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

Oh, of course friends! I am always happy to help.!

The specific crime is §38.123

Section (a) is met by clause 5, since he was acting on behalf of a separate legal entity, i.e. his TX media company.

In section (b) the clause is met by not being in good standing with the Texas State Bar, because of this:

View attachment 1634266

There is more information in §81.102 too!

love, LT
Oh, how nice, we're able to see a single tweet by Sean. Too bad there's no way to see his other tweets, since the wheezing coward has locked his account to everyone, because he simply couldn't handle children posting mosquito memes on his account.
 
I wouldn't hold my breath considering who would be doing the arguing. I mean Ty lost the case but in the following Dahlin Depo hearing the defense got KO'd and then the Fee hearing they got ROFL stomped again in arguments. And most likely the Supreme court is not going to give a shit either since it was an Amicus Brief.
So let me get this correct: you state that because the time and effort required to prosecute someone for a crime isn’t worth it to you, that means Nick did no wrong?
 
Interestingly, the rejection seems to have been done due to the fact the fees weren't collected. If you read the reasoning, the very end mentions that out of state attorneys must pay a fee to participate and that they hadn't received payment.

So, no, @LawTwitter Cheer Squad is just dumb and can't read properly. No crime has been committed unless they want to allege that for some insane reason nick was intentionally attempting to defraud the court.

Although his livestream afterwards shows that it wasn't. Nick admitted he found it weird that they never asked for a fee of any kind and that he was prepared to drop 400 bucks for it. So from there, proving fraud would be... well you know that one greek punishment involving the boulder and the hill? Good luck.
 
So let me get this correct: you state that because the time and effort required to prosecute someone for a crime isn’t worth it to you, that means Nick did no wrong?
You mean like the same crime Ty committed that Chupp just didn't give a fuck about? So why would the SC be any different? At most they put something on file for Rekieta just in case he tries and get a Texas license. Some things are just not worth the effort to a system that is busy as hell, especially in this COVID season.
 
  • Like
Reactions: P5Fever
You mean like the same crime Ty committed that Chupp just didn't give a fuck about? So why would the SC be any different? At most they put something on file for Rekieta just in case he tries and get a Texas license. Some things are just not worth the effort to a system that is busy as hell, especially in this COVID season.
Got it. So it’s only a crime if someone gets punished harshly for it and not whether the law says it is or not. Thank you for clarifying.
 
I am curious, please explain the last one....

Texas Health and Safety Code § 81.102. Tests;  Criminal Penalty

View attachment 1634281


Are you saying: Nick has AIDS or HIV?
While the idea of lawtwitter being so stupid and clueless that they accidentally cited an AIDS law against Nicky, I think this is what theyre talking about:
Screenshot_20201001-130321.png
Now a layman like me can read this and see that it doesn't apply because: a) the webpage itself says that Nick failed to pay the fee, which he apparently intended to and will amend and b) this law in no way mentions amicus briefs or the fees for out of state attorneys, just the requirements to practice law in the state of Texas.

Of course lawtwitter doesn't know what "practice law" means, but as a layman I'm fairly certain it means to give specific legal advice, represent a client in a court of law, or perform legal paper work/documentation for a client usually in exchange for currency at a billed hourly rate or, rarely, done pro bono. So to be clear, law twitter is not so stupid and clueless as to unintentionally claim that Nicholas Rekieta, Grifting Champion of the Century and World's Most Super Duperest Lawyer, of having and spreading AIDS/HIV but they are so stupid and clueless as to accuse him of being criminally liable of illegally practicing in a state he's not licensed, when the court record in question simply states that he failed to pay a fee. Y'know, because they're clueless and stupid and think everyone is as much as a drooling idiot as they are.
 
Got it. So it’s only a crime if someone gets punished harshly for it and not whether the law says it is or not. Thank you for clarifying.

You do realize you are not on twitter? Probably an odd statement to make, but you are acting like a bitter bitch here. Get your shit together. You will get further with rational arguments and well-explained examples rather than trying to put words into people's mouth and acting like whiny brat cause someone decided to answer your assery.


ahhh, of course.....

1601572719476.png
 
So, no, @LawTwitter Cheer Squad is just dumb and can't read properly. No crime has been committed unless they want to allege that for some insane reason nick was intentionally attempting to defraud the court.

