-
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.
Vic Mignogna Lawsuit |OT| Hold My Beard (Update: Appeal lost, Mignogna must pay attorney fees to defendants)
- Thread starter Sibersk Esto
- Start date
The Judge is not going to be pleased by this at all. If there's one thing I've learned from actual practicing lawyers, it's that judges really have zero sense of humor about lawyers trying to pull shit like this. Usually results in incredibly purple 50-page rulings complete with verbal beatdowns and popoffs you rarely see out of the FGC.
Gotta feed the rabid fans. He will be stubborn till the end.
It seems that yes, they will be. I mean he can also bill for the hours spent drafting his lie to the court.
According to Nick, who we all know is super trustworthy, the money is in an IOLTA account and can only be used by Beard for legal work. He has never provided any proof of this claim as far as I know.
Remember Vic himself is not involved in that GFM, he was rather specific about that in his deposition. So the money is collected by by Nick and payed out to Beard, without anyone else involved in the specifics.
So for all we know Nicks booze might also be payed for by the GFM.
I was about to post this.
He is his spitting image and acts accordingly.
I was about to post this.
He is his spitting image and acts accordingly.
Seriously.
No disrespect to Antony Starr, though. I'm only partway through episode 3, and his performance is fantastic. A really exceptional actor.
I'm trying to read both sides, the Threadnought and Kiwifarms, and it's like two different realities. Eventually it has to resolve down to one and I'm pretty sure it's going to go how most of law twitter says but JFC this isn't going to go away with this case.
GOD DAMN, SON. Someone send Percy a gallon of Bactine, he needs it bad.
EDIT: As Mike Dunford is relating, the Amended Motion is more of the same, just for some reason with glorious Sean Lemoine smackdowns appended because, I don't know, Percy is an exhibitionist masochist?
(2) Earlier today, I said that the argument that a letter that was filed with the court, via ECF, and served on opposing counsel was "too dumb even for Ty." That, too, was obviously - I don't even know how this is possible, but it was - wrong.
This is in reference to something that came out from Screech, talking about an ex parte letter from opposing council that was going to be some kind of bombshell.
Except it wasn't, of course, because the so-called ex parte letter had been filed with the court and given to Percy. As Mr. Dunford says above.
This is why I feel so iffy about all the claims that Rekieta and Beard are just grifters Because they're so genuinely stupid and evil that I don't know how necessary the grifting is to explain their behaviour. They definitely are grifting, but if they were just grifters, they could do it without humiliating themselves repeatedly.
Beard has repeatedly filed pointless motions and slapped his own terrible correspondence in as supporting material, including the opposing attorneys telling him how stupid the idea of filing the motion is and why it isn't going to work. He's been publicly broadcasting his strategy even after the fact that he was doing so was brought up in the case. And now we have him basically admitting that he lied.
Nick's a little better off since he's not directly involved, but he's still managed to let it slip that he didn't know what "publishing" means in the context of defamation, or even that libel and slander are forms of defamation, as a result of this.
Beard has repeatedly filed pointless motions and slapped his own terrible correspondence in as supporting material, including the opposing attorneys telling him how stupid the idea of filing the motion is and why it isn't going to work. He's been publicly broadcasting his strategy even after the fact that he was doing so was brought up in the case. And now we have him basically admitting that he lied.
Nick's a little better off since he's not directly involved, but he's still managed to let it slip that he didn't know what "publishing" means in the context of defamation, or even that libel and slander are forms of defamation, as a result of this.
Last edited:
What is the other option? They are not talented enough to do anything with this case.
The only thing they are winning from this is money? Maybe a more permanent NickBeard Youtube grifting channel.
But they aren't getting law careers based on this.
At this point they probably don't have an option, but they didn't have a good position at the start, either.
My guess is less that they specifically went "ah well, we can't win, let's just wring out as much money from Vic as we can" as that they were genuinely champing at the bit to defend some pedo molester guy they knew, but were also pretty happy to fleece him while doing that because they're horrible people and have no issue with fucking over their friends either.
Nah man. He might be a piece of shit, but no reason to toss the good stuff with the bad. Maybe a "nope" sticker over his?
That sounds a lot like grifting.
Yeah, the way this has quickly gone from just a bad case (that was laughable at times, despite being worrying) into this horribly incompetent mess has me wondering about that too. From afar, I kinda got the feeling that Nick believes what he's selling; unfortunately, it's not exactly like people getting rabidly angry at women online is uncommon. But it was hard to tell how much Beard believed in all that too, and so similarly how much of it was grifting or not.
