PULL Gawking Thread - Stupid thoughts from stupid THOTs

AnOminous

Really?
True & Honest Fan
Retired Staff
kiwifarms.net
I just looked at it again. He was libel-proof for the purpose of that specific case.
A court only decides the specific case. A plaintiff can be libel-proof in the case he is bringing. The is the doctrine.

Incidentally, the case being upheld didn't hold the plaintiff libel-proof but the Second Circuit went out of its way to say that he was.
 

PeruvianPerun

kiwifarms.net
View attachment 918464
How did beard screw ovet vic
If I get this right latest document was too fat and failed to be transferred on the 30th. So there is apparently some law, that says if document applied at weekend, it counts as on the first working day after. Now they happy that Ty late by 4 days, don't know why 4 tho, saw at some lawtwitter. Also Chucks words that Vic not saint (which he admits) and that everyone at funi hated him for no reason make Vic case fall apart.
 

teriyakiburns

Your world frightens and confuses me.
kiwifarms.net
If I get this right latest document was too fat and failed to be transferred on the 30th. So there is apparently some law, that says if document applied at weekend, it counts as on the first working day after. Now they happy that Ty late by 4 days, don't know why 4 tho, saw at some lawtwitter.
Of course, this is what happens when non-lawyers who also can't into simple research comment on things like this.

TRCP 21(f)(6) :

Technical Failure. If a document is untimely due to a technical failure or a system outage, the filing party may seek appropriate relief from the court. If the missed deadline is one imposed by these rules, the filing party must be given a reasonable extension of time to complete the filing.
As Ty said, the rule gives leeway for late filing caused by technical issues. They very publicly announced those technical issues as they were filing and can no doubt provide evidence of that. They're fine.
 

ConSluttant

Because everyone needs advice. Even Thots.
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
Yes it is and it was originally articulated in this case: Cardillo v. Doubleday Co., Inc, 518 F.2d 638 (2d. Cir. 1975).



It is reserved for people whose reputation is so bad they are essentially pariahs.

Nobody who routinely, even after being defamed, attends conventions with lines of fans around the corner is going to qualify under this.

It is laughable and pants-on-head exceptional to think this is even a possibility.
And my favorite felon and Speedway Bomber Brett Kimberlin was declared libel proof in the defamation case he brought against friends of mine. It was a glorious day when that judgement came down I tell you.

I'm not great with legalese... but it sounds like the court basically said, in that, that no one should ever be considered able to be libeled and defamed no matter their history and have it unable to matter. In otherwords, it looks like they said libel-proof isn't actually a thing.
No..what they are saying is that every case has to be judged. Libel proof isn't automatic if you have been convicted. But being Libel proof is VERY much a thing. Reading comprehension is good.

They claim that Ty's filing was terrible. Most likely because it didn't have the "flair" of Lemoine's.
Thank GOD it didn't have Lemoine's flair. I would have gouged my eyeballs out. THAT would not have been a good look for Vic. The actual filling, on the other hand, is as succinct and to the point as it can be, mistakes and all. A very GOOD look for Vic - which they hate of course. Lol
 

Garm

kiwifarms.net
Thank GOD it didn't have Lemoine's flair. I would have gouged my eyeballs out. THAT would not have been a good look for Vic. The actual filling, on the other hand, is as succinct and to the point as it can be, mistakes and all. A very GOOD look for Vic - which they hate of course. Lol
Lemoine's filing seemed to come from the "Perry Mason/Matlock/Law and Order" school where you badger the witness in to confessing.
 

BHWuser

kiwifarms.net
And my favorite felon and Speedway Bomber Brett Kimberlin was declared libel proof in the defamation case he brought against friends of mine. It was a glorious day when that judgement came down I tell you.



No..what they are saying is that every case has to be judged. Libel proof isn't automatic if you have been convicted. But being Libel proof is VERY much a thing. Reading comprehension is good.



Thank GOD it didn't have Lemoine's flair. I would have gouged my eyeballs out. THAT would not have been a good look for Vic. The actual filling, on the other hand, is as succinct and to the point as it can be, mistakes and all. A very GOOD look for Vic - which they hate of course. Lol
Except it still states "in this case" which leaves it open, even for that particular person, to still be able to seek justice under libel in the future. Those three words aren't ambiguous and are entirely intended to convey what I said. That's the problem people seem to be having with my point. They gave an opinion and wording that specifically states that no one can or should become 100% libel proof in all instances.

