#KilledInUSA
Samuel Martínez Roque
[REDACTED FOR PRIVACY]
November 25, 2025
To:
Ramon Ontiveros, also known as "Ramon Ontiveros Medina"
[REDACTED FOR PRIVACY]
ramon.ont4@gmail.com
FLOOR KO LLC, also performed services in El Paso, TX, as "Angel's Carpet," "Mata Instalaciones," "Ramon's Carpet Tile Laminate and Viny"
441 Huerta St, El Paso, TX 79905
(915) 540-6407
floorkomanager@gmail.com
https://www.floorko.com
https://www.facebook.com/floorko.llc
https://www.instagram.com/floorko.llc
Attention Ramon Ontiveros and Floor Ko LLC
This serves as a formal written record regarding the phone call I just received on November 24, 2025 at approximately 11:47 a.m., from a private number. During this call, you spoke while pretending to be someone else. I consider this misrepresentation to be intentional. Before I could begin recording, you ended the call. Accordingly, I am documenting the details here and will submit both this correspondence and the phone records as evidence.
I have stated this to you before, but I am reiterating it now in writing so there is a clear paper trail that can be provided to you, to any legal representatives you have referenced, and to the appropriate authorities:
I am not pretending, participating in, following, or complying with any “clues,” instructions, or manipulative efforts to influence, distort, or stage events in a manner designed, directly or indirectly, to misrepresent facts or to defraud the United States immigration system per your request. In this sense, your continued attempts to initiate contact must stop. I am asking again that you cease all harassment, intimidation, retaliation, and any conduct that could be viewed as tampering with evidence or witnesses.
It is my observation, based on my direct experiences and interactions with you since September 2021, that you act to manipulate, conceal, or distort information whenever it challenges how you want to be perceived publicly. My intention in sending this email is not to humiliate or harass you. In fact, I want to make it clear: I do not attach the significance to you that you appear to assume. My purpose is to formally document your conduct and protect myself if necessary for further legal proceedings.
You previously referenced what you called your “San Diego, CA” and “619” plan. I recognize this as an attempt to construct a coordinated narrative. While the metaphor you used, comparing it to choreographed wrestling timing, may be accurate in describing your intentions, the issue remains that my life is not a staged performance for public consumption. I am the one who has endured the consequences of these actions and these consequences are for life. I refuse to "perform" justice in the way you want me to stage it in front of whatever audience. I was loyal to you, and you retaliated against me without cause, based on a rumor that originated with Alex Armengol.
As I have repeatedly stated since 2024, I have been subjected to a pattern of harassment, retaliation, intimidation, and conduct consistent with labor exploitation and human trafficking related offenses. I state that you withheld my wages for months in 2022 which caused that I starve for 24 consecutive days and over a month over all, which have generated a chronic disease because of all related to that particular episode of abuse, and also several times during 2023 and during the Embassy Hotel project where you claimed you weren't paid and that you paid me half of my wages but refused to give me a total amount for all the time that I worked.
In relation to the wage withholding that I experienced during April-July 2022, just as I informed you in August 2024, I still have a backup of all my notes from work, a copy of the google calendar events including quotes and installations completed, which serve as proof to my claims that there was enough money coming into the company, money that disappear (since my wages were withhold), but you later admitted to have used them to finance the smuggling of several individuals across the United States–Mexico border, including the illegal smuggling of underage Honduran immigrant Jr. Alexander Mejía back into the country in 2022, with assistance from Mexican cartel elements, a fact that later was corroborated by Jr Alexander Mejia in December 2022, during the time we had an issue and after I explained it to you, you called me a "bad person."
On January 18, 2025, you sent me a cease-and-desist letter threatening to file police reports and demand that I was arrested. It has not happened. Why? At that time, I informed you that I was no longer afraid of you. That remains true. If your intent is to threaten me with harm, you have already told me directly that you will "come by my house to shoot me" and that if I talk to the police you were going to kill me. I do not care. Kill me if you have to, but my position has not changed: no threat, harassment, stalking, intimidation, or retaliation will force me to modify, alter or change my version of facts, which has remained consistent since the moment I understood in 2024 that you were behind the actions targeting me, including exploiting personal issues involving my former partner that you took advantage of to conceal your intentions.
Regarding the public posts on my website and social media accounts.
I again clarify: they are not intended to humiliate you, but are my response to your threats and my effort to speak openly about my experiences.
If you believe any of my statements constitute defamation, you are free to pursue civil action. You do not need my address to proceed, based on your own statements, you already obtained it (illegally, in my view, which can be addressed in court).
I will rely on the truth, on my documented evidence—including photographs, written materials, videos, and voice recordings made with my consent as a participant—and on the statements I have already provided to law enforcement.
As you know, truth is an absolute defense to defamation.
“The defendant has the burden of proving the truth of his statements… We now hold that the common-law presumption is invalid.”
— Philadelphia Newspapers v. Hepps, 475 U.S. 767 (1986)
“Truth may not be the subject of either civil or criminal sanctions where discussion of public affairs is involved.”
— Garrison v. Louisiana, 379 U.S. 64 (1964)
“One who publishes a defamatory statement of fact is not subject to liability for defamation if the statement is true.”
— Restatement (Second) of Torts § 581A (1977)
These authorities support the legal principle that truthful statements based on verifiable facts cannot be deemed defamatory, even when the subject finds them uncomfortable.
During today’s call, your final statement to me was: “This is war.” If that statement represents your intent, I am placing you on notice that forced starvation is recognized internationally as a war crime, and I am entitled to seek justice for the 24 consecutive days of forced starvation caused by sustained wage withholding during April-July 2022 I endured.
You do not need to acknowledge or respond to this email. What matters is that you understand the following:
I do not want you contacting me through any channel—formal or informal—including fake or concealed accounts of any kind.
I do not wish to communicate with you
I do not wish to negotiate with you, and
I won't modify, change or amend my version of events, not even if you offer to buy me a new car.
Note that I have made aware contacts from the FBI, ICE and United States' Department of Justice to be witnesses for this correspondence.
This will serve as additional evidence and as a formal final notice for you to cease and desist from harassment, retaliation, intimidation, or any attempt to interfere with my safety, my testimony, or the investigative process. Feel free to use it too if needed because I will.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the statements I have provided are true to the best of my knowledge, supported by evidence, and based on my direct lived experience. No threat, intimidation, or retaliation will alter the truth regarding the actions you have taken or will further take, even though I have to pay with my life.
Samuel Martínez Roque
“The common law of libel took the view that the defendant had the burden of proving the truth of his statements. We now hold that the common-law presumption is invalid.” U.S. Supreme Court — Philadelphia Newspapers v. Hepps, 475 U.S. 767 (1986)
“Truth may not be the subject of either civil or criminal sanctions where discussion of public affairs is involved.” U.S. Supreme Court — Garrison v. Louisiana, 379 U.S. 64 (1964)
“One who publishes a defamatory statement of fact is not subject to liability for defamation if the statement is true.” Restatement (Second) of Torts § 581A (1977)
I state under penalty of perjury that everything I have described is true and supported by verifiable facts, evidence, and lived experience, and no amount of intimidation, threats, or retaliation will change the truth regarding what Human Trafficker Ramon Ontiveros has done to me.
Samuel Martínez Roque