Law&Crime Sidebar - Wife Sues TikTok Star Who STOLE Her Husband: Lawsuit

Episode Date: November 11, 2025

A North Carolina woman sued a social media star for "alienation of affection" and "criminal conversation," claiming the influencer broke up her marriage. With TikTok star Brenay Kennard representing herself against Akira Montague, the courtroom saw an intense showdown, shocking testimonies, and a major verdict that rocked the internet. Family law attorney Randy Kessler joins Law&Crime’s Jesse Weber to break down the rare legal claims, the dramatic evidence, and the massive $1.75 million judgment.PLEASE SUPPORT THE SHOW: Ready to give MASA a try? Go to https://masachips.com/SIDEBAR and use code SIDEBAR for 25% off your first order. HOST:Jesse Weber: https://twitter.com/jessecordweberLAW&CRIME SIDEBAR PRODUCTION:YouTube Management - Bobby SzokeVideo Editing - Michael Deininger, Christina O'Shea, Alex Ciccarone, & Jay CruzScript Writing & Producing - Savannah Williamson & Juliana BattagliaGuest Booking - Alyssa Fisher & Diane KayeSocial Media Management - Vanessa BeinSTAY UP-TO-DATE WITH THE LAW&CRIME NETWORK:Watch Law&Crime Network on YouTubeTV: https://bit.ly/3td2e3yWhere To Watch Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3akxLK5Sign Up For Law&Crime's Daily Newsletter: https://bit.ly/LawandCrimeNewsletterRead Fascinating Articles From Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3td2IqoLAW&CRIME NETWORK SOCIAL MEDIA:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandcrime/Twitter: https://twitter.com/LawCrimeNetworkFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/lawandcrimeTwitch: https://www.twitch.tv/lawandcrimenetworkTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@lawandcrimeSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Wondery Plus subscribers can binge all episodes of this Law and Crimes series ad-free right now. Join Wondery Plus in the Wondery app, Apple Podcasts, or Spotify. Your first great love story is free when you sign up for a free 30-day trial at audible.ca slash Wondery. That's audible.com. Can you get your hair out of my nookshake? Pick it up. I'm driving. Boy, when does I ever stop?

Who is she talking to, bro, too? Tim, when is that ever, Tim, please. No, when has it ever stop you from picking your drinks up? A bombshell lawsuit and a bombshell trial, a woman sued a social media star for having an affair with her ex-husband and destroying their marriage. And while not available in every state, North Carolina actually allows people to sue for this and wait to you hear what happened at trial, where this online influencer, who represented herself, questioned the woman suing her. This was an intense showdown that all culminated with a major verdict. Welcome to Sidebar. Presented by Law and Crime, I'm Jesse Weber.

Now, as we're talking about laws that you may not have heard of, here's a fun fact that you might not have heard of. Did you know that chips were cooked in tallow until the 1990s? See, that's when corporations, they switch to the cheap processed seed oils. And I hate seed oils. I am trying to rid my diet of seed oils. Seed oils, they make up what? 20% of the average Americans' calories, and we know they're linked to inflammation and metabolic

issues, but that is why I'm so happy we have our sponsor, Mossa chips. Okay, this is a game changer. These are delicious tortilla chips that are made from just three ingredients. Organic corn, sea salt, and 100% grass-fed beef towel. There are no seed oils ever. They are crunchier, they are tastier than other chips, and you actually feel good after eating them. There's no bloat. There's no sluggishness. I got to tell you, this Habanero flavor right here, I'll be eating these I broke the bag I'm not a good bag opener

but I ripped these open I did it for the other flavors they gave me lime churro these are amazing okay they're amazing so if you're ready to give mossa try

probably shouldn't have eaten as I'm doing the ad read but anyway go to masa chips.com slash sidebar used code sidebar for 25% of your first order if you didn't hear me

because I'm eating that is mossachips.com slash sidebar code sidebar for 25% of your first order, or you can find Masa now at your local Sprout stores, and go now before they're gone, because they're amazing. I saw this story, knew immediately we had to do it here on Sidebar, because look, we cover,