I also think people are taking words of humility and jumping on it to assume what I said was incorrect. I've read it over and over. I'm not wrong in stating what I said above. I am wrong that it was just a theory, but that's due to a legal paper stating at such that I read that was published like late last year. So that was my mistake.
 

Garm

kiwifarms.net
Maybe if it was b/w, badly formatted, rotation and orientation were fucked up, they'd like it.
That is what I was thinking. That either law Twitter has terrible standards or the TCPA filing is like one of those 3D pictures where if you look at it right *boom!* Pedophile.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: FluffyTet

AnOminous

Really?
True & Honest Fan
Retired Staff
kiwifarms.net
Except it still states "in this case" which leaves it open, even for that particular person, to still be able to seek justice under libel in the future.
No shit. There's no such thing as being permanently declared a "libel-proof plaintiff" and then never being able to sue ever again for anything defamatory. You are only a libel-proof plaintiff for the case in question, which is all the court has jurisdiction over.
 

Kosher Salt

(((NaCl)))
kiwifarms.net
I think this moron doesn't realize you only fully cite a case the first time it appears. While it's nice one of these children realizes citations are a thing, failed attempt.
I think they're referring to the missing exhibit letters.
Untitled.png
If I get this right latest document was too fat and failed to be transferred on the 30th. So there is apparently some law, that says if document applied at weekend, it counts as on the first working day after. Now they happy that Ty late by 4 days, don't know why 4 tho, saw at some lawtwitter. Also Chucks words that Vic not saint (which he admits) and that everyone at funi hated him for no reason make Vic case fall apart.
Monday was a holiday in the US, so the response, which was due Friday the 30th before midnight, was technically submitted this morning, Tuesday the 3rd.

The technical difficulties in submitting it do give them a valid excuse, though. Their PDF was too big and they'd run out of sacred ointment.
 

BHWuser

kiwifarms.net
No shit. There's no such thing as being permanently declared a "libel-proof plaintiff" and then never being able to sue ever again for anything defamatory. You are only a libel-proof plaintiff for the case in question, which is all the court has jurisdiction over.
Okay, then the people saying I'm wrong can fuck off because I was correct, lol
 

DragoonSierra

kiwifarms.net
..Philemon...did he name himself after Lemoine?
PULL deserves to be mocked by the biggest of Weebs lol
Its a Persona reference

There was a possible person that might be that poster and we did dox them, but beyond that name, there's nothing else that ties the person to that account. Typically there are enough other details to link a person to the online identity that they use, but the posts on by that person are such complete and utter fabrications that it wasn't possible to draw connections to any real person, because no such real person who had any of those experiences likely exists.

Several weeks ago I'd made a post that I think pretty thoroughly takes the entire story apart and shows why it's just a work of fiction. Too many red flags that scream it's fake, especially since the poster hasn't bothered posting again. If it came down to it, the information about the person's identity could reach those who would need it and could possibly verify (to some degree) if it's actually them if they were to subpoena IP logs.

The conclusion was that it's better just to let it die. The story on PULL was pure bullshit no matter how you slice it and it's unlikely that it will matter at all who the person who wrote it actually is in much the same way it doesn't matter who wrote any of the other ridiculous posts (I'm talking the dream rape kinds of posts that are just beyond all belief) on PULL or that tumblr site.
Im convinced Lynn Hunt is the source of most of the Vic rumors since 2007 as @Allanon has suggested.
 

About Us

The Kiwi Farms is about eccentric individuals and communities on the Internet. We call them lolcows because they can be milked for amusement or laughs. Our community is bizarrely diverse and spectators are encouraged to join the discussion.

We do not place intrusive ads, host malware, sell data, or run crypto miners with your browser. If you experience these things, you have a virus. If your malware system says otherwise, it is faulty.

Supporting the Forum

How to Help

The Kiwi Farms is constantly attacked by insane people and very expensive to run. It would not be here without community support.

BTC: 1DgS5RfHw7xA82Yxa5BtgZL65ngwSk6bmm
ETH: 0xc1071c60Ae27C8CC3c834E11289205f8F9C78CA5
BAT: 0xc1071c60Ae27C8CC3c834E11289205f8F9C78CA5
LTC: LSZsFCLUreXAZ9oyc9JRUiRwbhkLCsFi4q
XMR: 438fUMciiahbYemDyww6afT1atgqK3tSTX25SEmYknpmenTR6wvXDMeco1ThX2E8gBQgm9eKd1KAtEQvKzNMFrmjJJpiino