Shane Holmberg / Shane Presley Holmberg - The Containment Cell for The Breaker of Chairs, Eater of Shoes, Groomer of His Child Bride

  • Thread starter Thread starter AJ 447
  • Start date Start date
  • 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
Facts Over Feels said:
Shane hasn't been right about pretty much anything so far so I guess he's decided to try the scattershot approach and hope he gets lucky and hits something.
Click to expand...
So far his method of flinging shit at the wall and seeing what sticks hasn't worked out for him, but I'm sure if he tries another million times, then he'll finally get lucky.
 
Another Wild Allegation Appears!!!!! or is this an old one honestly hard to tell with how many stories Shane tells.

Screenshot (203).png
 
Army Burger said:
View attachment 770015

archive.fo

Shane Holmberg on Twitter: "Not take seriously the guy who knows stuf…

archived 24 May 2019 00:26:56 UTC
archive.fo archive.fo

Shane is getting butthurt that people aren't taking him seriously.
Click to expand...

is he even speaking English in this? Is it just me or are his tweets becoming if anything even more incoherent than whatever passes for Normal with Shane?

Urbanmech said:
Another Wild Allegation Appears!!!!! or is this an old one honestly hard to tell with how many stories Shane tells.

View attachment 770203
Click to expand...

And what exactly does another "high profile accuser" accomplish? Shane still doesn't grasp the core element here. Vic is NOT the one on trial. MoRonica and Marchi etc are. The existence of the high profile accuser means nothing. It likely will not be allowed in court.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well, Nick -did- mention one of the three stories was the "consensual kiss".

Given three stories mentioned, one was involving two accusers, with no sexual contact, one was the Jellybean incident, and the last was the consensual kiss.

Toye's texts indicate 4 accusers, which adds up to these incidents. Throw the twins in with the two accusers story, Monica for the Jellybean incident, leaves "Ian's GF" for the last.
 
AnCapFool said:
Well, Nick -did- mention one of the three stories was the "consensual kiss".

Given three stories mentioned, one was involving two accusers, with no sexual contact, one was the Jellybean incident, and the last was the consensual kiss.

Toye's texts indicate 4 accusers, which adds up to these incidents. Throw the twins in with the two accusers story, Monica for the Jellybean incident, leaves "Ian's GF" for the last.
Click to expand...
Well, that's another mystery solved without the help of Shane. Who's up for coffee?
 
Shane operates under the assumption that Nick hasn't released everything he's been authorized to release. I sincerely doubt he's actually payed attention to what Nick's been streaming and what he's actually said.
 
And I think I recall some blog post out there somewhere that contested the "consensual" part of the consensual kiss. Which'd solidify my theory on it being Ian's GF.
 
AnCapFool said:
And I think I recall some blog post out there somewhere that contested the "consensual" part of the consensual kiss. Which'd solidify my theory on it being Ian's GF.
Click to expand...
Wait, are they seriously trying to imply her being in a relationship means Vic did it without her consent?
 
What is that even supposed to mean? It would almost make sense as a statement rather than a question.
 
Army Burger said:
View attachment 770248

archive.fo

Shane Holmberg on Twitter: "He is seeking a million dollars because h…

archived 24 May 2019 03:02:58 UTC
archive.fo archive.fo
Click to expand...

Ah, @Shane_Yes_That_One, you just tipped your hand.

Vic is the plaintiff here, and he KNOWS his dirty laundry will be dredged up during this process, but he's still going through with this, so the other side has more to lose than he does both financially and via reputation.

Second, you've basically said Vic will likely win but still lose his reputation over this, and you ascribe his demands of monetary compensation for loss of career opportunities to a petty, evil motivation.

Vic's reputation has already been dragged through the mud. Even if he does win, the damage will likely never be fully repaired, but he still wants to make up for the lost money said damages have cost him or will cost him.

In essence, you'll be happy so long as Vic somehow looks like the villain here, even if the truth exonerates him in court and he gets legally compensated for his damaged reputation.
 
GethN7 said:
Ah, @Shane_Yes_That_One, you just tipped your hand.

Vic is the plaintiff here, and he KNOWS his dirty laundry will be dredged up during this process, but he's still going through with this, so the other side has more to lose than he does both financially and via reputation.

Second, you've basically said Vic will likely win but still lose his reputation over this, and you ascribe his demands of monetary compensation for loss of career opportunities to a petty, evil motivation.

Vic's reputation has already been dragged through the mud. Even if he does win, the damage will likely never be fully repaired, but he still wants to make up for the lost money said damages have cost him or will cost him.

In essence, you'll be happy so long as Vic somehow looks like the villain here, even if the truth exonerates him in court and he gets legally compensated for his damaged reputation.
Click to expand...
Brilliant logic as always, Shane.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom