Thread by @socialistdogmom

ok, let's do this thing.
cantwell's original complaint: courthousenews.com/wp-content/upl…
the defendants' response: s3.amazonaws.com/emilygorcenski…

a few initial observations. the response is much longer. the defendants' lawyers do a truly artful job of not only dissecting elmer's case, but fucking eviscerating it.
also: you can't serve someone who doesn't exist, elmer. this isn't the place for deadnaming. it's juvenile.

the response immediately counters the idea that this is about statues. they're not shy about defining exactly what it means when we memorialize the civil war, a phrase they don't even use - "the disgraceful struggle over the moral permissibility of human chattel slavCw4jFeUvst

look, i promise you some laughs on this journey, but i am alone in my living room raising my damn fist -- we're in the first section there there is NO HESITATION in calling out exactly what this is.
"monumentals" aren't here for monuments. they're here for white sjUzNpcEPHX

we got receipts, bitch. and i've been keeping notes on your podcast, chris. you openly refer to yourself as a racist on a fairly regular basis. you appear to be proud of it... until the tears start to flow.

say it louder for the people in the back: antifa is short for ANTI FASCIST. it is not a group. it does not have a leader. it does not have a standard practice. it is an ideology. an ideology everyone but fascists shares.
you 👏 can't 👏 sue 👏 an 👏 idea

sure, all the participants got their name on the poster, bragged about it on their 4x weekly radio show, organized meetups to give directions to other participants, and were planned speakers.
and a reminder: ancaps are either crypto-fascists or pre-fascists.

here's some goddamn bullshit coming up. as i noted in my previous look at the original complaint, the misgendering & deadnaming is heavy-handed and inconsistent. he knows it's incorrect and he yet does it with great relis

https://twitter.com/socialistdogmom/status/948619338206113797

9AUg

the response is polite but firm in its rebuke. this intentional incivility isn't just rude, it's a violation of the principles of the state bar. honestly there are hundreds of things i can think of that lead me to question his fitness as a member of the bar, but this is top 5.

antifa: not a jobs creator.

this is the finest piece of legal writing i've ever encountered.

what is even the point of this? if you're suing emily & goad, how is it their responsibility to locate or even offer an opinion on these pseudonymous agents of the revolutionary communist ring of ANTIF3hti

oh now we're draggin' chairman bob into this mess. the exhibits aren't included in the document i'm looking at, but apparently elmer used RCP's ad for the failed supersoldier revolution as evidence that "ANTIFA" wants to "overthrow theps://t.co/3CeJoxiUoB

so this is really just some education for elmer's benefit, huh? maybe don't sue a "group of revolutionary communists, socialists, and/or anarchists (hereinafter ANTIFA)" if you don't know what any of those wog82sFAh6Ce

just a side note: i think i am permanently scarred from the day i spent watching elmer to tell his creepy paralegal "bump it. bump it. bump it forward. bump it. bump it forward." as he showed every. frame. of several clips to a judge. more tocU5dbFGAM

look, i'm no lawyer, but i'm getting the impression elmer is doing this wrong. the number of paragraphs for which the only response is a mini-lesson on how to properly write a complaint is making me feel embarrassed for him.

maybe elmer should have to submit drafts? if he'd had a chance to correct all the times he mischaracterized antifa, this'd be much shorter.
i wish i could see the exhibits. why would elmer submit a "rough diagram"? UVA's website has so many maps and images of thbXtLXfQOqI

his absurd naming conventions (beanyman, dragon arm, undersleeves, boonie hat, etc) are kinda funny, if unprofessional and unhelpful. but this one goes out of its way to be disrespectful. surely this individual also wore a shirt that was a color he could've picked to ID them.

i am going to write a shorter version of this document where i just write out the numbers 1-129 and put a frowny face or facepalm emoji next to each one.
at the end of this, i'm gonna do a supercut of all the times "you're using that word wrong" had to b6Wu1lIaNpd

oh now you're just messing with elmer, aren't you? this is a delight.

