Vic Mignogna

[Cursed Lemon]

So according to Rekieta then, nothing is happening on Monday.

[AgitoZ]

Except there is literally no proof this is what occurred. The con chair denies it. Many cons uninvited Vic not just Kameha Con

And she didn’t make her own competing event. She is signing at another con. And Kameha Con advertised it.

Also she left autographs with Chris Sabat for anyone who can’t get to where she is.

For all I know the ones who threatened was Vic’s lawyer and Kameha didn’t want to get Sued.

There is no proof either way!

The con chair did not deny it. The Kamehacon twitter account put out a statement that no voice actors had interfered. This is contradicted by other events that have happened but that's neither here nor there.

It also contradicts Rekieta's information. Which is the main topic of this current exchange. Other cons are irrelevant as Rekieta did not bring up other cons nor have I.

Under the contract she agreed to, it's a competing event. Kamehacon running the path of least resistance does not invalidate this.

If Kamehacon was threatened of being sued or some other blackmail why wouldn't they bring this up or contact the proper authorities? Is it not more likely that somebody let's say Mignogna's lawyer reminded them to honor Mignogna's contract?

There is no Stunt. The only stunt is the Con uninviting Vic after the controversy than reinviting him 3 weeks later when ppl already put money into the con thinking he wasn’t coming and couldn’t change their travel plans.

This further proved Vic is a creep and doesn’t care that he makes people uncomfortable or causes controversy. I mean he could have done what Monica did and signed somewhere else.

I don’t blame Monica or anyone for leaving. And a lot of ppl announced they weren’t attending before Monica did. Why is everything always on Monica? I
Wouldn’t want to attend a Con with Vic in attendance either.

Rekieta alleges that people had put pressure on Kamehacon to uninvite Mignogna. After nothing had come from these people like some kind of arrest or proof as to the allegations to Mignogna, Kamehacon looked into reinviting Mignogna. Rekieta further alleges that Rial and Sabat had been hounding the con head into not doing it and threatening things like not showing up at the convention. All this info came out days before Kamehacon had said anything further about Mignogna beyond disinviting him.

If the allegations against Mignogna are untrue then Rial is a saboteur by trying to interfere with another person. If he's innocent like he and his counsel claims, why shouldn't he be allowed to go to a convention he already signed a contract to appear at?

Maybe 2 or 3 voice actors at most announced cancellations before Rial did. This all happened mere hours apart mind you, which is totally not suspicious at all.

And it's important that Rial did it because that's who Rekieta claimed was interfering with Mignogna appearing.

ANN usually takes longer to publish things because it has to be looked over etc. It just can’t go live right away. So no he didn’t get a contract before ANN.

Given how edited their initial hit piece on Mignogna is, it seems like they don't do a great job combing over their articles. And in the coming weeks it might be that ANN is REALLY bad at combing over their articles. But that's a topic for a later time.

It's ultimately irrelevant as Rekieta had the "scoop" before ANN did which was my point. And ANN only further supported his claim.

And you are being dense. This is not about watching conservative vs liberal media. Your source is literally a friend of Vic, ran a go fund me on his behalf and is doing everything to help his friend Vic. So yeah he is not trustworthy source.

You continue to bring up irrelevant things. I'm not talking about conservative or liberal media. The topic of conversation has been: I claim that Rekieta has proven himself to have reliable info in relation to this stuff. You claim he is not and untrustworthy because he is biased and your further clarify because they are friends. None of this particularly invalidates everything that seems to corroborate his info.

It seems this conversation is going nowhere so I think we can leave it at that.

[Cursed Lemon]

I feel like blackmail is an offense you could probably get disbarred for.

Look at this fucking drama queen trash pile of a human being.

https://youtu.be/uR3Gns71O5I

[Captain Awesome]

The sabotage was she tried to interfere with Vic's own contract and agreement to appear at the convention. At which point she then publicly cancelled, called the conventions' security into question, and made her own competing event. I don't particular if you don't see it as sabotage, it is and it also blatantly breaks many agreements found in her contract.

