Jonathan vs Amy Hamm (@preta_6) - Jonathan claims Post Millennial reporter sexually assaulted him in a courthouse restroom.

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Maybe, though likely only a fantasy, Yaniv can cause politicians and MSM here to have a mature conversation about Transgenderism and Gender Dysphoria one day, instead of feeding free hormones to kids going through puberty and feeling awkward.

It's not going to happen so long as Justine is in power, and it looks like he's entrenching himself in the PMO, buying the media and penalizing any speech that is contrary to his pedo-party-line. It's truly the end times when the Hurt Feelings card trumps Physical Trauma, when subjective reality supplants the objectivity.
 
It's not going to happen so long as Justine is in power, and it looks like he's entrenching himself in the PMO, buying the media and penalizing any speech that is contrary to his pedo-party-line. It's truly the end times when the Hurt Feelings card trumps Physical Trauma, when subjective reality supplants the objectivity.
Yeah, I'll just leave it at this..


Our Prime Minister was concerned that most people considered him vain and vapid.. his best solution? He grew a beard so he would look serious and not vain. QED
 
If you actually want to collect damages in a defamation action you are almost compelled to request a retraction first. In some places, there's even a statute requiring it, but even where there isn't, you're seriously limiting your damages by not giving an opportunity to retract.

Under the BC Libel and Slander Act, a defendant can use an apology and retraction before the commencement of the action to mitigate (but not negate) liability. The BC Civil Rules (and the general common law) also allow a defendant to claim that the plaintiff failed to take reasonable steps to mitigate the damages. This is the legal reason these letters are sent in BC.
Also, people generally don’t want to litigate when they don’t have to because it’s really expensive and in BC you aren’t reimbursed for most of your costs. People usually don’t sue for defamation even after an apology unless there were significant consequences or they’re rich enough to just want to prove their point.
 
People usually don’t sue for defamation even after an apology unless there were significant consequences or they’re rich enough to just want to prove their point.
Wouldn't Yaniv just see that as 'getting away with it?' Words are cheap.
 
Words may be cheap...BUT what does JY do after the words? ALL his past & future claims can be called into question.
I see, in his future, an enforceable court order to stay off social media. Can you imagine the Pompeii like build up if JY had to stay off all social, including socks, for an extended period? Especially if a breach caused him to be incarcerated, like the Unfortunate Mr Smith. He would find it hard to comply. It would be a harsh, and arguably appropriate sentence.
 
I see, in his future, an enforceable court order to stay off social media. Can you imagine the Pompeii like build up if JY had to stay off all social, including socks, for an extended period? Especially if a breach caused him to be incarcerated, like the Unfortunate Mr Smith. He would find it hard to comply. It would be a harsh, and arguably appropriate sentence.
Or a psych eval, anger mgt...pretty much anything court ordered & JY will fuk it up & get his stupid ass hauled back into court.
"I will ONLY go to groups that are trans friendly"

Sorry bucko...U don't have a fukkin choice
Then????? He takes the court to the HRT :)
 
I see, in his future, an enforceable court order to stay off social media.

Yes possibly, seen the BC judiciary has done blanket orders against people like "you cannot use any computing device or smart-phone," but I don't see that being handed down on Jonathan, unless he goes after the courts or government agencies. He's too juvenile for that (there's no easy shakedown when you target the government or corporations), and because he "claims" that social media is an integral part of his ability to thrive, he won't get that such restriction unless found guilty. Too punitive or something.

BCProsecution won't do anything to infringe upon his ability to earn green via social media without a conviction.
 
Yes possibly, seen the BC judiciary has done blanket orders against people like "you cannot use any computing device or smart-phone," but I don't see that being handed down on Jonathan, unless he goes after the courts or government agencies. He's too juvenile for that (there's no easy shakedown when you target the government or corporations), and because he "claims" that social media is an integral part of his ability to thrive, he won't get that such restriction unless found guilty. Too punitive or something.

BCProsecution won't do anything to infringe upon his ability to earn green via social media without a conviction.
Not sure about completely staying off social media but maybe something like a fine fore everyday the libelous Tweet is kept up.
 
Yes possibly, seen the BC judiciary has done blanket orders against people like "you cannot use any computing device or smart-phone," but I don't see that being handed down on Jonathan, unless he goes after the courts or government agencies. He's too juvenile for that (there's no easy shakedown when you target the government or corporations), and because he "claims" that social media is an integral part of his ability to thrive, he won't get that such restriction unless found guilty. Too punitive or something.

