Horrorcow Lucas Werner - A man of Spokane, Washington who is obsessed with millennial and Gen Z chicks

[WonderWino]

I guarantee that if this conversation actually took place at all, outside of Lucas's head, some of what he's reported here are misunderstood social cues.

No girl, not even a street prostitute, would ask Lucas to kick it. It's also kind of strange how this happening conforms exactly to the pattern he's always complaining about. Such that he's talking to a girl, and another guy swoops in and cock blocks him. Even though he decided that the cock-blocking was the other guy saving him from disease. I think it's a sign of his mental illness that he views other people's actions as being directly related to his benefit. If any of this happened and another guy did go off with the girl, it wasn't because the guy loved Lucas so much and wanted to prevent him from getting crotch rot.

I suspect its more his narcissism combined with mental illness that leads him to view everyones actions as being directly aimed at benefiting him in some way (or not benefiting him). its a very narcissistic 'everything is literally about me! even the nonsensical stuff I imagine!' viewpoint and shows how very ingrained that narcissism is and would be even if he wasn't mentally ill. That said as you said it follows the same pattern it always does so I have my doubts that it happened at all

and did anyone catch the part of the video where he literally says '...or things that bernie sanders would look at and say nu uh you're harassing lucas!'

ffs he talks like bernie is literally his bff. and if his ranting about almost all the young people 'clapping for bernie' how does he explain how super tuesday went or why bernies campaign fell flat on its face like the joke that it is

"I haven't got laid in 8 years, but that's your hate. That's not me, I'm super nice"
Once again blaming others for your lack of sexual activity, classic incel Lucas. "Super nice", I guess harassing people around town, videoing them, and leaving creeper notes all over the place, including the doors of anything unfortunate enough to be living in the same apartment complex as you, is just your way of being a 'nice guy'.

Speaking of creeper notes, I wonder if sooner or later he will start writing the notes he leaves around town in his pidgin ghetto slang for everyone to pull their hair out trying to understand wtf he is actually trying to say

 

[AbraCadaver]

Honestly figured he forgot the login to his alt account given how stupid he is. Lucas looks pretty consistently repulsive since his appearance doesn't change much even when he has a roof over his head, another warning sign he gives to women. That thumbnail just makes Lucas look even more of a rapist though.

Since I'm kinda bored I guess I'll try breaking down this fedora tipping rant of his


"Most atheists you meet are some of the nicest people you'll ever meet. They're usually the bravest and smartest"
He says as he was stupid enough to get evicted from special housing for being a piece of shit who documented his own harassment of other residents

"against greed, avarice, worship of material possessions, worship of money"
Also Lucas: leeches off charities for free food even when he's not homeless, hoards martial possessions such as board games that he doesn't need or use, begs people online and tries to use money to groom teens into letting him molest them by offering $1000 which still wasn't enough money for any woman to let Lucas anywhere near them

"women these days have jobs. When they're there expecting the same of me that's classism"
I love that Lucas talks shit about himself more than any Christians when he contradicts himself trying to justify why he's a lazy fat pedo piece of shit.

"The calling cards of Christians are pride, wrath, and greed"
Kinda like you Lucas; pride that you have your head so far up your ass with your lies you honestly think you do nothing wrong when you contradict yourself and try to manipulate others, wrath in that you're an angry incel who still hasn't gotten over being rejected by Lacie or thrown out by Suzanne for being an abusive creep, and greed because you're a fat lazy prick who has to eat excess hence the tits, and you don't give a shit about anyone but yourself, which you've admitted in your own videos

"I don't see them practising forgiveness, understanding, compassion for me trying to groom minors. I don't see them doing much kindness except feed and provide a shelter to my fat creeper ass"
I don't see you taking accountability for your own actions ever Lucas, and it's the same Christians you keep gossiping about who are keeping you from starving to death at this point.

"By staying away from a lot of shit and keeping to myself a lot of times, I'm pretty much practising Christian behaviour"
I don't remember what part of keeping to yourself involved leaving notes all over town and on the doors of other residents when you were at Pioneer about how much of an incel you are is Christian behaviour or keeping to yourself.

"I haven't had a girlfriend in 8 years. Usually when I meet Christians they're nice to my face, for a while. Most of the time when I meet them, they're cool at the start, but then you start asking questions like hey where the women at, let's get it quicken'. No no, none for you, she doesn't like you because you don't believe in god. Then Lacie's bf/ex? is being edgy online and getting what I want, it's straight up bogus"
Most of them are being polite to you, until you eventually go too far with your creep behaviour as you always do, and they want nothing to do with you afterwards. Women do not owe you anything, the fact you need to be told this at 40 is another reason women don't want your fat homeless mrsa ridden creeper ass.

"I'm atheist, I've googled parts of the bible that tell me you have to forgive me for being a groomer, otherwise you're going to hell"
Are you suggesting eternal torture is more preferable to being in proximity to you for women Lucas?

"you there, you're in Spokane Washington, I like zoomer/teen girls, generation z, I'm a pedophile, generation x. I misread some articles online that tell me it's okay to groom teens if it's for breeding purposes. I believe older fathers are more attentive towards their kids, ignore my old facebook posts about child neglect, no I don't have a credit card but I'll go back to community college when I have a teenage girlfriend. I was on the honour roll, despite failing maths and science, pretty sure I know what I'm doing. "
We're aware you're a predator who uses pseudoscience to justify being a groomer Lucas, and if you were serious about studying you'd spend less time on the love quest and more on actually learning maths when you have plenty of online resources to teach yourself.

"You could date a poor guy, with an ebt card or nothing. You teenage college girls I like, that are nice to me and don't care about your religion unless you're practising it"
They could, and some probably do, date poor guys their own age who are doing things to improve their situation and are not manipulative creepers

"You're cockblocking me against going to the women, having a normal life, and a normal conversation"
If you didn't behave like an incel and actually took your medication, you might have had a chance at these before you became internationally famous for being a disgusting excuse for a human. Until you stop blaming others for your own actions you will never have these

"If you understand what I'm saying you're smart, if you don't you're dumb"
Random word salad you've pulled out your ass to poorly attempt to be hip isn't smart, the fact none of your target audience is interested or impressed should be evidence of this, since you like to portray yourself as a man of science and all, but keep acting like a clown online and I'm sure one 14-16 year old might think you are smart initially due to your age.

"I'm not a Christian I don't have to be nice to you"
And women don't have to date or have sex with you, nor does anyone in Spokane have to put up with your behaviour just because you're sexually frustrated


Yeah I know it's pretty long

Sorry, little confusing as you put stuff in quotes that’s your (likely very correct) translation of what he’s saying. I got confused at what he actually said and what you said.

 

[GleamingTheQ-Bert]

An older vid from the channel he's currently using. Hilarious for his smug condemnation of the homeless (which he now is) and the religious (who he mooches off).

Lucas makes every bad thing he's ever said or done part of a swift karmic kick in the ass.

It's rather satisfying to hear this, knowing he's literally in the gutter.

Perhaps there IS a God, Lucas!

Yathink?

 

[AbraCadaver]

More word salads.

I think Lucas just discovered women have jobs! Like, just now!

I didn’t know that having a credit card means a man is going to get laid. Everyone has credit cards. Motherfucking Spongebob had a wallet full of credit cards in one episode.

Also here comes Cameron with the good caveman logic. Women aren’t dating guys with financial responsibility exclusively because they instinctively feel they need protecting. We’re doing it because we want to date fellow grownups who can take care of themselves and aren’t incompetent children. Sure, there are people who want to just live off another’s money at any cost, and they are also incompetent children.

I like Lucas’ new “women work and have money” revelation. I’m interested to see how he tries to work that into his future arguments.