Nobody could read the brief and believe Nick was holding himself out as a Texas practitioner even if he was improperly attempting to represent a Texas corporation. He clearly identified himself with his Minnesota bar number, not claiming to be a Texas lawyer. While this obviously was a waste of his time as he can't represent a corporation, it's not like there was any fraudulent intent.

Since our friend here can't read let's look at the statute:

"Sec. 38.122. FALSELY HOLDING ONESELF OUT AS A LAWYER. (a) A person commits an offense if, with intent to obtain an economic benefit for himself or herself, the person holds himself or herself out as a lawyer, unless he or she is currently licensed to practice law in this state, another state, or a foreign country and is in good standing with the State Bar of Texas and the state bar or licensing authority of any and all other states and foreign countries where licensed."

Nick held himself out, entirely truthfully, as an attorney licensed in another state. Mistakenly believing he could represent his corporation in its role as an amicus does not convert this truthful statement to the felony of UPL.
 
Was going to put in his thread but it needs to be seen here. Ron found Vic's yelling at homophobic Christian's video. I thought it was impossible but he made an attempt to spin this around
View attachment 1634159
"Research" right
View attachment 1634166
Well that was a nice attempt at therapy
View attachment 1634167
Well here's a bit of context you sad little man. Those people were harassing fans at a con and Vic wanted to step in and help.
View attachment 1634168
I mean its not like his religion is being used in a hateful manner something that he strives to tell not to do. Why would he ever be so angry?
View attachment 1634170

He then wants to talk that guy and tell him about Vic. So yeah he doesn't know
View attachment 1634217
To quote a meme, "When people ask you What would Jesus do? Don't rule out whipping people and turning over tables". Does Soy boy really have no idea of what righteous indignation is?
 
I can personally confirm that Tiffany Grant at least doesn't want to be involved in this situation. I know that because I met her at a convention and I asked her about Vic's situation. If I remember correctly, she said it didn't involve her so didn't really have an opinion on it.
No disrespect but why, oh why, would you go up to a voice actor and do something like this? There’s pozloading my neghole and then there’s this. Of course any voice actor, even those who genuinely support Vic, is going to say something like “No comment” or lie to you, because they’re trying to make money and don’t want to get in trouble. And even if they did tell the truth, what if someone was recording? What if someone like you posted it on the Internet and some idiot with free time on his or her hands use it against that said voice actor? Dude, you got to think before you do shit like this.
Nobody could read the brief and believe Nick was holding himself out as a Texas practitioner even if he was improperly attempting to represent a Texas corporation. He clearly identified himself with his Minnesota bar number, not claiming to be a Texas lawyer. While this obviously was a waste of his time as he can't represent a corporation, it's not like there was any fraudulent intent.

Since our friend here can't read let's look at the statute:

"Sec. 38.122. FALSELY HOLDING ONESELF OUT AS A LAWYER. (a) A person commits an offense if, with intent to obtain an economic benefit for himself or herself, the person holds himself or herself out as a lawyer, unless he or she is currently licensed to practice law in this state, another state, or a foreign country and is in good standing with the State Bar of Texas and the state bar or licensing authority of any and all other states and foreign countries where licensed."

Nick held himself out, entirely truthfully, as an attorney licensed in another state. Mistakenly believing he could represent his corporation in its role as an amicus does not convert this truthful statement to the felony of UPL.
And it’s not like Nick blew a major opportunity to give Vic the upper hand; everyone (even Nick himself) said that amicus briefs are a pointless endeavor and if what you say is true, the chances of such briefs getting accepted are the same as Greg being a responsible dad. They’re trying to find an excuse to dunk. That’s really what it is.

You know what’s sad about this? Even though for once lawtwitter has a legitimate reason to criticize Nick, they still can’t get it right and they somehow look dumber than Nick. Let’s not laugh at Nick for overlooking one aspect that prevented his brief getting filed. No, let’s accuse Nick for committing a crime. God, these people are hopeless. There should be a law banning people with severe mental and emotional disabilities from accessing the Internet.

And since Nick is not a licensed attorney in Texas, shouldn’t that finally lay to rest the lie that Nick is Vic’s attorney or an agent?
 
Back