• We are delighted to introduce GiftBot 2.0, the next generation of our popular gifting feature. To celebrate, we'll be giving away some incredible prizes over the coming weeks in one big Giveaway Extravaganza!

Vic Mignogna Lawsuit |OT| Hold My Beard

JuicyPlayer

Member
Feb 8, 2018
1,554
Now all the Vic fans are saying , “We May have lost but FUNimation has destroyed its reputation and Toei will take the Dragon Ball license from them because they’re angry!”
 

astro

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,780
Now all the Vic fans are saying , “We May have lost but FUNimation has destroyed its reputation and Toei will take the Dragon Ball license from them because they’re angry!”
Destroyed their reputation*

*Except the majority of #istandwithvic don't actually care enough to boycott anything, and Toei aren't even going to react to this especially as Vic's case has fallen to pieces.
 

muteKi

Member
Oct 22, 2018
8,532
a sunken pirate ship

caliph95

Member
Oct 25, 2017
21,217
Unless Funimation bombed financially there's no way Toei gives a damn

Also Boycotts in general don't really work there was a study or article on it
 

deepFlaw

Member
Oct 25, 2017
13,980
So... the OP could stand to be updated to included the latest events, but to be fair the title wasn’t about the latest events either till recently. People absolutely should be checking threadmarks too. Probably needs a FAQ too (so that can go in the OP), yeah, but I also really think people could stand to scroll back or search for a minute before dropping questions.

Beyond that, other thing that I think might merit being made is a rundown/timeline of the documents on the drive, so that people actually look at that stuff for themselves, but that would take some amount of extra work.
 

deimosmasque

Member
Apr 22, 2018
1,505
Tampa, Fl
Because it's the same thing these Alt-right types do anytime something like this or some other "SJW" thing comes up.

That the relatively simple and honest thing "Woman comes out about being harassed by coworker" "LGBTQ people get to be married" and twist it down to the most ridiculous of all ridiculous slippery slopes possible.
"Next thing you know even looking at a woman will be considered rape." "Next people will want to marry their dogs"
 

Balfour

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,014
The bad jokes and changes to the DBS dub are more likely to hurt Funimation than this Vic crap lol
 

Cheerilee

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,684
Something I randomly wanted to comment on: I saw someone say that Ty Beard didn't bungle the case like an idiot, it was the judge who was "legally required" to be on Vic's side, he should've made the case for Vic and Beard, and he didn't, therefore this is a mistrial and Vic and Beard will win on appeal. I just wanted to sort out where we actually are with this case.

Despite all the "innocent until proven guilty" and "free speech" claims that Vicstans keep throwing around, Vic Mignogna is not the one being oppressed here, Vic is the one suing people for exercising their right to free speech. So the burden of proof most heavily lies with Vic.

But we're not actually at the "trial" portion yet, because the law moves slow. The defendants are currently asking for Vic's case to be thrown out early, because Vic doesn't have a case and he knows it, he's just trying to abuse the legal system to cause harm to the defendants. That's a strong statement, so the judge is essentially required to flip his position (putting the burden of proof on the defendants) as he says "Prove it. Prove that Vic doesn't have a case, and that he's just abusing the legal system."

The defense has seemingly proved it. They submitted evidence that supports their claim to have it thrown out. For example, there's "the truth". If what the defendants said about Vic is true, then that's one of the things that makes it not libel/slander (and Vic fucking confessed to pulling Jamie's hair, while making hand-motions to show how he did it). Another way to have it tossed out is if Vic is a celebrity, and Vic clearly is a celebrity, albeit a minor one. There are a bunch of these sorts of arguments, and the defense made them, and submitted them to the judge.

Vic and Beard were also given an opportunity to counter this evidence. And I saw lawyers on twitter saying that Beard absolutely needs to unload with all of the evidence that he has, because the survival of his lawsuit is currently in jeopardy, and because there's no better time to show the evidence (because actual law is boring, and has nothing to do with twists and turns and surprise witnesses).

The defense had time to put a defense together, while Beard had time to smash their defense. Oh, but Beard said that time wasn't enough? Okay, the judge gave Beard an extra fucking month to put his evidence together, while Beard had full access to the defense's evidence. And Beard still came in late, and the judge didn't give Beard shit for missing his extended deadline.

Okay, so, it's time for Beard's evidence to be shown, to counter the defense's evidence. Judge: "Can I see the contracts that were interfered with?" Beard: "Contracts? What contracts? I assume there were some contracts, but I don't have any."

It's like, seriously... WHAT THE FUCK? How can you be that incompetent? Vic's case is getting utterly dismantled, as it should be, and Vicstans are blaming the judge for not stepping in and literally arguing the case on Vic's behalf.

Ty Beard's performance was ruinous, which doesn't bode well for the chances on any of the remaining charges that Vic has levelled against the defendants.

And if any of those charges happen to survive this stage, the scene flips again, and the judge becomes "legally required" to side with the defendants. Anything that passes this stage is not "a win" for Vic, it's just dragging things out, as the odds stack harder and harder against Vic. Everything that Vicstans think that the judge is supposed to be doing for Vic right now, is what the judge would be supposed to do against Vic after this stage. This was supposed to be the easiest part of Vic's case (simply prove that "it exists"), and it's already standing in ruins, with Ty Beard having lost massive chunks of it on day-zero. But then again, maybe it's not really Ty Beard's fault, as this really is just an abuse of the legal system intended to cause harm to the defendants, and Beard had nothing to work with.
 

L Thammy

Spacenoid
Member
Oct 25, 2017
15,655
So get this.... this guy seriously believes that there was a conspiracy to ruin Vic’s life.
I mean, so does the lawsuit. That's one of the legal accusations.

Like, put on your best Vincent Price impersonation and read this short story by Ty Beard:

From the plaintiff's response to the motion to dismiss said:
The evidence shows that Defendants’ objective here was simple: run Vic out of Funimation, ruin his reputation, and get him kicked from conventions ... i.e., #kickVic. Jamie Marchi signaled the plan: the best way to ruin a career is to “name and shame.”

Monica initiated Funimation’s internal investigation. Funimation shared details with Monica and Ronald, and both publicly goaded Funimation to release the content of its investigation while bombarding Vic with defamatory tweets. Meanwhile, despite Funimation’s argument that she had no authority to speak for the company, Monica and several Funimation employees (with whom she is “very good friends”) emailed back and forth about the investigation and how to make Monica “feel better” and what Monica could say to the public. Even Marchi tweeted about the investigation. Seeing conventions cancel after Monica’s retweet of @hanleia’s false accusations, Funimation tweeted its defamatory statement that it was parting ways with Vic after its “investigation” because of abusive and harassing behavior. Monica then tweeted her endorsement of Funimation’s investigation. And Ronald tweeted gleefully that Vic’s career was over. Mission accomplished. Funimation has stood by Jamie, Monica and Ronald, exposing themselves to damages – fulfilling its part of the conspiracy by lending credence to Monica’s [and Jamie’s] allegations. They have played their role as the sine qua non of the conspiracy.
 

L Thammy

Spacenoid
Member
Oct 25, 2017
15,655
So erhm. This is on tv and shit:

This is the person who wrote this article earlier.


Seems she's putting work into this story.
 

ArchedThunder

Uncle Beerus
Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,189
Something I randomly wanted to comment on: I saw someone say that Ty Beard didn't bungle the case like an idiot, it was the judge who was "legally required" to be on Vic's side, he should've made the case for Vic and Beard, and he didn't, therefore this is a mistrial and Vic and Beard will win on appeal. I just wanted to sort out where we actually are with this case.
Imagine thinking a Judge is supposed to be biased, lmao.
So how did Beard F up exactly?
It'd be easier to list the ways he didn't fuck up.
 

L Thammy

Spacenoid
Member
Oct 25, 2017
15,655
As for the thing about Toei getting mad about Vic being kicked. My understanding is that while Japanese companies aren't great with social justice issues, they're really concerned about avoiding offending people. In the Dragonball sphere itself, you have stuff like censoring Trunks flipping the bird even in the Japanese version because it's an offensive gesture overseas (here's the Yamcha manga artist taking the piss out of this on Twitter)





Takao Koyama calling Broly better than Beerus also got a lot of publication.
 

mael

Avenger
Nov 3, 2017
7,355
So erhm. This is on tv and shit:

This is going about as well as GeriatricGerbil from 2014.
These morons never learn.
Not sure if anyone posted this yet but it's hillarious. The discussion of conspiracy made me remember it.

Ok so just to say that the mom is fantastic.

 

L Thammy

Spacenoid
Member
Oct 25, 2017
15,655
Imagine thinking a Judge is supposed to be biased, lmao.
Rekieta and Beard seem to be under the impression that with Texas' anti-SLAPP thing, the judge is supposed to show prejudice favouring the plaintiff. It's something like, he's supposed to take their stories and evidence in the most favourable light for now and then let the defendant try to break them down later.

This is getting into some real specifics and I have no idea if that's true - at least, it's not absurd when applied to only this particular part of the case, since in the rest the judge is supposed to be favouring the other way - but that seems to be stretching that idea into "he has to let Vic win regardless of what Vic's side actually produces". Even if it's true, the judge couldn't do a whole lot that because Beard rarely had any evidence for the judge to work with.
 

mael

Avenger
Nov 3, 2017
7,355
Rekieta and Beard seem to be under the impression that with Texas' anti-SLAPP thing, the judge is supposed to show prejudice favouring the plaintiff. It's something like, he's supposed to take their stories and evidence in the most favourable light for now and then let the defendant try to break them down later.

This is getting into some real specifics and I have no idea if that's true - at least, it's not absurd when applied to only this particular part of the case, since in the rest the judge is supposed to be favouring the other way - but that seems to be stretching that idea into "he has to let Vic win regardless of what Vic's side actually produces". Even if it's true, the judge couldn't do a whole lot that because Beard rarely had any evidence for the judge to work with.
That doesn't even make sense.
When would anti-SLAPP ever apply if the judge had to give an automatic win to plaintiffs?
 

zulux21

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,835
That doesn't even make sense.
When would anti-SLAPP ever apply if the judge had to give an automatic win to plaintiffs?
As far as i know he's supposed to view the evidence in the best possible light.... But you need actual evidence for that to happen not your personal thoughts about what something might mean without context like beard was trying to argue.
 

L Thammy

Spacenoid
Member
Oct 25, 2017
15,655
That doesn't even make sense.
When would anti-SLAPP ever apply if the judge had to give an automatic win to plaintiffs?
Actually, now that we're discussing this. Maybe this is why Greg Doucette didn't think things were going get struck down at that hearing. It makes sense if the plaintiff's case was meant to be looked at in the most favourable light, and so many of the claims being dismissed were a result of Beard making such a weak case that it can't stand even when the judge is trying to favour it.
 
Oct 25, 2017
5,254
Florida
Does Toei honestly even care?
For reference, about a decade or so ago when Funimation was first getting into streaming, they accidentally leaked a One Piece episode ahead of it's Japanese broadcast. If Funimation could repair their relationship with Toei from that grave of a mistake, I doubt they're really going to give two shits from Funimation sacking one of their voice talents.
 

Uzumaki Goku

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,389
For reference, about a decade or so ago when Funimation was first getting into streaming, they accidentally leaked a One Piece episode ahead of it's Japanese broadcast. If Funimation could repair their relationship with Toei from that grave of a mistake, I doubt they're really going to give two shits from Funimation sacking one of their voice talents.
Oh, I imagine Toei was pissed.
 

Katten

Member
Oct 27, 2017
783
Rekieta and Beard seem to be under the impression that with Texas' anti-SLAPP thing, the judge is supposed to show prejudice favouring the plaintiff. It's something like, he's supposed to take their stories and evidence in the most favourable light for now and then let the defendant try to break them down later.
TCPA is Texas Citizens Participation Act. "Lets help citizens by heavily favoring cash heavy plaintiffs!"
 

