The Incident
It began with a near-collision in a Dunkin’ Donuts parking lot. It ended with a federal judge sanctioning a TikTok influencer and his lawyer.
Her name was Anglyke Reed (TikTok: @spammanj1). She was 20, having just come from a breakup in Massachusetts that had brought her to Florida. She filmed herself smoking blunts in a car with her “baby daddy”—captioning one clip, in all caps: I LOVE MY BABY DADDY.
On January 26, 2022, she drove her old Mazda into the Dunkin’ Donuts lot on Colonial Boulevard. She was filming herself instead of watching the road.
A black Mercedes G-Wagon was at the drive-through. Inside was Jennifer Couture and her daughter.
As Reed—busy filming herself—barreled toward a crash into the driver’s side where Couture’s daughter sat, Couture hit the gas to evade it. Reed looked up from her phone and saw the G-Wagon speeding up.
She interpreted it as a cut-in. Furious at the woman in the $100,000 car, she gave her the finger.
Couture got out: “You need to relax with your f–n’ little attitude.” Reed kept filming. In a quick reaction that had already saved her daughter from Reed’s reckless driving, Couture reached through the open window and knocked the phone from her hand. No one was hurt.
Reed picked up her phone and told Couture, “You just f–n assaulted me.”
Couture mimicked her voice and went to her car.
Reed got out of the car, still filming, yelling, “is this how the rich act?”
The argument went on. Couture should have driven off. Instead, she rolled down her window.
Reed gave the police four short clips. What they don’t show is the moment before: the near collision, the insult, the danger to a child. They do show that no one was injured. Police reports were filed, but the story didn’t end there.
The Manipulator
Danesh Noshirvan, a TikTok influencer known as “ThatDaneshGuy,” obtained the video. Couture and Danesh had never met. They lived thirteen hundred miles apart.
He edited the Reed video, editing out the clips of Reed’s provocation, to make Couture appear as the sole aggressor.
Danesh’s formula was simple. He had been doing this for several years: Scout videos of arguments, jokes, or unpopular opinions; pick a villain; edit to fit the narrative; insert himself—singing, smirking, talking to the camera; and dox the target.
He claimed Couture tried to run Reed over. He cut the portion of the video that proved Reed was never in danger.
Fabricated Claim – “Assault With a Deadly Weapon”
The original Anglyke Reed video showed something significantly different than the video Danesh presented for his viewers. Danesh chose to cut critical seconds that showed his words, “Hello Jennifer. That sounds like assault with a deadly weapon” was not true. The lie was in what he left out. The missing frames.
Danesh’s video can be compared side by side to the video Reed published. Readers can see that Danesh was not being accurate when he said he believed Couture was trying to hit Reed with her vehicle.
Left: Danesh overlays himself and announces “stitch incoming,” cutting to his commentary.
Right: The original footage continues showing only a car driving past — not toward Reed.
Left: Danesh inserts Couture’s Facebook page and leaves out the key seconds of video.
Right: The unedited video shows Couture inside her car, not using it to advance toward Reed.
Left: Danesh appears saying “that sounds like assault with a deadly weapon,” —an interpretation the original footage does not support.
Right: The original clip shows no attempt to strike anyone — just Couture speaking from her window.
Left: Danesh chooses not to show that Couture was not trying to assault Reed with her car. She backed up to speak with Reed..
Original video: Reed (arm is extended) is not in danger.
Left: Danesh adds commentary suggesting Couture she tried to hit Reed with her car.
Right: The original shows Reed’s hand showing she is far from harm’s way.
The edited TokTok video went viral – seven million views, according to TikTok. The lawsuit alleged he received $5,000 from someone angry at Couture—unrelated to Reed or the Dunkin’ incident—to post about her.
After the post, Couture’s phone flooded with messages. She received more than 700 messages in a few days. Some were real. Most were not. Her inbox was filled with similarly fictitious emails.
Here are a few samples:
“Eat shit and die, you fucking worthless cunt. Literally f-n kill yourself.”
“Dumb ass.”
Hi angry Karen.
“Oh look the Trumper racist is gonna lose her business. That is so awesome. It makes me so incredibly happy.You and all your hate and all your bullshit towards everybody else is different than you comes back to bite you in the ass you nasty little Karen. I hope you lose everything you piece of crap
This one sounds like Danesh:
Hey you dumb fucking cunt. … a video of you attempting to run that person over hitting them.
“I need a blonde whisperer and makeover maven who is a master extension specialist, master certified color correction specialist. I need someone who creates miracles daily and is blessed to be able to share her gifts with me of running over people in parking lots. You stupid dummy, dummy, dummy, dummy.”
