Richard Meyer v. Mark Waid (2018)

  • 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

Waid Livestream - What will happen?

  • Talks about the lawsuit.

    Votes: 3 8.1%

  • Further incriminates himself.

    Votes: 18 48.6%

  • Defames YaBoi again.

    Votes: 5 13.5%

  • Doesn't talk about the lawsuit nor CG.

    Votes: 2 5.4%

  • Host disagrees with Waid on something, chimpout insues.

    Votes: 7 18.9%

  • Normal interview. (no drama)

    Votes: 2 5.4%
  • Total voters
    37
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
AnOminous said:
I think it's more likely he gets reported to the bar if he ramps it up. It's an incredibly unprofessional stunt.

I don't think he's baiting. I think he's just an idiot piece of shit who is profoundly unprofessional and lacks ethics.
Click to expand...

Hmmm? What would be the ethics involved if Zaid is a Principal or Owner in a related or competing business to either Antarctic Press or Meyer? http://esquirecomics.com/ also via his https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_of_Disclosure and advisory status with Overstreet he has his hands in setting the aftermarket pricing of collectible comic books. Was Esquirecomics.com one of those shops refusing to carry Antarctic Press books due to Meyer?
 
RodgerDodger said:
Hmmm? What would be the ethics involved if Zaid is a Principal or Owner in a related or competing business to either Antarctic Press or Meyer? http://esquirecomics.com/ also via his https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_of_Disclosure and advisory status with Overstreet he has his hands in setting the aftermarket pricing of collectible comic books. Was Esquirecomics.com one of those shops refusing to carry Antarctic Press books due to Meyer?
Click to expand...

It would certainly add another wrinkle.

Anyway, what Zaid is doing is like if his client were being prosecuted for attempted murder and he were publicly tweeting that he's going to put the victim underground.

It's impossible to imagine any good at all coming of such idiotic blustering and openly owning the specific intent his idiot client is accused of having.
 
AnOminous said:
It would certainly add another wrinkle.

Anyway, what Zaid is doing is like if his client were being prosecuted for attempted murder and he were publicly tweeting that he's going to put the victim underground.

It's impossible to imagine any good at all coming of such idiotic blustering and openly owning the specific intent his idiot client is accused of having.
Click to expand...

Everything surrounding Waid is like watching something from a bad cheesy sitcom.
 
The only thing I can think is, Waid and Zaid genuinely believe Comicsgate is a bunch of no-kidding KKK basement-dwelling Nazi caricatures and all the 'Aids team has to do is rile 'em up and they'll reveal themselves to the world.

That or they're nuts. One or the other.
 
MysteriousStranger said:
The only thing I can think is, Waid and Zaid genuinely believe Comicsgate is a bunch of no-kidding KKK basement-dwelling Nazi caricatures and all the 'Aids team has to do is rile 'em up and they'll reveal themselves to the world.

That or they're nuts. One or the other.
Click to expand...
These explanations don't exclude each other. In fact, them being crazy would be a good explanation for why, exactly, they see nazis under every rock and check under their bed for Klansmen before going to sleep.
 
Adamska said:
He's associated with Creepy Porn Lawyer in the past apparently, so I would not be shocked if his egomania, greed, and incompetence will land him into prison at one point.
Click to expand...
IIRC, He wanted to go out and watch a baseball game with America's soon to be most anally raped lawyer. I wouldn't be surprised if Zaid has some skelletons in his closet.
 
Slimy Time said:
IIRC, He wanted to go out and watch a baseball game with America's soon to be most anally raped lawyer. I wouldn't be surprised if Zaid has some skelletons in his closet.
Click to expand...

The skeletons in Zaid’s closet include throwing his clients under the bus for the CIA.
 
