Logan Paul's Legal Mistakes in Responding to Coffeezilla | LAWYER EXPLAINS
Vložit
- čas přidán 11. 05. 2024
- In this video we go over the controversy between Logan Paul and Coffeezilla. After Coffeezilla exposed Sam Bankman-Fried and the collapse of FTX, as well as Andrew Tate's "Hustler Club," he turned his sights on Logan Paul's crypto NFT project, Cryptozoo. See his videos below:
Investigating Logan Paul's Biggest Crypto Scam: • Investigating Logan Pa...
The Biggest Fraud in Logan Paul's Scam: • The Biggest Fraud in L...
Ending Logan Paul's Biggest Scam: • Ending Logan Paul's Bi...
In response, Logan Paul posted a short video to his main channel, Logan Paul, in which he threatened Coffeezilla with a defamation lawsuit. He followed this with an episode of his podcast, Impaulsive, where he repeated the same threat. He has since taken down both videos and reached out to Coffeezilla to inform him that he's no longer pursuing litigation--but he still may have opened himself up to liability along the way, nonetheless.
TIME STAMPS
0:00 Introduction
0:47 Background
1:40 Cryptozoo and Coffeezilla's Exposé
6:04 Why a Defamation Lawsuit Would've Been Disaster for Logan Paul
10:35 Coffeezilla's Litigation Options
10:51 Anti-SLAPP Motion
12:49 The Magic of Discovery
15:21 Other Legal Trouble for Logan
15:50 Negligent Hiring
23:49 Statements about Other People
24:17 Statements about Coffeezilla
29:10 Statements about Emilio
30:32 Statements about Z Developer
35:00 Last Thoughts
To Become a Member of Byte Club, you can pick between YT, Locals, or Patreon:
YT Members: / @legalbytesmedia
Locals: legalbytes.locals.com
Patreon: / legalbytes
--------------------
🚨 Our podcast:
Anchor: anchor.fm/legalbytes
Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/4i3YLop...
Apple Podcast: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast...
Google Podcast: podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0...
--------------------
🚨 We have a @legalbytesclips4042 clips channel for clips from our live streams. Subscribe here: / @legalbytesclips4042
--------------------
Follow me here!
Twitter: / legalbytesmedia
Instagram: / legalbytesmedia
Facebook: / legalbytesmedia
--------------------
🫖 Dragon's Treasure Teas: Visit www.thedragonstreasure.com/?d... for 10% off some delicious teas and to support this channel!
--------------------
Merch: legal-bytes.creator-spring.com
--------------------
#LoganPaul #Coffeezilla #CryptoZoo
In response to Coffeezilla's series on Logan Paul and whether he's been scamming his fans with Cryptozoo, Logan Paul posted a short video to his main channel, Logan Paul, in which he threatened Coffeezilla with a defamation lawsuit. He followed this with an episode of his podcast, Impaulsive, where he repeated the same threat. He has since taken down both videos and reached out to Coffeezilla to inform him that he's no longer pursuing litigation--but he still may have opened himself up to liability along the way, nonetheless. What do you think?
Got a question for you. I thought “scam” was a layman’s term that wasn’t a legally recognized under defamation law as a cause of action.
Since this is the verbiage Coffeezilla used in his video, how should we as the onlookers of this “soon-to-be-expected” legal drama interpret this expectantly?
High chance to be dismissed with prejudice?
Coffee should destroy him.
@@brutalhonesty07 Scam is a layman term separate from law. But just because something isn’t a legal term doesn’t mean it’s not defamatory necessarily. However that is not to say that a scammer is not criminal in their scam. They can and do get arrested, charged, and punished to the full extent of the law. For Defamation cases in particular it is definitely a key factor. If you are accused of being a scammer and decide to sue it’s pretty much impossible to win a defamation lawsuit unless you have ironclad proof in everything you claim..
You said it yourself in your video. Filing a lawsuit would open Logan Paul up to discovery and he simply CAN'T have anyone digging around in his business. Lord only knows what they would find. Now as for the a possible defamation lawsuit against Logan Paul by the developer Zach Kelling; he has already publicly admitted that he did indeed have the arrests on his record from over 20 years ago. I can't confirm it but It was mentioned that he (Mr. Kelling) got his record expunged. If that's true it begs the question; how did Logan Paul know about it?
@@LastMumzy I’ve heard once expunged documents rarely show up on anything like credit reports, background checks, or anything else that a employer could get. But if Logan got his hands on it…doesn’t it mean he knew it existed in the first place? And they aren’t supposed to be allowed to share those without express permission from the state even to private individuals let alone the entire public.
It amuses me that, in a legal context, Logan basically threatened Coffeezilla with a good time.
Lmao well said XD
Seriously. That’s probably the best quickly understandable way to put it.
Coffeezilla indeed, "wants the smoke."
He gave coffee bullets. While having none
I was about to comment this myself; all Logan has done has twist narrative to make himself look the victim; those messages directly link him to not only insider trading, but showing that he was more involved in this than he's portraying.
Logan just realized "discovery" is a thing 🤣
His lawyers must have be panicking trying to get this child to understand what would happen if he goes on with this lawsuit.
I was hoping that he had bad lawyers, and we get the discovery to know exactly what else he was hiding. I feel bad for the people who are not smart enough to see an obvious scam as a scam, and who are too trusting of people.
Honestly it’s crazy to me that Jake Paul is actually the better Paul brother right now. But both are scammers so it’s doesn’t really matter.
@@Devilmaycry-Joker They're both spoiled rich brats who think they can get away with basically anything. Honestly the only difference is Jake is better at hiding his bullshit now
@@Devilmaycry-Joker Yeah, I agree, I’m quite reticent to use the word ‘better’ in describing either of these two, they’re just shady, slimy people.
@@Devilmaycry-Joker same here. Would've been nice to see another Alex Jones tier blunder with this one.
How has this clown gotten this far, for so long, without something legal happening?
One could also argue that Logan Paul saying that "Z" has a "fondness for orange jump suits" is defamatory as well because that implies that Z is an habitual criminal and STILL does crime all the time. But the only thing we see is that one felony conviction. For a 6 month sentence. 19 years ago. When the guy was 19.
I feel like part of the reason why the case was immediately dropped was because Coffeezilla had immediate evidence that Jeff knew he was being recorded. That was his BIGGEST anchor with everything. And when Coffeezilla wasn't going to back down, Logan panicked and dropped everything.
I feel like you don’t even need that. Basically Logan Paul got told by his legal team “you’re going to have to hand over everything related to this” and Paul said “oh, no. Bad idea”
@@KallTech I think it's far more likely Logan got a call from his sponsors/advertisers, who might be worried about this spilling outside of CZcams and becoming a PR nightmare for them as well as Logan.