As for him denying the existence of Hell but then telling christians to cater to him or they'll be condemned to it...he’s doing the “eat your veg or Santa won’t come this year” routine you use on kids. YOU know there is no Santa but the kids don’t! It’s the perfect plan! He must feel so idiotically smug to be getting one over on all those nones of christians listening to his rants.

 

[Club Sandwich]

I like Lucas’ new “women work and have money” revelation. I’m interested to see how he tries to work that into his future arguments.

i'm more curious how Lucas both recognizes that women have their own money, and how he feels entitled to it, or that successful adults in general have their own money - so why should he be exempt from also having his own money and instead expects his imaginary gf to pay his way 90% of the time.

and no, living on the dole does not mean having "your own money". at least not in God's America.

 

[TelemeresDaddy69]

Sorry, little confusing as you put stuff in quotes that’s your (likely very correct) translation of what he’s saying. I got confused at what he actually said and what you said.

Its hard to know what he's saying at times as Lucas often butchers pronunciation, bigot is probably the best one, so I have to use auto-generated subtitles on YouTube and try to figure out best with some words.

i'm more curious how Lucas both recognizes that women have their own money, and how he feels entitled to it, or that successful adults in general have their own money - so why should he be exempt from also having his own money and instead expects his imaginary gf to pay his way 90% of the time.

and no, living on the dole does not mean having "your own money". at least not in God's America.

He feels entitled to it because that was how his relationship with Suzanne was, he stayed at home and just ate all her food while she went out and worked. He expects teen girls that he dates to do the same and calls anyone who disagrees a classist, despite not having an economic class being homeless and on welfare.

It's the closest thing Lucas will ever have to making his own money, besides the $3 a month on Patreon, which is probably the only thing that keeps his delusion of working class still going. It'd be a real shame if he was reported on Patreon for monetising hate speech

 

[Apteryx Owenii]

I've never heard someone who doesn't believe in god be so pissed off at him.

I see he is back to spouting telomere nonsense about studies he is doesn't understand and has been flat out threatened with legal action for not shutting up about. Shows how stupid he is that he's opening that can of worms again. Thats just what he needs now: eisenberg suing him and getting a big chunk of his tardbux taken every month. Though if he is too stupid to keep his mouth shut about it after multiple warnings he has it coming

You can't take tardbucks away from a tard for being a tard. You can't do anything to some homeless lunatic for ranting about a study you published that he doesn't understand. Maybe Eisenberg could try and get Lucas to not use his name or something but I'm guessing the Wern is basically judgement proof anyway.

If he did indeed send a cease and desist letter, such documents are worth no more than the legal theory unpinning them and are often bluffs. I encourage Lucas to get back into the ridiculous telomere crap in the hope that it'll mean less of this "slang" he's trying to sling.

 

[Club Sandwich]

Its hard to know what he's saying at times as Lucas often butchers pronunciation, bigot is probably the best one, so I have to use auto-generated subtitles on YouTube and try to figure out best with some words.

he also blatantly has his own spin on words, both in meaning and subtext, so "bigot" has almost a completely different meaning when spoken by The Wern, likewise with "classicist".

classicist
Lucas: someone who expects him to pull his own (considerable) weight.
Normal People: someone who, regardless of class consciousness, engages in class warfare, typically for the benefit of his own class.

bigot
Lucas: someone who excludes Lucas from some thing or activity for whatever reason, legitimate or not.
Normal People: someone who has an outspoken belief, usually negative, of certain identifiable groups of people based on real or perceived traits.

we already know he has a loose grasp of other words and meanings: hygiene, food, responsibility, science, logic, money, et c.

 

[WonderWino]

You can't take tardbucks away from a tard for being a tard.

