A really good actor like Michael Rooker. Gonna be tough to act that dumb.I would watch it. Dustin Diamond obviously would play Rekieta, but who would play Beard?
A really good actor like Michael Rooker. Gonna be tough to act that dumb.I would watch it. Dustin Diamond obviously would play Rekieta, but who would play Beard?
He also mentioned other cons that Vic was disinvited to, but Beard has no evidence that Funi's staff were the ones who got him disinvited. He just assumed since they got involved in one con, then it's reasonable to assumed they got involved with the other cons disinviting him. The judge didn't buy this since as he pointed out, other people could have called in and raised concerns about Vic since his accusations was all over Twitter. So Beard needed some evidence that showed than Funi's staff got Vic disinvited from other cons instead of just Random Person A. It stands out more since Beard apparently didn't even talked to the other con owners.
Every time I look at his transcript the same phrase keeps coming in to my head: "if only you thought to plead it". You can't just bamboozle people at the hearing in litigation. All sides play with their cards face up.
Seth RogenI would watch it. Dustin Diamond obviously would play Rekieta, but who would play Beard?
It's so insane.
Beard: [says thing]
Defense: That's a lie
Judge: is that a lie?
Beard: please ignore the evidence that proves it's a lie
I want to hear Charles Dance day "Y'all" lol
I'm reminded of the scene in My Cousin Vinny where Joe Pesci tries getting friendly with the judge in order to dupe him into swiping evidence from the prosecution, and he gets all excited that it worked only for Marisa Tomei to call him a massive idiot for not knowing that all presented evidence from both sides is supposed to be available.
No surprises, Percy.
Your reminder that My Cousin Vinny understood the law better than Percy does.
Man,Beard is really bad at this. Even when he's not screwing up definitions his attempts at offense are so feeble.For those following his thread, Mike Dunford has started part 2 of live tweeting the transcript.
Man,Beard is really bad at this. Even when he's not screwing up definitions his attempts at offense are so feeble.
I ended up reading that filing finishing at like 3am and having to head to my nephews birthday at 8:30 the next morning. So I missed a fair bit. Really enjoying Mike's (rather sober) takes on it. Especially since I think I have a tendency to concentrate on the "funny" bits when reading it myself.
I've got a passing interest in law and follow various lawtwitter accounts now since they found out about the lawsuit. Sorta like expanding my knowledge by finding HistorianTwitter. Anyway, it's kinda telling when they collectively dunk on your court hearing.
SO many of them are pretty much "If the judge said this to me I'd melt/die/etc"
I've got a passing interest in law and follow various lawtwitter accounts now since they found out about the lawsuit. Sorta like expanding my knowledge by finding HistorianTwitter. Anyway, it's kinda telling when they collectively dunk on your court hearing.
SO many of them are pretty much "If the judge said this to me I'd melt/die/etc"
Kevin M. Kruse is my main go-to and he has a twitter list-thread of others.Oooooo. Historical twitter. That sounds awesome, any recommends?
He might have made it into the court room without shit in his pants, but he certainly left with a pile in his drawers.Edit: I wrote somewhere earlier in the thread that I had lowered my standards to being impressed if Beard was able to enter the courtroom without shitting his pants. There more I read, the less sure I am that he met that standard.
You know... Getting lost in a 2 hour fight with these people on Twitter is really something... I had People tell me that Funimation's stocks are dropping because of the leaks and the casting couch shit and when I post Sony's stock prices actually some of the highest since their crash in the early 2000s they're screeching "I said Funimation! Not Sony! Their Stocks and Subscribers are dropping!" It's never a thought to them that Funimation is not a traded company... It's like... The YouTube people tell them these things and it never enters their mind that they are being lied to... I'd feel bad for them if they weren't so proud of their stupidity.
As far as I can tell there aren't Funimation isn't even on the stock market, so WTF are they talking about?
It's more mind boggling you still think they're competent enough to even think that far ahead. ;DThis is what I don't get. If the conventions were hostile, why not bring a motion to conduct discovery and compel them to answer under oath. It's like he didn't run his answer against even a cursory list of the elements of the case. The affidavits from JSL are devastating but they are in dispute. All he needed to do is get the con rep on the record saying that we were potentially going to invite Vic, we saw the allegations sent to us by the defendant, and we decided to decline Vic's attendance. Whether the allegations are true or not, Vic has the chance to deny them in his response and the judge has to take the plaintiff's side on questions of fact.
That Percy didn't do that is mind boggling.
This is what I don't get. If the conventions were hostile, why not bring a motion to conduct discovery and compel them to answer under oath. It's like he didn't run his answer against even a cursory list of the elements of the case. The affidavits from JSL are devastating but they are in dispute. All he needed to do is get the con rep on the record saying that we were potentially going to invite Vic, we saw the allegations sent to us by the defendant, and we decided to decline Vic's attendance. Whether the allegations are true or not, Vic has the chance to deny them in his response and the judge has to take the plaintiff's side on questions of fact.
That Percy didn't do that is mind boggling.
I'm reminded of the scene in My Cousin Vinny where Joe Pesci tries getting friendly with the judge in order to dupe him into swiping evidence from the prosecution, and he gets all excited that it worked only for Marisa Tomei to call him a massive idiot for not knowing that all presented evidence from both sides is supposed to be available.
No surprises, Percy.
This is what I don't get. If the conventions were hostile, why not bring a motion to conduct discovery and compel them to answer under oath. It's like he didn't run his answer against even a cursory list of the elements of the case. The affidavits from JSL are devastating but they are in dispute. All he needed to do is get the con rep on the record saying that we were potentially going to invite Vic, we saw the allegations sent to us by the defendant, and we decided to decline Vic's attendance. Whether the allegations are true or not, Vic has the chance to deny them in his response and the judge has to take the plaintiff's side on questions of fact.
That Percy didn't do that is mind boggling.
Beard is the most bumbling of fools.We got a transcript of the hearing on Friday, and Beard is far, far worse than the livetweets made him out to be in court.
Well, if someone asked me to recommend a lawyer for vic, he's at the top of my list. Absolutely the best guy to get justice here.
Wait, failed?! B-but I thought we shouldn't be spiking the football yet thooo.
BEARD: They don't get to keep adding evidence after the deadline.
THE COURT: I let you.
I would feel bad for Beard if he wasn't so unable to learn.Mike is finishing up tweeting through the transcript, with part 3. Just in case anyone missed it.
I would feel bad for him if he wasn't a piece of shit that spend the whole time pretrial talking shit about the defendants on a grifter's youtube channel and asking people to doxx them and anyone who criticized him and his rapist client.
There's a clip of Vic talking about the Threadnought in an armory basement and it's just... He's in for a rude $$$ awakening.
This was a good article for those who haven't been keeping up with the whole thing.
This is what I don't get. If the conventions were hostile, why not bring a motion to conduct discovery and compel them to answer under oath. It's like he didn't run his answer against even a cursory list of the elements of the case. The affidavits from JSL are devastating but they are in dispute. All he needed to do is get the con rep on the record saying that we were potentially going to invite Vic, we saw the allegations sent to us by the defendant, and we decided to decline Vic's attendance. Whether the allegations are true or not, Vic has the chance to deny them in his response and the judge has to take the plaintiff's side on questions of fact.
That Percy didn't do that is mind boggling.