• Reminder: Do not call, text, or mention harrassing someone in real life. Do not encourage it. Do not talk about killing or using violence against anyone, or engaging in any criminal behavior. If it is not an obvious joke even when taken out of context, don't post it. Please report violators.

    DMCA, complaints, and other inquiries:

    [email protected]

I Wanna See the Courthouse Movie! - Part 3

FurBurger

FurBurger

What would you do for a Klondike bar?
‎
Forum Clout
22,495
Brian_Gilgore said:
Well that's my bitchute channel, should I leave it up or what?

Click to expand...


That's handy to have, as we can hear the judge saying:
As counsel is appearing I have somebody onscreen with a raised hand with a screen name identified as quote "Firstname, Lastname". I dunno who that is, but that person will not be admitted until and unless he or she identifies himself or herself as counsel of record.
Click to expand...
What's important to note is he doesn't kick them out of the session; just refuses to acknowledge their input until he knows why he should. He's fine to have them sit there and watch; and he does the same with Phat Pat. The SFWA lawyer makes it sound like the judge kicked out everyone other than the lawyers, Pat, and Quasi; but that's Not So. Also he thinks the only conceivable person who could have recorded this (even though there's a least two observers) is Patrick Quasi, so I guess you're Quasi now.

...as for the $1000 fine the SFWA's council mentions, that seems iffy to me, given that the court is the one doing the recording. Rules like that are normally there for cases which need evidence given in secret to protect the witness' privacy - snitches, child abuse, rape - and I don't think that counts as a valid reason in this case. Plus, the judge could just order the cameras turned off, and there's 60-odd anonymous defendants with a valid interest in the case, and whoever recorded the stream might not even be in California. If the court did try to impose that fine it would be a good case for the ACLU, if they're not too busy defending mandatory trans rape and defaming Johnny Depp.
 
G

guest

Guest
FurBurger said:
That's handy to have, as we can hear the judge saying:

What's important to note is he doesn't kick them out of the session; just refuses to acknowledge their input until he knows why he should. He's fine to have them sit there and watch; and he does the same with Phat Pat. The SFWA lawyer makes it sound like the judge kicked out everyone other than the lawyers, Pat, and Quasi; but that's Not So. Also he thinks the only conceivable person who could have recorded this (even though there's a least two observers) is Patrick Quasi, so I guess you're Quasi now.

...as for the $1000 fine the SFWA's council mentions, that seems iffy to me, given that the court is the one doing the recording. Rules like that are normally there for cases which need evidence given in secret to protect the witness' privacy - snitches, child abuse, rape - and I don't think that counts as a valid reason in this case. Plus, the judge could just order the cameras turned off, and there's 60-odd anonymous defendants with a valid interest in the case, and whoever recorded the stream might not even be in California. If the court did try to impose that fine it would be a good case for the ACLU, if they're not too busy defending mandatory trans rape and defaming Johnny Depp.
Click to expand...
Btw the lovely asian clerk from the A Fistful of Rupees episode said that everyone is allowed to observe.
 
FurBurger

FurBurger

What would you do for a Klondike bar?
‎
Forum Clout
22,495
safka13 said:
One with honorable judge pro tem Stein, right after patso Kool-aid man apperance so about 6minutes in
Click to expand...
You are exactly right; Pat blasts in like he's The Shockmaster at 5:05, and then at 6:00 or so the clerk points out it's a public hearing and all are welcome to observe. Courtvidmin.mp4, if you're looking for it.

Also, there's something odd about that SFWA lawyer asking for the details of Pat's $150k "prezzie" to be sealed by the court. He must know (or at least guess) that all of Pat's shit is going to end up in open court anyway, particularly since Pat isn't playing ball and so can't ask for it to be sealed.

He's just trying to cover up the identity of whichever shifty cunt gave Pat the money.
 
PlayfulScamp

PlayfulScamp

‎
Forum Clout
2,358
FurBurger said:
You are exactly right; Pat blasts in like he's The Shockmaster at 5:05, and then at 6:00 or so the clerk points out it's a public hearing and all are welcome to observe. Courtvidmin.mp4, if you're looking for it.

Also, there's something odd about that SFWA lawyer asking for the details of Pat's $150k "prezzie" to be sealed by the court. He must know (or at least guess) that all of Pat's shit is going to end up in open court anyway, particularly since Pat isn't playing ball and so can't ask for it to be sealed.

He's just trying to cover up the identity of whichever shifty cunt gave Pat the money.
Click to expand...

This post had me go back to watch for a few rupees more for the first time awhile and I’m wheezing at the clerk opening the floor for William Tetley, Yusuf Kumiya, Nick Carpanelli and Paul Weimer.

A murderer’s row of rib breakers.
 
A

archive_bot

‎
‎
Forum Clout
5,871
234532345.png



ibb.co

08097808 hosted at ImgBB

Image 08097808 hosted in ImgBB
ibb.co ibb.co

ibb.co

08097810 hosted at ImgBB

Image 08097810 hosted in ImgBB
ibb.co ibb.co
 
SmellenShoehorn

SmellenShoehorn

‎
Forum Clout
27,752
PlayfulScamp said:
This post had me go back to watch for a few rupees more for the first time awhile and I’m wheezing at the clerk opening the floor for William Tetley, Yusuf Kumiya, Nick Carpanelli and Paul Weimer.

A murderer’s row of rib breakers.
Click to expand...
a nice Nick Carpanelli in the wild never ceases to break my ribs. Whoever did that deserves a nice Drink to Help You Think (Or at Least Sink the Pink)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top