❄️ Snowflake Jack Monroe / Melissa "Mel" Hadjicostas / Jack Xatzinikolas / @BootstrapCook - Spaghetti hoop rinser who wants to live like Common People, the face of poverty in Britain, literally can't lie

[Carpe Jugulum]

TBH at this stage, I'm bored of it all and I just want my money back. I think most of Twitter see her for what she is now, and the media are investigating and writing up stories about her so... I feel like my job here is kind of done? What does the Farm think?

I will never not find grifters getting their comeuppance funny. She’ll either learn from it or continue to spiral into further cowdom and irrelevance (box of hair dye says it’s the latter).

More people need to hold the Jack’s of the world to account so I hope others will find your experience useful and give them the courage to take actions themselves.

 

[Pampered Degenerate]

What do the Farms think?

Ftfy, but to answer your question, personally I'd like you to take this as far as possible (for lulz but also justice) but I appreciate that legal proceedings are exhausting.

 

[glioblastoma multiforme]

TBH at this stage, I'm bored of it all and I just want my money back. I think most of Twitter see her for what she is now, and the media are investigating and writing up stories about her so... I feel like my job here is kind of done? What does the Farm think?

can't blame you. my concern would be that if you backed down now, she would spin it as a concession, or an admission of being a vexatious litigant, whatever. and whereas most people can see her lies for what they are now, it would create room for doubt.

is it possible to disconnect from it as much as possible while seeing what you've already started through? do you have to attend the rest of the court hearings?

i have no doubt that she will continue to cow though her tailspin over this has been exceptional.

from a milk production perspective this has been excellent but its not worth your health. whatever you do, take legal advice first.

 

[Ethics Gradient]

M

I'd love to know how I've abused the judicial system and what exactly is unravelling.



Yeah, the hearing is just for informational purposes, and she's still required to attend. I can still enforce the judgment and have the hearing go ahead. It's not a binary choice.

It won't be an open hearing - it's confidential information (i.e. her finances) HOWEVER the contempt hearing will be public.

TBH at this stage, I'm bored of it all and I just want my money back. I think most of Twitter see her for what she is now, and the media are investigating and writing up stories about her so... I feel like my job here is kind of done? What does the Farm think?

My preference, for what it's worth:

Take her to the cleaners and use all legal channels to expose her grift / her true character.

She's tying herself up like a pretzel with her lies and obfuscation. And I must say, it's rather entertaining.

 

[Legal Gengar]

Ftfy, but to answer your question, personally I'd like you to take this as far as possible (for lulz but also justice) but I appreciate that legal proceedings are exhausting.

can't blame you. my concern would be that if you backed down now, she would spin it as a concession, or an admission of being a vexatious litigant, whatever. and whereas most people can see her lies for what they are now, it would create room for doubt.

is it possible to disconnect from it as much as possible while seeing what you've already started through? do you have to attend the rest of the court hearings?

i have no doubt that she will continue to cow though her tailspin over this has been exceptional.

from a milk production perspective this has been excellent but its not worth your health. whatever you do, take legal advice first.

M

My preference, for what it's worth:

Take her to the cleaners and use all legal channels to expose her grift / her true character.

She's tying herself up like a pretzel with her lies and obfuscation. And I must say, it's rather entertaining.

The Farms have voted. The milking must continue. I'm not backing down, to be clear. I WILL get my money back. I don't have to go to any further hearings though - the court will just send me the documentation and results from the hearings she's obliged to attend.

I agree that backing down now would see her spin it as a victory or that I am a vexatious litigant. TBH I probably just need to stop autistically refreshing Twitter every nanosecond. I find posting truth bombs on Twitter and then closing the browser tab produces delicious milk at no cost to me, so I'm going to carry on doing that.

 

[CrossedTubes]

That is the safest, and sanest, way to interact with Twitter.

 

[Octopi]

Does everyone else find her smile incredibly unnerving? Big pyscho ex energy.

 

[Palla Strozzi]

Does everyone else find her smile incredibly unnerving? Big pyscho ex energy.

