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

Cross-post:
Spectre_06 said:
So, I can now break my silence on something

A few months back I got a bunch of shit for "teasing" and "blue-balling" you all about something (you can find the post here). I got a lot of shit and, quite frankly, the raging in DMs was pretty funny I have to admit. I promised Nick at the time that under no circumstances would I leak this information but I can now, since today is the day, bois, that the appeals panel convenes for this shit.

Under the Texas Rules of Appelate Procedure, any swinging dick can submit an amicus brief in support of one (or more) of the parties. The court is obligated ot receieve it but not obligated to give a good Goddamn motherfuck about it. Nick said he was considering writing one, but he wanted it kept on the DL until it was too late for Lawtwitter to submit one for the defendants. I apologize for nothing on this.

BUT IT'S DONE BOIS!

View attachment 1613550
Click to expand...
 
  • Winner
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: ConSluttant, ThatDumbPhilosopher, 6thRanger and 14 others
SeniorFuckFace said:
Can someone expand on the legal strategy of this filing? The implications?
Click to expand...
Almost nothing. "Amicus Curae" is dead Roman for "friend of the court," where an uninvolved party can submit a legal opinion to help sway the court in one direction or another.

The court can consider it or reject it.

I don't think the court will consider it, but this is the closest Nick gets to being Vic's lawyer and allows him to farm some salt and grift.
 
  • Agree
  • Winner
  • Like
Reactions: Hotfartz :), ConSluttant, FadeIntoObscurity and 17 others
With that filing Nick will set off lawtwatter so expect REEEEEEEEEEEEEEing from the faggots today and for the next few weeks with them saying "See We KNEW Nick was secretly Vic's lawyer!" which again those fat asses will be wrong.
Betrik will be shoving that bag of lies down everyone's throats with Two Ton (Lose some fucking weight fat ass!) splurging like she raped a baby dingo. Law twatter never fails to entertain us.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ConSluttant, GenericReviewerDraco, P5Fever and 6 others
PorkeyDuck said:
View attachment 1613183View attachment 1613184
Click to expand...
"...and we all know they are too scared to come talk in this thread. Instead they hide in the little hug box".

Oh, really, Mr. "Weh, here's Vic saying COVID-19 is a joke, despite me not showing the whole clip?" By the way, this is the same guy we're supposed to be "scared" of. Run for the hills.
Screenshot (407).png

5t3n0g0ph3r said:
Cross-post:
Click to expand...
Ooh boy, if there was a lot of screeching before, prepare for a tsunami of it today.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ConSluttant, The Decimator, Riku and 6 others
OneHandClapping said:
Almost nothing. "Amicus Curae" is dead Roman for "friend of the court," where an uninvolved party can submit a legal opinion to help sway the court in one direction or another.

The court can consider it or reject it.

I don't think the court will consider it, but this is the closest Nick gets to being Vic's lawyer and allows him to farm some salt and grift.
Click to expand...

All these real lawyers in law Twatter doing real, big boy law work and that fake lolyer Nick Risotto thinks he can just slide into the court DMs?

Yeah, that's going to piss some people off spectacularly. Nick continues showing actual tangible support for Vic while law Twitter continues its ineffectual posturing. Sure, the court will likely ignore it but there's someone I know that won't. @Ron Toye. His sperging alone will be a sight to behold.
 
  • Like
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Riku, Rondo Richter Belmont, P5Fever and 5 others
HighwayStar said:
"...and we all know they are too scared to come talk in this thread. Instead they hide in the little hug box".

Oh, really, Mr. "Weh, here's Vic saying COVID-19 is a joke, despite me not showing the whole clip?" By the way, this is the same guy we're supposed to be "scared" of. Run for the hills.
View attachment 1613960
Click to expand...

He should watch out.
It would be a shame if his community found out he is a pedophile.

Dude looks like he's got at least three hard drives full of cp and can write you a book series longer than Harry Potter with justifications for why he did it.

And 90% would be saying Vic eating a jellybean was worse.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Riku, GenericReviewerDraco, Rondo Richter Belmont and 2 others
Allanon said:
Which is significant in its own way, because it'll be the first time a judge actually looks at Vic's case. Unlike with 'I've got better things to do than my job' Chupp, however, we can safely assume they'll wait to render judgment until they're finished looking at everything. That is to say, we shouldn't expect anything until mid-October.
Click to expand...

It's pretty routine that the panel doesn't even see any briefing related to the case until it is submitted. In this case, there has been a bit of motion practice, so at least one judge on the panel is familiar with at least its existence. But in general, the record is complete before it's looked at in depth.

At the point the record is complete, multiple complete copies of all the briefs and the relevant parts of the record below (in this case what is called the clerk's record and the reporter's record) are distributed to the members of the panel and any support personnel like clerks who may look at it and draft material related to it.

The judges confer at some point and generally, flesh out the likely outcome in the case and choose one judge to do the drafting. This can be hashed out over a period of months if disagreements need to be smoothed over or to avoid having a dissenting opinion. Sometimes you'll see seemingly contradictory language in a unanimous appeals opinion, reflecting the adoption of language from what might otherwise have ended up a dissenting opinion, narrowing the ruling in scope in order to maintain seeming unanimity. This kind of thing happens in the deliberation period.

