• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

Slaythe

The Wise Ones
Member
Oct 25, 2017
15,855
A few things here:

1. Him supporting Jamie means little, since that e-mail was to Monica (and Ron?), with Monica being the one to CC in Jamie right before he dropped the proposed statements. Maybe Jamie's ok with him, but that doesn't mean the others are, and it's weird to want to bring her into it besides. Cause frankly maybe they're all ok with him, but it doesn't make it any less shitty.

2. That tweet supporting Jamie looks like it was about a month before he sent these e-mails, so that also doesn't help much given that he was apparently willing to support Vic like this even after it.

3. What I've bolded is very wrong. My impression of him from stories of him I read - maybe 5+ years ago now - was not "rude to con staff". It was "a creep". That stuff was already out there in general. Hell, even Vic's admitted as much in his deposition, the "rumor panel" stuff, etc. The rumors they talk about in those cases were not "he's a diva".

4. I think you mean well, but "Monica and Jamie were still friends with Vic" is buying into the same misunderstandings he's been claiming as reality and his supporters are using as evidence of hypocrisy. Professionalism and getting along for work purposes (or to not have your career hurt by his influence) are not the same as being actually friendly or wanting to be around someone. Similarly, I don't know how they "clearly did not know of Vic's atrocious actions in private" when some of those actions were directed at them...? Maybe they didn't hear the stories about who else he was targeting, but it's not like they thought he was just a diva after stuff, y'know, happened to them?



1. The statement adresses both, I believe he targeted Monica first because her statement was the most damaging to Vic (and she was the biggest target of Nick's harassment). "It doesn't make it less shitty" I mean, if he apologized since then, yes it does. And there's more conversations they've had we don't have access to. Jamie has also been very protective of her friends, so again, if she felt like Chuck had to apologize or needed to be called out, when asked about it, I'm sure she would let us know. So it's not "weird" at all to want to hear where she stands.

2. And again, you need to put things back into context. A shockingly high amount of the fanbase turned against Monica and Jamie and harassed them on a daily basis. Thanks to the work of Nick. This still hasn't stopped. Literally right now I was on twitter and under a random DBZ tweet I saw this :

2f4ff433a9606e416ab52201058aa63b.png


On top of that, Nick had been extremely intimidating because of his hatred filled fanbase and his legal threats + the insane gofundme.
Several lawyers stated the case could damage Jamie and Monica. Including recently, Greg Doucette, who stated he won't attack Ty legally until he case is over to make sure he isn't fired and he keeps ruining this case forever because "a competent lawyer could create serious problems for the defendants". Now that being said after the investigation of the defendants' lawyers and the TCPA filings, I don't think anybody could ever salvage that case but it's not something that was known at the time.

So Chuck was trying to foolishly please all parties at once.
Again I do not believe for a second Chuck knew the extent to which Vic had misbehaved, so he thought Vic, as a christian, deserved a chance for redemption if he showed true remorse and worked hard on himself, and shouldn't lose his livelihood right away. This was about the Monica Jamie incidents + his public behavior, not any of the abuse / rapey situations later described. (We can absolutely disagree with this, and I sure do, but that context is important)

Also Chuck had been in communications with Vic and Nick so he didn't randomly demand things, that's what they wanted.

The deal tried to accomplish this :

- Vic admits he hurt people publicly, he is a sex addict, needs therapy and time

- Vic does not get any new role but keeps his existing ones (that just means he voices video games which is more than enough to make a living)

- Monica and Jamie agree to re-qualify the behavior of Vic that they had suggested was akin to criminal, as "inappropriate advances" (not state that it didn't happen)

- Encourage victims of sexual assault to keep sharing their stories (the "not about Vic" didn't mean don't share Vic stories, the mail acknowledges his victims, it was referring to the dozens of women who shared their powerful stories about abuse that were not related to Vic)

- "Our intentions was not to destroy Vic but to make him realize his behavior and lift up victims who have been hurt"
I don't exactly call that "sweeping it under the rug", it's just giving Vic a second chance, the other alternative is just literally firing him and letting him rot (and again, I'm not disagreeing with you guys at all, just saying the second Chuck wanted Vic to have a second chance, it meant staying hired in some capacity)

- Funimation donates 500k to sexual abuse causes
- Vic handles all legal fees and donates the gofundme entirely to the same charity
- Funimation creates new guidelines and rules to make sure every artist they hire interacts with the fanbase in proper manners, and cons monitoring
- Nick publicly apologizes and asks his fan base to stop harassing the women

That's like a very naive and stupid 4th grader plan to "solve it all". But I do not see evil.

3/4.

You're misunderstanding my point.

I was absolutely not implying they were hypocritical.