Those grinning photos are one of the most frustrating things about her, for me. Consider that her 'comments club' members give her their hard-earned money, only to have her bald-facedly lie to them about everything under the sun, and then to top it all off they have that grimace appear in their twitter feed as she flaunts her abuses of said donations. It is a nauseating and disturbing smile.

 

[AirdropShitposts]

I'd love to know how I've abused the judicial system and what exactly is unravelling.

Narcissist lolcows belief in how the court system works is that they'll stand up to make a statement to the judge who will suddenly see the truth of everything and order you to be Jack Monroe's personal slave forever. And then there will be a big parade and party to celebrate her victory.

You don't have to be in an actual legal case to see this happen just turn on a random episode of Judge Judy and you've got a 50/50 shot.

 

[Legal Gengar]

Narcissist lolcows belief in how the court system works is that they'll stand up to make a statement to the judge who will suddenly see the truth of everything and order you to be Jack Monroe's personal slave forever. And then there will be a big parade and party to celebrate her victory.

You don't have to be in an actual legal case to see this happen just turn on a random episode of Judge Judy and you've got a 50/50 shot.

I suspect that's what she thinks will happen, yes. Too bad I already turned on the waterworks when describing her doxxing, abuse, and harassment of me. I've endured weeks of it, and I'm not ashamed to say I cried when the court officer asked me about it before telling me to make a statement to the judge. He kindly pointed out the box of tissues in front of me, which was very generous of him.

There didn't seem to be any sympathy for her at all. Probably because she didn't turn up and wasted their time.

 

[Geranium]

Deprived of Jack drama, Gengar has taken on the Tattle fraus, who have been wringing their hands over whether he is pure enough for them to support.


@LegalGengar, tweet 1671552792064917506 (archive)

Legal Gengar (@LegalGengar) · Jun 21, 2023 · 4:16 PM UTC
Once again for the people at the back: motivation is irrelevant to a simple breach of contract claim.

@LegalGengar, tweet 1671550060956381185 (archive)

Legal Gengar (@LegalGengar) · Jun 21, 2023 · 4:06 PM UTC

1. It does, on the basis that there were no discount codes available in the "locked posts" section of the Patreon so you don't actually get anything. The ONLY post there is a stupid rambling apology. Digital content that is not available, by definition, cannot be consumed.
2. I waited until the end of January for my WEEKLY rewards. She had 3 weeks to send *something* out and failed utterly.
Please, if you're going to offer your opinion at least try and get it right.

@LegalGengar, tweet 1671532641621794817 (archive)

Legal Gengar (@LegalGengar) · Jun 21, 2023 · 2:56 PM UTC
Tell me you don't know the law without telling me you don't know the law The audacity of these sock accounts, honestly! There is no successfully arguable defence to a breach of contract claim on her Patreon ("failure to mitigate" falls on grounds of false representations being made) so I highly doubt she would have prevailed on the facts at a hearing.
Anyway, she was too arrogant to reply to the claim, so I won. Notice how she's still not applied to set it aside, despite moaning about how wronged she is by it all.
Oh, and it's not a donation—it's a contract for goods so distance selling covers it.

All of the stress means that Gengar is now covered in disgusting scales, though the presence of "SHAN'T" in the tweet makes me wonder whether that's just a distraction from his crumbly bones/arthritis/bloaty head/smol pixi syndrome.

@LegalGengar, tweet 1671219828923695116 (archive)

Legal Gengar (@LegalGengar) · Jun 20, 2023 · 6:13 PM UTC
I'm going to sashay away to the gym now. Although all this stress and worry has resulted in me looking like a very angry snake (thanks, dormant psoriasis that has awoken as a result of the doxxing, defamation, harassment, etc. and now spread across my entire body), I'm determined to get fit again and I SHAN'T be stopped.
Time to channel those negative feelings into being sexy.

 

[frap]

The fraus are never fucking happy. They spend literally years hand-wringing about Jack getting away with her various scams but then someone comes along and takes action and actually getting somewhere with it and they’re still whinging that it’s not good enough.

 

[AirdropShitposts]

I love how many idiots think "this is new so the old laws can't apply to it" is a real intellectual thought. Everything ph12 listed is something humans have been doing for millennia just not over the internet because well, a lack of tubes. Across the pond is an endless parade of these experts saying stuff like how the First Amendment doesn't apply to the internet even though it doesn't specify any method at all in "make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press."

