Former WWE developmental and TNA wrestler Trenesha Biggers, also known as Rhaka Khan, was arrested this morning in New York City for criminal trespass, according to a report from TMZ.
The report states that tenants at the apartment complex informed authorities that Biggers had remained on the property despite being served an eviction order. Photos obtained by TMZ show Biggers being escorted out of the building before being taken to the NYPD’s 17th precinct, where she remains in custody as of Saturday afternoon. The article also notes that there had been previous incidents involving Biggers at the same residence.
It’s important to note that TMZ’s coverage currently features a photo of former WWE developmental talent Linda Miles, who is not Trenesha Biggers.
This marks the latest in a series of legal troubles for Biggers, who last wrestled professionally in 2011.
In October 2023, U.S. District Court Judge Laura Taylor Swain dismissed a second amended lawsuit filed by Biggers in the Southern District of New York. The suit alleged a widespread conspiracy against her related to an ongoing criminal case in Texas. Among the dozens of defendants named in the case were: the State of Texas, El Paso Child Protective Services, the FBI, the NYPD, Las Cruces Police Department, the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, Omega Psi Phi Fraternity, Sigma Phi Epsilon, Suffolk County, The Rock, WWE stars The Miz and Maryse, Impact Wrestling’s Heath Miller, WWE Hall of Famer Nikki Bella, the late Chris Benoit, former WWE star Mark Jindrak, Panda Energy, Home Depot, Florida Championship Wrestling, Steve Keirn, the NWA and its president Billy Corgan, Deep South Wrestling, Bank of America, Michael Jordan, several universities, Jim Cornette, Mick Foley, Con Edison, and others.
The lawsuit alleged that the defendants all “conspired to kidnap plaintiff and her children.” The lawsuit stated,
Plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, brought this action asserting unrelated claims against thousands of Defendants. By order dated August 11, 2023, the Court granted Plaintiff 30 days’ leave to file a second amended complaint because the previously-filed amended complaint did not state a claim.
The Court encouraged Plaintiff to limit her submission to 20 pages and informed her that, should she file a second amended complaint that was similar to her original and amended complaints, naming thousands of Defendants and asserting thousands of allegations, the Court would direct the Clerk of Court to enter judgment in this action. Plaintiff has submitted a 171-page amended pleading that names approximately 500 defendants and asserts thousands of allegations. She also names the undersigned as a Defendant.
As discussed below, the Court (1) construes the second amended complaint as including a motion to recuse the undersigned, and denies the motion; (2) dismisses the second amended complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii); and (3) directs the Clerk of Court to enter judgment in this action.
DISCUSSION
A. Motion to Recuse In the second amended complaint, Plaintiff asserts that she and the undersigned were roommates. Plaintiff raised a similar allegation in a motion to recuse that she filed on July 5, 2023. (ECF 15, at 1) (claiming that Plaintiff and the undersigned “were previously roommates and/or co-workers,” and that the undersigned is aware of this alleged prior relationship).
On July 7, 2023, the Court denied the motion, concluding that “[b]ecause Plaintiff and the undersigned do not have a prior relationship, and no other grounds require the undersigned to recuse herself from this action,” the motion should be denied.
For the same reasons articulated in the Court’s July 7, 2023 order, the Court denies Plaintiff’s motion to recuse the undersigned. B. Order of Dismissal The Court has granted Plaintiff two opportunities to file a pleading that complies with Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. That rule requires that a complaint “contain . . . a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). In the two prior orders granting Plaintiff leave to amend, the Court considered the possibility that a claim arose in New York County and granted her leave to assert such a claim. The Court also warned Plaintiff that should she file a pleading similar to her original and amended complaints, the Court would direct the Clerk of Court to enter judgment.
Plaintiff has now submitted a third pleading that is substantially similar to her first two pleadings. The Court therefore dismisses the second amended complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.
The Court certifies under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. Cf. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962) (holding that an appellant demonstrates good faith when he seeks review of a nonfrivolous issue).
The Court directs the Clerk of Court to enter judgment.
In February 2023, Trenesha Biggers was granted permission to proceed with her lawsuit without having to prepay court fees. According to court records, she was notified of this development by mail in March, at a New York City address she listed in the filing. The lawsuit spans 48 pages and seeks $3 billion in damages. Much of the document consists of an extensive list of defendants — some named multiple times — but none of them were ever officially served.
Texas court records show that Biggers still has an active bench warrant for failing to appear at a criminal trial in December 2022. She was scheduled to face charges of interference with child custody and aggravated kidnapping to facilitate interference. Under Texas law, interference with child custody involves knowingly taking or retaining a child in violation of a court order or custody agreement. It is classified as a state jail felony, carrying a penalty of up to two years in prison.
In her civil complaint, Biggers claimed she was taken to Rikers Island in October 2021 after U.S. Marshals arrested her at her New York City home. She alleged that no substantial evidence was presented at her extradition hearing and that the presiding judge ultimately ordered her release. However, she contends the arrest and proceedings enabled the “kidnapping” of her children, accusing law enforcement agencies of failing to act. Biggers further asserted that “terroristic tactics, actions, and events” surrounding her case left her unable to find employment and destroyed her professional wrestling career.
Biggers was originally indicted on the charges in August 2019 and was later named one of El Paso’s most wanted fugitives after missing her court date. Her failure to appear led to her bail being revoked on at least two occasions. She was eventually arraigned in December 2019. At one point, a bench warrant issued for missing a hearing was rescinded after she posted a $6,000 bond. Biggers also uploaded videos to YouTube about her case, claiming the indictment was “fake,” although those videos were later made private.
Biggers first entered the wrestling spotlight during WWE’s 2005 Diva Search, where she failed to advance past the top 25 contestants but was signed to a developmental contract. She trained with Deep South Wrestling until her release in May 2006. She went on to work in various independent promotions, including a stint in Japan, before joining Impact Wrestling in 2008. She left the company in 2009 and last wrestled in 2011 for the now-defunct Lucha Libre USA, which aired on MTV.
