Is he trying to insinuate Vic bought his followers and that he didn't grow them organically? If that were in any way true, wouldn't that be, like... hella embarrassing, to say, "It's cool, guys, he's WAY less popular than he looks"?haha holy shit
-
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
OP
OP
Thanks for this. Not really sure how threadmarking other posts work but it seems I can mark mine.
It's ok guys. He is less popular than a dog, and he bought the followers he does have.
Read it all (well, skimmed right past the hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of single page deposition + tweet stuff) , waiting on the legal commentary now.
Sure seems like they're leaning real hard on those few affidavits despite one largely being about Sabat, one just being the same convention stuff that's been known forever, and another just being the "don't remember but I totally woulda if it happened" one finally being filed. I guess the assumption is Motion To Strike = we'll totally be set to pretend all those other affidavits don't exist? None of this is surprising, but they really think they can go with this being a conspiracy and there being 0 rumors about him beforehand?
I also found it funny that Vic said in his affidavit that the jelly bean thing (as if that matters) was totally non-sexual, then immediately they have his e-mail where he admits it was potentially "in bad taste".
My only other thoughts:
1. at what point is repeatedly citing Marz like that some form of harassment
2. do the 570s or so look completely fucked up to everyone else (they're repeated later as well)
Sure seems like they're leaning real hard on those few affidavits despite one largely being about Sabat, one just being the same convention stuff that's been known forever, and another just being the "don't remember but I totally woulda if it happened" one finally being filed. I guess the assumption is Motion To Strike = we'll totally be set to pretend all those other affidavits don't exist? None of this is surprising, but they really think they can go with this being a conspiracy and there being 0 rumors about him beforehand?
I also found it funny that Vic said in his affidavit that the jelly bean thing (as if that matters) was totally non-sexual, then immediately they have his e-mail where he admits it was potentially "in bad taste".
My only other thoughts:
1. at what point is repeatedly citing Marz like that some form of harassment
2. do the 570s or so look completely fucked up to everyone else (they're repeated later as well)
That's been a running theme.
Haven't looked into it yet, but just from what people are saying so far, it sounds like he's just saying words and not doing anything that actually support his case. Basically, what he has to demonstrate are some group of these things:
- Vic is not a public figure (P.S.: this isn't going to happen when a core component of this case is that he lost money that comes from fan interactions)
- Vic's reputation was damaged and he had a reputation to damage
- Ron, Monica, and Jamie specifically were the ones who damaged his reputation
- Ron, Monica, and Jamie were lying and knew they were doing it
- Ron, Monica, and Jamie intentionally sought to damage Vic's reputation or business
- Ron, Monica, and Jamie collaborated to do the above
- Ron, Monica, and Jamie's actions and their actions alone caused Funimation or conventions to break existing contracts with him
- Ron, Monica, and Jamie's actions and their actions alone caused Funimation or conventions to drop future business with him
- Ron, Monica, and Jamie were acting on the behalf of Funimation to do the above or were given Funimation resources to do them
So if you're looking at a point and it doesn't fall into one of these, you should be wondering why it's in there. Unless it's trying to prove some other ridiculous nonsense that has only come up because this is an incredibly stupid lawsuit, like that killing a lawsuit for having no substance is unconstitutional.
Yeah, this is a common attack from the alt-right now: set up a fake account that claims to be trans, bait someone into "misgendering" the fake account, then mass report the target and let Twitter's automated systems do the rest.
Greg will be back shortly, Twitter is fairly onto this tactic now.
EDIT: Just to elaborate on why I put misgendering into quotations, it's because the account setup to bait is fake, so there's no actual trans person to misgender.
Last edited:
Ah yes, "Panty & Stocking" and "Prison School" is proof that Funimation is a non-stop orgy. Doing silly promo jokes is also proof that everyone fucks.
The judge would have to be incredibly naive to find any ground with that reasoning, right?
Also lol, sure, the rumors only originate from Funi, as if multiple different congoers and con runners don't have stories of their own.
At best, at MOST GENEROUS, one could go "yeah they really hated you... Why did you choose to keep working there then? Why did they let you keep working there? Why did the guy who supposedly started this let you work at HIS separate company?"
More likely, and what I believe, as most of us do, it's, you know. Man with a lot of fame using his clout to use his workplace and con appearances to push himself on women. And given that's the most likely case to the average joe, the lawsuit has no fuckin' basis.
The judge would have to be incredibly naive to find any ground with that reasoning, right?
Also lol, sure, the rumors only originate from Funi, as if multiple different congoers and con runners don't have stories of their own.
At best, at MOST GENEROUS, one could go "yeah they really hated you... Why did you choose to keep working there then? Why did they let you keep working there? Why did the guy who supposedly started this let you work at HIS separate company?"
More likely, and what I believe, as most of us do, it's, you know. Man with a lot of fame using his clout to use his workplace and con appearances to push himself on women. And given that's the most likely case to the average joe, the lawsuit has no fuckin' basis.
Yeah it fuckin' sucks, actual people are intentionally misgendered as an attack to make them feel unwelcome by the minute if not second, and these chodes decide to prey on the need to police that for their ill gain. It's heartless. I've seen more trans activists temp banned for hate speech via alleged misgendering than any conservative or alt-righter (who continue to do it and get away with it).
Before anything else. The Panty & Stocking argument, while being ridiculous Twitter-esque logic, is also some straight up rape culture shit. I'm not sure it's something to joke about.
Consider that he's essentially saying that it's okay for people to sexually abuse others if they're working in a "sexually charged" atmosphere - something like, if you work for Funimation, you're asking for it. Also consider that one of the reason why sexual humour was treated as kosher was because Funimation had been cool with some rapist going around for years.
Consider that he's essentially saying that it's okay for people to sexually abuse others if they're working in a "sexually charged" atmosphere - something like, if you work for Funimation, you're asking for it. Also consider that one of the reason why sexual humour was treated as kosher was because Funimation had been cool with some rapist going around for years.
I've barely started on this; it's going to take a while if I want to read the whole thing. This actually looks like one of the best (for their side) things to come out of Vic's side so far in terms of actually being focused on what they're supposed to do, but it's weaselly as fuck already. I'm just going to post two early things that jump out at me.
I should again mention that I'm not a lawyer so a lot of the nuance is going to jump over my head, but here goes anyway.
So I thought this was weird. My assumption just based on them being on Vic's side was that they were stating the above to position it as being false. But then there's point clarifying to state that there was an intention to file criminal charges at that point, which lends to it being substantially true - not that Monica's ambiguous wording could be proven false anyway, but they're certainly more true for having been referring to charges that were intended to be filed.
