SchizoNerd420
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2025
I think there is one word for those legal arguments around the timeliness of Abby's declaration, and it's "sloppy." I don't know what he's talking about; he keeps oscillating between it being untimely for purposes of the motion for a preliminary injunction, and it being untimely for purposes of establishing subject-matter jurisdiction. It's important to note that, in the Shepherdson case he cited, the defendants actually moved to dismiss the case. I couldn't find the Koch case (I think he used the wrong citation, or I'm just dumb), but I suspect the defendant in that case probably also moved to dismiss. Destiny has not formally moved to dismiss the case; he's just gesturing at lack of jurisdiction and hoping the court will dismiss the case on its own initiative.
Is he retarded or am I? This last minute evidence bullshit - wasn't Abby included early on in disclosure? Can't they collect evidence until December? @SchizoNerd420 @Napoleon III @GarlicFragment @do ut des
Seeing this lunatic's ramblings from stream in a legal document is surreal
But just to be clear about what Destiny's attorney is actually saying. He is arguing that the text message Abby sent to somebody else about the videos is untimely, not that her declaration is untimely (he suggests they "belatedly" filed the declaration, but I don't think he's actually suggesting that the court strike it as untimely in this motion). He might have a point there. Pxie really should have just submitted the text message with Abby's declaration; I'm not sure why she didn't. But the "new evidence" doesn't really add anything new; it just corroborates Abby's testimony. Destiny's suggestion that Abby's testimony is untimely as to the merits of the case is altogether stupider for reasons I've already outlined. Pxie can still move to amend the complaint to include additional allegations and parties, and discovery is still ongoing. She was under no obligation to attach any affidavits or declarations to her complaint, and Destiny can subpoena Abby if he wants to (apparently he is trying, but has been unable to). It's important to note that Destiny's attorneys never really argued that Abby's declaration should be stricken because it was too late. Unless I'm missing or forgot something, Destiny's attorneys only ever objected to the declaration because it was submitted to them in redacted form, not because it was untimely filed.
This is why it should have been submitted along with her declaration. No doubt Destiny's attorneys would have found some bullshit reason to object to the evidence regardless, but typically you'd file evidence like that along with a declaration "authenticating" it; basically just some statement saying "My name is Abby, and the attached Exhibit X is a true and correct copy of a text message I sent Y." Without that, the "evidence" he's referring to is just some stand-alone text message. Maybe the court will connect the dots, but maybe not."Unauthenticated," you say? I am guessing Abbymc probably still has her verifiable, original Discord logs that can be produced come trial.. Destiny doesn't. Happy to hear the defense shine light on the skepticism that should be shown to unauthenticated Discord logs, though!
Does this really constitute inadmissible hearsay? The evidence is a combination of the screenshot and her statement made under penalty of perjury; it is a firsthand account of what Destiny sent her?
And it's been commented on already in this thread, but I think something is going on with Abby. Maybe it's nothing, but it is odd to me that they didn't have her sign another declaration to accompany that text message (it's not as odd to me that she wouldn't have showed up to the hearing as a witness). The fact that Pxie's attorneys refuse to accept service on her behalf could mean one of three things. (1) Pxie's attorneys and Abby never had an attorney-client relationship (seems unlikely, as both Destiny and his attorney now have suggested that they told them they were representing Abby at some point); (2) Pxie's attorneys represented Abby, but only for the limited purpose of sending Destiny a demand letter; perhaps the scope of their representation does not extend to her capacity as a witness, so they are not authorized to accept service of a subpoena on her behalf (again, why it's stupid that Destiny and the pseudo-lawyers in his audience are dumb for saying there's a conflict of interest; they don't even know the scope of the relationship, which would be necessary to even conduct such an analysis); or (3) they currently represent Abby, but Abby has instructed them not to accept service on her behalf. Attorneys can accept service on behalf of their clients, but they are not required to as far as I know, especially if the client explicitly instructs them not to. It could be as simple as Abby not wanting to get more involved unless her anonymity from the public is secured (a bit weird at this point, but whatever). Or, somebody may have "persuaded" her to step away from the case. That would be unfortunate and, if true, if I was Pxie's attorneys, I'd be making a bigger stink about Darius's communications with her. It was painfully obvious from their conversation that the only reason he reached out to her was to convince her to not testify against Destiny, not because he actually cared about her public image or whatever bullshit he was spewing at the time.