as you know, all different kinds of lawsuits, breach of contract, intentional infliction of emotional distress, assault, battery. I will tell you right now, I feel fairly confident in saying, I don't think we have ever covered a lawsuit like this one before, where you have a very popular TikTok star who is being sued by a woman who claims that she essentially stole her husband from her, and believe it or not, in the law, there is an actual specific claim or claims you can sue for. I remember studying this in law school. I hadn't thought about it since then, and it was only now when I hear about the story

that I remembered it. A few states recognize it. It's called alienation of affection, and you can also sue for something called criminal conversation, which is a claim here, too. It's basically adultery. You can sue when someone has sexual intercourse with your spouse. And we're going to talk about this. This is a real thing.

It is a real thing in the state of North Carolina where this is happening. So back in May of 2024, Akira Montague filed a $3.5 million lawsuit against viral TikTok star Brene Kinnard. She's got over 274,000 followers on Instagram, nearly 3 million on TikTok, talks about her life, get ready with me videos, doing product reviews, makeup lessons, and stuff. so forth. Hey, TikTok. So I have a couple things that I got from a TikTok shop that I want to show you guys. First up, this hydrating tent. If you don't want to wear a foundation, this would be great for you. If you've had this before her, this brand, let me know. And sometimes she

appears with her husband, Tim. Hi, guys. What's up, y'all? Hello? We on here? Hey, guys. It's Bray. It's Tom. And now, Bray and Tim have found themselves in Akira's legal crosshairs. Akira sued for something called alienation of affection. And basically, it's saying, it's alleging, you are responsible for my marriage ending. In North Carolina, which is only one of a few states that recognize this, you have to prove there was a real affection, real love between two people in a marriage. There was clear proof that a third party intentionally interfered with that marriage and that the love, the marriage, the affection, it was destroyed, meaning the love was quote, alienated. Is that easy to prove? Is it easy to prove in this kind of case? And you know

why we're talking about this right now? Because the trial just happened. We actually just got a verdict on how all of this played out. Plus, Brunay represented herself during this trial. And before we even get into the trial, back in September, got to mention this, Bray was charged with cyber stalking after Akira filed a formal complaint against her, accusing the social media star of harassing her online, showing up places, a filing saying, quote, Canard constantly mentions my name, as well as posts my name, and answers questions pertaining to my personal life and pending cases. And there was also an allegation that Brunay violated a restraining order that Akira took out on her. Now, Brunay was released at the time on a $2,500 bond. But when we talk about

bad blood. It should also be noted that just days before Akira filed her lawsuit against Brunay, there was a warrant that was issued for Akira's arrest, that she was purportedly threatening Brune by allegedly saying, I will kill you and I will beat your bleep, and I know where you stay. This is according to the warrant. So in that criminal case, by the way, prosecutors allowed for Akira's prosecution to be deferred in exchange for 12 months of unsupervised probation, and she had to complete anger management classes and have no contact with. Bray. Bad, bad, I know. So let me bring on an attorney who specializes in family law and divorces. Randy, Kessler, Randy, thank you so much for taking the time. Have you ever handled

an alienation of affection case, a criminal conversation case? I mean, is this common? I know it's only in a few states. Have you ever handled anything like this? So in a roundabout way we certainly have. So it's only in five or six states. I practice primarily in Georgia where we don't have it. But we do have jury trials in Georgia. And so a lot of times what happens is my clients come in and say, she called my husband to leave me. I want to bring her in. So we can't sue her in Georgia and in most states, but you can sue the spouse and say, listen, because you did this and you can bring them in as witnesses and you can make the life uncomfortable. But the short answer is no, very rarely, no states really have this since five or six.