The aid's team response is coming in
735010

www.courtlistener.com

Docket for Meyer v. Waid, 1:18-cv-00800 - CourtListener.com

Docket for Meyer v. Waid, 1:18-cv-00800 — Brought to you by the RECAP Initiative and Free Law Project, a non-profit dedicated to creating high quality open legal information.
www.courtlistener.com www.courtlistener.com

Edit: I'm just a layman, but this doesn't seem like the brilliant response that Zaid promised me would blow Meyers case out of the water.
 
Last edited:
Love Soze said:
It is posted, just not the Exhibits.

EDIT:
View attachment 735016
lol No, Waid.

EDIT Again: Yet another document NOT signed by Zaid. What a waste of money.
Click to expand...
A LOT of the defense seems to rely on 'Waid didn't know', therefore we win. Like the first document it also seems to bring 'evidence' to bias people against how horrible Meyer is, not actually argue against jurisdiction.

Also caught this, which is a false statement, He said 'they look like pedophiles', not that they were
735027
 
This reminds me of an old saying. If the facts are on your side, bang on the facts. If the law is on your side, bang on the law. If neither is on your side, bang on the table.

This is just a dumb filing. It's barely worth addressing. "Plaintiff entirely hangs his case for jurisdiction. . ." no, did this guy even read the filings up until this point? Did whoever wrote this just hatch from an egg?

It's just dumb.

Also it repeatedly argues about the merits of the case that the court hasn't even decided if it has jurisdiction over. Unprofessional.
 
AnOminous said:
This reminds me of an old saying. If the facts are on your side, bang on the facts. If the law is on your side, bang on the law. If neither is on your side, bang on the table.

This is just a dumb filing. It's barely worth addressing. "Plaintiff entirely hangs his case for jurisdiction. . ." no, did this guy even read the filings up until this point? Did whoever wrote this just hatch from an egg?

It's just dumb.

Also it repeatedly argues about the merits of the case that the court hasn't even decided if it has jurisdiction over. Unprofessional.
Click to expand...

It's called grasping for straws. I think deep down both Waid and Zaid know they are fucked, so they are just trying to stall as much as possible. Of course, that's probably incredibly optimistic on my part, because this assumes that Waid and Zaid's minds aren't completely raped of all sanity, which they are.
 
Plissken said:
It's called grasping for straws. I think deep down both Waid and Zaid know they are fucked, so they are just trying to stall as much as possible. Of course, that's probably incredibly optimistic on my part, because this assumes that Waid and Zaid's minds aren't completely raped of all sanity, which they are.
Click to expand...

What's annoying is this filing introduces a couple minor but new and dumb arguments and invites yet another sur-reply. I hope if Meyer's counsel takes the bait, it's only 2-3 pages at most or they just ignore this nonsense entirely.

If they respond at all it should be to the silliness about the complaint. Remember, they didn't have the information about Waid defaming Meyer while physically present in Texas because Waid tried to deceive the court about that in a perjured declaration and hadn't admitted to it.

So the plaintiff couldn't have known about that when drafting the complaint. So if anything they should amend the complaint to add that.

Or not.

It's just a timewasting unnecessary additional response.

And frankly, this jurisdictional argument was weaksauce when it was just about the phone call. Which is what plaintiff actually has argued, repeatedly and at length, was sufficient BY ITSELF for jurisdiction. The response literally flat out lies about that and claims it's all about Waid's in-person in-Texas appearance.

While that permanently puts that argument to death (and frankly they should have just withdrawn the motion after Waid's perjury came to light), it wasn't the original argument. It's a supplemental argument only made after Waid's perjury.
 
AnOminous said:
And frankly, this jurisdictional argument was weaksauce when it was just about the phone call. Which is what plaintiff actually has argued, repeatedly and at length, was sufficient BY ITSELF for jurisdiction. The response literally flat out lies about that and claims it's all about Waid's in-person in-Texas appearance.

While that permanently puts that argument to death (and frankly they should have just withdrawn the motion after Waid's perjury came to light), it wasn't the original argument. It's a supplemental argument only made after Waid's perjury.
Click to expand...
That pretty well answers my question.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom