In a resounding blow to cancel-culture accusations, a federal judge has stood by a Texas jury’s decision to award more than $3 million to a young man smeared as a racist over what jurors determined was nothing more than immature teenage behavior.
Collin County District Judge Benjamin Smith upheld the $3.2 million verdict in favor of 19-year-old Asher Vann, who sued Summer Smith and attorney Kim Cole after they publicly accused him of orchestrating a racially motivated attack on Smith’s son during a 2021 birthday sleepover.
The claims were explosive. According to a widely circulated fundraiser, the boy was subjected to horrifying abuse. “While at the sleepover several white students shot [Smith’s son] with BB guns. When he was asleep they slapped him, all while calling him racial slurs. And worse yet, they forced [Smith’s son] to drink their urine. [Smith’s son] had been subjected to the unthinkable. He is in need of therapy and is planning to change to a private school,” the fundraising page declared.
That campaign pulled in over $100,000 and ignited outrage online.
But inside the courtroom, the narrative shifted dramatically.
Vann’s lawsuit accused Smith and her attorney of seizing on the moment for maximum gain, stating they had “decided to capitalize on the situation to the maximum extent possible” and “embarked on a campaign, all of a sudden claiming the events were racially motivated and that the boys had invited [Smith’s son] to the party for the purpose of playing out some sadistic racist fantasy.”
Jurors ultimately sided with Vann’s version of events — and rejected the race-driven narrative outright.
According to court filings, the evening unfolded like countless ill-advised teenage gatherings. The boys had pre-planned a prank for the first friend who fell asleep. When Smith’s son dozed off first, they carried out what the lawsuit described as a “childish and immature prank.”
The account in the complaint reads: “Ultimately, [Smith’s son] went to sleep first. The group, as they had planned for whoever fell asleep first, decided to play a childish and immature prank on their friend. In short, the boys filled a cup with apple juice, and (to the extent they could), one or more boys dribbled a bit of urine into the juice. They then woke up their cohort, offered him the icky brew, which he appeared to take a brief sip (swallowing none).”
Distasteful? Certainly. Criminally racist? The jury didn’t think so.
Vann himself addressed the controversy plainly, telling WFAA, “This wasn’t me doing a racist act. This isn’t me hating someone because of their skin color. This was me at an immature stage of my life at a sleepover for my birthday, doing immature dumb things.”
The jury agreed — finding no racial motive behind the conduct and concluding that the public campaign against Vann caused him significant emotional harm and exposed his private information.
In an era where reputations can be torched overnight by viral accusations, this case serves as a sharp reminder: facts still matter in a court of law. And when the smoke cleared in Collin County, a jury of citizens made clear that sensational claims don’t substitute for evidence.
