The highly publicized state case against Oren and Alon Alexander and their associate Ohad Fisherman has effectively crumbled, revealing troubling foundations rooted not in rigorous investigation, but in political animosity.
Recent developments starkly illustrate the collapse. Defense attorneys have convincingly argued that key evidence was mishandled or deliberately unpreserved by prosecutors. The defense successfully quashed state subpoenas seeking access to iCloud data, underscoring the thinness of the prosecution’s arguments. Alarmingly, prosecutors apparently failed to preserve essential evidence despite clear indicators, leading to accusations of bad faith from defense attorneys.
Moreover, depositions have further eroded prosecutorial credibility. The alleged victim, identified as M.W., gave contradictory testimony about the incident, undermining the core allegations. Further weakening the state's case, defense lawyers highlight the disturbing deletion of group chat communications among the alleged victim and her sisters, spanning from the incident date in 2016 through December 2024. Such substantial gaps cast severe doubts on the reliability of the accusers’ narrative.
Most troublingly, the origins of this prosecution appear deeply problematic. The entire case was triggered by Miami real estate agent Cynthia Golub, a competitor of the men, who referred an article about a civil case to her sister, prosecutor Suzanne Von Paulus. Golub expressed overt hostility toward former President Trump on social media, posting she'd "vote for Joe Biden even if he shot Trump on 5th Avenue." She urged Von Paulus to act against the Alexander brothers and Fisherman, labeling them "scumbags" based solely on civil accusations rather than proven criminal conduct. Von Paulus subsequently forwarded Golub's inflammatory email to Natalie Snyder, Chief of the Special Victims Unit, explicitly stating, "My sister will not stop talking about these 2 brothers who make a practice of dosing and raping young women."
Further complicating matters, Natalie Snyder herself promoted an inflammatory article on her personal Facebook page on October 14th, 2020, describing it as "a good read as we enter into the last days of the election." This article explicitly compared Donald Trump to Adolf Hitler and suggested that Trump could drown a kitten on live TV and nobody would care, or "indeed shoot someone on 5th Avenue, and some people will still consider him the lesser of two evils." Snyder’s endorsement of such extreme rhetoric raises serious questions about her impartiality and objectivity in this politically charged case.
Compounding the issue, it was widely known that the Alexander brothers and Ohad Fisherman were Trump supporters, having attended his election watch party in November 2016, further highlighting potential political biases fueling the prosecution.
This alarming backstory reflects poorly on the justice system’s supposed impartiality. Rather than rigorous legal processes, this case appears driven by gossip, partisan spite, and familial leverage within prosecutorial circles. The implications are clear and concerning: justice has been hijacked by political vengeance, not anchored in fact-driven legal investigation.
The imminent ruling on a motion to dismiss will determine if Florida’s courts will reinforce due process or allow politically tainted motivations to prevail. Given the current state of evidence—or rather, its glaring absence—the only just outcome is to dismiss this politically charged, poorly substantiated case immediately. Justice must remain blind, objective, and evidence-based, rather than swayed by personal political vendettas.