As far as I know, it’s a copy of your lives in Texas what is a one party consent state
@@KallTech literally just sounds like you made that up on the spot moronic
My guess is that Paul talked to a lawyer, and after the lawyer recovered from laughing themself to the floor, probably wetting themself and regaining the ability to control their breathing, the lawyer told him that actually filing the suit would be the worst possible thing to do.
Nailed it, my man.
Exactly lol. His response video, the recently deleted, was heat of the moment outburst prolly made by him and his yes men. His legal team saw it and told him to back pedal immediately!
The fun part is that Logan Paul may only have talked to a lawyer AFTER he did his 2 stupid response vids (including ImPaulsive)
He probably made the decision based on his yes men hes surrounding himself with. Then when he actually talked to a lawyer he changed his mind quick.
I would bet there was a string of expletives complaining about how stupid making that video was.
The single issue I wanted to see addressed by Logan Paul was the damning text messages that took place between him and his associates which showed them clearly colluding on ways to manipulate the price of their own cryptocoin that they had stealth launched. The only reasonable conclusion is that they intended to be the only buyers of the coin at the stealth launch letting them buy up mass quantities of the coin unopposed (and at low cost), and then selling it after 'publicly' promoting the coin and driving it's price up. The corruption in this industry is out of control.
I've been thinking about this too. Would be nice to see a financial lawyer weigh in on if it would qualify as market manipulation
@@seegee9 It certainly is that.
@@roncolemanlaw think anything will come of it?
EXACTLY!!
@@seegee9 it is by definition. It wouldnt just qualify, its the direct example of it
Logan seems to have this approach of doing and saying whatever he wants and then posting a "oops, sorry, my bad" video and thinking that everything is going to be ok. Someone needs to take him to task and have him face some actual repercussions for his actions.
Problem is he had imo a bigger controversy before, japan forrest one. And he came out of that situation pretty much scot free. But while that problem was bigger, now actually money is involved. So here’s hoping that he will be held accountable
Won't happen. The scam isn't high profile enough to get the attention required.
That’s because it keeps working for him.
Sadly it doesn't seem like that will happen, so we can only hope that his fans know better now.... actually nevermind, nothing will change
@@TheSilverwing999 🙄yup
Soon as I saw Logan’s response video I said “there’s absolutely no way he files this lawsuit, discovery would wreck him.”
I wanna see that crypto wallet history, because the blockchain remembers, it always remembers.
Imagine Logan being able to suceed where Sam bankman failed
Imagine if journalists had to get permission before posting their interviews, would there even be consumer rights journalism?
well, no.
there are countries where journalists get sued for defamation for provably true statements too. it sucks.
but what's funny is that logan didn't get a competent lawyers opinion on releasing his own defamation video, like his arguments don't even work for proving that he wasn't a scammer, just that everyone he associated with in the scam were scammers.
Well you say that, but that's pretty much what 'access journalism' is. Journalists now won't publish a lot of shady dirt on major celebs and powerful figures in case they get shunned and cut out.
@@lasskinn474 So if everyone was a scammer, he’s either an idiot for not seeing it and shouldn’t be trusted with other peoples money, a complacent wimp who let it happen and shouldn’t be trusted with other peoples money, or the mastermind who orchestrated it, in which case he SHOULDNT BE TRUSTED WITH OTHER PEOPLES MONEY!!!
Do you sense a trend?
@@stingerjohnny9951 well yea his defense basically boils down to saying that he is stupod.. Which doesn't even work because he said he would make it better but didn't do anything.
@@lasskinn474 Admitting to being an idiot is no excuse, especially in serious financial situations. It can be an apology, but only if you display a genuine attempt to learn from mistakes.
I not only don’t believe that Paul will learn from this, but I refuse to call any of this a “mistake,” since I am personally convinced that Paul intentionally set up a scam and is now pissing himself for getting caught and called out for it.
I am not saying Logan Paul definitely and intentionally scammed people, I’m merely saying my own read on the matter based on the information provided.
@31:43 importantly, zach kelling publicly posted on facebook confirming he did have convictions in 2002 which were subsequently expunged. but here is something people seem to be missing: that image logan posted of the record, like you said, is from a background check report or maybe a westlaw/lexus people search result. *those documents are strictly regulated by FCRA.* they CANNOT be used for a purpose other than those specified in FCRA, AND MUST REMAIN CONFIDENTIAL. disseminating them publicly is a HUGE PROBLEM for logan legally. HUGE.
eg, when you do a record search on westlaw/lexis, you are asked to first identify the specific permissive use before you can proceed to results. if logan’s attorney pulled that info and allowed logan to use it like this?! YIKES.
zach also said his counsel contacted logan this morning to address this and the defamatory statements about the size of his team working on the project and status of payment. he even said his github clearly shows 30 people on his team working on the project. seems to me that the about-face happened shortly after zach’s attorneys contacted him, and then logan contacted coffeezilla.
From watching reactions videos to Logan's responses, one take away for me: Logan needs better advice around him. George was the only one to actually bring common sense to his team and it seemed like he got cut off when he was starting to tell it like it is.
@@RenegadeMatrix 1000%. at minimum, it seems like jeff isn’t remotely experienced/knowledgeable enough to be a manager for someone with such reach and such extensive business dealings. hearing how he spoke on that call with coffee was *painful.* and it seems like he just never informed logan that people (including coffee and adam robb) were digging into crypto zoo from an investigative journalism perspective and were actively seeking his comment. if there was such thing as managerial malpractice, jeff probably committed it 16 ways to sunday… logan even seems to blame him for picking eddie and overseeing the cryptozoo project… yet he is still his manager? it’s mind blowing how poor logan’s judgment is.
Please, more people sue Logan. He cannot just walk away from this with just some reputational damage.
If only there was somebody he could've hired to advise him on how to not end up as a internet laughing stock once again.
CZcamsrs and the layman, in general, have so many misunderstandings about the law. That's what caused Logan P to think he could even sue Coffezilla (successfully) in the first place. Law is usually really complicated, so it is so nice to have real lawyers that make youtube content. Thanks for taking the time to explain these things to those of us without the specialized knowledge that you studied so hard to acquire 🙏
He did watch Depp v Heard!
@@KallTech They do. Even lawyers are not 100% correct outside of their expertise. As a *specific* example, when Thunderf00t was threatened with a lawsuit (buy some self important cameraman) both Legal Eagle (a lawyer but not specifically for copyright) and Lawful Masses (an actual copyright lawyer) made a response, and their analysis was *very* different.
There are a lot of youtubers (including the aforementioned Thunderf00t) who has misunderstood some law, fair use especially tends to be misunderstood a lot. Not just strawmen.
@@KallTech No, I'm sorry, for trying to share with you my experience, and help you better yourself, when you've already decided that you are perfect, and everything you speak is the absolute and unchangeable truth.
And please look up the term "strawman argument", because you are using it wrong.
Logan acted like he is bigger and more powerful than Coffeezilla and thought he could scare him. Coffeezilla seems to be doing well and most likely has lawyers that he consults with.
A year back he brushed up with someone who doxxed him and was threatening him and he said in that video that he's made necessary steps to protect himself.
My first thought when I heard Logan wanted to sue was: “do you really want to go through discovery? Seems like a bad idea” It all feels like he wanted to use his platform and persona to pressure Coffeezilla, yet vastly underestimated the public’s ability to understand coherent arguments from Coffezilla’s videos. Doesn’t help that Logan’s own arguments just make him look worse. Feels like he reacted emotionally because he feels (or knows) there’s truth to Coffeezilla’s videos.
Logan didn't watch the vids by coffee. He was told what was in it hence why he ignored all evidence and attack coffee's character
Attacking their accuser's credibility is the liar's first line of defense.
Also he never made clear where the defamation is. all hes been doing is literally corroborate what was in the videos.
Logan's an idiot. It's as simple as that.
Based on the internet conjecture I'd say he didn't underestimate the public's ability. The types of people who are going to watch Coffee & believe the facts & understand the logical reasoning aren't going to be the ones who were duped into Crytpo Zoo. The people who were duped into that are going to say his response video seemed rational and then say that they're sure Logan knew what he was doing.
I just find it funny that his defense for it being not a scam is that he got scammed first. It's sad that he believes the rest of the world is stupid enough to believe this as if he was talking to his general fans.
He seems to think that you're only guilty of wrongdoing if you fully succeed in the end state of that wrongdoing... One can scam people and then also be terrible at holding onto that money. 🙃
@@LegalBytesMedia I object! I can't be a scammer because I'm incompetent!
@@LegalBytesMedia it really only proved he was the worst scammer from the group
Don't forget "it's not a scam because we didn't make any money!" Yes because you planned to scam others and failed. While everyone else still lost money.
ikr?
That's like saying, "I'm not a thief. The money I stole from you was actually taken from me by my accomplice who has now fled to who-knows-where? So therefore, I didn't commit robbery..."
So glad coffeezilla is getting the attention he deserves at the moment. He's been brilliant for a while. I only discovered him a couple months ago but I've gone back through a lot of his stuff and I think he's providing a vital service to people, in the form of education of real world scams.
Logan on the other hand, he does everything for clicks. He's very good at that. I wouldnt be surprised if it turned out he never had any intention of suing coffee. But just decided to feed into the controversy to get eyes and ears back on him. It's a dirty game but he plays it well, I have to give him that. He'll always find a way to get people talking about him. That's the nicest thing I can say about him. In fact the only nice thing, so I'll leave it there.
I never watch a scumbags response video. I just wait for more important people (like Charlie or Felix) to explain the scumbags video. This way I don't give the scumbag my views.
I also don’t think he was actually going to sue, but just trying to scare him with the high cost that comes with being sued. Problem is, Logan’s risk was not calculated and if it was, he must suck at math.
LP seems like a sociopathic douchebag. That's been evident for some time. And Coffeezilla is now threatening everything in his life that churns out money and fame. Coffeezilla possibly even threatens his freedom if CryptoZoo turns out to be the giant pump-and-dump scheme it seems to be. So LP had to go on the offensive in that big, dumb, cow-like way of his. So I think LP did it partly to get eye-balls back on him. But it was done mostly as an "alpha-male" response that totally backfired on him. The lawyers finally got through that thick skull of his, and LP is now backing off. He's doing what he should've been doing all along--lawyering up and keeping that pretty little mouth shut.
I've watched alot of people talk about this and I haven't seen or heard anyone talk about the most obvious issue to me. Jeff's expectation of privacy. Jeff knows who coffee is and what he does. There was no way Jeff thought their conversation was private. We hear him answer the phone until he hangs up. No where did he say this is off the record. Or make any attempt to increase the expectations of privacy. Just. "no comment" then makes comments.
So you get a like and a sub from me. Also glad I found this channel.
also, this is weird but hearing him say "no comment" just sounds like something he is saying FOR THE RECORD. he wants there to be no comment on the record for that question...
@@graciouscalf well yeah. That is an answer. But even that isn't admission to record
I went back to the video and Coffee starts the conversation by saying in his opening sentence “This is Stephen from Coffeezilla” and “I’m just reaching out for comment”
Based on Jeff’s statements later in the video, he’s clearly familiar with what coffee does.
At minimum Jeff KNEW a summary of the conversation would appear in the video.
Sure he didn’t explicitly give permission to record BUT he choose to continue the conversation WITHOUT saying he wanted the conversation to be off the record.
It is reasonable expectation that given the nature of the situation, the phone call was being recorded for the channel.
Like if he didn’t want to become public… he could have just hung up.
In my lay-man’s opinion, *choosing* to take the action of continuing the conversation with a journalistic CZcams channel (upon learning that is tho has called you) as the manager for a public figure is a non-verbal way of giving constant to record.
Consent is not always given in the form of saying “yes”
Lack of consent is not always given in the form of saying “no”
Non-verbal communication is a way humans communicate. Thus body language, word choice and actions are also ways a person can give consent (or lack of consent)
True. And this feel true because The Crypto King DID say "off the record," which Coffee respected.
Only talking about thing The Crypto King said it's okay to share to the public.
So we can assume BOTH people were aware that they were being recorded or, at least, what they say will be shared to the public.
That information that Paul used about prior felony charges for Kelling, the dev, is expunged information (its real, but from 2002 and the records were expunged by the courts, Mudahar from the SomeOrdinaryGamer channel did some detective work to determine that). Legally, it never happened. But Paul dug it up (looks like he probably used a deep background check type site) and put it forward as if Kelling is a convicted felon. Not since those records were expunged he's not. Getting felonies expunged from your record is NOT easy... because when they are, it is exactly as if it never happened. You do not have to disclose anywhere, to employers or government or anything, that you had such charges even when they directly ask. Because legally speaking, it did not happen and no record exists. I am guessing there are probably specific laws barring people from digging up expunged information, ignoring the courts rulings and claiming it should be taken as truth.
Paul multiple times accuses the developer of "stealing" the code and "holding it hostage". There's a problem with that claim. That code... was their property. They held the copyright to it, and had full ownership of it at all times. That's how 'work for hire' agreements work. Ownership and copyrights transfer to the customer only AFTER payment is made. Since Paul is a deadbeat scammer and didn't pay a cent for the development work, he had absolutely no right to the code. He's whining and moaning about not being allowed to have and keep something he didn't have a single legal right to.
In another analogy, it's like Logan Paul arguing that an artist "stealing" his art, that Logan commissioned that said artist without paying the commission fee.
exactly! I was so impressed muta caught that issue. and your spot-on about the vice ownership. I do kinda want to snack zach, though, since apparently they never reduced anything to a written contract. this type of crazy situation is exactly why you do so before performing any contract work for someone! saves a whole lot of headaches.
I suspect LP and his team know about Zach's case before he get recruited, for blackmail material and such. I mean they definitely recruit scammers for this project
Kelling was young and robbed a store or some sort , not scamming.
And things that happened 20 years ago doesn't count into the present and unrelated.
Just because he robbed someone doesn't mean that Logan is not scamming others.
Logan's point is weak and unrelevant.
Im not sure code can be copyrighted. I think you can copyright the brand and maybe only patent parts of the idea.
Developers usually charge for a service and not a product. Now, when is the service considered delivered? I think that depends on the contract they have.
The legality of not paying vs holding the code hostage, depends on the contract signed by both parties.
I think Logan called a lawyer, they watched Coffee's videos and than watched Logan's responses and told him that he lost the moment he opened his mouth and that he should have called before responding.
I'm not a lawyer, but it was pretty obvious to me he didn't talk to a lawyer before his response videos because i cannot imagine, a lawyer, ever telling their client "Oh yeah it's cool if you send your rebuttal over the internet on the worlds largest video platform" lol
Na he lost the moment he scammed people. HIs two videos or not
@@SM-nz9ff Yeah you're absolutely right
@@SM-nz9ff pfft hes lost nothing, his crypto accounts still see frequent activity ove millions of dollars.
@@deezboyeed6764 So you mean to tell me LP still has plenty of money so is a juicy target for a bunch of investor lawsuits? On top of the SEC/the feds getting up in his business? The class-action lawyers must be licking their chops right about now and calling all the investors LP bamboozled. The payday will be good! :D
@@Luboman411 he will get away with it, because hes rich, nothing more. Nothing less.
The legal discovery aspect is what makes the most compelling sense to me. Using adverse inference, we can understand the implication of an (alleged) criminal organization wanting to stay private. This will go down as one of the greatest flame-bait's of all time, where CoffeeZ dangled allegations to Logan, and got under his skin to the point that Logan starts acting irrationally. I admire the spectacular meltdown this has caused. I'm looking forward to Coffeezilla's next video on the topic. And I'm also hoping for some bored prosecutor to bring criminal charges. Logan should be an example to any other so-called influencer.
Have you been seeing our political situation lately, especially with the more than 1,000 pending criminal cases that still need to be filed for the January 6 business? I don't think there's a single prosecutor at the DOJ who's bored at the moment. In fact, quite the opposite. LOL...
I'm glad you posted out the fact that if the leader appointed all these "bad actors," then the leader is still guilty of incompetence and still IMO responsible for ppl getting scammed while they worked under him.
Logan clearly did not talk to an attorney before the two videos, and he must have talked to one after for him to drop any threat of lawsuits. No way he was going to win, and it opened up discovery into these crimes I mean scams, I mean game.
He did talk to an attorney, A fraudulent attorney. You know Logan loves to hire criminals.
This gets me. In tv shows and the movies, everyone always says "I'll be talking to my attorney!" In reality, it seems almost no one does, no matter how high profile. They tweet and post videos, then scramble to delete days later. And they do it over and over.
I think Logan removing his responses and "taking accountability" has nothing to do with him suddenly seeing he was in the wrong and looking to make things right. I think the most important factor here is what LegalByte covers at the end of her video. He performed very real defamation of Zach Kelling and he's looking to cover up the fact that he just exposed himself to litigation himself.
According to Zach, the criminal record Logan exposed in his response video was in fact his. However, he had those convictions expunged. Meaning they were removed from his record and they should have been sealed.
By Logan inferring Zach is some active criminal who extorted him for $1 million, he's doing irreputable damage to Zach Kelling's career as a developer. Zach has also shown proof that he had 30 employees working for the CryptoZoo project and while he doesn't provide proof of the "50k a week" claim, as a developer myself, that does not seem all that unreasonable when you're running a business and managing multiple employees.
Zach actually has confirmed that he's going to bring legal action against Logan's team and I imagine that response video will be the perfect bit of evidence for his case.
Damn, that's what we in the tech industry refer to as "A whoopsie", or in more broad terms... "A general fuck-up".
The cat interrupting was exactly the confirmation I needed that you're clearly a patient yet knowledgeable expert! Great video!
I'm almost positive that Paul's legal team rolled up and told him to take his videos down and back off the lawsuit threat because not only would he lose, but he'd be required to hand over a lot of private information that Coffeezilla doesn't already have access to that might actually end up being further proof towards the idea that Paul really did scam his fans. There could be no good that would possibly come from such a suit for Paul.
This would be a cake walk for Coffee if it went to court. As far as reputational harm, Logan’s reputation is pretty stained already even without Coffee’s videos.
Logan is the one at the bottom of a pit. Logan Paul is MOST LIKELY a scammer, dare I say CRIMINAL.Yes.
I believe Coffee did get Jeff’s permission on the call, at the beginning and showed it on the video. There were 2 revenue streams too, the coins and eggs. Logan and Jeff didn’t sell the coins but hasn’t explained what is happened with the egg money or why no one was paid?
I can't believe that nobody told Logan to eat his humble pie, admit to his wrongdoings and move on. Logan made things so much worse for himself
The taping would have to be referred to the DA and it’s a misdemeanor.
Also, can you imagine being on the other side of a CZ discovery process? Logan would be effectively self referring himself to the DOJ and the IRS.
Coffee was in Texas, where only 1 party needs to be aware of the recording. And federally it’s the same. So there’s no issue there at all. Coffee can’t be held accountable for California laws while in Texas, just because the other person is in a 2 party consent state
@@charlesbronson2926 in the video, she goes over this. court usually goes with the more restrictive of the two jurisdictions meaning Coffee could be held accountable using the laws from CA.
@@charlesbronson2926 California Supreme Court already has a ruling on the books stating that the protection of CA citizens overrides the one party rule in another state. Granted this was in regards to a company in GA calling people in CA and recording the conversations. Whether or not this applies to individuals I dont think has been tested in a higher court like CSC yet.
Of course serving CZ and getting him to appear in court over a misdemeanor in CA might just have the California DA decide to not prosecute.
If a misdemeanor it's still opens up for an investigation. So what else can we find just saying.
To continue, she does state that it would also be dependent on whether there was an expectation of privacy which is a grey area and likely require arguments on both sides. Seeing as how CZ was doing investigation and this was fairly obvious, it's likely that they would have taken his side ie. there was no expectation of privacy with a call with an investigative journalist.
Also the whole 10k dollar punishment and/or 3 year jail was also slightly exaggerated, as that's only for multiple offense. First offense would only be 2.5k if anyone was found guilty. Nor would it even be worth it to go after him for the fees involved.
I've seen other Lawyers on CZcams address this, and some seem to state that Texas's OP consent law would take precedent as that's where CZ is from. Looking online, this does seem to be a bit of a grey area, though it's generally advised to air on the side of caution when there are two conflicting state rules and go with the more strict set of rules (in this case, the one where there is two party consent).
Question I would have is, if indeed CZ was guilty of this specific misdemeanor, would California be able to extradite him from Texas? 🤔
First time viewer of your channel. For a non-US native, you explained things extremely well. Hope your channel grows as big as @legaleagle
This was reminiscent of the most famous proto-anti-vaccine case where the anti-mmr vaccine doctor sued a journalist for defamation before being absolutely horrified to discover this means the journalist can now look through his research.
Wait really? Are there videos of this?
@@Akatsuki69387 hbomberguy did an excellent video on the British MMR Vaccine scandal and its false link to autism. Its a long video, and it gets into heavy subjects like child abuse, but its an excellent watch.
The Developer Z has said that his record was expunged. In addition, he has shown that the pictures Logan showed of only 3 people in the office are misleading because there was remote working (it’s IT and happened during lockdown). So, Logan is also making an allegation that Z is a fraudster which may not be substantiated.
Isnt Logan defaming the developer by bringing up his expunged record and full on doxxing him ? Especially that everyone talking about this situation are painting the developer as a criminal only cause of Ligans statements
@@gingerpotter21
Yes. More than defamation, using expunged records for anything but specific prescribed uses is an actual cringe.
There are only 2 pictures of me outside, therefore I have only been outside twice! Hes so dumb, and his video looked awful.
@@gingerpotter21 in digital age lot of counties, cities, state will post mug shots and the arrest record online. Bunch of sites copy public records. Expunging your record only removes it from whatever court/jurisdiction it was filed but it stays online forever. Not sure you can defame someone by posting easily available public info.
@@KaliAndy2 he called him a criminal cause of a 20 yearold served charge thats expunged, as well as stating that hes trying to extort him for money that he doesnt need because he has 3 employees instead of 30 and his proof was 2 pictures of 3 people in an office ? Thats it ? Then he claims he stole the code that he wasnt paid for and fled to switzerland with no actual proof to back that up other than his claim, and also he doxed him when he didnt want to be doxxed and he also did it with expunged records that shouldnt be relevant to his current life hence why they are expunged, and Logan effectively painted him as a criminal and associated him with the other two actually proven frauds, and now whenever someone mentions the dev they are referring to him as a criminal, its pretty neglectful on Logans part and there is an argument for defamation i believe.
If Logan doesn’t fire his manager, he will NEVER be able to claim to be an honest person believably.
That ship has pretty much already sailed.
I'm pretty confident that Logan dropped the case when someone told him about discovery.
His lawyer prob told him to back out asap
It would be astounding if someone really believed that they could sue for defamation just because someone made true statements about them that cast them in a bad light or didn't tell "the whole story"
No Lawsuit was filed and a charitable reading (of his intelligence) would be that Logan hoped the mere threat would work, without any filings needed. After all, as noted in this video, court cases are expensive and taxing on those involved.
I am rather inclined to believe far less thought went into this situation, but it is still a possibility, however slim.
If you don't want people to say things about you that make you look like a dick, then I guess don't be a dick.
Great analysis! I think Logan got legal advice on what would discovery involve and realized that he would end up in federal prison if he decided to proceed with a lawsuit
Not sure on this, but I thought I heard that apparently Logan didn't actually talk to a lawyer prior to making his initial response video.
If that is true, yeah, what you say does make a lot of sense.
@@IamCanadian3333 I have no doubt his lawyers, upon seeing the first video, were parachuting down from helicopters in an attempt to get him to stop.
@@IamCanadian3333Logan said he'd been talking to his legal team. But it was so offhand and vague that it gave me more empty threat vibes than anything. No doubt he had already talked to attorneys when Stephen's first video dropped more than a month ago, and it does seem like Logan's team is interested in suing the (other) scammers in CZ. But but the attorneys probably told him to clamshell shut and say nothing which is why Logan's responses are so neutered and vague.
@@glumreaper8885 Oh maybe. Admittedly, that was just something I heard from another lawyer on CZcams and given what his sloppy video response turned out to be, it was something I was admittedly more on the side of believing.
@@glumreaper8885 Kinda hard to do, as there is clear evidence of them manipulating Cryptozoo's value; And Logan spearheaded the idea of stealth launching and buying up all the tokens at a discount.
They're from the same team, if Logan drops them, the others can drag him down as well.
I think the reason they backpedalled fast, was because of the great idea of digging up Zach's expunged criminal record on 2002 and posting in public for all to see; Coupled with the fact that Logan still owed them 1 mil.
Thanks for doing this, Alyte. Was waiting for a real lawyer on CZcams to address these issues. On the phone recording issue, there's one more issue that people have not been looking at: the State of California getting personal jurisdiction over Stephen. Not sure how that happens.
Thanks so much, Ron!! That's actually a good point I hadn't thought about. The one way I could think he'd be roped into California court was on the defamation side, similar to getting Amber Heard in Virginia (through the Washington Post for publishing her op-ed)--the statements were all made by Coffeezilla through CZcams, which is headquartered in California. But then, it's not a given that the phone recording claim could be added to the defamation claim, because Logan Paul wouldn't be the one to sue him for that; it would be his manager, Jeff. So I'm not even sure they could be scooped up into one lawsuit.
Alyte covered that in the video. In cases off cross jurisdictional law breaking, courts typically side with the *more restrictive* jurisdiction. Meaning Coffeezilla would be tried based on California's two party consent rules.
But as she stated, the exception to California's law is in cases involving no reasonable expectation of privacy. Coffeezilla states that he is investigating Cryptozoo and that he wants Logan and Jeff's side of the story. As Coffeezilla is acting as a journalist in this sense, there is implied consent on Jeff's side that anything Jeff tells him would be recorded and used in said investigation. Jeff's rambling nonsense response even seems to acknowledge that he knows he's being recorded. Why else tell Coffeezilla that he needs to say the "truth" and that if doesn't say the truth that would open himself up to potential lawsuits.
@@PacMonster0 I heard that, but I don't think that's what Alyte meant. Texas does not prosecute violations of California law.
@@PacMonster0 Wouldn't they only be able to use it in a Civil case?
It seems like complete and utter nonsense to think he could be tried in California for an action taken in Texas that was legal in Texas. That's the phone call equivalent of the State of California ticketing a truck in Texas for violating California's emissions laws even though in never drove in Texas because the air emissions may have drifted there.
@@IkLms11 Yes, but Logan Paul repeatedly referred to the recording as a crime and a matter for law enforcement. Of course, he has NO IDEA what he's talking about.
Thank you for providing us with your legal commentary on this subject. It's important to have as many views and opinions to be able to make an informed analysis before coming to a conclusion. I have come across your channel before but I've been following this situation closely with intent. Looks like YT's algorithm led me to your channel, you've got another follower. Wishing you continued success. Thank you!
I believe that Zack Kelling recently said his prior felonies had been expunged years ago, and that he would also be filing a defamation suit against LP.
Alyte's production skills are growing fast. Lots of small touches help this really shine as her best-produced video -- small tweaks in the audio, thumbnail, set, script, etc. It's just really well polished. Not to mention the excellent legal analysis as usual. Nicely done!
Excellent summarization of the situation.
Holy shit that photoshopped inmate photo though... That's some next level shit. At first I thought Logan was just ignorant and full of ego rage, but if he's photoshopping stuff to make it seem more legit before smearing people with it... well that seems like a whole new level of malice to me.
I mean, my impression of that was more that it was Logan trying to convey that Zach was a criminal in an abstract way. I don't think the audience was necessarily MEANT to think it was a real picture, and was meant to see it as being more similar to the edits of coffeezilla seen in other parts of the video. That being said, there is CERTAINLY an argument for gross negligence there seeing how easily misinterpreted it was. It certainly LOOKED real, and if it was meant to be transparently an edit, then Logan did a very bad job of conveying that.
@Max Gosselin I would consider myself a reasonable person by the courts definition, and I had no clue that was photoshopped. Its clearly malice and lp is trying to sway public opinion on the people he hired to shift the blame from himself.
Thank you Alyte for this video, it helped me understand the whole thing alot better, you're a great legal analyst. I also think its great that you've transitioned your channel to cover more broad subjects like this one. I'm glad ur doing alright and I am looking forward for more content!
I would have paid actual money to be a fly on the wall when Logans lawyer got his hands on him.
i like your point with the phone call recording since it did seem to be the 1 potentially valid point logan had in his video. I also like the point with the expectation of privacy being needed, and when being contacted by a journalist for comment he is being asked for a statement that he can assume is going to be published.
Zack's part is also interested since zack has responded and said his record was expunged and also 20 years ago so its really not relevant. I'm interested how logan found it since my understanding is it wouldn't come up in a background check.
yeah the CA statute in question makes the “reasonable expectation of confidentiality/privacy” issue a threshold issue. that needs to be shown to establish it’s a confidential communication, which is therefore subject to the 2-party consent requirement. no confidential communication -> the analysis is over.
@Jillian Smaniotto yeah most phone calls people would likely have a reasonable expectation of privacy. But when he is asked for a comment about the story CZ was doing would he still have reasonable expectation of privacy. CZ essentially asked him a question and put a microphone in front of him.
@@electricmocasins7789 exactly! it couldn’t have been any clearer.
We don't know if that wasn't the case - stating that the call is being recorded. Also in the same call Jeff was saying to Coffee that he is obliged to report verified information which may imply he was aware the call might be shared publicly.
@Tnargav CZ said he was asking for on a story he was doing. After stating that it could probably be argued that a reasonable person would expect anything they said was likely going to be published as part of the story and therefore had no reasonable expectation of privacy.
Jeff's hole statement about CZ needing to report facts is also stupid because CZ is contacting him to verify what he was told and Jeff is someone who could prove its not true since he should be able to get receipts of payment to the developers if they were made. Instead he just wanted to say no comment and sort of imply they would sue CZ if he said anything instead of trying to disprove those facts.
Great video! I hope your channel continues to grow. This is the first "lawyer talks about" channel that I've found that actually talks about the topic in a well formatted, structured, and concise way 👌
First, I can't believe this is the first video I've seen of yours, because this is phenomenal work (subscribed). Second, I love that you have such a well-edited video and choose to include the interruption and kitty cat, because it adds so much charm. It's clear that you made a choice to keep that stuff in and I am one hundred percent here for it.
I'm glad you did this. Everyone else talking about this is a CZcams personality, but I wanted an actual lawyer's perspective. So thank you!
I love your live streams, but I think you really shine in editted videos like this. They are always so eloquent :)
Thank you for posting this vid! It was interesting to here a more in-depth legal perspective. I did not even realize that the "orange jumpsuit" image was photoshopped! That is definitely sketchy 🕵
If that background-check information is actually false, hopefully he finds this (LegalBytes) video and is encouraged to take some action
Some Ordinary Gamers did a follow up video on it. He couldn’t find any criminal records on him, so he contacted the developer.
Apparently the records were expunged, and Kelling said Logan’s characterization of the charges was extremely inaccurate, and he felt it was defamatory.
They didn’t say what the exact charges were, but I very seriously doubt he was able to get a felony conviction for aggravated armed robbery expunged. It just doesn’t seem credible, so I tend to believe the developer.
Thank you. I'm in the UK and not the US. Our defamation laws are quite different to yours in a number of respects and this is the first time I've heard such a thorough explanation of the US laws in a very straightforward way.
Such a great video from a channel I had never found before! While the timing was a bit unfortunate, it was really interesting to see a lawyer break down all the ways this was such a stupid idea by LP. Very well done video!
I’m excited about this one! Love the perspective you can bring to the situation 😊❤️
spicy drama that makes ppl rethink their actions in the future
The Channel "SomeOrdinaryGamers" got in contact with Zack (AKA Z), and Zach says that his record was expunged, but also that he never robbed a liquor store. So if what Z says is true what are the legal repercussions to that?
He also said that their were 30 developers, and that a majority of them worked remotely.
There is a video on the his channel.
yeah smartass logan p doxxed the man lmao, quick edit. he even said there was an investigation that's why he was silent, so its pretty stupid to be giving names away.
I really enjoyed your cat's erudite contribution to the video during the post filming update. Holmes clearly knows the subject matter well and has many opinions on the topic.
"SomeOrdinaryGamers" got Zach Kelling's side in his video titled _'Logan Paul's Terrible Response...'_ and Zach explains that his record is actually expunged (hence why you can't just google it and have it appear) and Logan lied on the nature of what he was accused of, calling his statements reckless defamation.