They stated that they forgave Vic and moved on because they thought it was a one time thing. They were still friends with him.
That wasn't just professional courtesy.
What changed, is that when they saw that his behavior was actually widespread, it made them realize it was absolutely unacceptable and they decided to speak out to support his victims. Which is perfectly legitimate (and that's what the Vic stans are ignoring).

The point is, if they had known about how he targeted young girls, to get into his rooms, that he got fired for that etc..., they would have NEVER remained friends with him, for professional reasons, or else. And the initial scandal was all about Vic and his public behavior + Monica and Jamie incidents.
Therefore it's unfair to claim Chuck is a "rape apologists" and whatever else I'm reading in this thread.
If it's ever stated or proven that Chuck did know, obviously it's irredeemable. But honestly, with all we have seen so far, I do not believe he did.

And this is why I would love to hear more from the people directly involved, if they tell us Chuck is trash then we fully believe them. And if he apologized in private because he was a fool to believe Vic's crocodile tears and Nick's intimidation, that's good, and I hope he learned from that.


I don't know why I misremembered the emails. I thought it was a proposal for Monica AND Jamie. My apologies for that error.

But yeah I agree with you Thammy. My own bias towards Chuck just makes it hard. I'm at least aware of it, thanks to you guys on here. I'm a rape and sexual harassment victim so these topics are very important to me. It's just hard seeing someone you thought was safe turn out not to be =(

Hey, don't feel this way. Unlike what is stated by some, Chuck has never implied there were no victims, or that people weren't hurt by Vic.

But maybe you should try to reach out to Chuck and share some words to make him realize (in case he hadn't already cause it's been months) that this wasn't okay and that he hurt people indirectly with his behavior. Hopefully he can use this as a chance to grow.

I do not believe that Chuck actively tried to cause harm to people. He may have been too oblivious, and naive (on top of forceful trying to get his "ideal solution" rolling), to forgive him without more information or statement, but I still don't think he's an evil man.
 

L Thammy

Spacenoid
Member
Oct 25, 2017
50,045
Slaythe , I feel the main issue is how much you're drawing from this. For the most part, I think you're simply taking the lightest possible read based on what we have. But this:
Therefore it's unfair to claim Chuck is a "rape apologists" and whatever else I'm reading in this thread.
I think is simply flat out wrong. Chuck may not have intended to be a rape apologist, but ultimately it doesn't matter, as what his proposal would actually achieve is very much the same. It attributes error to the victims while simultaneously claiming that the perpetrator is not within his own control. It's fair to claim that he's a rape apologist in practice regardless of what his intent.

I think it's possible that he thought he was striking a balance between two stories, but he was doing so by creating falsehoods in both accounts, and both of the falsehoods shifted things in Vic's (the abuser's) favour.
 
Last edited:

dennett316

Member
Nov 2, 2017
2,982
Blackpool, UK
Why bring up "evil"? There's lots of degrees of shitty behaviour before you get to evil. This Chuck asshole may not be evil, but he's a piece of shit for suggesting what he did. Wanting Vic to stay employed, wanting the women to say they over-reacted to his behaviour (that alone is unconscionable, never mind the rest of his bullshit 'compromise'), it all smacks of thinking about the man's poor ickle feewings instead of the needs and feelings of his many victims. Give him a chance as a Christian? Fuck that. This wasn't a one time fuck up, it was decades of behaviour, behaviour that was an open secret to pretty much everyone in that industry.
At best he's a misogynist shithead who wanted women to shut up so they wouldn't impact the career of a fucking scumbag who voiced some cartoon characters that he liked. It's the same sort of shitty behaviour that has seen ex Channel Awesome contributors like Allison Pregler get shit on for daring to speak up against the shitty behaviour of those who ran that site. It's not naivety, it's toxic as fuck, and it doesn't come from any kind of positive place.
 

HStallion

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
62,262
Chuck doesn't need to be evil to be a scumbag. Simple as that. Constantly talking about good and evil about him makes me think I need to throw Holy water at him or something.
 

Katten

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,501
Slaythe you have now asked people to reach out to both Jamie and Chuck. If you feel you need further clarification, you should do just that. But people are entitled to form their own opinions on the information that is now out there.

Chuck does not really look good in that set of emails. If he wants to clarify, I am sure that he knows that the emails are out there and he has access to Twitter.
 

Killer Tofu

Member
Feb 18, 2019
48
Hey, don't feel this way. Unlike what is stated by some, Chuck has never implied there were no victims, or that people weren't hurt by Vic.

But maybe you should try to reach out to Chuck and share some words to make him realize (in case he hadn't already cause it's been months) that this wasn't okay and that he hurt people indirectly with his behavior. Hopefully he can use this as a chance to grow.