And North Carolina being a close state to us, a lot of our clients say, well, what if I just move to North Carolina? You can't do that after the fact. But it's something we think about. and talk about a lot and we get asked the question all the time and my understanding these are kind of laws that originated back in the day when it was you know men still considered women property essentially so it's there's a reason you don't see this across the country but how difficult are these claims to prove so if you look at alienation of affection you have to prove that there was a genuine love affection that there was a deliberate interference by a third party, I guess criminal conversation, you just have to prove what, that there was an affair,

that there was an actual sexual intercourse going on during the course of the marriage. How difficult is this to prove? And what do you do to prove it? How do you prove it? What kind of evidence is introduced in these kinds of cases? So there's a whole bunch of evidence, but I'm going to take a break for one second. We've evolved from fault divorce. You were talking about at the beginning, you know, these laws go way back to where you

have a reason to get a divorce. You had to prove somebody was cheating. And now in almost every state, you can get a divorce because I want a divorce. So it makes it hard to reconcile I want a divorce with pointing the finger at somebody else. So that's just to get to your first point. But as far as how hard is it to prove these cases, it's hard. You mentioned two, right? There's the alienation of affections and the criminal conversation.

As I understand criminal conversation, it's what we call a strict liability case. Like if you prove that it happened, there's liability, even if the person cheating with the spouse didn't know the spouse was married. So that's an interesting one in and of itself. The other one, the bigger one, the one that they're really traveling under, the alienation of affections is my husband loved me because she made him leave me. And it's hard because most people say, your husband left you because he didn't like you or your husband went with somebody else because the relationship wasn't there. It's very hard to blame somebody else as if your spouse was not a willing participant, right? But that's what they have to do. They have to prove that the other person knew there was a marriage, that the marriage still had some viability.

There's still a chance of marriage can last. It doesn't have to be a perfect marriage, but some romance. and that it caused the divorce. And that is a key factor in this case that I want to get into because there's a difference of opinion when you hear what came out in trial. So first of all, how did all this come about? Well, Akira alleges in the complaint that Brunay and Tim started making these social media videos, this content together while he was still married to Akira, like cooking videos,

and that Akira didn't know about any of this or didn't sign off on any of this, even going so far as to allege that Brunay would post pictures of Tim and the children he had with Akira, and she claims they were having an affair that Brne was flaunting this online, that she herself found out about this alleged affair from a video of the two of them together in January of 2024. But when you go to the trial, okay,

there are different versions here of the relationship, the marriage, which becomes very important from a legal point of view. And by the way, a little preview of the trial, we would learn during the trial that Bray and Tim, they apparently dated in high school, that Brne's ex-husband testified that he found out the two were trying to get back together in December of 2023, even heard them being intimate in his house in January of 2024. And the complaint also claims that Akira and Brne at one point were friends that Brne allegedly used information that she learned from Akira about Tim, about their marriage,

that she used that to seduce Tim. Now, before I get into all of that, okay, Randy, First of all, three and a half million dollars that she's suing for in compensatory and punitive damages. And again, we'll talk about the trial and everything that happened there. But three and a half million dollars in compensatory and punitive damages, your thoughts on that number? And how do you prove that? There's a lot there. And you had my mind working. I was listening to everything you were saying, Jesse, and talking about, you know, I started to think, you know, rape is a bad example.

But the defense can be consent. Someone consented, you know, and did she know about it? So there are all these defenses that are whirling through my lawyer brain. But the number, you asked me about the number. I don't know how you get to that number. And, you know, one thing that lawyers always think about is collectability. You know, does it do a lot of good to bring a lawsuit if you can ever collect it? And what's interesting here is this is one of those kind of cases where most clients, most plaintiffs,

don't really care as much about the number as the principal, right? They want to prove to the world that this lady caused my divorce. I'm not a bad wife. I didn't do anything wrong. It's because it's outside person. I think the three million or three point five million, whatever she's seeking, it's got to be more of that. more of a I want the world to know it's so bad that it's millions of dollars so I don't know how else you quantify you know 3.5 was my relationship worth 3.5 million my relationship might have been

worth a hundred million or might have been worth 10 dollars I just don't know but it's also pain and suffering right what you went through yeah but you know in a typical pain and suffering case right you know this we have you know how much is a lost arm worth if you break your leg what's the value of that what about a damaged kidney you can find ways to prove how much that shortens your life the medical bills associated with it, and then you multiply the medical bills by three to get a pain and suffering number. I mean, there's just no real numbers game, no math. It's a matter of, you know, how bad does this make you feel?