Knowing Couture was under seige with calls and texts, Danesh created a fake account, Erica Sabonis, to console her—then mocked her replies on video.
Couture didn’t use TikTok. She wasn’t part of that world. When the attacks began, she deleted the comments.
Danesh messaged her in his own name:
.
He said, “The fun hasn’t even started.” He warned her about his “1.3 million fans.”
The Synthetic Mob
Not all of his followers joined in, not all of them called, but a small, rabid group, some human perhaps, many bots, sent threats by text and email. Here are a few more samples:
An analysis of the comments of the original Danesh TikTok video of Couture and Reed reveal that most of the outrage was artificial: of a sampling of 300 comments, about 75 percent came from clearly fake accounts. Social media users can buy comments and fake followers for a few dollars per thousand.
Danesh apparently created the messages and calls that looked human but weren’t. Danesh made someone a villain. He pressed a button. The bots did the rest.
For days afterward, Danesh kept posting videos and apparently buying comments.
When he discovered the link between Couture and her employer and future husband, Dr. Ralph Garramone, he aimed at his practice next. At Dr. Garramone’s clinic in Fort Myers, the phones started ringing. Calls came to his office.
.
The online reviews came next—one-star ratings from names that didn’t match Garramone’s records—reviewers from out-of-state towns with no online history or social trace, just blank accounts created that week. Each used similar words, as if scripted by one hand—or one machine.
Danesh said to “leave a review if you care about victims.”
It seemed Danesh was behind the bogus reviews, texts and calls with digital voices, mimicking a crowd.
When Garramone replied to a review, denying that any of the reviewers were his patients, Danesh posted a new video, accusing Garramone of slander.
Message Left on Garramone Office Phone: (sounds somewhat like Danesh with a voice alteration device giving him a southern accent. The caller suggests that Garramone pay Danesh money).
“We see you guys like stalking children so I thought I’d bring it to your attention that like 100,000 people are dissatisfied with your behavior on the Internet I would pay the money and apologize because I bet you even after that court case there’s going to be some fucking crazy people out there that just you know over the next 10 years that video is going to be on YouTube if you don’t *fucking apologize. 10 year’s long fucking time for people to go crazy. I’m just saying.
“I’m not threatening anything. I’m just letting you know there are crazy people out there and I myself wouldn’t want to perturb them because well they’re fucking crazy and you know guns are easy to buy in Florida so, you know, do yourselves a favor, get ahead of the curve on this one, bite the bullet, pull the trigger, apologize, do the smart thing.”
The Arrest
Couture’s lawyer, Patrick Trainor, said her arrest was no accident: “This was not a decision based purely on evidence,” he said. “The public outcry, driven by Danesh’s followers, played a significant role.”
By February 20, police, flooded with calls demanding Couture’s arrest, caved to the (manufactured) pressure, per her lawyer. They charged her with burglary, battery, and assault with a deadly weapon, all from the Dunkin’ video.
Danesh’s lawyer, Nick Chiappetta, said it was free speech. That Danesh only reported crimes. That his followers were lawful. It was accountability, not harassment.
Unmentioned was the catalyst for her arrest: several hundred spoofed calls to police, generated by Danesh’s software. At the time, the police did not know the outcry was evidently and largely artificial.
Later, Couture pleaded to misdemeanors—trespass, assault, battery. No one was injured. No weapon existed. Couture got probation.
By July 2022, Danesh allegedly filed an anonymous report with Florida’s child welfare office.
It said Couture had harmed her child, and the child was in danger. In August, state investigators came to her house without warning. They separated her from her child. They questioned them both.
The accusation was cleared right away. But it was the kind of an invasion no one forgets.
And in those weeks, hundreds more calls came in—each anonymous, each the same lie.
It mimicked a mob.
Danesh posted a link to CrimeStoppers. He said people could get paid for her arrest.
Next, Danesh instructed his followers to call Couture’s probation officer, Marc Lubin. The calls, again, likely all or mostly AI-generated, asked Lubin why he did not violate her for supposedly committing other crimes. Voices merely left messages. The effort to violate Couture failed.
To be continued…
Editor’s Note: This investigation was conducted independently under a professional journalism retainer. The reporting concerns ongoing litigation between Jennifer Couture and Danesh Noshirvan (“ThatDaneshGuy”). Every effort has been made to ensure fairness, accuracy, and balance. All parties named in this and forthcoming reports are invited to provide comment.
Any use of artificial intelligence or related technology to harass or intimidate others in response to this reporting may constitute criminal cyberstalking.
Frank Parlato is an investigative journalist, media strategist, publisher, and legal consultant.
