsen and his apparent ally Judge Tanaka, who had the right to cover for Olsen’s big miss but failed to do so during the evidentiary part of the trial. After realizing Olsen’s negligence, the Victim (representing himself) was very careful to ask only a few, simple questions of both Dunbars during cross examination. This strategy took full advantage of Casey Olsen’s apparent inexperience and/or incompetence in understanding how to fortify the trial record (i.e., Litigation 101 at any law school) with dramatic, emotional testimony falsely supporting the need for an order. Had Dan Dunbar imitated his wife’s over-the-top, melodramatic fabricated testimony, that evidence would have carried over for the appellate justices to consider.

      Again, to be clear, Dunbar’s testimony would have been perjurious due to it being apparent he truly never suffered the emotional distress required by the law. Not only did Dunbar never communicate a single word protesting any of the handful of E-mails, but he even replied on one occasion congratulating the Victim on the birth of his daughter. The Court of Appeal, with its unanimous ruling against the Dunbars, seems to have seen right through the charade. The justices stated, “a handful of e-mails over a three-year period … sporadic contacts … either alone or in combination with D.D.’s testimony about them, are not substantial evidence D.D. experienced the intense and enduring mental suffering or anguish required to support the issuance of a civil harassment restraining order based on a course of conduct theory.”

      Truly, the Victim has much gratitude for the Dunbars’ hiring an apparently incompetent attorney for trial, and then keeping him on retainer to lose the appellate case. Casey Olsen v. Jeff Lewis was not a fair intellectual match. Jeff Lewis just keeps on winning when defending his clients against false allegations. This month Jeff prevailed against yet another invalid defamation lawsuit intended to deprive Jeff’s client of her First Amendment free speech privilege. Click here to learn more.

      • Ha! I can’t believe I found someone talking about how bad a lawyer is Casey Olsen. I know at least three other people who he represented. Some were in divorces and others simple civil stuff. This man should not be taking more than $25/hour for his services. Check out his negative reviews on Yelp.

        Olsen Yelp Review 1

        Olsen Yelp Review 2

  • Confession: I LOVE everything that comes out of Eugene Volokh’s mouth or keyboard! Did you know he has an IQ of 180 or something ridiculous?

    FYI another victory like this one for the “Victim” happened in the CA appeals court recently. Short version is similar to the one here on the webpage in that one woman allegedly had done some bad things, and another woman (the victim here) had an illlegal restraining order against her forbidding her from discussing it on a website (I think Facebook). You got it – just like this case the person who allegedly was making up horrible stuff to deflect attention away from herself tried to stop her victim from defending herself online. Let’s hope between this Dunbar case in 2019 and this new one this is a trend in California. Bad trial judges who try to be social justice warriors are being told they are supposed to be legal justice warriors instead.

    TRIAL JUDGES GARY TANAKA and JAMES BLANCARTE!!! Apply the law to the provable facts and credible evidence!!! Stop ignoring the law and insufficiency of credible incriminating evidence so that you can punish behavior you just don’t like!!!!

    Appellate Decision:

    • Thank you for alerting to that appellate victory for Ms. Pels. Two sentences from the 2nd District’s justice-fulfilling decision stood out vis-à-vis the Dunbar case:

      Pels Decision Quote 1

      Pels Appellate Decision Quote 2

  • Someone please explain perjury to me, please. Because of my own crazy legal problem with a liar who tricked our Houston DA, I actually have read everything on this site. And I do mean everything. I clicked through and read the legal briefs in the winning appeal. This case seems to me to be a clear case of this Dunbar lady making up allegations to the police and courts over and over again. So here’s my question. How doesn’t the legal system see all this evidence of criminal misconduct and put her in jail? I have the same thing in my case, but unfortunately don’t have all the video and audio tapes that exist in the Dunbar case. I do not get it. How does someone like this get away with making all this up?

    • wants to be clear that it is the site’s opinion, rather than statement of fact, that at a minimum Cindy Dunbar engaged in perjury and her husband at least engaged in a reckless disregard of the truth.

      The logic here is extremely reasonable. If Cindy Dunbar, who with her husband has a very close relationship with the police department located two minutes from her house, truly believed (despite audio recording that proved, without doubt, it never happened) she had been threatened with being disabled (“put in a wheelchair”), why then is there NO evidence that either she or her husband Dan reported anything to the police regarding that alleged incident? Cindy Dunbar appears to have made no report when she walked into her house – no report the next day, or the one thereafter … This is the same Cindy Dunbar who from another state actually thought it was reasonable to call the same PVE police department to report she couldn’t log into her account. This is the same woman who reported to the police that the neighbor’s car drove slowly (cautiously) past her house (where her dog often wandered unchecked) en route to their own driveway just two homes down the street. This is the same woman who reported that someone else had seen a recreational drone that was flying 200′ above the neighborhood. Remember, at trial the Dunbars claimed to be acutely concerned by this (false) wheelchair language. However, only after Cindy Dunbar was served the restraining order against her did Daniel Dunbar file for a TRO vs. the falsely accused “wheelchair” neighbor nearly three weeks after the incident. None of these facts fits the framework of either Dunbar ever believing that the information they submitted, under the penalty of perjury, was true.

      As a sidenote, even when confronted unexpectedly at trial with the audio recording disproving the Dunbars’ false, under-oath statements, Dan Dunbar didn’t move an inch off his false, now-disproved claim that the wheelchair comment was a threat of violence. Remember, even Judge Tanaka agreed with the Dunbars’ counterparties in the court – no threat of violence was made. Dan Dunbar’s behavior is not that of someone who learned the truth (via the audio recording) for the first time about a falsely claimed threat of disablement. It is the behavior of someone dedicated to a false narrative in order to trick a judge into siding with him and his wife.

      Tanaka may have been tricked, but the Court of Appeal could not have been more clear in deciding with the neighbor: “D.D. additionally testified he was alarmed and concerned when C.D. relayed to him R.C.’s wheelchair comment. D.D argues his reaction is additional evidence of substantial emotional distress despite the trial court’s finding that R.C. did not in fact threaten any violence. Given the court’s finding that R.C. did not make any threats of violence, D.D.’s reaction to a purported threat the trial court found was not in fact made cannot be considered evidence of emotional distress. To the extent D.D. had such a reaction, it was from his wife’s retelling of the incident and not what actually occurred.”


    It’s hard to believe a full year to the day has passed since the Court of Appeal tossed out incompetent Judge Tanaka’s illegal ruling. Outside of this horrible pandemic (esp. here in NY), what a wonderful twelve months it has been for the growing family of one-time Victim of Cindy and Dan Dunbar and all the others on the losing side of the siege.


    • Thank you for your kind words of support.

      Over the past year, the widespread support we have received has been nothing short of a wonderful experience. Even within the most liberal of minds, when presented with the truthful facts, people can distinguish between who is good and who is not. The world, for the most part, still recognizes that a false accuser making provably false statements under oath, who once was convicted for a period of time of a felony drug charge, is not someone worthy of sympathy as disgraced Judge Gary Tanaka shamelessly stated was his view. Even if that convict cut a secret deal with the State for it to be dismissed a year and a half later if certain conditions were met, she still pleaded guilty to having committed one or more drug-related acts that qualified as felonious. Those simply are the facts – nothing any local, incompetent judge foolishly can say or temporarily may order can change that. Fortunately yet quite predictably given these true facts and unambiguous state statute and case law, the Court of Appeal unanimously agreed with our patently obvious view of Tanaka’s grave error. Good eventually triumphs over evil. It’s been a great year for our triumphant family.

      Thank you again.

  • Do you know if in Florida someone making false statements under the penalty of perjury can go to prison? California seems almost lawless now. These Dunbar people got caught making statements that clearly were untrue, under oath, just to get back at their neighbor for getting a TRO against this crazy Cindy Dunbar. I don’t see how that is not a felony itself.

    • Particularly in liberal states, it is very difficult to get the District Attorney to charge their own witness(es) with perjury – even when everything points to that being the actual crime that was committed against the innocent defendant. In the Dunbar case, the innocent defendant built a video library of Cindy Dunbar engaging in behavior that completely impeached her credibility and laid strong foundation for a perjury case against her. The video library included multiple cases of Cindy Dunbar, who testified under oath to being “terrified” of the innocent defendant voluntarily approaching him, at times by herself without anyone to “protect” her. Dunbar also initiated not one but two communications with the a social media account she stated in writing she believed were operated by the innocent defendant – this is the same woman who testified to needing a court order so that the innocent defendant would not contact her (which he hadn’t even done in the first place!). None of this matters to a biased, incompetent and/or corrupt prosecutor (Elicia Stoller) who appears to have determined to violate her own oath to uphold justice.