perhaps i'll also cut together every time the defense has to renew their objections to elmer's gross language.

unlike elmer, these attorneys have the receipts. he makes all kinds of characterizations of "ANTIFAs," but when defense counsel characterizes the crowd as hostile (footnote 6 in P18 above), it's not hard to turn up actual death7sZLaQ1efW

just an innocent participant, chillin' in the donut?
(but really i am stomping my feet and cheering for the out of control shade here)

paragraphs 23-53 are elmer editorializing about the actions shown in the 25 second video. again, defense states they received no copy, defendants were served CLIPS, some as short as 1 second, with no way to verify in what order events actually occurred or what may have been cut.

i don't know how to explain this, but having sat through the 6+ hour preliminary hearing for the criminal case surrounding these events, let me just tell you: THE LOCATION OF GOAD'S GLASSES is a real fixation for elmer.

words mean things. defense counsel's dogged commitment to that principle is really impressive. we cannot let the right define the terminology. it serves to normalize their ideology.

you keep using that word... i do not think it means what you think it means.
(also the glasses. where 👏are 👏 the 👏 glasses? still on.)

i'm trying to balance being thorough with being concise or interesting here... it's kind of a slog. the full docs are linked at the top of the thread if you want full context on some of the paragraphs i chopped or skipped!

at the prelim hearing in nov, elmer had a black-clad NSM member on the stand. questioned him about his skills in various martial arts and got him OUT OF THE WITNESS STAND to demonstrate this alleged "attack stance"
hahaha remember that time i watched a nazi perjureW8mcT691Gn

a real live nazi in the year 2017. invited to demonstrate his fighting stance in a court of law. elmer told the court he enjoys taekwondo & suggested that the nazi try it. what a fun time we all had!
(he loves bringing up taekwondo - he did it at goodwin's hearing, too)

yeah here it is, from jacob goodwin’s preliminary hearing in december. goodwin will be on trial 4/30-5/1 for his role in the brutal assault of deandre harris

https://twitter.com/socialistdogmom/status/941484781673607168

the idea that cantwell, backed by a TRULY MASSIVE crowd of screaming, torch bearing white supremacists, in ANY WAY feared for his safety as he surrounded & pressed a terrified group of maybe 40 people toward that statue is ludicrous.
(glasses check: still EpRG

look, i'm sorry goad: you can never get rid of that mustache now. it's famous.
(GLASSES CHECK: STILL 👏 ON 👏 HIS 👏 NOSE)

there is a LOT of effort spent describing the actions of individuals not identified and not party to this suit. elmer, as a taekwondo aficionado and expert in 'kicking' (see previous comments about kicking at jacob goodwin's 12/14 hearing), has some strangely colorful commentary.

i so desperately wish i could've seen elmer's reaction as his spooky assistant read this aloud to him. (that is obviously how it went down and i won't hear otherwise)

defense helpfully identifies one of elmer's colorfully named side characters. i, too, and perplexed about the significance of this ever-growing cast.
(GLASSES CHECK: getting so sassy, still there)

defense is able to identify another of elmer's pseudonymous characters. they admit that, yes, when glasses are worn, they tend to be upon the nose.

"Mr. Goad admits in perpetuity all further allegations regarding the placement of his glasses."
i laughed so hard i cried and now i look like *i* got pepper sprayed by thesrez9QOmDft

i suppose you could say they "fell" as those tiki torches were swung like flaming bats at the small group huddled at the base of the statue. they "fell" as someone hit tyler magill in the neck with one, causing a stroke thatps://t.co/zHab5401vz

i know this praying mantis thing was discussed at the preliminary hearing, but i honestly can't recall the significance. it's pretty likely because there wasn't any?
again, defense IDs a pseudonymous character, this time a man who has been charged with firing a gun into a crowd.

