JLR's ridiculous motion to modify stalking injunction against @WHITEBOY_RADIO - short version! 👀

Añadido: 2026-05-13

[00:00:00]Since respondents appearance in court on April 17th, he has continued to talk about petitioner on his YouTube channel.

[00:00:09]Oh, no. How dare he? And reading the restraining order to his viewers.

[00:00:16]Respondent pins post pinned comments of his followers mocking and humiliating petitioner.

[00:00:24]And talking about his sexuality y t i y sexuality.

[00:00:33]You can't be [ __ ] serious, really?

[00:00:37]>> [laughter] >> He's pissed off because his viewers are questioning his sexuality.

[00:00:49]Okay. Other posts he put Other posts he posts threaten my safety from his followers to come to my house with him.

[00:01:02]He is inciting his followers to harass me all while asking for money for his legal defense.

[00:01:09]He has invited a viewer to come on his channel and talk about petitioner's medical situation.

[00:01:17]Petitioner has reported to the sheriff's office who has referred this to the state attorney.

[00:01:23]Ooh.

[00:01:24]Petitioner is requesting, however, that this court modify the current injunction to state that respondent not talk.

[00:01:32]Whoops.

[00:01:34]Not talk about petitioner on any social media.

[00:01:41]Well, I think that's asking a bit much, Mr. Richings.

[00:01:46]You would like for Matt tomorrow to not talk about you?

[00:01:51]Huh.

[00:01:52]Well, I'm just an Australian over here and we don't have the first Amendment, but I'm pretty sure the First Amendment is something that ensures that all Americans can talk about other other Americans.

[00:02:08]Generally. Just generally talk about other Americans and pretty much most things that they want to. Respondent is making a mockery of this injunction.

[00:02:18]A mockery That is a mockery.

[00:02:21]As well as inciting his viewers against petitioner. What do you mean inciting against petitioner? They didn't like you anyway, JLR.

[00:02:30]Petitioner is greatly concerned for his safety and that he has already had his viewers Had viewers of the respondent call him. Call him.

[00:02:41]Well, look.

[00:02:42]If his viewers are calling, I don't think that's Matt's fault.

[00:02:48]And sorry to be the bearer of bad news, JLR, but that's a bit of the pot calling the kettle black because I know that there are supporters of JLR that are going around calling people and harassing them.

[00:03:03]But maybe that's not your fault, either.

[00:03:07]Maybe you're just bringing a lot of stuff into this that is completely irrelevant.

[00:03:15]You can't prove.

[00:03:17]And threatened to harm him.

[00:03:20]Attached are examples of items on respondent's YouTube channel.

[00:03:23]Chanel.

[00:03:25]On his YouTube channel.

[00:03:30]Uh spoiler alert, whatever he attached, it didn't convince the judge.

[00:03:37]Petitioner requests the injunction be modified to be specifically specifically bar respondent to to specifically bar respondent from talking about petitioner on his [snorts] YouTube channel or any social media until the final hearing date. Yeah, [ __ ] I don't think that would hold up in the US or Australia.

[00:04:03]Or any free bloody country. This ridiculous.