Andrew has provided a copy of the petition:
View attachment 3096922
What a fat baby Pat is. He also wrongly claimed that Andrew was African-American which is odd because Pat had Andrew's drivers license at this point. I'm sure piggy thought that Andrew wouldn't show and he might get a racist judge that would immediately rule in his favor.
View attachment 3096930
I swear, that petition is the worst bit of writing Fat has ever done! Good grief, this is scribbled on the back of a napkin for your mommy quality writing, not I'm going to hand this in to the judge for a legal proceeding where there are actual standards applied.
He's not writing to his audience. This isn't twitter where he can vague-post a list of potentially awful things for a bunch of likes. This is a court of law. They care about specifics.
-False police reports: case number, what were the reports about? How does this result in Fat being threatened and needing a restraining order?
-Impersonations: are we talking a free speech issue, or is someone trying to get loans in Fat's name? Is this even a criminal thing? Is this something that has in any way damaged Fat? The judge doesn't know.
-Harassment through the mail, threatening voicemails, emails: what did any of those say? Also, that's awful writing. Were only the voicemails threatening? Was only the mail harassment? Fat doesn't know how to structure a list, this is embarrassing. He should have written it: "There have been harassing messages, including threats sent through physical and electronic mail and left on voicemail."
-This group of people have been caught repeatedly on the cameras on our house vandalizing my property. Dates, times, what was the nature of the vandalization? Again, the court cares about specifics, you need to provide them. Also, given that those are criminal actions, the police reports for each of those occasions should be included.
-They harass the local businesses I frequent: How? When? Which ones? Without knowing what Fat considers harassment, the court cannot decide whether this piece of information is useful. Of course, if Fat writes, "They leave 5-star reviews with messages mocking me for the pub where I eat my Thanksgiving dinner," the judge isn't going to think that's a matter he should be bothered dealing with.
-They have threatened to etc. etc... Okay, this is starting to get relevant. But again, specifics are needed. What does Fat consider a threat? "Black Bulls fart in your wife's vagina" isn't going convince the judge that anybody is planning on raping Nikki.
Of course, the bigger problem with that paragraph is that it's about a bunch of unidentified people. It may be relevant as context for why Fat is afraid of Andrew, but he has to draw a connecting line between those acts and Andrew in order for the judge to be able to use any of the information from paragraph one in considering whether to use those claims in deciding to issue an order against Andrew. How does Fat draw that connecting line? "Andrew is the first of them who identified themselves." That's it. He doesn't say that Andrew posts regularly on the OnA forums, he doesn't say that Andrew claimed to be part of the group of harassers. He doesn't say anything to prove his claim. This guy is inept. He makes Russell Greer look like a competent lawyer.
The rest of the second paragraph is just pure garbage writing. He tells the court that Andrew went to the bar to harass him, and then he starts over and tells the same story a second time, without ever clarifying that the two accounts are of the same event. With only this report, the judge couldn't be certain how many times Andrew went to Hooligans. Fat also tells the story wholly out of order. Chronologically, it goes:
-Andrew texts Fat, sending him a copy of his drivers license, threatening to kick his ass
-Fat leaves the bar
-Andrew drives to the bar
-Andrew uses his debit card and identifes himself to people at the bar.
-A police report is made several days later
-Additional texts from Andrew.
What we get is this:
-Andrew identified himself.
-Andrew drove to the bar Fat frequents.
-Andrew had sent harassing messages
-Fat was at home.
-Andrew drove to the bar Fat frequents.
-He told several of Fat's fellow customers that he was there to fight Fat.
-Police were called to make a report several days later
-Andrew sent a text of his license
-Andrew used his debit card at the bar.
This garbage is from a professional writer, people. Fat can't even manage two paragraphs. What a fat loser.