BCProsecution won't do anything to infringe upon his ability to earn green via social media without a conviction.
If he was making $$$ off social media? he wouldn't be out hawking booze
& even as if U say? wouldn't his activity be biz related?....No "I saw U turn Ur lights off"?
JY's his own worst enemy...I doubt he's had any real boundaries enforced in his life....I'm confident he will test any & all limits imposed on him ...ie: his claims about Amy...He can't...he won't....as he knows just removing them is an admission of guilt.
I pray whoever is handling Donny is aware of this shit & can present it in Donnys defense...Let Donny pay for Donny's errors...NOT the shit the bully beast JY has & is loading up on him.
 
He deserves to be sued. Idk how stupid you have to be to accuse a woman of sexual assault who literally just walked into a restroom like a normal person.
Shes a petite woman and hes a fat ogre. How exactly can she assault him?
 
If this goes to court, I hope Jonny will be defending himself.
From the letter:
“Your Twitter account currently has 140.9K followers, and each one of them has been the recipient of your defamation of Ms. Hamm.”

I can just see Yannypants in court arguing "She knows perfectly well all my followers are fake or hate me!"

“You are much larger and more physically imposing, dwarfing her physically.”

"No I'm a frail and delicate lesbian princess! Look at my profile photo!" (fakes passing out)
 
I just checked...JYs tweets about Amy are still there.
I question the letter, here a letter of demand generally has a period of time stated for compliance. The letter only says "immediately"..So when is "immediately" over?
Jonnys so fukked....has all this real legal shit goin on.....& his broke ass can't afford a lawyer if he could find one that would accept him.
Maybe the reason he's been kinda quite is he's poundin the books for that bar exam?
 
I just checked...JYs tweets about Amy are still there.
I question the letter, here a letter of demand generally has a period of time stated for compliance. The letter only says "immediately"..So when is "immediately" over?
Jonnys so fukked....has all this real legal shit goin on.....& his broke ass can't afford a lawyer if he could find one that would accept him.
Maybe the reason he's been kinda quite is he's poundin the books for that bar exam?
As some here have alluded, the letter of demand lays the groundwork for actual and consequential damages. The best defenses upon which a defamer might rely: I posted in haste, in error, in misunderstanding, I edited, took it down, apologised, and, clarifications: you were not the person, your name was used in error, etc etc. these defenses are peeled away by his inaction. Then the aggravated damages accumulate: knowingly left the post up, let the post be retweeted, did nothing to correct the record. Malice is now on the table. It is a specific legal concept. Very expensive. All of the tweets and press mentions that flow from the original tweet are part of the assessment for damages. Yaniv was dumb to post the tweet, but the stupidity is compounded hourly by not taking action to mitigate the consequential damages. This has the capacity to bankrupt him, and the early court actions will probably include an injunction against further publications about Hamm, something that Yaniv is unlikely to adhere to.
 
Call me contrary, but I can see JY getting off on this. He likes being seen as frightening, threatening, and and embarrassing people. This letter just tells him he's done exactly that.

I guess lawyers know what they're doing? I dunno, it just seems like they could've left out a lot of the stuff that gets Jonny's microdick hard, and still demanded an apology. Am not a lawyer though (nor do I play one in C-197).
all of that wording, enabling his behavior is necessary for setting up the court case. He doesn't apologize, and this is evidence to her impact on him. Defamation needs real or perceived damage. After all, if the town drunk, or the doomsday prophet on the corner calling someone a whore damages nobody's reputation, however somebody openly calling a person a whore who is on seemingly good standing within the community damages reputation and the argument for harm can be made by those words. Without feeding into JY and setting up the groundwork for him having some social platform that he can leverage his words with it would be impossible to move the case forward. Furthermore if the victim never tries to settle things in a civil matter outside of the courts the case could end up looking vexatious, or as though no actual damage was done. I assume all of this is absolutely necessary. It also gives the troon, whose behavior has never abated even when approaching real consequences more rope to hang himself with. If he doubles down on his accusations, which I am sure we can all imagine him doing, as he knows the troonshield is strong, it makes the case for them.
 
I was talking to a solicitor once, and she told me one piece of information they'll look to get from clients that want to take legal action against an individual, is 'if that individual owns their own home'.

The Lawyers at the end of the day will be paid, if Yaniv has no assets (and they can't include his mother in it), there's no point. Yaniv as an individual can drag the whole thing out for maximum expense and then at the end of the day just refuse to pay any settlement/costs.
Doesn't Yaniv own his condo?
 
Back
Top Bottom