Listen to the article
A Texas TikTok creator is fighting a $10 million defamation judgment after falsely accusing a professor of orchestrating the notorious University of Idaho student murders.
Ashley Guillard, known online as “Ashley Solves Mysteries,” filed her appeal with the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Thursday, according to court documents. The appeal challenges a February jury decision that found Guillard liable for spreading unfounded claims about University of Idaho history professor Rebecca Scofield.
The case stems from a series of TikTok videos Guillard posted following the November 2022 murders of four University of Idaho students — Kaylee Goncalves, Madison Mogen, Ethan Chapin, and Xana Kernodle. In these videos, Guillard claimed that Scofield had ordered the killings after allegedly having a romantic relationship with one of the victims.
Particularly troubling was Guillard’s methodology — she cited tarot card readings as evidence for her serious accusations. In one social media post, Guillard wrote in all capitals: “REBECCA WAS THE ONE TO INITIATE THE PLAN.” Another post definitively claimed Scofield “is going to prison for the murder of the 4 University of Idaho Students whether you like it or not.”
The videos gained significant traction on TikTok, where misinformation about high-profile cases can quickly reach millions of viewers. This virality prompted Scofield to file a defamation lawsuit in December 2022, expressing fears for her safety and that of her family.
Meanwhile, the actual murder case concluded when Bryan Kohberger pleaded guilty to the killings in July 2025. Authorities never connected Professor Scofield to the crimes in any capacity.
The three-day trial resulted in the jury ordering Guillard to pay Scofield $2.5 million for financial hardships and an additional $7.5 million in punitive damages. Scofield’s attorneys later requested more than $165,000 in legal fees.
Throughout the proceedings, Guillard chose to represent herself, a decision that legal experts typically advise against in complex defamation cases. During the trial, she failed to provide any substantive evidence beyond her tarot readings to support her serious accusations against Scofield.
After the verdict, Guillard compared the legal proceedings to the “Salem Witch trials,” according to TMZ, suggesting she believed herself to be unfairly persecuted. Despite expressing a desire to move on from the case, Guillard told The Guardian, “Unfortunately… I have to appeal.”
While the appeal documents don’t specify Guillard’s legal arguments, she has previously claimed the verdict did not align with the evidence presented at trial.
The case highlights the growing concern about misinformation and conspiracy theories spread through social media platforms. With millions of active users, TikTok has become a powerful tool for spreading information — and misinformation — about current events, including criminal cases.
Legal experts have noted an uptick in defamation cases related to social media posts in recent years. While the First Amendment provides broad protection for speech, it does not protect knowingly false statements that damage someone’s reputation, especially when made with actual malice or reckless disregard for the truth.
For academic institutions like the University of Idaho, the case underscores the vulnerability of faculty members to online harassment and false accusations. Many universities have established protocols to support staff targeted by online misinformation campaigns, though these resources may be insufficient when accusations go viral.
The $10 million judgment represents one of the larger defamation awards in recent years for a case involving social media posts, signaling courts’ increasing willingness to hold content creators accountable for damaging, unfounded claims spread online.
As Guillard’s appeal moves forward, legal observers will be watching closely to see how appellate courts balance free speech protections against the demonstrable harm caused by viral misinformation in the digital age.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
8 Comments
This case raises important questions about the line between free speech and malicious defamation. While everyone is entitled to their opinion, blatantly false accusations can have devastating consequences. I hope the appeals court upholds the original verdict.
This highlights the need for greater digital literacy and fact-checking, especially on social media. Anyone can post unfounded theories, but that doesn’t make them true. I hope this serves as a lesson about the power and responsibility that comes with having a platform.
Well said. Spreading misinformation, even inadvertently, can have severe impacts. This case underscores the importance of verifying claims before amplifying them online.
While the $10 million verdict may seem steep, false accusations of this nature deserve strong consequences. Defamation can ruin lives and reputations. I hope this appeal is rejected and the original judgment is upheld.
Tragic incidents like the University of Idaho murders should be handled with care and respect, not sensationalized for online clout. I’m glad the courts are taking this seriously and pushing back against irresponsible behavior.
Absolutely. Exploiting tragedies for personal gain is reprehensible. The victims and their families deserve dignity and justice, not unsubstantiated conspiracy theories.
This is a troubling case of online misinformation causing real harm. Spreading unsubstantiated claims about a tragic event is irresponsible and can have serious consequences. I hope the appeals process leads to justice being served.
Agreed. Tarot card readings are not credible evidence, especially for such a grave accusation. The courts must uphold the truth and protect the innocent from these false smear campaigns.