State of Texas v. Riley Dalton Mix (a.k.a. Youngclippa)

  • 🇵🇦 Nuestro primer dominio localizado está en español en kiwifarms.pa. Our first localized domain is on Spanish on kiwifarms.pa.
  • 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
The parasocial Eric July fans like this are what escalated this whole feud initially.
I’ve come to the conclusion that the gayest YouTube genre is black man shares my interest and/or politics.

I didn’t know much about this drama but the way Eric July fans reacted to a slight push back instantly made me want him to lose. (I haven’t followed comicsgate or whatever this gay shit is for years).
Which would make Eric July a bitch made faggot.
All he had to do was show up. Honestly I think he’s cashed out and just wants to chill. I don’t blame him with how autistic everyone online is.
 
I’ve come to the conclusion that the gayest YouTube genre is black man shares my interest and/or politics.
the based black man effect is real
1736628803997.png
I didn’t know much about this drama but the way Eric July fans reacted to a slight push back instantly made me want him to lose. (I haven’t followed comicsgate or whatever this gay shit is for years).
That was years ago when a lot of his fans were pushing back. Now the comicsgate people have been radicalized against Rippa with literally hundreds of anti-Rippa streams. People from the outside would understandably be confused because it was supposed to be a movement against the mainstream or whatever, but now it's a movement against a based black man? Also there is no action really happening with Rippa other than these court filings so the retards that stream about Eric July every day are seething about comments in this thread. Like if you didn't comment that ackshually Eric July should be in jail not Riley you are some kind of Eric July plant. It's gotten to the same place with the anti-Rippas as those initial pro-Rippa people with that pushback. Those spergs with nothing better to do than track what Eric July had for breakfast last Tuesday are the current state of Comicsgate.
All he had to do was show up. Honestly I think he’s cashed out and just wants to chill.
If the case is being dismissed or whatever wouldn't the state just not bother to file the record of the other subpoenas being served even if they were?
 
Ostatnio edytowane:
If he ducked a subpoena, he's a bitch.

He can pursue whatever charges he wants but to be unavailable at the last minute is ridiculous.
That's a big if. So far as I know, he had nothing to do with the charges even being pressed, and what we do know of what he said in public was that he wasn't afraid of this guy and was willing to settle the matter in person. Given the combination of this and a really poorly drafted initial filing that got quashed, I could see the prosecution just giving up.

Obviously I'm disappointed since I hate this particular scumbag and think he's enough of a public nuisance (to people other than EJ) to warrant prosecutorial attention, but seriously, what happens if you bring this to a trial and cross examine EJ on his prior public statements, which arguably amounted to an invitation to a fight?

Without EJ as a victim here, what do you really have? A guy being a jerk at a strip mall. It's at most a minor disorderly persons offense.
I didn’t know much about this drama but the way Eric July fans reacted to a slight push back instantly made me want him to lose. (I haven’t followed comicsgate or whatever this gay shit is for years).
EJ himself initially angrily responded to the provocation. The main reason he didn't go full cow was he figured out what was going on and stopped feeding the trolls.

Since then, it's just been a bunch of retards trying to make fetch happen.
All he had to do was show up.
And then what? Lie and claim he's actually afraid of this guy? And then if he does that, then how about him basically saying let's meet in person and finish this? I know subjective fear is not a necessary part of the case, but what's a jury or even a judge going to think? "Why are we here?" is my opinion.
 
Ostatnio edytowane:
That's a big if. So far as I know, he had nothing to do with the charges even being pressed
I am still confused about the charges in general.
According to the OP, who I expect must have gotten the info from somewhere, Riley was trespassed and arrested when he returned anyway.

That would be a slam dunk case that requires zero witnesses, but he was not even charged for it.
I believe someone made the trespass up.
 
That would be a slam dunk case that requires zero witnesses, but he was not even charged for it.
I believe someone made the trespass up.
He was charged with harassment, though, not trespass specifically. That would have been pretty easy, even if the trespass consisted of standing on an otherwise public street and affixing something to the property with no legitimate purpose.

You're still rarely going to face any real ramifications for a simple trespass. I mean the first time they'll tell you stop doing that, and the second time, maybe they tell you stop doing that again and fine you. (It becomes willful after the first time and technically a jailable offense although that rarely happens without something more than merely trespassing.)
 
You're still rarely going to face any real ramifications for a simple trespass.
Unless Texas handles it much different, as I understand it the process would be to be trespassed once, with police taking down your information and then officially telling you that you "cannot come back there for duration of X" or otherwise you are committing a crime.

You are right, being told to leave the first time isn't going to get anyone arrested, its just part of the process.
But everyone keeps saying "but he came back", in which case if the official trespass had been issued by police, he would have be charged with that.

