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

Someone might be able to correct me on this, but I think TI only allows for judgments of actual damages, not exemplary/punitive damages. So TI by itself might not amount to all that much in comparison to the legal fees.
I think he could have claimed his entire income for several years. Since the US is several years behind Japan, they could maybe guess at lost voice acting in the TV series and Movies and that director's job. And also whatever they could have justified from lost cons appearances.

If you can demonstrate malice, you can add punitive damages.
 
Ah, okay, thanks for the info.

Read this,

Nick genesis story incoming:
Vic hasn't gone on Twitter or YouTube this whole time for his own sanity's sake, so I was doing my best to collect evidence for whatever law firm may be up to bat. Fans and friends were sending me screenshots, etc., and I had created a one-pager outlining the case to send to...? At that point, we had hired and fired 2 attorneys who were def not up to the task for various reasons and were actively looking for a new one to stop the bleeding.

I remember when Nick first emailed Vic. Vic forwarded it to me for my take, I looked Nick up and watched some of his content. I found him to be insightful, smart, fair, blunt (bonus points) and funny. I told Vic so and suggested he reach out. Nick was asking him to come on his stream, but we felt that keeping a low profile was best. Vic replied declining the invitation, but agreed to speak to Nick by phone.

Nick, upon speaking to Vic and hearing of the troubles finding the right counsel, referred Vic to Ty. Nick and Vic have been friends for months and have spoken often even though they'd never physically met until this weekend - can confirm.

Nick does Nick. Vic is so grateful for everything Nick has done (as am I) even if Nick's style of coming at the situation is very different than Vic's. When someone throws you a life-ring when you're drowning, you say thank you rather than complain about it's size/color.
 
Some context please?
The appellate-level decisions that should be guidebook that lower courts should be following.

In Van Der Linden v. Khan, it was established (in the terms of anti-SLAPP) that if the plaintiff and defendant disagreed on events, and if the events were known only to those two, then the defendant would be held to have actual malice.

For example, Monica said Vic tried to rape her in his hotel room. Vic said that it never happened. Since the TCPA rules evidence in the plaintiff's favor, it would mean Vic's story is held true, and Monica's is believed to be false. And, since only Monica and Vic knew what happened, and Monica is held to be false (in the context of the TCPA), she knowingly told a lie, which is actual malice.

Also I think Van Der Linden v. Khan dismissed a TI-EC case, but that was because the plaintiff couldn't prove the existence of a contract... which Vic can.
 
Do you have a database of literally everything just so you can helpfully whip it out when someone's curious about something? That post is almost literally halfway through a 3072-page thread.
He's singlehandedly destroyed what little credibility Manjawllo has had since day one. I think he just enjoys this shit.
 
He's singlehandedly destroyed what little credibility Manjawllo has had since day one. I think he just enjoys this shit.
I think, considering how quickly he shut all Manjaw's claims down by finding evidence and how quickly he found that post 1500 pages ago to reply to me, that he may actually be the internet.
 
The appellate-level decisions that should be guidebook that lower courts should be following.

In Van Der Linden v. Khan, it was established (in the terms of anti-SLAPP) that if the plaintiff and defendant disagreed on events, and if the events were known only to those two, then the defendant would be held to have actual malice.

For example, Monica said Vic tried to rape her in his hotel room. Vic said that it never happened. Since the TCPA rules evidence in the plaintiff's favor, it would mean Vic's story is held true, and Monica's is believed to be false. And, since only Monica and Vic knew what happened, and Monica is held to be false (in the context of the TCPA), she knowingly told a lie, which is actual malice.

Also I think Van Der Linden v. Khan dismissed a TI-EC case, but that was because the plaintiff couldn't prove the existence of a contract... which Vic can.
reminder that monica didnt just say vic tried to rape her, that she believes ALL the stories about vic because it happened to HER. Its not monica story that started it all but she came in with her story to also "confirm" all the other rumours. This is even worse than just claiming vic raped her, shes claiming not only did he attempt to rape her but he also did everything else that was being thrown around at the time.
 
reminder that monica didnt just say vic tried to rape her, that she believes ALL the stories about vic because it happened to HER. Its not monica story that started it all but she came in with her story to also "confirm" all the other rumours. This is even worse than just claiming vic raped her, shes claiming not only did he attempt to rape her but he also did everything else that was being thrown around at the time.
Right, and I agree. The question I was answering was in relation to Van Der Linden v Khan, and how Chupp ignored it.
 