You can when 'being a tard' involves being sued for violating cease and desist orders and inevitable restraining orders that involve telling said tard not to use your name and associated statements to do creepy and unlawful things. I've seen it happen literally to a family member in washington state. My aunts kid out in oroville who had some weird obsessive shit going on with an employee at princes years back. tldr they eventually sued him for slander or defamation or some shit cause he wouldn't shut up about it and got some of his tardbux garnished. It wasn't that much of it, as by law they can't take so much that it would prevent him from being able to live off it or anything of that nature, but it was done. Didn't shut him up much either, ended up in a nuthouse himself a year or so later after going batshit on their ranch with a pellet rifle using those pellet darts. tldr: you can take some of it, just not alot. Mostly to make a point about it being unacceptable behavior that lead to it I suspect. Not that there is much reason to take it that far most of the time

That aside courts can also fine him aside from any kind of garnishing of his money or as an alternative, and they can fine said tards more or less as they please for wasting the courts time by forcing the issue. Same as tards can get fined for littering or traffic violations

You can't do anything to some homeless lunatic for ranting about a study you published that he doesn't understand.

Cease and desist followed by restraining order to stop the behavior is what you can do, which in lucas's case isn't something he wants. If he violated such an order a court is in the position of either garnishing a pittance, which would scare the shit out of lucas, by saying he was mentally competent enough to understand what he was doing and so can be held liable for it, or they can say he clearly isn't mentally competent enough, in which case they can just send him back for another stint in the nuthouse, which lucas also doesn't want

In other words if lucas wants to make an issue of fucking with people like that a court will do the same to him in turn, one way or another

If he did indeed send a cease and desist letter, such documents are worth no more than the legal theory unpinning them and are often bluffs.

Often bluffs in the sense that not everyone wants to bother to follow up. Not to mention most people will get the hint to shut their mouths, even tards. But given the guy in question is a scientist and its not good for him professionally to have some nut getting more and more famous by claiming that the scientific work he did somehow promotes that being a pedo is a good thing for humanity, its not in his best interests to allow it to go on. On that note in this case its a clear cut example of 'this behavior can have legitimate harmful effects on said scientists professional life and livelihood if allowed to continue' so its definitely actionable if he wants to make an issue of it. He clearly said something to lucas because he was freaked out enough to shut up real quick about something that was said. He wouldn't have cared unless he believed some kind of legal threat was made

Personally if I were in his position i'd just get a restraining order against lucas as a matter of protecting my own interests, with a letter telling him in no uncertain terms that legal action would follow if he violated it. and if that didn't work I wouldn't sue him, i'd inform the court of the violation of the order, show it his history and petition the court to have him thrown in the nuthouse for awhile as the best course of action for everyone involved

 

[Apteryx Owenii]

You can when 'being a tard' involves being sued for violating cease and desist orders and inevitable restraining orders that involve telling said tard not to use your name and associated statements to do creepy and unlawful things. I've seen it happen literally to a family member in washington state. My aunts kid out in oroville who had some weird obsessive shit going on with an employee at princes years back. tldr they eventually sued him for slander or defamation or some shit cause he wouldn't shut up about it and got some of his tardbux garnished. It wasn't that much of it, as by law they can't take so much that it would prevent him from being able to live off it or anything of that nature, but it was done. Didn't shut him up much either, ended up in a nuthouse himself a year or so later after going batshit on their ranch with a pellet rifle using those pellet darts. tldr: you can take some of it, just not alot. Mostly to make a point about it being unacceptable behavior that lead to it I suspect. Not that there is much reason to take it that far most of the time

That aside courts can also fine him aside from any kind of garnishing of his money or as an alternative, and they can fine said tards more or less as they please for wasting the courts time by forcing the issue. Same as tards can get fined for littering or traffic violations



Cease and desist followed by restraining order to stop the behavior is what you can do, which in lucas's case isn't something he wants. If he violated such an order a court is in the position of either garnishing a pittance, which would scare the shit out of lucas, by saying he was mentally competent enough to understand what he was doing and so can be held liable for it, or they can say he clearly isn't mentally competent enough, in which case they can just send him back for another stint in the nuthouse, which lucas also doesn't want

In other words if lucas wants to make an issue of fucking with people like that a court will do the same to him in turn, one way or another



