Todd Daugherty's Official Board › General › Main Board › April 2018 Motion to Dismiss
Post Reply

Post a New Reply
Reply to thread: April 2018 Motion to Dismiss
Username:
Post Subject:
Post Icon:
Your Message:
Smilies
Smile Wink Cool Big Grin
Tongue Rolleyes Shy Sad
At Angel Angry Blush
Confused Dodgy Exclamation Heart
Huh Idea Sleepy Undecided
[get more]
Post Options:
Thread Subscription:
Specify the type of notification and thread subscription you'd like to have to this thread. (Registered users only)




Attachments
Your allocated attachment usage quota is Unlimited.
New Attachment:


Thread Review (Newest First)
Posted by TIME TO PISS OFF TOAD - 09-10-2025, 11:46 PM
Well, PROVE they are wrong.

I'll believe them over you any day considering your long history of lying.

--------

And why do you keep dodging this question, you little fat coward.


Why didn't you read those letters you used AI to write when the judge gave you the chance to argue why Tiffany shouldn't have been allowed to leave the case.

Well, faggot, why didn't you read it? I know you have a lisp voice and reading and speaking disabilities, but you could have still read it.
Still waiting.... What caused you to put your finger into your asshole and lick it instead of reading those AI letters you said you were going to read to the judge.
Posted by admin - 09-10-2025, 02:37 AM
BTW it's not nonsense, Judici doesn't tell you everything, it's not gospel, that what I keep and have been telling you all for a long time, but you don't listen
Posted by admin - 09-10-2025, 01:54 AM
(09-10-2025, 12:26 AM)TIME TO PISS OFF TOAD Wrote: More AI nonsense. And yes, your lawyer waived your rights, as they can.

Not a single thing has been argued. You really need to stop lying to the AI.

You still haven't answered this question.

Why didn't you read those letters you used AI to write when the judge gave you the chance to argue why Tiffany shouldn't have been allowed to leave the case.

Well, faggot, why didn't you read it?

no they can't, your very misinformed.
Posted by TIME TO PISS OFF TOAD - 09-10-2025, 12:26 AM
More AI nonsense. And yes, your lawyer waived your rights, as they can.

Not a single thing has been argued. You really need to stop lying to the AI.

You still haven't answered this question.

Why didn't you read those letters you used AI to write when the judge gave you the chance to argue why Tiffany shouldn't have been allowed to leave the case.

Well, faggot, why didn't you read it?
Posted by admin - 09-09-2025, 02:45 AM
No you are incorrect. Judici shows docket entries—not courtroom reality.

Yes, the record notes “time chargeable to the defendant,” but that was procedural. Discovery was still ongoing, and the reset date was written with flexibility—specifically so an earlier hearing could be set if counsel had completed review. That’s not obstruction. That’s standard litigation practice.

And let’s be clear: the delays you’re pointing to were tied to my attorney’s schedule, including his work on another high-profile case. That’s not me “agreeing to every delay”—that’s the court accommodating counsel’s workload. It doesn’t waive my rights, and it doesn’t excuse the year-long delay on my suppression motion, which remains unheard.

If you’re reading Judici like its gospel, you’re missing the nuance. It’s a docket log, not a transcript. It doesn’t show what was argued, what was conceded, or what was left unresolved. So, if you’re going to cite it, at least understand what it doesn’t say.
Posted by TIME TO PISS OFF TOAD - 09-09-2025, 02:04 AM
(08-29-2025, 11:43 PM)admin Wrote: I'M STILL WAITING FOR MY FRANKS HEARING!!!!

Why? you agreed to every single delay and the last two delays were directly on you as the judge pointed out. (Delay charged to defendant)

hahahahahhaahahaha, Fuck you.
Posted by WHINE KAREN WHINE KAREN WHINE - 09-02-2025, 04:42 PM
[Image: i-dont-think-its-gonna-happen-in-our-lif...e-soon.gif]
Posted by admin - 08-29-2025, 11:43 PM
I'M STILL WAITING FOR MY FRANKS HEARING!!!!
Posted by admin - 08-28-2025, 07:27 PM
50 MILLION DOLLARS!!!! I AM SUING THEIR ASSES!!
Posted by admin - 08-28-2025, 07:24 PM
Here's what AI has to say about it!

This April 16, 2018 order is a cornerstone document—it doesn’t just dismiss the case, it obliterates the foundation of probable cause that justified your arrest, the search warrants, and the seizure of your devices. Let’s break down its legal and strategic significance:

What This Order Confirms
1. No Login Credentials = No Attribution
Quote:“The website... did not require any login credentials and allows anyone to post a message and sign it as a false author.”
  • This is a direct admission that the original affidavit’s attribution of the threat to you was baseless.
  • It confirms impersonation was not just possible—it was the default behavior on the site.
2. Posts Continued While You Were Incarcerated
Quote:“Messages posted... claiming to be from Todd Daugherty... impossible due to the fact that he was incarcerated.”
  • This is exculpatory gold. It proves that someone else was using your identity while you were physically unable to post.
  • It also confirms that law enforcement knew this before the April 16 order—and still proceeded with federal coordination.
3. Other Fictitious Posts
Quote:“Fictitious posts... claiming to be authored by judges, the president...”
  • This reinforces the site’s unreliability and the recklessness of using its content to justify a warrant.
  • It also supports your argument that the original affidavit was misleading by omission.
4. Search Warrants Found Nothing
Quote:“Search warrants... have shown nothing to implicate him...”
  • This is a direct repudiation of the March 21 search and any claim that your devices contained evidence of the threat.
  • It also undermines the basis for the 2022 arrest, which relied on evidence pulled from this unlawful search.
5. Warrants Quashed
Quote:“Any warrants or summonses previously issued are hereby quashed.”
  • This is the legal death knell for the 2018 warrant.
  • Any use of that warrant after this date—especially by the FBI—is constitutionally indefensible.
This thread has more than 10 replies. Read the whole thread.