Victor Mignogna v. Funimation Productions, LLC, et al. (2019) - Vic's lawsuit against Funimation, VAs, and others, for over a million dollars.

[Fapcop]

So Nick showed Stan Dahlin's affidavit on stream tonight

View attachment 848677

BOOM!

That just sank the good ship “HMS SEXUAL ASSAULT”.

I remember seeing ecstatic posts on both PULL and Twitter about how this incident proved that Vic is a total rapist, how “there are witnesses!” And of course the obligatory “This certainly doesn’t look good for Vic!”.

While I’m sure KickVic’s resident hambeasts and soy suckers will find some other retarded detail to chimp out about, I can’t wait to see the immediate reaction to this!

 

[Spicybeef]

That's my opinion, but the only person whose opinion actually matters is Judge Chupp's. It's not an insane argument to say look, the parties are in agreement as to the material facts about this incident. Without a dispute of material fact, the issue is a matter of law and the judge can decide it.

But that would make it a candidate for summary judgement, and not a TCPA thing, right? For the TCPA phase, isn't the 'fact' of the hair pull considered from the plantiffs perspective?

Also, I have a hunch that Vic's side has more stuff on Marchi that they havent shown yet. Their level of confidence in their case against her seems disproportionately high, considering how much less data we have seen regarding her.

 

[Gehenna]

But that would make it a candidate for summary judgement, and not a TCPA thing, right? For the TCPA phase, isn't the 'fact' of the hair pull considered from the plantiffs perspective?

Also, I have a hunch that Vic's side has more stuff on Marchi that they havent shown yet. Their level of confidence in their case against her seems disproportionately high, considering how much less data we have seen regarding her.

I would feel I'd have to ask why they didn't put SOME of it in the initial complaint, as without presenting it it makes the case weaker regardless.

 

[Far Queue]

One other thing that will likely factor into any TCPA motions is the argument that Vic is a public figure. That seems to have been lost in the shuffle with everything else that's been going on, and while it may not be important in all cases due to the overwhelming amount of evidence, it could certainly be a larger factor in cases like Marchi's where it's less clear.

This is by no means a perfect measurement of notariety, but I decided to look at Google Trends

Vic's previously high point is mid 2011 where he's at an 8. That means the allegations garnered about 12.5 times as much interest in Vic than he'd ever had previously. Furthermore, that was 8 years ago, perhaps the height of his career when FMA:B was still airing. Leading up to February 2019, interest had dropped off quite a bit, typically down to 2.

For comparison here's Bill Cosby:

The high point is in late 2014 shortly after Hannibal Buress's stand up video went viral. But even though that blew up in his face, he was at 50 in August 2012 for some reason, which means that allegations of him being a massive rapist only generated about twice as much interest as that over the same time interval. However, even before that you see plenty of other spikes in the graph. If we could go back further there'd probably be a lot of other points where he pops up as well.

We'd also want to look at the absolute interest or volume as well, and not just the relative difference over time, but I think this shows that if Vic suddenly appears popular, it's largely because he was thrust into that position through the acts of the defendants rather than doing anything else to insert himself into the public sphere.

 

[Kosher Salt]

Also, I have a hunch that Vic's side has more stuff on Marchi that they havent shown yet. Their level of confidence in their case against her seems disproportionately high, considering how much less data we have seen regarding her.

Remember that we've determined that Marchi was the "she devil" user from the secret Discord channel that was used to coordinate all of the efforts to defame Vic and to defend and advance the #KickVic movement. I think it's virtually certain that BHBH has evidence against Jamie Marchi that they haven't released yet. It wouldn't make sense for them to release much now; she hasn't been deposed yet, and if they tip their hand now, it would allow her to come up with a story that doesn't outright contradict their evidence but tries to spin it differently. They'll release the bare minimum that they absolutely have to release, and then, if or when she tries to lie her way through the deposition, they can impeach her testimony by showing contradictory evidence that she didn't realize they had.