I do not believe that Chuck actively tried to cause harm to people. He may have been too oblivious, and naive (on top of forceful trying to get his "ideal solution" rolling), to forgive him without more information or statement, but I still don't think he's an evil man.

Like with Jamie, reaching out to Chuck really isn't something I feel comfortable doing.

I know you must be a big fan of his judging by your words and avatar, but no matter Chuck's intentions, what he did was wrong. That's the bottom line. I don't think he's evil either of course. But like I said before... you can't play devil's advocate and be an ally to victims especially with what he said in the email. If what he proposed to Monica happened, Vic might not get new roles from Funimation, sure.... but he'd still have his power. The domino effect in being blacklisted from cons which in turn protects women and underage girls would not have happened. It needed to.

Edit: just edited grammar mistakes
 
Last edited:

Minataur

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,151
That's the real danger of misogyny. In most cases, at least in my experience, it's not actively malicious. It's a deep-seated ideology that affects the way one views and acts around women, and can spread its tendrils into one's behaviour in ways not even they're aware of.

Regardless of whether or not he "meant" it, everything Chuck tried to do (especially those disgusting emails) with regards to this case was tinged in casual misogyny and reckless disregard for the safety and well-being of women (in online spaces, at Funimation, and in general) and thus it's irresponsible to give him a free pass just because he perhaps didn't ~intend~ to be crazy sexist on purpose.

And for the record, I don't think it's exactly fair to dismiss his weird beliefs like the flat earth bullcrap as quirky/innocuous, either. That alone belies a MASSIVE ignorance and disregard for basic common sense; an ignorance that clearly is present in the rest of his beliefs and opinions as well.
 

L Thammy

Spacenoid
Member
Oct 25, 2017
50,045
And for the record, I don't think it's exactly fair to dismiss his weird beliefs like the flat earth bullcrap as quirky/innocuous, either. That alone belies a MASSIVE ignorance and disregard for basic common sense; an ignorance that clearly is present in the rest of his beliefs and opinions as well.
His flat earth comments came from his stated interest in fringe science. It's not something passively absorbed that he's just unaware of, it's part of something he specifically and actively seeks for while knowing that it's not accepted by mainstream science (generally because it's wrong). It's probably not something his daddy impressed on him when he was a kid. Considering Wikipedia entries tend to state the errors in how experiments like the flat earth one Chuck was talking about produced faulty results, it would probably have been easier for him to find the proper result than to dig out this fringe science stuff in the first place. I don't see it as sensible when used to present him as ignorant either.
 

Slaythe

The Wise Ones
Member
Oct 25, 2017
15,855
Slaythe , I feel the main issue is how much you're drawing from this. For the most part, I think you're simply taking the lightest possible read based on what we have. But this:

I think is simply flat out wrong. Chuck may not have intended to be a rape apologist, but ultimately it doesn't matter, as what his proposal would actually achieve is very much the same. It attributes error to the victims while simultaneously claiming that the perpetrator is not within his own control. It's fair to claim that he's a rape apologist in practice regardless of what his intent.

I think it's possible that he thought he was striking a balance between two stories, but he was doing so by creating falsehoods in both accounts, and both of the falsehoods shifted things in Vic's (the abuser's) favour.

Alright, fair enough. Also keep in mind that only Vic had "lost everything" so of course it would seem to go in his favor once you're past the apology therapy etc... Monica and Jamie were not trying to "get" anything besides maybe some peace back.

That being said, kissing someone on the cheek or elsewhere, pulling their hair, hugging them too close without asking etc..
That's absolutely unacceptable behavior. And in many of the instances, sexual harassment/abuse.

So I understand you feel like it's the same in "essence", and I'll agree, but the crime (at the time) was not a rape.

Like with Jamie, reaching out to Chuck really isn't something I feel comfortable doing.

I know you must be a big fan of his judging by your words and avatar, but no matter Chuck's intentions, what he did was wrong. That's the bottom line. I don't think he's evil either of course. But like I said before... you can't play devil's advocate and be an ally to victims especially with what he said in the email. If what he proposed to Monica happened, Vic might not get new roles from Funimation, sure.... but he'd still have his power. The domino effect in being blacklisted from cons which in turn protects women and underage girls would not have happened. It needed to.

Edit: just edited grammar mistakes

For the record, I can't stand the english dubs of Funimation. So I'm not a fan. I do know people that are friends with Chuck. They were really positive about him. That's all.

But regarding Vic, not only would his reputation be completely ravaged, he also would be heavily monitored (both officially through funimation and through con owners) at any event he intended.

