On November 19, Stanford student King Vanga lost a defamation lawsuit against a family member of two people he killed in a car accident in 2021.

The lawsuit alleged that letters from defendant Priscilla Juarez to Stanford – where Vanga was a student at the time – were defamatory. Juarez sent the letters after the accident that resulted in the deaths of the defendant’s mother, Pamela Juarez, and father-in-law, Jose Juarez.

According to Vanga’s LinkedIn account, he was originally a student at Stanford from 2019 to 2023.

In his complaint, Vanga alleged that Juarez’s letter falsely referred to him as a “murderer,” falsely accused him of violating Stanford’s code of conduct and falsely claimed he was drunk during the accident.

In the decision, the court reasoned that Juarez’s statements calling Vanga a murderer and saying he violated the university’s code of conduct were opinions protected by free speech under the First Amendment. The court also ruled that her claims that Vanga was drunk were not defamatory based on police reports and news reports at the time the email was written.

On June 25, 2021, Vanga was involved in a car accident in Atwater, California, where Jose and Pamela Juarez died. Vanga was charged with two counts of aggravated involuntary manslaughter while intoxicated, resisting a senior officer, attempting to steal a peace officer’s firearm and battery on a peace officer. Vanga pleaded not guilty to these charges.

According to the police officer who attended the accident, Vanga allegedly refused an on-site alcohol test. Still, the officer claimed that Vanga was under the influence. According to the police report, the officer noticed “a strong odor of alcohol emanating from (Vanga’s) breath and body and noted that his eyes were red.”

Media reports that circulated in the days that followed also said that Vanga was under the influence of drugs, alcohol or both, according to law enforcement reports cited in the case.

This prompted Priscilla Juarez and several other family members to write emails and letters to Stanford. In her email, she wrote that she hoped the university would “take the appropriate action and expel this man as an active student of (the) morally respected institution.”

Priscilla Juarez’s attorney, Kenneth White ’91, told The Daily that Priscilla Juarez never received a response to her email from the university. According to White, the university told Vanga that they were investigating the matter, but there was no evidence that any disciplinary sanctions had been taken against him. Vanga is listed in the Stanford directory as a bachelor’s student in computer science and a master’s student in management science and engineering.

The Daily has reached out to the university for comment.

In December 2021, Vanga threatened to sue the Atwater Police Department and the California Highway Patrol for alleged mistreatment and false accusations of driving under the influence. Vanga claimed he was punched twice, kicked and verbally abused by responding officers. Meanwhile, blood samples from the night of the accident showed neither drugs nor alcohol.

Priscilla Juarez found out about the blood tests in March 2023. The criminal complaint was ultimately changed from two counts of aggravated manslaughter under the influence of alcohol to two counts of negligent homicide. His criminal trial has not yet taken place.

The defamation lawsuit arose after Vanga gained access to his Stanford student files in October 2022, where he viewed letters written to the school by Priscilla Juarez and other family members. In 2023, he filed the lawsuit against Priscilla Juarez, stating that he would withdraw the lawsuit if she removed all online statements related to Vanga that she had posted, which may have referred to an X account apparently owned by family members who are vying for justice for Pamela and Jose Juárez. Additionally, the lawsuit said he would withdraw it if Priscilla Juarez agreed to stop making statements about Vanga in the future and refrain from further encouraging his prosecution, according to an article White agreed to wrote on this topic.

In response, White filed an anti-SLAPP motion. Anti-SLAPP motions – Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation – are motions to dismiss a lawsuit that violates a defendant’s right to free speech. Anti-SLAPP motions also entitle the defendant to compensation for their attorneys’ fees if they prevail, to prevent lawsuits from being used to intimidate people.

“There is a trend where rich people think that the poor should only have as much free speech as they can afford,” White said. “And that’s what this case was about for me, and that’s why I’m glad we have a tool like the anti-SLAPP law.”

The case was decided in favor of Priscilla Juarez on November 19th.

The daily has contacted Vanga and his lawyers for comment.

Priscilla Juarez and White are currently in the process of receiving compensation for their legal fees. Vanga has also filed defamation cases against other family members of the deceased in-laws, which have not yet been heard.

“Each case is a little different because each case is based on what the defendant said in his letter (to Stanford),” White said of the other lawsuits Vanga has filed. “But in my opinion (Priscilla Juarez’s family members) should be very optimistic based on this outcome.”