And from a lawyer's point of view, it's a straight face test. What can I walk in in front of a jury and say, ladies and gentlemen, the jury, this should be compensated to the tune of, and if I say $100 million, they're going to laugh. If I say $100,000, they're not going to take me seriously. So $3.5 million sounds like it, you know. And when you're talking punitive damages, a way to punish the defendant for really bad egregious acts, you know, you wonder in a case like this, if you're accusing somebody of stealing her husband and cheating, you know, you wonder if a jury would side or a judge would side.

So I mentioned that this trial just happened, and it just concluded at the Durham County Courthouse. And we're going to talk about how this are all resolved. But, Randy, first of all, Bernard is representing or was representing herself. Were you surprised by that? And the one reason, the first thing I thought about, look, if she communicates on social media in a way where she got this following, that's a useful skill in maybe getting a jury on her side, right? It was her personality, the way that she spoke, that got a lot of people to follow her.

I wonder if that's useful, maybe not the worst idea for her to represent herself, even though you and I both know it's more advantageous to have a lawyer represent you. Right. Well, I mean, there's that famous old saying, right? He who represents himself has a fool for a client. because you just don't have the objectivity. You don't really have a chance to read the jury. And she could always testify, and she would testify, of course, on direct examination.

But it's guts, it's gumption to say that I'm smart enough to be able to, you know, commit this whole jury. But maybe that's what's in her mind. And she's got so many followers and people like her and adore her that maybe she thinks that's what's going to happen. The one skill set that most people don't have and most lawyers don't have, and I'm still trying to figure it out, is voir dire, right, jury selection, because you were talking about what's going on in the jury's mind. You don't know with the background of each of these jurors,

or what if one of these jurors sympathizes with one side or the other? What if they were the spouse that was cheated on? Or what if they were the paramour that broke up another marriage? You've really got to figure out who's deciding this case. That's a hard skill to learn, especially for a non-lawyer. No, that's a good point. So, okay, I'm going to get to the verdict, but a few points I want to mention. Now, as I mentioned, in order to prove alienation of affection,

you have to show that there was a genuine, real love in the marriage. So Akira gets on the stand and testifies that there was love between her and Tim, that Tim wrote her love letters daily, that they had matching tattoos, that the relationship continued well past when Tim claimed it ended with the two having sex regularly. And she expressed sadness on the stand that her children lost both of their parents in this whole ordeal, that her kids are on the wait list for therapy because they are, quote, through a lot of behavioral changes. Her mother also testified that Akira and Tim were, quote, inseparable. There were texts that were apparently presented in court where Tim was

planning a surprise birthday party for Akira. But then you have Tim's side of it, okay, and completely different. And Tim was called by Bernay, by the way, again, she was representing herself. He had a completely different view that the two were more like, quote, roommates than deeply in love, even saying he was never in love with Akira, that he bought her cheap engagement ring, that he didn't even get down on one knee when he proposed, that they were essentially in this weird living situation where they were forced to marry in order for them to stay at Tim's parents' place. He testified he never wrote those love notes, even testifying, quote, I can't even recall a time when we held hands. He testified that they fought all the time,

too, that he had a different timeline of when the relationship ended, saying that they separated in 2021, but Akira's mom said they were still a couple. Now, Randy, that's a big aspect here. I mean, it's trying to prove whether or not there was real love and affection in the marriage. But you also wonder, both parties testifying, are they biased in their testimony? Well, you know, maybe she should be a lawyer because that is the exact strategy you have to use. You have to prove that the marriage wasn't viable. There was no more, it was not a real marriage. You didn't break up something because there wasn't anything to break up in that situation. The marriage was not a real marriage. The problem she has,