I knew Logan was gonna drop the case (the day he mentioned it)before he ever attempted to sue, even if he didn't and tried to move further on it chances are a judge in Texas would throw it out before it went to trial based on Texas anti-slapp laws. Logan attempted to do so by threatening a costly lawsuit because his wallet is bigger... As I'm writing this past Aly just started mentioning it in better detail anyways haha
alyte - this is by far one of the best analyses of this situation i’ve seen. you covered all the parts i had been screaming about but weren’t really covered by others. excellent excellent stuff!!!
Thank you so much!! 💙
Agreed! Alyte has taught me a lot about law over the past months that watching the videos regarding this situation just screamed out at me. Real happy she provided this breakdown.
@@Sir_Psych it’s really great. i’m a lawyer myself and have been disappointed by the coverage of this scenario. alyte nailed it from top to bottom.
I'm kinda sad Logan backed out. It made for good youtube/celeb drama. I mean it was clear Logan was always in the wrong from the get go, but it was just so entertaining watching Logan dig himself into a hole.
He probably backed out because every lawyer he talked to said it was stupid to pursue.
@birds He would have been fine, he has good legal insurance
@@DadsCigaretteRun antislapp laws exist.
This is kind of a weird way of thinking, y'all need to remember this isn't petty 'drama' and real people have lost millions of dollars (as stupid as their decision was to buy it in the first place, I just think some compassion is needed)
@@vivilvrAgreed. I feel like most people were banking that Coffeezilla would have fundraised all his lawyer fees. Versus the other party who would have spent his own dime. Especially when we talk about how many people dislike the other party and would just donate money to mess with him. This would have been the new Crypto boy vs Atozy.
Well I'm glad to see I was right about an anti-SLAPP measure being on the table in case that lawsuit idea had gone through as action. This video taught me a lot about defamation requirements. I had some ballpark understanding but now it's more concrete, thank you.
Great video! These self-snitching guys are their own worst enemies. Coffeezilla has great content and does a thorough job of vetting his info before he puts it out there, whereas guys like Logan, SBF and Andrew Tate hang themselves by their own rope.
Coffee deserves a Award for the no. of people he saved from these scams
Great video Alyte. I started watching Coffeezilla about a year ago and he makes really good videos. It's very interesting hearing your perspective as a attorney on this topic given the way Paul has rushed to his bumbling and reckless defensive response to Coffezilla. Also, nice touch with the Tim and Eric 'ya blew it' lmao
Coffeezilla would be a nightmare to litigate against. From what I’ve seen from his work he is a very intelligent and very patient man.
Add to that Logan has a lot of people who actively hate him and people generally viewed Coffee as the hero of the hour. If Coffeezilla started a GoFundMe legal fund he’d have major CZcamsrs and their fans mobilizing in mass.
Fantastic analysis. Very much appreciated. As a lay person I was vaguely wondering about some of these issues. Your explanation was clear and thoroughly understandable, and gives me a context to sit back and see what happens next. I'm thinking the people who claim to have lost money on Cryptozoo now have more than enough evidence to proceed against Logan Paul to recover their money. And then Logan will possibly have to deal with discovery from their lawsuits. I would think it well worth pursuing given the amounts of money claimed to have been lost.
Being weird I've watch a number of legal breakdowns of this Paul-Coffeezilla stuff... and your video seems by far to be the most clear/articulate as well as thorough.
This is the best legal breakdown of the situation I've seen so far. Very awesome work.
Logan's lawyers: Yo bro, delete that bullsh!t response video, NOW!!!!!!!! We do not want to go to DISCOOOVVVEEEERRRRRYYYY!
The bad photoshop with the background behind not matching when you look closely was hilarious lol.
Love the breakdown. Also, as pointed out in a video on this matter by SomeOrdinaryGamers, the lead developer was charged with the felonies but had his record expunged.
What exactly does that mean?.. I probably didn't pay attention to that part
@@techedbirb6663
It means it's gone. It never happened.
@asain3586 oh so even if it did, can't be used in court?
@@techedbirb6663 Yes but more than that, as it is expunged from record it means it is no longer in the records so Logan shouldn't have been able to find it through a simple background chek and the kind of background check that do give that kind of information are restricted to specific autorizations and it's generally not authorized to disclose the results. I don't know what the specific sanctions for that are and wether they would be on LP or on whoever gave him access to the background check, but it smells trouble anyways.
On top of that as what is expunged technically never hapened, Z is not a criminal anymore, and logan pulicly calling him such is probably defamation.
@desfougerescorentin2503 WOW I never heard of that before thats probably the main reason why he deleted the video
Exactly what I've been saying. The fact that he said he is suing and then turns around and tries to say is "under investigation" is bullsh!t. The "charges" have been dropped. That is if you even believe their was an investigation in the 1st place.
omg I hope someone puts a class action lawsuit together against Logan Paul.
Super informative recap and very comprehensive.
I'd like to hear your thoughts on the possible upcoming lawsuit from Henry Cavill, Gal Gadot, and Ben Affleck against Warner Brothers. This should be an interesting case of public figures versus a corporation, especially since it's likely there has been a breach of contract.
Love the past/future Alyte! 😅 Thank you for this deep dive, always appreciate it... Bonus Holmes and Mr Bytes cameo💙
Love your explanations, and giving your opinion on whether something is legally likely.
26:12 just curious: is it legal to add a hidden mic to a public courtyard to record everyone's conversation? (And this isn't me alluding to anything in the case - just curious)
I feel like a lot of private conversations take place in public when you can't see anyone close by
I really enjoy the video, but would you be able to make a Spotify podcast type of style for your content? I don't have CZcams premium and I would love to listen to this kind of content just through earbuds or a speaker while I were doing something else
Coffee has posted up a response on patreon. Basically he has kept quiet to enable Paul to make the next move in hopefully what will be compensation for the those financially hurt by all this. If that doesn't happen, he'll let the dogs loose. What really strikes me is Paul's subs have not moved an inch.
👏👏👏 Incredible simple explanation on Defamation lawsuits and how this not only doesn't qualify as that, but also puts Logan in hot water as it requires actual legal investigation(discovery) on Logan Pauls ,, totally legal" crypto stunt!
I've been watching several videos on the subject, but yours is the first one I've seen that really talks about it seriously and not just laughing and mocking. Quite refreshing and enjoyable content. I loved the video.
