DA broke it down brilliantly in video at the five minute mark with actual proof including him describing his strikes on channels using Comicsgate as a 'reign of terror.'
Preston Poulter et al v. Ali "Dean" Assaf et al (2021) -
- Thread starter 5t3n0g0ph3r
- Start date
-
Sister services, email, and search will continue to be negatively effected by the attacks. I made a thread to talk about it, if you're into networking.
DA broke it down brilliantly in video at the five minute mark with actual proof including him describing his strikes on channels using Comicsgate as a 'reign of terror.'
Preston filed his amended complaint. It's a clusterfuck, the chief fuck-up being claiming John Lamont is a writer and illustrated and published "many comics in the past"...
...but claimed earlier this is the first comic John has published.
...but claimed earlier this is the first comic John has published.
But the important part was making sure the damages were spelled out in there, right? And Poulter must have really wanted to make sure they got in there because he seems to have pasted the same paragraphs outlining them in two separate places in that document (starting on pages 2 and 14).
I understand making the argument for loss of future sales and that sort of thing, but law farmers, does the mental anguish/"my therapist charges $160 an hour" stuff count for this purpose?
I understand making the argument for loss of future sales and that sort of thing, but law farmers, does the mental anguish/"my therapist charges $160 an hour" stuff count for this purpose?
Grammar mistakes are fine on message boards, but in a court filing? "Some prospective customers refused to support the campaign citing allegations of pedophile." Nicely done, faggot - writing your submission like a hood rat. Also, good luck proving that. How many?
Last edited:
Elwood P. Dowd
kiwifarms.net
I don't see anything I would consider actual damages here, it is all a "If it weren't for those meddling kids, I'd have made my fortune in comics," sort of thing, mixed with "somebody said mean things about me on the Internet."
I'm a little surprised they expect the Court to buy this, but I'm honestly surprised Poulter & Co. in fact filed a response at all, so what the hell do I know?
There's certainly nothing solid to base the above statement on, is there? Did Vicki or DA Talks ever directly contact Kickstarter, even?
I'm a little surprised they expect the Court to buy this, but I'm honestly surprised Poulter & Co. in fact filed a response at all, so what the hell do I know?
MonkeyBaby
kiwifarms.net
I like the part about how Lamont has been overeating and has gained weight because of this.
It would be fun for the defense attorney to argue with that.
"As the court can see in Exhibit H, which is a photo of Mr. Lamont spraying whipped cream directly into his mouth, the plantiff was already fat before any of this happened."
It would be fun for the defense attorney to argue with that.
"As the court can see in Exhibit H, which is a photo of Mr. Lamont spraying whipped cream directly into his mouth, the plantiff was already fat before any of this happened."
Elwood P. Dowd
kiwifarms.net
Poulter was selling things today at an RPG convention. No security in sight, at $400
Too lazy to do screen grabs.
There's actually more tweets, but I'm too lazy to grab them.
The con he's at:
There's actually more tweets, but I'm too lazy to grab them.
The con he's at:
Is this as bad a look as I think it is? Technically it is not a "comic book convention," after all. But it is the same day he filed this, contra that.
Man I would love to be there and say "hey, before you buy that comic, I think you should know that the creator is 100% on the right side of history. He definitely believes Black Lives Matter. In fact, I want to show you a video of how much he cares about his friend, Leroy."View attachment 2231934
Poulter was selling things today at an RPG convention. No security in sight, at $400/hour(edit, oops) per diem (or not).
View attachment 2231940
Too lazy to do screen grabs.
There's actually more tweets, but I'm too lazy to grab them.
The con he's at:
Is this as bad a look as I think it is? Technically it is not a "comic book convention," after all. But it is the same day he filed this, contra that.
Also, is it ever possible to see a picture of him where he doesn't look like he just swallowed a load?
Nick Rekieta will go over @PocketJacks & Lamont's amended petition tonight:
Archive:
Start at 01:35:24.
Last edited:
So about $250-300 a day for the table and it looks like he hasn't sold anything unless this is just before the con started.View attachment 2231934
Poulter was selling things today at an RPG convention. No security in sight, at $400/hour(edit, oops) per diem (or not).
View attachment 2231940
Too lazy to do screen grabs.
There's actually more tweets, but I'm too lazy to grab them.
The con he's at:
Is this as bad a look as I think it is? Technically it is not a "comic book convention," after all. But it is the same day he filed this, contra that.
Why does this suit look like he's suing someone because of his comic not selling due to bad artwork/ story and not because of defamation?
Profligates like this belong on a cross.I went into Preston's discord and looked at John Lamont's posts.
No wonder someone could come to the conclusion that he is attracted to kids.
Looking at this it seems likely it is Lamont's own fault.
This one is pretty tame, but this really adds up over the course of my post.
View attachment 2221206
This character seems to be a petit succubus, who shows child like behavior.
Nothing too incriminating.
But make up your own mind on this one honestly:
Read My Pet succubus page 1-25 from Carlos G free on Graphite Comics!
Graphite Comics is the free, streaming comics service built by readers and creators, for readers and creatorsgraphitecomics.com
The next thing that is really interesting is his choice for pre made models.
View attachment 2221216
Looking at the original Aiko models and the edited models made by John Lamont they seem to be aged down.
Especially the faces.
He had spicier ones on his DA page, but curiously he deleted them after Vikki and Dean's video,
feeling guilty?
But I don't have the archive of those, they might be on V&D's video, I will give it a look later.
To be fair he has also older looking models, but the attraction to children
doesn't need to be mutually exclusive.
The next thing I want to talk about is what kind of audience he seems to be pandering to.
Look at this tweet made by John Lamont:
View attachment 2221304
This redhead is Emma his 17 year old OC.
So we can assume her friend is the same age range.
Her likely underage friend has sex with Emma's ugly hairy father who doesn't even resemble her at all.
Emma is wearing panties with cherry pattern and an unicorn top.
In another tweet we learn about another important character named Lolita.
I think we all know at this point who he is advertising to....
Here's something very concerning:
View attachment 2221337
View attachment 2221341
Let us have a look at the DA page.
View attachment 2221343
Nothing to concerning right?
Please move forward nothing to see here, right Lamont?
I should point out that the non nude stuff is surrounded by a ton of nudes of similar origin.
Please take a look for yourself if you don't believe me via the link above.
View attachment 2221363
Here's the craziest thing, in an attempt to "own" Vikki and DA_Talks he posted these two pics:
View attachment 2221372
She is 18+ for anyone concerned.
I will add an uncensored version.
View attachment 2221377
Owning the haters by showing his attraction to child-like feature, sure dude.
All in all I think that someone could come to the conclusion that John Lamont is attracted to children
or at least child-like features.
After looking at all of this I would say John Lamont is a pedophile or at least a hebephile.
I should point it out before all these Preston Knights start to cry.
I don't think John Lamont did anything illegal, in my opinion he is just attracted to children.
Btw sorry for not including the archives to these tweets, the archive sites are a mess today on my end.
Could you give a little more context to this? I know about Vic but not what or who Preston is or what the deal is with some being called a paedo (I assume)
6MillionCoofs
kiwifarms.net
Meant to post in the Rackets thread. Posted in Rosterteeth by mistake.
Comicsgate bullshit.
Simply puts dudes drawing loli comics get called lolicon and a pedo for it, funding supposedly dries up, future prospects are supposedly damaged and mental health issues as a result.
Even if he likes loli and what they say is true, showing that broadcasting that hurt him seems beyond easy.
I am always surprised when people don’t show proof.
Even if they are raging lolicons are/or pedos how difficult is it for them to show receipts of costs, messages of or other proof of backers backing out or put together examples of comicsgate stuff making tens to hundreds of thousands on a single book campaign?
It certainly does not help the look.
Honestly if I were him. I would be staying in doors and writing emails to all the conventions I intend to go saying that I would have loved to go, I planned to do x but as a result of mental issues can’t go and ask them to price me for how much what I wanted to do was so I could say the damage being labbeled a pedo is also hurting other people because I am not showing up.
Last edited:
Elwood P. Dowd
kiwifarms.net
Not what he's saying, that font of integrity and moral probity that is ol' Preston. Pity he had to spend $1,200 on his security detail ($400 "per diem" * 3 days) to stay safe from all the raging hordes of 'Gators.
PS: Isn't Doug Tenapel the biggest fan of the Baby Jesus out there? WTF is he doing liking ANYTHING from ol' Preston?
