17 April 2019

KingCast Explains Why People are Helping to Fund Litigation Against Facebook for Fraud, Breach of Contract, False and Deceptive Business Practices, Racism and Bogus Censorship.


So here's the thing to remember about my GoFundMe campaign to sue Facebook: 

Prologue: Many of my friends cannot even see the GoFundMe post I put up yesterday, fact....... 


First of all, Facebook has now -- after 10 years -- determined that my personal blog "Chris King's First Amendment Page" is "in violation of community standards" and so links cannot be shared on "the platform." Really.  I have had this blog for fourteen -- 14 -- years. 

Second, they did this only after I pointed out that their ban on my "How to Sue Facebook" blog was underinclusive because everything on THAT blog was also on my personal blog, right?  I have pending Discovery Requests on the timing and rationale behind all of this.


Third, when I ask for money I'm actually out the expenses. 

As Jimmy Berlo -- the Boston Fire Captain in the video who fought racism noted in his donation yesterday:

“I donated because of Mr. King's relentless pursuit for Justice for the those who suffered injustice usually at the hands of corrupt Government Officials that can overwhelm and harm their Victims at will without worry of recourse. Mr. King has no fear taking on these miscreants . he fights for the unheard , the hopeless and the beaten down. He has on 3 occasions traveled over 3,000 miles across this Nation to help me ( and others) at his own expense.”
This is unlike, say, some bloke or some sally killing your dog and raising money through a GoFundMe account when their homeowner's insurance actually covers the expense. That would be fraudulent conduct from a POS person, just like Facebook is also a fraudulent POS and I can't wait to get in front of Federal Judge Orrick and break it down at the Motion to Dismiss Hearing. 

They try to hide behind the Communications Decency Act but basically what is going on here is that the ToS bind only the user but not them. It's like what we lawyers call a unilateral or illusory contract and so they can violate the rules with impunity. 


Furthermore nothing in the ToS gives them the right to ban people out of retaliation when they know full well that the user has not actually violated ToS by any objective measure.


It's fucking bullshit is what it is. 


 Oh, I mean, Your Honor it is patently disingenuous, Sir.

12 April 2019

Facebook Facing Federal Lawsuit for Fraudulent Business Practices, Racism and Breach of Contract: Christopher King, J.D. v. Facebook, Inc. CV19-1987 WHO.


CLAIMS[1]

1.  Breach of Contract, Promissory Estoppel, Violation of 42 U.S.C. §1981, Fraud (Fraudulent Inducement, Fraud in the Factum), Breach of the Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing, False and Deceptive Business Practices pursuant to CA Bus & Prof. Code §17203.

DEMANDS

Plaintiff has been materially harmed by the egregious Breach of Contract, Fraudulent practices and the ongoing pernicious effects of Institutionalized Racism in this case. Wherefore he seeks the following:

1. Compensatory Damages in excess of $75,000 in an amount to be determined by a Jury;

2. Punitive Damages in an amount to be determined by a Jury;

3. Injunctive Relief with a specific Court Order and Finding of Fact and Conclusion of Law that Plaintiff has not used the term “nigger” in a way that violates Defendant’s Terms of Service;
 
4.        4.  A Public Apology;

5.        5.  Costs of Suit with pre and/or post Judgment Interest as 

           contemplated by applicable Governing Law.


Respectfully submitted in Good Faith and subject to the Pains and Penalties of Perjury as to all factual allegations,

_______________________________
Christopher King, J.D.


JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff hereby Demands this Cause to be heard by a duly-empaneled Jury.


_______________________________
CHRISTOPHER KING, J.D.



[1] Again, with the caveat that Facebook Amicus Counsel has expressly stated that Contractual and Civil Rights cases should never be dismissed without full Discovery and Trial.   This Notion is supported by Darnaa, LLC v. Google, Inc. et al even though Plaintiff in that case could not meet the requisite thresholds. Plaintiff can meet and surpass those thresholds in the Case at Bar.



Facebook Faces Lawsuit on C... by on Scribd

26 March 2019

A KingCast First Amendment Public Speakers' Warning to Seattle City Council and Debora Juarez.

Back Story.

I am here to tell all of you, and particularly Councilor Juarez that you work for us. And you are in no ways to treat speakers differently based on Content or to interfere with their public comment unless there is a time, place or manner violation. I have seen Council do this to me and to many others and last week in a most despicable manner you did it to a tax-paying public citizen. 

We will revisit this soon but for now watch your step unless you want me to sue you on my behalf or for local licensed Counsel like Lincoln Beauregard to sue you on behalf of someone else. Submitted with all of the respect that is due, I am: 
Christopher King, J.D.

18 March 2019

KingCast on Livi, Pepper and Fang: Raise Good Dogs.

Please people raise your dogs in homes full of love. 
Teach them to protect but teach them to love first and foremost. 
Always do this.

17 March 2019

New Courtroom Audio as State Runs out of Time to Retry Darrell Jones, an Innocent Man.

Time is up. The State is still harassing an innocent man. We are stuck on stupid. More than a year has passed.... 

Why has the Commonwealth Failed to bring Darrell Jones to Retrial? 

32 Years and County.... This "Case" must be DISMISSED with Prejudice. See: Darrell Jones - An Innocent Man.