 

[NotaLolyer]

TCPA filed and available yet?

 

[Far Queue]

TCPA filed and available yet?

It might be a while. I wonder if Casey stayed up late rewriting large portions of it due to Dahlin's affidavit blowing a massive whole in Monica's main allegation.

So now Monica is down to jelly beans, a consensual office kiss she may have reported on behalf of someone else, and twins who told her for multiple years that they had a bad experience with Vic whenever he was mentioned but only came forward with the story recently in an email that according to her didn't even mention Vic by name which is why she didn't turn it over to BHBH.

And it will all be filed jointly with Ron who's actually a separate defendant in the case, which opens the entire thing for attack on completely separate grounds than the shit-tier content of the motion itself.

 

[Skeptical Idiot]

I think this shows that if Vic suddenly appears popular, it's largely because he was thrust into that position through the acts of the defendants rather than doing anything else to insert himself into the public sphere.

Key point. The Court should disregard articles published after defendants defamed Vic. Defendants shouldn't be able to point to the fact that the media covered the firestorm of innuendo they created as a basis for finding Vic a limited purpose public figure. Hutchinson v. Proxmire, 443 U.S. 111, 135 (1979) (“[T]hose charged with defamation cannot, by their own conduct, create their own defense by making the claimant a public figure.”).

 

[Far Queue]

Key point. The Court should disregard articles published after defendants defamed Vic. Defendants shouldn't be able to point to the fact that the media covered the firestorm of innuendo they created as a basis for finding Vic a limited purpose public figure. Hutchinson v. Proxmire, 443 U.S. 111, 135 (1979) (“[T]hose charged with defamation cannot, by their own conduct, create their own defense by making the claimant a public figure.”).

I forget which article it was, but I hope that they specifically include one of the articles that both Ron and Monica denied having ever seen or read in their deposition. I believe that Nick specifically pointed out one in particular being the only possible basis they might be able to use for claims of dozens or hundreds of women.

Between their TCPA and any bombshells that Nick might drop tonight, this is already shaping up to be another interesting day. I can't wait for the next time someone tells us that the case is going to slow down for a while again.

Edit: From what others are saying about their filing, it appears that I was correct. I take now pride or delight in that fact, but fuck me are these idiot super lawyers exceptional.

 

[Spicybeef]

There is [yet] one more thing I am confused about, and I am hoping some of the more legally astute folks can help me out here.

There are 4 or 5 causes of action: defamation, TI with contracts, TI with prospects, conspiracy, and maybe 1 more that I forget. There are 4 defendants, 1 of which (soon to be 3) have filed a TCPA.

What happens if the judge finds, for example, that there is no prima facie case for TI/contract against funimation, but there is for defamation. Is funimation completely out of the lawsuit, even though there is still a case for defamation to be made? Do ALL of the causes have to be tossed for funi to be out?

I can't imagine all 4 defendants have all committed the same torts in the same proportions, so I am not sure how this all sorts out. Any insight you can share would be appreciated.

 

[BigDuckEnergy]

TCPA filed and available yet?

The assumption is that it was filed slightly too late to be processed yesterday, so it won't be until court opens for business today. That's not for at least an hour from now so the earliest we can expect to see it is an hour and a half or 2 hours from now.

 

[Skeptical Idiot]

Between their TCPA and any bombshells that Nick might drop tonight, this is already shaping up to be another interesting day. I can't wait for the next time someone tells us that the case is going to slow down for a while again.

I'm not so interested in Ron and Monica's TCPA. It'll be fun for laughs, but most of it will be irrelevant. I am extremely interested in seeing Ty's opposition. I listened in to part of the Nick and Ty stream last night and it sounds like there's going to be significant evidence that we haven't seen yet when they drop their opposition. I also liked Ty's confidence. As he pointed out, Ty's got skin in this game. His reputation is at stake unlike anything I or the twitter law brigade might say.

