Nick Rekieta's Weeb Wars videos & livestreams - MULTIPLE SLURS

Status
Not open for further replies.
Garm said:
Unless Ron did something stupid.

Follow me here. Ron uses Emoji's as a coping mechanism under the "best" of circumstances. That doesn't seem like a particularly robust coping mechanism. He's been under stress for months, bills piling up, lawyer forces him off Twitter, some internet shock jock calling him a cuck.

We already know he is transcribing YouTube videos for a retalitary lawsuit. Nick claims that he has been texting witnesses to change their stories. Hell, he has probably been shaking down everyone he knows to find someone else to make claims against Vic.

Finally the TCPA hearing comes and Marchi gets off the hook, but Ron, Monica and Funimation are still on for defamation. That claim, the one claim that Lemoine and LawTwitter have told him for months would be dismissed out of hand, is the one damn thing the judge has to think about.

Ron probably flipped his shit and tried sending messages to the judge or Ron took a shit in the judges yard.

Alternative theory: The loan for Chupp's house came from through the Tuttle Group. Maybe some inappropriate background messages were exchanged.
Click to expand...
That wouldn't be something that 'hasn't been tried before' to get a new hearing

That shit is very unlikely in my estimation. Its some weirdo attempt for a new hearing i'm almost certain of it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dean Pentel
Reverend said:
Answer to both questions with one word: No

Outside of finding Chupp was sleeping with the defendants, getting bribes from lemonjello's snack tray, or becoming a regular on Funimations DragonBall:Hedonism 2089 there is nothing that can be done LEGALLY to remove a sitting judge from hearing a case they have already begun working on. Without demonstrating a clear conflict of interest Chupp is on this case till it goes to appeal which we all know it will.
Click to expand...

What if Chupp posts on Law Twitter?
 
HTTP Error 404 said:
What if Chupp posts on Law Twitter?
Click to expand...

He can post all he want on anything he wants except his current and past cases. Anything that he's not attached to is fair game. Anything he does comment on that comes to him he then has to recuse himself from the case as he is 'biased'.

If Chupp for whatever ridiculous reason decides to comment on the case OUTSIDE of his courtroom either side has a case against him for bias.
 
Reverend said:
He can post all he want on anything he wants except his current and past cases. Anything that he's not attached to is fair game. Anything he does comment on that comes to him he then has to recuse himself from the case as he is 'biased'.

If Chupp for whatever ridiculous reason decides to comment on the case OUTSIDE of his courtroom either side has a case against him for bias.
Click to expand...

That's literally how Microsoft survived. The judge that chopped them up gave an interview, and they were able to claim that that meant he was baised. The new judge was cucked and let them get away, and 20 years later we have Google trying to fix elections via manipulation.


But yeah the more I think about it the more I think maybe this is... some way of getting a mistrial. Although, remember Ty already has talked about getting the TCPA declared unconstitutional.

So either some sort of legal setting that he can use that basically states "nope, start over, shits fucked yo" or something that says "The TCPA doesn't apply here because of X, ergo Marchi was never really let go."

Of course, given how Chupp has been, he'd likely state that no, he let her go so even though the TCPA he let her go via isn't there anymore, she's still gone.

Really interested in what we're gonna find out in a few days.
 
  • Agree
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Fougaro, BoomerPrime and GenericReviewerDraco
Allanon said:
Is there anything a person could possibly do that isn't technically a filing that might either;

1 - replace Chupp immediately
2 - force the entire hearing to be redone from scratch and throw out the previous results due to, essentially, mistrial?
Click to expand...

An extraordinary writ like a writ of mandamus. However, that kind of thing has been tried. Incidentally, Chupp himself has been issued a writ of mandamus because of his bizarre choice to allow lawyers to represent a corporate entity in the church case despite the fact they only represented a faction of the disputants and had no actual authority to represent the church corporation. In re Salazar, 315 S.W.3d 279 (2010).

The problem is this kind of decision is interlocutory and generally can't be appealed.

However, the appeals court found that "the trial court clearly abused its discretion." That's ordinarily the standard for an appeal, but an appeals court generally doesn't hear interlocutory appeals until the case is over. However, under extraordinary circumstances, it has the power to issue a writ of mandamus, which is Latin for "you dun fucked up boy."

