Evidence Tampering Exposed in Bryan Flowers Defamation Case

This video presents verifiable YouTube analytics that directly contradict sworn court testimony made by Bryan Flowers, Punnipa Flowers, Nick Dean, and Fernando Bauab in an ongoing defamation lawsuit against a former investor.

In court, all four witnesses claimed they had personally seen the alleged defamatory video while it was publicly listed on YouTube. However, backend analytics — now shown here for the first time — prove that:

- The video was never published publicly or made discoverable

- It shows zero organic impressions from YouTube search or recommendation

- A short burst of fake Russian bot traffic was injected, lasting an average of 6 seconds per view, starting and ending abruptly

- The spike began the same night the defendant met Bryan and Punnipa Flowers at a Thai police station, and vanished just days later

📌 What this video proves:

- The witnesses’ claims to have “seen the video live on YouTube” appear provably false

- There is strong digital evidence of artificial traffic manipulation, not human views

- The timeline suggests intentional setup or tampering, potentially to fabricate a false narrative

- Raises serious questions about evidence integrity, judicial abuse, and coordinated legal retaliation

The data doesn’t lie — but in this case, it appears that the plaintiffs did.

⚠️ Disclaimer:
All analytics presented in this video are from verified YouTube backend data. All claims of perjury and evidence tampering are based on publicly accessible court records and digital timestamps. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.

This video is part of an ongoing investigative series examining misuse of legal systems, weaponized defamation suits, and digital forensic evidence in Thai civil litigation.