I also don't think he would have any kind of power remaining after what happened. It was a desperate attempt to let him get money for saying the same 3 shitty lines in video games. Ironically I remember Chuck mentioning that they make a big chunk of their money from the video games, so that's absolutely was he was gunning for. Vic would not have been directing any set whatsoever.

That's the real danger of misogyny. In most cases, at least in my experience, it's not actively malicious. It's a deep-seated ideology that affects the way one views and acts around women, and can spread its tendrils into one's behaviour in ways not even they're aware of.

Regardless of whether or not he "meant" it, everything Chuck tried to do (especially those disgusting emails) with regards to this case was tinged in casual misogyny and reckless disregard for the safety and well-being of women (in online spaces, at Funimation, and in general) and thus it's irresponsible to give him a free pass just because he perhaps didn't ~intend~ to be crazy sexist on purpose.

And for the record, I don't think it's exactly fair to dismiss his weird beliefs like the flat earth bullcrap as quirky/innocuous, either. That alone belies a MASSIVE ignorance and disregard for basic common sense; an ignorance that clearly is present in the rest of his beliefs and opinions as well.

That's a good post. And Chuck is not getting a free pass. I do believe that intent matters, because it's what does define who you are and whether you deserve to be heard when you mess up. I truly hope he can use this to grow.

But I agree with what you said. Except the safety of girls, because Vic's problems would be recognized, and watched out for by several entities.
And there was an effort to try to stop the online harassment. The rest is spot on.

I'll try to see if I can contact one of the people involved.

Is there a way to watch Monica's deposition without chuds flooding it?

I take it you're referring to BlackfaceJournalist ?

I don't think so. Only this idiot decided to "leak" them.
 

DragonSJG

Banned
Mar 4, 2019
14,341
Alright, fair enough. Also keep in mind that only Vic had "lost everything" so of course it would seem to go in his favor once you're past the apology therapy etc... Monica and Jamie were not trying to "get" anything besides maybe some peace back.

That being said, kissing someone on the cheek or elsewhere, pulling their hair, hugging them too close without asking etc..
That's absolutely unacceptable behavior. And in many of the instances, sexual harassment/abuse.

So I understand you feel like it's the same in "essence", and I'll agree, but the crime (at the time) was not a rape.



For the record, I can't stand the english dubs of Funimation. So I'm not a fan. I do know people that are friends with Chuck. They were really positive about him. That's all.

But regarding Vic, not only would his reputation be completely ravaged, he also would be heavily monitored (both officially through funimation and through con owners) at any event he intended.

I also don't think he would have any kind of power remaining after what happened. It was a desperate attempt to let him get money for saying the same 3 shitty lines in video games. Ironically I remember Chuck mentioning that they make a big chunk of their money from the video games, so that's absolutely was he was gunning for. Vic would not have been directing any set whatsoever.



That's a good post. And Chuck is not getting a free pass. I do believe that intent matters, because it's what does define who you are and whether you deserve to be heard when you mess up. I truly hope he can use this to grow.

But I agree with what you said. Except the safety of girls, because Vic's problems would be recognized, and watched out for by several entities.
And there was an effort to try to stop the online harassment. The rest is spot on.

I'll try to see if I can contact one of the people involved.



I take it you're referring to BlackfaceJournalist ?

I don't think so. Only this idiot decided to "leak" them.
Shame. BTW, was curious, who do you know are friends with chuck if you don't mind me asking?
 
Jun 17, 2019
2,182
Did I read right? Did Monica say in her deposition that Sentai will not let Vic on the property? Now that is interesting because it means that he did something serious enough to get some sort of restraining order or that security was told he's not allowed on site. You would have to have done some serious damage to be order to keep off property. I wonder what that would be.
 

L Thammy

Spacenoid
Member
Oct 25, 2017
50,045
Did I read right? Did Monica say in her deposition that Sentai will not let Vic on the property? Now that is interesting because it means that he did something serious enough to get some sort of restraining order or that security was told he's not allowed on site. You would have to have done some serious damage to be order to keep off property. I wonder what that would be.

I don't think it's necessarily anything special; it could "just" be that he's known to harass their employees. Remember, it seemed to be known at Funimation that he was doing that, they aren't really a victim here despite being a defendant in the lawsuit. They allowed him to keep coming and took other measures to attempt to reduce the damage.


TFFgbbl.jpg



Sentai Filmworks might have encountered the same behaviour and taken a harder stance on it.
 

Doctor_Y

Avenger
Mar 14, 2019
125
For the record, I can't stand the english dubs of Funimation. So I'm not a fan. I do know people that are friends with Chuck. They were really positive about him. That's all.

uh huh....

I remember all those "friends" of Vic. And all the people that met him that say he's "so nice".

You can try to paint Chuck in a good light.

