Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Feb. 24, 2025 - Viva & Barnes

03:12:30

Barnes Live from Seattle - Defending Benshoof in a Case that is CRAY CRAY!

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Seattle Municipal Court.
	Today's session will be presided by the Honorable Noah Weil.
	And I do notice that we have a lot of folks logged on, and I just want to let people know that this is for the Inkasi Arrayments.
	Is anyone here for the Benshuf matters?
	If you are here for the Benshuf matters, that matter is being heard in the Seattle Municipal Court room 1003.
	And that session will be presided by the Honorable Andrea Chin.
	Okay, thank you very much.
	Thank you.
	you.
	Hey there.
	Can you take your camera off of their live stream?
	Stop your video.
	I can't hear you because you're not on stage.
	They don't want to see my beautiful face in the stream?
	That is correct.
	They just said it was going to be in another judge in another room.
	Do we need...
	This is right.
	Hold on.
	I'm going to turn my camera off.
	Yep. Here?
	No, not that.
	Where the heck is the screen?
	Here? Stop video.
	Stop video.
	Stop video.
	There we go.
	There you go.
	Okay. Yeah, Jopper is in our community.
	He's live in there, too.
	Okay, because she just said that his was going to be heard by another judge.
	So I'm wondering if the feed is going to be different as well.
	Hold on.
	See, they can see me on the stream, but if I bring myself back into the...
	Oh, am I in the stream right now?
	So we're live in the StreamYard stream.
	No, so we're live on Rumble and Locals then.
	Yes, we are.
	Yeah, okay.
	I can see us and hear both of us.
	Okay, so just bear in mind people are watching us.
	No worries.
	Okay, so the question is...
	Hearing my voice for the first time.
	The question is...
	For everybody who's watching, by the way, we're trying to watch Barnes pleading in Seattle for the Kurt Benzhoof case, and it's available to the public.
	I'm going to let the stream go, and then I'm going to take my face out.
	Maybe I'll commentate.
	I wanted to go to the car and do a video, but maybe I'm going to have to wait for that.
	FYI, your camera's on the court.
	Okay, I turned that off.
	So the question is going to be...
	Is this the right stream to watch Barnes?
	Because I said this is for another case, and if you want to go that, it's...
	What was the name of the judge?
	Kurt Chim?
	Let's see if we can...
	If this doesn't work, this is the first time we're actually trying this.
	Direct in front of the...
	Direct? Are we in the right place, Viva?
	Can people see this coming up on StreamYard?
	Yeah, they can.
	Okay, this is wild.
	So I don't know who's texting in the top corner there.
	Jopper, hello.
	Is this the Ben's Hoof hearing?
	Oh God, what do you want?
	Jopper is one of our amazing community members.
	So Jopper is in...
	Is he in the court or is he in the room?
	He is in the courtroom just like you are.
	Okay, like the digital courtroom.
	He's not in the courtroom.
	Yes, sir.
	Okay. So we're going to see if we can actually make this work.
	Okay. We can talk all we want out here, right?
	They can't hear us.
	My mic is muted.
	My camera is off.
	But they can't hear or see me.
	Correct. Okay.
	But StreamYard can see me.
	Kurt Benzhoof is a man who...
	This is for the sentencing in the...
	Civil... This is the sentencing in...
	What part of the trial is this?
	Because there's two different pending disputes, pending litigations going on.
	Well, we're going to see if this works, people.
	We're going to do it live.
	F it, we're doing it live, says Titan Testes.
	Okay, this may or may not work, but now we've got to go see if there's another...
	I had the court docket thing opened in the back.
	I just dropped it into your text, right into the chat here.
	You can go ahead and click on that.
	This is the proper courtroom.
	This is the proper courtroom.
	Join the WebEx app or join from this browser.
	Let's join from the browser.
	Join as a guest.
	Viva Frye.
	And there's my email address.
	Okay. Okay, I'm going to stop video and mute.
	Okay, join meeting.
	And we're going to see if it's the same thing.
	Oh, no, I see something different on this one.
	Okay, so hold up.
	I hear a judge.
	I hear a judge.
	Hold on, I'm going to switch to the screen.
	It's going to work.
	She received the memorandum.
	The memo's from both parties.
	Here we go.
	Okay. Tell me how the audio levels are in cryptus.
	If you're on a little more perspective, and I believe that as I put it out in their memo, a lot of my written arguments outlines a summary of a little bit more of the background in the context, and what's been going on with Mr.