At this point, I'm feeling... possibly a grift at the start, possibly being so mistaken about the law that he (and his colleagues...?) somehow thought it was a good case, possibly both. And either way he's just so incredibly incompetent that he is finding himself unable to climb out of the hole he's dug for himself.
Like it's totally possible he thought they could win, but would profit off a loss anyway if it happened, so they should take the case no matter what. Or thought that they'd lose, but would profit while also gaining attention/publicity for the effort. And if those were true, he seemingly completely overestimated his ability to gracefully handle things anywhere near competently/safely as a loss approached. To a rather extreme degree.
Which is to say: if they're grifters, it doesn't mean they have to be competent grifters.
There have been a few moments where I was looking at one filing or another from Ty Beard and it looks exactly like something that some uneducated moron would be tweeting at Greg Doucette. At which point, I'm wondering, wait. Are the stupid internet lawyers getting their wonky ideas of the law from Beard? Did Beard read some dumb tweets and take them at face value? How is the actual lawyer not better than the internet ones?
Last edited:
It seems like Beards many years of lawyering were spent drafting property contracts and whatnot. I seem to remember a Westlaw search saying 3 cases or some such (this is just my shitty memory of some tweet, dont ever use this number in a conversation :P).
So yes, it seems like Beard is indeed getting his ideas from either kiwi farms or nick and his users. This ex parte thing especially seems to be him grasping at straws, since he suddenly realized he fucked up and saw "friendly" people saying that was a way out.
It is still grifting, just impressively incompetent and amazingly stupid grifting.
To a point where the whole disbarring angle might suddenly take on a whole new life.
Edit: Adding this ex parte "motherfucking really?" tweet from Dunford.
Last edited:
Because lawyers come in many specialties. Ty Beard's specialty has been, up to this point, estate planning. It's a sedate life being a transactional attorney. They usually don't see the inside of courtrooms because either they're in back office reading piles and piles of text to make sure the other party didn't dick them in the fine print or writing pages and pages of fine print for a client. I know of one that got burnt out and quit because it's so ridiculously boring. Now he's trying his hand at litigation, maybe because feminists piss him off or something and he's trying to fight the good fight, and it clearly shows he is out of his depth against experienced litigators.
It's the only reason I can think of for someone to be dumb enough to not realize something isn't ex parte if all the parties are cordially informed. Not to mention all the other gaffes and faux pas.
It's like doctors. Sure, a dermatologist is a doctor and a neurosurgeon is a doctor but if you ask a dermatologist to remove a brain tumor you're going to have a bad time even though the dermatologist may be confident and says "what? I'm a doctor."
Okay, but you ask a dermatologist to remove a brain tumor, does the dermatologist try explain to the nurses on site what a brain is? I remind, we literally had Ty Beard try to explain what the word "shit" meant, as if it hadn't been the English language since the fifth century.
I'm just saying, there's a certain point where I feel you look at a person who does incredibly stupid things for no plausible purpose and have to conclude that perhaps that person is genuinely really fucking dumb.
I'm just saying, there's a certain point where I feel you look at a person who does incredibly stupid things for no plausible purpose and have to conclude that perhaps that person is genuinely really fucking dumb.
Absolute clownshoes.
Hold the phone, really? I'm aware he wasn't involved with litigation previously -- hence how inept he's been -- but...
The thing that blows my mind though is that Ty is making ridiculously basic errors. The infamous piece of shit letter, not standing before the Judge, seemingly not even discussing a fee arrangement with his client...this isn't specific to litigators. He's getting basic shit we learned in law school wrong.
Yeah but people forget stuff they don't practice over the years. Like yeah, most of law school is litigation orientated, but if you spend your days working out of an office and barely seeing the inside of a courtroom or not drafting motions and documents for litigation, it's probably trivial to forget. Then when you try your hand at it again you're bound to fuck everything up like a first year.
People haven't even brought up the most actually damaging thing in this motion yet. The "ex parte" stuff exposes how far out of his depth Beard is, but I don't think it's actually all that harmful. It's just very, very dumb.
What actually might land him in hot water is the fact that he doubled down on his lie to the judge. As was pointed out earlier, in his initial motion for continuance, Beard told the judge that he asked for more time because he needed that time to read all the exhibits. But, in the Rial/Toye motion filed to oppose the continuance, Beard's emails were included where he told the attorneys that he intended to bring motions against them all to strike their exhibits and to bring sanctions, pointing to specific exhibits from those motions that he wanted to strike. Both of these things cannot simultaneously be true. If he knew enough about the exhibits to be able to describe specifically why each one named should be struck, then he's already read them.
