BREAKING NEWS: Karl Jobst is suing Billy Mitchell for defamation

by ersatz_cats

Oh, we are back. We are soooooooooo back. You cannot believe how back we are. No people in the documented history of back have ever been as back as we are, right here, right now.

Yes, it is 100% true. Karl Jobst has filed a brand new lawsuit against “Video Game Fraud of the Century” Billy Mitchell, in U.S. federal court in Florida. This is all-time serious shit. Billy’s had lots of fun waging lawfare against a whole range of innocent people, including Jace Hall and Twin Galaxies, his old ally David Race, the moderation team at Donkey Kong Forum, the late YouTuber Apollo Legend, and of course Karl himself. Among them, Karl was the one to make key mistakes allowing Billy to see the case through trial for a victory – a victory Billy and his son have been incessantly gloating over ever since. But as we’re about to see, Team Billy fucked around a bit too much, and as a result, they are about to find the fuck out.

The filing can be downloaded via PACER in two parts – one for the complaint, the other for the lengthy gallery of exhibits. Better yet, since I acquired it, you can just snag it here:

https://perfectpacman.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Legal-Karl-vs-Billy-2026-04-08-Karl-Complaint.pdf

https://perfectpacman.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Legal-Karl-vs-Billy-2026-04-08-Karl-Exhibits.pdf

Today, we’ll review all the relevant material, including some evidence new to the public. Note that the court’s greyscale scan of the paperwork is total ass, so where able I’ll substitute fresh screenshots of my own availing. Diverging from the flow of the filing, we’re going to start with an overview of the alleged counts, then look at the evidence supporting those counts, then circle back and assess each count’s viability. Lastly, we’ll discuss what I believe are Karl’s chances of winning this case, while taking a look at the one and only thing I don’t like about this filing.

I intend to spell out my usual thorough detail below, for those who want it. But there’s so much to say about this single legal filing, it was impossible to keep this one brief. (The pun is always intended.) Since this outstanding news deserves a spotlight brighter than many Internet attention spans, I’ve decided to provide a TL;DR in the form of a parallel “skimmer’s edition”, showing off just the key evidence and quick summaries of the legal claims. You can find that here:

https://perfectpacman.com/2026/04/09/karl-is-suing-billy-skim/

Otherwise, grab all the popcorn you can find, and settle in for one epic ride. Oh, and as I’ve said on many occasions, and as I’ll repeat a few times today, I DO NOT SPEAK FOR KARL JOBST. All opinions and analyses are my own. Karl can speak for himself, although for obvious reasons he is unlikely to discuss this case at all for its duration.

ONE, TWO, THREE, COUNT!

Karl Jobst is alleging Billy Mitchell of seven torts against him. In plain English, this means Billy, allegedly, has wrongfully harmed Karl in seven distinct and legally identifiable ways. Spoiler: Some if not all of these allegations are well-founded far beyond the need to qualify them with words like “allegedly”, but for the purposes of strict litigation coverage, they are just allegations at this point.

The first five counts allege “defamation per se”. That “per se” bit is actually very important, but let’s table that for a second. You all know what defamation is – libel, slander, calumny. (Fun with thesauri!) In other words, Billy sed shi’ bout Karl dat wudn’t true. Worse, Billy said it many times, on multiple platforms, in ways that would make any attorney representing Billy reach for their heart medication.

Per Count I, Billy published statements claiming Karl had engaged in “serious illegal activity” during the course of his bankruptcy. The statements were false, and furthermore, Billy either knew they were false, or acted “with reckless disregard for the truth”.

Per Count II, Billy published statements claiming that Karl fraudulently obtained $200,000 through a GoFundMe campaign based on false premises. (This would be the GoFundMe Karl opened in his own defense.) Again, Billy’s statements to these ends were false, and Billy either knew they were false or didn’t care if they were.

Per Count III, Billy published statements claiming Karl misappropriated $50,000 from a GoFundMe he set up to support defendants in Billy’s other cases. (This would be the money used to support David Race in his lawsuit defense.) Once again, as the filing argues, Billy either knew his statements were false or didn’t care. Note that while Karl is wise to use boilerplate catch-all terminology about what Billy did or did not know, Billy definitely for sure knew this one was a lie. But we’ll get to that later.

Per Count IV, Billy published statements alleging that Karl had swindled $300,000 from Markus Persson, better known as “Notch”, as in that Notch, the Minecraft guy. Repeat after me: “These statements were false. Mitchell made these statements with knowledge of their falsity or with reckless disregard for the truth.”

As we’ll see, Count V is kind of an overture of Counts II-IV. Basically, using his other false claims as a basis, Billy has made statements generally to the effect that Karl defrauded over half a million dollars from his supporters. Since these statements were made in a standalone fashion, I guess that means it legally qualifies as a separate tort, which makes sense. Yet again, Billy either knew these claims were false or didn’t care.

Let’s pause there for now, and talk about “defamation per se”. What exactly does that term mean? I myself would be interested in hearing an actual attorney weigh in on Karl’s allegations in particular, but poking around Google does offer some general guidance:

Per se defamation statements are so bad they immediately subject a person or a company to hatred, distrust, ridicule, disgrace or contempt.

For example, let’s say a potential client was considering using Business A or Business B. Business B says to the potential client — in an effort to convince them to not use Business A but to use them instead — “Don’t use Business A, those guys have been charged with bribery and blackmail.”

That is per se defamation. In the context of this type of lawsuit, it’s per se defamation because it’s such an egregious statement that a court will presume that they harmed the plaintiff’s reputation.

So basically, it’s when you accuse someone of something so egregious, so reprehensible and offensive, so obviously damaging to their reputation, you can skip the part where you have to explain to the court or to the jury why such a claim was damaging in this specific instance. And the linked site does include “Accusing someone of a serious criminal offense” as an example of defamation per se. I don’t think you need me to explain why filing these claims in this way is advantageous to Karl. He doesn’t have to show financial losses, or have his close friends testify about how many speaking events they had to “cancel”. Karl just has to show that Billy made these outrageous claims, that the claims were false, and – since Karl is a public figure – Karl must also show that Billy acted with malice (hence all the language about Billy either knowing falsity or acting with reckless disregard).

Oh but wait! There are two more counts. Count VI involves “unauthorized appropriation of name or likeness”. In other words, Billy has been aggressively using Karl’s name and visage to sell hot sauce and other promotional items, such as those red joystick prints which have Karl portrayed as like a lobster clown thing:

I can already hear the frothing Karl haters and the deluded Billy butt-kissers latching onto this count in isolation. “Call the Waaahhhmbulance! Karl’s suing Billy just cuz Billy made fun of him!” These are the dumb fucks who think stanning the guy who pretends he’s the best at Donkey Kong makes them alphas. Again, I do not represent Karl in any way. But speaking strictly from a vantage of personal opinion, I think it’s safe to say: Karl isn’t suing Billy because of likeness rights. If he was, this would be higher than Count VI. Karl is suing Billy because of all the wild defamation and fully actionable slander Billy’s been indulging in. And then, once you start putting together a case, you look at all of the defendant’s other conduct, and you say “Hell, might as well throw that in there as well.” Plus, I would guess the evidence pertaining to Billy’s commercially-motivated mockery of Karl ties into the malice threshold for all the defamation.

Lastly, Count VII titled “Intentional infliction of emotional distress” seems to be in a similar vein:

I’m more than happy to discuss the facts of the Billy Mitchell saga – I am, after all, the expert on the topic. In this case, I’ll leave it to the legal commentators to opine on the relevance or viability of this seventh count. But for those who want to read too much into this passage as a window into Karl’s state of mind, I’ll say – again, strictly of my own accord – even when you’re pursuing “defamation per se” and don’t need to prove damages, judges and juries are still human. Obviously you’re not going to go to all this effort and then roll into court like “Nah bro, I’m doing great, shit hasn’t affected me at all.” Maybe the relentless mockery from Billy has affected Karl. Maybe it hasn’t. I eagerly await further testimony.

With all of that out of the way, let’s get to the thing Billy hates the most.