Also, just for the record, the Wild West didn't abandon the common law, if anything it relied on it even more due to a lack of statutes or more specific/arbitrary court rulings. The existence of criminals does mean that everyone else has abandoned the law.

 

[Geranium]

Gengar is threatening Jack with a libel case:

@LegalGengar, tweet 1671904950920544257 (archive)

Legal Gengar (@LegalGengar) · Jun 22, 2023 · 3:36 PM UTC
Jack Monroe (@BootstrapCook) failed to reply to my informal offer of settlement regarding her malicious and defamatory comments about me made on Friday 2nd June 2023.

As a result, I am publishing my formal letter before claim (emailed to her prior to publishing here) along with my requirements for settlement. These are:

1. A prominent public apology, wording to be supplied, at a date and time of my choosing, that fully retracts the allegations made about me, and is pinned to her unlocked Twitter profile for 7 calendar days

2. An undertaking to never repeat the allegations about me, publicly or privately

3. £5,000 to compensate me for damage to my reputation and account for the distress, anxiety, and hurt feelings I suffered as a result of her actions and statements about me

4. £1,000 donated to FareShare. FareShare is the UK’s national network of charitable food redistributors, made up of 18 independent organisations. Together, they take good quality surplus food from right across the food industry and get it to nearly 8,500 frontline charities and community groups. The food they redistribute is nutritious and good to eat. It reaches charities across the UK, including school breakfast clubs, older people’s lunch clubs, homeless shelters, and community cafes. Every week they provide enough food to create almost a million meals for vulnerable people. You can read more about FareShare on their website here: https://fareshare.org.uk/

I have not yet formally instructed solicitors, however in the event that we cannot reach a settlement, I will be openly and transparently crowdfunding to do so on CrowdJustice. I am doing this because I cannot afford to fund a defamation action on my own.

Any crowdraised funds will be sent directly by CrowdJustice to my solicitors (the money will NOT be resting in my bank account) and donors can have full confidence that the funds are being used for their intended purpose.

I will update this post with the crowdfunding information as necessary.

This potential litigation is unconnected to any existing litigation I am pursuing against Jack Monroe. I simply wish to vindicate and restore my reputation to what it was before she made those malicious and defamatory comments about me to over half a million people.

Any questions should be sent via DM to me. I have no further statement to make on this until the expiry of the 14 day deadline (Thursday 6th July 2023).

 

[CrossedTubes]

I'm sure one of the forum legal scholars will be along in a minute, but this doesn't give off 'likely to succeed' vibes. Defamation/libel is tricky to prove. And the remedy - a court ordering someone to unlock their Twitter and post a soz letter? Gib five grand? What for?

From what I can see
point one (is he/isn't he a lawyer) is straightforwardly true or not. Also, 5 (did he dox her or not?); that can be proved one way or the other. But equally, there has to be evidence of harm - scaly skin, crying, loss of income and work, etc.
The others come over as matters of opinion and not specific enough - there is a 'reasonable opinion' defence. It may even be called that. Like I don't think him ringing her at home amounted to harassment, but it wouldn't be an unreasonable opinion that it did. Equally, I think this is definitely about more than 'I just want my money back' now and LG has said so all over the internet, so a reasonable person might well see motives of 'take down the grifter' rather than 'get refund'.

I wonder if you can win by default. Say she shoves the letter of claim under a pile of designer lipsticks and forgets about it.

 

[Dr. Butt]

Is Gengar the first cow-adjacent person to join the farms without then cowing out themselves?

Edit: Christ, that fucking hair dye post! She expects us to believe she bleached her hair all the way up to white, dyed it several shades of red, and then gave it a moisturizing treatment? It's clearly been done either at a salon or, if at her home, by someone she knows with professional experience.

 

[Palla Strozzi]

I think he's made the right decision - Twitter; archive - dropping the claim for personal damages and just asking for a public statement and a donation. I don't think he should let her bully him, but I'm also relieved as I don't think the original claim was the best idea.