Jesus Christ this is all so fucking stupid.

I don't think you understand contract law. Even if he obtained a copy of her contractual agreement (he didn't, it was likely a form contract used across the board) it is utterly immaterial to anyone outside of that contract what clauses she did or didn't breach. It's a commercial agreement between two private parties and within that agreement there is potential recourse for both parties.

Now, in terms of the sabotage that you're throwing around, likely the only action he would probably have would be something like tortious interference with contractual relations, not knowing the facts in this case it could also be interference with prospective or anticipated contractual relations. This would need to be brought as a separate civil action and would have little to nothing to do with Monica's contract, and is instead focused on the negligent act interfering with the mutual conduct of the contracting parties. It's an economic tort though and most of the time they go down like a lead balloon (at least in my country) - especially in cases where that economic loss is to remote (i.e where you're having a signing and an indeterminate amount of people show up).

My point is, please stop.

I feel like blackmail is an offense you could probably get disbarred for.

Honestly I'd be interested to know if Rekita actually practices, I'm not familiar with practicing guidelines in the United States, but here there are provisions about bringing the profession into disrepute. You don't see lawyers doing things like this in my country - at least not for long.

[Cursed Lemon]

The con chair did not deny it. The Kamehacon twitter account put out a statement that no voice actors had interfered. This is contradicted by other events that have happened but that's neither here nor there.

It also contradicts Rekieta's information. Which is the main topic of this current exchange. Other cons are irrelevant as Rekieta did not bring up other cons nor have I.

Under the contract she agreed to, it's a competing event. Kamehacon running the path of least resistance does not invalidate this.

If Kamehacon was threatened of being sued or some other blackmail why wouldn't they bring this up or contact the proper authorities? Is it not more likely that somebody let's say Mignogna's lawyer reminded them to honor Mignogna's contract?

Is that more likely because that's what your biased ass wants to believe? Because some rando who's not involved with the case claimed that that's what happened?

Honestly I'd be interested to know if Rekita actually practices, I'm not familiar with practicing guidelines in the United States, but here there are provisions about bringing the profession into disrepute. You don't see lawyers doing things like this in my country - at least not for long.

I have unfortunate news.

America is literally the Jerry Springer Show.

[Fionordequester]

Honestly I'd be interested to know if Rekita actually practices, I'm not familiar with practicing guidelines in the United States, but here there are provisions about bringing the profession into disrepute. You don't see lawyers doing things like this in my country - at least not for long.

Ah, there's my lawyer friend!

Anyway, I think he had like, 6 cases in the last year? Someone mentioned something like that, I think. Now, could you tell me if AgitoZ's correct in saying that email leaks aren't illegal? Because even if Nick is telling the truth in regards to that, I have a hard time imagining how leaking Chris Sabat's private email wouldn't be a violation of SOME kind of law or another.

[SaiyaSith]

Honestly I'd be interested to know if Rekita actually practices, I'm not familiar with practicing guidelines in the United States, but here there are provisions about bringing the profession into disrepute. You don't see lawyers doing things like this in my country - at least not for long.

Ah, there's my lawyer friend!

Anyway, I think he had like, 6 cases in the last year? Someone mentioned something like that, I think. Now, could you tell me if AgitoZ's correct in saying that email leaks aren't illegal? Because even if Nick is telling the truth in regards to that, I have a hard time imagining how leaking Chris Sabat's private email wouldn't be a violation of SOME kind of law or another.

He didn't leak Chris Sabat's email or any email. He paraphrased an email from someone connected to the con so it didn't give away who the person was.

[Captain Awesome]

Anyway, I think he had like, 6 cases in the last year? Someone mentioned something like that, I think. Now, could you tell me if AgitoZ's correct in saying that email leaks aren't illegal? Because even if Nick is telling the truth in regards to that, I have a hard time imagining how leaking Chris Sabat's private email wouldn't be a violation of SOME kind of law or another.

