Weeb Wars / AnimeGate / #KickVic / #IStandWithVic / #vickicksback - General Discussion Thread

PrinceofAllCucks said:
Didn't Nick or Ty say that they've only used a few thousand out of the GoFundMe so far? Like, all of the evidence gathering and such, wasn't it paid out of pocket by Vic before they actually touched the warchest?
Click to expand...
Nah, Nick said on stream he has no knowledge of payments to Ty or the billable hours that the GFM has covered.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Exterminatus, Army Burger and PrinceofAllCucks
Jack Atlas said:
For the guys more knowledgeable on the law, as i am not, is this a good/effective move? In either having Vic spend too much money or winning them the lawsuit? Or is this something Ty will slap away easily without it having any effect on Vic or his pocket?
Click to expand...

They will probably get some kind of extension on producing at least some of the stuff Ty is asking for if I were to hazard a guess. But that's all this is.....a delaying tactic. Eventually they are going to have to comply.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: Exterminatus, IAmNotAlpharius, AStupidMonkey and 4 others
Freddy Freaker said:
Crossposting from the Lolcow & Lolcow thread. Motions from Rial and Soye Toye to quash depositions and grant protective orders. What gets me is both mention subpoenas and discovery requests being withdrawn by BHBH on the 5th

EDIT: These fuckers have the balls to basically respond to the deposition request with "FUCK YOU ACCEPT THE INQUISITIONS PUNISHMENT VIC"
Click to expand...
Wait a minute...I thought they relished the chance to go to court...

...Did it finally dawn on them them that they are not taking Vic to court, but that he is taking them to court?
 
  • Like
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Crabbo, not william stenchever, YarrBlueballs and 3 others
LMR365 said:
Who's the furry? Someone, we know from the past? Now I wanna know this Pixel girl. lol, Avatar is making me wanna say she is an artist and furry. And she's terrible at thinking if she believes fake news.
Click to expand...
She? You should know by now to never trust any avatar.

751807

http://archive.fo/Qeq7z
 
  • Horrifying
  • Islamic Content
  • Informative
Reactions: Crabbo, not william stenchever, ConSluttant and 16 others
Immortal Technique said:
The strategy makes sense.........when you're the ones with more money to burn. I doubt the MoRons have more to spend than Vic in this lawsuit. If Ty's firm is spending money fighting motions, the MoRons are spending writing them up.
Click to expand...

The problem with Monica, Toye and Marchi is Vic has, at this moment, $155,000 and rising, to burn through before it hits his savings. The others? Not so much. Every minute of Lawyer time is coming out of their pocket. And with 4 different defendants their interests will start to diverge. So a delay caused by one can start eating into the others legal time and billing just as much as the plaintiff’s. Here’s a fun example, just from today. Monica and Ron’s Attorney has asked for a protective order. Now in the unlikely event that might be granted, it will immediately be challenged by not the Plaintiff, but the “Media” seeking to preserve and report on the public’s interest in the case. The Media being Nick Rekieta. Costs to Nick to file such a challenge? Reasonably minimal. Costs to Defendants to defend against it? Throw another $5 grand on the trash fire. Costs to Plaintiff to sit back and laugh watching this? $0.

What are the chances that Rial, Marchi or Toye could manage to crowdfund any legal funds? What legal and ethical problems arise from Toye and Rial being separate defendants, with separate causes of actions having a common lawyer? Especially given that nobody is going to donate individually to Soyboy? Would there be a problem with them creating a single joint legal defense fund, with no clear path to severability? I don’t believe that under the circumstances the Law Firm could create a single joint IOLTA for them? They have to be treated as individual clients. (Yeah, that whole shared lawyer thing is going to get messy fast, isn’t it?)
 
  • Like
  • Informative
  • Agree
Reactions: Crabbo, Exterminatus, theworstkindofeurofag and 9 others
  • Informative
  • Horrifying
  • Winner
Reactions: Crabbo, not william stenchever, Exterminatus and 5 others
RodgerDodger said:
The problem with Monica, Toye and Marchi is Vic has, at this moment, $155,000 and rising, to burn through before it hits his savings. The others? Not so much. Every minute of Lawyer time is coming out of their pocket. And with 4 different defendants their interests will start to diverge. So a delay caused by one can start eating into the others legal time and billing just as much as the plaintiff’s. Here’s a fun example, just from today. Monica and Ron’s Attorney has asked for a protective order. Now in the unlikely event that might be granted, it will immediately be challenged by not the Plaintiff, but the “Media” seeking to preserve and report on the public’s interest in the case. The Media being Nick Rekieta. Costs to Nick to file such a challenge? Reasonably minimal. Costs to Defendants to defend against it? Throw another $5 grand on the trash fire. Costs to Plaintiff to sit back and laugh watching this? $0.