	Benson to the future.
	To give your honor a little bit more of the scope of how long and how it's going on.
	I wanted to see if you died here and there in trial and was out of time to surrender himself in trial.
	I wanted your honor to send more information to inform sort of what all that's about.
	But that is not the focus of what my argument is going to be.
	This prosecutor sounds like she's going to cry.
	The real crux of this particular case, this DD case that is for the court, that the jury sat for two weeks and found Mr. Benchute guilty on 81 domestic violence counts is based on real harm that occurred.
	It's in the curve that Mr. Benchup actively did and chose to do throughout the course of almost a full year to his ex-partner, Jessica Owen, and even more egregious to their son.
	Maybe his intention wasn't to harm his son.
	I don't know.
	I don't care to try to psychoanalyze Mr. Benchup, and I don't particularly care what his personal beliefs are.
	But the evidence of what he has done is very self-eminent, and so I want to focus on that.
	To start off, I'm going to give kind of a psychological perspective here.
	There's a phenomenon that anyone who works in the domestic violence realm...
	It's probably familiar with some term or other.
	There might be different terms used for it.
	Currently, I think the most commonly used term is called DARVO, P-A-R-V-O, which stands for Denied, Attack, and Reverse, Victim, and Offender.
	This was first described by a psychologist named Jennifer Fried.
	Obviously not sure how to pronounce her last name.
	She's written a lot of articles and done a lot of studies about it.
	It's something that's been around and understood for a long time.
	She just kind of put this acronym into it and pile this together a little bit more.
	But it's essentially a way that when an abuser of any kind, an emotional abuser especially, is faced with their own actions.
	They deflect that and try to get out of any responsibility or accountability by first denying what they did, and then turning that as an attack onto their victim, the person that they abused, and therefore reversing their roles and trying to place themselves as the victim and the person that they victimized as the offender.
	This entire case and these messages that Mr. Venture sent to his son, his then 12- and then 13-year-old son, throughout the course of most of a year, is practically a textbook example of this kind of manipulative behavior.
	And you read through, or rather I had someone read through, Quite a number of examples in the trial itself.
	The jury obviously had the entire 400, some almost 500 pages of messages that they were able to go over.
	Some of them we did not go over in depth in trial.
	So I wanted to highlight a few examples of Mr. Betschew's own words and how this...
	It's the example and how this demonstrates how he manipulated and emotionally harmed his son, whether he mentioned it or not.
	We'll start off with some messages on September 28th of 2022.
	They're in the middle of a conversation and his son asks...
	So, when should I be picked up in the future when the main lawsuit goes down?
	Referring to one of many of what have now been termed as vexatious and fallacious lawsuits that Mr. Beneschuk has been and is continuing to file against Ms. Owen and a number of other people.
	And then they talk about that for a little bit.
	The son wants to actually know, like...
	What happens when you win?
	Well, when you inevitably win the lawsuit, when will that happen?
	Mr. Genshu wrote, it's hard to say with the family court judges because they are literal criminals and they are trying to destroy me because they know they are named as defendants in my federal lawsuit.
	I could use your help if you feel up to it.
	Only if you do, though.
	Son, how would I help?
	Mr. Benchu, write one page of facts.
	Sign it.
	Son, what are the facts?
	Mr. Benchu, and send it to the court.
	For example, Jade, who is Miss Owen, and Magali, who is her fiance, have been lying about everything.
	You don't want to be trapped there.
	You want to be with your sweet goofball dad.
	And then the son replies, okay, makes sense.
	But I'm worried what's going to happen on my side.
	Mr. Benchu, sending a copy to CPS and the police would be good.
	It's not going to get them arrested.
	No way.
	All it's going to be doing is smashing the glass house of their lies.
	If it's me saying it, they all just say, oh, he's that crazy asshole.
	So it isn't true.
	But if you say it, it's irrefutable.
	Yes, I get the worry on your side.
	The son?
	No, I meant how mom will react with you and me.
	First I'll help you.
	Miss Grinchute, tell me what you're worried about.
	Yeah, I know.
	What do you fear happening?
	You have been watching her closely, so tell me what you think she would do.
	The son?
	Mom got pretty betrayed.
	And I don't want to hurt people, even though this is all happening.
	Mr. Benchu, I know you have the kindest of hearts, but she is manipulating you that way.
	She plays the poor victim because she knows you will fall for it.
	But beneath her acting, she is cunning and malicious.