Basically, what I'm thinking is that if Beard wants to go "how can you say Vic is a predator if he hasn't been proven one in a court of law", can't you then go based on this "we were referring to how we believed that he would be found a criminal if we went through with our plans to charge him criminally"?
Nothing much to say here, I'm just amused as the cheap scare quotes. There's also the point that confidentiality and this was spread to the public because of a lawsuit that Vic filed.
This seems to be the support for the conspiracy part, which essentially amounts to... uh... tweeting at the same time and using a set phrase.
While I'm posting this, does anyone have the link to the Slatosch affadivit? Or is it in this same document? I'm curious as to what lines are being used to suppose what claims.
I should again mention that I'm not a lawyer so a lot of the nuance is going to jump over my head, but here goes anyway.
So I thought this was weird. My assumption just based on them being on Vic's side was that they were stating the above to position it as being false. But then there's point clarifying to state that there was an intention to file criminal charges at that point, which lends to it being substantially true - not that Monica's ambiguous wording could be proven false anyway, but they're certainly more true for having been referring to charges that were intended to be filed.
Basically, what I'm thinking is that if Beard wants to go "how can you say Vic is a predator if he hasn't been proven one in a court of law", can't you then go based on this "we were referring to how we believed that he would be found a criminal if we went through with our plans to charge him criminally"?
Nothing much to say here, I'm just amused as the cheap scare quotes. There's also the point that confidentiality and this was spread to the public because of a lawsuit that Vic filed.
This seems to be the support for the conspiracy part, which essentially amounts to... uh... tweeting at the same time and using a set phrase.
While I'm posting this, does anyone have the link to the Slatosch affadivit? Or is it in this same document? I'm curious as to what lines are being used to suppose what claims.
The affidavits they mention are in this document, including the one that hadn't actually been filed till now despite them making a big deal of it. You'll basically want to read everything up until you hit the deposition transcripts and then stop, because after that it's basically just the despositions and tweets.
Thanks, might as well look into those references then.
As the OP, you will find a little note saying Add Threadmark next to the Report button. Then if you click that, it asks you what title you want to give the post, which I think is optional.
We've downgraded from citing actual dictionaries to citing Urban Dictionary.
Hoo boy, the other side (at least /v/) STILL thinks Vic is going to win this and are using the outtakes as proof he'll win...
Okay, even if by some MIRACLE Vic wins. What's going to happen? Vic isn't getting his roles back, he's basically blacklisted from all the major studios, at most he'll voice some crappy Christian cartoon with a 5-digit budget.
I know people are fear-mongering that Toei is going to stop all business with Funimation, but that's just bad business.
I saw one person cite how MST3K is no longer allowed to re-release their Godzilla and Gamera episodes and somehow that means Toei won't let Funimation work on DBZ anymore... I don't see how that really relates.
Okay, even if by some MIRACLE Vic wins. What's going to happen? Vic isn't getting his roles back, he's basically blacklisted from all the major studios, at most he'll voice some crappy Christian cartoon with a 5-digit budget.
I know people are fear-mongering that Toei is going to stop all business with Funimation, but that's just bad business.
I saw one person cite how MST3K is no longer allowed to re-release their Godzilla and Gamera episodes and somehow that means Toei won't let Funimation work on DBZ anymore... I don't see how that really relates.
Noted another argument rooted in rape culture. One of the defenses is that "exercise of the right of free speech" according to the TCPA is apparently defined as, for example, an issue of health and safety of the community. They then compare to how "embarrassing facts about private citizens" are not considered public concern.
So, the implication is that Vic's predatory behaviour towards fans and coworkers is just some private embarrassment.
EDIT: Oh, hell, look at the beginning of the next argument. It can't be a threat to the community because we can't define the community it threatens.
So, the implication is that Vic's predatory behaviour towards fans and coworkers is just some private embarrassment.
EDIT: Oh, hell, look at the beginning of the next argument. It can't be a threat to the community because we can't define the community it threatens.
So when Vic was telling his fans to go talk about this he wasn't increasing the exposure of the controversy like the people on the other side.
As an addition point, maybe Freudian slip, there's a little grammatical issue here. He meant to say
which would mean he tried to stop harassment instead of encouraging it, but what he actually wrote was
which means he called for the stopping of harassment but didn't actually encourage it to stop.
pretty sure arguments based on seinfeld aren't legal grounds for dismissal, my guy
A veritable Hannibal crossing the Alps he is. May we all bow to his mastery of strategy.
Have skimmed through this a couple of times, and I really don't get it.
He is regurgitating pretty much every argument the twittler army has been going through for months. He is doing hanleia, he is doing the malice/actual malice thing, he is attacking defendants character, he is saying claims in the TCPA are "nuh huh - not true" without backing them up with cases, he is even fucking claiming Marchi who pretty much even Vicstans have given up hope of "defeating" is lying - with Vic's own deposition saying she was absolutely correct.
And yet he still put together this 1.000 page document. He must believe he is lawyering his ass off? It can't just be a grift for him? It fucking looks like he thinks this pile of doodoo is a case winning document of awesomeness.
He is regurgitating pretty much every argument the twittler army has been going through for months. He is doing hanleia, he is doing the malice/actual malice thing, he is attacking defendants character, he is saying claims in the TCPA are "nuh huh - not true" without backing them up with cases, he is even fucking claiming Marchi who pretty much even Vicstans have given up hope of "defeating" is lying - with Vic's own deposition saying she was absolutely correct.
And yet he still put together this 1.000 page document. He must believe he is lawyering his ass off? It can't just be a grift for him? It fucking looks like he thinks this pile of doodoo is a case winning document of awesomeness.
I think I very nearly let myself get caught in one today. I suspect anyway. All kinds of suspicious flags around that account - started in May, tweets nothing but ISWV stuff and far right conservative retweets, claims uncommon gender neutral pronouns in the profile. Very nearly said "this dude" (probably because they have "boner" in their name) and stopped myself.
I'm conviced that the reason it took so long is that he let the top donors to the GriftFundMe write this for him.
On the plus side, this only furthers the cause of the singular they.
And the best part is how hilarious it is that they are oblivious to it.
Read everything up to the depositions and jotted down some notes. I don't know if his mom wrote this for him or something because it seems stronger than anything else he's written, but there's still a bunch here that I don't really buy being effective arguments.