What are the chances that Rial, Marchi or Toye could manage to crowdfund any legal funds? What legal and ethical problems arise from Toye and Rial being separate defendants, with separate causes of actions having a common lawyer? Especially given that nobody is going to donate individually to Soyboy? Would there be a problem with them creating a single joint legal defense fund, with no clear path to severability? I don’t believe that under the circumstances the Law Firm could create a single joint IOLTA for them? They have to be treated as individual clients. (Yeah, that whole shared lawyer thing is going to get messy fast, isn’t it?)
Click to expand...

Plus, isn't this motion just a standard response to a deposition to limit it's scope? That seems to be the meat-and-potatoes of it, and they're just trying to tack on as much shit to see what they can get away with to help the MoRon case.

Monica doesn't need to worry about expenses though; Soye is going to be the manliest man of men and man-up paying this duel lawyer bill himself.
 
  • DRINK!
  • Optimistic
Reactions: not william stenchever, Questioning_Huggers and Hotfartz :)
LMR365 said:
I checked more of that guy's account and I see the people who follow him online.

View attachment 751819

Both followed by Discord and Mother's Basement. lol

The gatekeepers must stick together if one was to like what the other says in their cult to be true. Shameful!
Click to expand...
you mean to tell me discord follows a furfag? unheard of.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Like
  • Winner
Reactions: DingusKhan, Exterminatus, NewFag7 and 4 others
Facts Over Feels said:
They will probably get some kind of extension on producing at least some of the stuff Ty is asking for if I were to hazard a guess. But that's all this is.....a delaying tactic. Eventually they are going to have to comply.
Click to expand...
you forget the fact that they basically tell the judge he has to defend them.

judges do not like being told what they must do in their own court room.

especially when there is no case law to back it up like with ty beard.

note: there is a difference between citing a case law and saying what a court's obligation is and demanding something. the former is done in a respectful tone to the judge and still respects his authority. the latter will always piss them off. guess what dweebledumb and dweeblebrat went with?
 
  • Like
  • DRINK!
Reactions: Exterminatus, theworstkindofeurofag, AStupidMonkey and 1 other person
boulderblundermatt90 said:
you forget the fact that they basically tell the judge he has to defend them.

judges do not like being told what they must do in their own court room.

especially when there is no case law to back it up like with ty beard.

note: there is a difference between citing a case law and saying what a court's obligation is and demanding something. the former is done in a respectful tone to the judge and still respects his authority. the latter will always piss them off. guess what dweebledumb and dweeblebrat went with?
Click to expand...
So, they've basically stuck their collective dicks into the Hornets nest expecting honey? That's some exceptional logic.
 
  • Optimistic
Reactions: Hotfartz :)
PrinceofAllCucks said:
View attachment 751730
Click to expand...
I don't know if it had been already brought up in this discussion, but the document starts with allegations of Vic's sexual advances on students of Liberty Christian Academy in 1989. As for the evidence, there's a twitter thread of an alleged victim, a post from another alleged victim, and a proof from Vic's resume, that he's worked there.
The second allegation is just implication that he must have been fired due to a sexual misconduct in 1987 with no proofs.

I'm not sure if we can and should archive google documents, but here's the original link:
docs.google.com

Vic Mignogna: Allegations and Supporting or Relevant Information to Those Allegations

Vic Mignogna: Allegations and Supporting or Relevant Information to Those Allegations Table of Contents Allegation of Sexual Advances on a Student and Minor (1989) Allegation of Job Termination Due to Sexually Inappropriate Behavior with Students (1987) Allegation of Sexually Inappropriate B...
docs.google.com docs.google.com

edit: grammar
edit№2: see file attached; surprisingly, they allow you to download it
 

Attachments

Last edited:
  • Like
  • Late
Reactions: LobotomizedFerret, theworstkindofeurofag, Army Burger and 1 other person
LeLLinne said:
As for the evidence, there's a twitter thread of an alleged victim, a post from another alleged victim, and a proof from Vic's resume, that he's worked there.
Click to expand...
Just because you can prove Vic worked there doesn't prove anything
You have to prove you were there and he assaulted you, saying it happened within itself isn't "proof". What buffoons
Essentially all this "proof" is just saying "I was there and it happened to me because I said so"
 
  • Agree
Reactions: madethistocomment, theworstkindofeurofag and Kosher Salt
Dopey Cunt said:
I think it was called SLAAP or some such and I also believe Ty stated that he had a plan for if the defense attempted it themselves.
Click to expand...
Incorrect. SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation) are basically frivolous lawsuits filed to shut down someone's First Amendment rights. Basically sue someone who's saying something you don't like until they're broke and they fold.

For example, if I tweeted that you were, indeed, a dopey cunt, and you sued for me defamation, the case would rejected on anti-SLAPP grounds since I have the right to call you a dopey cunt. If a case is rejected by anti-SLAPP you have to pay my legal fees as well as your own.

If, however, I called you a dopey cunt who rapes little boy, and you sued me, that wouldn't be frivolous since I alleged that you had performed some heinous acts.
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: Crabbo, not william stenchever, YarrBlueballs and 1 other person
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back