Cultcow Russell Greer / @theofficialinstaofrussellgreer - Swift-Obsessed Sex Pest, Magical Star Buddy

Plastic Inevitable

Actually not a TERF
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
> He takes medicine twice a day (lamotrigine) and at night (clonidine) to cope with his pain. He has to take melatonin also in order for him to sleep.

Lamotrigine is approved in the US for maintenance treatment of bipolar I disorder and bipolar II disorder. While the anticonvulsants carbamazepine and valproate are predominantly antimanics, lamotrigine is most effective for preventing the recurrent depressive episodes of bipolar disorder.

A 2013 review about lamotrigine concluded that it is recommended in bipolar maintenance when depression is prominent and that more research is needed in regard to its role in the treatment of acute bipolar depression and unipolar depression. Furthermore, no information to recommend its use in other psychiatric disorders was found.

Off-label psychiatric usage includes the treatment of treatment-resistant obsessive-compulsive disorder, depersonalization disorder, hallucinogen persisting perception disorder, schizoaffective disorder, and borderline personality disorder.

It has not been shown to be useful in post-traumatic stress disorder.
 

cogsworth

Aren't you fucking tired of screaming?
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
Here you go, fellow kiwis!
Someone help, my sides have detached from my body and rocketed into space!
Let's peek at parts of this trainwreck, hold my hand we're going in.

> "In a world where safeguards and disclaimers are put into place at every turn for consumers and those wishing to do business with others, there are surprisingly no safeguards or disclaimers utilized by world famous celebrities, whose influences can be felt internationally, to minimize or avoid potential damages."

Incredible, completely wrong right out of the fucking gate. Celebrities are required to disclose if they're sponsored by companies or not and can be sued for lying about the efficacy of products they endorse. There are safeguards for MILES, the problem is that you're some kind of horrid homunculus who thinks celebrities have to tell you up front they won't suck you your penis.

> "Defendant Taylor Swift happens to have such an influence, which has resulted in a nearly four year long harm to Plaintiff Greer, which has resulted in giving Greer post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and has given rise to this Complaint."

You don't have PTSD, you're just pissed off, you tight headed cunt! The wording on this is awful, by the way, and really shows that patented Greer intellect.

> "Since the inception of the American judicial system, courts and legal scholars have held and argued that those who create misrepresentations, can be held liable for harm suffered by third parties, when those third parties rely on information that risks their safety, physically and monetarily."

Firstly, no, it has not been law since the founding of the country that you can sue someone for lying about a product. Secondly, even if it was, no product was sold to you that harmed you. You didn't suffer physical or monetary harm from Taylor Swift not hearing your song and sucking your dick. You suffered a blow to your over-inflated, hypersexual tard ego. You realized you're NOT, in fact, a 9/10 stud who can have any girl he wants through cheap flowers and trinkets. That kind of thing is a knife to the eyes for people (and I'm being very generous with the definition of a person here) like you.

> "Celebrities and public figures can already be held liable by the Federal Trade Commission (hereby collectively referred to as the "FTC"), per 16 CFR §255, for negligent endorsements and for failures to warn, in regards to the endorsement of products, though, only the FTC can bring action against celebrity endorsers in regards to products."

You were not sold a fraudulent or defective product by Taylor Swift, so none of that matters.

> "However, there are no restrictions precluding a private party to cite and use said federal statute as persuasive authority for actions not based on the statute, per se. Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising. Federal Trade Commission. (https://www.ftc. gov/sites/defaultlfiles/attachments/press-releases/ftc-publishes-final-guidesgoverning-endorsements-testimonials/091005revisedendorsementguides.pdf)."

Now, I am not a Studly Paralegal Eagle who is basically a lawyer. However! I'm pretty sure I have a basic grasp of the law. My understanding is that you can only use relevant laws, cases, and statutes in a lawsuit, right? Tell me, Russ, in WHAT FUCKING WORLD is "lying about a product you are selling" relevant in any way to a case where the 'misrepresentation' being sued for is "I thought a song would get her to look at me and fuck me, but it didn't".

Are you trying to argue that Taylor Swift is, herself, a product, and that the product was represented as easy to obtain for your own personal ownership? Something which will not hold up in court, because Taylor Swift is an entire person, a real living human being?


> "This is a civil action seeking monetary damages for the negligent actions of Defendant Taylor Alison Swift (hereby collectively referred to as "Swift" and/or "Defendant") for her failure and breach of duty to use disclaimers in connection to her publicity stunts and intellectual property, of which have resulted in monetary damages, emotional damages, economical damages and physical damages to Plaintiff Russell G. Greer (hereby collectively referred to as "Greer" and/or "Plaintiff"), as he relied on Swift's publicity stunts and her intellectual property."