That is why I am figuring something about the story from the EJ side is not making sense.
 
But everyone keeps saying "but he came back", in which case if the official trespass had been issued by police, he would have be charged with that.
But he wasn't, for whatever reason, even though there was an arrest warrant over that incident, and that's why he was arrested when he showed up to tard out at the strip mall. For whatever reason, they decided to prosecute solely for harassment, even though they had what looks like a slam-dunk trespassing case.

It's possibly just because the trespassing and the harassment incidents were in different counties and the other county declined to prosecute.

In any event, this whole thing looks like a botch job.
 
I believe it was actually the property owner, nor Eric July, who called the cops on him on the second arrest that ended up with him being arrested on the original arrest warrant. And it's unclear to me whether EJ himself was even aware of or concerned by Riley's behavior harassing people coming in and out of the event.

That's what the video seemed to be. If I recall it was...
- Riley gets kicked out of Boozy Bird just for being a general problem (as bars often do to problem customers), owner probably had no idea of connection of Eric July
- Riley and Mint continue to cause trouble in the parking lot, I think the video mentioned harassing customers of CiCi's next door
- Police run his credentials, find out he shouldn't be there and have him arrested.

Probably why Mint didn't get arrested despite not identifying herself properly was that she wasn't the one with the flagged ID.
 
I am still confused about the charges in general.
According to the OP, who I expect must have gotten the info from somewhere, Riley was trespassed and arrested when he returned anyway.

That would be a slam dunk case that requires zero witnesses, but he was not even charged for it.
I believe someone made the trespass up.
He was charged with harassment, though, not trespass specifically. That would have been pretty easy, even if the trespass consisted of standing on an otherwise public street and affixing something to the property with no legitimate purpose.

You're still rarely going to face any real ramifications for a simple trespass. I mean the first time they'll tell you stop doing that, and the second time, maybe they tell you stop doing that again and fine you. (It becomes willful after the first time and technically a jailable offense although that rarely happens without something more than merely trespassing.)

There is no trespass mentioned or alleged in the OP, so I am not sure where you are getting that idea. Certainly, from the narrative, trespass charges at the business location where Riley put up stickers and money could be inferred, but for whatever reason he was not charged with that.

If you check the Motion to Quash and the State's Response, you can seethe original report that led to the warrant issue for stalking--later emended to harassment. See below sequence of events for the second incident that got him arrested.

That's what the video seemed to be. If I recall it was...
- Riley gets kicked out of Boozy Bird just for being a general problem (as bars often do to problem customers), owner probably had no idea of connection of Eric July
- Riley and Mint continue to cause trouble in the parking lot, I think the video mentioned harassing customers of CiCi's next door
- Police run his credentials, find out he shouldn't be there and have him arrested.

Probably why Mint didn't get arrested despite not identifying herself properly was that she wasn't the one with the flagged ID.
 
That's what the video seemed to be. If I recall it was...
- Riley gets kicked out of Boozy Bird just for being a general problem (as bars often do to problem customers), owner probably had no idea of connection of Eric July
- Riley and Mint continue to cause trouble in the parking lot, I think the video mentioned harassing customers of CiCi's next door
- Police run his credentials, find out he shouldn't be there and have him arrested.

Probably why Mint didn't get arrested despite not identifying herself properly was that she wasn't the one with the flagged ID.

We can review the tape. I assume these gentleman at the beginning are the owners of the respective restaurants. Please correct this if wrong.

If they got into Boozy Bird I don't know how because the event was RSVP and Rippaverse Brandon was both an unstoppable force and immovable object. You would also take note in this video that the gentleman in the suit from the bodycam is telling Riley where he can stand, Riley poiltely acquiescing, and the man in the suit telling him "you're fine".

I have no idea what happened at Cici's but with Rippa, Lady Rippa, all the Rippaverse employees, Nerdrotic, Mrs. Nerdrotic, Griggs, RK Outpost, Drunk3P0, Melonie Mac, Alex Stein and Stuttering Craig all too busy to call the cops it was a praise Jesus miracle that the guy in the suit knew the sped in the capes name was Riley Mix and there was a warrant out for his arrest.

I thought everyone involved was comicsgate, including EJ. I haven’t kept up with it at all.

EVS and Rippa had a falling out that someone else can get into.

All he had to do was show up. Honestly I think he’s cashed out and just wants to chill. I don’t blame him with how autistic everyone online is.

If he's genuinely in fear for the lives of himself and his employees he should show leadership, bravery and integrity by testifying against this obvious menace to society.
 