Depends on the privacy laws in that jurisdiction. Couldn't tell you.

Any liability incurred would likely be directed at the person that initially published the information, either if some unlawful means were used to obtain it, or if there was some kind of breach of confidence involved.

[AgitoZ]

Jesus Christ this is all so fucking stupid.

I don't think you understand contract law. Even if he obtained a copy of her contractual agreement (he didn't, it was likely a form contract used across the board) it is utterly immaterial to anyone outside of that contract what clauses she did or didn't breach. It's a commercial agreement between two private parties and within that agreement there is potential recourse for both parties.

Now, in terms of the sabotage that you're throwing around, likely the only action he would probably have would be something like tortious interference with contractual relations, not knowing the facts in this case it could also be interference with prospective or anticipated contractual relations. This would need to be brought as a separate civil action and would have little to nothing to do with Monica's contract, and is instead focused on the negligent act interfering with the mutual conduct of the contracting parties. It's an economic tort though and most of the time they go down like a lead balloon (at least in my country) - especially in cases where that economic loss is to remote (i.e where you're having a signing and an indeterminate amount of people show up).

My point is, please stop.

I feel like blackmail is an offense you could probably get disbarred for.

Honestly I'd be interested to know if Rekita actually practices, I'm not familiar with practicing guidelines in the United States, but here there are provisions about bringing the profession into disrepute. You don't see lawyers doing things like this in my country - at least not for long.

You're telling me to stop and you're not even familiar with American law or that Rekieta is a lawyer? This is just sad.

But you did actually cover a bit of what Rekieta actually got to. You misinterpreting my summaries as if I'm proclaming it is what will happen is quite humorous. Notice I refer to what Rekieta says as allegations. Until actual papers start moving I don't take any of this info as definitive and it can all be actively contradicted by new further info. No one relating to Kamehacon is looking to hold anyone accountable, at most events surrounding it will just be as used as part of evidence for the supposed civil conspiracy.

Funnily enough, Rekieta is looking to do a stream relating to Australian law and looking for an Australian lawyer to provide input. You should e-mail him about it. Take him down a peg.

[Captain Awesome]

You're telling me to stop and you're not even familiar with American law or that Rekieta is a lawyer? This is just sad.

Well that lack of familiarity around Rekieta is by choice, and you're right about my limited knowledge around many areas of US law but if your posts are any thing to go by you know even less than I do.

Funnily enough, Rekieta is looking to do a stream relating to Australian law and looking for an Australian lawyer to provide input. You should e-mail him about it. Take him down a peg.

Absolutely no interest. I already regret what limited involvement I've already had.

[Saiga]

The con chair did not deny it. The Kamehacon twitter account put out a statement that no voice actors had interfered. This is contradicted by other events that have happened but that's neither here nor there.

It also contradicts Rekieta's information. Which is the main topic of this current exchange. Other cons are irrelevant as Rekieta did not bring up other cons nor have I.

Under the contract she agreed to, it's a competing event. Kamehacon running the path of least resistance does not invalidate this.

If Kamehacon was threatened of being sued or some other blackmail why wouldn't they bring this up or contact the proper authorities? Is it not more likely that somebody let's say Mignogna's lawyer reminded them to honor Mignogna's contract?

I'd asked before how Rial interfered and you hadn't responded. But from this it sounds like you're claiming she interfered without any proof?

In what way did she interfere and breach her contract and what proof is there of this?

You've been taking jabs at other posters for not being level-headed in their responses or knowing what they're talking about but this seems like a pretty big contradiction to me.

[Kinokima]

The con chair did not deny it. The Kamehacon twitter account put out a statement that no voice actors had interfered. This is contradicted by other events that have happened but that's neither here nor there.

Except the Twitter account represents the con. So yes the con chair denied it.

It also contradicts Rekieta's information. Which is the main topic of this current exchange. Other cons are irrelevant as Rekieta did not bring up other cons nor have I.

No actually they aren’t irrelevant. Many cons who also had contracts with Vic also uninvited him. It wasn’t just Kameha Con.

Under the contract she agreed to, it's a competing event. Kamehacon running the path of least resistance does not invalidate this.

And she is apparently friends with the con chair. He probably knew she would not want to be around Vic and does not care.

If Kamehacon was threatened of being sued or some other blackmail why wouldn't they bring this up or contact the proper authorities? Is it not more likely that somebody let's say Mignogna's lawyer reminded them to honor Mignogna's contract?

I never said Blackmail . But yes a Lawyer pointing out a contract (which is basically just a formality and conventions are run on good faith) so Vic can worm his way back into the con and make a lot of people feel uncomfortable and unsafe is pretty shitty.

If Vic’s lawyer pointed out honoring a contract then they were basically saying it by not honoring it we could sue.

Rekieta alleges that people had put pressure on Kamehacon to uninvite Mignogna. After nothing had come from these people like some kind of arrest or proof as to the allegations to Mignogna, Kamehacon looked into reinviting Mignogna. Rekieta further alleges that Rial and Sabat had been hounding the con head into not doing it and threatening things like not showing up at the convention. All this info came out days before Kamehacon had said anything further about Mignogna beyond disinviting him.

If the allegations against Mignogna are untrue then Rial is a saboteur by trying to interfere with another person. If he's innocent like he and his counsel claims, why shouldn't he be allowed to go to a convention he already signed a contract to appear at?

You keep saying “if he is innocent”. He got univined from many cons for gross and inappropriate behavior at conventions for years. He doesn’t have to get arrested for a crime. And many different testimonies from many different women over a course of many years (because no these stories are not new) is proof.

He made a lot of women uncomfortable including women he worked with for years. Conventions should have stopped inviting him a long time ago. Sadly they didn’t. But now I see how a bunch of nerds reacted I guess I can kind of understand.

Maybe 2 or 3 voice actors at most announced cancellations before Rial did. This all happened mere hours apart mind you, which is totally not suspicious at all.

It’s not suspicious. People announced they weren’t coming after Vic was announced again. One event lead to another.

It's ultimately irrelevant as Rekieta had the "scoop" before ANN did which was my point. And ANN only further supported his claim.

No it doesn’t and you are really reaching. I remember he tried to make it seem like he was sharing someone’s contract but instead it was just a generic contract. So yeah again not a trustworthy source at all.

You continue to bring up irrelevant things. I'm not talking about conservative or liberal media. The topic of conversation has been: I claim that Rekieta has proven himself to have reliable info in relation to this stuff. You claim he is not and untrustworthy because he is biased and your further clarify because they are friends. None of this particularly invalidates everything that seems to corroborate his info.

And he doesn’t seem reliable at all to me because he presents the information he has in one sided and manipulative ways. So even if he has information it doesn’t mean I trust how he presents it or that he isn’t twisting the truth.

[AgitoZ]

Well that lack of familiarity around Rekieta is by choice, and you're right about my limited knowledge around many areas of US law but if your posts are any thing to go by you know even less than I do.

The only one who claimed to have deep knowledge of the law was you. I've tried to get others to look at Rekieta's videos himself where he explains far better than I do. You jumping to conclusions to try and be well I don't know what is again just sad.

Absolutely no interest. I already regret what limited involvement I've already had.

That's too bad.

I'd asked before how Rial interfered and you hadn't responded. But from this it sounds like you're claiming she interfered without any proof?

In what way did she interfere and breach her contract and what proof is there of this?

You've been taking jabs at other posters for not being level-headed in their responses or knowing what they're talking about but this seems like a pretty big contradiction to me.

You never quoted me and I'm not paying attention to every post on the thread. Pardon if I ignored you.

I've never "claimed" anything. Once again this all relates to info Rekieta has given that I bothered clarifying. These aren't my own assertions.

You are also confused and combining two assertions. One, that Rial tried to interfere with Mignogna's contract and appearance at the convention. The other is that Rial is in breach of her contract.

And I already gave a basic summary as to what's alleged as to how she took part in the first assertion. And I don't feel the need to further clarify or repeat myself.

For the second, you can go to ANN's article about the contracts used at Kamehacon which I've already quoted before in this thread about it where it states how she did so by cancelling her appearance and setting up another even nearby.

If you would like further info as to what Rial supposedly has done I invite you to go to Rekieta's own videos where these happen.

[Saiga]

I'm looking for actual proof, and nothing has indicated that it can be found in Rekieta's videos.

There doesn't seem much grounds to defend Rekieta in these allegations and it seems unusual that you're apparently giving him so much benefit of the doubt despite his claims running contrary to officials actually involved in the convention.

I also wasn't conflating the interference and breach of contract. I was asking about both of those.

I've looked for the Kameha con contract but could not find a contract reproduced in full. However, from my knowledge of contract law I would expect a clause that allows both parties to terminated the contract if they agree to do so.

If you're referring to section 4.4 quoted by ANN in their excerpt here:

Section 4.4 stipulates that guests may not cancel in order to attend another autograph event unless contractually obligated by a studio to do so.

This still does not mean Rial has breached. She cancelled due to concerns about personal safety and offered to sign at a separate event. That may be pedantic but it's still a reason that Kameha con can choose to accept as not being in breach of her contract.

Further, if her and Kameha con agreed to terminate her contract this clause would no longer apply anyway.

Given that Kameha con have shown their support in either case I'm not even sure how this allegation is supposed to be relevant to this situation anyway.

[Bryesque]

Podunk Lionel Hutz is a propagandist, plain and simple. Stop looking to him as a valid source of information - he's financially connected to Mignogna as a fundraiser, he's tied himself to this "controversy" for clicks/views and building his own personal revenue and brand, and as such he's motivated to build a narrative that benefits him and his interests. Nothing he says can be taken as unbiased or truthful.

[AgitoZ]

I'm looking for actual proof, and nothing has indicated that it can be found in Rekieta's videos.

There doesn't seem much grounds to defend Rekieta in these allegations and it seems unusual that you're apparently giving him so much benefit of the doubt despite his claims running contrary to officials actually involved in the convention.

I also wasn't conflating the interference and breach of contract. I was asking about both of those.

I've looked for the Kameha con contract but could not find a contract reproduced in full. However, from my knowledge of contract law I would expect a clause that allows both parties to terminated the contract if they agree to do so.

If you're referring to section 4.4 quoted by ANN in their excerpt here:

Section 4.4 stipulates that guests may not cancel in order to attend another autograph event unless contractually obligated by a studio to do so.

This still does not mean Rial has breached. She cancelled due to concerns about personal safety and offered to sign at a separate event. That may be pedantic but it's still a reason that Kameha con can choose to accept as not being in breach of her contract.

Further, if her and Kameha con agreed to terminate her contract this clause would no longer apply anyway.

Given that Kameha con have shown their support in either case I'm not even sure how this allegation is supposed to be relevant to this situation anyway.

Rekieta literally went over the whole contract. If you ignore Rekieta and don't trust his info of course you're never gonna find the info you need.

Once again, it's a statement on Twitter PR account. The same one that contradicted itself when they reinvited Vic. I'm not sure why you give it so much weight for some things and then none at all. By your logic, Kamehacon officials said that they had plenty of security for the convention which should have alleviated Rial's reason for no showing.