BILLY MITCHELL HATES EVIDENCE

Reading through this filing, my mind keeps calling back to a line from Karl’s “Final Lawsuit Update” video. Karl meant it as a throwaway line, illustrating why he shouldn’t let himself be provoked by any insane verbal sewage coming out of Billy Mitchell’s mouth. But man, does this line explain so much:

Billy is always going to say stupid shit.

I was never setting out to codify any “Billy Mitchell rules” a la Ashley Judd on Star Trek. If I was, I would’ve done so long ago. But if you were so inclined, you could call this the Third Law of Billy Mitchell, after “Billy Mitchell lies all the time about everything” and “Billy Mitchell hates evidence”. And heck, you could also throw in my old fave, “Billy Mitchell saying something does not make it any more likely to be true than if he had said nothing at all.” These are like jury instructions; sure, some of them overlap thematically, but each has a distinct point to be made. As you’re about to see, each of these four maxims are gonna log some miles today!

Let’s start with the evidence surrounding Count I. Did Karl engage in “serious illegal activity” during the bankruptcy process?

For our purposes, this begins with a tweet from Billy, linking a Reddit post with just the words “The plot thickens”:

When you follow that link, you can read the comments, but the post itself now reads “[deleted by user]”. However, with some finagling, you can bring up the original content on Wayback Machine. The title of the original post characterizes Karl’s actions as “a possible ‘creditor-defeating’ scheme”. Of course, as we’ve discussed here, and as Karl himself outlined in his video, none of that is true; Karl was describing strict bankruptcy procedure in his Discord. While Billy’s remark is generic, the replies from others (as seen in “Exhibit 3”) further characterize Karl’s actions as “illegal”, “bankruptcy fraud”, and “clear and obvious fraud”, indicating (as the filing argues) that Billy intended for his audience to infer criminality.

Okay, let’s be clear. Legally, this does belong on the list, but it’s not the strongest item. If this was the extent of Billy’s commentary, maybe he could pursue a “wink wink” defense in court. “Oh, gosh, golly, I wasn’t trying to impute Karl is a criminal! Not at all! I just thought the discourse around the community’s interpretation of Karl’s Discord comments was an interesting development! That’s all!” Sure, buddy. And maybe the jury would believe it.

However, Billy didn’t stop there.

This, which you can find in the main document, is “Exhibit 5”. (We have 42 more to go.) What exactly is this “serious illegal activity” Billy is accusing Karl of? I guess nobody’s allowed to know. Not even the bankruptcy trustees! And they’re the officials Billy should be reporting any legitimate concerns to.

What’s especially wild is that, less than a month prior to that very tweet, those same trustees had already issued a report to Billy (as one of Karl’s creditors), informing him that as part of their required investigations, they “have not identified any offence” by Karl during the bankruptcy:

UH-OH!!

You should really let the flavor of this one marinate a bit. It’s easy to gloss it over when we’re talking about bankruptcies and trustees, which I’m sure feels a bit abstract for most of us. Billy Mitchell is publicly accusing Karl Jobst of actual crimes. And the authority whose job it is to investigate those crimes is telling him basically “We have found no evidence of any such crimes”… and Billy is continuing to accuse Karl publicly anyway!!

Holy shit!!

Imagine if Billy accused Karl of some ordinary crime, like cattle rustling. He wouldn’t go to the actual police, of course, because there’s no evidence. Instead, he just goes around telling everyone Karl committed a crime. Karl has to be the one to go to the police and ask “You have any idea WTF cattle rustling this guy is talking about?” And the police call Billy in and tell him “We’ve investigated this. There’s no evidence of any crime. There’s no missing cattle. There is no basis for what you’re accusing him of.” And then Billy… continues going around accusing Karl anyway.

As the Third Law of Billy Mitchell states: Billy Mitchell is always going to say stupid shit.

Can you believe it gets worse? As exhibits, Karl attached various communications, including his pre-bankruptcy settlement offer to Billy and Billy’s rejection letter. These are included to demonstrate that Karl engaged in good faith, and did not seek bankruptcy except as a last resort when he was literally unable to pay the judgment debt, which is exactly how bankruptcy works. (If you haven’t seen Karl’s “Final lawsuit update”, he explains it all there.) More importantly, Karl continued directing the trustee’s attention to Billy’s public claims of wrongdoing, for which the trustee sought out clarification from Billy’s attorneys directly:

Finally, as Exhibit 11, Karl includes another email he received from the trustee earlier this year, clarifying that they’ve asked Billy’s solicitor multiple times by email and by phone for any evidence of this alleged wrongdoing, and still have received no response.

But you know what did elicit a response?

So Billy wouldn’t share any evidence of wrongdoing with the trustee (because he doesn’t have any evidence), but the moment Billy learns Karl sought clarification from the trustee, he or his son will jump straight to Twitter to mock Karl’s attempts to pursue official channels. Hey, here’s a free hint: Courts tend to like official channels. You know what courts don’t like? Openly fantasizing about lynching people from trees, using their real likeness and everything.

This is astonishing. For one thing, it’s a straight up admission that they received the trustee’s inquiry and chose to ignore it. So… thanks for that, morons.

But that’s not even half of how dumb this was.

Imagine the audible gasps in the courtroom when they see that tweet. I know, everyone reading this, we’re all among the terminally online. So we’re used to seeing outrageous shit on the Internet – although even this is a bit beyond the typical boundaries of what’s allowed on mainstream social media (hence why Twitter immediately yanked it). But you know who’s gonna be on the jury deciding this case? Not fuckin’ any of us.

That jury’s going to consist of grumpy retired Marines, little old church ladies, exhausted single moms, and weekend fishermen. And those nice church ladies are going to see this, and they’re going to look at Angry Mullet Man and say “How the H-E-double-hockey-sticks did you think you were going to take this to trial and win?”

I know, I’ve thought the same thing before, about Billy’s text messages joking about the death of Apollo Legend. Will Billy try to do the whole “Dark humor that I regret” thing again? Will it work a second time? Will he throw his son under the bus? “Nah man, he posted that. I would NEVER, EVER engage in such commentary.” Would that even work, since the Twitter account belongs to and presents as Billy Senior? Would implicating Junior have unintended consequences, including with discovery? Is it even possible to get eight Clueless Ken Barlows on this jury? Given Billy’s body of work to date, I’m seriously doubting this will even get that far.

Count II involves claims of monetary impropriety, but let’s set aside the dollar figures for a moment. As part of this new lawsuit, Karl is choosing to formally litigate the terms of his personal GoFundMe, which Billy and other haters characterized as misleading or fraudulent in the wake of Karl’s court loss in Brisbane. If you’ve seen Billy’s and Karl’s videos on the topic, you already know the story, but I’ll summarize again here. In short, Billy sent Karl multiple “concerns notices”, which are prerequisites for civil litigation in Australia. This was over dumb shit like an Angry Video Game Nerd meme that suggests Billy Mitchell cheats at video games, which Billy objectively does do. One of these threats included a full draft complaint, along with the assertion that Billy had instructed his solicitor to file if a settlement in the main lawsuit could not be reached at their scheduled mediation. Karl opened the GoFundMe on the basis of that explicit legal threat, which was never retracted. Karl even ran the text of this GFM by his own solicitor, who approved it as not making any false claims. The solicitors also rebuffed an inquiry from Billy’s camp, pointing out again that the GoFundMe claims were factual and that the additional legal threat from Billy still had not been withdrawn. If you felt disinclined to take Karl at his word on all this, he provides full documentation of this in the exhibits, which are now part of the court record.

Notably, Billy couldn’t seem to make up his own mind whether there was “one complaint” (as he had emphasized at NERG in 2023) or if there was indeed a second complaint that was sent to the attorneys but not formally filed (as he emphasized in his black background video in June 2025). But he was definitely sure Karl did something nefarious! Here’s Billy in his own words, at about 8:50:

Karl, I do not accept the fact that you generally woke up six months after the last correspondence, and also after your financial support ran out from Notch, and you suddenly felt the need to crowdfund for a potential second lawsuit. You obviously knew the second lawsuit was not coming, or at the very least, you were unsure if it ever was. You created a GoFundMe campaign with the knowledge and intent to fund the existing lawsuit on false premises. Period. End of paragraph.

lol Well, the scenario Billy described did not seem very general, so it’s safe to assume Billy meant to say “genuinely”. But that’s not important. We just encountered another wild admission! So you’re saying it’s possible Karl was “unsure” if the second lawsuit would ever be filed? Thanks, William! I mean, the documentation provided demonstrates resoundingly that Karl had every reason to expect a second lawsuit, but it’s helpful to hear confirmation direct from your own smacking lips. Strange though that you would then still insist, without a moment’s pause, that Karl started the GoFundMe on “false premises” and with “knowledge and intent”. I thought you just said you weren’t sure?

Dude can’t make up his mind if there was one complaint or two. Can’t decide if Karl did or didn’t know the second complaint would be filed. All he is sure is that Karl’s GoFundMe, which raised $200,000, all of which was used for exactly the purpose described, was somehow a scam, in some nebulous way he struggles to articulate. But he is absolutely certain of that conclusion! Karl do thing bad, period, end of paragraph.

Karl responded to that passage in his “Final Lawsuit Update” video. We know that the person running Billy’s Twitter account saw that video, because they promptly responded with the tweet from “Exhibit 14”:

Count that as another genius admission. Notice also how Billy/Junior made a point to tag Karl in the image. If this ever gets to trial, Billy had better have a solid rebuttal for the evidence laid out in Karl’s August 2025 video, because otherwise (as this lawsuit argues), repeating the claims after being made aware of their falsity demonstrates “reckless disregard for the truth”.

All of this is used as a basis to claim Karl scammed $200,000 from his audience. Whether you like Karl or not, whether you think he had a viable defamation defense or not, those funds were used for exactly the purpose described. Billy is allowed to think that purpose is stupid, but he’s lying if he tells you the money was not applied toward that stated use. In fact, Karl spent a whole lot more than that on his legal defense. (See “Exhibit 23”.) And yet in his black-background video, Billy sprinkles in language like “[Karl] stands to gain $200,000 from his audience”, insinuating that Karl stole the money and funded a giant bender or something. Billy doesn’t like that people crowdfund to the defense of those he sues. So he’s using the fact that one of his defendants lost as a basis for saying it was somehow a “scam” all along, which just so happens to discourage participation in any future fundraisers.

WE’LL DO IT LIVE

“Excuse me, mister ersatz. You may think Karl has a case, but I am possessed of a galaxy brain, and can immediately see a glaring flaw. Much of what you’ve laid out relies on a social media account which multiple people have access to. So Mr. Mitchell will simply claim these things were posted by someone else and do not represent him or his beliefs.”

I guess that would be Billy’s only defense at this point, wouldn’t it? I’ll skip the case law research for now, but I’ll surmise that not many people win court cases arguing “I’m not responsible for that social media account I’ve owned for over ten years, which I allow to continue using my name and likeness, and whose offending conduct I’ve allowed to persist for several months without intervention.” That’s already on thin ice to start. And remember, through his attorneys, Billy’s been made directly aware of some of these statements (such as “serious illegal activity”), and he has allowed them to stand on the account he owns. Even the hanging tweet wasn’t removed by Billy – it was taken down by Twitter themselves for violating “the X Rules”. (Yes, I still call it “Twitter”.)

Some of the material we’ve discussed implicates Billy even more directly than that. The trustee emailed Billy’s attorney, who communicates with Mr. Mullet directly. (Unlike in the California case, no attorney privilege for Junior was ever asserted in Australia.) And as a result of this direct communication, Billy’s account declares that Karl “complained about one of my tweets to the bankruptcy officer”. There’s clearly some level of collaboration going on, which can be better established through discovery. And then there’s the black-background video, where Billy makes some of these claims directly in his own voice. lmao Is he gonna try and claim the “That video was AI” defense?

It is true that in Brisbane, Billy Senior testified that his wife and son operate the social media accounts, and that Junior testified that he mainly does the Twitter stuff while Evelyn handles the Instagram. Probably why the Insta comes across as significantly less unhinged. And they may or may not stick to that exact story. Also, as I’ve discussed previously, much of the Twitter content does indeed have Junior’s fingerprints. But Billy clearly still publishes things himself at least some of the time, without Junior present. He also posts links to his live YouTube page when he streams himself playing Donkey Kong, including when he’s streaming alone:

Wait a second…

Did you say streaming!?

This lawsuit includes several quotes from various live streams by Billy. Rather than using reuploads of the streams themselves, these passages seem to be sourced by way of screenshots along with speech-to-text captions, although it’s hard to tell because of the dogshit quality of the scan. Over the years, I’ve shared many quotes plucked from Billy’s various live streams on Twitch and YouTube. But unless Billy keeps the streams up himself, I’m usually not able to link and provide the actual source because… well…

See the Second Law of Billy Mitchell. However, it occurred to me recently, I have this site now, with its own hosting. (Thank you all so much for helping fund this project for the next 10+ years!!) This platform doesn’t enable me to republish whole ass multi-hour streams, but I can upload small video clips, to be used for fair use commentary. I don’t need YouTube for this. And should some kind of DMCA claim come across my desk as site administrator, I’d be happy to tell the sender where to forward it.

I’m not going to list all the Billy streams I have preserved, because I think it would be funnier if the bad guys had to guess. But this filing cites four specific streams – conveniently, one from each of the months of August, October, November, and December of last year. From those, I’ve extracted eleven relevant clips, along with relevant chat commentary in the side panel. Apologies, they’re a bit on the quiet side – that’s because Billy’s streams run quiet, and then me recording them in OBS to capture chat makes them double-quiet. Whatever. You can view or download the clips here:

https://perfectpacman.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Stream-Billy-2025-08-26-Aint-seen-nothing-yet.mp4

https://perfectpacman.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Stream-Billy-2025-08-26-Didnt-acknowledge-that.mp4

https://perfectpacman.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Stream-Billy-2025-08-26-Half-a-million-dollars.mp4

https://perfectpacman.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Stream-Billy-2025-08-26-Misrepresented-the-lawsuits.mp4

https://perfectpacman.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Stream-Billy-2025-10-28-Half-a-million-fraudulently.mp4

https://perfectpacman.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Stream-Billy-2025-10-28-Owned-by-his-wife.mp4

https://perfectpacman.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Stream-Billy-2025-11-11-Piss-you-off.mp4

https://perfectpacman.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Stream-Billy-2025-12-03-Id-go-to-jail.mp4

https://perfectpacman.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Stream-Billy-2025-12-03-Like-somebody-evading-taxes.mp4

https://perfectpacman.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Stream-Billy-2025-12-03-Lying-to-the-trustee.mp4

https://perfectpacman.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Stream-Billy-2025-12-03-Too-many-YouTube-videos.mp4

Let’s start with some bits fleshing out what we’ve already discussed. In the August stream, a chatter asked Billy about the “misinterpretation” of the Brisbane lawsuit. Billy responded:

If I could pick on you just for a second… You don’t think your question should be: How do you feel about the fact… How do you feel about how [Karl] misrepresented the “lawsuits” with an “s” to take advantage of his audience? Now, some of them were taken advantage of because they were stupid. Some were taken advantage of just cuz they weren’t familiar with the situation and didn’t really care. But… No… I… I think that’s lousy. I think if I did that, I’d probably be in jail.

Oooh, a reference to criminality on the part of Karl. Okay. Now, you may hear that passage and think “At least Billy is once again confirming there were multiple lawsuits”, as Billy seemed to admit in his black-background video. But in another clip, Billy is adamant that that is not the case:

There were letters back and forth with the attorneys, and if I understand correctly, cuz unfortunately somebody clipped a portion of the video… clipped a portion of the video and sent it to me where [mocking voice] “Well, at least Billy finally acknowledged that there was a second concerns notice and a lawsuit.” No, I didn’t acknowledge that. Look at all the paperwork, not just what is cropped and shown to you on the screen. It’s all available for public consumption in the Australian courts. So no, once again, no I don’t “finally acknowledge that”. Dipshit.