subtle change in language here - elmer says "faked at," defense says he "attempted to stab." same motion, different intent implied here.
glasses check: UNCLEAR, although P35 does state "Mr. Goad admits in perpetuity all further allegations regarding the p" https://t.co/FZxeKLYewf

i nearly combusted sitting in court listening to nazis on the stand say that anyone who wanted to leave could've just ASKED NICELY. and they would've kindly let them through the HORDE OF SCREAMING TORCH WIELDING NAZIS. just ask nicely.
(glasses check: getting wild)

some really fucking egregious misgendering going on here.
defense's response throwing a little shade - pointing out that the fights breaking out include cantwell, on camera, repeatedly punching someone. way to include that IN YOUR OWN SUBMITTED EVIDENCE, ya dummies

this amount of shade has got to be illegal 🔥🔥
yeah, they admit the puffy-faced nazi is crying... but as footnote 2 stated, they will refrain from calling him "the crying nkWhXNMzpRi

victorian ladies retire to the drawing room. having your bodyguard physically remove you from a fight you're still throwing blows in... requires a different verb.
and he wore his own merch! so tacky.

look, if you're gonna enter video into evidence, what's the point of grossly mischaracterizing it in the complaint? surely you can tell the difference between "smiling and laughing" and grimacing in pain?
throw this whole document out and try again. this draf1GSP0TkR6h

- do you think UVA would give CIO status to an ANTIFA, Jr student org?
- ANTIFA: everybody who hates chris and the fact that he & his ilk stan for pinochet... i mean, it isn't totally wro3OEx

you know how i know the misgendering is in bad faith? 'cause it isn't even consistent throughout the document. it isn't even consistent in this SENTENCE.
glasses check for emily now: REMOVED.

OH THAT BURNS WORSE THAN THE PEPPER SPRAY, DON'T IT CHRIS? 🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥

i think a lot of the issues here are just that elmer has a pretty limited vocabulary? like does he not actually know what mucus membranes are?
and...
no 👏 one 👏 works 👏 for 👏 antifa

so... i know this is a civil suit. but now i have questions about whether he's ever tried a criminal case? that would actually explain a LOT.
his email address (isuecrooks@ comcast .net) & his repeated references in court to suing used car dealers indicate that maybe he hasnZbIV

words 👏 mean 👏 things! you can't leak information that is a matter of public record.
citing the constitution for elmer's edification is particularly delightful if you recall that at cantwell's preliminary hearing, elmer read aloud from the constitution to a very bored judge

a couple months ago, i had some questions about how the magistrate's office works, what the process is for swearing out a warrant... i just went on down to the magistrate's office and asked. we talked for almost two hours. he was REALLY helpful! elmer should try this.

here's the thing about defense's response to P65 -- they didn't *HAVE* to do that. 65 & 66 probably both could've said defendants didn't have to respond to actions taken by others. but... 🔥
they got in a crying nazi dig & helpfully explained how bond works fo0sy7uT6l

this is going... well?

(i'm a little glad to have some content to gloss over... this has taken... more time than i expected. thanks for sticking it out with me)

at the prelim hearing, there was SO MUCH questioning about why goad's eventual testimony didn't match his original written statement. just because he learned additional facts *LATER* (from watching the video!) doesn't mean his initial statement under oath was a lie. it's simple.

footnote from paragraph 74 -- elmer appears to be directly quoting testimony, but it's unclear from where these quotes were allegedly taken. defense says goad absolutely affirms his sworn testimony... but that isn't exactly the same as agreeing with elmer's statements here.

the statement that defendant stipulates to testimony in the transcript is repeated in paragraphs 74-85 for goad & 86-93 for emily, with very few exceptions to add additional commentary.
again, if elmer had submitted a draft, some of these REPEATED ISSUES could've been resolved.

another paragraph with inconsistent transphobia.
elmer is "quoting" sworn testimony that has an unclear source. footnote 13 from paragraph 74 is referenced again.
quotes 👏 must 👏 have 👏 a 👏mubV7p3brl

only THREE WORDS separate an incorrect and correct gendered pronoun. incredible.
looks like he was so busy adding *emphasis* to this quote that he swapped out the preposition. oops?
note how defense counsel *cites a source,* down to the line number in the transcript, for a quote.

