In the sterile language of the ruling, this was "rampant and willful spoliation of evidence." In real terms: she deleted things she shouldn't have, and the case died because of it. The court found she spent "more than two years" engaged in a pattern of altering, delaying, and destroying evidence that could have hurt her claims.
But in court, Figueroa’s attorney, Francis Flynn, argued that the dynamic between Fletcher and his client was defined by an abuse of power: "He’s charming her, and she’s responding in kind, okay, but because of the disparity of power, that's her boss. That was why there was no consent."
Flynn told the judge that most of the evidence in this case came from Figueroa herself, not MTS or Fletcher, and that she had turned over significant amounts of material - including some harmful to her case. He argued it was Fletcher who failed to turn over all evidence. Judge Braner was not persuaded.
Figueroa also addressed the court directly, saying: "Thank you, your honor, first I’d like to say, respectfully, that I find it disrespectful to invalidate my experience and call abuse of power an affair." She added, “At this point I have complied with discovery, I have sat for more than 25 hours of deposition, produced ten thousand messages between my friends and I, have turned over medical records and personal records, and nothing was deleted with the intent to hide anything. In fact I wish I had some of the missing evidence because I think it could be helpful to my case."
Figueroa also addressed the court directly, saying: "Thank you, your honor, first I’d like to say, respectfully, that I find it disrespectful to invalidate my experience and call abuse of power an affair." She added, “At this point I have complied with discovery, I have sat for more than 25 hours of deposition, produced ten thousand messages between my friends and I, have turned over medical records and personal records, and nothing was deleted with the intent to hide anything. In fact I wish I had some of the missing evidence because I think it could be helpful to my case."
She further recounted that when she asked MTS’s CEO, HR chief, and her manager about reporting sexual harassment, two weeks later they drafted the memo for her termination. "I felt trapped because they didn’t give me any reassurance that I would be protected, and it is with the same courage that I stand before you today. Because this lawsuit was never just about me, it was to ensure what happened to me never happened to anyone else." She concluded, "And if I never get the chance to testify in court, I want to say this: What I understood the day that Nathan Fletcher ended his deposition was that this lawsuit, and the courage that it took to bring it forward, and the women that also spoke up have already helped save many people from experiencing the same abuse of power, and that is something no one can take away."
Dismissal ≠ Exoneration
Here’s the problem - and why this ruling’s impact reaches far beyond San Diego. This was a procedural death, not a factual finding. The judge never ruled on whether Fletcher sexually harassed Figueroa. He simply decided too much evidence was gone for a fair trial. Yet Fletcher and his defenders will present this as vindication, cherry-picking from the decision to claim the allegations were "false" and framing him as the victim of a "mountain of lies." His lawyer is already pushing that message. His wife, labor leader Lorena Gonzalez Fletcher, is echoing it - the same wife who has defended him staunchly despite his admitted "inappropriate" conduct.
And it works. For much of the public, "case dismissed" will register as "case closed."
That's dangerous, because there's no serious dispute about certain basic facts. Fletcher was in a position of power over Figueroa as MTS board chair. According to the allegations in her complaint, he pursued her while married, during the pandemic, while living in a hotel with his family after a house fire, and during the holiday season. She alleged he wrapped his arm around her without consent, commented on her body, stalked her Instagram, and pressed for secret meetings, all while requesting discretion.
Here’s the problem - and why this ruling’s impact reaches far beyond San Diego. This was a procedural death, not a factual finding. The judge never ruled on whether Fletcher sexually harassed Figueroa. He simply decided too much evidence was gone for a fair trial. Yet Fletcher and his defenders will present this as vindication, cherry-picking from the decision to claim the allegations were "false" and framing him as the victim of a "mountain of lies." His lawyer is already pushing that message. His wife, labor leader Lorena Gonzalez Fletcher, is echoing it - the same wife who has defended him staunchly despite his admitted "inappropriate" conduct.
And it works. For much of the public, "case dismissed" will register as "case closed."
That's dangerous, because there's no serious dispute about certain basic facts. Fletcher was in a position of power over Figueroa as MTS board chair. According to the allegations in her complaint, he pursued her while married, during the pandemic, while living in a hotel with his family after a house fire, and during the holiday season. She alleged he wrapped his arm around her without consent, commented on her body, stalked her Instagram, and pressed for secret meetings, all while requesting discretion.
Fletcher’s own legal defense even acknowledged at least two closed-door makeout sessions with Figueroa inside MTS conference rooms, as well as another in the closed stairwell of a hotel while his wife was away - an encounter that allegedly took place after Figueroa had consumed approximately three beers.
