Ty park/ ty lizards FL

Originally Posted by tegusaurus

Is it the same attorney who posted earlier in this thread claiming to represent Ty Park? Seems odd that you say he just hired an attorney at this late point if it is not the same person.

Would seem to be a real one this time. Probably could have kept going pro se if utilizing the previous "attorney" for this malicious-looking spectacle he has built.

Ty didn't have a lawyer before, unless he is calling himself a lawyer based on the IP evidence posted lol.

Just in case anyone forgot about the time where Ty tried to pretend to be his own lawyer and magically had the exact same IP address

Originally Posted by WebSlave

Hmm, not sure what to make of this, so I'll just post what facts I know, and let the viewers come to their own conclusions.



The above posted message is tagged with the IP address of 181.198.86.107.



That IP address actually resolves to Ecuador, Guayas, Playas. Screen shot will be attached below.

That is interesting enough, but earlier today the following emails were received:





Note the IP address for BOTH emails is identical to the above mentioned member (Lizard101) who made that originally quoted post.

For what it is worth.....

And a personal message to whom it may concern: Don't waste your time threatening me with lawsuits. I am NOT impressed with such crap.

Originally Posted by FresnoTortoise

so raffles are illegal unless done by non-profit. Ty could be considered an agent of a non-profit.

The complaint specifically notes he is "one of the largest suppliers" to the "Retail pet chain." Nothing in the complaint references acting as an agent, it all relies on the damage done to his business.

So, either he's an agent of a non-profit, or a business. Which is it?

And to everyone else... for the LOVE OF GOD, stop pointing out legal arguments publicly. There are all sorts of screen shots of comments made here included in the court document. Which means it's being watched, and it gives the other party time to come up with an excuse or defense.

How many times does this have to be mentioned before people get the hint?

Originally Posted by Mike (The M)

The complaint specifically notes he is "one of the largest suppliers" to the "Retail pet chain." Nothing in the complaint references acting as an agent, it all relies on the damage done to his business.

So, either he's an agent of a non-profit, or a business. Which is it?

And to everyone else... for the LOVE OF GOD, stop pointing out legal arguments publicly. There are all sorts of screen shots of comments made here included in the court document. Which means it's being watched, and it gives the other party time to come up with an excuse or defense.

How many times does this have to be mentioned before people get the hint?

Because at this point the illegal activity is in a sworn legal document? No takebacks. It's also a point potential buyers need to have available to them to make educated decisions, that he is conducting himself illegally in addition to immorally so tread with extreme caution.

I agree Mike. Katie, I don't think Mike is saying Ty's actions shouldn't be stated here. I believe he is only saying that when we point out holes in the case publicly we are (unintentionally) helping Ty identify the gaps that he needs to plug before it goes before a Jury.

Originally Posted by AllisonLeigh

I agree Mike. Katie, I don't think Mike is saying Ty's actions shouldn't be stated here. I believe he is only saying that when we point out holes in the case publicly we are (unintentionally) helping Ty identify the gaps that he needs to plug before it goes before a Jury.

Precisely.

The more it is discussed openly, the more chance there is that there will be a counterargument created beforehand in anticipation of it being brought up.

Keep in mind, this is not going to be a jury of like-minded peers (i.e., reptile people) that are necessarily going to "buy in" to all the facts here.

Ever encounter a layperson that thinks a turtle is a "snapping turtle" simply because it bites?

Ever have to explain "T+" versus "T-" to a non-reptile person who thinks a lizard is a lizard is a lizard, regardless of who bred it and what color its eyes are?

These are some things that need to be taken into consideration when going before a judge, or jury.

Theres nothing here that anyone has stated against Ty that could be used to his advantage IMO.....

he ran an illegal raffle that he didn't follow through on, he has lied, had contradicting stories, provided half-truths and alternative facts in order to sic his followers on Michelle, and basically done everything possible to provide a mountain of evidence against him in pretty much all aspects.

In the words of our recently departed friend Bill Paxton: "Game over man, Game over!"

I disagree. There's not much Ty can do to get out of his predicament. And there is a lot of value in pointing out possible legal transgressions, so that those visiting minions will see a perspective that does not need to be hidden, that they are not seeing elsewhere, in order to draw informed conclusions.
Remember that a lot of 'legal' advice in this thread is being given by good hearted people that have little legal expertise, so Ty's watchers build on a shaky foundation if they use some of the expressed opinion.

Originally Posted by Mike (The M)

If I were in the OP's shoes, I would have taken the $400 back and cut my losses in money, time, and stress long ago, and chalked it up to stuff happens and never dealing with Ty again.

Is this still your point of view?

David I was disagreeing with Mike's post, not yours, which I agree with.