Often bluffs in the sense that not everyone wants to bother to follow up. Not to mention most people will get the hint to shut their mouths, even tards. But given the guy in question is a scientist and its not good for him professionally to have some nut getting more and more famous by claiming that the scientific work he did somehow promotes that being a pedo is a good thing for humanity, its not in his best interests to allow it to go on. On that note in this case its a clear cut example of 'this behavior can have legitimate harmful effects on said scientists professional life and livelihood if allowed to continue' so its definitely actionable if he wants to make an issue of it. He clearly said something to lucas because he was freaked out enough to shut up real quick about something that was said. He wouldn't have cared unless he believed some kind of legal threat was made

Personally if I were in his position i'd just get a restraining order against lucas as a matter of protecting my own interests, with a letter telling him in no uncertain terms that legal action would follow if he violated it. and if that didn't work I wouldn't sue him, i'd inform the court of the violation of the order, show it his history and petition the court to have him thrown in the nuthouse for awhile as the best course of action for everyone involved

I don't know what was up with with your aunt's son twice removed and his pellet darts but if scientists could collect judgements against dumb\insane people for misinterpreting their research they'd all be rich men. You cannot get a "restraining order" in Washington for someone talking about your research in youtube videos, either. They are part of family law. Nor would the anti-harassment statute apply unless Lucas has continued to contact someone after being told not to. That's why kiwifarms is not harassment. And good luck with defamation unless he lies about the doc by name.

If you think Lucas is going to be dragged into court by a scientist and get his tardbucks garnished because he keeps talking about telomeres you're as exceptional as he is.

 

[TelemeresDaddy69]

I don't know what was up with with your aunt's son twice removed and his pellet darts but if scientists could collect judgements against dumb\insane people for misinterpreting their research they'd all be rich men. You cannot get a "restraining order" in Washington for someone talking about your research in youtube videos, either. They are part of family law. Nor would the anti-harassment statute apply unless Lucas has continued to contact someone after being told not to. That's why kiwifarms is not harassment. And good luck with defamation unless he lies about the doc by name.

If you think Lucas is going to be dragged into court by a scientist and get his tardbucks garnished because he keeps talking about telomeres you're as exceptional as he is.

Hasn't Lucas already got multiple no contact orders against him? I'd love to see him try to explain those to a young woman he's trying to date. You know, assuming his appearance, behaviour, and pretty much everything else didn't alert her

 

[WonderWino]

f scientists could collect judgements against dumb\insane people for misinterpreting their research they'd all be rich men

Thats not what i'm saying at all. This isn't about misinterpreting anything. I'm saying he can go after lucas for using his name as an authority on the telomere stuff (which he is and has done several times) to flat out say 'this scientist did this research that says old men should be breeding with little girls. its totally legal cause shes totally 16' which is essentially what he is and has been doing. Its not about how its being misinterpreted its about bringing his name into it publicly to justify the actions of someone who is by all accounts an obvious pedo

tldr: its about using someones name to justify the bs conclusions he came up with to justify pedo behavior publicly and by extension, taking legal steps to publicly separate his name from that 'misinterpretation' and from being used as an excuse to be a pedo

You cannot get a "restraining order" in Washington for someone talking about your research in youtube videos, either.

I didn't say you could. Its not about the videos themselves, its about lucas continuing to bring his name into crackpot interpretations of his work to after being repeatedly told not to and after being sent a cease and desist letter telling him to stop doing so. The next step in such scenarios is literally to get a restraining order prohibiting lucas from bringing his name into anything, and in this case, more than likely including a prohibition on the 'breed with a little girl cause the telomere study tells you to' nonsense because of its association with the scientist in question. It is not difficult to get a restraining order when you follow the correct steps

And good luck with defamation unless he lies about the doc by name.

...He literally has, multiple times. Ranting publicly and telling anyone who will listen how said scientists telomere research amounts to proof old men should be having kids with underage girls more than meets the standard for defamation. You're essentially implying the guy released research that tells people to be a pedo by doing that

If you think Lucas is going to be dragged into court by a scientist and get his tardbucks garnished because he keeps talking about telomeres you're as exceptional as he is.