I thought everyone involved was comicsgate, including EJ. I haven’t kept up with it at all.
The 2025 version of Comicsgate is just Ethan Van Scammer and his close allies. He's snaked on many of the members you might think are still involved. In late 2023 EVS turned on Eric July after siding with Nick Rekieta and Dick Masterson. Since then the streams have been dominated by anti-Eric July content to an absurd level (over 100 episodes of his show Trashcast which focuses on Eric). Also there are a bunch of other toady simp channels that are EVS/Dick underlings that do all Eric July content, such as Frog Tony and KatyDid.

Here's a video made by a guy who posts on the CG thread that is a pretty good way to catch up on the basic drama. I time stamped it to the part i'm talking about but the whole thing is a good watch.
 
1736652450804.png
He was trespassed from the boozy bird, the cop and him were talking about it that's where I heard about trespassing.
 
From the fact that he was fucking warned to stay away from the property. That's obviously trespass. So I got that "idea" from the actual fucking facts.

Are you talking trespass from the Rippaverse office or trespass from the meetup? I don't know why Riley wasn't charged with trespassing at the office but that did lead to the warrant for harassment no one knew about. If you're talking about trespass at the meetup you can see in both videos I posted in comment #192 both restaurant owners (again, correct me if I'm wrong on who they are) told Riley where the line was. Maybe he pushed those boundaries but I guess we'll never know.
 
I have no idea what happened at Cici's but with Rippa, Lady Rippa, all the Rippaverse employees, Nerdrotic, Mrs. Nerdrotic, Griggs, RK Outpost, Drunk3P0, Melonie Mac, Alex Stein and Stuttering Craig all too busy to call the cops it was a praise Jesus miracle that the guy in the suit knew the sped in the capes name was Riley Mix and there was a warrant out for his arrest.

Oh yeah, you're right. The CiCi's thing comes from the Johnson Bodycam. After Suit Guy comes out and shakes hands with the officer, the guy in the shirt (2:21) says "I told them to stay off my area, all the way to the corner line where CiCi's is ... got their phones out, screaming, doing all kinds of crazy shit" and wants them to get off my "glass" (that is, the storefront windows). I had assumed he was the CiCi's guy since he wasn't wearing a jacket like the other guys were, but he was talking about UP to CiCI's, which the Boozy Bird space goes up to.
 
From the fact that he was fucking warned to stay away from the property. That's obviously trespass. So I got that "idea" from the actual fucking facts.

It was more of a query to @Gobermental Supervisor than yourself. I agree that the elements for trespass are there, and concur in bafflement that he was not charged with it as well. It points to lazy work on part of the State, I would guess.

Perhaps Eric or his manager talked up 'stalking' (in the colloquial sense) such that the prosecution was overly optimistic in the charge and decided to not pursue the lesser. 'Stalking' was the original charge, as documented on page 7 or so, and that was changed to 'harassment' on suggestion of an evidence clerk/technician.

Not being American, I am speculating that often lesser charges are not pursued if a higher charge with greater penalty or deterrence is available.
 
There is no trespass mentioned or alleged in the OP, so I am not sure where you are getting that idea.
From OP
July's on-site manager would call the police and have him trespassed from his property by police, citing that his employees were put in fear, business interference, and Eric capped off his official response with a claim that by returning at night, Riley put himself in damger becaise could legally be shot in Texas in self-defense. These actions would result in a police report being filed and a Texas warrant being issued for Riley on the charge of harassment.
I took that info from this part in the OP, and understood other commentary as him showing up at this property again and a warrant being issued because of it. If he never actually came back and committed CRIMINAL trespass (doing so after being warned), then it makes sense for him to not be charged.

For the final arrest if the owner of that property did not have him trespassed he cannot be charged with violating that.

[EDIT] The procedure in the US is that you are removed from a property, told to not come back by Police who formally issue the trespass and you get it in writing that you cannot come back for X amount of time. People use the term a little freely, but if all those parameters, including the formal trespass by police are not fulfilled you can't be criminally trespassed and charged with CRIMINAL trespass. (from what I know, might differ from state to state though, fucking federalism)
 
Ostatnio edytowane:
From OP

I took that info from this part in the OP, and understood other commentary as him showing up at this property again and a warrant being issued because of it. If he never actually came back and committed CRIMINAL trespass (doing so after being warned), then it makes sense for him to not be charged.

For the final arrest if the owner of that property did not have him trespassed he cannot be charged with violating that.

[EDIT] The procedure in the US is that you are removed from a property, told to not come back by Police who formally issue the trespass and you get it in writing that you cannot come back for X amount of time. People use the term a little freely, but if all those parameters, including the formal trespass by police are not fulfilled you can't be criminally trespassed and charged with CRIMINAL trespass. (from what I know, might differ from state to state though, fucking federalism)

That is my error then, and I need to update it for clarity. Apologies for the confusion.

I swear I CTRL-F'd the word 'tresspass'and changed it a week ago. Alas...
 
Wstecz
Top Na dole