For me he is AT BEST a naive idiot who believed Vics lies and/or believed Monica/Jamie and wanted to "help" them. With his "help" being to tell them to shut the hell up.


At worst. He's a mysoginist asshole who only plays the nice guy.
 
Last edited:
Jun 17, 2019
2,182
Interesting that Sentai may have taken a harder stance on him, could it have to do with his behavior with Mari?

Regarding the Chuck thing, keep in mind that there were several others too that were tweeting that he should be given another chance. Colleen Clinkbeard comes to mind as she said to forgive Vic in her tweet way at the start of this. I get the disgust of the letters, but what I'm wondering is if it was a third party that requested him to do this, not Vic, Monica, or Jamie.

Okay so I'm reading up on how mediation works, and according to Financial World these are the steps.Financier worldwide court mediation

So given chuck is not a in court mediator this means he falls under private. Private mediators are selected by the lawyers of the parties because both feel he will be neutral.

The mediator is paid by the parties; usually the parties share the cost equally. The mediator charges either by the hour or by the day or half-day.

The parties should try to find a mediator who is knowledgeable about the subject matter of their case, has experience litigating or mediating similar cases, and who they think has the mediation skills necessary to bring the parties together in a settlement.

In private mediation, the role of the mediator is very different. Once a mediator is chosen, the parties submit to the mediator copies of briefs and exhibits that they may have filed in court or may have created for the mediator, to educate the mediator regarding the case and the issues that separate the parties. The mediator is expected to read – and to be paid for reading – these materials before the mediation begins.

The mediation is then held in an office, usually provided by the mediator, not in the court house. When the mediation begins, the mediator will ask each party to state its case, essentially to make what would be an opening statement in a trial.

The mediator then usually will separately caucus with one of the parties, then the other, until either an agreement has been reached or the mediator feels it would be fruitful to bring the parties together again. During these caucuses, the mediator is expected to probe for weaknesses in each party's case and to attempt to bring the parties' positions closer together.

The mediator is often asked to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the parties' positions, and may even be asked for an opinion of how the case should be settled, but the parties are free to accept or to reject the mediator's opinion, if the mediator even agrees to give one.

While the process remains confidential, voluntary and non-binding, the mediator often develops an aura of authority that causes the parties to alter their positions, and leads to settlement. If a settlement is reached, the mediator will draft, and the parties will execute, a binding settlement agreement that will include the dismissal of the case or the entry of an agreed judgment.

Something interesting about this is that it shows that both parties would have had to have been present during the mediation and that the draft is based on what the two were saying.

I'll also point out that Chuck previously worked in education at an administration level, which means he may have run into similar circumstances where the cases didn't work out for the victims, as we've seen in cases where a school is involved.

Trying to cover the whole thing so people know how this works regarding mediation.
Edit: One more thing. So from what this sounds like the end draft has to be okayed by the clients and the lawyers, and you know Blackface lawyer would never allow for the victims to not get some of lame and having Vic not get his position back in some way. That's why I think that it is worded the way it is.
 
Last edited:

deimosmasque

Ugly, Queer, Gender-Fluid, Drive-In Mutant, yes?
Moderator
Apr 22, 2018
14,215
Tampa, Fl
Is there any evidence that Monica or Jamie asked Chuck to mediate? Or even show interest in mediation.
 

Doctor_Y

Avenger
Mar 14, 2019
125
Something interesting about this is that it shows that both parties would have had to have been present during the mediation and that the draft is based on what the two were saying.

Remember that he said "If you are talking to lawyers, i can't help you anymore".

So he wasn't an official mediator and the whole idea of him being one falls flat.
 
Nov 2, 2017
2,243
Okay so I'm reading up on how mediation works, and according to Financial World these are the steps.Financier worldwide court mediation

So given chuck is not a in court mediator this means he falls under private. Private mediators are selected by the lawyers of the parties because both feel he will be neutral.





Something interesting about this is that it shows that both parties would have had to have been present during the mediation and that the draft is based on what the two were saying.

I'll also point out that Chuck previously worked in education at an administration level, which means he may have run into similar circumstances where the cases didn't work out for the victims, as we've seen in cases where a school is involved.

Trying to cover the whole thing so people know how this works regarding mediation.
Edit: One more thing. So from what this sounds like the end draft has to be okayed by the clients and the lawyers, and you know Blackface lawyer would never allow for the victims to not get some of lame and having Vic not get his position back in some way. That's why I think that it is worded the way it is.

You're way overthinking this. He wasn't acting as a professional mediator. He was just inserting himself in the situation to act in that manner.

As soon as Monica mentions running this offer by their lawyer, he's like "if you're talking to lawyers I'm out", which is a good indicator that he wasn't brought in by the lawyers.
 