Again, its not about the telomeres its about bringing his name into it repeatedly, even after being repeatedly told not to. Though in this case the two are tied rather closely together considering its literally his and only his scientific work that lucas appears to fixate on using to justify his actions

To put it simply, you can't for the most part take someone to court to stop the from talking about telomeres, but you absolutely can take them to court to stop them from talking about this guys specific telomere research and more to the point, to stop him from using the scientists name in his questionable statements about kids and breeding using that research to justify it. Its not like this is an ambiguous situation, he has flat out been told to stop bringing the guy into it, not to stop talking about telomeres in and of itself. That is something a court can absolutely take action to enforce. and again, if he really is too nuts to stop he can easily be sent back to the nuthouse and/or forced to compensate the guy. Lets not forget this isn't random ranting that affects nobody, it could have serious implications for the guys livelihood and reputation to have rumors that his work is used to rationalize pedo behavior. Thats not the kind of thing you want following you around

The entire tldr of what i'm saying is simple: tell lucas to stfu about him personally and leave his name out of it. if he refuses send him a cease and desist letter, if he refuses still, get a restraining order, if he is stupid enough to continue after that take him to court because at that point he absolutely has it coming and is in blatant breach of the law. At a bare minimum he'd be getting a fine and some time in a cell for violating a restraining order. Its not complicated and not difficult to arrange. Lucas isn't legally immune from his actions because of being a sped. The fact he's spent time in nuthouses and jail already speaks to that, as does the fact that he has at least two non contact orders that we know of against him - that one from that dan guy in olympia and another from suzanne. Speaking of which, violating the one on suzanne is literally what landed him in jail for 50 days by his own admission

 

[wenttobermuda]

Thats not what i'm saying at all. This isn't about misinterpreting anything. I'm saying he can go after lucas for using his name as an authority on the telomere stuff (which he is and has done several times) to flat out say 'this scientist did this research that says old men should be breeding with little girls. its totally legal cause shes totally 16' which is essentially what he is and has been doing. Its not about how its being misinterpreted its about bringing his name into it publicly to justify the actions of someone who is by all accounts an obvious pedo

tldr: its about using someones name to justify the bs conclusions he came up with to justify pedo behavior publicly and by extension, taking legal steps to publicly separate his name from that 'misinterpretation' and from being used as an excuse to be a pedo



I didn't say you could. Its not about the videos themselves, its about lucas continuing to bring his name into crackpot interpretations of his work to after being repeatedly told not to and after being sent a cease and desist letter telling him to stop doing so. The next step in such scenarios is literally to get a restraining order prohibiting lucas from bringing his name into anything, and in this case, more than likely including a prohibition on the 'breed with a little girl cause the telomere study tells you to' nonsense because of its association with the scientist in question. It is not difficult to get a restraining order when you follow the correct steps



...He literally has, multiple times. Ranting publicly and telling anyone who will listen how said scientists telomere research amounts to proof old men should be having kids with underage girls more than meets the standard for defamation. You're essentially implying the guy released research that tells people to be a pedo by doing that



Again, its not about the telomeres its about bringing his name into it repeatedly, even after being repeatedly told not to. Though in this case the two are tied rather closely together considering its literally his and only his scientific work that lucas appears to fixate on using to justify his actions

To put it simply, you can't for the most part take someone to court to stop the from talking about telomeres, but you absolutely can take them to court to stop them from talking about this guys specific telomere research and more to the point, to stop him from using the scientists name in his questionable statements about kids and breeding using that research to justify it. Its not like this is an ambiguous situation, he has flat out been told to stop bringing the guy into it, not to stop talking about telomeres in and of itself. That is something a court can absolutely take action to enforce. and again, if he really is too nuts to stop he can easily be sent back to the nuthouse and/or forced to compensate the guy. Lets not forget this isn't random ranting that affects nobody, it could have serious implications for the guys livelihood and reputation to have rumors that his work is used to rationalize pedo behavior. Thats not the kind of thing you want following you around