Hey great video!! Also, SomeOrdinaryGamers did a deep analysis on Logans response from other points of view. One of his discoveries was that, trying to find anything about that Z developer's criminal background, he couldnt find anything public. Later, he was able to contact this guy to try to confirm everything Logan says about him, and according to him it was true he was convicted 20 years ago (although the liquor store thing is just made up by Logan) but most importantly, that he got his record expunged. So how Logan had access to all that information remains a whole mistery. My question is, what legal repercussions could this probably have if its true that indeed that record was expunged and Logan somehow got access to it and made it public?? Once again, loved the video, all the explanations were great and easy to follow for people without great law knowledge. You got a new subscriber!!
Thanks for this, I needed the rundown. Hi from 🇮🇪💜
All the videos from lawyers analyzing the issue with Cryptozoo and Logan Paul's actions are great, but I believe Logan is using the free legal advice from lawyers on CZcams to make better informed decisions now. Clearly his legal team is lacking in this regard lol. I actually wish his issue wasn't analyzed by competent lawyers so we can all see Logan play his cards wrong and make a bigger fool of himself.
Wow. I definitely did not catch that the Zach Kelley jumpsuit picture was photoshopped. That was a good spot. It’s obvious when you pointed it out, but I never even thought to question the validity of the image
All I know is that federal prosecutors are normal people, who watch CZcams, too ! Makes me ponder, if I should edit a photo of Logan, and put him in an orange jumpsuit, or wait for it to happen for real.
Then offer Tate or Paul amnesty, if they agree a kick-box fight to the death - at public expense covered live on CZcams - winner takes all
Excellent video! Coffee looks like a hero and a hunk after all this lol. I only wish we could know if Steven would've let the litigation proceed or go with that Anti-SLAPP option. My money says he would've let the discovery process commence with a justified smirk on his face 💥💥
I wish there was some more legal analysis. The closest this came to providing legal insight for me was explaining the one/two party consent laws for recording. I liked the video, but it would be great to dive a bit deeper into legal text, precedent, etc. if I’m watching a lawyer’s reaction. This came across more as speculative conclusions with sprinkles of legal reasoning to support. However, thank you for posting this!
There's no way in hell that Logan consulted an attorney before releasing his response video. There were way too many basic mistakes in it that any competent lawyer would have vetoed, similar to how Logan and Jeff seemed to think that recording the phone conversation was illegal (obviously unaware that Texas is a one-party state, or how that applies to the conversation they had). I bet someone on his legal team saw the video after it was posted and immediately told him to take it down. It's always hilarious to see someone in the wrong threaten legal action, only to find out what discovery actually entails and what it means for them if they actually decide to carry out their lawsuit. Of course, the intent of such suits is never to actually go to court, but to threaten the other person into silence, which is why the suits are often dropped once the other party shows that they're willing to see the legal process through (much like how Bitboy ran away with his tail between his legs once Atozy had raised enough money for a proper legal defense).
Great financial advice begins with "So you buy these eggs..."
Hahaha! So true
Hi! New on the channel: first of all, my most sincere greetings for the content!
You made a wonderful video and a really great analysis, pointing out many things almost every other youtuber failed to point out.
So.. really good job that speaks out for your work ethics and how you do your things! "Bravo", as you'll say!
One thing that I wish to ask you thou: turns out that the infamous lead developer really was a felon but is criminal record was exponged.
Now, I'm from Italy therefore I don't know how it works in the US, but is there any legislation to protect against defaming someone who got his record exponged and (more important) are there limitations to access those informations? Because, in Italy, after your records get "exponged" only the court/prosecutor can access them and they will be kept secret until a certain phase (tipically, when the prosecutor chooses wheter or not to press chargers against you) and publish/leaking those information before that phase constitutes a felony in our system.
Is there something similat in your judicial system?
Thank you anyway and sorry for any spelling and/or grammar mistake, obviously English is not my mothertongue
:)
I am from the US and I was wondering the same thing! You did a beautiful job with your English by the way! ❤
@@jenniferconley3396 One day you may want that exponged
Zach has since come out and said that these criminal charges that happened in 2002 and were expunged so they are likely true but I don’t think Zach wanted his name released etc based on how coffee assessed him as Z and distorted his voice (probably all he was comfortable with). So can he sue Logan for releasing this information? Plus Logan released his full name and doxxed him. What are the legal ramifications.
I'm still staggered that people are surprised by one crypto being a dodgy enterprise and two logan Paul not being an honest, reliable and decent person.
its not just that an anti-slapp motion would be easy... attorneys would volunteer to defend coffeezilla b/c logan paul would be obligated to pay coffeezilla's attorney fees in an anti-slapp so its ripe for dragging out the entire process and just building up billables and handing over a 6 figure bill to logan paul.
love it
Logan Paul did something dumb? I’m shocked!
I'm not necessarily sure the call with someone else who isn't coffee can be used against him as he might not be the one recording the call. The other one on the other hand, Jeff seems to give the impression that he's well aware that the call is being recorded as he constantly tries to keep what he says to a minimum and word everything properly as well maintaining a professional tone which wouldn't really be necessary if he was unaware that he was being recorded as he would talk much more naturally.
Accusing other people being in it just for the money is hilarious.
great video! Someordinarygamers reached out to Zach Kelling, it's even weirder than you think -- he _did_ do the crimes (21 years ago lol), but he had his _record expunged._ he apparently has no idea how Logan found that stuff because it's not supposed to be accessible -- muta couldn't find it on a records search, which is why he asked.
How does _that_ shake out for defamation? He's maliciously revealing information he would have had to have known is meant to be off the record...
I had this exact same thought. What is the law regarding exposing an expunged record? Is there anything that restricts public revealing the records in case, with penalties if this is revealed?
He did a crime, but he said it wasn’t what Logan said it was. I mean the screenshot Logan posted was for obstruction, not aggravated armed robbery of a liquor store.
I would be floored if anyone was able to get an aggravated armed robbery charge expunged as an adult.
If Logan had evidence of armed robbery, why would he only show a conviction for obstruction?
Paul's response videos were so embarrassingly bad and downright idiotic, that it was hard for me to watch. Couldn't even get through them completely.
Punch drunk
Apparently the lead developer had his criminal record expunged but still makes sure whoever he is working for knows about it ahead of time. He said he would be pursuing logan in court.
Dang, didn't get to see what I wanted. You didn't specifically address it. Maybe I'll get noticed here-
What's the case if Zack had his criminal record from 20 years ago expunged? What if it's no longer part of the public record? Because Zack admitted to his past, but it was all expunged.
Nobody has asked how LP had access to information about a criminal history that isn't available to the public? Is this a soft admittance to his terrible hiring practices and would be evidence to prove negligent hiring?
About the phone call with Jeff, I think Coffeezilla asked him if he would be prepared to go on the record. If Jeff agreed, could that count as consent to be recorded
Iirc that was Jake. Jeff went on the defensive the moment Stephen said he was Coffeezilla.