"A friend" emailing a bunch of stuff which Tiffany will have to disclose to the judge

[WHINE BABY MAN WHINE]

Stuff like this.. (and several dozen more, including your threat to kill people in the courthouse and burn it down) The judge will read it in court, and "you're have a chance to explain yourself". My "friend" is emailing her now. And she'll have to disclose it all.

I hope you spend the summer in that unair-conditioned jail while it takes a few months for new council to get up to speed on your case.

[admin]

including your threat to kill people in the courthouse and burn it down

I never said such things. The image you posted I did because virtual child porn is legal

[admin]

...and your talking ex parte well your and friend are doing it. you are interfering with a court case you have nothing to do with. NOW I can ask to have the whole thing thrown out, thanks

[admin]

From an AI standpoint,

Let’s unpack the dangers here:

1. False attribution of threats: If you never made those statements—and they’re being anonymously or falsely linked to you—this is classic reputational sabotage. Judges are human; planting these statements is a backdoor way to erode your credibility before you’ve even had a hearing.

2. “My friend is emailing her now”: That line alone implies improper ex parte communication with the court or prosecutor. That’s wildly unethical—and in some jurisdictions, potentially criminal if it’s done with intent to sway proceedings.

3. Weaponized delay: The part about “hope you spend summer in jail” is telling. They’re not even pretending this is about justice. It’s about malice and using procedural chaos as punishment.

[WHINE BABY MAN WHINE]

1. Yes, you did threaten to kill people and burn down the courthouse, and we have it archived. In 2024 in fact. My only mistake was not notifying the FBI about it, but I'm not a snitch.

2. Third parties aren't subject to ex-parte communications. That's up to the parties at hand. You still don't know what it means. Remember, you're the one who posted her email address losing your lawyer/client by doing that and releasing documents.

3. You're right. We aren't pretending this is about court justice. I'm allowed to say that under the first amendment.

The remedy to give you a fair trial is to revoke your bond, cit you Contempt of Court, giving you a evaluation in a mental hospital because you can't aid in your defense and are obstructing it on purpose. Since you have no employment, no current education, and no dependents, there is no burden to you by going back to jail so you can't sabotage your case any further nor do you have any need for the internet.

I still can't wait for you to discuss "dick sucking" to the judge on Tuesday.

My friend emailed her. She might have not have to share it with you but she does have to share it with the court and with the prosecution.

Anyhow, STAGE ONE and STAGE TWO are complete.... STAGE THREE IS NEXT and STAGE FOUR which is the FINAL STRIKE.

[admin]

1. Yes, you did threaten to kill people and burn down the courthouse, and we have it archived. In 2024 in fact. My only mistake was not notifying the FBI about it, but I'm not a snitch.

prove it. you are full of shit.

2. Third parties aren't subject to ex-parte communications. That's up to the parties at hand. You still don't know what it means. Remember, you're the one who posted her email address losing your lawyer/client by doing that and releasing documents.

What you're doing is interfering with a court case, which will allow me to have the whole thing tossed. Lawyer/Client privilege only applies to the lawyer, not me.  

3. You're right. We aren't pretending this is about court justice. I'm allowed to say that under the first amendment.

You’re absolutely allowed to speak freely—but speech that’s weaponized to interfere with someone’s legal case isn’t protected. The First Amendment doesn’t give anyone a pass to harass, defame, or inject falsehoods into a criminal proceeding. If you’re openly admitting this isn’t about justice, then I appreciate the honesty—because that kind of statement says more about your intentions than anything I need to respond with.

This is still a court of law, not a message board. And that’s where I’m focused.

The remedy to give you a fair trial is to revoke your bond, cit you Contempt of Court, giving you a evaluation in a mental hospital because you can't aid in your defense and are obstructing it on purpose. Since you have no employment, no current education, and no dependents, there is no burden to you by going back to jail so you can't sabotage your case any further nor do you have any need for the internet.

What you’re suggesting isn’t about justice—it’s about punishment without due process.


Contempt citations, mental health evaluations, and bail revocations aren’t tools for retaliation—they’re legal remedies that require evidence, hearings, and constitutional safeguards. You don’t get to decide someone’s capacity to aid in their defense just because you disagree with how they’re defending themselves. That’s for a court—not a message board.

And let’s be clear: a person’s worth isn’t measured by their job title, enrollment status, or whether they have dependents. Freedom isn’t a privilege reserved for the employed or conventionally productive. It’s a right—especially before conviction.

You can have your opinions. But advocating that someone be locked up and silenced because you dislike their defense strategy? That’s not advocacy. That’s authoritarianism, cloaked in internet theatrics.

I still can't wait for you to discuss "dick sucking" to the judge on Tuesday.

My friend emailed her. She might have not have to share it with you but she does have to share it with the court and with the prosecution.

I would like to see evidence of that, because they only thing I've seen is a comment on Kiwifarm from Dirty harry. I have yet to see the actual post and since I haven't seen it it, then it's not real.

Anyhow, STAGE ONE and STAGE TWO are complete.... STAGE THREE IS NEXT and STAGE FOUR which is the FINAL STRIKE.

The final stage is me having this whole thing tossed because of your interference with a court case.

[Yosemite Sam]

[quote pid="1457" dateline="1750625288"]
Adnim

The final stage is me having this whole thing tossed because of your interference with a court case.
[/quote]

Never happened as you didn't mention it to the judge

---

[admin]

BTW filing a motion to withdraw a week before a Frank's hearing isn't only unethical it's scummy of her.

[Foghorn Leghorn]

BTW filing a motion to withdraw a week before a Frank's hearing isn't only unethical it's scummy of her.

Too bad you are a coward and will do nothing about it.

And if you think it's scummy, why aren't you appealing the decision or do what you promised and "censure" her???

THE JUDGE BLAMED YOU for what happened, not her.  GET OVER IT FATTY