Crossover @endomorphosis / Benjamin Jay Barber - Some revenge pornographer from Oregon is gunt guarding.

ChromaQuack said:
Since you are big on transparency maybe you should mention that the state of Oregon only having 31% of the number of public defenders has no bearing on your pile of shit of a case, as you were assigned *multiple* attorneys which you then dismissed when they refused to entertain or argue your point that somehow, copyright law would give you an out from being a revenge pornographer.

You should also mention that once you burned through enough of them, you were told to bring your own attorney or fuck off, hence the pro se filings.

You Legal and Legalese inclined kiwis should look around his filings, you'll have weeks worth of entertainment if you do.
Click to expand...
I am sure he is just one more pro se filing away from complete exoneration.
 
  • Like
  • Winner
Reactions: GreeneCoDeputy and Bush did USS Maine
a mild case of endomorphosis.pngsevere endomorphosis.png
 
  • Like
  • Winner
  • Feels
Reactions: SargonF00t, Dead Wife, A big guy (for you) and 12 others
ChromaQuack said:
Since you are big on transparency maybe you should mention that the state of Oregon only having 31% of the number of public defenders has no bearing on your pile of shit of a case, as you were assigned *multiple* attorneys which you then dismissed when they refused to entertain or argue your point that somehow, copyright law would give you an out from being a revenge pornographer.

You should also mention that once you burned through enough of them, you were told to bring your own attorney or fuck off, hence the pro se filings.

You Legal and Legalese inclined kiwis should look around his filings, you'll have weeks worth of entertainment if you do.
Click to expand...
Actually, this was the arguments made by both the Ex wife, and the state of oregon.

Content based restrictions of speech must be restricted to a historically proscribable category of speech. Intellectual property laws are a historically exempt category of speech when the first amendment was enacted, and the State's attorney compared it to a Unlawful Use of a Motor Vehicle, in making that "stolen property" argument.

Moreover this entire dispute started as a DMCA complaint, which when the ex wife was upset that she lost, tried to "forum shop" to state court when she lost, subsequently in court she said that "its a copyright issue".

1651369433984.png


Slimy Time said:
Imagine being a convicted sex offender. Imagine also being so smug while having this hang over your head.
Click to expand...
It's not a "sex offense" because no "sex" occurred while committing the offense, and it is not in the defined sex offenses, but it appears that you cannot be bothered to think before you speak.
 
  • Lunacy
  • Disagree
  • Mad at the Internet
Reactions: NibbaBibba, AltisticRight, Bush did USS Maine and 1 other person
endomorphosis said:
It's not a "sex offense" because no "sex" occurred while committing the offense, and it is not in the defined sex offenses, but it appears that you cannot be bothered to think before you speak.
Click to expand...
Oh sorry, my mistake. Guess my punishment is...nothing. Yours on the other hand.
hRhcEQy.png
This is your name through the mud for the rest of your life.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: not william stenchever, GreeneCoDeputy and InwardsStink
endomorphosis said:
Do you not understand what a Writ of Habeas Corpus is ?


"The writ of habeas corpus was described in the eighteenth century by William Blackstone as a "great and efficacious writ in all manner of illegal confinement".[3] It is a summons with the force of a court order; it is addressed to the custodian (a prison official, for example) and demands that a prisoner be brought before the court, and that the custodian present proof of authority, allowing the court to determine whether the custodian has lawful authority to detain the prisoner. If the custodian is acting beyond their authority, then the prisoner must be released. Any prisoner, or another person acting on their behalf, may petition the court, or a judge, for a writ of habeas corpus."
Click to expand...

What the fuck are you going on about? You cannot file habeas actions on the behalf of third parties. It's a post conviction post-appeal process (see 2254 and 2255) for prisoners in custody.

endomorphosis said:
Actually, this was the arguments made by both the Ex wife, and the state of oregon.

Content based restrictions of speech must be restricted to a historically proscribable category of speech. Intellectual property laws are a historically exempt category of speech when the first amendment was enacted, and the State's attorney compared it to a Unlawful Use of a Motor Vehicle, in making that "stolen property" argument.

Moreover this entire dispute started as a DMCA complaint, which when the ex wife was upset that she lost, tried to "forum shop" to state court when she lost, subsequently in court she said that "its a copyright issue".
Click to expand...

Why are high school dropout cows so attracted to convoluted frivolous legal arguments? Especially within copyright law. There is zero caselaw to support your dumb assertions. Honestly your fellow autist Acerthorn makes more coherent and well-thought legal arguments and he's been declared by federal courts to be a vexatious litigant that filed a 5 billion dollar lawsuit against the State of Texas.

Your wife isn't a party to your criminal case. Notice the styled actions are "state of X v. you". Her opinion of the law surrounding this is frankly irrelevant.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
  • Agree
Reactions: not william stenchever, GreeneCoDeputy, Johnny Clyde Cash and 2 others
PickwickPub said:
What the fuck are you going on about? You cannot file habeas actions on the behalf of third parties. It's a post conviction post-appeal process (see 2254 and 2255) for prisoners in custody.



Why are high school dropout cows so attracted to convoluted frivolous legal arguments? Especially within copyright law. There is zero caselaw to support your dumb assertions. Honestly your fellow autist Acerthorn makes more coherent and well-thought legal arguments and he's been declared by federal courts to be a vexatious litigant that filed a 5 billion dollar lawsuit against the State of Texas.
Click to expand...