First off, the things that seem strong to me. He does seem to be trying to tie the origins to Monica and Jamie (and Chris Sabat instead of Ron for some reason). Mind you, I think that area's already kind of fucked for them because Vic admitted to rumours existing about him for years.
He recognizes defamation per se, which seems like the easiest thing to do.
The argument against him being libel proof seems okay at first blush at least. Basically it seems to assert that Vic needs to have a history of criminal behaviour that's been widely reported, the former hasn't been found in court and the latter hasn't been true until now. I don't know if it'll work but I'm still going, well, okay, that doesn't seem like blatant nonsense anyway.
Intentional comedy keeps come out of that argument though:
One thing I'm concerned about is that Beard seems to believe that during this TCPA stuff, Vic's claims are given the benefit of the doubt, so simply by saying he didn't do it it gives him the position where he may as well not have done it. Now it's entirely possible that he's just an idiot - I mean regarding his reasoning here, he's definitely an idiot as a generality - but seeing this over and over and without me knowing the specifics of the TCPA, I'm a little disconcerted.
The Doug the Pug bit actually isn't bad. It's just totally unnecessary. The section is basically saying that Vic Mignogna is not a household name that everyone would recognize, even when he's outside of the area that he's actually famous for. No one was arguing that. That's where this first came up though:
Now for the bad. It relies on Vic saying he's innocent as proof he's innocent. So if they're wrong about the proceedings currently being prejudiced in favour of his statement, then that's a whole lot of this that falls apart.
There's a bit on "Defendants' communications are not subject to the TCPA's protections" which has like half of an argument. It says that the TCPA is not supposed to be used against meritous lawsuits but doesn't establish that this is a meritous lawsuit. It also says that it isn't meant to dismiss "on a quick, summary proceeding before evidence can be gathered and the merits developed," but this has already come up when they were granted an extension. This proceeding has been dragged out already.
It tries to claim that Vic is not a public figure because there is no controversy (because Ron doesn't define well enough what it is he's criticizing Vic for?), that the public isn't affected (I don't think I need to explain why this is wrong), and that Vic telling his fans to do his bidding like the wicked witch's flying monkeys isn't participating in perpetuating the controversy.
It says that Funimation's arguments are self-defeating because a confidential investigation can't be a matter of public concern. i don't think anyone was claiming that the investigation itself was the public concern? The abuse was the public concern. The details of the investigation only came out because of this lawsuit, right?
That claim about the anime community being undefinable seems to be something that they're more confident about, because it actually comes up in a few places. Take this one:
They argue that Nick Rekieta didn't perpetuate the controversy until the defendants did. Which, regardless, does not mean that he was not involved in perpetuating the controversy, it just means he just didn't start it - perpetuating means to continue, so who started it is irrelevant.
It also relies heavily on the jellybean story.
They try to prove that Monica, Jamie, and Ron are agents of Funimation despite being contractors and I don't even understand how it's supposed to work. It seems like he's saying that because they didn't specifically say they weren't, it must be true. It's even underlined in the text so they must have been really confident about this argument.
Other details.
Take a look at this line. Beard really struggles with concepts like "the gist of the statement" or "substantial truth":
There's more blatant rape apologist shit.
There's this bit, which feels like they started on a point and just gave up. Note that I'm including the entire subsection:
Here's the conspiracy narrative. Read it like you're narrating a murder mystery.
First off, the things that seem strong to me. He does seem to be trying to tie the origins to Monica and Jamie (and Chris Sabat instead of Ron for some reason). Mind you, I think that area's already kind of fucked for them because Vic admitted to rumours existing about him for years.
He recognizes defamation per se, which seems like the easiest thing to do.
The argument against him being libel proof seems okay at first blush at least. Basically it seems to assert that Vic needs to have a history of criminal behaviour that's been widely reported, the former hasn't been found in court and the latter hasn't been true until now. I don't know if it'll work but I'm still going, well, okay, that doesn't seem like blatant nonsense anyway.
Intentional comedy keeps come out of that argument though:
Had Vic's activities been widely reported to the public, the Court as well as opposing counsel would have known who he was and how to pronounce his name at the first hearing, thus Defendants' are unable to prove that Vic is libel proof by a preponderance of the evidence.
One thing I'm concerned about is that Beard seems to believe that during this TCPA stuff, Vic's claims are given the benefit of the doubt, so simply by saying he didn't do it it gives him the position where he may as well not have done it. Now it's entirely possible that he's just an idiot - I mean regarding his reasoning here, he's definitely an idiot as a generality - but seeing this over and over and without me knowing the specifics of the TCPA, I'm a little disconcerted.
The Doug the Pug bit actually isn't bad. It's just totally unnecessary. The section is basically saying that Vic Mignogna is not a household name that everyone would recognize, even when he's outside of the area that he's actually famous for. No one was arguing that. That's where this first came up though:
Vic is neither an elected official nor a well-known celebrity like Tom Hanks or George Clooney; the Court will recall neither it nor opposing counsel could identify Vic or correctly pronounce his name at the initial hearing in this matter.
Now for the bad. It relies on Vic saying he's innocent as proof he's innocent. So if they're wrong about the proceedings currently being prejudiced in favour of his statement, then that's a whole lot of this that falls apart.
There's a bit on "Defendants' communications are not subject to the TCPA's protections" which has like half of an argument. It says that the TCPA is not supposed to be used against meritous lawsuits but doesn't establish that this is a meritous lawsuit. It also says that it isn't meant to dismiss "on a quick, summary proceeding before evidence can be gathered and the merits developed," but this has already come up when they were granted an extension. This proceeding has been dragged out already.
It tries to claim that Vic is not a public figure because there is no controversy (because Ron doesn't define well enough what it is he's criticizing Vic for?), that the public isn't affected (I don't think I need to explain why this is wrong), and that Vic telling his fans to do his bidding like the wicked witch's flying monkeys isn't participating in perpetuating the controversy.
It says that Funimation's arguments are self-defeating because a confidential investigation can't be a matter of public concern. i don't think anyone was claiming that the investigation itself was the public concern? The abuse was the public concern. The details of the investigation only came out because of this lawsuit, right?
That claim about the anime community being undefinable seems to be something that they're more confident about, because it actually comes up in a few places. Take this one:
They fail to explain how their comments concern such a broad category of persons—for example, how are their comments concerning "the health or safety and the well-being" anime fans in Japan?
They argue that Nick Rekieta didn't perpetuate the controversy until the defendants did. Which, regardless, does not mean that he was not involved in perpetuating the controversy, it just means he just didn't start it - perpetuating means to continue, so who started it is irrelevant.
It also relies heavily on the jellybean story.