Jun 17, 2019
2,182
I had assumed, given the nature of the writing that he would have had to have been acting as a private one, but if there was no lawyers involved then, yeah he wasn't acting in a professional manner. I wonder who was the one that asked him to be involved? I know that all of them, sans Jamie I think, were in the STC group and, given Michele's line about it being a "family" in her letter to Vic, so maybe that was why they were trusting him on this? Maybe the three of them agreed because Chuck was the most neutral person all of them knew?

Regarding the Sean and Chris line, I'm wondering if Chuck's thinking more on the line of Chris having a Studio and being involved in a court case would mean adding more lawyers to the whole thing and may bring his Studio into that issue? And if Sean could get into trouble with the whole character he played in the Sonny Strait clip and thus neither would want to get involved in this?

I admit it's a horribly worded letter, and damn man he should have run that by some legal people before he even suggested these. I get what he was trying to do, but dude, not a cool move. Hell he was a principal at a school, so he should know how to word these things better. Really I hope at some point Chuck will explain this, or one of the Ladies would explain in regard to him being involved in the first place.

What I'm curious about now is Jamie's deposition and what Funi is going to do.

Also, I can take a speculative guess about why Vic wasn't brought up before now at Funi, betting anything he was closer with the former head of the company as both are "religious" people and both are republicans, and the former head of Funi was friends with either a Rep or a Senate member that's part of the Republican party and they shared office space with the guy. So probably he was sweeping it under the rug.
 

Primus

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,840
Looks like the TCPA/Motion to Dismiss for Monica Rial and Ron Toye has been scheduled for August 8th, the same day that Funimation's TCPA/Motion to Dismiss hearing is. That is not a good sign for Vic.



Exactly It's also a sign the Ds think this is a slam dunk IMO. Statute doesn't require a hearing for Rial/Toye until late August; they could get through the Funi TCPA, see what Percy offers, and adjust. Instead, they're going for a quick kill
 

Cokomon

One Winged Slayer
Member
Nov 11, 2017
3,766
So if this all gets dismissed on the 8th, will dipshits finally scatter like cockroaches? Or will they make one idiotic last stand? At least the mental gymnastics to convince themselves Vic won will be somewhat entertaining.
 

Tabaxi

Member
Nov 18, 2018
12,918
So if this all gets dismissed on the 8th, will dipshits finally scatter like cockroaches? Or will they make one idiotic last stand? At least the mental gymnastics to convince themselves Vic won will be somewhat entertaining.

They'll dig themselves deeper and claim Vic was the victim of the SJW conspiracy.

Like QAnon or any other conspiracy-based cult, being proven wrong usually only strengthens their beliefs.
 

Mr. Zero

Member
Apr 22, 2019
86
So if this all gets dismissed on the 8th, will dipshits finally scatter like cockroaches? Or will they make one idiotic last stand? At least the mental gymnastics to convince themselves Vic won will be somewhat entertaining.

Sadly they'll stick around for another month at least. From what Greg has said, the hearing will be on the 8th and the judge has the next 30 days after that to make a decision based on the hearing. Also from what I understand, the motion to dismiss also allows the defendants to submit more to add to the TCPA before the hearing date. All that is left is for Jamie to file the motion to dismiss the case.
 

HStallion

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
62,262
So if this all gets dismissed on the 8th, will dipshits finally scatter like cockroaches? Or will they make one idiotic last stand? At least the mental gymnastics to convince themselves Vic won will be somewhat entertaining.

They'll just claim the usual insane conspiracy theories as the reasons like the Judges were paid off or in on it or some such nonsense. They'll grow quieter and quieter over time and eventually just stop altogether after the dust has finally settled and move onto the next flash point. People aren't caping for Milo or Candace Owens any more once they got their own comeuppance and the same will happen to Vic. Once your purpose is served they toss you like last weeks garbage.
 

Jintor

Saw the truth behind the copied door
Member
Oct 25, 2017
32,430
So if this all gets dismissed on the 8th, will dipshits finally scatter like cockroaches? Or will they make one idiotic last stand? At least the mental gymnastics to convince themselves Vic won will be somewhat entertaining.

they'll claim the justice system is against them
 

Cokomon

One Winged Slayer
Member
Nov 11, 2017
3,766
Oh, I know. That's what I meant by "mental gymnastics". It was a kind way of saying "bizarre alt-right conspiracy theories".

The other way it will go is Vic being completely cast aside now that his usefulness is at an end. Like all right-wing personalities, they have a shelf life of relevancy before they're completely disavowed.
 

