Laura Michelle Owens denies the allegations; hearings in two Arizona cases are moving ahead while a third accuser speaks publicly.
PHOENIX, Ariz. — A televised interview posted Nov. 25 featured an Arizona man saying a woman falsely claimed he fathered her unborn twins in 2016, even as that woman, Laura Michelle Owens, faces expanding felony charges in two separate cases. Owens has pleaded not guilty and disputes the new interviewee’s account.
The public statement arrives during a pivotal pretrial stretch. A judge has set a January 2026 trial date in the first Arizona case, which centers on a former reality television star. A second grand jury indictment, filed Nov. 6, outlines new counts tied to another man who briefly dated Owens. Taken together, the filings signal a broader criminal theory: prosecutors allege a pattern of falsified documents and false statements used to support pregnancy claims. Defense lawyers say Owens will contest the charges and evidence in court.
The man in the Nov. 25 video, identified as Michael Marraccini, said he met Owens in 2016 and that weeks into dating she told him she was pregnant with twins. He said he received images of positive tests and frequent messages about medical procedures, some described as urgent. “It consumed everything,” Marraccini said. He says that after about six months, the pregnancy story ended abruptly. Owens denies his version, saying he is mischaracterizing events and that his allegations are not part of the criminal cases now on file.
In the first Arizona case, prosecutors allege Owens used altered images and a fabricated video to support a 2023 paternity claim against a former Bachelor franchise lead, then lied under oath when pressed by a court. Investigators say lab results undercut the claim, and a judge later found the assertions knowingly false. In the second case unsealed Nov. 6, a Maricopa County grand jury indicted Owens on seven counts, including fraudulent schemes, perjury, forgery, taking the identity of another, and theft by extortion by accusation. Charging documents describe doctored records and identity data allegedly used to pressure a different man; some exhibits remain sealed, and the county has not released full evidence logs.
Records show the investigation grew after the civil paternity suit was dismissed in 2024. Prosecutors with specialized financial-crimes teams then compiled additional witness statements and digital artifacts, including text strings and image files, according to summaries filed with the court. Officials said the Nov. 6 indictment is independent of the earlier case but will be handled by the same office. The county declined to comment on the Nov. 25 interview except to note that the man’s claims are not part of current charges. Defense lawyers argue the public narrative has outpaced the facts and say Owens looks forward to trial.
Next, both Arizona matters move through standard pretrial steps. The first case is scheduled for final trial management conferences in December, with jury selection expected in January barring continuances. The newer indictment will proceed to arraignment and a Rule 16 scheduling order, where deadlines for discovery and expert disclosures are set. Judges could consolidate overlapping issues such as digital forensics or keep the dockets separate to avoid prejudice. Any plea negotiations would occur confidentially but must include notice to listed victims under Arizona law.
Reaction to the Nov. 25 broadcast rippled across social media and court watchers. Marraccini said he came forward after seeing other men speak out, adding that he saved messages and photos from 2016. Two acquaintances from that period recalled him talking about the alleged twin pregnancy and appearing anxious, but said they were never contacted by investigators. A courthouse clerk said phones have been ringing more since the second indictment became public, with callers asking about dates and filing procedures.
As of Wednesday, Owens remained out of custody on existing conditions while awaiting her next appearances. The January 2026 trial date in the earlier case stands as the nearest fixed milestone, with scheduling in the new case to follow in the coming weeks.
Author note: Last updated November 26, 2025.