Mouna's Story

Supported by court transcripts, depositions, text messages, audio recordings, and public records.

Death Threats Were Made Against Mouna, Then Attributed to Them

The only documented, timestamped death threats in this case were made against Mouna, not by them. Adriane Norman sent Mouna messages stating she wished Mouna would die, that she would shoot them in the head, and that she would be justified in beheading them. Emily Kothe, a friend of Tasha Kaminsky, joked about killing Mouna in a Facebook conversation, and Tasha did not object. Despite this, Tasha Kaminsky later accused Mouna of being the one who made death threats. Her claim is contradicted by her own sworn testimony, unsupported by any documentary evidence, and uncorroborated by the very person she claims was also threatened. This pattern of reversing victim and offender has a name: DARVO (Deny, Attack, Reverse Victim and Offender). The evidence below shows it in action.

The Actual Threats: Adriane Norman’s Messages and Voicemails

Over the course of April 24 and 25, 2017, Adriane Norman sent Mouna a series of one-directional messages that included statements such as “I wish you would die,” “If you were to come here and hand me a gun it would be extremely hard for me to not go ahead and shoot you in the head,” “I believe you deserve to die,” and “If I were to cut off your head and drag it into the streets for everyone to see, I would be justified in it.”[1] On direct examination at trial, Adriane confirmed the shooting threat under oath.[2] Mouna did not respond to any of these messages.

Adriane also left voicemails in which she explicitly stated her intention to “take down” and destroy Mouna.[3] These voicemails were left during the same period as the text messages containing the death threats. Beyond the threats, Adriane kept a key to Mouna’s house after being asked to return it,[4] entered their home without consent,[5] and later admitted she had no need for the key.[6]

These threats came after weeks in which Adriane made escalating accusations against Mouna while Mouna consistently attempted to de-escalate. The full breakup dynamic is addressed on the rejection and violence page.

These are not ambiguous statements recalled years later. They are documented, timestamped, and in the case of the shooting threat, confirmed under oath.

The “Goodbye Earl” Exchange: Emily Kothe Jokes About Killing Mouna

In a Facebook conversation, Emily Kothe, a friend of Tasha Kaminsky, wrote “I would like to goodbye earl him” and “It’s the only way to take care of things nowadays,” referencing a song about two women killing a man. Tasha did not object or push back.[7]

More revealing than the joke itself is what Tasha did contribute to that conversation. She mocked Mouna’s fear for their life and laughed at the order of protection Mouna had sought, ridiculing the idea that Mouna “says he fears for his life.”[7] This is someone who received documented death threats taking steps to protect themselves, and Tasha’s response was contempt. The mockery of Mouna’s fear, combined with the failure to object to a joke about killing them, shows how seriously Tasha took the threats that had been directed at Mouna.

Tasha’s Kill-Threat Claim: Reversing the Narrative

Despite the threats flowing toward Mouna, Tasha testified at trial that “Nick[8] has threatened to kill me and [Adriane] and other people.”[9] She placed this alleged threat during the period when they were dating,[10] around March 2013.[11] But the text exchanges[12] and emails from that period contain nothing even remotely resembling a threat. The conversation is affectionate in tone. For example, on April 3, 2013, shortly after the period Tasha claims the threat was made, she texted “I’m excited to see you tomorrow.”[13] No threats appear anywhere in the text messages spanning the entire relationship.

Tasha’s Own Sworn Testimony Contradicts Her Claim

Tasha sought an order of protection against Mouna (it was denied). In her petition, she included minute details such as seeing Mouna at a large public parade but was not even sure if Mouna saw her.[14] Yet even though the form asks about threats, she did not mention that Mouna had threatened her in any way,[15] let alone threatened to kill her or Adriane.

At the hearing on November 30, 2017, whose very purpose was to establish that Mouna posed a threat to her safety, Tasha did not articulate any specific threats Mouna had made. Instead, she testified only that she felt threatened.[16] On cross-examination, she confirmed: “Never made any threats to you, correct?” “Correct.”[16]

At the later civil trial, the cross-examiner pressed this point: “when trying to convince a judge to [not] let this person within 500 feet of me, he threatened to kill me four years earlier would be a pretty compelling statement; right?” “Yes, sir.” “Not anywhere in your petition… correct?” “Yes, sir.”[17]

The Nearly Six-Year Delay

The kill-threat claim did not appear in writing until nearly six years after the alleged event. The timeline makes the delay stark:

That is nearly six years of silence, including sworn testimony in which she identified no specific threats, before the claim appeared. The delay, combined with her prior sworn testimony, raises serious questions about whether this claim was fabricated after the fact.

The Fabricated Details

After being sued for lying about the death threats, Tasha offered a dramatically different version of events. She claimed Mouna “made it very clear that [they] knew how to have people killed, that [they] had access to people who would do such a thing, and that [they weren’t] afraid to do it.”[19] This bears no resemblance to her original claim and no evidence supports it.

Adriane Did Not Corroborate the Kill Threat

Adriane Norman was Tasha’s co-defendant in Apperson v. Kaminsky. If there were any person with reason to corroborate the kill-threat claim, it was her. She did not.

When asked directly at trial whether Mouna had ever threatened to kill her, Adriane did not say yes.[20] Instead, she described a vague statement and said she “wasn’t sure” if it was a threat to her life. She testified twice, in deposition and at trial, that Mouna never threatened to kill her.[21] She also confirmed that Tasha had lied about Mouna running her out of town.[22] And Adriane continued dating Mouna and discussed marriage afterward.[23] If someone truly believed their partner had threatened to kill them, continuing the relationship and talking about marriage would be difficult to explain.

When a co-defendant is unwilling to corroborate the central claim, the claim is weak on its face.

Summary

The documented threats in this case run in one direction only: toward Mouna. Adriane Norman made timestamped death threats against Mouna and confirmed the shooting threat under oath. Emily Kothe joked about killing Mouna in a Facebook conversation, and Tasha’s response was not to object but to mock Mouna’s fear for their life. Despite this, it was Tasha Kaminsky who accused Mouna of making death threats. Her claim appeared nearly six years after the alleged event, was preceded by sworn testimony in which she identified no specific threats, and was uncorroborated by her own co-defendant. This is DARVO: the evidence shows threats flowing toward Mouna, but the narrative was reversed to cast Mouna as the aggressor.