Fat4all

Woke up, got a money tag, swears a lot
Member
Oct 25, 2017
92,903
here
would Funimation have grounds to file a countersuit for legal fees or whathaveyou??
 

zulux21

Member
Oct 25, 2017
20,370
Sadly they'll stick around for another month at least. From what Greg has said, the hearing will be on the 8th and the judge has the next 30 days after that to make a decision based on the hearing. Also from what I understand, the motion to dismiss also allows the defendants to submit more to add to the TCPA before the hearing date. All that is left is for Jamie to file the motion to dismiss the case.
I believe Greg has also said even if the case is dismissed Vic can still try to appeal and likely will since it would give the youtube guy a chance to get a new influx of cash to file for the appeal.
would Funimation have grounds to file a countersuit for legal fees or whathaveyou??
Texas has a law that if this is determined to be a lawsuit just to silence the defendants that the plaintiffs will have to pay all the defendant's lawyer fees.
 

zulux21

Member
Oct 25, 2017
20,370
Yup.

That is what an anti-slapp law is for texas its


If you add a defamation claim to your case, do so with caution. Regardless of who sees the alleged defamatory statement, if the defendant can make an argument that the alleged statement was made "in connection with" or about "an issue related to" a public concern, you will likely face a Motion to Dismiss. It automatically stays discovery, gives the defendant an automatic right to appeal and if a defendant prevails on a motion to dismiss, Texas courts are required to award the defendant "(1) court costs, reasonable attorney's fees, and other expenses incurred in defending against the legal action as justice and equity may require; and (2) sanctions against the party who brought the legal action as the court determines sufficient to deter the party who brought the legal action from bringing similar actions described in this chapter." Id. at 27.009(a).

aka TCPA which is what you are seeing talked about above. Thus if it's dismissed because of the TCPA Vic would likely be on the hook for everything.
 

Famassu

Member
Oct 27, 2017
9,186
They'll just claim the usual insane conspiracy theories as the reasons like the Judges were paid off or in on it or some such nonsense. They'll grow quieter and quieter over time and eventually just stop altogether after the dust has finally settled and move onto the next flash point. People aren't caping for Milo or Candace Owens any more once they got their own comeuppance and the same will happen to Vic. Once your purpose is served they toss you like last weeks garbage.
They will likely continue using this as a case of SJWs ruining a perfectly fine gentleman's life, whenever appropriate to bring up instances of Good Men being dragged down by feminazis.
 

Erik Zarkov

Member
Dec 4, 2017
274
Keep in mind, even if it does get dismissed, you'll have the appeals process. That's why the lawyers on the D's side are expecting this to still take another 8 to 12 months. The Vic crowd, from what I've seen, try to spin the fact that the D's are expecting this to last another 8 to 12 months as a sign that the D's know the Anti-SLAPP filings are going to fail and that this will go to court. Even though the reason the D's give for this time frame is the appeals process. Because it's the D's who are lying.

So, when the motion to dismiss gets carried out, expect a month of how the penalties will be non-existent. When Vic and his lawyers get the book thrown at them, expect to hear how it's all a conspiracy and how it'll be brought before a real judge in the appeals and they'll get their revenge. And of course, expect any argument that was used about how Vic's case would lose that could be twisted to make Vic look innocent to be used as well. "Oh well you all said Monica didn't have to be telling to truth to win, so obviously she's lying!" "Vic wasn't on trial here, so it does nothing to prove his innocence or guilt!", and it's pretty much going to keep going till the crowd find some other trash person to defend.
 

HStallion

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
62,262
They will likely continue using this as a case of SJWs ruining a perfectly fine gentleman's life, whenever appropriate to bring up instances of Good Men being dragged down by feminazis.

They refuse to acknowledge defeat and if Vic loses outright then he's useless to them. No losers allowed in the club house, especially those who lose to the "other side".
 

Famassu

Member
Oct 27, 2017
9,186
They refuse to acknowledge defeat and if Vic loses outright then he's useless to them. No losers allowed in the club house, especially those who lose to the "other side".
While Vic will likely lose this case, he hasn't been condemned of any crimes. There are already people who use this angle in their arguments defending Vic. As such, I feel it mostly depends on Vic how visible he will remain in the alt-right scum stratosphere. If he doesn't want to disappear, I feel he can use this new-found fame amongst his misogynistic shitgibbon fanbase as a way to not descent into complete obscurity.

And my point was not that Vic will necessarily stay as a person actively engaged with the alt-right or championed by them, and more that they'll use this case as an example when it fits their arguments in their version of reality. As in, when these people engage in arguments about SJWs destroying Perfectly Good Mens' lives, they can & will probably use his case as an example.
 

Katten

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,501
How fast will that gofundme disappear if that happens?

