-
- Mr. Tomlinson's feud started after members of the now-defunct Reddit site r/opieandanthony got his Twitter account suspended, causing him to threaten some bored trolls who never heard of him with a libel lawsuit. The trolls responded predictably.
- Mr. Tomlinson has been instructed many times by friends, family, police, and attorneys to stop engaging with his trolls, and that continuing to provoke them will cause him to be trolled even more. Mr. Tomlinson wilfully ignores this advice.
- He would eventually file a defamation suit against 60 anonymous people which was dismissed with Mr. Tomlinson being ordered to pay $34,762.25 for opposing parties' attorney fees.
- He ended up paying $83,736.99 due to his unsuccessful attempts to dodge the court-ordered judgement, for which he faced jail time and contempt charges.
- He also filed 2 frivolous restraining orders against people who had engaged in First Amendment-protected behavior (one for texting him and another for attending his contempt of court hearing), both of which were dismissed.
- Early on in the lawsuit, Mr. Tomlinson vandalized his own motorcycle and submitted a false police report blaming the people he was suing.
- He accidentally sent surveillance video of the alleged vandal to a troll. The individual in the video is very obviously Patrick S. Tomlinson.
- Mr. Tomlinson has never submitted this video footage during any of his many media tours, and desperately tries to scrub it from the internet.
- Mr. Tomlinson claims that the surveillance video was initiated by his "motion-activated" camera, which only collects "30 seconds at a time", despite the video being 32 seconds long and beginning several seconds before the "vandal" enters into the frame.
- On 13 April 2023, the individual responsible for calling the fake emergences (SWATs) to Mr. Tomlinson's house, a SWAT-for-hire dealer named "Torswats", revealed that Mr. Tomlinson ordered the SWATs to his own house because he wanted to get in the news and sue the MPD for money.
- Torswats would repeat these allegations in private chats which were not intended for public view.
- Mr. Tomlinson has gone on multiple news tours since the SWATtings started in order to promote his victimhood brand, utilizing the services of Lenora Claire.
- He also recently sued the MPD for money.
So where are we at with Judge Ashley after the first 3 episodes?
- Thread starter Covid19
- Start date
To be fair, this lolsuit is so fucking retarded he was probably in a state of shock for the first few hearings. If he did toss it during the first hearing though, think of all the funny shit we would have missed out on.
Plus I feel like he has to go through the motions to make sure The Blob doesn’t have any grounds for appeal
HE’S A NIGGER! HE’S A NIGGER! A NIGGER, LOOK THERE’S A NIGGER!
He stinks.
What kind of judge responds to "they got this information illegally" with "well, the horse is already out of the barn"?
What kind of judge responds to "they got this information illegally" with "well, the horse is already out of the barn"?
He’s just running the clock out until retirement. “I’m getting too old for this Fatrick Shit!”
I think Ashley thinks this suit is so flimsy and vague (they don’t even know who they’re suing) that eventually they will drop it once someone refuses to keep paying Resto. He’s look confused the whole time because they haven’t even been able to name anyone yet. The downside of the virtual stuff is if these lawyers had to physically go into court this would have been tossed. At this point Patrick could say he’s suing the Loch Ness monster but just need more time to figure out his address so they would request an extension.
Holy fuck, I missed you.
G
guest
Guest
There was a lot of confusion there, and I can't say how much is Ashley's fault, the stupidity of the initial complaint, or Null's lawyer not communicating the situation properly.
Ashley was assuming the quash was to maintain the anonymity of the owner of kiwifarms, as is partially the case with the onaforums quash. With that assumption, what Ashley meant was that Brinton couldn't just erase the knowledge of who the owner is in order to not send them a subpoena. Once he knows it, it doesn't really matter at that point. Hence the horse and the barn etc.
Unbeknownst to Ashley, Null's info is public so this isn't the issue. And why would Ashley presume this? It doesn't make any sense for Brinton to subpoena cloudflare unless it was a pretext to obtain information not needed in identification. Can we blame Ashley for not knowing all the details of the case? Sure, probably, but not for that comment specifically.
Null explained this in his thread. He said the subpoena was requesting information about other sites managed by the same account, billing info, country info etc. All things not needed to identify him. Barnes didn't really explain this objection properly. He mentioned a statute that said the info was obtained illegally, but we don't have his response so it is not clear what he meant.
What is not clear is if cloudflare acted illegally in sending the info before they said they were, given some implied contract, or another law (which barnes may have referenced). In that case the issue is between Null and cloudflare.
It's sort of like someone sending evidence to the police that was taken illegally from an office. The police can't use that evidence specifically, but they now know the name of someone to investigate and where to look to launch an investigation. What Ashley is basically saying is, Brinton has this info and can use it to do more discovery, there's really no way to go back in time and remove the knowledge of that.
~~this is not legal advice~~
Last edited by a moderator:
Thats what really confused me about the last hearing. Barnes never even brought up the main issue and instead just said they didn't use the California protection act or whatever.
I think Ashley is still doing a good job. He’s just trying to move the case along to where something can actually be litigated as far as I can tell.
the person I’m most disappointed with so far is Barnes. We hyped him up and he let us down, meanwhile a complete unknown baby-faced Latino came in and fucking delivered
the person I’m most disappointed with so far is Barnes. We hyped him up and he let us down, meanwhile a complete unknown baby-faced Latino came in and fucking delivered
i'm waiting until the next episode to make any sort of judgement.
He's a good guy, a gentleman...but he's a fucking hayseed. He just didn't grasp the ridiculousness of this case at first and gave it the benefit of the doubt (as most midwesterners naturally do) but you can obviously tell his patience is running out, in regards to this case. So if he's a bit more curt and terse in the next episode this month, then I'll sign off on him as being a good egg.
He's a good guy, a gentleman...but he's a fucking hayseed. He just didn't grasp the ridiculousness of this case at first and gave it the benefit of the doubt (as most midwesterners naturally do) but you can obviously tell his patience is running out, in regards to this case. So if he's a bit more curt and terse in the next episode this month, then I'll sign off on him as being a good egg.
I like his old school attitude, but he not the kind of guy that should be dealing with a case like this. He has no idea what is going on and I wouldn't be surprised if he hasn't even actually looked at any of the details of the case. Also, what kind of judge knows a party did something illegally and makes a barnyard analogy to tell the other party it's out of his control?
With all that said, based on what he had to say at the last hearing I highly doubt he grants the motion to quash.
With all that said, based on what he had to say at the last hearing I highly doubt he grants the motion to quash.
G
guest
Guest
Probably a good guy but a letdown as a judge after the whole "fuck it" episode last time. According to every Hollywood movie of the last 25 years, a man of his hue should be a Supreme Court Judge by now, if he was above average at his job.