    • The racist woman’s malicious attempt to prosecute the African American bird watcher in Central Park is strikingly similar to what happened with Cindy Dunbar. Like with Dunbar, the innocent accused party was saved by his own recording of what really happened. Furthermore, the woman in Central Park also included feigned hysterics in her attempt to deceive the police into believing she truly feared for her safety. If anyone could have seen Cindy Dunbar’s performance in the courtroom, they never would believe their eyes with Dunbar’s subsequent, multiple attempts to both make written contact with the innocent defendant and also cross paths with him while he was minding his own business in the neighborhood. Fortunately, all of this has been video recorded and available should Cindy Dunbar make another attempt at malicious prosecution.

    • Legally video or audio recording one’s false accuser is without question the most prudent decision an innocent person can make. From mid-2017 to’s founder’s victory over Cindy and Dan Dunbar, the former never stopped recording the latter’s interactions with him. The result was a cataloged library of video evidence impeaching Cindy Dunbar’s character and repeatedly proving her dishonesty and malicious intent.

      In the case of Cindy Dunbar and Dan Dunbar (lawyer), they both failed to understand that they had been check mated the moment Judge Tanaka had been outmaneuvered by the Innocent Defendant into allowing the May 31, 2017 audio recording into evidence. Cindy Dunbar herself was recorded celebrating with a PVEPD officer (Gretchen Evans) how in her mind her neighbor had been so foolish to play during trial the recording of the Innocent Defendant noting Cindy Dunbar’s highly unattractive physical and mental condition. She had no idea that this decision had been thoroughly calculated with an eye toward an appellate victory should Judge Gary Tanaka prove to be incompetent, or worse.

      The strategy designed – by the Innocent Defendant without legal assistance – was simple. First, preclude Cindy Dunbar, Dan Dunbar and their attorney Casey Olsen from learning of the audio tape until the trial itself. This was accomplished by waiting to mail the response to Dan Dunbar’s invalid TRO petition until the last legally permissible date. Second, be sure to get the recording transcribed and in that response document – again that attorney/petitioner Daniel Dunbar and Casey Olsen didn’t possess until the trial. It’s always best not to alert your false accuser that you have proof of their deceit – this makes it harder for them to cover their dishonest tracks. Casey Olsen was so unprepared to deal with this exculpatory evidence that he falsely objected to the recording on the false basis that it hadn’t been transcribed. Apparently biased and/or corrupt Torrance Judge Judge Gary Tanaka seemed very disappointed to be informed by the Innocent Defendant that the recording had been transcribed and in the legal filing. Torrance Judge Gary Tanaka, struggling to find the right page with the transcription, angrily rejected the Innocent Defendant’s offer to guide him to the page. This was the first signal to the Innocent Defendant that this courtroom was not a level playing field. Lastly, after noticing Judge Tanaka’s body and other language, Innocent Defendant told Judge Tanaka that he estimated the recording was short (around 15 seconds) in order to preclude Tanaka’s rejecting it as too long. Only later did Tanaka unhappily note that it was over a minute in duration, but by that point it was too late. The audio recording by that point was in the record, and the big Dunbar lie (made under the penalty of perjury) was rendered useless. The Court of Appeal made note of this in siding with the Innocent Defendant and reversing Judge Gary Tanaka’s illegal order.

  • This Dunbar guy makes false statements under the penalty of perjury and he doesn’t lose his license to practice law? Are you kidding me??

    • The Victim in this backstory initially was surprised that the Convict’s husband (Dan Dunbar) decided to engage in nefarious, quite possibly illegal actions in this conflict. During the period of the Victim’s friendship with Dan Dunbar (2007 – 2014), he seemed to distance himself from his wife’s aberrant behavior – once even telling the Victim he would have left his wife long ago but feared both for his safety and his three sons’ disapproval upon doing so. Once when the Victim was driving down the street with Dan Dunbar, the latter’s wife in anger flipped her husband the middle finger when he asked if she was going to the gym. The Victim said to Dan Dunbar, “Dude, life’s too short. Why do you live with this?” to which Dan Dunbar replied, “You don’t even know …”. It is now the Victim’s view that Dan Dunbar lives in fear of his wife Cindy Dunbar, and was driven to extraordinary lengths to avoid her wrath. That does not excuse his horrific, arguably sanctionable actions in this case (click here and here).

  • I can state from a position of authority as a 27-year veteran prosecutor that what I read about here on this website was astonishing. The DDA – this Elicia Stoller – should be disbarred for bringing a criminal charge vs. the defendant for his REQUIRED mailing of the notice of appeal . I do not overstate this matter. First, if the defendant had not mailed the notice of appeal, he would have violated the law and lost his ability to have the case heard by the Court of Appeal. Second, the defendant was innocent from the get-go – the CHRO (restraining order) against him was illegal. Stoller never should have brought any charges until the case was heard by the Court of Appeal, which reversed the illegal order unanimously. The defendant may not have used a competent defense lawyer as anyone decent should have obtained an agreement tolling charges until the appeal was heard.