That all depends. The guy who made it insists that it has been put in an IOLTA account and can only be used for legal fees. Most likely outcome is Vic's lawyers fees will match up with whatever is in there, and Vic will be stuck with defendants fees plus any damages that might be awarded.

Edit: A few more thoughts on the matter:

The case is reaching a point where Vic's lawyer is either purposefully hurting the case, or so insanely inept that he has no clue whatsoever about what he is doing. This ranges from not filing his evidence correctly, leaking material from the case to BFL's Youtube grifting machine, and oh so much more. (This guy has a neat list of his incompetence)

So it does seem very likely that they are simply trying to pull as much money out of this as possible before the inevitable loss.

What comes after should be fun to watch. A few possible outcomes are Vic suing his own lawyer for malpractice, and more likely that there will be complaints incoming to the Texas bar association (Threadnought creator has been quite clear that after the doxxing threats he will do this, but wants the case over first so Vic doesn't end up with an actual funtioning lawyer).
 
Last edited:
Jun 17, 2019
2,182
Good on Greg for waiting till the case is over. I really do hope he's able to at the very least get the Bar to look into these two skeevies.

So would a win for Funi mean that Vic can be kept away from their gaming area and not be able to get work on voicing their video games?
 

Katten

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,501
So would a win for Funi mean that Vic can be kept away from their gaming area and not be able to get work on voicing their video games?

I would find it really hard to believe that any company would hire a person that dragged them to court. And since there is now a 579 page court protected document detailing his Icky Vicy ways that can be sent to future employers for their consideration, I think he will have a hard time getting much work going forward.

Even in the super duper unlikely event that he "wins" this case I can't see a lot of credited VA roles for him in the future.
 

sensui-tomo

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
4,629
Good on Greg for waiting till the case is over. I really do hope he's able to at the very least get the Bar to look into these two skeevies.

So would a win for Funi mean that Vic can be kept away from their gaming area and not be able to get work on voicing their video games?
I think chris sabat is the head for most of the gaming side of dubs that funimation does, and he'll have nothing to do with Vic if his tweets are anything to go by.
 

zulux21

Member
Oct 25, 2017
20,370
So would a win for Funi mean that Vic can be kept away from their gaming area and not be able to get work on voicing their video games?
Funimation is the defendant not the plaintiff. A win for funimation officially means nothing more than they proved they weren't guilty of any damages to Vic in the eyes of the court. Winning or losing doesn't change anything at all in regards to Vic's ability to get any future jobs with them or anyone else.

That being said, all of these details coming to light with Vic, as well as trying to sue his former employer for not wanting to work with him anymore in an at will state.... well that will likely greatly impact his ability to get jobs in the future and he has absolutely no one to blame but himself.

He has enough of a following that despite these claims going on for literally decades companies like Funimation and cons were willing to look the other way in general. Had he done an apology tour, stepped out of the light for a year, he likely could have come back and continued working. Instead he decided to do this lawsuit which has only brought out far more claims and horrible details about him (some from his own mouth) and basically burned any possible bridges he had to ever really work in the industry again. He will get some work still with smaller companies who either want access to what is left of his fan base and are willing to look away, or whom have similar skeletons in the closet as well.
 

L Thammy

Spacenoid
Member
Oct 25, 2017
50,045
So would a win for Funi mean that Vic can be kept away from their gaming area and not be able to get work on voicing their video games?

Aside from what others are saying, bear in mind that Funimation is only drawn for vicarious liability, which is essentially an accusation that they're responsible for people acting on their behalf. He's a contractor and there's no allegation of breach of contract, so all Funimation has to do is stop hiring him. The have no obligation to continue to do so.

The case is reaching a point where Vic's lawyer is either purposefully hurting the case, or so insanely inept that he has no clue whatsoever about what he is doing. This ranges from not filing his evidence correctly, leaking material from the case to BFL's Youtube grifting machine, and oh so much more. (This guy has a neat list of his incompetence)

This is one part that always gets me. That they're acting so incompetent that it has to be part of a scam sounds okay, but then you have things like Nick losing arguments with Greg on Twitter and being forced to admit that he doesn't know what "publishing" means in a defamation case or that slander and libel are both defamation.

They're also associated with a website that was created for the sole purpose of bullying an autistic person, along with Nick's rape apologism arguments, so it's easy to fit this case into a pattern of behaviour wherein they enjoy bullying vulnerable people and see the law as a way to enable themselves to do so.

So it's weird trying to figure out the relative weight of these things. It wouldn't surprise me if they genuinely thought of Vic as a friend and sympathized with his misogyny, but are so unscrupulous that they tried to scam him anyway, while at the same time being stupid enough that things are still going worse than they planned.