They try to prove that Monica, Jamie, and Ron are agents of Funimation despite being contractors and I don't even understand how it's supposed to work. It seems like he's saying that because they didn't specifically say they weren't, it must be true. It's even underlined in the text so they must have been really confident about this argument.
While Jamie claims she is an independent contractor, her legal conclusion that Funimation has no control over her is unfounded and inadmissible. Perhaps, most damning, Funimation never once stated publicly that Monica, Ron and Jamie did not speak for Funimation but only expressed their own opinions. The rational inference: Monica, Ron and Jamie had inside information and had authority to speak for Funimation.
Other details.
Take a look at this line. Beard really struggles with concepts like "the gist of the statement" or "substantial truth":
has been a voice actor in hundreds of Japanese anime films (an inaccurate statement)
There's more blatant rape apologist shit.
If she was so concerned about her safety and health and was concerned about the safety and health of what she claims are past and future victims, then why did she wait years to make her statement?
There's this bit, which feels like they started on a point and just gave up. Note that I'm including the entire subsection:
d. Defendants' tweets are not an exercise of protected speech.
The TCPA does not protect the unfettered right of speech but, rather, expressly protects that right only to the maximum extent permitted by law, Weber, 2019 WL 1395796 at *23. Defendants have failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that their tweets are subject to the TCPA, and the Court should deny their motions on this point.
The TCPA does not protect the unfettered right of speech but, rather, expressly protects that right only to the maximum extent permitted by law, Weber, 2019 WL 1395796 at *23. Defendants have failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that their tweets are subject to the TCPA, and the Court should deny their motions on this point.
Here's the conspiracy narrative. Read it like you're narrating a murder mystery.
The evidence shows that Defendants' objective here was simple: run Vic out of Funimation, ruin his reputation, and get him kicked from conventions ... i.e., #kickVic. Jamie Marchi signaled the plan: the best way to ruin a career is to "name and shame."
Monica initiated Funimation's internal investigation. Funimation shared details with Monica and Ronald, and both publicly goaded Funimation to release the content of its investigation while bombarding Vic with defamatory tweets. Meanwhile, despite Funimation's argument that she had no authority to speak for the company, Monica and several Funimation employees (with whom she is "very good friends") emailed back and forth about the investigation and how to make Monica "feel better" and what Monica could say to the public. Even Marchi tweeted about the investigation. Seeing conventions cancel after Monica's retweet of @hanleia's false accusations, Funimation tweeted its defamatory statement that it was parting ways with Vic after its "investigation" because of abusive and harassing behavior. Monica then tweeted her endorsement of Funimation's investigation. And Ronald tweeted gleefully that Vic's career was over. Mission accomplished. Funimation has stood by Jamie, Monica and Ronald, exposing themselves to damages – fulfilling its part of the conspiracy by lending credence to Monica's [and Jamie's] allegations. They have played their role as the sine qua non of the conspiracy.
Monica initiated Funimation's internal investigation. Funimation shared details with Monica and Ronald, and both publicly goaded Funimation to release the content of its investigation while bombarding Vic with defamatory tweets. Meanwhile, despite Funimation's argument that she had no authority to speak for the company, Monica and several Funimation employees (with whom she is "very good friends") emailed back and forth about the investigation and how to make Monica "feel better" and what Monica could say to the public. Even Marchi tweeted about the investigation. Seeing conventions cancel after Monica's retweet of @hanleia's false accusations, Funimation tweeted its defamatory statement that it was parting ways with Vic after its "investigation" because of abusive and harassing behavior. Monica then tweeted her endorsement of Funimation's investigation. And Ronald tweeted gleefully that Vic's career was over. Mission accomplished. Funimation has stood by Jamie, Monica and Ronald, exposing themselves to damages – fulfilling its part of the conspiracy by lending credence to Monica's [and Jamie's] allegations. They have played their role as the sine qua non of the conspiracy.
The reason I mentioned that really fast after posting the link, was just that it stood out to me as being really fucking funny, and with a dose of "my first skimming of this before heading out of the door had me notice this".
I absolutely find it hilarious that a lawyer will mention that:
My client, who is seeking damage from not being able to attend cons and make money from signing autographs to his adoring fans (his poor fan club :( ), and has lost 1-5 million from this, is not a public figure, because:
1. My client has less followers than this dog with a twitter account
2. He could have bought those followers.
I won't make an argument from a legal perspective, since I have no experience in those matters.
But holy fuck is it funny.
Oh, don't get me wrong, it's totally absurd. But in context, it's like... People are going to hear "it's not like he's George Clooney where everyone knows his name" and will go "well okay". You didn't really have to tell us that your client is less popular than a dog.
But the thing is. If you start sorting out all of the irrelevant stuff in this document it would get a lot smaller. Like why the fuck is all this stuff about Sabbat in there? He isn't part of this particular thing, and it only proves that the actual defendants here are not at all to blame as was the original claim.
Then sort out all the Twitter conspiracies, and imagine he didn't include indexes of the depositions, and knew how to format them so he could fit 4 per page. And maybe presented more than 1 tweet per page.
Then the relevant stuff about the actual case is SO minute. And has no evidence against it presented. He mostly just goes "this isn't true" or "the law doesn't work like that" and presents no cases to back him up.
This seems like if it was simmered down to relevant bits, it would be a maximum 300 page wet fart.
Edit:
Ok, this is funny
Last edited:
I was going to look at some of the citations from the affidavits to see how grounded they are but Huber's is really something. It comes across to me like he's really bitter against Chris Sabat and afraid for his own career and so defends Vic for those reasons - and he is very clearly taking Vic's side here, painting him a a victim, so there goes the possible interpretation of him innocently trying to work things out between everyone. He even explains his thinking behind the "sex addict" letter, which apparently Vic didn't even know about, it was just something Huber did on his own.
He does note, however, that he believes that Vic used his position for sex, and gives a hell of a lot of details about how commonly he was viewed as a predator and pedophile. He goes into a bunch of details that I don't think we've seen elsewhere as well. It doesn't seem like he's totally bullshitting; there are a lot of things that aren't good for Vic's case but Huber is interpreting it in a lens that's favourable to that position.
I'm going to just post a somewhat trimmed down version of it. The last part might have some typos since the scan was slanted and I can't just Ctrl+C it.
He does note, however, that he believes that Vic used his position for sex, and gives a hell of a lot of details about how commonly he was viewed as a predator and pedophile. He goes into a bunch of details that I don't think we've seen elsewhere as well. It doesn't seem like he's totally bullshitting; there are a lot of things that aren't good for Vic's case but Huber is interpreting it in a lens that's favourable to that position.