And she was not his only accuser. In 2023, a former UCSD student and intern for Fletcher’s nonprofit Three Wise Men Foundation, which focused on veterans issues and was founded by Fletcher, came forward alleging he sexually harassed her at age 19 - describing unwanted touching, explicit late-night texts, and being told to delete their communications.
And she was not his only accuser. In 2023, a former UCSD student and intern for Fletcher’s nonprofit Three Wise Men Foundation, which focused on veterans issues and was founded by Fletcher, came forward alleging he sexually harassed her at age 19 - describing unwanted touching, explicit late-night texts, and being told to delete their communications.
The Lie at the Start
When Fletcher announced his resignation in March 2023, he lied about why, claiming he was stepping down to address PTSD and alcohol issues. That cover story lasted only days before the Figueroa lawsuit became public. Today's ruling allows him to rewrite his fall from power as the story of a falsely accused man - a narrative that erases the original misconduct and the existence of multiple women’s accounts.
It’s a calculated playbook: control the first headline, then hope later developments - no matter how damning - get lost in the fog. By setting the narrative early, Fletcher ensured that some supporters would cling to the “mental health struggle” explanation even after the sexual misconduct allegations emerged. This is the same PR sleight of hand that has been used by countless politicians and corporate leaders to frame themselves as sympathetic figures, rather than people facing serious accountability for abuses of power.
Follow the Money
While Fletcher was publicly portraying himself as a man under siege, behind the scenes he was pouring massive resources into his defense. By early 2025, campaign finance records showed he had spent over $878,000 from his abandoned State Senate campaign to fund his legal fight in this case, draining the account entirely. KPBS later reported his total defense spending from campaign funds exceeded $1.1 million, spread across several high-profile law firms. That money came from political donors - people who likely thought they were helping elect a lawmaker, not bankroll his sexual harassment defense.
While Fletcher was publicly portraying himself as a man under siege, behind the scenes he was pouring massive resources into his defense. By early 2025, campaign finance records showed he had spent over $878,000 from his abandoned State Senate campaign to fund his legal fight in this case, draining the account entirely. KPBS later reported his total defense spending from campaign funds exceeded $1.1 million, spread across several high-profile law firms. That money came from political donors - people who likely thought they were helping elect a lawmaker, not bankroll his sexual harassment defense.
That spending is now at the center of a separate lawsuit filed in February 2025 by San Diego residents Colonel Richard Shigley and Kenneth Moser, alleging Fletcher illegally misused more than $1.1 million in campaign donations for personal legal expenses. The complaint seeks to recover the funds and accuses Fletcher of violating the Political Reform Act. That case is still active.
The Chilling Effect
This case sends a grim message to victims of workplace harassment: if your digital trail isn't perfect, don't bother coming forward. Many survivors delete messages out of shame, fear, or because they shblame themselves. Seeing this dismissal, they’ll conclude that without a spotless record of texts and emails, they’ll be eviscerated in court and their abuser will walk.
It also reinforces the perception that powerful men have access to virtually unlimited resources, legal teams, and media strategies to outlast and outmaneuver their accusers. For ordinary workers, the thought of going up against that machine is daunting enough - add the threat of having their personal communications dissected and weaponized against them, and the deterrent effect becomes overwhelming. This is how systemic silence is maintained: not through explicit gag orders, but by making the price of speaking up unbearably high.
The Reality That Remains
Figueroa's litigation failures handed Fletcher a golden opportunity to spin his story. But the legal technicality that saved him doesn’t erase his admitted misconduct, his abuse of power, or the credible allegations from multiple women. Even his own defense filings confirm physical encounters behind closed doors at MTS and in a hotel stairwell - facts that strip away any illusion of complete vindication.
Nathan Fletcher is still the man who resigned in disgrace. Still the man accused of leveraging his political power for sexual access. Still the man who lied to the public about why he was leaving office. Today’s ruling doesn’t change that. It only closes the courtroom door - and in doing so, it hands a victory to every powerful man hoping that procedure will do what accountability will not.
And Fletcher's legal battles aren’t over. In addition to the campaign fund misuse lawsuit, he still has a pending defamation case against Figueroa, keeping the original allegations - and his own conduct - in the headlines.
In a statement to SanDiegoVille, Figueroa indicated her intention to appeal the decision.
In a statement to SanDiegoVille, Figueroa indicated her intention to appeal the decision.
Originally published on August 8, 2025.