This sounds familiar. (Fucking upload is busted.)

Chupp presiding.

.
On April 11, 2019, the trial court held a hearing on BMIII’s Motion to Deposit
Funds with the Court. R.437 (Tab 10: April 11, 2019 Transcript). At that hearing,
the trial court refused to let Antero’s counsel argue why the suspended and disputed
royalty proceeds could not be deposited into the registry of the court under
established Texas precedents. See R.454-55 (Tab 10: April 11, 2019 Transcript at
18:24-19:3) (“MR. POWERS: Your Honor, can I be heard on these other issues?
There are other requirements of the inherent authority. THE COURT: No. Put it in
the registry of the court.”). After the trial court had orally granted BMIII’s motion,
however, the court specifically stated that Antero could stay enforcement of the
forthcoming order by filing a mandamus petition. R.485-86 (Tab 10: April 11, 2019
Transcript at 49:24-50:25) (“Can we have . . . a provision in here that would say that
if we file . . . a petition for mandamus, that the order is suspended during that time?

Edit: Sorry. Apparently upload did work. Damn it all.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20191013-212656.png
    Screenshot_20191013-212656.png
    303.2 KB · Views: 168
  • 506092195.png
    506092195.png
    676.4 KB · Views: 217
  • 506092195.png
    506092195.png
    676.4 KB · Views: 148
  • Screenshot_20191013-212656.png
    Screenshot_20191013-212656.png
    303.2 KB · Views: 98
This sounds familiar. (Fucking upload is busted.)

Chupp presiding.



Edit: Sorry. Apparently upload did work. Damn it all.
Can someone translate this from Law English to Real People English please?

Also you attached both of the images twice.
 
  • Feels
Reactions: Hotfartz :)
I think Chupp has a habit of refusing to listen to arguments.
I reckon he's a parent of at least three kids, a baby and two 4-6 year-olds.

Picture this: You have a shit night's sleep because the baby keeps waking you up, then your kids are having a squabble and then you have to go to court to watch adults in nice suits have a squabble.
 
I reckon he's a parent of at least three kids, a baby and two 4-6 year-olds.

Picture this: You have a shit night's sleep because the baby keeps waking you up, then your kids are having a squabble and then you have to go to court to watch adults in nice suits have a squabble.
Not gonna lie, I think you could make a sitcom out of that.
 
Geez. Kathryn has been scouring through MONTHS of posts on this forum. Someone's infatuated with us.

View attachment 969272
View attachment 969273
View attachment 969274
View attachment 969275
View attachment 969278
View attachment 969279
View attachment 969280



Tried to get archive.fo to work for 20 minutes, then gave up. Hope I did the wayback machine thing right.

Anyway, Kathryn, if you're reading this: Join us. You know you want to. Tell us how wrong we are and why.

Also, @AnOminous : I understand if you want to take a break after this, man. Take care (:_(

View attachment 969285

Heh. Found mine.
EGvHafeU0AIS6Ge.jpg
Wonder what the point of this one is. Are they trying to say Ty has reached his final form?

Also, lol at them featuring a post of @Stoneheart getting dumb-rated. Guess we've really lost the plot over here!

We've lost the case again, and somehow I'm sure Nick is responsible for it.

EDIT:
Bald prick Douchette with his take on the situation.

View attachment 970304View attachment 970305
Five whole buckarinos. Look out! We got a big spender!

Okay KV, here's how you do this: Spend that $5 on a superchat on Nick's stream (It burns, I know), and giggle while he reads your socialist propaganda. Yes, he reads them. Yes, all of them.
 
Last edited:
Back