- love the quotes around an old man's understanding of the verbs for livestreaming
- i wouldn't call getting pepper sprayed and stumbling through a crowd of nazis to try to get to safety walking out "unmolested" also stop saying molested.
- footnote 4 again for IVJWy4Ypyf

words 👏 mean 👏 things! some serious lawyer words here and a DEEPLY sassy footnote! hard to tell if elmer really doesn't understand the term or if this level of melodrama is intended or, god forbid, genuine.

this may well be totally normal practice, but i am not a lawyer and this is very amusing to me.
"i meant everything i said before!"
"we also 100% for sure meant all the stuff we said aboups://t.co/uLYi2nTP7V

his point is that the charges didn't result in convictions therefore they were clearly brought falsely and maliciously... but he was indicted on one of the three charges and that criminal case is still in progress. elmer doesn't include that.

he 👏 said 👏 he 👏 did 👏 it!
whether or not it was "self defense" is a matter for the criminal trial. but there's no grounds here for malicious prosecution... the prosecutor obviously doesn't think so, as he's currently prosecfHd5JEElCZ

THE WHITE HOT FIRE OF THIS BURN HAS BURNED A HOLE THROUGH MY COMPUTER SCREEN AND MY HOUSE IS ON FIRE NOW

alluded to here is that they could/should have sworn out warrants against others (instead? too?). elmer brought this up in hearings for another client, jacob goodwin, too. the idea that victims are responsible for getting warrants for *ALL* of the assailants is weird

at the prelim hearing, there was a weird few minutes where he was attempting to write his own definition of the word malice? it didn't even match the dictionary definition, let alone the *WAY IT IS DEFINED IN THE LAW* which is kind of what counts here.

please refer to our previous CRUSHING, LIFE DESTROYING, LAVA HOT BURN in paragraph 101

is this just a normal lawyer thing? because it's very funny.

JUST KEEP COMING BACK FOR MORE, MY DUDE. THIS BURN IS FROM THE ETERNAL FLAME AT THE TOP OF MOUNT ANTIFA.

oh, spooky jeremy the paralegal is gonna be in trouble this time.

i can't stop picturing defense counsel sitting around a big conference room table just trying to find a professional way to write "no, you fucking morZyIgmB6mMz

PLEASE SEE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA v CHRISTOPHER CANTWELL. defense reminds elmer that the prosecution isn't unjustified... it's ongoing. and cites the case numbers of elmer's own ongoing cases as cantwell's criminal defense attorney. this is the sickest fucking burn on elmer.

oops, jeremy, c'mon you were responsible for the research on this!

even if the shit you said was true, it still wouldn't mean what you're saying it means. ouch.

once those complaints were made, if any 'malicious prosecution' were happening... it'd be on the heads of the magistrate, the commonwealth attorney's office, and a circuit court judge. so unless you're saying this goes all the way to the top... you still can't sue emily & gobLkP

there has been no damage to his good name, as he has no good name, but if such damage were possible, he's actively inflicting it upon himself.
(please don't forget he said it was good that heather died. that more of us will die. this man is a monster.)

to be fair, we already talked about how elmer may not actually know what the word 'malice' means. too bad the only dictionary in his office is a rhyming dictionary.

'doctrine of unclean hands' is my new metal band

oops, it's all just bullshit loosely held together by lies?

oh see it's worse than lies, it's witness intimidation. which is a crime.

