Coverage spread: 3 sources — 3 unrated
Lean ratings via AllSides / Media Bias-Fact-Check. How this works.
Where they agree
- Laura Owens, 35, pleaded guilty to two counts of fraudulent schemes and artifices, one count of perjury, and one count of taking another person’s identity.
- The charges stemmed from her fabricating a pregnancy, including a fake ultrasound, to pursue a paternity/child support claim against former “Bachelor” star Clayton Echard.
- Sentencing had not yet occurred at the time of reporting.
Where they differ
- FOX 10 Phoenix centers the story on attorney Gregg Woodnick’s emotional reaction and his account of Owens targeting multiple victims over the years.
- AZFamily provides the most factual detail on the investigation’s origin, noting a judge referred the case to prosecutors in July 2024 after inconsistent testimony.
- AZFamily is the only outlet to report that Owens faces similar paternity fraud charges in a separate, unrelated case with another victim.
- 12 News offers a bare-bones report listing only the charges, without context on the investigation or victim impact.
Laura Owens, a 35-year-old Arizona woman, pleaded guilty on Friday, Aug. 28, to four felony charges after prosecutors said she faked a pregnancy, fabricated an ultrasound and pregnancy video, and lied under oath in a paternity lawsuit against former “Bachelor” star Clayton Echard. She pleaded guilty to two counts of fraudulent schemes and artifices, one count of perjury, and one count of taking the identity of another; sentencing has been described as coming in October, with Owens facing up to 12.5 years in prison.
What did Owens actually do?
According to court documents cited by AZFamily, Owens filed a paternity lawsuit against Echard seeking child support, claiming he had gotten her pregnant with twins. During hearings in that case, she reportedly made “several inconsistent statements,” which prompted a Superior Court judge to refer the matter to the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office for investigation in July 2024. Investigators say that between May 2023 and June 2024, Owens altered an ultrasound image and fabricated a pregnancy video to support her claims, then lied multiple times while under oath during the paternity proceedings.
Who else was affected?
Echard’s attorney, Gregg Woodnick, said Owens targeted more than one man with similar schemes over the years, faking medical records and conditions in addition to the pregnancies. AZFamily reports Owens faces similar charges in a separate paternity fraud case involving another victim. Woodnick said two victims were present in the Phoenix courtroom when Owens entered her plea, calling the moment emotional for both the victims and himself after “quite a ride” watching the case unfold.
What happens next?
Owens is expected to be sentenced in October, though AZFamily notes the exact date remains unclear. Woodnick said he expects some form of jail time and argued that incarceration would give assurance there won’t be additional victims. The pending second paternity fraud case involving a different alleged victim suggests Owens’ legal troubles are not fully resolved even after this plea.
How is this being covered differently?
FOX 10 Phoenix focuses heavily on the emotional aftermath and reaction from Echard’s attorney, including his description of Owens’ history of deception and his hope for a jail sentence. AZFamily provides the most procedural detail, laying out the timeline of the investigation, the judge’s referral to prosecutors, and the specifics of the fabricated ultrasound and video. 12 News offers only the bare charges without additional context. None of the outlets provide much detail on the second, separate paternity fraud case beyond confirming it exists.
Why this case drew attention
Echard appeared on the 2022 season of “The Bachelor” and became a public figure whose personal life drew scrutiny during the paternity dispute. The case highlights how fabricated medical evidence — altered ultrasounds and staged pregnancy videos — was used to pursue a child support claim, and how a family court judge’s skepticism during a hearing ultimately triggered a criminal fraud investigation.
Sources
Featured photo: Lightandtruth via Wikimedia Commons (CC BY-SA 4.0)