I'm going to just post a somewhat trimmed down version of it. The last part might have some typos since the scan was slanted and I can't just Ctrl+C it.
2. The facts in this affidavit should not be construed to condone Vic Mignogna's behavior especially as it relates to his infidelity towardMichelle Specht which was personally heartbreaking and horrible.
6. I am friends with several employees of Funimation and have had direct communication with former CEO Gen Fukanaga, Karen Mika, Justin Cook and Colleen Clinkenbeard through my years of employment at Funimation.
7. I have been a voice actor for Okratron5000, a company owned by Chris Sabat, since 2004 and have been an employee of Deep Space Mustache, a film company founded by Chris Sabat, during 2012-2013.
8. I have been friends with Plaintiff, Victor Mignogna ("Vic"), for at least 10 years.
9. I have been friends with the Defendants', Jamie Marchi and Monica Rial for at least 10 years.
10. I know Ron Toye from his relationship with Monica Rial.
11. The first time I heard Vic's name was in a conversation in 2003 or 2004 with Chris Sabat. This occurred while I was recording for a Funimation property at Okratron5000.
12. In that conversation, Chris Sabat verbally disparaged Vic's Christian faith and speculated that Vic was "actually gay" based on the way he dressed.
13. In that conversation, Chris Sabat stated that Vic was a pedophile who liked "little girls". Despite these statements, he did not express concerns about risks to fans, which I thought was odd.
14. During this conversation, there was no specific mention of Vic committing sexual harassment, sexual assault, inappropriate behavior with teenage fans or that Vic posed a risk to fans at conventions.
15. In approximately 2007, Vic began the practice of autographing artwork depicting anime characters for money at anime conventions.
16. Other voice actors (Jamie Marchi, Monica Rial and Chris Sabat) and other Funimation employees initially described that practice as "stealing from fans," "using fans," or "being an asshole." We all later adopted the same practices and currently follow those practices at conventions.
17. This behavior by voice actors (including Jamie Marchi, Monica Rial and Chris Sabat) and other Funimation employees toward Vic's successful business tactics demonstrates longstanding negative opinions about Vic.
18. In virtually all conversations I had with these voice actors when Vic was not present, disparaging remarks were made about Vic. Typical statements included "he's a prima dona, he's a douche, he's a diva, his clothes are gay," plus comments of his purported infidelity, dislike of his conservative Christian beliefs and personal attacks for his support of Donald Trump. All of these comments were made at one time or another by Monica Rial, Jamie Marchi, Chris Sabat, and others. All of them, however, conceded his ability to do his job.
21. In December 2013, at Yama-Con, I had lunch with Sean Schemmel and Sonny Strait.
22. Sean Schemmel tried to persuade me to participate in a derogatory video about Vic known as the "Vince Mangina VA pedophile video". The video was to portray Vic as a pedophile. I refused because Vic is my friend and he is not a pedophile.
23. Most of the time when I interacted with Sean Schemmel, he attacked Vic for pushing his Christian faith on fans at conventions and for Vic's purported sexual promiscuity.
24. In 2016, I was at Funimation and witnessed a producer at Funimation, warn other Funimation employees of Vic's arrival and address Vic negatively with directors at Funimation.
25. In approximately 2016-2017, a director employed at Funimation, told me that Vic would never get a directing job at Funimation because he was "such a douche." This conversation happened at Funimation. I advised Vic of this conversation. Vic later told me he addressed this issue with Justin Cook, a member of Funimation management.
29. In my opinion, the voice actors and Funimation employees described above were overly preoccupied with disparaging Vic.
30. Over the last decade, I was around Vic, the Defendants' and other Funimation employees hundreds of times. Until January 2019, none of them directly accused him of sexual assault or sexual harassment in my presence.
31. Until January 2019 negative discussions about Vic Mignogna in my presence were accompanied by laughter and derision but never included concern for any alleged victims or named specific victims. Vic has always been a joke to a certain clique of influential Funimation employees for decades but never a threat.
32. Vic indicated to me that in 20 years of working at Funimation he had never been warned of any complaints about his behavior.
33. Vic told me he had a meeting with a producer at Funimation, in approximately 2018 specifically to discuss any issues with his behavior. He stated that there was no mention in this meeting of his having committed sexual harassment, sexual assault or his having behaved in an inappropriate manner at Funimation or at any conventions. He stated that she told him that he was "difficult to work with" because he sometimes asked directors to do additional takes when the director was satisfied with his initial take.
34. Senior Fumimation directors have described the work environment at Funimation to me as a "Den of Poison," "Kafka Nightmare," and "Orwellian Slave Factory."
35. My experience working at Funimation was unpleasant. It is well known that if one falls out of favor with certain people (including Chris Sabat) or if one tries to do anything to change the working conditions, that person will not be rehired as a voice actor. I felt threatened with not being used as a voice actor in subsequent projects if I complained about the work environment.
36. Funimation posted no employment policies regarding sexual harassment in the workplace or at conventions.
38. In the twenty (20) years I worked at Funimation, it was very common for employees, voice actors, writers, producers, directors to hug and kiss each other at the Funimation offices. Raunchy and sexual comedy was extremely common. Sexual relationships between Funimation employees and voice actors was common. No one was ever disciplined or terminated for this conduct.
39. When Sony acquired a majority interest in Funimation in late 2017, a "no hugs" policy was announced. Funimation employees and voice actors largely ignored this policy at first.
40. The voice actors (including Jamie Marchi and Monica Rial) and other Funimation employees talked and flirted freely at Funimation on a regular basis, though this did become less common after Sony instituted the "no hugs" policy.
41. When the Dragonball Kai was being recorded in 2007, I heard rumors that actresses had been recast at Funimation for refusing sexual advances by Funimation employees. I consider these rumors credible based on my experience working at Funimation and from direct messages received from a former DBZ cast member.
42. I also heard that actresses who participated in sex with Funimation/Okatron5000 employees were cast in roles. I consider these rumors credible based on my experience working at Funimation
44. During this timeframe, I sent a text message to Chris Sabat who responded that "if this has anything to do with Vic, I will not talk about it."
47. Chris Sabat engaged in negotiations, either directly or through Funimation for various projects with TOEI, owner of the Dragonball Z properties.
48. The voice actors employed by Funimation generally consider Chris Sabat to be a de facto manager at Funimation and they believe his approval and support is vitally beneficial to succeeding at Funimation and the conventions and the converse regarding his disapproval.