is that it's not a criminal trial where the you know you have to get all 12 jurors all you have to do is get a compromised verdict and sometimes you're going to have some of the people saying yes some of the people saying no and the jury might say i think three men i think zero and they compromise down to the middle something like that sometimes happens so now here's another part of the story that we haven't mentioned yet okay so brine was apparently staying with akira and tim since december of 2023 something that akira didn't want And although Brunay claims she didn't know that Akira was uncomfortable about this, Akira's grandmother testified that she actually confronted Brne, asked her to leave the home. She claims that Brne responded, saying, Akira, you better come get your grandma because I don't have a problem putting my hands on an old lady. This is, and Kinnard, yeah, again, that is according to the grandmother's testimony. And apparently Tim even corroborated that there were words exchanged but to the, between the two. This is when he testified. Now, this grandmother also testified that she and Brunay actually got into a pushing match. Tim denied that happening. By the way, when talking evidence,

I got to mention this. Apparently, there was footage that was shown to the jury. Footage of Brne twerking on Tim while in a bathroom while he was married to Akira. Bray testified that she was just drunk in those clips. There was another video of Brne buying a pregnancy test after saying, I'm getting down and dirty in the sheets. There was another video where Brune apparently says, I make her very uncomfortable, so seemingly about Akira. There was reportedly a Snapchat story that was presented to where she talked about her legal issues and said that Tim was, quote, worth it.

Randy, in your opinion, how does that affect the case? Oh, boy. All right. So, you know, we've got all the law that we've talked about and what you have to prove and picking a jury. But really, what jury trials come down to, in my experience, is likability, right? You want to tell a story, and you want the jury to like your side, and then to figure out how can we help your side. So if this alienates the jury, if this makes the jury like or just like one side, they're going to be more likely to bend the law or view the law as it helps their viewpoint. They want to help award damages or they want to defend the defendant and not award damages. But those are some unlikely effects.

Those are the kind of things that make people say, really? You couldn't just be normal. You couldn't wait until they were divorced. You couldn't keep your hands off, grandma. I mean, those are the kind of things that might hit home. There might have been someone on the jury that had an experience like that. And it just triggers something that makes them say, I don't like that person. I'm going with this side.

And from a legal point of view, it's trying to show that she deliberately interfered with the marriage, right? Now, Bernay's counter argument was that she was being targeted, that she was being targeted in this lawsuit because of her social media fans. that she wasn't the reason the marriage fell apart. Bray saying to the jury in a closing argument, quote, this was a marriage that had been falling apart for years. And that goes back to what Randy said at the beginning, you know, trying to prove that, hey, I'm not the cause of it. Tim didn't love her.

He was going to break up with her. There was things that were going on between them. You know, I'm not the reason here. Now, it seems that the real fireworks happened in court when Brunay questioned Akira on the stand. And apparently it got really tense, okay, when she questioned her, for example, about how Akira suffered a miscarriage. And Brnay apparently said in court, in response to that, that must have been painful for you, right?

Now, the reporting from the news and observer claims that people in the gallery actually gasped, with even a few jurors looking just shocked that she said that to Akira. And Akira reportedly responded, well, I wouldn't expect you to know since you don't have children. So the judge had to get involved here. Judge Timothy Wilson reportedly had to step in, said to Bray, you don't need to express your sympathy and told Akira and you don't need to make comments. At another point when Brne questioned Akira about her blaming her for struggling in school, right? The allegation was, look what you did. You kind of ruined my life. Akira responded, I take accountability for allowing an intruder into my home. Randy, that is like, you know,

obviously there's bad blood between them and it's very awkward and unusual to have. the defendant herself questioning the plaintiff, particularly the animosity between the two. What'd you make of that? Made for TV, right? I imagine security was doubled when they said, you know, guess who's going to be cross-examining who? Guess who's going to be, you know, getting to ask questions. I mean, it's the, it's almost, you know, it's the, and again, it's a dramatic over example, but it's the rapist getting to question the victim, right?

