Patrick Sean Tomlinson / @stealthygeek / "Torque Wheeler" / @RealAutomanic / Kempesh / Padawan v2.5 - "Conservative" sci-fi author with TDS, armed "drunk with anger management issues" and terminated parental rights, actual tough guy, obese, paid Quasi, paid thousands to be repeatedly unbanned from Twitter

Plaintiff is fat said:
I'm genuinely puzzled at Patrick trying to present hearsay to the court. Offended at him not paying attention to my kiwifarms posts, look what I said the very day he made the petition:

It's so baffled by his stupidity that I searched "hearsay" on his tweets, and found this gem:
View attachment 3095308

he's familiar with the concept of hearsay but somehow he thinks it doesn't apply to him? unfathomably retarded and fat
Click to expand...
No, he's familiar with the word hearsay. His understanding of the concept is what ever he remembers from Law and Order.

Then add that he doesn't think the rules apply to him.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
  • Informative
Reactions: ConSluttant, Sexy Senior Citizen, Dean Pentel and 13 others
Plaintiff is fat said:
he's familiar with the concept of hearsay but somehow he thinks it doesn't apply to him? unfathomably retarded and fat
Click to expand...
"Victim testimony" and "hearsay" are not mutually exclusive. Fat Rick does not know what he is talking about. If victim testimony were statements made by another person unavailable for cross examination, offered for the truth of the matter asserted, it would still be hearsay.

That's the basic 1L definition of hearsay, expressed as "OTOMA."

Offered for the
Truth
Of the
Matter Asserted

So if the victim testimony were "I saw Joe Bloggs and he blurted out 'wow you are such a victim why did Johnny Defendant do that to you?'" yes it would be hearsay. Then there would be a question of whether it fell into the over 9000 exceptions to hearsay.

My example probably would be inadmissible if offered to prove the ultimate fact of Johnny Defendant's guilt.
 
  • Informative
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: UncleTusky, No. 7 cat, ConSluttant and 15 others
JCDenthog said:
It's like Christmas morning. I really didn't expect fatrick to lose. I thought it was rubber stamp affair. Leave it to piggie to fuck up.
Click to expand...
I expected him to lose ultimately, like he'd heard you can always get a TRO which really is nearly always true and was expected in this case even with how bullshit it obviously was. But he missed the rest of the discussion which is where he loses the moment a court actually looks at his claims.

Apparently his $160 got him a fairly immediate hearing. The fact it was 45 minutes is interesting, but may be completely normal in Wisconsin. The kind of orders spouses claiming abuse get often just get done cattle-call style with all the petitioners, often ex parte (without the other side there) swearing out a TRO (or protective order or other name), and it's pretty much he hit you? Yeah. Granted. And they go through hours of these.

Anyway he got a full hearing on this and it went badly enough for him that at the end of it he wasn't just denied his temporary injunctive relief but his whole complaint was chucked into the dustbin after the judge basically called him an idiot. Well, he called both of them idiots, but the one responsible for him having to listen to this bullshit was Fatrick.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
  • Agree
Reactions: Lorgar, ConSluttant, Sexy Senior Citizen and 21 others
the khat quaffer said:
Am I the only one that thinks that whole lizard King bullshit was stupid and gay? It produced nothing except the same copy pasted cease and desist response.

It wasn't fucking funny. You didn't rustle his jimmies.
Click to expand...
We have appointed moderators to police this thread. We do not have humor police, nor are we holding auditions. That said, you’ve been outvoted.
 
  • Like
  • Feels
  • Winner
Reactions: rusty shackleford 1, A Spooky Ghost, ConSluttant and 22 others
SixPennyWalnut said:
It fills me with joy that there will be staff at that courthouse who must think “oh god, not this asshole again, he’s insane” when they see his name anywhere.

It’s madness that the courts time is being wasted with this stuff.
Click to expand...
It fills me with joy that a judge had to have lolcows, ayylawgs and the basics of patposting explained to him on the record, even if those specific terms of art weren't necessarily used.

I overflow with joy that Pat tried to raise the Pepperoni Defense
 
  • Like
  • Agree
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: No. 7 cat, Oliver Onions, Botchy Galoop and 21 others
FinnSven said:
By “friends” do you mean “sad hopeless barflies who basically live there drinking themselves to death, and just sit nodding and agreeing with Patrick because he buys them booze”?

I am sure they don’t listen to a thing he says, just wallow internally in their personal misery and he takes their general silence as awed respect.
Click to expand...
Sounds just like Bam Margera's current crew of 'Friends'.
 
  • Feels
  • Like
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: rusty shackleford 1, Lorgar, Botchy Galoop and 13 others
Sexy Senior Citizen said:
Personally, I want to see Patrick pitted against the legal genius of Russell Greer.
Click to expand...
He could take on the dream team of Russel Greer, Melinda Scott, and Jonathan "snatcher of strings" Yaniv without even breaking a sweat. Well more of a sweat than his usual fat sweats. Did any of them win March Fagness with 1488 votes? No child, none of them can claim this highly prestigious accolade! They have been measured, weighed, found various degrees of fat and stupid, but even putting all their fat, stupid, and poor powers together none of them can manage to owe Quasi a lot of money.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Winner
  • Agree
Reactions: The Org, A Spooky Ghost, ConSluttant and 15 others
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back