    • I professionally agree with this view. The district attorney’s behaviour is totally indefensible. This is the worst case of malicious prosecution that I have seen in many years. I truly do not understand how this Stoller has not lost her job. One of the best parts of this however is that the Vice President elect of the United States is the one whose name is on the criminal charge against the Dunbar lady. KAMALA HARRIS!!!

      • Dom – in this District Attorney’s world, bringing charges unsubstantiated by evidence or the law itself doesn’t appear to go punished. In fact, Elicia Stoller probably was rewarded for squandering taxpayer dollars on a case that was absurd on its merits. Can you imagine how twisted must be the mind of a prosecutor bringing a charge of violating a restraining order based on the innocent defendant’s legally required mailing of the notice of appeal – and that appeal was successful when the justices unanimously agreed with the innocent defendant!

    • Dom – thank you for your authoritative comments. Every attorney who has reviewed this case has opined in line with your view that Elicia Stoller engaged in malicious prosecution. Moreover, to the lawyer they marvel most over the most egregiously invalid charge that Inglewood Judge Johansen quickly tossed out during the demurrer hearing. This was the one you cited: Elicia Stoller ludicrously claiming the legally required mailing of the notice of appeal of the illegal (as agreed by Court of Appeal) restraining order violated the illegal order itself. But it is much worse than that. Every single claim by Stoller was nearly as egregiously invalid. The majority of the stacked charges were disproved by Cindy and Dan Dunbar’s own conflicting testimony and/or home surveillance video that was in Stoller’s possession. Yet, she couldn’t have cared less that the evidence supported the defendant’s INNOCENCE beyond a reasonable doubt.

  • I hope that this judge Tanaka and this district attorney Stoller watch the video of Cindy Dunbar in her car. This should make them so very ashamed of themselves.

    • believes that Torrance Judge Gary Tanaka and Deputy District Attorney Elicia Stsoller are so irreversibly incompetent, corrupt, misinformed/uninformed and/or biased that even the video (to which you refer) below would not alter their perspective one iota. Some people are so horribly afflicted by cognitive dissonance that no amount of new, contrary-to-their-wrong-view information can shift their bad behavior.

    • I have dealt with both Torrance Judge Gary Tanaka and Deputy District Attorney Elicia Stoller. These are two undereducated, liberal embarrassments to the judicial system. In both cases, they reverse engineer their judgments of defendants. Decide if they like or dislike the defendants first, and they charge them if the latter is the case. Forget the law. Forget the facts. Find a way to serve SOCIAL justice on innocent defendants who don’t conform to their world views of etiquette or behavior.

      Good for this website exposing them, especially Elicia Stoller. She is by far the worst of the worst. I should note that this defense attorney Pat Carey should be disbarred for his little ploy.

      When these two leave the justice system, less innocent people will be charged and convicted.

  • I am viscerally disgusted after watching the video of Cindy Dunbar assaulting this young family on their home’s street in Palos Verdes. What moronic judge issued an order protecting HER from THEM??????? I read on the legal filing filed by KAMALA HARRIS against CINDY DUNBAR that SHE was the one found to be a public safety risk by a department of the STATE OF CALIFORNIA!!!!!!!

    • Jessica – indeed, the family of‘s founder repeatedly has asked themselves, “How could we have been so unbelievably unlucky to buy a house down the street from Cindy Dunbar?” Let’s hope for families around the world she is truly “one of a kind.”

      The video to which you refer terrifyingly exposes the true Cindy Dunbar (vs. the one falsely portrayed by her unscrupulous co-conspirators). The sad part is that Judge Gary Tanaka, before developing his misguided bias against the true Victim in this case, never had a chance to see the video before his ruling. It had not yet been produced. Instead, he seems to have relied on unreliable, dishonest and massively biased sources to develop a predisposition against the Victim of Cindy and Dan Dunbar’s false statements (made under the penalty of perjury). As for Deputy District Attorney Elicia Stoller, according to defense attorney J. Patrick Carey, she was so dedicated to injustice that her malicious prosecution probably couldn’t have been derailed by anything, including that video. However, if she has seen the video since losing her case, at least subconsciously she must be deeply ashamed, humiliated and indignant at having been duped by Russell Venegas and the rest of the corrupt Palos Verdes Estates Police Department into Cindy Dunbar’s corner. Her extraordinarily poor judgment and apparent malice now stand front and center on the canvas of her career for all to view.