 

[Legal Gengar]

I'm sure one of the forum legal scholars will be along in a minute, but this doesn't give off 'likely to succeed' vibes. Defamation/libel is tricky to prove. And the remedy - a court ordering someone to unlock their Twitter and post a soz letter? Gib five grand? What for?

From what I can see
point one (is he/isn't he a lawyer) is straightforwardly true or not. Also, 5 (did he dox her or not?); that can be proved one way or the other. But equally, there has to be evidence of harm - scaly skin, crying, loss of income and work, etc.
The others come over as matters of opinion and not specific enough - there is a 'reasonable opinion' defence. It may even be called that. Like I don't think him ringing her at home amounted to harassment, but it wouldn't be an unreasonable opinion that it did. Equally, I think this is definitely about more than 'I just want my money back' now and LG has said so all over the internet, so a reasonable person might well see motives of 'take down the grifter' rather than 'get refund'.

I wonder if you can win by default. Say she shoves the letter of claim under a pile of designer lipsticks and forgets about it.

You can't win by default on defamation - you still have to meet the statutory tests. I took legal advice before writing the letter and they said I had an arguable case. Not necessarily the strongest case, but an arguable one. The remedy by way of apology is actually a very common one and one endorsed by law in the Defamation Act 1996, termed an offer to make amends:

Offer to make amends.

(1) A person who has published a statement alleged to be defamatory of another may offer to make amends under this section.

(2) The offer may be in relation to the statement generally or in relation to a specific defamatory meaning which the person making the offer accepts that the statement conveys (“a qualified offer”).

(3) An offer to make amends—

(a) must be in writing,

(b) must be expressed to be an offer to make amends under section 2 of the Defamation Act 1996, and

(c) must state whether it is a qualified offer and, if so, set out the defamatory meaning in relation to which it is made.

(4) An offer to make amends under this section is an offer—

(a) to make a suitable correction of the statement complained of and a sufficient apology to the aggrieved party,

(b) to publish the correction and apology in a manner that is reasonable and practicable in the circumstances, and

(c) to pay to the aggrieved party such compensation (if any), and such costs, as may be agreed or determined to be payable.

The fact that the offer is accompanied by an offer to take specific steps does not affect the fact that an offer to make amends under this section is an offer to do all the things mentioned in paragraphs (a) to (c).

(5) An offer to make amends under this section may not be made by a person after serving a defence in defamation proceedings brought against him by the aggrieved party in respect of the publication in question.

(6) An offer to make amends under this section may be withdrawn before it is accepted; and a renewal of an offer which has been withdrawn shall be treated as a new offer.]

I think he's made the right decision - Twitter; archive - dropping the claim for personal damages and just asking for a public statement and a donation. I don't think he should let her bully him, but I'm also relieved as I don't think the original claim was the best idea.

Ver archivo adjunto 5174493

Yeah, I'm too tired/worn out to carry on tbh - I'm going to settle everything and move on. I've emailed her my (brand new) bank details so she can pay me in full, I've asked for a public apology and a donation to settle the defamation because that's all I actually care about. I don't care about the money, I just want her to admit she was wrong and say sorry to me.

Is Gengar the first cow-adjacent person to join the farms without then cowing out themselves?

Edit: Christ, that fucking hair dye post! She expects us to believe she bleached her hair all the way up to white, dyed it several shades of red, and then gave it a moisturizing treatment? It's clearly been done either at a salon or, if at her home, by someone she knows with professional experience.

What does cowing out mean?

 

[Dr. Butt]

What does cowing out mean?

I used it to mean "turning into a cow", but I don't think it's some established term or anything. Just some phrasing from my own idiot brain.

 

[Geranium]

this doesn't give off 'likely to succeed' vibes. Defamation/libel is tricky to prove.

In Britain, the burden is on the defendant to prove they didn't libel the claimant. It's the main reason why our libel law is considered harsh.

The standard for whether a statement is defamatory is "serious harm to […] reputation" . From s1 (1) of the Defamation Act 2013:

A statement is not defamatory unless its publication has caused or is likely to cause serious harm to the reputation of the claimant.

Ultimately I think Jack's tweet has not caused substantial harm to Gengar's (real world) reputation, and is not likely to. It helps Jack that she removed the offending post very quickly.