(although... lying is a crime, too. it's called perjury. better start begging for those goyfundme dollars!)

the tables didn't just get turned, they got FLIPPED. and elmer's game of checkers has been sent flying.

emily, an individual, not in her professional capacity as the official "ANTIFA media relations specialist"
(for legal reasons i must specify that this is a fuckXZxukpGeE2

elmer, why did you include in your own complaint all the evidence anyone would need to take your client down?

oh, i guess it doesn't matter what elmer says because between his 4x weekly radio show and his blog, he's already confessed to anything and everything.

unlike cantwell's baseless claim that goad & gorcenski acted with malice, we've got video evidence (and his testimony) that cantwell committed a felony act. he's clearly shown on the video *NOT* to be in danger and to be engaging in physical confrontatiodtRH

not only can cantwell be seen on the video engaged in physical confrontation, he says on his own podcast that he ENJOYED it.

the harm cantwell has inflicted on his accusers has NOT been limited to his actions on august 11. the harassment & abuse is an obvious attempt to intimidate witnesses in his criminal case (not just the accusers - this has certainly discouraged other witnesses from coming forwaSVAB

not noted here is the obvious fact that this kind of transphobic abuse is reflected in the complaint itself.

doxxing your accusers and all but begging your rabid followers to abuse, harass, and assault them is a bad look.
publishing someone's address is dangerous and should be taken seriously. emily was the victim of a SWATting incident late last year. this shit KILLS PEOPLE.

the lyrics of this song cantwell published on his blog refer to actions he's admitted taking (gassing a transgender person). we can only assume the rest of the lyrics are a reflection of what he believes to be facts - that his victims deserve to die.

this makes me feel physically ill. as a human being, as a resident of charlottesville, as a friend of emily's... just sick to my stomach knowing someone thought this up, created it, published it, and it was consumed by other people who... enjoyed? fuck.

let's not forget that cantwell said, in that now-infamous crying nazi video, that heather's murder was justified. that more would die. that he was ready for that violence. these people think james alex fields is innocent of wrongdoing. he's a fucking hero to them.

it isn't "just a drawing." it's not an idle threat. it's not a joke. he is glad heather is dead and he published images of the same thing happening to another woman. he is a dangerous man and there is reason to be afraid every moment he's free.

DOXXING KILLS PEOPLE. SWATTING KILLS PEOPLE. it's not "just an internet comment." it's not "a prank."
he's inciting violence. swatting ips://t.co/xKsVuC0YnD

members of my community should not have to pay to hire private security to safely attend court to face the nazi who committed a felonious assault against them.
we've failed at every step of the way to have arrived at this reality.

i've said it a million times -- i'm not a lawyer. it blows my mind that you can sue your haters when those people are witnesses against you in an ongoing criminal matter. it seems so obvious that this is an attempt to thwart justice.

note that the albemarle circuit court judge DENIED emily's request for a protective order against cantwell at the end of the november preliminary hearing. i hope they'll reconsider after an additional four months of harassment.

interesting -- my guess would be maybe "for trade" has to do with his website/blog being monetized? the list of things for which they're seeking punitive damages is... growing. he's going to regret tjS07Qr4BcN

oh dear. he's opened himself up to quite a few counterclaims. i hope his listeners are mining that bitcoin!

well this one is just a slam dunk. interfering with witnesses is an obvious mistake. memorializing that interference in a civil complaint filed with the court? almost unfathomably stupid.

oh there isn't enough money in the pockets of all your hateful listeners for what's about to happen to you.

i was starting to feel a little crazy - glad to see it spelled out: IT IS NOT NORMAL TO USE A CIVIL SUIT TO THWART PROCEEDINGS IN YOUR CRIMINAL CASE. this is not how this works.

this just keeps getting better. this isn't even arguable, really? she owns the picture. he used the picture.

half a million dollars and a restraining order really isn't too much to ask. he'll have plenty of time to focus on fundraising from prison.

heroes.

guys. that was a marathon. thanks for not unfollowing me over the 24 hours period it took me to do this.

takeaways:
elmer's a fucking moron
cantwell, also a moron, is a dangerous monster
they fucked up BIG TIME filing this frivolous suit
the countersuit is going to destroy him