So there was a second concerns notice / lawsuit, but there wasn’t. He uses the classic liar’s trick of “Well, you need to look at all the evidence,” when he doesn’t provide any of his own, and the evidence we’ve seen resoundingly demonstrates the claim he’s disputing. Like, do we really need to see more of the banter between the lawyers to understand that there was indeed a second draft complaint with instructions to file? Is a subsequent letter going to read “Nevermind, that didn’t count, and also it never happened in the first place”?

Also, I won’t call this a “lie”, because Billy may generally be ignorant on this point. (See what I did there?) But he describes the litigation like it’s an American lawsuit, where all the filings and such are “available for public consumption”. Hardly any of the Brisbane shit was public – not unless you hire an attorney and make a special request for certain documents. If it was public, I would’ve been republishing it here all along. And obviously internal attorney communications are never published except perhaps as exhibits, as some were in the TG California case.

Billy’s inferences of criminality on the part of Karl continued in the December stream. At one point, he reads a remark from a chatter named “dmcathis2012”, who I’m going to assume is literally fourteen years old. The remark read as follows:

Karl is lying to the trustee. He says his viewership decreased, so he’ll earn less. The trustee is actively disputing it.

This of course is total insanity. “He says his viewership decreased”? Bro, it’s a public metric. You can go to his channel and see that this is true. I don’t know what to say. And will he “earn less” with decreased viewership? I would assume so!

“The trustee is actively disputing it”?

Funny, when I read the exhibited communications from the trustee, all I see is “We are not aware of the ‘serious illegal activity’ referenced by Mr Mitchell”. They repeatedly ask Billy’s solicitor for any evidence of misconduct, and can’t get any response, as they continued to confirm earlier this calendar year (per Exhibit 11), well after that December stream. But Bozo the fucking Chat Clown here thinks he has all the inside juice.

You might say, that’s not Billy expressing that passage himself, that’s just him reading something from his chat. And that’s certainly what he would try to argue in court. The problem is… not only did Billy choose to read that comment in particular, he promptly followed it up with his monosyllabic seal of approval:

Yeah.

Billy didn’t contest or contradict the remark. Instead, he proceeded to tell a story about Karl’s Brisbane testimony that’s meant to affirm a narrative of deception on the part of Karl. And in the other December clips from that same stream, Billy refers to dmcathis2012 as “know[ing] their stuff”, and says their comments are “always good”.

In another clip from that stream, Billy infers criminality once again:

Just like dmcathis says, you know, he’s claiming that, you know, he’s not getting any money. Of course he’s claiming that. It’s like somebody evading taxes.

Look, I’m just diligently covering what’s in the filing. I’m not a lawyer, so I can’t speak to the legal viability of a defamation case based on a series of vague inferences of criminality. But don’t worry, we’ll get into some hardcore slander here in a moment.

Curiously, in another clip from that December stream, Billy shuts down his friend “ConcertCruizer” (the voice on the phone), when CC tries to suggest Karl improperly transferred assets to his wife. Billy interjected:

That isn’t what happened. You’ve been watching too many YouTube videos. That’s not what happened at all. If he did that, he’d go to jail.

And then Billy explains that Karl’s wife taking ownership of the house is standard under Australian bankruptcy procedure. Okay? Great! I’m not gonna complain if Billy retracts a previous lie. Except… It’s not really a “retraction”, is it? It’s more of a contradiction. He doesn’t say “I had this wrong previously”. And he doesn’t issue any sort of retraction on Twitter, the platform where he linked that lying Reddit post and where he accused Karl of “serious illegal activity before and during the bankruptcy process”. In fact, as I write this, both of those tweets are still live! And they each had way more views than this circlejerk livestream. So… I guess Billy doesn’t care if those were lies, and people continue believing them?

But here’s where we get to the real fireworks. In the August stream, one of Billy’s chatters suggested Karl scammed his viewers out of $200,000, referring to the GoFundMe Karl used to raise money for his own defense. That’s when Billy chose to drop one serious bar:

He actually scammed his viewers out of more than $500,000. So there, I’m telling you something that isn’t reported. More than a half a million dollars.

WHAAAAAAAAAAAATTTT!?!?!?

What does this mean? Half a million dollars?

And he says it again in the October stream. ConcertCruizer attributes a cheating claim to Karl, to which Billy replied:

He said that. Okay. He said that, so you believe him. The guy… The guy who took over half a million dollars fraudulently from his listeners. He said it, so you believe it. Tell me I’m wrong!

Literally every word of what Billy said there was wrong, but I’ll stay on point. In November, we finally got an explanation from Billy as to what he means when he says Karl scammed half a million dollars from his audience. You may want to put on the stupidity goggles for this:

Publicly, that’s publicly, he had $50,000 in one GoFundMe, 55 I think. And $200,000 in another GoFundMe. So publicly, it was $250,000 donated. Now, if you… Now, for the people who donated privately, that money wouldn’t be seen. Okay. He acknowledged that Notch gave him $300,000. So the $250,000 public dollars, okay, from the two different GoFundMes, and 300,000 is 550,000, okay, that he has acknowledged, like Notch, or was public. How much more private money there was, who knows? Okay. And let’s forget “550”. Let’s just say five-hundred. It’s an easier number. Okay. He deceptively took $500,000 from you, each one of you people that say “Oh, I learned about you through that.” Whether you gave him money… I don’t know what to say, I’m sorry that happened to you. Or… If you didn’t give him money… But again, think about it man. He was asking you to give money. That’s just unbelievable to me. And somehow, he wants to explain that it wasn’t his fault, or that you were too dumb to understand. That’s just crazy. If that doesn’t piss you off, I can’t help you. I can’t help you.

So Billy is summing together three sources of money:

– The fundraiser for Karl’s own benefit, which raised $200,000;

– The fundraiser for other defendants facing Billy Mitchell lawsuits, which raised $55,000;

– and $300,000 provided privately by Notch, to assist Karl in defending his lawsuit.

And Billy is claiming Karl “scammed” these given donors out of their money.

This is absolute, unmitigated insanity. It is impossible to overstate how wild and reckless this is. I’m sure some of you can already see where this is going, like watching a tractor trailer begin drifting off the side of a bridge right into a flow of lava filled with hungry alligators.

Let’s start with the Notch stuff. Billy Mitchell doesn’t fucking know what went on between Karl and Notch. They’re grown ass adults, both of sound mind. If Notch believed he’d been taken advantage of, he would be capable of expressing that himself. In fact, Notch has expressed just the opposite! Billy certainly isn’t speaking out of some concern for Notch’s wellbeing, given he was openly mocking Notch for continuing to defend Karl following the judgment loss:

But here’s where it gets even wilder. What we in the public haven’t seen, and what Billy hadn’t seen, are the extent of Karl’s communications with Notch and Notch’s attorneys. And now, courtesy of Exhibits 33 and 34, we got to see for ourselves how it all went down:

“Everything looks good”, huh? A month prior to that message, Notch’s manager Lisa told Karl “you can make your own decisions with your lawyer regarding this and how you would like to proceed”, but she did ask for all relevant documentation “so that we know what we are financing and for us to know how the case is proceeding”. And as you see, their attorney reviewed and approved it all. The only caveat was, they preferred to pay Karl’s lawyers directly, so Notch and Lisa could more easily declare what their money went toward.

Here’s the thing. Just because you fund a legal defense, and that defense loses at trial, that doesn’t mean the money funding that defense was somehow misapplied or misappropriated. It’s court! Shit happens sometimes! The money was still spent toward exactly the purpose that was intended. The fact Billy personally disapproves of that purpose doesn’t make it a “scam”. And while many people in the public casually assumed the Queensland lawsuit was over video game cheating allegations, here we have a documentary trail evidencing that Notch and his team were advised of exactly what the lawsuit was about. There was no “scam”. There was no “misleading his audience” here. None of the lies Billy has been riding in the wake of his court victory make this claim that Karl “scammed” Notch any more buoyant. And yet Billy’s happy to run his mouth and accuse Karl of a literal crime anyway.

