- Joined
- Oct 25, 2024
Alright....why the fuck does it seem like Aaron phoned it in on Nick's HRO but this one for Melton seems pretty well thought out?
This is just a guess but the different form used and different writing style could be a throwback to that time he teased on October 20th about some "great conversations" while he "dropped his children off" about "a lot of clips and a lot of screenshots" that "judges... are going to love to see," combined with that time he teased on October 27th that he got a "call from an attorney" that he "wasn't on the bad guy side of" who needed to schedule for Aaron to be "interviewed" for "two hours" in support of something that "client so-and-so is doing."
Everybody of course took those to mean that his first ex-wife Ashley and her husband had retained an attorney to pursue an HRO against MAPton on behalf of the daughter and that the process got far enough along for the attorney to interview Aaron for purposes of compiling and contextualizing exhibits and perhaps also to prepare an affidavit of his recollections in support of Ashley's petition. After that late stage there has been no movement ever since, leading to some speculation that perhaps some sort of pre-petition demand got Melton to reach some sort of private agreement eliminating the need for a petition, or perhaps the costs involved or low odds of success on the merits got Ashley to just back down altogether.
Since that time, when the aftermath of Aaron's sentencing hearing got him trigger-happy about HRO options again, it makes sense that he would have drafted the petition against Nick on his own using some random online form because he himself said that at least one lawyer he talked to about it months ago advised against it due to the low odds of prevailing, whereas the petition against MAPton may have already been drafted by Ashley or her attorney and was sitting there gathering dust because she didn't move forward with it.
From there Aaron would have just had to ask her or the attorney to send over the unused draft, or perhaps he already would have had it after having been asked for feedback and revisions back in the day, but in either case all he would have to do is pick up where they left off by swapping out his name for Ashley's, deleting any reference to the attorney in the draftsman's statement and signature block, adding a few other tweaks more specific to him being the new petitioner who has more direct history with MAPton than Ashley had, and filing it. At least that way all the hard work back in October wouldn't have to go to waste, but it still will go to waste if he doesn't fucking lawyer up already for whatever good it might do at the hearing. Even if there's no chance of an attorney preventing dismissals on the merits, just the sheer financial risk of Nick's open threats to pursue Rule 9 sanctions, without more, make any thought of a pro se appearance utterly insane at this point.
Here's a few more gems from this morning before the snipe got deleted:



Even though MAPton setting up a streamsnipe for others to make their own commentary stands next to no chance of ever being prosecuted as an "indirect contact" violation, for purposes of the hearing it's at least not a good look to foment or even platform such a vile culture of harassment-by-proxy when it would have been so easy to just lay low for two weeks. Tsk tsk...
Last edited: