original reddit post (removed).
Go get him, Kim.
It's more nuanced than that. It's that you make a statement that you know to be untrue.
Yeah, that's right. Defamation tends to be a fairly involved thing to prove, presumably so that people aren't filing suit every time another person speaks. Another reason that I get the impression that this ends with him finally realizing that his lawyers have been stringing him along.
original reddit post (removed).
I think one of the forum members here updated that wiki page a few weeks back.
a pimo elder at bethel has come forward with a special message posted on reddit.. https://www.reddit.com/gallery/v9mgao.
the dated pictures attached are "proof conclusive" that this is for real.
no outside guests are allowed inside bethel at this time.
I think that has always been the dirty little secret at Bethel. I just hope this person is making sure to cover his tracks as thoroughly as he can.
Thanks for posting this, Kim/Mike.
original reddit post (removed).
Cappytan makes a good point about this part:
At some point soon it is my hope that a full list of examples of precisely how I have been defamed by each of the defendants during the three-month window (Jan 31 to April 30) will be made public. We had hoped that this would be included in the original filing but due to time constraints my legal team chose to wait for the court to invite them to amend the paperwork retroactively with specific examples based on evidence I compiled back in April.
So, his 'legal team' did not include any actual examples of defamatory statements when they filed the criminal complaint, instead preferring to wait for the court to ask them to provide some? And this is why he hasn't made any of them public? Does he understand how the legal system works? This really does make me think that his lawyer is taking him for a ride (all expenses paid!). Imagine that you decide to file assault charges against your neighbor, and when the cops ask what happened, you tell them to file the charges first and ask for specifics later. Your amended complaint, you tell them, will detail what actually happened.
If you're lucky, they'll simply ask you to leave. Otherwise, it won't be your neighbor spending the night in jail.
In any case, it's as expected. Just a few hours after he made the statement, and already the 'defendants' are making fun of him and having a laugh at his expense. VAH's comment that he and Marc Latham would start a gang in Croatian prison made me laugh out loud.
i saw a statistic the other day that something like 25% of all the debt that the us has incurred since 1776 was created in the last 12 months.
that's because they have printed so much currency and instead of letting that stop them, they are going to continue printing more to go on a spending spree on crazy green-new-deal schemes and union handouts.. does anyone think that this can be anything other than inflationary?
they are effectively stealing the wealth of everyone to then hand money out to people.
Not just wheat, but also fertilizer, as I understand it. Food shortages may very well be coming.
original reddit post (removed).
The only time he has provided anything close to specifics is when he has referred to the accusations of grooming a 14-year-old. If those accusations cannot be proven, then he's potentially got a case against anyone who made the accusation. The question then becomes, who made those accusations? Can he demonstrate that any of the seven made those accusations publicly and with malice? Remember, defamation would require that a person make a claim that is untrue or that they cannot prove is true, made with malice aforethought.
He cannot file a credible civil/criminal claim for statements made about him that he has confirmed to be true. He has denied that he groomed a 14-year-old or that he had any sort of sexual encounter with a 14-year-old girl when he was in the UK. Aside from that, he has admitted to lots of stuff. He cannot win a case against any of those claims, nor would a judge allow him to base a lawsuit on the definition of "regularly" and how it applies to his admitted actions.
original reddit post (removed).
How can he hire a lawyer to file criminal charges? Thats the state's job. You dont have to hire a lawyer for criminal prosecutions.
Yeah, that part seems odd. An individual can press charges or report crime to the authorities, at which point a prosecutor can determine whether or not to follow through. Defamation is an actual crime in Croatia, the sort of law that can help keep the press in line when the government is as sensitive as Evans. I would be surprised (and quite amused) if the government agreed to spend tax dollars to pursue criminal charges in such a case.
But when you are confident that no one will contest the charges, you can file away and bluster all you want online. The problem will be the aftermath, when the 'defendants' continue to poke fun at him and mock him endlessly even after they were all 'convicted' of the crime of insult.
original reddit post (removed).
That his court case will succeed is a vain hope. Even if it did, there will be no repercussions except it would let him 'crow' his innocence.
That's the gist of it. Notice that he tries to gloss over the actual consequences of the case, assuring everyone that the court can find against someone who doesn't bother to show up to defend themself. That's pretty much the extent of the consequences- you'll be 'convicted' in absentia of insulting someone across the internet. Actual consequences? Nothing.
And I'll point out again, that he does not want any of this stuff actually tried in court, with defendants making a case and cross-examining or deposing him. He can say what he wants in a Twitter rant or Facebook post, but it would be very different facing an actual lawyer, asking him questions that might actually put him in his own legal trouble.
One curious thing that he points out as "obvious" is this:
When you defame someone it isn't their job to provide a point-by-point summary of how you have defamed them and/or help you fact-check your defamatory content to make it more agreeable.
Actually, it is exactly like that. Unless the Croatian courts use the standard of 'guilty until proven innocent,' you do have to prove your case to either a judge or jury. Same with a civil case. And you are indeed expected to provide the defense with a summary of the case you intend to make, again unless Croatian courts allow plaintiffs to ambush defendants with a lawsuit.
Again, I have to wonder if this "legal team" exists outside of his mind.
i saw a statistic the other day that something like 25% of all the debt that the us has incurred since 1776 was created in the last 12 months.
that's because they have printed so much currency and instead of letting that stop them, they are going to continue printing more to go on a spending spree on crazy green-new-deal schemes and union handouts.. does anyone think that this can be anything other than inflationary?
they are effectively stealing the wealth of everyone to then hand money out to people.
There was a twitter post with this info:
original reddit post (removed).
But Cedars? Just imagine if he were truly being controlled by WT.
It would explain why Anthony Morris buys so much liquor, lol.
