TCPA Hearing 9/6/19 - Marchi ran from the Law, TI crumbles, conspiracy still on the table, and collective autism from all sides.

Nuke twitter?

  • Yes

    Votes: 109 19.2%
  • No

    Votes: 3 0.5%
  • Look at those faggot ass clothes! Faggot! Faggot, fag! Fuckin fag, my son's a fag!

    Votes: 323 57.0%
  • Apply the sacred ointment!

    Votes: 132 23.3%

  • Total voters
    567
The Superchats on Nick's next show are gonna be unbearable.

Nick, at 2 AM, drunk and reading like an inner city 9th grader: "Hey Nick my dad just died of a massive hashtag heart attack and the vic case has me so depressed that I might kill myself. can I get a moment of silence for my sister who got brutally raped so I know what A REAL VICTIM is like. Please say this in Macho Man Randy Savage's voice. Hashtag I Stand With Vic."

"Wow. Uh. Sorry to hear that buddy. Mythos Serving says..."

It's gonna be like all of the worst AGDQ donation messages crumpled into a single retard ball.
 
I was at the hearing. I am not KickVic or IStandWithVic, just curious how a case like this plays out. However, feel free not to trust some anonymous newfag (and apparently not the only one joining for this thread).

It'll take time for me to read the thread from the start. Before then, what are the remaining open questions people have as to what happened? I can provide facts and impressions, but would prefer to avoid anything too speculative.
 
This is a pretty entertaining recounting of things...
View attachment 925841

Public figure is interesting. Shouldn't be fatal but if everything gets appealed, that's also up for it.

"Whether an individual is a public figure is a question of law for the court to resolve."  Rosenblatt v. Baer, 383 U.S. 75, 88, 86 S.Ct. 669, 15 L.Ed.2d 597 (1966). Since it's a question of law, the standard on appeal is de novo, i.e. the appeals court substitutes its own judgment for the trial court's.
 
I now worry for Richard Meyer's case.
Meyer will be fine, Waid was dumb enough to not only commit TI, but to brag about it online after the fact and harrass the contract holder with messages trying to get them to say he didn't bully them into breaching contracts.

Meyer will probably lose on the defamation claims though, but in Meyer's case the meat and money was in the TI.
 
What about a bunch of fuckheads on twitter, he needs to please them right?
Please repond, my parents are dying.

For now, it seems those "fuckheads" on twitter were in the right - but then who knows maybe Chupp will go Judge Dredd on the defamation claims and the case goes forward.

PS: Legal lads -> does this mean that Lemoine can finally claim he "won" a TCPA?
 
My first thought is that Chupp can't be arsed with the case (because of the stupid amounts of filings and bickering or whatever) and decided that he didn't want to do what the people of Tarrant County pay him to do.
Can "Borrok'd" be a verb after a certain other judge who pulled this lazy BS? Let's remember, your average Texas Republican functionary isn't much different at the core than your average New York Democrat functionary. It just seems ridiculous a judge can throw out the majority of this before even brought to trial. It's completely different to say "no, they didn't commit TI/defamation" after a trial then to say "I won't even let you try and prove that case".
Chupp put a higher than tcpa requirement on TI by wanting specific numbers for damages.
Wonder why "TI with prospective contracts" even exists then. Seems like a law you can safely ignore in Texas.
 
I am still trying to wrap my head around how the defamation got through but not the TI.
We have a word to describe the phenomenon of seemingly incoherent decisions that require further information to process.

Chupped.

As in: "I got totally chupped when I read things on Twitter that made no sense."
 
For now, it seems those "fuckheads" on twitter were in the right - but then who knows maybe Chupp will go Judge Dredd on the defamation claims and the case goes forward.

PS: Legal lads -> does this mean that Lemoine can finally claim he "won" a TCPA?
He can't really claim he won if the case wasn't dismissed, no.
 
Back