I cant imagine him ever letting the idiots win, but I also cant imagine the SFWA allowing any further loans.
Pests, what say you?
Pests, what say you?
-
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]
Is Pat going to exhaust the appeals process, or is he calling it quits?
- Thread starter MunchausenByProxy
- Start date
It depends whether they're paying attention or not. Pat should have had to waive legal privilege so the SFWA's lawyer can examine his case before they fund it... but something tells me that they didn't, mostly by the way they fucked up the Cloudflare and Google subpoenas. Hopefully his loss means they actually take a look, and drop the fucker.
I suspect that right now Quasi's negotiating settlement, and has that signed declaration from Brinton showing that they'd hacked into the forum and potentially changed the posts within as a bargaining chip. That's also going to put a dent in his chances of an appeal.
I'd be tempted to ask for some extra money as compensation for emotional distress, to save Quasi the hassle of suing Patrick for it later on.
I suspect that right now Quasi's negotiating settlement, and has that signed declaration from Brinton showing that they'd hacked into the forum and potentially changed the posts within as a bargaining chip. That's also going to put a dent in his chances of an appeal.
I'd be tempted to ask for some extra money as compensation for emotional distress, to save Quasi the hassle of suing Patrick for it later on.
G
guest
Guest
Ask him yourself he’s usually here. Illegally and fatly.
This place really does need a warning at the start telling Patrick he's been trespassed from the place, and if he comes here again charges will be pressed.
Quasi ought to send him something official, via his lawyer.
He probably will give up, like everything he does. He couldn’t remove a stump. He’ll just pretend things didn’t happen the way they do and he thinks that time will make it go away. Then maybe I’m a few years he‘ll try again. Like he does with his toys.
a dead fish
G
guest
Guest
He is definitely going to take this as far as his creditors will allow. I’m sure he’s looking at all this from a complete fantasy land.
I don’t think he ever wanted to win. Originally they just thought they’d scare us off and that blew up in his face. He’s just trying to make this a “national news story” now. Problem is he is fat and irrelevant so nobody cares.
I don’t think he ever wanted to win. Originally they just thought they’d scare us off and that blew up in his face. He’s just trying to make this a “national news story” now. Problem is he is fat and irrelevant so nobody cares.
@notalawyer explained it better and can correct my nonsense if I'm way off but I believe that the appeals process wouldn't really give them much of an opportunity to submit new evidence, just appeal the judgment using the merits of their original evidence.
This means they already would have submitted indisputable proof that Quasi posted defamatory statements and the judge applied the wrong precedents or interpretation. Introducing new evidence may be possible but probably requires a ground breaking finding that's critical to the case to be admissable in an appeal situation.
Again, putting words in @notalawyer 's mouth but the good judge Schulman obviously doesn't want a successful appeal on his record so that's why he let Stavros run his mouth; so he could respond thoroughly and support his own decision to quash in the event of an appeal.
That's not to say he won't try, but it'd just be more of the same. More time, more energy, more embarrassment, and more money.
This means they already would have submitted indisputable proof that Quasi posted defamatory statements and the judge applied the wrong precedents or interpretation. Introducing new evidence may be possible but probably requires a ground breaking finding that's critical to the case to be admissable in an appeal situation.
Again, putting words in @notalawyer 's mouth but the good judge Schulman obviously doesn't want a successful appeal on his record so that's why he let Stavros run his mouth; so he could respond thoroughly and support his own decision to quash in the event of an appeal.
That's not to say he won't try, but it'd just be more of the same. More time, more energy, more embarrassment, and more money.
G
guest
Guest
You’re seriously overestimating him. He’s a fucking sociopath with a victim complex. He’d just claim it was some kind of threat and behave all entitled about it. Attempt to explain to him what he’s doing is an actual crime and he would just stomp his feet insisting that everyone follow his demands. He’s fat like that.
I don't think it would change his behaviour, but it would be another thing for Quasi to slap him around with, if he tries to go to court again.
That's my recollection, too. Mayr had two chances to submit written arguments to the judge pro tempore, plus a chance to verbally argue in front of him; he failed those three and then got the chance to argue it in front of Judge Shulman (who told him that he was "making [his] opponent's case for him"). He's got fuck-all chance of arguing that both judges made the same mistake in applying Krinsky to his case.
Hopefully the Wisconsin court dismisses it with prejudice.
G
guest
Guest
Can’t our Mola Ram just move on that now? He’s got ApostleGate to back up his claims about Pat and his Lionel Hutz lawyer admitting to that breach. Then again Quasi is still 27K in the hole at the moment.
Also, I’m sure Lionel would have insisted: [MEDIA=youtube]5yuL6PcgSgM:15[/MEDIA]
Oh no, my sweet child. I've already won the appeal. You're too stupid to have been paying attention to any of this, as always.
G
guest
Guest
It's not up to him, it's up to the SFWA who funded this, and no they are not shoveling more money into the fire so that Pat can have a few more months on his high horse
Something tells me Canyon Boykin won't be appearing in court, so I doubt much of that is admissible. Quasi could report Brinton/Fatrick's hacking as a crime, but I don't know whether the cops could effectively keep him anonymous (probably not, as I think Fats has the legal right to question his accuser in court). It's a nice headshot if he does get unmasked, though.
Lastly, we don't yet know whether Pat's going to sell an engorged kidney or two and refile elsewhere; so Quasi should probably keep his head down for a little longer.
Hush Niki child. If we sell the hovel and move in with your mom we can have $425,000 to re-sue the atalkers and Trump, child.