Ordinarily, some time after this, oral argument would be scheduled to resolve any remaining issues, or to be more cynical, to give the appeals lawyers one more chance to milk their clients for a meaningless hearing and give the impression that nobody missed any opportunity to do whatever could be done. In this case, this won't happen. They're just going straight to the decision phase, and very often, even were there oral argument, the decision has already been made by this point and nothing short of some Daniel Webster shit would change the minds of any of the judges.

Hence, you often see long delays between the submission and the ruling. I'd expect weeks rather than months, because despite the persistent foot-dragging of both sets of parties, the court has been treating this as an accelerated appeal in the briefing schedule.

The very fast turnarounds this court has had, at least in the past couple months, have mainly been no-brainers like the court clearly lacking jurisdiction over an interlocutory appeal (an appeal during trial of a normally unappealable decision), or routine matters like someone not paying a filing fee and then still not paying after being reminded.

I wouldn't be surprised at any imaginable result or timetable, though, at this point.
 
  • Informative
  • Like
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Hotfartz :), Riku, 6thRanger and 12 others
  • Like
Reactions: ThatDumbPhilosopher, Xenomorphs Are Cute, Riku and 4 others
PorkeyDuck said:
View attachment 1613002

View attachment 1613010




Back in July, that faggot tweet edited screenshots and then nuked his account.
Click to expand...
Have these retards not see then shit we have archived?! We arent out to harass like 4chan in the 2000s, but catalogue all this bullshit, because friendly reminder roosevelt made soldiers do the same thing to preserve the holocaust.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Riku, 6thRanger, Seraphic_Vishnal and 7 others
OneHandClapping said:
Almost nothing. "Amicus Curae" is dead Roman for "friend of the court," where an uninvolved party can submit a legal opinion to help sway the court in one direction or another.

The court can consider it or reject it.

I don't think the court will consider it, but this is the closest Nick gets to being Vic's lawyer and allows him to farm some salt and grift.
Click to expand...
It would be hilarious if they consider it only because they're curious since the defendants obsessed over Nick so much in their filings.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Hotfartz :), Riku, 6thRanger and 6 others
  • Informative
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Hotfartz :), ThatDumbPhilosopher, theworstkindofeurofag and 7 others
AnOminous said:
It's pretty routine that the panel doesn't even see any briefing related to the case until it is submitted. In this case, there has been a bit of motion practice, so at least one judge on the panel is familiar with at least its existence. But in general, the record is complete before it's looked at in depth.

At the point the record is complete, multiple complete copies of all the briefs and the relevant parts of the record below (in this case what is called the clerk's record and the reporter's record) are distributed to the members of the panel and any support personnel like clerks who may look at it and draft material related to it.

The judges confer at some point and generally, flesh out the likely outcome in the case and choose one judge to do the drafting. This can be hashed out over a period of months if disagreements need to be smoothed over or to avoid having a dissenting opinion. Sometimes you'll see seemingly contradictory language in a unanimous appeals opinion, reflecting the adoption of language from what might otherwise have ended up a dissenting opinion, narrowing the ruling in scope in order to maintain seeming unanimity. This kind of thing happens in the deliberation period.

Ordinarily, some time after this, oral argument would be scheduled to resolve any remaining issues, or to be more cynical, to give the appeals lawyers one more chance to milk their clients for a meaningless hearing and give the impression that nobody missed any opportunity to do whatever could be done. In this case, this won't happen. They're just going straight to the decision phase, and very often, even were there oral argument, the decision has already been made by this point and nothing short of some Daniel Webster shit would change the minds of any of the judges.

Hence, you often see long delays between the submission and the ruling. I'd expect weeks rather than months, because despite the persistent foot-dragging of both sets of parties, the court has been treating this as an accelerated appeal in the briefing schedule.

The very fast turnarounds this court has had, at least in the past couple months, have mainly been no-brainers like the court clearly lacking jurisdiction over an interlocutory appeal (an appeal during trial of a normally unappealable decision), or routine matters like someone not paying a filing fee and then still not paying after being reminded.

I wouldn't be surprised at any imaginable result or timetable, though, at this point.
Click to expand...

Interesting. So dropping the oral arguments should, at least, speed up the process as well as them treating it as an accelerated appeal. Even if it does take months rather than weeks, much as I hate the suspense, it's best that they actually take however much time they need to go over everything and properly consider it, than rush through it. Chupp Chupped mostly because he was in a hot hurry to just get everything done right on the bench and get rid of it immediately like some kinda traffic court judge and couldn't be bothered to slog through the giant mess of exhibits, depositions, and affidavits. Even if it takes longer to be methodical, we should at least get good, thoroughly reasoned decisions - positive or negative - unlike Chupp's 'the court finds Ron Toye to have proven himself an independent contractor of funimation' scrawled halfway across his paper.
 
  • Feels
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: Hotfartz :), Francis York Morgan, theworstkindofeurofag and 7 others
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back