TherapyMan
kiwifarms.net
Mental anguish and the medical bills associated with the defendant's conduct are recoverable as damages. As a practical matter, demonstrating a particular dollar amount for something nebulous like "mental anguish" and tying it to the defendant's actions is pretty difficult. At this stage, however, the fact that it is highly questionable whether those damages can actually be shown doesn't matter. Complaints by their nature are preliminary documents.
The bar to properly allege an amount in controversy is very low. Courts use what's called a "legal-certainty test" to determine whether a plaintiff plausibly alleged damages. Basically, unless it is absolutely certain that there is no possible way that a plaintiff could recover enough money to put the amount in controversy over $75,000, a federal court will not dismiss due to a failure to meet diversity jurisdiction. Even if it is highly doubtful a plaintiff will actually recover >$75,000, it doesn't matter.
What's sort of amusing about the amended complaint is all the unnecessary itemization concerning the plaintiffs' damages. The Court's order wasn't asking for a detailed breakdown; it just wanted to know what the factual basis of the damages were. If you look to the factual allegations in the original complaint, there is fuck all concerning how the allegedly defamatory conduct affected Lamont and Poulter. All Fein Law had to do was write something along the lines of "Plaintiff Poulter sold substantially less lubricated horsecocks and Plaintiff Lamont was uninvited from the National Not a Pedo Convention, where he planned to sell his Not-Pedophillic Works following Frog et al.'s statements" or something to that effect. Describing how the plaintiff was harmed is an essential part of any lawsuit that just was not present in the original complaint for some reason.
Fein Law fucked up in the first complaint since they never actually stated a factual basis for each Plaintiff having a claim worth more than $75,000. Basically the only thing they did say was that the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000. That's not enough, particularly when there's two plaintiffs, since each plaintiff independently has to reach the >$75,000 threshold. On a minor note, the amended complaint further fucked up by putting factual allegations in the jurisdictional section instead of the facts section. The Court will probably review that amended filing and wonder why these bush-league fuckers can't do simple things like organize a complaint properly or write something without obvious typos.
That's dirt cheap for a table, even for a tabletop con. Must have only brought in a total of 500 people to the convention. Even the swap meets here for collectors a small table will be at least $150 a day. They bring in around 1000 people max each day.Not what he's saying, that font of integrity and moral probity that is ol' Preston. Pity he had to spend $1,200 on his security detail ($400 "per diem" * 3 days) to stay safe from all the raging hordes of 'Gators.
View attachment 2237442
PS: Isn't Doug Tenapel the biggest fan of the Baby Jesus out there? WTF is he doing liking ANYTHING from ol' Preston?
Strix454
kiwifarms.net
Comments:
1) They did not enhance or even bother to correct most of the problems in the previous version of the complaint. Specifically the misrepresentation of the trademark issue between EVS and Preston.......and the lack of detail in terms of the claimed defamatory statements.
2) The claims in [17] don't seem to attribute anything defamatory to Vikki.
3) They did not further clarify any of the claims against EVS in [20]. They simply continue to claim that he defamed through "innuendo" with no actual specification or quotes of what the innuendo was.
4) They did not change or clarify their definition of "lolicon" or "loli". They still remain in a trap where their own definitions of loli/lolicon defeat the argument they are trying to make about it.
5) In [18] they are still boxed in by the fact that the quotes they present from EVS are in the context of a disputed trademark with Preston. EVS has a compelling interest in defending such a trademark and offering opinions on it through speech.
6) They claim in their definition of damages that Kickstarter rejected Lamont's work due to Vikki/Dean/EVS. And yet they offered no support for that idea in the factual sections of the document. They also talk of kickstarter making "unreasonable demands" about Lamont's work but carefully don't say what they are.
7) In section 7 (a) (ii), its claimed that Preston lost $25000 in revenue for 2021. The public information about Preston's comics sales does not seem to support the idea that he ever made close to $25k in a single year for comics. I don't know how he or his attorney will be able to support the idea that he suffered larger economic damages in one year than he likely ever made LIFETIME selling comics.
In section 7 (b) (ii), they project that Lamont would have released 5 comics in 2021 and made $5k from each of them in Kickstarter revenue. Delusional.9) They retained the concept that Preston is the "owner" of the comicsgate movement and that being the "owner" of comicsgate is Preston's primary profession.
10) They basically reached the damage thresholds in the most lazy way they could. By packing in damages related to their mental suffering and reputation damage.
All in all, it appeared IMO that Preston's attorneys once again put the minimum amount of time and effort into the complaint to keep the case going. But no more than that. They seemed to exclusively address the court's expressed concerns rather than looking toward improving the complaint as a whole. And the sense I still get is that the whole thing will collapse once the court and others involved get a good look at the artwork in question. The current claims against EVS and Vikki are extremely weak to non-existing.
The claims related to Preston being defamed by anyone are extremely weak. The claims against Dean by Lamont could perhaps be argued, But the problem is that they would force the attorneys to try to draw a distinction between Loli and Pedo in the face of Lamont's public statements on Loli and the content of his "art". Lamont's biggest problem IMO is the kickstarter thing. Because kickstarter refusing the work for violating terms of service creates a fact in the case that its going to be impossible for them to get around. Their admission in the new complaint that Kickstarter requested changes that Lamont refused to make puts Lamont's complaint into an even deeper hole.
Strix454
kiwifarms.net
Doug tends to be a terrible judge of character and also tends to sometimes rush in to defend anyone under attack without understanding the issues. No matter how justified that attack might be. Back in 2018, he saw Sketch Therapy as a victim. He also was a firm believer that warcampaign was a bunch of great funny guys in 2018 and made statements defending them as well. More recently when Liam Grey did his strikes on multiple channels on youtube, Doug thought what was being done to poor Liam was just awful. He has a long history of supporting the wrong person, then realizing he has made a terrible mistake long after it will do any good and then making some self-destructive gesture about it.
There is a Christian-Political component to the Preston thing as well for Doug. Doug's general view is that anyone outside his narrow Christian group is an evil person committing all sorts of sins and that its not his business to weigh the individual sins of one of them (Preston) against others of them. If you are one of the heathens,, you are no better than any other heathen (for example Preston) even if you think you are. And the thinking goes a heathen who is a republican can't be all bad.
In this case, Doug (as usual) has made a stupid gesture to support someone in a situation where they deserve no support. If called out on this in future, Doug will inevitably offer his "pontius pilate" defense. A defense where when he steps into a bad situation or offers foolish (public) gestures of support to bad people doing bad things, Doug's hands are clean. Doug would claim that while to outsiders he is walking into a minefield of loli comics and a bad lawsuit to silence critics offering support to one side, Doug isn't responsible for anything other than the literal words he has said. Doug often talks about "morality", but often is oblivious to his own moral failures. In particular his long-running tendency to offer support to people like Preston at times when they are not deserving of support. And his tendency to implicitly offer support to bad people when they are doing bad things.
Preston spent alot of time in 2020 trying to cultivate Edwin, the followers of Mike and Doug through their shared political beliefs. Preston got Edwin involved because Edwin's poor judgment is legendary. Preston made inroads with Mike because Mike is weak and through Mike's followers/admins. Doug was too smart to be used by Preston, but Preston could use Doug's ego, arrogance and love for hearing his own voice reflected back by others.....against him.
Last edited:
To be fair, Doug, Mike, and Edwin would be damned if they do or don't. They find allot of things offensive.
People would have bitched if they denounced Preston's Yuri porn comics. I don't understand this sudden desire for the Jesus morality hammer if anything it's hypocritical.
I'm far more interested in
And why should they? They're mercenaries. I'm going to go out on the limb and say that Preston is using his ongoing legal business in order to get them to do this. If I were a betting man, I'm sure they have a law student or paralegal on staff. Odds are they dumped it on that poor fucker and told him to write it then without even looking they signed it.
People also told me Vic/Waid were slam dunks. Don't get cocky.
Does it?
Strix454
kiwifarms.net
Agreed. Predicting anything legally, especially in courts in Texas, is a very dangerous game. Nothing is ever really a slam dunk legally. And they can certainly go back multiple times to rework the complaint to make it more specific and stronger. The document in its current form could be a sort of placeholder where the attorneys come back and firm it up when they decide to spend the time doing it.
Similar threads
Vic's lawsuit against Funimation, VAs, and others, for over a million dollars.
