By Richard Luthmann
Richard Luthmann and Michael Volpe tackled the breaking news surrounding TikTok influencer Danesh Noshirvan on The Unknown Podcast.
The discussion, sparked by Frank Parlato’s reporting on The Frank Report, examined allegations that Noshirvan’s social media crusade contributed to the death of Aaron De La Torre, a beloved high school football coach.
“This isn’t just ugly speech,” Luthmann declared during the podcast. “Danesh Noshirvan uses fraudulent AI-driven bots to amplify harassment campaigns, turning his victims’ lives into nightmares.”
A Coach Destroyed by Cancel Culture
Aaron De La Torre, a long-time coach at Denton Ryan High School in Texas, died by suicide after enduring a targeted campaign led by Noshirvan. De La Torre had been falsely accused of assaulting a child at a gas station.
Hickory Creek police closed the case, finding no evidence of wrongdoing, but Noshirvan wasn’t satisfied. He weaponized his TikTok following of over two million to attack De La Torre, calling him a bully and inciting his audience to take action.
“Aaron was a pillar of his community,” a family spokesperson said. “But this online mob, driven by lies, destroyed his reputation and pushed him over the edge.”
Luthmann and Volpe explored the tactics Noshirvan used to escalate the situation.
“This wasn’t speech; it was a coordinated assault,” Luthmann argued. “Hundreds of phone calls and emails flooded the school board. It wasn’t just followers—it was bots. These AI tools simulated public outrage that wasn’t even real.”
Danesh Noshirvan: Social Justice Warrior or Harasser?
Noshirvan has gained notoriety for his controversial online campaigns, including doxxing U.S. Supreme Court justices following the Dobbs v. Jackson decision.
Critics accuse him of crossing ethical and legal boundaries by exposing private individuals and encouraging his followers to attack them.
“Public officials have some protections,” Luthmann said. “Supreme Court justices have security, but what about private citizens like Aaron De La Torre? He had no way to defend himself.”
Michael Volpe noted that while the First Amendment protects free speech, the tactics Noshirvan allegedly employed might go beyond constitutional limits.
“The line gets blurry when bots are involved,” Volpe said. “If he manufactured a fake groundswell of outrage, that’s not free speech—it’s fraud.”
Frank Parlato’s Investigative Bombshell
Parlato’s reporting on The Frank Report hinted at the intricate methods Noshirvan may have used to hone in on De La Torre and others.
“According to TikTok, Danesh has more than two million ‘followers’ – which, like all TikTok accounts, is a combination of human and AI bots,” Parlato wrote.
Some say Danesh leverages AI-driven bots to spam victims with messages, creating the illusion of overwhelming public disapproval. He uses his platform to inflict maximum harm while staying just inside the bounds of plausible deniability.
During the podcast, Luthmann emphasized the difference between reporting on public interest stories and targeting private individuals.
“If De La Torre had been charged with a crime, that’s fair game,” he said. “But he wasn’t. Danesh didn’t care. He made him a target for millions.”
The First Amendment vs. Accountability
While Volpe acknowledged that the First Amendment protects most speech, he questioned whether Noshirvan’s actions crossed into criminality.
“If he used bots to fabricate outrage and orchestrated a campaign to harm De La Torre, that’s beyond speech,” Volpe said. “That’s an attack.”
Luthmann agreed, highlighting the power differential at play.
“This is a private citizen who became a scapegoat for Noshirvan’s online mob,” he said. “Cancel culture has devastating consequences, and it’s time we hold influencers accountable.”
Legal and Cultural Implications
Texas law enforcement has confirmed that Noshirvan is under investigation. While no charges have been filed yet, legal experts suggest the case could set a precedent for holding influencers accountable for the actions of their followers.
“The key question is whether Noshirvan’s conduct created a foreseeable risk of harm,” one attorney familiar with the case explained.
For Luthmann, the case highlights the darker side of social media.
“What happened to De La Torre is tragic,” he said. “This wasn’t just a viral moment—it was a calculated takedown.”
The Court of Public Opinion
Public reaction to Noshirvan’s actions has been swift and divisive. Supporters of De La Torre are demanding justice, while some argue that Noshirvan’s actions fall under free speech protections. On the podcast, Luthmann dismissed Noshirvan’s defenders.
“This isn’t about free speech,” he said. “This is about abuse of power and the weaponization of social media.”
Volpe added, “The First Amendment wasn’t designed to protect coordinated harassment. If Danesh crossed the line, he should face consequences.”
A Call for Change
As the investigation continues, Luthmann stressed the need for stronger legal protections against online harassment of private citizens.
“We can’t keep letting influencers act like vigilantes,” Luthmann said. “There needs to be accountability.”
“This is a wake-up call for platforms like TikTok,” Luthmann concluded. “They have a responsibility to stop this kind of harm before more lives are destroyed.”
The tragic death of Aaron De La Torre has reignited debates about cancel culture, free speech, and the limits of online activism.
While a court of law in the Middle District of Florida will ultimately determine Noshirvan’s fate, Luthmann says the court of public opinion already rendered its verdict, and Aaron De La Torre was dealt a final punishment.
“This can’t keep happening,” Luthmann said. “If we don’t draw the line here, more lives will be ruined needlessly.”
Share this post