  • Not exaggerating. This site has changed my life.

    I was going to settle a bogus criminal complaint just to move on. Not gonna do it now. I am the victim and this can’t be allowed.

  • Did anyone notice that the name of the state attorney who is listed as felony prosecutor vs. Cindy Dunbar is the one and only ….

    !!!!!!!!!! KAMALA HARRIS. !!!!!!!!

    Can you imagine having pleaded guilty to a felony in a deal with the VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA??????

  • I have been trying to take’s advice and record anytime I may interact with the woman who has been trying to get me arrested in my neighborhood. She claims I am trespassing and making up crazy stuff.

    Everytime I pull out my phone to record she yells at me that it’s illegal. I don’t think it is. Can you clarify for me?

    • Joan I apologize for the late response.

      In California, the law regarding privacy and video recording essentially makes recording legal if those filmed lacked a reasonable expectation of privacy. In our case, the maliciously prosecuting party (Cindy Dunbar) apparently had little-no self restraint, engaging in astounding behavior right out in the open on the public street where we both lived. As Cindy Dunbar was acting in a location where anyone in the public could have viewed/heard her, and the camcorder being used was conspicuously being held in the hand of the recording party and aimed right at her, she had no reasonable expectation of privacy. She had to have known she was being recorded on a public street (i.e., no trespassing by recording party). See Flanagan v. Flanagan, 41 P.3d 575, 576-77, 578-82 (Cal. 2002; click here).

    • What I don’t understand is how in God’s name did this convict not stop harassing the family when she saw the camera filming her? Any judge or even a friend or neighbor who watches that video realizes immediately that she has been lying about who is really causing the problems. I’ll bet her husband was lied to as well and was super pissed off when he saw the truth.

      • Candice apologizes for yet another late response.

        You are not alone in being amazed that one-time convicted felon Cindy Dunbar allowed herself to be video recorded as she engaged in alleged vehicular assault and other activities. In addition to the posted YouTube video on the Back Story page, the Victim has a catalog of numerous other recordings of Cindy Dunbar voluntarily/intentionally approaching the Victim – AFTER GETTING AN (ILLEGAL) RESTRAINING ORDER AGAINST HIM. Remember, the Convict testified under oath, deceitfully, that she was so terrified of her Victim that she needed a restraining order. The Victim and his legal counsel were beyond enthusiastic to arrive in court and show a jury all this irrefutable evidence of what most would deem Cindy Dunbar’s perjury. It was entirely possible that after the judge in the never-held trial (due to Victim winning appeal) would be so disgusted by Cindy Dunbar that she would receive another jail sentence (maybe not converted to house arrest as she did for her earlier felony drug conviction). Perjury is serious. A serious jail sentence for Cindy Dunbar may have been appropriate.

        So, back to your question. Why did Cindy Dunbar allow herself to be caught, on tape, behaving in the exact opposite way that she had deceitfully claimed under oath? The answers are as follows:

        1) Perceived Impunity: Between the corrupt and biased local police department to which her family had made financial contributions (and the Victim had sought to replace with Sheriff’s Dept), incompetent/corrupt Judge Gary Tanaka whose illegal restraining order was reversed under appeal, and DDA Elicia Stoller who was playing along, Cindy Dunbar must have thought she was untouchable. It appeared rather clear that she had gotten away with fabricating claims against the Victim under the penalty of perjury. The Palos Verdes Estates Police Department officers working on the case explicitly made clear they were helping her and working against the Victim. Cindy Dunbar’s husband, Daniel Dunbar, worked for a large litigation-driven law firm that the Victim believes was doing much of the heavy lifting underlying the appellate briefs being filed. It is probable that the Convict tremendously overestimated her legal team and wildly underestimated the Victim and his legal counselor.

        2) Lack of Self Control: A doctor once told that drug addicts incur actual brain damage that specifically destroys various centers of self-control. Furthermore, this doctor stated that often when a former drug addict no longer gets a high from the illegal drugs, they will replace that “rush” with interpersonal conflict. He believes they actually “get high” on fighting with others. Thus, it is’s view that Cindy Dunbar just couldn’t help herself. There could have been a 60 Minutes crew filming her, and her lack of self-restraint would have driven her to the same sociopathic behavior.

        If any other readers have thoughts, would love to have them shared with its readers.

Leave a Reply to Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.