The court found: "This is an exceptional case justifying mandamus relief because the failure to correct the trial court’s abuse of discretion would 'so skew[] the litigation process that any subsequent remedy by appeal [would be] inadequate.'"

In other words, the appeals court had to step in and fix Chupp's mess because otherwise, the case would have been so completely fucked up there would be no way to un-fuck it by the time it got to them again.

To be fair to Chupp, that case involved absurdly hairy establishment clause issues and more experienced judges than Chupp have fucked up cases like that. They're a nightmare and absolutely no judge wants to hear cases like that.

So there's that, but it certainly has been tried in the past. I wouldn't put much faith in it happening again in this case. This is pretty generic error.

As for things that have never been tried before, they usually haven't because they wouldn't work. When a court describes an argument as "novel" it is not a compliment.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Zero Day Defense, Hotfartz :), AlexJonesGotMePregnant and 6 others
Reverend said:
Without demonstrating a clear conflict of interest Chupp is on this case till it goes to appeal which we all know it will.
Click to expand...

A judge can be recused for bias or even the appearance of impropriety. Such motions are usually not granted by the judge himself, but are sometimes referred to another, and are usually not taken very seriously when they come after an adverse ruling. An adverse ruling isn't bias, nor is the judge being impatient with the attorney evidence of bias.

HTTP Error 404 said:
What if Chupp posts on Law Twitter?
Click to expand...

He'd have dismissed the case because Vic's lawyer, Nick Rekieta, showed up late.
 
  • Feels
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: Kosher Salt, Zurui, Dr. Geronimo and 10 others
Sheryl Nome said:
Yeah this 'Never been tried before' Does not instill faith in me.
Click to expand...
For autistic fortune telling I'm going to roll a d20 to predict the outcome...

Holy shit, I actually rolled a 20. Never get one when I need one.... So based on a random roll from some asshole on the internet who could be lying (I'm not though I expected to roll a 7 or something) this hail mary has a really good chance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zero Day Defense, Balaam, Garm and 1 other person
Probably late here, but shortround would be an excellent candidate to rotate in as regular guest. Particularly on a stream with Josh to hear the "Fucking cops" v "yeah, well here's how that'll play out, son" dynamic
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kosher Salt and indianshedevil
AnOminous said:
An extraordinary writ like a writ of mandamus. However, that kind of thing has been tried. Incidentally, Chupp himself has been issued a writ of mandamus because of his bizarre choice to allow lawyers to represent a corporate entity in the church case despite the fact they only represented a faction of the disputants and had no actual authority to represent the church corporation. In re Salazar, 315 S.W.3d 279 (2010).

The problem is this kind of decision is interlocutory and generally can't be appealed.

However, the appeals court found that "the trial court clearly abused its discretion." That's ordinarily the standard for an appeal, but an appeals court generally doesn't hear interlocutory appeals until the case is over. However, under extraordinary circumstances, it has the power to issue a writ of mandamus, which is Latin for "you dun fucked up boy."

The court found: "This is an exceptional case justifying mandamus relief because the failure to correct the trial court’s abuse of discretion would 'so skew[] the litigation process that any subsequent remedy by appeal [would be] inadequate.'"

In other words, the appeals court had to step in and fix Chupp's mess because otherwise, the case would have been so completely fucked up there would be no way to un-fuck it by the time it got to them again.

To be fair to Chupp, that case involved absurdly hairy establishment clause issues and more experienced judges than Chupp have fucked up cases like that. They're a nightmare and absolutely no judge wants to hear cases like that.

So there's that, but it certainly has been tried in the past. I wouldn't put much faith in it happening again in this case. This is pretty generic error.

As for things that have never been tried before, they usually haven't because they wouldn't work. When a court describes an argument as "novel" it is not a compliment.
Click to expand...

Well, 'probably won't work' might fall in line with the hints. Is there anything that might trigger such a writ in an exceptionally quick way, maybe? The writ wouldn't be a new thing, but those usually take quite some time to get through appeal, I imagine, so something that could immediately trigger such a command might be more appealing and clearly would be something not tried in recent memory.