There is no world in which you convince a judge and jury that Taylor Swift physically hurt you by not accepting your tard songs and meeting you. Let's be clear here, that's ALL she did. She just ignored you. By definition, she did NOT harm you. You also can't claim physical damages when you've already admitted that you made up your stories of being attacked because of your first lawsuit against her, so making that claim in court could actually land you in serious trouble, Droolio.

> "PARTIES
8. Plaintiff Russell G. Greer resides in the State of Utah. He is 29 years old and has his paralegal degree. He was born with a facial disability termed, "Moebious Syndrome, " which means that he can't close his mouth and talk clearly, thus making daily life activities such as communicating, eating, drinking and being in public difficult.
9. Defendant Taylor Swift is an internationally famous, award winning artist, who is a year and a half older than Russell Greer. Swift is celebrated by the media for being supposedly compassionate and open with fans."


So, he's under the impression that the parties section calls for a short biography on his plights.

> "GENERAL ALLEGATIONS Plaintiff Greer has always wanted to get into the entertainment industry. With a disability that limits Greer's expressions, though, it is difficult to do so, given that the business is already competitive enough."

Completely irrelevant to the lawsuit.

> "Throughout the years, Greer saw Defendant Taylor Swift interact with fans who reached out to her. These interactions consisted of showcasing invites to red carpet events; simple gifts, such as gift cards and quilts, on Twitter; accepting prom and military ball invites; inviting girls, who made paper cranes for Swift's ill mother, to a concert of hers."

Oh my god, still mad about the fucking paper cranes.

> "While the interactions varied, they established a reoccurring theme: Taylor Swift is open to accepting gifts and life stories from fans. She endorses such conduct. But it hasn't all been subtle: she has openly been generous and is constantly on the look out to help others. A Timeline of Taylor Swift's Generosity. Billboard. (2018)(hLts://ww4N,.google.com/amp/s/ww,billboard.coin/amp/articleslnews/8481430/timeline-ta orswift-generosity)."

Yes, and?

> "Besides the fan interactions, Swift gave several interviews to promote her music, where she expressed that certain things inspired her."

Yes, and? You've yet to say anything relevant.

> "In an interview to promote a movie she wrote music for, Swift states that she did the project because the story of a man who never gave up on his dreams, "inspired" her. One Chance — Exclusive First Look with Taylor Swift. YouTube. (2013)(https://-voutu.be/l,er9llP2Lu8lTo). Exhibit A (shows Swift's misstatements that were broadcasted and Greer's reliance on them)."

In what way is this a misstatement? She was inspired by a guy, who is NOT YOU, and thus has no bearing on your lawsuit.

> "For further influence, on a charity website that lists the charities that celebrities support, Taylor Swift is listed as supporting several charities for those with disabilities: ALS Association, Cancer Research Institute, Make-A-Wish Foundation. This all inspired Greer that Swift would be open to his intentions as a disabled man. Taylor Swift Charity Work, Events and Causes. Looktothestars.org. (2020). (littps://Nvw looktothestars.org/celebril5i/tUlor-swit'). EXHIBIT B. As a side note, even charities, including the ones that Swift supports, have disclaimers. Better Safe than Sorry: Nonprofits' use of Waivers, Releases and Disclaimers. CharityLawyer. (2013). (https://charillawyerblo g. com12013/02/26/better-safe-than-soii:y-nonprofits-use-of-waiversreleases-and-disclaimers/)."

"This inspired Greer that Swift would be open to his intentions as a disabled man" I am...wow. She supports charities for dying children and cancer patients and you thought that this meant she would be open to your "intentions" IE willing to have sex with you because she donates time and money to dying children.



Russ, I don't know why it's so hard for you to grasp that as a human being, Taylor enjoys the right to choose at her own discretion who she associates with. You didn't make the cut, you will NEVER make the cut, and the law cannot be used to force her to interact with you. This isn't the fucking playground and the judge is not your kindergarten teacher.

Lord help me this isn't even the really hilarious stuff, this is just the opener. This thing is miles and miles of plights and I don't think I can get through it all like this, my god.
 

DrainRedRain

Autoandrogynephile
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
Given that the quality of things Swift received weren't all that great, the bar was set low to impress her
This right here sums up the type of person Russel is to a T. He blamed SongCat (the music production company) for the 'bad quality' of his song, when everyone and their mom know the true culprit behind that shitty job. (Hint: it's Russ and Russ alone).
After that he ranted about being poor and unable to pay other company to redo his song, so he sends the one he already had, saying what I quoted above.

He's literally saying that fan gifts of CHILDREN (who didn't expect anything in return, only to make TS happy) are bad quality and it set the bar for gifts low. Man, I can't even begin to talk about how vile and narcissistic this shit right here is. He's blaming everything under the damn sun minus himself, and he does it so naturally that for an outsider, this stuff just blows the mind, you know?
I'm speechless.
 
Last edited:

Sam Losco

True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
Screenshot from 2020-05-23 12-32-29.png

If he's going to say "and/or" he should reverse Swift and Defendant. He's not (or maybe he will) going to refer to her as "Swift Defendant" which would be the "and" use of both.

Screenshot from 2020-05-23 12-38-06.png

Screenshot from 2020-05-23 12-37-54.png

Lol, still salty about that. Also, the court doesn't care that you were upset with the product and couldn't get a refund. Not relevant to you suing Taylor.

Screenshot from 2020-05-23 12-42-04.png

Russ, the difference, and I know this has been said before, is that those were all already HER music. Her IP. What you were trying to give was not and to avoid any lawsuits from future songs sounding like what you gave (which would never happen anyway), she can't listen to what you made. If you have made a compilation of her songs, they would have accepted it.

Screenshot from 2020-05-23 12-47-17.png

She probably was bothered by how you look and talk, but that's not why Greg said she was. Greg said that because you were suing her and said some nasty shit about her mom (if I'm getting the timeline right).

Screenshot from 2020-05-23 12-49-06.png

So, for once, the media actually showed the truth.

Screenshot from 2020-05-23 12-51-39.png

LOL, a pack of killer wasps? Do you mean killer bees, Russ?

Screenshot from 2020-05-23 12-55-53.png

I'm going to ignore the shitty sentences in 52 for something more out of place. The switch between the different forms of past tense between those two sections is jarring.

Screenshot from 2020-05-23 13-05-04.png

LOL X to Doubt

Screenshot from 2020-05-23 13-08-49.png

lol
 

DrJonesHat

Chose Wisely
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
He was expecting something in return. so it wasn't a gift. You can reject gifts for any reason, and since this was sent with the intention of getting something in return, she was even more free to reject it since it would (hypothetically) impose an obligation on her.
Russ, the difference, and I know this has been said before, is that those were all already HER music. Her IP. What you were trying to give was not and to avoid any lawsuits from future songs sounding like what you gave (which would never happen anyway), she can't listen to what you made. If you have made a compilation of her songs, they would have accepted it.
Even if she did accept unsolicited music, she's free to choose what she accepts. Someone at the beginning of the thread said Russ is essentially arguing that if I give a homeless guy a dollar, all other homeless guys in America can sue me for a dollar. Obviously it doesn't work like that, and neither does accepting gifts.
 

GloriousScarf

kiwifarms.net
It's important to know this difference because if he was just trying to get her to do his song and they cited unsolicited policies, Greer would have accepted that and moved on with his life.
Would Greer have accepted that though? I don't think so.

The best part:

Greer has lost family relationships, friend connections and business connections because of the trauma of Taylor Swift. His family tells him to "get over it," resulting in shouting matches and strained relationships. Greer's friends get annoyed by his focusing on the trauma of it, when nobody knows the pain of getting rejected by a public figure — twice — and the fallout that has resulted from it. Greer lost a connection with his publicist because of the 2019 event with Swift. Greer's own flesh and blood want nothing to do with him, thinking of him as deranged. To simply say, "'get over it," is very hurtful and ignorant to what has happened.
 
Last edited:

SojuDrnkr

Stays after last call.
kiwifarms.net
Russ is the type of guy who would keep slamming his dick in a door and wonder why he's pissing blood, shrug his shoulders, and then continue to keep slamming the door.

Russ, if you get butthurt because a celebrity ignores your gift (which in this case your song wasn't a gift because you demanded to have a date with her) that's on you. She doesn't owe you shit. All your evidence proves is that Taylor Swift is famous and does nice things for SOME of her fans, and that you're an obsessed stalker who is also tard. No judge in the world would look at your complaint and evidence, and say that you have a case. Why do you think no lawyer would take your case? Spoiler Alert: It's not because there's a conspiracy to keep you away from Taylor Swift.
 

WhaleOilBeefHooked

I'm not the sharpest point in the pentagram.
kiwifarms.net
Just another sleepless night seething over Taylor Swift
It's such a fascinating thing to think about. If he's up at 5 AM still bitter about Taylor Swift (who, let's not forget, did nothing to him and doesn't know he even exists) after all this time that probably means he has sleepless nights like this a lot. It's been years since he first tried to "woo" her, years since he was called "invasive and troubling" and it's still a fresh wound for him. He's an almost 30 year old man who has ruined his own life and relationships in a totally self-serving fame quest, rejected everyone who ever cared about him, and never even got close to his goals. Hell, he never even got off the ground. He's kept up at night not by regret for his actions, but out of bitterness that everyone involved didn't instantly drop everything in their lives to accommodate his outlandish demands. It's almost depressing to see a man so obsessed with someone who will never even know his name. The fact that he's preparing another lawsuit shows that he was probably planning this the second he lost his other lawsuits, especially since we know he was planning his second TS lawsuit right after he lost the first one. Taylor lives rent free in Russell's head, no doubt.

Edit: I just started reading this thing and WOW.
Screenshot (161).png

22. That. Doesn't. Fucking. Matter. He's had it explained to him so many times and he still refuses to process that they can't accept songs, even as gifts.
23. "if he was just trying to get her to do his song and they cited unsolicited policies, Greer would have accepted that and moved on with his life." The fact that you're filing a lawsuit about not getting your way 4 fucking years later begs to differ. And you WERE trying to get her to do your music, Russ. You said so yourself.
"he felt it unfair that he invested that and was not able to show her." He mentions this because he thinks it matters. It doesn't. It's not unfair because this rule applies to everyone else as well. The fact that you feel very strongly about something has no effect on the rules. You can't sue someone for giving you the wrong impression.
24. "Schaudies never mentioned anything about the gift, thus reinforcing his cluelessness." Oh, the irony of Russell Fucking Greer calling someone else clueless. The fact that he put the word "cluelessness" in a legal document reinforces Russell's cluelessness.

This may be the most telling lawsuit out of all of them because it shows us that years later and despite multiple legal professionals telling him he's wrong, he still hasn't learned a fucking thing. These are the exact same points he has brought up so many times before. It's like a Russell's Greatest Hits collection. It's so damn funny how he has explained his insane thought process in such detail so many, and doesn't see how it makes him sound like a total psychopath.
 
Last edited:

WhaleOilBeefHooked

I'm not the sharpest point in the pentagram.
kiwifarms.net
I love how he keeps putting words into bold and italics, like he's explaining it in anger. You just know he wrote this while fuming.
Screenshot (162).png

WHY DON'T THEY GET IT? I'VE EXPLAINED IT SO MANY TIMES! Also, none of these things he mentioned are Taylor accepting other people's songs. They're hers. All these years later and he still doesn't understand the policy that he thinks ruined his life.
 

DrJonesHat

Chose Wisely
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
Fuck it, do it without Sriracha. She doesn't add enough for me to justify never talking about Russ again.
Who is she and why is she such a big deal?


I think the funniest thing about this lawsuit is that Russ doesn't realize he shows he has no case in his own filing. All the negative results from his reaction to being told no are his doing. TS had nothing to do with that. If he'd just accepted that music stars can't accept unsolicited music, he wouldn't have a thread here. I find it amusing (and very in-character for him) that he can't understand why TS accepted covers of her own songs and not his original song. He really can't detect nuance at all. Should we start a betting pool on whether or not he even serves this suit? I'd actually be slightly impressed if he manages that.
 

GethN7

Set free by truth, my only true judge is God
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
I know it's not completely likely, but if this gets him officially declared a vexatious litigant finally, I will horse laugh for half an hour straight.

It's pretty clear from his past history and the derangement in this current screed he sees the court as nothing more than his personal cudgel, and ever time they denied him, he just ramped up the crazy from last time, and I'm sure the Utah court system must be pretty weary of this guy by now.
 

Disgruntled Pupper

True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
This is the little cherry on the top of the content sundae of the past week.

I REALLY want to know more about this "Alvin" the publicist and friend-of Taylor "Toderick Hall". I can't decide what would be more hilarious- that two idiots burned their connections for Russel, or that Russel was taken on an extensive ruse cruise and for it to come out in court that it was all fake.
 

DrJonesHat

Chose Wisely
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
This is the little cherry on the top of the content sundae of the past week.

I REALLY want to know more about this "Alvin" the publicist and friend-of Taylor "Toderick Hall". I can't decide what would be more hilarious- that two idiots burned their connections for Russel, or that Russel was taken on an extensive ruse cruise and for it to come out in court that it was all fake.
You'd think he'd use the C&D letter as some sort evidence that Taylor Swift is the living incarnation of Satan like he does everything else. If he didn't get one, can he get in trouble since he uses the claim her lawyers sent him one as the basis for this suit?