49. Chris Sabat has more influence at Funimation and other studios, including Roosterteeth and Toei, than Vic has ever had in the Anime industry.
50. I heard Chris Sabat and Sean Schemmel call Vic a pedophile numerous times before the allegations against Vic in January/February 2019 arose.
51. I have observed Chris Sabat on multiple occasions talk in a derogatory manner about members of Funimation management and other people he calls "friends."
52. I was aware of no rumors or accusations that Vic committed rape, sexual assault or sexual harassment until the accusations arose in January- February 2019 on the internet.
57. I was aware of no rumors or statements that identified any purported victims of sexual assault or sexual harassment by Vic until January- February 2019 on the internet.
58. Jamie Marchi and I have been close friends and writing partners since 2009. She never mentioned the hair-pulling incident at Funimation that she alleges occurred between Vic and her.
60. I believe Jamie Marchi would have mentioned the hair-pulling incident, if it had bothered her, since she is typically very outspoken. In addition, while Jamie Marchi, Monica Rial and other Funimation employees often expressed animosity towards Vic, they never claimed he had sexually harassed or sexually assaulted anyone. Their animosity was primarily due to his personality, his sexual promiscuity, his Christian faith and claims that he was difficult to work with.
61. In 2009. Jamie Marchi and I worked with Chris Sabat on CONdotcom.com, which was a website where voice actors could provide content for fans. Vic was a digital guest on that website and our primary marketing force because of his prolific convention schedule. In dozens of specific conversations about Vic there was never any concern about pedophilia or other criminal sexual behavior.
62. I have never seen Vic behave inappropriately with any fans of any age.
63. Although voice actors and other Funimation employees called Vic a pedophile and accused him of liking underage girls for years, they never said these things to Vic and never expressed any concerns about working with Vic or doing panels at conventions with Vic until 2019. Nor did they express concern for the convention fans until 2019.
65. Jamie Marchi, Monica Rial, myself and almost all other voice actors have kissed and hugged hundreds of fans at conventions, no matter their age.
66. I approached Jamie Marchi and Monica Rial to attempt a settlement between Vic and the Defendants' in early March 2019. Vic was not aware of my efforts.
67. I was initially supportive of what Jamie and Monica were doing because my understanding was that they were, with inflated versions of their stories, attempting to help the alleged underage victims of rape and sexual assault by Vic, which they along with Michelle Specht directly told me existed, who would otherwise be too afraid to speak out. I never considered Jamie and Monica to be victims of attempted rape or sexual assault by Vic.
68. I drafted a proposed statement by Vic that included the phrase "I am a sex addict" because my conversations with Jamie Marchi and Monica Rial convinced me that Vic would have to admit some form of "guilt" for them to settle. Vic never saw or approved that phrase.
69. I am not educated about sex addiction nor am I an expert about sex addiction.
70. I talked with Vic about sex addiction and advised him to speak with his counselor about it. I now believe his sexual activity and infidelities are more closely associated to the common narcissism and ego from men in his position. I believe Vic is sincere in his efforts with his counselor to correct the abject moral failings associated with his sexual behavior.
71. My settlement efforts were an attempt to help my friend Vic who was suffering tremendously, to protect Jamie and Monica from the difficulty of a lawsuit and to heal the Anime community, which has been seriously divided by the allegations against Vic.
72. During my settlement efforts. Todd Haberkorn told me that that Chris Sabat, Ron Toye and Sean Schemmel told him that he was in danger of never working at Funimation again because Haberkorn retained the same law firm as Vic. (see attached email)
73. I also feared that my twenty (20) year voice acting career at Funimation and personal reputation would be damaged by retaliation for my association with Vic.
74. I contacted Gen Fukanaga, the then CEO of Funimation to discuss my concerns with Chris Sabat's gaslighting of Sean Schemmel, damaging use of his authority toward actors and his attempts to destroy my career, in early March 2019 who met with me and advised that Vic would lose and have to pay via something he had learned about called an Anti-SLAPP motion. He also, in response to my specific concerns about Chris Sabat, said that he had been friends with Chris Sabat for 17 years and he did not believe me. This meeting occurred on March 5, 2019 at 2:30 p.m. in Gen's office approximately a month to a month and a half prior to Vic filing the current pending lawsuit.
75. I and my wife fear direct, planned and specific retaliation from Chris Sabat and those loyal to him in response to this affidavit that will be damaging to my reputation and career.
76. I have known Vic for many years, and I do not believe he has ever sexually approached anyone past the point of them telling him no.
77. I believe Vic utilized his position of privilege in shameful ways in attempts to obtain sex.
78. In my experiences with Vic, if someone acted like they did not want to be hugged or kissed, he stopped immediately.
79. Funimation employees, including Jamie Marchi, Monica Rial and Michelle Sprect have advised me more than once since February 2019 that criminal charges are coming against Vic. In response I encourage them to help these alleged underage victims of rape and sexual assault to come forward. When asked to provide specifics to these allegations they couldn't or refused to do so.
80. When I was told about the contents of the "confidential" investigation undertaken by Tammie Denbow on behalf of Funimation, my opinion was that Funimation, Jamie Marchi and Monica Rial acted together and with encouragement from Chris Sabat and Sean Schemmel, to destroy Vic's career and life.
81. I believe that the purported incidents investigated by Tammi Denbow occurred of Funimation property and not at Funimation events. The one incident that purportedly occurred on Funimation property occurred prior to Sony's acquisition of Funimation, thus the "no hugs" policy from Sony was not in effect (i.e. there were no signs about the policy hung around the Funimation office).
81. I do not believe that Vic kissed Sarah Bachmeyer without her consent. I have never heard rumors of Vic behaving sexually inappropriate at Funimation.
82. Funimation has supported the accusations made by Defendants' that Vic is a sexual predator, pedophile and rapist by supporting the accusations directly with their own public statements (I, as a member of the pubic, viewed the Tweets made on February 11, 2019 by Funimation as supporting the accusation against Vic and asserting Vic was fired for sexual harassment and threats).
83. It appears to me that Ron Toye, Monica Rial and Jamie Marchi have been speaking with Funimation's tacit or overt consent in tweets that have been made by them since January 2019.
6. I am friends with several employees of Funimation and have had direct communication with former CEO Gen Fukanaga, Karen Mika, Justin Cook and Colleen Clinkenbeard through my years of employment at Funimation.
7. I have been a voice actor for Okratron5000, a company owned by Chris Sabat, since 2004 and have been an employee of Deep Space Mustache, a film company founded by Chris Sabat, during 2012-2013.
8. I have been friends with Plaintiff, Victor Mignogna ("Vic"), for at least 10 years.
9. I have been friends with the Defendants', Jamie Marchi and Monica Rial for at least 10 years.
10. I know Ron Toye from his relationship with Monica Rial.
11. The first time I heard Vic's name was in a conversation in 2003 or 2004 with Chris Sabat. This occurred while I was recording for a Funimation property at Okratron5000.
12. In that conversation, Chris Sabat verbally disparaged Vic's Christian faith and speculated that Vic was "actually gay" based on the way he dressed.
13. In that conversation, Chris Sabat stated that Vic was a pedophile who liked "little girls". Despite these statements, he did not express concerns about risks to fans, which I thought was odd.
14. During this conversation, there was no specific mention of Vic committing sexual harassment, sexual assault, inappropriate behavior with teenage fans or that Vic posed a risk to fans at conventions.
15. In approximately 2007, Vic began the practice of autographing artwork depicting anime characters for money at anime conventions.
16. Other voice actors (Jamie Marchi, Monica Rial and Chris Sabat) and other Funimation employees initially described that practice as "stealing from fans," "using fans," or "being an asshole." We all later adopted the same practices and currently follow those practices at conventions.
17. This behavior by voice actors (including Jamie Marchi, Monica Rial and Chris Sabat) and other Funimation employees toward Vic's successful business tactics demonstrates longstanding negative opinions about Vic.
18. In virtually all conversations I had with these voice actors when Vic was not present, disparaging remarks were made about Vic. Typical statements included "he's a prima dona, he's a douche, he's a diva, his clothes are gay," plus comments of his purported infidelity, dislike of his conservative Christian beliefs and personal attacks for his support of Donald Trump. All of these comments were made at one time or another by Monica Rial, Jamie Marchi, Chris Sabat, and others. All of them, however, conceded his ability to do his job.
21. In December 2013, at Yama-Con, I had lunch with Sean Schemmel and Sonny Strait.
22. Sean Schemmel tried to persuade me to participate in a derogatory video about Vic known as the "Vince Mangina VA pedophile video". The video was to portray Vic as a pedophile. I refused because Vic is my friend and he is not a pedophile.
23. Most of the time when I interacted with Sean Schemmel, he attacked Vic for pushing his Christian faith on fans at conventions and for Vic's purported sexual promiscuity.
24. In 2016, I was at Funimation and witnessed a producer at Funimation, warn other Funimation employees of Vic's arrival and address Vic negatively with directors at Funimation.
25. In approximately 2016-2017, a director employed at Funimation, told me that Vic would never get a directing job at Funimation because he was "such a douche." This conversation happened at Funimation. I advised Vic of this conversation. Vic later told me he addressed this issue with Justin Cook, a member of Funimation management.
29. In my opinion, the voice actors and Funimation employees described above were overly preoccupied with disparaging Vic.
30. Over the last decade, I was around Vic, the Defendants' and other Funimation employees hundreds of times. Until January 2019, none of them directly accused him of sexual assault or sexual harassment in my presence.
31. Until January 2019 negative discussions about Vic Mignogna in my presence were accompanied by laughter and derision but never included concern for any alleged victims or named specific victims. Vic has always been a joke to a certain clique of influential Funimation employees for decades but never a threat.
32. Vic indicated to me that in 20 years of working at Funimation he had never been warned of any complaints about his behavior.
33. Vic told me he had a meeting with a producer at Funimation, in approximately 2018 specifically to discuss any issues with his behavior. He stated that there was no mention in this meeting of his having committed sexual harassment, sexual assault or his having behaved in an inappropriate manner at Funimation or at any conventions. He stated that she told him that he was "difficult to work with" because he sometimes asked directors to do additional takes when the director was satisfied with his initial take.
34. Senior Fumimation directors have described the work environment at Funimation to me as a "Den of Poison," "Kafka Nightmare," and "Orwellian Slave Factory."
35. My experience working at Funimation was unpleasant. It is well known that if one falls out of favor with certain people (including Chris Sabat) or if one tries to do anything to change the working conditions, that person will not be rehired as a voice actor. I felt threatened with not being used as a voice actor in subsequent projects if I complained about the work environment.
36. Funimation posted no employment policies regarding sexual harassment in the workplace or at conventions.
38. In the twenty (20) years I worked at Funimation, it was very common for employees, voice actors, writers, producers, directors to hug and kiss each other at the Funimation offices. Raunchy and sexual comedy was extremely common. Sexual relationships between Funimation employees and voice actors was common. No one was ever disciplined or terminated for this conduct.
39. When Sony acquired a majority interest in Funimation in late 2017, a "no hugs" policy was announced. Funimation employees and voice actors largely ignored this policy at first.
40. The voice actors (including Jamie Marchi and Monica Rial) and other Funimation employees talked and flirted freely at Funimation on a regular basis, though this did become less common after Sony instituted the "no hugs" policy.
41. When the Dragonball Kai was being recorded in 2007, I heard rumors that actresses had been recast at Funimation for refusing sexual advances by Funimation employees. I consider these rumors credible based on my experience working at Funimation and from direct messages received from a former DBZ cast member.
42. I also heard that actresses who participated in sex with Funimation/Okatron5000 employees were cast in roles. I consider these rumors credible based on my experience working at Funimation
44. During this timeframe, I sent a text message to Chris Sabat who responded that "if this has anything to do with Vic, I will not talk about it."
47. Chris Sabat engaged in negotiations, either directly or through Funimation for various projects with TOEI, owner of the Dragonball Z properties.
48. The voice actors employed by Funimation generally consider Chris Sabat to be a de facto manager at Funimation and they believe his approval and support is vitally beneficial to succeeding at Funimation and the conventions and the converse regarding his disapproval.
49. Chris Sabat has more influence at Funimation and other studios, including Roosterteeth and Toei, than Vic has ever had in the Anime industry.
50. I heard Chris Sabat and Sean Schemmel call Vic a pedophile numerous times before the allegations against Vic in January/February 2019 arose.
51. I have observed Chris Sabat on multiple occasions talk in a derogatory manner about members of Funimation management and other people he calls "friends."
52. I was aware of no rumors or accusations that Vic committed rape, sexual assault or sexual harassment until the accusations arose in January- February 2019 on the internet.
57. I was aware of no rumors or statements that identified any purported victims of sexual assault or sexual harassment by Vic until January- February 2019 on the internet.