 

[NotaLolyer]

When you’re so bad at law (I was going to say Texas law but cuck lightyear is bad at all law) you don’t understand Texas rules of evidence 103 (d) does not apply to TCPA in a civil suit that hasn’t been to a jury stage yet.

https://twitter.com/greg_doucette/status/1152210144664739843?s=21

T. Greg Doucette on Twitter: "No, it's a motion made under Texas Rule…

archived 19 Jul 2019 14:54:28 UTC

archive.fo

That whole twitter thread in general is a remarkable laugh if you want to read through the direct link of couchette taking out of context clips as a nice GOTCHA to the case. I’d archive it all but then it would have to go in the couchette thread and not in this law thread.

They still haven’t learned that context is what’s going to lose them their TCPAs and this case in the first place.

Edit: Holy fucking shit he doesn’t even understand sarcasm OR how Minnesota shield laws work

https://twitter.com/greg_doucette/status/1152201229105344512?s=21

T. Greg Doucette on Twitter: ""Did you just blow my source?" No, he b…

archived 19 Jul 2019 15:10:17 UTC

archive.fo

I’m going to have to crosspost this shit in the couchette thread now

 

[PrinceofAllCucks]

There is [yet] one more thing I am confused about, and I am hoping some of the more legally astute folks can help me out here.

There are 4 or 5 causes of action: defamation, TI with contracts, TI with prospects, conspiracy, and maybe 1 more that I forget. There are 4 defendants, 1 of which (soon to be 3) have filed a TCPA.

What happens if the judge finds, for example, that there is no prima facie case for TI/contract against funimation, but there is for defamation. Is funimation completely out of the lawsuit, even though there is still a case for defamation to be made? Do ALL of the causes have to be tossed for funi to be out?

I can't imagine all 4 defendants have all committed the same torts in the same proportions, so I am not sure how this all sorts out. Any insight you can share would be appreciated.

Fairly certain that for them to be completely pulled from the suit, all 4 causes of action would have to be unsupported as a prima facie case. If any of the others still stick, then they can still be held accountable for that cause of action, but it will severely diminish the damages that Funimation can be held accountable for.

 

[MelloYello]

On the other hand, I think after Vic's deposition, and this may be an unpopular opinion, I think his deposition testimony may have tanked his case against Jaime Marchi.

Well, Ty said on stream that he still thinks Funimation would have the best chance to prevail on TCPA, that there are more affidavits coming out, and that he has enough evidence for a prima facie case against "Iago".
From that, I think we can infer that some info concerning the civil conspiracy aspects is about to come to light, and that probably doesn't bode well for any of the defendants.

If I were to guess, convention organizers, people they urged to "remember" stuff about Vic, or maybe that mystery source at Funimation coming forward?

 

[Sketcher]

Holy fucking shit he doesn’t even understand...

TBF, I'm reasonably certain that the bounds of what he doesn't understand have few if any limits.

 

[Fapcop]

Nick isn’t “an agent of Ty’s” anymore than the “NYT is an agent of Gloria Steinem”, when she uses a journalist to create good press for a client.

Is Nick a journalist? What he does here certainly fits the legal definition.

 

[JoyfulDarter]

So he's accusing Nick of "leaking" shit via Ty but... none of this stuff is private. They aren't legitimately this retarded, right? It's just building a narrative for super lawyer twitter and the sychophants that have latched onto them?

 

[SargonF00t]

So what happens if the TCPA is defeated and this goes to court, but Moronica haven't got any more funds?

Is there some kind of "throwing themselves at the mercy of the court" here?

 

[JoyfulDarter]

So what happens if the TCPA is defeated and this goes to court, but Moronica haven't got any more funds?

Is there some kind of "throwing themselves at the mercy of the court" here?

I think in terms of money there's speculation Funimation will have to get more involved and that in the case of Riel they're liable for what she said/did?