🚨🇺🇸Tate Fires Back at Bri Stern
Andrew Tate has filed a cross-complaint in California, seeking $50M from Bri Stern.
We’ve read the full legal filing so you don’t have to. Let’s unpack it 🧵👇
Andrew Tate has filed a cross-complaint in California, seeking $50M from Bri Stern.
We’ve read the full legal filing so you don’t have to. Let’s unpack it 🧵👇
Andrew Tate denies all her assault and abuse allegations - and accuses her of defamation, emotional distress, “false light” invasion of privacy, abuse of process, and misappropriation of his likeness.
The Defence: “It Was Consensual”
Tate’s filing admits to elements like choking and “property” language - but frames them as mutual BDSM roleplay.
He argues Stern embraced these dynamics publicly and monetised them, pointing to her adult entertainment and BDSM-themed social media.
Tate’s filing admits to elements like choking and “property” language - but frames them as mutual BDSM roleplay.
He argues Stern embraced these dynamics publicly and monetised them, pointing to her adult entertainment and BDSM-themed social media.
“The DA Declined to Prosecute”
Central to Tate’s argument: the LA District Attorney reviewed Stern’s police report in June 2025 and did not file criminal charges.
Legal reality: this doesn’t prove innocence - only that prosecutors didn’t believe they could win a criminal case beyond reasonable doubt. Civil cases require a lower burden of proof.
Central to Tate’s argument: the LA District Attorney reviewed Stern’s police report in June 2025 and did not file criminal charges.
Legal reality: this doesn’t prove innocence - only that prosecutors didn’t believe they could win a criminal case beyond reasonable doubt. Civil cases require a lower burden of proof.
Attacking the Evidence
Tate’s team claims Stern’s photos of bruising match cosmetic filler injection sites rather than assault injuries.
They cite medical reports, AI image analysis, and expert opinions.
Stern’s side will likely contest this with their own experts.
Tate’s team claims Stern’s photos of bruising match cosmetic filler injection sites rather than assault injuries.
They cite medical reports, AI image analysis, and expert opinions.
Stern’s side will likely contest this with their own experts.
Questioning Motive
The filing claims Stern sought fame and money by:
• Launching “Sister Coin” right after Tate’s “Daddy Coin”
• Using his likeness in promotions
• Publicising allegations instead of resolving them privately
• Allegedly having a history of similar disputes with other men (her lawyers will likely challenge the relevance/admissibility).
The filing claims Stern sought fame and money by:
• Launching “Sister Coin” right after Tate’s “Daddy Coin”
• Using his likeness in promotions
• Publicising allegations instead of resolving them privately
• Allegedly having a history of similar disputes with other men (her lawyers will likely challenge the relevance/admissibility).
The Legal Counterattack
Tate’s cross-complaint isn’t just defence - it’s offence.
He’s demanding:
• $50M+ in damages
• A court order stopping Stern from repeating her allegations
• A ban on using his name/image for commercial purposes
• Retractions of prior statements.
Tate’s cross-complaint isn’t just defence - it’s offence.
He’s demanding:
• $50M+ in damages
• A court order stopping Stern from repeating her allegations
• A ban on using his name/image for commercial purposes
• Retractions of prior statements.
Why This Matters
This filing reads as much like PR strategy as legal strategy.
It’s packed with colourful narrative, attacks on Stern’s character, and talking points designed for social media - perfectly suited to be amplified by Tate’s fanbase.
This filing reads as much like PR strategy as legal strategy.
It’s packed with colourful narrative, attacks on Stern’s character, and talking points designed for social media - perfectly suited to be amplified by Tate’s fanbase.
What Comes Next
This is only Tate’s side of the story.
Stern’s team will respond with their own evidence, witnesses, and counter-arguments.
In civil court, the question will be: whose version of events the jury finds more credible on the balance of probabilities.
This is only Tate’s side of the story.
Stern’s team will respond with their own evidence, witnesses, and counter-arguments.
In civil court, the question will be: whose version of events the jury finds more credible on the balance of probabilities.
Final Thought
Whatever the outcome, this is a high-stakes reputational battle playing out in both the courtroom and the court of public opinion.
One thing’s certain: both sides are lawyering up for a long, messy fight.
Whatever the outcome, this is a high-stakes reputational battle playing out in both the courtroom and the court of public opinion.
One thing’s certain: both sides are lawyering up for a long, messy fight.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
