😵‍💫 Skitzocow David Anthony Stebbins / Acerthorn / stebbinsd / fayettevillesdavid - Litigious autist, obese livestreamer, elder abuser, violent schizo, ladyboy importer, hot dog enjoyer, wereturkey.

[Sandnigger]

The only houses that I've seen in my neck of the woods that look like that are abandoned houses that have roofs collapsing from disrepair. He has at least three windows broken or missing, two of them have some mesh over them and one has a piece of plywood. It's like a paranoid schizophrenic took over a crack shack.

 

[Galeocerdo]

The only houses that I've seen in my neck of the woods that look like that are abandoned houses that have roofs collapsing from disrepair. He has at least three windows broken or missing, two of them have some mesh over them and one has a piece of plywood. It's like a paranoid schizophrenic took over a crack shack.

Yeah he's fucking weird about being an out and out slob, as I said, he used to literally boast about how much of a slob he was. I think it's like some form of "I can't be fucked" type beat and he just owns being a fat, disgusting clob which... I mean... If other people weren't impacted I guess I can say he's better than most lolcows who try to pretend they're not fucking disgusting slobs

 

[DavidS877]

In Stabby v Redfield, N.D. CA, 23-cv-321, Stabby just dropped a bunch of crap on the docket.

Based on that list, I assume it's gonna be funny.

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/66752331/stebbins-v-redfield/

ECF 133 is a total of 195 pages. I've attached a single giant PDF. And I'll do images for the filing and his memorandum of retardation.

Spoiler: 25 Pages

For instance, I don't think this is a valid discovery request. Please tell me how you're going to defend your case is not a request for evidence.

 

[Sweeter and Savoury]

Ah this was a fun read.

So it's David basically trying to get Sid to admit to...well everything in the form of questions. This is not discovery, this David's own person inquisition.

Such as:

REQUEST NO. 20: Admit that many of the Defendant's informants – including
IntitiativeKookie – repeatedly made multiple new accounts on multiple platforms,
including YouTube, Discord, Reddit, and Twitch, among others, for the sole and
express purpose of continuing to hurl insults at me even after I had already blocked

REQUEST NO. 24: Admit that despite the aforementioned but-for causation
caused by InitiativeKookie, the Defendant purposefully omitted this causation from
his smear video with the express intent of making me appear as an unprovoked
villain.

And Sid's lawyer going LOL not going to happen. so Ole Stabby is pissed and going to the judge to "enforce his rights to discovery" by asking the judge to make Sid admit guilt in the matter? Yah, not gonna happen.

I also love David's "person has a legal duty to leave me alone after I blocked him". Yah, interesting legal point there Davey, care to point to which law says that?

Over all good stuff!

 

[DavidS877]

Well played Mr. Edmondson, well played.

We would be happy to allow you to inspect the documents. In person.

Yes, Mr. Stabby, that's exactly what you get in discovery, it is not the other parties job to point you to exactly what you asked for, you asked for documents, you got documents.

I just realized that Sid missed a funny opportunity. Sending the documents on a writable Blu-Ray. Wonder what the chances of Stabby having a drive that could read it would have been.

 

[Sweeter and Savoury]

For the record David made a total of 314 "requests for disclosure". All of them in the same vein. All of them nothing more then a blatant traps for Sid to admit guilt for everything.

On the down side, this probably cost Sid a fair chunk of change due to the length of the filing and as David has zero issues filing all this shit by himself and doesn't pay a cent it's just more pain he can heap upon Sid. The judge really should step in and slap David down for such open abuse of the rules.

 

[Harvey Danger]

This objection could apply to nearly every motion Acerthorn has ever filed.

 

[Gobermental Supervisor]

Wyświetl załącznik 9191550
This objection could apply to nearly every motion Acerthorn has ever filed.

TL: "Objection: Counsel does not speak retard."

EDIT: Just imagine going through law school, passing the bar, with the expectation of making a living litigating meaningful cases. And then you get hired to defend against this vexatious creature abusing the legal system.

 

[Sweeter and Savoury]

I still can't believe David signs his legal emails as "Acerthorn".

edit: I would have given much to be on that call where David tries to school the lawyer on "his Way" of doing things. Such a thing lost is a real shame.

So much win here:

I therefore ask that the Court issue a protective order forbidding the Defendant from offering any more evidence to support any of his affirmative defenses or to refute any of my elements of prima facie defamation.

 

[Harvey Danger]

EDIT: Just imagine going through law school, passing the bar, with the expectation of making a living litigating meaningful cases. And then you get hired to defend against this vexatious creature abusing the legal system.

What do you mean, legal requests like this are basically boilerplate.



Practically copied out of Black's Law Dictionary, word for word.

 

[ADN_VIII]

The desperation is practically bleeding from these filings. I think Stabby finally has had the concept that he may have bitten off more than he can chew sink through his malformed skull. Zell folded and Baz never responded, so the wins so far have been against a retard and a default, respectively. Maybe the nectar of easy wins has fully fooled Stabby.

The delusion in some of these filings is also quite fascinating. Sid isn't a mind reader insofar as I can tell, so a lot of these "questions" demanding admissions about other people feel like Stabby wants Sid to perjure himself. Plus I have strong doubts that people like Kookie sent Sid any kind of document detailing their thought processes for trolling.

 

[Harvey Danger]

Yes, Mr. Stabby, that's exactly what you get in discovery, it is not the other parties job to point you to exactly what you asked for, you asked for documents, you got documents.

Maybe don't ask for 400 things if you don't want to deal with 400 problems.



AT: "Tell me exactly what your evidence is, EXACTLY PRECISELY EXACTLY!"
CE: "Ok, here."
AT: "That's not good enough!"
CE: "What is your exact, precise problem with our answers?"
AT: "NOOOOOOOOO you don't get to ask for precise responses! I'm going to sanction you!"