Before we continue, I would like to pause on this point for a little longer. As someone who’s happy to relitigate the Australia defamation case at any time, it turns out this case was reviewed by an independent attorney who deemed the defense worthy of funding. Notch’s attorney didn’t step in and say “Woah, this is insane, we can’t fund this crap, this Karl guy needs to settle with Billy ASAP.” They probably thought what many of us thought: “Holy shit, Billy Mitchell was cracking jokes about how much he wants to see Apollo Legend confirmed dead, and yet he thinks he’s going to succeed because Karl reported some inaccuracies about their settlement?” Granted, the unnamed attorney representing Notch in Sweden may or may not be well versed in Australian defamation law. Look, I get it. Everyone wants to trust the judge. He does have a very big chair. But there was nothing about the Australia case that inherently said “Karl is going to lose and this will be a massive waste of time and money.” Only the lying-lie-liar who finally won a lawsuit wants you to think that.

Getting back to business, passages 54 and 55 of the filing tie Count IV together:

At this point, you might be thinking Billy Mitchell is kinda fucked.

Can you believe it’s about to get worse?

This is David Race, armed and ready to bust a giant hammer through Billy’s bullshit. I swear to you, I will one day find the time to finish my multi-part series on Billy’s failed lawsuit against David in Florida. It remains like 70% completed. In short, Billy sued David over a recorded phone call based on a specious interpretation of Florida law. David prevailed on appeal, and the whole case ultimately got tossed by the state Supreme Court.

So David won! And this victory was thanks in part to Karl, who set up the GoFundMe where you all were able to donate toward David’s successful legal defense. So even any fucking dunderheads who want to say a legal fundraiser retroactively becomes a “scam” the moment the recipient loses their case, not even they can say a damn thing here. The law was correctly applied. Billy’s frivolous lawsuit was tossed. David Race prevailed. And – most importantly for our discussion – the money was spent for exactly the purpose described.

Where the actual motherfucking fuck does Billy Mitchell get off calling this fundraiser a “scam”? Or accusing Karl of “deceptively” and “fraudulently” taking people’s money?

This would be like him saying you got scammed for attending a football game just because he didn’t like the outcome of the game you went to. Sure, you can cry about it Billy, if that helps you through your trauma, but we thought that game was awesome!!

And yet, it somehow gets even worse. And this, Count III, might actually be the strongest of all the counts in Karl’s lawsuit. At least with the Notch stuff, you could maaaybe try to argue Billy was somehow unaware of the interactions between Karl and Notch, and the fact that Notch’s attorneys were directly apprised of the terms of the lawsuit. It was still reckless as hell for Billy to immediately jump to calling their private arrangement a “scam” based seemingly on nothing but his desire to slander both parties. Still, if Billy’s only hope is to claim pathetic ignorance, I guess that’s what he’d try.

But even that doesn’t fly here. During the Brisbane trial, David Race was asked about the money from this GoFundMe. You can read about this in my “Day 5” reporting from the trial, or in a passage from the transcript included as Exhibit 31. David testified that most if not all of the money from that fundraiser was spent on defense in his case, with his only stated reservation being that he was unsure how much may have gone to Jeremy Young and JC Harrist, who were defending a different baseless lawsuit from Billy:

Billy Mitchell

was present

in the courtroom.

I know, because I was there as well.

I noted specifically in my “Day 5” coverage that Billy was reacting to David’s testimony as it was being spoken. Just prior to the GoFundMe testimony, David remarked that trying to defend Billy is “like being in a cult” (or words to that effect), to which I wrote:

As I heard that line, I looked over at Billy. He had a very displeased look on his face, having to sit and listen to David tell the truth.

We don’t need secret Notch correspondence on this one. Billy heard David say, in court testimony, basically “Yeah, the GoFundMe money for my legal defense was spent exactly as declared.” And Billy’s still gonna run his mouth and tell everyone Karl “deceptively” and “fraudulently” “scammed” the entirety of that money from his audience?

Are

you

shitting

me!?

Is Billy Mitchell really this dumb!?

And lest you think “scam” and “fraud” here are somehow meant rhetorically and not as literal accusations of criminality – as if that would be a viable legal defense here – we can once again go to the stream record and show otherwise. In one clip from the December stream, ConcertCruizer refers to Karl as “The guy who lied about the case and e-begged his entire crowd for money for a second lawsuit that was never coming”. Billy then embraces this characterization as “Correct”, before spiraling into yet another rant:

He took over half a million dollars of people’s money, okay, based upon… Let me be kind… based upon the falsehood. Yes, he took over half a million dollars. I mean… some people argue that you should go to jail for doing something like that. There’s just certain things in the world that I laugh at, and one is, if I did that, I’d… I would, I’d go to jail.

The echo chamber among these people is insane. First they allege Karl fraudulently obtained the $200,000 from his personal defense fundraiser, which wasn’t true in the first place. Then they keep adding more. Whatever money they can see, add it to the fraud total. Don’t question it! Meanwhile, you have clowns like “dmcathis2012” making stuff up out of thin air, and that gets promptly added to the “fraud” narrative as well. ConcertCruizer hears claims from chat and he immediately believes those, too. Not for a moment do they seem to think “Wait, these are all statements of fact, alleging someone who doesn’t like us of committing specific crimes, so maybe we should have some idea of how true they are.” Who knows how high their dollar total would’ve eventually gotten?

TIME FOR A RECOUNT

Okay, let’s review those alleged counts again.

Per Count I, did Billy accuse Karl of engaging in “serious illegal activity” during his bankruptcy? And were the statements false? And did Billy either know they were false, or act with reckless disregard for the truth?

Yes to each. He’ll probably try to spin some other alleged wrongdoing out of whole cloth, so that he can say he was technically correct, while peddling a weak excuse as to why he wouldn’t simply share this evidence with the authority tasked with investigating such wrongdoing. Or maybe the dog ate the trustee email along with his homework. But the known facts do not support Billy’s innocence.

Per Count II, did Billy accuse Karl of defrauding $200,000 through his personal defense GoFundMe? And were these statements false, and made with reckless disregard?

While this may not be as strong as some of these other counts, I think these are sufficiently established.

Per Count III, did Billy claim that Karl scammed $50,000 donated for defendants of other Billy Mitchell lawsuits, primarily David Race? And did Billy know these accusations were false?

Emphatically, empirically yes. This is about as open-and-shut as anything gets.

Per Count IV, did Billy accuse Karl of swindling $300,000 from Notch? And were these statements made with either knowledge of their falsity or reckless disregard for the truth?

Yes indeedy! Direct knowledge of falsity may be a stretch on this one (although Billy mocking Notch doesn’t help his defense there), but the whole narrative certainly reeks of reckless disregard.

Per Count V, did Billy declare repeatedly and emphatically that Karl fraudulently took half a million dollars through these combined sources? Yadda yadda falsity?

Well, since this comprises of elements from other counts which are all established, some up to the point of fully confirmed knowledge of falsity, I’d say yes, this one’s pretty covered as well.

As far as the strict legal allegations go, there are a few loose ends to tie up. Count VI is “Unauthorized appropriation of name or likeness”, and Count VII is “Intentional infliction of emotional distress”. Again, I’ll leave it to the law commentators to say whether the evidence meets specific legal hurdles, as opposed to our lay tendencies to gasp in disgust. Also, since Karl is a public figure, there is a threshold Karl has to clear in establishing that these statements from Billy were made with malice. The remaining exhibits from 38 onward are spent fleshing out these points. Here’s some of what the judge will be seeing to those ends:

Again, I couldn’t tell you exactly what legal threshold needs to be met in order for all of this to be qualified as a civil tort. But Billy has clearly and aggressively been using Karl’s name and likeness in his sales campaigns, and continues doing so up to the present month.

Gosh, Billy’s sure not shy about tying his attempts to publicly humiliate Karl directly into his hot sauce sales!

There’s this whole subgenre of Billy tweets bragging about how fun it is to sue everyone. I’m sure those will age like a fine gourmet cheese.

Some galaxy brain will no doubt point out that Karl has produced many, many videos mocking Billy and reporting on his lies and lawsuits. But Karl was reporting on actual news, relevant current events in gaming. Sure, you may see lots of mockery of public figures on social media every day. But will the court see this stuff from Billy as valid journalism? Or will they see it as a dedicated campaign of harassment?

There’s another one for the little old church ladies. I hope they have a couple fainting chairs in that jury box.

You can see many more monochromatic examples in the actual filing – and don’t forget about that hanging tweet from earlier – but I think this is a representative sample. However, there are a couple more Twitter exhibits that have deeper connotations:

This one’s interesting to me. It doesn’t seem anything came of this declaration from “Legal Mindset” blue check guy several months ago. But Billy retweeting it to his timeline seems to indicate an intent, a desire, to “cripple Jobst’s future income”. Wouldn’t that be contrary to Billy’s financial interests, though? On paper, you’d think he’d want Karl to make more money, so more could go to the bankruptcy trustee, and Billy could recoup more of what Karl owes him – at least, within the window before Karl’s debts are wiped. But of course, that’s not what’s going on. Maybe I’m reading too much into it, but it just sorta feels vaguely, faintly, slightly, like perhaps Billy simply wants Karl to suffer, and is even willing to sacrifice personal gains to that end. And Twitter activity like this is, perhaps, an expression of that goal.

Lest you think I’m reading too much into this…

Oh boy! So it’s not enough for Billy to smear and slander and humiliate Karl using his default platform. Billy was considering paying money to amplify this slander to a wider audience.

Okay, dude. Another golden admission. Either way, this stuff is in the lawsuit now. So I guess the judge or jury will have to consider it.

As we wrap up our look at the evidence, let’s turn back to Billy’s streaming fuckwittery. Earlier, I kinda glossed over this remark from his November stream:

That’s just unbelievable to me. And somehow, he wants to explain that it wasn’t his fault, or that you were too dumb to understand. That’s just crazy. If that doesn’t piss you off, I can’t help you. I can’t help you.

You might notice the complaint has a section titled “Mitchell’s malice and pattern of conduct”, which includes the following passage:

Mitchell encouraged his audience to react emotionally to his statements, including by framing his allegations in terms intended to provoke anger rather than to present verifiable facts.

That certainly hits the mark. And elsewhere in the filing, this sentiment is repeated:

Mitchell encouraged his audience to react with anger toward Jobst, evidencing an intent to undermine Jobst’s credibility and relationship with his viewers.

There are three remaining stream clips, which also relate to the questions of malice and intentional emotional harm. First, in the October stream, Billy’s chatters were spouting random rumors they’d heard, leading Billy to compliment them on supposedly being informed. Billy then remarked:

He basically lives in a home… that’s owned by his… wife. So if his wife throws him out, he’s homeless.

It’s funny because you can hear in Billy’s voice the gradual realization that what he’s saying is just as true of himself. In December, Billy decides to have another laugh at the thought of Karl being homeless and out on the street:

So now he lives in his house, the house that is in his wife’s name, she’s the only one with any equity in it, and if she sells the house, she takes the money – I think she’s from Hong Kong – if she sells the house, takes the money, if she gives him a boot in the ass, she leaves with all the money, and he goes to the soup kitchen.

Billy sure thought this was funny! But if you still harbored any doubts about Billy’s intent, he erases those in a clip from his August stream. One chatter named “White Guy” something-or-other said he appreciated Billy allegedly destroying Karl’s career, to which Billy replied:

Mr. White Guy… You ain’t seen nothing yet.

A moment later, another chatter claims Karl’s voice is now shaking, and that he’s “on the ropes badly”. Again, Billy mused:

You ain’t seen nothing yet, Connor.

Does all of this establish malice? If this didn’t, I struggle to imagine what would.

Remember, these aren’t the crux of the complaint. Okay, one of the counts is “Intentional infliction of emotional distress”. But mostly, this is about establishing malice with regard the other counts. Lots of people mock public figures on social media. To a reasonable extent, that’s allowed. What’s not allowed is falsely accusing them of specific crimes you know they didn’t commit. This well-established pattern of conduct demonstrates that the defamation was intentional. And Billy’s frequent tie-ins linking this harassment of the guy he’s slandering to commercial pitches and product sales? I almost feel bad for Billy’s attorney.

IN THE DETAILS

We’ll wrap this up in a moment, but because this is the long version, and because I know my regular folks appreciate all the smaller details, I’d like to go over a few more quick observations. This is for the super-nerds.

First, you may be wondering how Karl can afford to wage a lawsuit when he’s bankrupt. I’m certain that was Billy’s first question! In fact, Billy has probably been operating under the belief he can safely run his mouth all he wants because Karl couldn’t afford to do anything about it. Hey, so much for that “plan”, huh?

However, as you can see, this complaint was filed by Karl himself, without an attorney. Yes, you can do that. Billy’s lawsuits against Twin Galaxies, Donkey Kong Forum, and Apollo Legend were initiated without legal representation. So all Karl needed was to do the work himself, and pay the filing fee. Given how everything played out previously, I personally would say Karl is unlikely to crowdfund this one lol, but he would have every right to do so, and probably a lot of people would still fund it.

This doesn’t mean there has been no lawyerly assistance behind the scenes, though. The filing reads very impressively, and considerate of the required legal hurdles. While I’m not a legal professional, I’ve also read my share of court stuff. It’s certainly much more fleshed out and detailed than Billy’s self-initiated lawsuits, where he complained about such things as Apollo saying he does “stupid stuff”:

Out of curiosity, I perused the filing for examples of Commonwealth English versus American English. Unsurprisingly, there are some instances of the former, likely indicating some degree of authorship by Jobst. There’s “advertise”, “defence”, and two instances of “offences” (although those refer to the trustee letter where “offences” is used). However, American English was much more prevalent. “Civilized”, “summarized”, “unauthorized”. “Monetisation”/”Monetization” is used both ways, lol. Most of the dates are American style – MM DD YYYY – but some are Australian style – DD MM YYYY:

You may think little of these examples if you’re from Australia or the UK. But you have to remember, here in the United States, our primary exports are media and culture. We get the periodic Bond movie, and the occasional reality show featuring an angry Brit shouting at us, but everything else is catered strictly to American audiences, featuring American characters speaking in American accents and following American customs. So stuff like the King’s English stands out to us like a sore thumb.

Still, the fact these don’t fall exclusively one way or the other is just as apparent. Given how airtight the case reads, if Karl did shop the case around before filing, I would be shocked if an attorney turned it down for any reason other than “Billy Mitchell’s probably broke as a joke, so it’s not worth it for me to take the case on contingency”.

[EDIT: Since people have asked, I would say Karl is unlikely to represent himself through the entire process. At absolute minimum, he would be wise to hire an actual attorney for the trial. Despite what some folks seem to believe, Karl can add an a lawyer any time he wants, or as his financial situation allows.]

The filing is light on statute citations and case law, including only two references justifying jurisdiction. Usually, when covering legal briefs, those citations are what I follow to gauge the validity of legal arguments. In this case, I’ll have to leave it to the professional commentators.

I will say, I like how Karl handles his Queensland court loss:

In September 2021, Mitchell filed a defamation lawsuit against Jobst in Australia relating to a May 2021 video publication.

The litigation resulted in a judgment in Mitchell’s favor.

It’s tricky, because you don’t want to prejudice the new judge against you from the outset. “Oh, I defamed this guy before and that’s why he’s pissed off at me.” But you also can’t dance around it entirely. “I owed Billy Mitchell a bunch of money, but I won’t tell you whyyyyyyyyy.” This is good. Karl is factually acknowledging the circumstances originated from a single video. I would even specify it to say a single statement in a single video. Compare that to this wild campaign of slander from Billy, and there’s no comparison.

There is one and only one thing in this filing I actively dislike. I’m probably the only independent party on this entire planet who would notice this trivial detail – although I guarantee Billy and Junior will catch it immediately. Such is the burden of being the expert on this extremely niche subject. Even if you’ve followed this entire saga intently for years, and read all my coverage on this site, you could have read this filing for yourself, and this item probably would have slipped right by you.

In paragraph 25, Karl is describing Billy’s black-background video, where Billy says Karl “stands to gain $200,000 from his audience” on “false premises” with Karl’s “knowledge and intent”. Those are all lies, which we’ve gone over already. But then at the end of that paragraph, this claim is appended out of nowhere:

In the same video, Mitchell further stated that Jobst had made a “hail Mary attempt to dismiss the lawsuit,” referring to a July 2022 application.

Two paragraphs later, after illustrating the demonstrable falsity of Billy’s other claims, Karl adds:

Mitchell’s assertion that Jobst had made a “hail Mary attempt to dismiss the lawsuit” was also false; the July 2022 application was an application for security for costs, which the Court granted, ordering the provision of additional security to be held in trust and expressly finding that such an order would not be oppressive, and that it was not an application seeking dismissal of the proceeding.

There’s just one minor problem.

It wasn’t a lie from Billy. It wasn’t even particularly a falsehood. It was just like an opinion, man.

Comparatively, do you recall when Tony Nimrod and company filed to disqualify the Mighty Mister Tash in the California case? I certainly had my opinions about that at the time:

The whole exercise was a wild pipe dream, and one that I suspect was more about Billy’s lawyers trying to appease their client by giving the appearance of going on the offensive than it was about any sort of cogent strategy or hope for success.

On the face of it, this disqualification motion was always a fantasy. […] What they wanted was to chill Tash’s zeal and curb his effectiveness. In that regard, this ruling was the best they could have hoped for.

I never thought twice about saying these things, because none of what I described were crimes, and because I never thought people would assume I was an actual mind-reader who literally knew Billy’s and Ellrod’s exact motivations. Sure, Team Billy would say “Gosh golly, we’re just filing this disqualification motion out of deep concern for the sanctity of the jurisprudential process blah blah.” But no, they were doing it because they wanted to win their case, as evidenced by the fact their disqualification motion went nowhere as soon as the case was settled.

It’s like when you say, “He’s just doing that to get attention”, you’re obviously making an informed guess, not a formal psychiatric assessment. Or if you say “That guy’s totally full of shit”, you don’t expect people to think you literally mean the subject of discussion is physically engorged with excrement. You’re just speaking figuratively, about what you think is going on in someone’s noggin. You’re allowed to do that. I’ve done that at least twice in this write-up so far, and you probably didn’t even notice.

Let’s stipulate right here and now that the contested application (which doesn’t seem to have been provided) said nothing about the termination of the case. Fine. There doesn’t seem to be any dispute as to that. They were just trying to get Billy to put up a security deposit. Billy saying basically “Oh, Karl was just desperately trying to get the case dismissed” is nothing. It is a non-thing. Complete and utter nothing burger. I don’t even especially disbelieve it. Like, what would anyone expect to happen if Billy was unable to pay a required security deposit? Wouldn’t Karl’s attorneys have immediately followed up with a motion to dismiss? If Billy’s case was shitcanned for failure to comply with court orders, would Karl’s legal team really have gone “Woah, that’s not what we were asking for!” Yes, it’s true you’re not supposed to file motions under false pretenses. But lawyers file shit like this all the time. They ask for little things, hoping for big things, or big things hoping for little things. And they throw obstructions in the path of their opposition, hoping that one or a combination of these will be what wins their case via technicality or failure to comply or whatever. Allllll the time.

When writing “Fallout roundup” part one, I was aware of this claim from Billy, and I had the opportunity to call it out, but I didn’t, because it was a void sandwich. And while that series hasn’t caught up to Karl’s response video, I also wasn’t intending to criticize Karl for calling it “such a ridiculous lie that I’m shocked even Billy Mitchell would say something this stupid”. Whatever, that’s just YouTube drama beef.

But now it’s in a court filing?

It baffles me. Why is this here? Billy lies all the time about everything. He’s a lying-lie-lie-liar of inexhaustible lie-itude. You can’t include it all, my friends. Was it so important to litigate this one point in court? Did Karl really need everyone to know his lawyers really didn’t file a desperate ploy to scuttle the case, even though literally no one would care if they did? This brief point reads like that bizarre chapter or plotline in a novel which doesn’t connect to anything else, and doesn’t advance the story or develop the worldbuilding in any way, but the author is married to it for whatever reason. You gotta cut out bullshit like this. It is dead weight.

Lest you think I’m overreacting – repeat after me – it gets even worse. Let’s call back to exactly what Billy said about this in his black-background video, starting at about 7:30:

In July of 2022, Mr. Jobst submitted an application to the court of what effectively amounted as a hail Mary attempt to dismiss the lawsuit. That didn’t pan out for him. For the sake of brevity, I’ll continue on, but I’ll leave an explanation of that application in the description of the video.

Wait wait wait…

“effectively amounted”?

That’s what this is about? Huh, why didn’t that get included in the filing? Sure seems like this was strictly couched as a matter of personal belief. You know me, you know I’m no fan of Billy. I’m not looking to defend him on anything. But this one item was an unmitigated non-taco from the start.

You can’t even say Billy “hid” the real details in his video description a la James Somerton. He pointed you directly toward it! I’m not going to copy-paste the entirety of Billy’s text here, but it reads exactly as we stipulated – that Karl’s attorneys sought and received an order for an increased security deposit. And presenting this information in this way was perfectly understandable, as the description was a lengthy mouthful that would have derailed the video Billy was trying to make. Of all the numerous valid things to criticize Billy for, why this?

We’re talking about a court in the United States, where fine print is King. The judge absolutely will not see this as a “lie” or “falsehood” from Billy in any way, shape, or form. And now, Billy has the opportunity to highlight this and say “See? Mr. Plaintiff Jobst didn’t tell you everything, did he?”

I’m not writing any of this to impugn Karl’s sincerity at all. I’m sure when he first saw Billy’s video, he heard the “Hail Mary” line and went “WTF is he talking about? That’s not what happened!” And Karl is also correct, that that is not what happened. This bit obviously stuck in Karl’s craw. You may also notice, Billy did selectively crop the court order shown on screen to hide what it was actually saying. And obviously, Billy may not even sincerely believe whatever opinion or belief he states at any given time. But he is legally entitled to express a conclusion based on facts.

With all of that said, I recognize that you can argue the other way on this. There is the school of thought that says to include as much as possible, throw everything at the wall, etc. Keep Billy defending rather than attacking. I guess this stands out so much for the fact it’s the only item of that sort which doesn’t pull its weight. When the body of evidence is so damning, I’d think the best approach is to maintain that high standard of impact throughout. But that’s just me. This could also maaaybe be part of some big brain 5D chess gambit, where this point somehow becomes relevant down the line, but Karl needs to introduce this line of argument at the complaint stage. I guess we’ll see. It’ll get litigated either way now.

WHAT ARE KARL’S CHANCES?

Let’s be clear: Everything else about this filing reads as completely bulletproof. Ordinarily, Karl may struggle to establish malice and/or knowledge of falsity with regard to some of the specific GoFundMe statements. But the fact these counts are all bundled together benefits Karl greatly. Billy’s knowingly false claims about the David Race fundraiser were surely malicious, and that should increase the likelihood that similar statements about the other fundraisers are viewed as indicative of the same malice. Billy may try to argue that his live streams with small audiences have minimal reach, but again, Karl is alleging “defamation per se”. He doesn’t have to prove damages, but merely that the conduct and claims are so wildly defamatory that harm is legally implied. You can’t just log in on cheapstream.tube, start running your mouth and falsely accusing people you don’t like of major crimes which you know are false, and then expect the court to decide it doesn’t count. And holy smokes, if this stuff gets in front of a jury!?

Karl lost in Australia over a strained interpretation of a single statement in a single video. Billy’s conduct here involves a repeated pattern of false allegations of a disgustingly criminal nature across multiple platforms over the course of several months. While I wouldn’t expect Karl to make any public statements about this case before its completion, I feel like there should be no doubt whatsoever that Karl’s chances of prevailing here are exceptionally high. Any sane person receiving a lawsuit this ironclad would be shitting their walls. And if Billy has any sense left, he should be seeking to settle immediately by any terms necessary.

I recognize in retrospect that I failed you all in my coverage of the Brisbane case by not adequately expressing the possibility – even as minimal as I believed it to be – that Billy could win that case. It’s easy to see my error in hindsight. I intend not to make that same mistake again, which is part of why I chose to be forthright about my misgivings over the “Hail Mary” inclusion. I don’t give a shit if idiots on the Internet don’t like me or my work. But I don’t want to lead you all astray, given the nonzero possibility of the rug being pulled out from under all of us yet again.

That said, when pondering the issue, I run into many of the same complications I did before. Just because I am indeed an independent (unpaid) journalist doing valid gaming journalism – don’t @ me – doesn’t mean I don’t have a strong opinion of who’s in the right, and who’s in the wrong. I never had any interest in giving Billy advice on how to successfully sue innocent people, and that inclination has not changed now that the unrepentant serial liar and con artist is now a defendant.

With all of that said, I see only two ways this could go south for Karl. (Or I guess “north” if you’re Australian?) I think, if Billy’s dumb enough to try spending resources to defend this case, his only nominally-viable line of defense would be to try to turn all of this into a “TAB” case before the judge.

What, you may ask, is a “TAB” case?

I would love to pretend “TAB” is some fancy Latin court acronym, but no, it’s just something I made up. “TAB” stands for “Two Assholes Bickering”. Judges see TAB cases alllllll the time. They’re not going to be impressed. They’re not going to take either side. They know they’re paid caretakers – surrogate parents for two dysfunctional adults whose fathers didn’t spank them properly or whatever. Sure, one of the parties has to prevail, but neither TAB party is likely to get much cooperation from the judge along the way.

As a defendant in a case like this, you’re dying for the judge to see this as a TAB case. After all, you’re not the one who brought it to court. Fuck it, fling shit at the wall! If you can get the other party to lose their composure in the process, that’s good for you. Just ride it out, try and exhaust the other party’s resources and spirit, or worst case scenario, hope you can schmooze the jury into thinking this TAB case was a waste of their time.

On the other hand, this is the last thing you want as a plaintiff. Your goal is for the judge and jury to see you as a sincere and serious party, with a fully legitimate grievance, against a wholly unreasonable agent, which you have pursued through non-court means to the full extent available. You are there, respectful of the fact you are compelling everyone’s time, as a final resort, exercising your right to seek deserved restitution.

I’ve never been a judge, but judges are human, and I have been one of those. They’re going to have respect for one side, or the other, or neither. Even if the judge is not the “finder of fact”, they can obviously have a major influence on how the terms of the battle play out. But if you won’t take my word for why this is important because I’m not an attorney, by happenstance I recently heard an actual lawyer – LegalBytes on YouTube – discussing the same idea in the introduction to a video on the Logal Paul / Coffeezilla case:

I’ve talked about this before on this channel. It is totally possible to run litigation tactics that bring you into, let’s just say disfavor with the judge. And personally, I’m starting to see signs here that the judge is probably getting annoyed “A-F” with Paul’s side for precisely that reason. And the signs may be a little bit subtle, but I think that it can still lead to some consequences for Paul, because those kind of annoyances can impact a judge’s decision on smaller matters, and smaller decisions can add up to much bigger ones in the end.

I’d like to think Billy’s many lies and his outrageous conduct would be what puts him in disfavor with the court. But let’s be honest, that suit must be lined with Teflon. We’ve seen him escape accountability so many times. It seems everyone else has to play to a different standard in life, which is how it is sometimes. But you can’t just assume you can indulge in the same comportment. I’d say Karl and his attorney will need to be on guard for the TAB approach.

However – and I hate to bring this up, but I must be frank with you all – there is another way Karl could lose this otherwise unassailable lawsuit.

I think it’s fair to say Karl was overly confident in his chances of winning the Queensland case, and that led to some stupid decisions along the way. That failure to take the vulnerabilities of one’s case seriously contributed to an outcome where Karl spent years of his life giving Billy Mitchell the only legitimate win he has ever earned.

As usual, I never speak for Karl. But I think we can stipulate that he learned a lot from that experience. So I’m not worried at all about him making the same mistakes. And I’m assuming Karl’s not going to all this trouble, putting his reputation back under scrutiny, without the intention of seeing this case through to trial if necessary. But – as crazy as it may sound – you can’t assume you are certain to win just because the letter and intent of the law and the full weight of the evidence are all on your side. You’ve gotta put in the work, and you have to keep your shit on point. Because you will be shocked at how quickly things can unravel if you take them for granted.

I guess this is why the “Hail Mary” argument bothers me as much as it does. I see it as contributing, even minimally, to both of these potential avenues to defeat. First, it’s a TAB argument, which won’t stick to Billy, and which Billy will use to cast doubt on the rest of Karl’s framing. But it also reads like an indication of a mindset of “I can throw this in, and it won’t matter.” The issue for me is not that there’s anything but a miniscule chance that addition could materially damage Karl’s case. The issue is that any such damage would be 100% self-inflicted. If Billy somehow wins this, it’ll be in part because of an accumulation of tiny own-goals along the way.

Maybe I’m overemphasizing a microscopic detail. This is all just my personal take on the complaint as filed. But like I said, I failed you all last time. I treated the case as something the good guys would surely, obviously, undoubtedly win… and the good guys lost. This time around, I would much rather be candid and objective about the flaws of the protagonist’s posture in exchange for a more favorable outcome. And once Karl formally adds a real attorney to the case, we’ll likely see an amended complaint, which will be more polished.

Aside from all that, I guess you could say my only remaining concern is that this case is so exceptionally damning for Billy, so outrageous and unwinnable as a defendant, that he could decide his only option is to go full nuclear. After all his bravado, I can’t imagine him agreeing to produce a video retraction written by Karl (lmao). Billy’s far too narcissistic to admit fault the way Karl has. Is it even possible for them to reach a settlement without a public retraction from Billy? Would Billy piss away what remains of his family’s future in yet another losing legal war because he sees no alternative?

Generally – and I do mean “generally” this time – I believe most matters such as these should be handled outside of court, and that individuals who are too eager to sue their critics rather than publish rebuttals are awful people. But this is clearly a situation where litigation is warranted. Cases like this are what the court system is here for. Billy Mitchell has 1000% illegally defamed Karl Jobst, repeatedly, and intentionally. Karl has already published many rebuttals, and shameless Billy has only gotten more aggressive in his malicious defamation. I’m also a firm, unwavering believer in the “Asshole Tax”. If this was some ordinary knucklehead on YouTube, I’d feel differently about Karl initiating a court battle. But we’re talking about the guy who revelled in suing almost everyone he could over the mountain of evidence that he cheated at a fucking video game. Fuck this guy. Fuck him in his stupid ear. Billy Mitchell is the one who wanted to play the courtroom game. I do not feel the least bit sorry for him now.

Yes, if this goes all the way to trial, I will absolutely cover it in Florida in person, like I did in Brisbane. I couldn’t guarantee the ability to fly across the entire globe again, but I can surely find my way to the Sunshine State one more time. I may have no material stake in who wins or loses, but I sure as heck care who wins. But before then, we’re gonna have the full suite of motions and procedures, most likely beginning with an anti-SLAPP motion from Billy, all of which should be publicly available via the American court system. I will continue to be here, covering it all throughout. And don’t worry, there’s still gonna be a “Fallout roundup” part three soon-ish, although I may have to expand that series once the eventual aftermath of this litigation is appreciated.

To any Florida attorneys reading this, contemplating taking on this case: I am a fair man. I know first-hand that law is complicated. If I understand why an action or a decision is made, even if it’s unpopular, I will defend it. But I’m also not a dummy. If you’re just going to fuck around, draw a paycheck, and lose, I don’t want you anywhere near this case (unless you’re representing Billy lol). But if you want to become famous as the attorney who finally took down the infamous “King of Kong” cheater guy, here’s your opportunity.

To date, Billy has sued a bunch of innocent people, he has fully and eternally cemented his reputation as a lying narcissist who cheated at the very video games he wants you to think he’s a champion at, he has lost nearly every lawsuit he initiated, and after lucking into a single litigation win, he celebrated by running his dumb mouth so badly he’s getting dragged back into court, to face one of the most damning lawsuits you’re ever going to see in print.

I think from this, we can add a Fifth Law of Billy Mitchell:

“Billy Mitchell says he always has a plan, but he never said it was a good one.”

Thank you all for reading as always! Enjoy your weekend. And stay tuned!