That is the federal habeas statute and procedure, not the state habeas statute and procedure, moreover it was a pre trial habeas corpus.

With regards to the ability to file on behalf of third parties, this is known as "next friend standing" see the following memorandum of law


1651370964901.png
 
  • Dumb
  • Autistic
Reactions: NibbaBibba, Insanely Retarded and Bush did USS Maine
PickwickPub said:
That isn't a memorandum of law. Nowhere in 2241 nor anywhere in federal caselaw does it suggest random third parties such as yourself can start a post conviction process for a gunted sex offender.
Click to expand...
Do you have a problem with reading comprehension, the federal habeas corpus statute has nothing to do with the state habeas statute, moreover there was no conviction at the time it was filed, it was a "pretrial" writ of habeas corpus when Ethan Ralph did not have an attorney appointed to him.
Moreover I'm pretty sure I'm going to trust the GPT-3 over some person who lacks basic reading comprehension
 
  • Mad at the Internet
  • Dumb
Reactions: NibbaBibba and Bush did USS Maine
endomorphosis said:
Oh man, you sure got me there. Its not like being shot in the eye prepared me for this. I better go buy a bunch of pride flags,", simp for Amanda Heard, to virtue signal harder.
Click to expand...
If a doctor told me my eye would look like this after removing the bullet, id tell him to rip it the fuck off and go all-in a pirate costume.

Heck, id pry it off with a fork with no anaesthesia if he was reluctant.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GreeneCoDeputy, Johnny Clyde Cash and HackerX
endomorphosis said:
Oh man, you sure got me there. Its not like being shot in the eye prepared me for this. I better go buy a bunch of pride flags,", simp for Amanda Heard, to virtue signal harder.
Click to expand...
Clearly it hasn't since you are here revealing all the details of your life. Self confirmed cuckold, sex pest, ugly cross eyed appearance, filing frivolous pro se lawsuits that won't anywhere. Belief
endomorphosis said:
Do you have a problem with reading comprehension, the federal habeas corpus statute has nothing to do with the state habeas statute, moreover there was no conviction at the time it was filed, it was a "pretrial" writ of habeas corpus when Ethan Ralph did not have an attorney appointed to him.
Moreover I'm pretty sure I'm going to trust the GPT-3 over some person who lacks basic reading comprehension
Click to expand...
Did you read the part where it told you not to publish revenge pornography?
 
  • Like
  • Winner
Reactions: GreeneCoDeputy, Insanely Retarded and An automatic clown
Slimy Time said:
Clearly it hasn't since you are here revealing all the details of your life. Self confirmed cuckold, sex pest, ugly cross eyed appearance, filing frivolous pro se lawsuits that won't anywhere. Belief

Did you read the part where it told you not to publish revenge pornography?
Click to expand...

tldr they were uploaded in 2011 before it was a law, and my ex wife admitted in court, to committing the same exact crime, so that she could use the new uploads to blackmail me with.

Apparently no i did not, because I uploaded it in 2011 before it was even a law. Subsequently my ex wife sends me a DMCA, and I file counter notices putting it back online. Apparently her attorney told her that it was going to be a law soon, and that they were anticipating using it to use against me. So instead she provides it to some people involved in gamergate indivudals named shrekbane, and some brittish dude whose name i forgot, who then decided to upload it to the internet, and then I was warned by a person named Beardmosexual, that her and her friends were going to try to blackmail me with the porn, to which I assumed meant publicize it to embarrass me (which i dont give a shit about).

where is the edit button on the posts?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • TMI
  • Dumb
  • Informative
Reactions: make_it_so, MightyBiteySnake, Johnny Clyde Cash and 4 others
endomorphosis said:
Do you have a problem with reading comprehension, the federal habeas corpus statute has nothing to do with the state habeas statute, moreover there was no conviction at the time it was filed, it was a "pretrial" writ of habeas corpus when Ethan Ralph did not have an attorney appointed to him.
Moreover I'm pretty sure I'm going to trust the GPT-3 over some person who lacks basic reading comprehension
Click to expand...
I don't know shit about the legal system but I can tell you are a fucking idiot.

1. You're actively poking the cow and getting involved in Ethan Ralph's life.
2. Look at you LMAO what a pathetic loser.
3. 100% I know the answer to my previous question is that your dick is at least as small as Gunt's

Look dude, I don't know shit, but at least I know that I don't know shit. You're out here making a laughing stock of yourself.

endomorphosis said:
where is the edit button on the posts?
Click to expand...
Yours needs to be revoked if it is active.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GreeneCoDeputy, RemoveKebab, AmateurComedicTaxidermist and 3 others
:story: REVENGE PORNOGRAPHERS, UNITE! lmfao it just never fucking ends, hes got that lolcow spiral going on where even if he doesnt do anything more flies come to orbit him.
endomorphosis said:
Are you sure you dont suffer from the dunning-kruger effect?

Dunning–Kruger effect - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
Click to expand...
endomorphosis said:
It's not a "sex offense" because no "sex" occurred while committing the offense, and it is not in the defined sex offenses, but it appears that you cannot be bothered to think before you speak.
Click to expand...
....... the fuck is wrong with you retard? you dont need to fuck someone for it to be sexual in nature.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: not william stenchever, GreeneCoDeputy, Insanely Retarded and 2 others
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back