The entire tldr of what i'm saying is simple: tell lucas to stfu about him personally and leave his name out of it. if he refuses send him a cease and desist letter, if he refuses still, get a restraining order, if he is stupid enough to continue after that take him to court because at that point he absolutely has it coming and is in blatant breach of the law. At a bare minimum he'd be getting a fine and some time in a cell for violating a restraining order. Its not complicated and not difficult to arrange. Lucas isn't legally immune from his actions because of being a sped. The fact he's spent time in nuthouses and jail already speaks to that, as does the fact that he has at least two non contact orders that we know of against him - that one from that dan guy in olympia and another from suzanne. Speaking of which, violating the one on suzanne is literally what landed him in jail for 50 days by his own admission

I get what you're saying, and think it'd be rad if Lucas had a lawsuit saga, but there are practical problems to be addressed. I don't mean to be pedantic.

First, because this is not a Family Law or criminal case, the only remedy provided for by Washington law is a civil anti-harassment/stalking order. Here, Lucas has not been contacting the researcher directly, but rather name dropping him. Accordingly, its not clear that he'd meet the requirements for an anti-harassment/stalking no contact order. He's not targeting the poor guy so much as citing him, and that's not what the applicable order is designed to address, to my reading. The situation is unlike that or your family member, who seems to have been directly threatening and contacting his victim.

Lucas is, however, arguably defaming the researcher by making factual assertions about how his studies justify, no require, him to impregnate teens.

Even if the researcher could meet the standard for defamation (like damages) Lucas is judgment proof against a civil suit, based on his source and amount of income. He's on disability and state aid, right, and making much less than 250 or so a week? His "income" can't be garnished to enforce a judgment against him for defamation. Whether an unenforceable judgment would be worth it for the poor researcher isn't clear. I'd be delighted if he decided to take a stand. Can you imagine Lucas as a civil defendant?

I tend to prefer Lucas the Homeless Scientist to Lucas Da Pussy God. But what I really want to see more of is Drunk Lucas.

 

[King Daddy Telomerase]

First, because this is not a Family Law or criminal case, the only remedy provided for by Washington law is a civil anti-harassment/stalking order. Here, Lucas has not been contacting the researcher directly, but rather name dropping him. Accordingly, its not clear that he'd meet the requirements for an anti-harassment/stalking no contact order. He's not targeting the poor guy so much as citing him, and that's not what the applicable order is designed to address, to my reading.

That's enough to violate harassment/protection orders. Or at least to be dragged to court and told to cut it out. Which is bullshit IMO, but I'm biased.

 

[wenttobermuda]

That's enough to violate harassment/protection orders. Or at least to be dragged to court and told to cut it out. Which is bullshit IMO, but I'm biased.

The question is, does Lucas's name dropping meet the requirements for a civil anti-harassment order? The answer, imo, is no. If you're curious I've included snippets of the governing statutes. Unless Lucas starts threatening the researcher or contacting him directly, no order will issue.

No, I'm not Lucsas's attorney. And no, it doesn't truly matter that much.

Spoiler: Washington Law

RCW 10.14.080 provides for an order of protection where there is unlawful harassment or stalking. I've included the definitions below.

Stalking:

*Defining Stalking Law (RCW 9a.46.110):

(1) A person commits the crime of stalking if, without lawful authority and under circumstances not amounting to a felony attempt of another crime:

(a) He or she intentionally and repeatedly harasses or repeatedly follows another person; and

(b) The person being harassed or followed is placed in fear that the stalker intends to injure the person, another person, or property of the person or of another person. The feeling of fear must be one that a reasonable person in the same situation would experience under all the circumstances; and

(c) The stalker either:

• (i) Intends to frighten, intimidate, or harass the person; or
• (ii) Knows or reasonably should know that the person is afraid, intimidated, or harassed even if the stalker did not intend to place the person in fear or intimidate or harass the person.