After this contradiction was pointed out, a normal person might amend their initial claim to the judge to back away from their misrepresentation. Instead, Beard maintained it, and signed and notarized a verification under oath of his claim that he needed more time to read the exhibits. To be fair, he included additional emails that have him eventually retreating to the position that "it is unreasonable to dump 600+ pages of material on us and then schedule two additional hearings within 13 business days," but if he was able to review those materials enough to point out where (he erroneously believed) they needed to be struck, I'm not sure that will help.
It's not good to lie to judges. It's also not good to lie to judges under oath.
What actually might land him in hot water is the fact that he doubled down on his lie to the judge. As was pointed out earlier, in his initial motion for continuance, Beard told the judge that he asked for more time because he needed that time to read all the exhibits. But, in the Rial/Toye motion filed to oppose the continuance, Beard's emails were included where he told the attorneys that he intended to bring motions against them all to strike their exhibits and to bring sanctions, pointing to specific exhibits from those motions that he wanted to strike. Both of these things cannot simultaneously be true. If he knew enough about the exhibits to be able to describe specifically why each one named should be struck, then he's already read them.
After this contradiction was pointed out, a normal person might amend their initial claim to the judge to back away from their misrepresentation. Instead, Beard maintained it, and signed and notarized a verification under oath of his claim that he needed more time to read the exhibits. To be fair, he included additional emails that have him eventually retreating to the position that "it is unreasonable to dump 600+ pages of material on us and then schedule two additional hearings within 13 business days," but if he was able to review those materials enough to point out where (he erroneously believed) they needed to be struck, I'm not sure that will help.
It's not good to lie to judges. It's also not good to lie to judges under oath.
I'm not really giving him credit. He's incompetent acting outside his wheelhouse. But people are asking how someone can be that stupid.
So... Beard has essentially accused defense counsel AND the fucking JUDGE of "unethical behaviour"?
Bold strategy cotton...
Bold strategy cotton...
These people believe in this.
They're the kind of person who truly believes they're in a moral war with SJWs, and that they're oppressed by the evils of equality, etc...
True believers are the scariest of their kind.
ANN's Tekkoshocon article is up.
There were two Mari Iijima incidents? I knew the details from both, but didn't realize they were separate cases.
There were two Mari Iijima incidents? I knew the details from both, but didn't realize they were separate cases.
Yeah, the people I know that are super pro Vic are doing it because they genuinely believe SJWs are trying to silence and "cancel" people using cries of misogyny or racism or whatever the fuck, and that they need to fight back. There's internalized misogyny, for many/most, sure, but it's not necessarily intentional. In their minds they're fighting the good fight. To them Vic is a victim and the claims about him are unsubstantiated and designed by SJWs to ruin his career. This is the latest in a series of SJW attacks and somebody finally is fighting back, and they're eager to eat up every little turd that Nick and Beard squeeze out that validates them and makes them feel cool. They're the good guys in a real life anime, fighting agains the despicable villains that are Monica et al. There's plenty of anime fans or fans of Vic in general that are along for the ride and have been converted, too.
This lawsuit is just the current topic. No matter what the result is, this farce will continue. It will follow all the parties involved forever, and as soon as another big figure is accused and lawyers up the same people will be back in the spotlight saying the same shit. This is the new normal.
This lawsuit is just the current topic. No matter what the result is, this farce will continue. It will follow all the parties involved forever, and as soon as another big figure is accused and lawyers up the same people will be back in the spotlight saying the same shit. This is the new normal.
That such a bad way of think when things like sexual harassment comes up and it leads to people taking advantage of people and crate a cycle of harm for the real victim. But like always it people who are already in a safe place that think that way and never look to step in someone else shoes.
Percy and Screech are a worldwide phenomenon, everyone! Now where's my reality show on TLC?
"Your honour, I'd like to draw your attention to Exhibit A, a list of all the girls that have rejected me over the past week. It's a quite long, so I took the liberty of indexing it by the barnyard animal they said I looked like."
"Mr. Beard, I fail to see how this does anything to make a case for your client."
"Uh, I guess I agree, your honour. In that case, let's move straight on to Exhibit B, a video of a toddler kicking my ass. I try to take her ice cream cone and practically get left in a body bag."
"Mr. Beard, I fail to see how this does anything to make a case for your client."
"Uh, I guess I agree, your honour. In that case, let's move straight on to Exhibit B, a video of a toddler kicking my ass. I try to take her ice cream cone and practically get left in a body bag."