58. Jamie Marchi and I have been close friends and writing partners since 2009. She never mentioned the hair-pulling incident at Funimation that she alleges occurred between Vic and her.
60. I believe Jamie Marchi would have mentioned the hair-pulling incident, if it had bothered her, since she is typically very outspoken. In addition, while Jamie Marchi, Monica Rial and other Funimation employees often expressed animosity towards Vic, they never claimed he had sexually harassed or sexually assaulted anyone. Their animosity was primarily due to his personality, his sexual promiscuity, his Christian faith and claims that he was difficult to work with.
61. In 2009. Jamie Marchi and I worked with Chris Sabat on CONdotcom.com, which was a website where voice actors could provide content for fans. Vic was a digital guest on that website and our primary marketing force because of his prolific convention schedule. In dozens of specific conversations about Vic there was never any concern about pedophilia or other criminal sexual behavior.
62. I have never seen Vic behave inappropriately with any fans of any age.
63. Although voice actors and other Funimation employees called Vic a pedophile and accused him of liking underage girls for years, they never said these things to Vic and never expressed any concerns about working with Vic or doing panels at conventions with Vic until 2019. Nor did they express concern for the convention fans until 2019.
65. Jamie Marchi, Monica Rial, myself and almost all other voice actors have kissed and hugged hundreds of fans at conventions, no matter their age.
66. I approached Jamie Marchi and Monica Rial to attempt a settlement between Vic and the Defendants' in early March 2019. Vic was not aware of my efforts.
67. I was initially supportive of what Jamie and Monica were doing because my understanding was that they were, with inflated versions of their stories, attempting to help the alleged underage victims of rape and sexual assault by Vic, which they along with Michelle Specht directly told me existed, who would otherwise be too afraid to speak out. I never considered Jamie and Monica to be victims of attempted rape or sexual assault by Vic.
68. I drafted a proposed statement by Vic that included the phrase "I am a sex addict" because my conversations with Jamie Marchi and Monica Rial convinced me that Vic would have to admit some form of "guilt" for them to settle. Vic never saw or approved that phrase.
69. I am not educated about sex addiction nor am I an expert about sex addiction.
70. I talked with Vic about sex addiction and advised him to speak with his counselor about it. I now believe his sexual activity and infidelities are more closely associated to the common narcissism and ego from men in his position. I believe Vic is sincere in his efforts with his counselor to correct the abject moral failings associated with his sexual behavior.
71. My settlement efforts were an attempt to help my friend Vic who was suffering tremendously, to protect Jamie and Monica from the difficulty of a lawsuit and to heal the Anime community, which has been seriously divided by the allegations against Vic.
72. During my settlement efforts. Todd Haberkorn told me that that Chris Sabat, Ron Toye and Sean Schemmel told him that he was in danger of never working at Funimation again because Haberkorn retained the same law firm as Vic. (see attached email)
73. I also feared that my twenty (20) year voice acting career at Funimation and personal reputation would be damaged by retaliation for my association with Vic.
74. I contacted Gen Fukanaga, the then CEO of Funimation to discuss my concerns with Chris Sabat's gaslighting of Sean Schemmel, damaging use of his authority toward actors and his attempts to destroy my career, in early March 2019 who met with me and advised that Vic would lose and have to pay via something he had learned about called an Anti-SLAPP motion. He also, in response to my specific concerns about Chris Sabat, said that he had been friends with Chris Sabat for 17 years and he did not believe me. This meeting occurred on March 5, 2019 at 2:30 p.m. in Gen's office approximately a month to a month and a half prior to Vic filing the current pending lawsuit.
75. I and my wife fear direct, planned and specific retaliation from Chris Sabat and those loyal to him in response to this affidavit that will be damaging to my reputation and career.
76. I have known Vic for many years, and I do not believe he has ever sexually approached anyone past the point of them telling him no.
77. I believe Vic utilized his position of privilege in shameful ways in attempts to obtain sex.
78. In my experiences with Vic, if someone acted like they did not want to be hugged or kissed, he stopped immediately.
79. Funimation employees, including Jamie Marchi, Monica Rial and Michelle Sprect have advised me more than once since February 2019 that criminal charges are coming against Vic. In response I encourage them to help these alleged underage victims of rape and sexual assault to come forward. When asked to provide specifics to these allegations they couldn't or refused to do so.
80. When I was told about the contents of the "confidential" investigation undertaken by Tammie Denbow on behalf of Funimation, my opinion was that Funimation, Jamie Marchi and Monica Rial acted together and with encouragement from Chris Sabat and Sean Schemmel, to destroy Vic's career and life.
81. I believe that the purported incidents investigated by Tammi Denbow occurred of Funimation property and not at Funimation events. The one incident that purportedly occurred on Funimation property occurred prior to Sony's acquisition of Funimation, thus the "no hugs" policy from Sony was not in effect (i.e. there were no signs about the policy hung around the Funimation office).
81. I do not believe that Vic kissed Sarah Bachmeyer without her consent. I have never heard rumors of Vic behaving sexually inappropriate at Funimation.
82. Funimation has supported the accusations made by Defendants' that Vic is a sexual predator, pedophile and rapist by supporting the accusations directly with their own public statements (I, as a member of the pubic, viewed the Tweets made on February 11, 2019 by Funimation as supporting the accusation against Vic and asserting Vic was fired for sexual harassment and threats).
83. It appears to me that Ron Toye, Monica Rial and Jamie Marchi have been speaking with Funimation's tacit or overt consent in tweets that have been made by them since January 2019.
Last edited:
But again, what is the relevance of this regarding the case at hand.
Once you start pulling the perspective back, none of this is relevant to the case at hand. It is really interesting in the perspective of the larger story, but looking at this case in particular - why does any of this matter?
You are gonna have to specify some shit to get a concise answer here.
It's actually very close to the narrative that Beard is pushing. Huber is also talking about a conspiracy against Vic, but his is that Chris Sabat's at the center of it and is bullying Vic for being a gay-looking Trump supporting Christian. He's also denying that sexual assault happened, although part of that is treating the manipulation of fans for sex as somehow separate rather than insisting that it didn't happen. He's also pushing that the workplace's atmosphere justifies things that happened there.
Yes. But Huber and Sabbat are not part of the original claim - so why is Beard talking about them? They have no place in what should be his focus: why toye, rial, marchi and funimation ruined
Edit: his changed to Vics
Because Beardy man decided it was awesome to bring in more parties that have nothing to do with his ongoing case.
It is a very long document, but just stay with the basics and ignore the 800+ pages of irrelevant shit.