I agree it's pedantic. I've already mentioned how Kamehacon seems disinterested in enforcing contracts and choosing the path of least resistance. Just because Kamehacon is choosing not to do anything about it doesn't somehow negate Rial's actions. If I run over the speed limit but a cop gives me a break, that doesn't mean I wasn't going over the speed limit.

I've never brought it up to try and make it seem as if I'm making some big case against Rial or #KickVic people. As I've told multiple members, it was brought up as to why I believe Rekieta can be good source of info.

[Saiga]

Rekieta literally went over the whole contract. If you ignore Rekieta and don't trust his info of course you're never gonna find the info you need.

Has Rekieta actually produced the contract, or only said what was in it? Because it would only be trustworthy with the actual, physical contract. Otherwise I can only use what was provided by ANN (which still isn't perfect, since it doesn't provide the contract itself).

Once again, it's a statement on Twitter PR account. The same one that contradicted itself when they reinvited Vic. I'm not sure why you give it so much weight for some things and then none at all.

I'm not seeing where I'm not giving them any weight? Also, them not inviting Vic does not contradict the idea that Rial did not interfere, at all. It does mean that there is likely more to this story than we are aware, but I still don't see that as a reason to trust Rekieta who is completely contradicting what they have said so far.

By your logic, Kamehacon officials said that they had plenty of security for the convention which should have alleviated Rial's reason for no showing.

That is a weak argument. Kamehacon can believe that they have sufficient security, but that isn't something that can be demonstrably proven.

I agree it's pedantic. I've already mentioned how Kamehacon seems disinterested in enforcing contracts and choosing the path of least resistance. Just because Kamehacon is choosing not to do anything about it doesn't somehow negate Rial's actions.

Calling it 'choosing the path of least resistance' is pretty loaded wording that would imply Kameha con was motivated by trying to avoid Her actions don't mean squat if they were agreed upon by all parties.

If I run over the speed limit but a cop gives me a break, that doesn't mean I wasn't going over the speed limit.

That is a horrible example, because in that situation you have broken the speeding laws instead of agreement between you and the police officer. Further, you seem certain that Rial breached her contract without any prior agreement with Kameha con, which I'm not seeing evidence of.

There is a big difference between 'Rial cancelled and Kameha con chose not to pursue, then supported her' and 'Rial cancelled with Kameha con's support'. You seem only to be looking at this situation through the lens of the former possibility.

As for Rekieta being a good source of info, this just doesn't seem very convincing. Not if the only way to obtain the info is to watch his videos which come with his own interpretations and misleading statements.

[AgitoZ]

SNIP

You can believe him or not. At this point I don't particularly care to continue.

Spoiler:

[Bryesque]

And what contract is that? I recall seeing acknowledgement from his own fanboys that the contract he streamed a week or two back wasn't even a Kamehacon contract - it was a boilerplate convention contract from somewhere else entirely. Didn't he strongly imply it was a relevant contract, in order to get maximum clicks on his video, then walked it back with "I never said it was a Kamehacon contract" or something like that afterward?

Besides which, celebrity guests very often have their own contracts, or their own terms written into the con's contract, that differ from whatever "form" version might exist. So unless the Mini-Mall Attorney has a copy of Monica Rial's signed Kamehacon contract, he has literally no relevant "evidence" whatsoever.

(Also... dude appears visibly drunk in that screenshot. Choose your "experts" wisely.)

[Fionordequester]

And what contract is that? I recall seeing acknowledgement from his own fanboys that the contract he streamed a week or two back wasn't even a Kamehacon contract - it was a boilerplate convention contract from somewhere else entirely. Didn't he strongly imply it was a relevant contract, in order to get maximum clicks on his video, then walked it back with "I never said it was a Kamehacon contract" or something like that afterward.

That's what he told me, when I talked to him on Twitter. That I was wrong to accuse him of blackmail, because whatever contract he had didn't have anything to do with what was happening; rather someone just accused him of not knowing anything about law, and he wanted to prove them wrong. He then claimed his quote got taken out of context.