Thursday, January 25, 2024

Chronicles of Twatrick: Still digging that hole.

As I described recently, undischarged bankrupt and MMA cosplay dude Patrick Ross is making life increasingly difficult for himself in that, rather than proceeding with his 2022 lawsuit against me, he has already announced that he is going to try to excuse his negligence by claiming it had to do with the passing of his father.

Patrick's problem, as I pointed out, is that when he eventually tries that pathetic and dishonest excuse, I will provide the Court with numerous publications of Patrick's wherein he continues to mock me on Twitter, making it clear that he has plenty of time for that but not to deal with the lawsuit that he himself filed.

And, yes, I have all the screenshots:

So, yeah, if/when I choose to have this action dismissed as abandoned due to Patrick's ongoing negligence, I will have a folder of evidence to prove what Patrick was really doing all that time.

I can assure you, the court will not be amused.


Anonymous said...

Seems the National Post is ok to refer to "gas" and fuel interchangeably.
Probably the Ottawa Canadian Tire ran out of the mandatory yellow diesel containers or they were following that law and bringing gasoline to the many pickup trucks and cars also there.
Do big rig drivers really say "have to stop and 'diesel' up"? or just say "gas up" like everyone else does.

RossOwesDay said...

The Twatster clearly has time to go to movies and make stupid vlogs about his pathetic life. I'm sure you could get his timesheets from FluidPro as well.

MgS said...

I'm sure that some allowance can be made for his father's end-of-life process, but I don't think that's going to go as far as Patrick wants it to.

Judges can be pretty hard-nosed about things like moving cases along in a timely manner.

Anonymous said...

Tip: don’t just take screenshots. Archive the individual URLs of each tweet using archive dot ph. This creates publicly-viewable, verifiable evidence that each tweet was in fact posted from his account.

CC said...

Anon @ 3:15 PM: Normally, if I want irrefutable proof of publication, I use, but I will check this out. In any event, Patrick is typically not smart enough to delete the damning evidence and, if he did and I could prove it, that would represent "spoliation," and he would be in even more trouble (if that is even possible at this point).

Anonymous said...

The other day I saw someone on Twitter advise using both of those sites for this purpose, just to be safe.

In the case of dot ph, it’s not done automatically; someone has to request each individual URL to be archived.

Screenshots can be faked, so archived versions may be preferable for legal purposes(?).

CC said...

Anon @ 11:38 AM: One way to be sneaky about this is to, if you want to enter tweets like this into evidence, just enter the screenshots. If the opposing party insists that those are not their tweets and that they're fake, you can then say, "Well, it turns out that I've archived them online to guarantee their authenticity," then move to have those archived images admitted and further insist that the opposing party be charged with perjury.