Primus

Member
Oct 25, 2017
812
Actually, now that we're discussing this. Maybe this is why Greg Doucette didn't think things were going get struck down at that hearing. It makes sense if the plaintiff's case was meant to be looked at in the most favourable light, and so many of the claims being dismissed were a result of Beard making such a weak case that it can't stand even when the judge is trying to favour it.
I mean, from the livetweets it seemed like Judge Chupp *was* trying to give Percy the benefit of the doubt. Threw him a lifeline on at least two occasions. But Percy was so holycrapOMGhowisthispossible unprepared for the entire day all the help in the world wasn't enough to salvage things.
 

mael

Avenger
Nov 3, 2017
7,355
As far as i know he's supposed to view the evidence in the best possible light.... But you need actual evidence for that to happen not your personal thoughts about what something might mean without context like beard was trying to argue.
Exactly but that doesn't mean that the judge has to give an automatic win based on the rambling of the plaintiffs' attorneys either.
If that was the case then it would be pointless because you could sue everyone and anyone and when the judge goes to anti-SLAPP, you just have to be
"I sued him for a reason that I won't tell"
and tadah antiSLAPP defeated.
It's moronic!
Actually, now that we're discussing this. Maybe this is why Greg Doucette didn't think things were going get struck down at that hearing. It makes sense if the plaintiff's case was meant to be looked at in the most favourable light, and so many of the claims being dismissed were a result of Beard making such a weak case that it can't stand even when the judge is trying to favour it.
Well yeah, Ty tried to drown the opposition in pointless paper but forgot to consider that he might be asked what proof there might be in there.
Like seriously the guy didn't even know what part of the evidence related to anything.
WORSE yet, he didn't even try to point them out.
 
Nov 2, 2017
519
Actually, now that we're discussing this. Maybe this is why Greg Doucette didn't think things were going get struck down at that hearing. It makes sense if the plaintiff's case was meant to be looked at in the most favourable light, and so many of the claims being dismissed were a result of Beard making such a weak case that it can't stand even when the judge is trying to favour it.
For the record, Doucette’s big comments about things not likely getting struck down at the hearing is less about their chances of winning on the TCPA motion and more about the deliberative nature of judges.

In most any other situation, that hearing would have ended and the judge had 30 days to render a decision on all 17 counts. The fact that 12/17 counts got thrown out on the spot is because he felt so sure they were wet farts that he wasn’t even going to wait and write a legal brief to explain why Beard loses.

Doucette’s been pretty consistent that the chances the Funi/Toye/Marchi claims had basically zero chance of surviving but Rial’s stood a 15% chance of remaining (hers is dicier because of claims about a private meeting and a case that says in situations like that, the plaintiff saying “it didn’t happen like that” can be enough to survive TCPA).
 

ExKage

Member
Sep 9, 2019
88
Stan Dahlin, founder of KawaiiCon, just implicitly tried to target harassment at Jamie Marchi (whose cases from Vic were entirely dismissed) or tried to raise boycott concerns. I am... doubtful of the intention for the latter and think he's all too willing to support the former. Mike Dunford took a screencap of his tweet that goes "wink wink nudge nudge".


My understanding of putting together the livetweets, Mark Methenitis' notes, and Sharon Grisby's article is that Ty Beard had many opportunities to at least make a [bad] case for the suits against Jamie Marchi and Funimation. I think there were still chances of getting past TCPA motion but still failing afterwards for Monica Rial and Ron Toye. They didn't expect Ty Beard to just "not find" the evidence that he needed to show clear and specific supports of his case. The quote so many from the hearing used was Judge Chupp telling him that the issue he has isn't the [standard of evidence] but that he had no evidence to support his claims.

It sounded like he tried to just dump the binder of his notice pleadings and said "Judge it's in here!"