Just to clarify, I'm not trying to theorycraft on how to 'fix' things, I'm just trying to solve the riddle of what Nick is teasing at before it gets answered on its own.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hotfartz :)
With some thought, I think I've got a possibility for what the 'thing thats never attempted before' is going to be

I figure there's no way Ty's team suddenly found the do-over clause in the law nobody else has found. To keep things in a realm of reality, any such motion here would have to focus in an abnormality particular to Vic's case. What happened here that wouldn't happen in a normal case that could provide a toe in the door for something strange?

The depositions. The defense engaging in discovery prior to filing a TCPA is extremely strange, especially as the purpose of filing a TCPA is saying 'The plaintiff's lawsuit is actually without merit and is intended to chill my speech.'

But engaging in discovery demonstrates that the defense at least thought the lawsuit did have merit at that time, why else would they do it? Yeah. Its very weird. And arguably contravening the purpose of the TCPA which is to end lawsuits quickly with as little money spent as possible when they're frivolous.

I think Ty might be trying to make an argument to strike the TCPA filings in this case entirely because of the fact that the defense engaged in discovery, which would nullify the hearing. This could also possibly drag Marchi back in, because Sam and Funimation both engaged in Vic's depo.

This seems like the kind of novel move that satisfies all the requiements of what Nick was teasing

I don't give it a high percentage of success at all, rather very low, but I think it makes sense.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: AlexJonesGotMePregnant, In Memoriam, Dean Pentel and 9 others
Sheryl Nome said:
With some thought, I think I've got a possibility for what the 'thing thats never attempted before' is going to be

I figure there's no way Ty's team suddenly found the do-over clause in the law nobody else has found. To keep things in a realm of reality, any such motion here would have to focus in an abnormality particular to Vic's case. What happened here that wouldn't happen in a normal case that could provide a toe in the door for something strange?

The depositions. The defense engaging in discovery prior to filing a TCPA is extremely strange, especially as the purpose of filing a TCPA is saying 'The plaintiff's lawsuit is actually without merit and is intended to chill my speech.'

But engaging in discovery demonstrates that the defense at least thought the lawsuit did have merit at that time, why else would they do it? Yeah. Its very weird. And arguably contravening the purpose of the TCPA which is to end lawsuits quickly with as little money spent as possible when they're frivolous.

I think Ty might be trying to make an argument to strike the TCPA filings in this case entirely because of the fact that the defense engaged in discovery, which would nullify the hearing. This could also possibly drag Marchi back in, because Sam and Funimation both engaged in Vic's depo.

This seems like the kind of novel move that satisfies all the requiements of what Nick was teasing

I don't give it a high percentage of success at all, rather very low, but I think it makes sense.
Click to expand...

This does seemingly fit the bid and it also reflects pretty badly on the defense. They played themselves.

Wish this was brought up day of. But that whole thing was a shit show.
 
Sheryl Nome said:
With some thought, I think I've got a possibility for what the 'thing thats never attempted before' is going to be

I figure there's no way Ty's team suddenly found the do-over clause in the law nobody else has found. To keep things in a realm of reality, any such motion here would have to focus in an abnormality particular to Vic's case. What happened here that wouldn't happen in a normal case that could provide a toe in the door for something strange?

The depositions. The defense engaging in discovery prior to filing a TCPA is extremely strange, especially as the purpose of filing a TCPA is saying 'The plaintiff's lawsuit is actually without merit and is intended to chill my speech.'

But engaging in discovery demonstrates that the defense at least thought the lawsuit did have merit at that time, why else would they do it? Yeah. Its very weird. And arguably contravening the purpose of the TCPA which is to end lawsuits quickly with as little money spent as possible when they're frivolous.

I think Ty might be trying to make an argument to strike the TCPA filings in this case entirely because of the fact that the defense engaged in discovery, which would nullify the hearing. This could also possibly drag Marchi back in, because Sam and Funimation both engaged in Vic's depo.

This seems like the kind of novel move that satisfies all the requiements of what Nick was teasing

I don't give it a high percentage of success at all, rather very low, but I think it makes sense.
Click to expand...

This sounds more likely than what I was thinking. That someone at the appeals court watches Nick's stream, researched the hearing and said "we're going to fix this with a sternly worded letter to Chupp."
 
  • Optimistic
Reactions: Dodonpa
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back