It's the person who's accused of breaking up the marriage, getting to question the victim of this whole situation. It's just a terrible situation. I'm sure they were thinking things that they probably didn't say. Thank goodness they didn't say them. And I'm sure security was double. But that's, that had to be the highlight of the trial. And if you're going to go watch trial and you get to see something like that, that's the moment you want to see.

That's the pinnacle, but for the verdict, right? And we're going to get to the verdict in a minute. But little side note here, you mentioned security. Tim, he was arrested during the trial outside the courtroom. Yeah, he was charged with carrying a concealed 9mm handgun in the court. courthouse. He was actually released after posting a $2,500 bond. It's just a little side note here in this story. Anyway, okay, now let's talk about the verdict. So after reportedly almost two hours of deliberations, the jury came back with a verdict. And you know who they sided with?

Akira. Yep, they found Brunay liable for breaking up this marriage. And when it came to damages, according to the news and observer, the judge ordered Brne to pay one and a half million dollars, for alienation of affection and $250,000 for criminal conversation. Randy, the suit was for $3.5 million in damages. Even so, that's a pretty hefty payday when you think about that number. Let's start with the number, and then let me ask you about why you think the jury found Brunei liable. Let's start with the number. What did you make of the number?

First of all, it's incredible, right? Anything over a million dollars. There's something magical. You know, every lawyer, when we go to law school, if you could get out of law school and say, I got a verdict for $1 million, that's a win, right? In almost any situation, except for when it's a, you know, class action lawsuit. What I think happened is, and this is just my experience from juries when I pulled the jury and asked them what they did, there was usually a few extremists.

Somebody that said, let's not give anything because you don't get rewarded for stuff like this. It's not a money thing. It's a family thing. Well, here I think, by the way, just I think it was the judge that, you know, determine the damages here, yeah. In that case, then the judge probably had the thing. going on in his mind, which is, you know, is it absolutely nothing? Is it something in the middle?

I think, you know, likeability comes into play when you come up with a number, right? I mean, it's a number that's really a figment of your imagination. There's no real concrete basis for the number. It's got to be some sort of in your mind, okay, I didn't like what she did, but it was, I've seen worse, and I didn't like what he did, but it's worse. It's a compromise verdict, but it certainly sends a message that there was something that need to be compensated, and it's a big number. It sounds like, If I was just deciding who won, plaintiff won by a long shot. And what is it?

The jury didn't believe Bernay's side of the story. She didn't believe they didn't believe Tim. In other words, it seems that they're saying, we talk about it in the law, but for them having this affair, but for them getting together, this marriage would have continued between Akira and Tim? I mean, is that what their conclusion is? And what do you think, why do you think the jury found Bray liable?

I think that's a natural conclusion. Would the marriage have lasted forever? They don't have to decide that. I mean, they looked at the elements of the law, you know, was there this relationship? Did it interfere with the marriage? Was the marriage still at all viable? You know, and then what were the damages? They found that this marriage would have continued.

But for this, it might have ended it for another reason or there might have been another relationship or another paramour, but this certain paramour caused the end of the affections. It alienated the parties from their affections. for each other. They found that the law applied and they applied the facts of the law and found that the plaintiff won. And also I will tell you that Robenetta Jones, who was the attorney for Akira said, told us to local outlet WRAL News, quote, she has just received justice from losing her husband and the father of her children. She's such an unusual case. Again, I wanted to cover it from a legal point of view. This is a sad case. You know, you're

talking about a lot of emotions here, a lot of bad blood, children involved. But yeah, this has been quite the saga, to say the least. Randy Kessler, thank you so much for taking the time. Really appreciate it. My pleasure. And that's all we have for you right now here on Sidebar, everybody. Thank you so much for joining us. And as always, please subscribe on YouTube, Apple Podcast, Spotify, wherever you should get your podcasts. You can follow me on X or Instagram. I'm Jesse Weber. I'll speak to you next time. You can binge all episodes of this law and crime series ad free right now on Wondery Plus.

Join Wondery Plus in the Wondery app, Apple Podcasts, or Spotify.