Defining Harassment Law (RCW 9A.46.020):

(1) A person is guilty of harassment if:

(a) Without lawful authority, the person knowingly threatens:

• (i) To cause bodily injury immediately or in the future to the person threatened or to any other person; or
• (ii) To cause physical damage to the property of a person other than the actor; or
• (iii) To subject the person threatened or any other person to physical confinement or restraint; or
• (iv) Maliciously to do any other act which is intended to substantially harm the person threatened or another with respect to his or her physical or mental health or safety; and

(b) The person by words or conduct places the person threatened in reasonable fear that the threat will be carried out. “Words or conduct” includes, in addition to any other form of communication or conduct, the sending of an electronic communication.

Eta; I'll now return to psychoanalysing the tard and marveling at his dysfunction and failure.

 

[mothman96]

I get what you're saying, and think it'd be rad if Lucas had a lawsuit saga, but there are practical problems to be addressed. I don't mean to be pedantic.

First, because this is not a Family Law or criminal case, the only remedy provided for by Washington law is a civil anti-harassment/stalking order. Here, Lucas has not been contacting the researcher directly, but rather name dropping him. Accordingly, its not clear that he'd meet the requirements for an anti-harassment/stalking no contact order. He's not targeting the poor guy so much as citing him, and that's not what the applicable order is designed to address, to my reading. The situation is unlike that or your family member, who seems to have been directly threatening and contacting his victim.

Actually Lucas did contact the researcher directly at least once. When Lucas was going all psycho using the researcher's name and research to "science a girl onto his dick", a couple of members here contacted Dr. Eisenberg about Lucas's actions. Dr Eisenberg replied back to one of them (maybe both) that he'd already received a message from Lucas. He'd taken one look at Lucas's insanity and cast it aside. I'd say it's via the members messaging Dr. Eisenberg that prompted him to take a close look at Lucas and take action. It's also possible other people outside KF reached out to the Dr. about what Lucas was doing.

 

[BIG CATS]

90% chance when people “like him” IRL they’re actually trying to get him to fuck off- like when you give a bum a cigarette so he’ll go away.
Lucas sees asking for women equivalent to asking for a cigarette or a stick of gum.



Edit: Like mother like tard. No wonder he blames everyone for his problems!



Myrna, the woman who traveled to Mexico for happy hour 3x during the CV19 shutdown, is now wringing her hands and blaming Trump.
“I hope it doesn’t cost you your life” FFS SHE has PERSONALLY endangered more people than anybody I’ve seen during the pandemic. And her tone is just like Lucas!

 

[Particle Bored]

Only listened to about half the video but he goes on to say how he’s a nice guy but if you talk shit online he’ll pop off but in real life he’ll blow you off unless you get in his face then it becomes a legal matter (very ACAB of you Lucas).
Then he rants about some ugly girl he chatted up for an hour who had fucked up teeth and acne but she asked if he wanted to kick it and his dick got hard but then his friend came in and started being mysogynistic and took her away. He also claimed she called him a faggot and he was still interested. Does he perhaps have a humiliation fetish?

Opens with "I'm not really much for slut-shaming ... "

Closes with "I'll call you out for being a slut and spreading the virus 'cause it's your goddamn fault."

 

[mothman96]

Opens with "I'm not really much for slut-shaming ... "

Closes with "I'll call you out for being a slut and spreading the virus 'cause it's your goddamn fault."

Wait a minute, a couple of weeks ago didn't he say he'd date a prostitute, but he's afraid he'd fall in love with her.

 

[GleamingTheQ-Bert]

Lucas explicitly says that the coronavirus is a plague on Christians because he can't get laid. He wishes death on the people at the House of Charity who put food in his mouth and a pillow under his head.

Not proud of this, but this stupid fuck gets me mad on the internet.

Someone should let the House of Charity know how grateful Lucas is for what they provide.

509-624-7821

Reap the whirlwind, fatass.

Edit:

Also this. Both from today. More self pitying whining.