	And this, in capital letters, not care about you or your feelings or what you want.
	Sorry to be blunt, but it's obvious if you stuck back and look at everything.
	It's her lies she is protecting.
	Her lies that felt betrayed.
	I know she acts like a normal human, but I'm telling you not everyone is a normal human.
	She is worse than my mom.
	you see.
	And I want to specifically point out the line where the son in this conversation says that his mom felt pretty betrayed and he didn't want to hurt people, and yet his own father was placing him in a situation where he was being constantly told that his own mother was a liar, that she was, as he says many other times in these...
	In these chats, a witch, a literal witch, a prostitute, a number of other terms that I don't honestly care to repeat.
	That his mother is not even human and that she doesn't care about him and that she doesn't love him.
	What kind of a situation does that put a little boy in?
	When he both loves his mother and his father and he wants to respect and do what's going to make both of them happy.
	But yet his own father is pitting him against his mother in such a way.
	As another example, skipping ahead to January 10th of 2003, Mr. Benshub says to his son, quote, do you remember in November 2014 going to Jade's credit union with a shoebox with my cash and the bank tellers taking forever account at three times because they kept getting a different total?
	I don't believe so.
	I'm pointing this example out because he's talking about some kind of events at a bank in 2014.
	His son, who was born in 2009, would have been five years old.
	What could a five-year-old possibly know about this?
	And yet his own father is trying to...
	Seed memories out of him or maybe even implant memories in his head that he was far too young to know what was going on so that he could then try to manipulate his son and use them against his mother again in the declaration that he talks about multiple times throughout this entire conversation.
	She then mentions again later Just a few lines down.
	A quote from Mr. Benshub, it would be best to put in your declaration.
	Can you write out your recollections in here or in an email draft in your email account?
	Sure, it's not much.
	most stuff I can write for you but those things I don't have knowledge of.
	you.
	Some of the worst examples of this are honestly difficult even for me to read, and I have read these many times.
	And in the course of doing domestic violence work, or working with abusers or survivors, which is external beyond my prosecution experience, this is some of the worst manipulative The worst emotional manipulation I've ever seen,
	especially of a child, where he vacillates between the sensitivity on the side, they'll spend a long, long time talking about video games, movies, you know, what looks like a normal or a healthy or a happy interaction.
	And then...
	All of a sudden, Mr. Benship will jump into using that mood or that emotion at the time to, again, try to get his son to give him something that he needs, whether that's spying on his mother, telling him to go through her files, to listen to her attorney, or if his son pushes back even a little bit.
	Mr. Benchu essentially makes him feel like a coward or like he's not doing what his father wants.
	And here is another example from January 18. They're in the middle of talking about the specific plans for how the son is going to run away and go stay with Mr. Benchu.
	The son asks, I can come over, can't I?
	Mr. Benchu, true.
	The restraining order only names me.
	I can't tell Jade.
	She's a lying, feeding, child-abusing whore.
	Three crying, laughing faces.
	The son, true.
	Mr. Benchu, imagine the look on her face.
	Crying, laughing face.
	I'm not controlled by fear.
	I'm being limited by the system's criminal corruption.
	Studying all these bullshit, legal, booby traps.
	You can do whatever the fuck you want to do.
	Growing up with Jade as your ma, she has trained you to be polite and go along.
	Part of her indoctrination has been to vilify me and ostracize me every time I pointed out her lies.
	She has been doing this for years.
	That's why she would always take you to her room and close the door and isolate me from you.
	Because I just want to pause here and, again, go back to the DARPA, the Deny Attack, Reverse Victim and Offender.
	It's practically a textbook example of how to do that.
	Ms. Owen had tried to remove her son from arguments or stressful situations in the home between herself and Mr. Benshuk at the time.
	Mr. Benshuk is now using that.
	To try to spin it, to make her looks out to be the abuser to their own son.
	I'm going to start with the quote again, still Mr. Genshub.
	What has been happening in the last 501 days is that same tactic on steroids.
	If anyone questions her about it, she subtly accuses you or them of not being trustworthy of some other bullshit and articulation.
	Usually guilt.
	If guilt doesn't work, she blames or even attacks.
	If that doesn't, she cuts the person off completely.
	That is what a mental and emotional abuser does.
	She plays victim as long as she can and attacks when that doesn't work." He is literally describing everything that he is doing, but attributing it to his own.
	Starting quote again, and when she attacks, she still says she was the victim defending herself.
	I've been watching her face for years, not an angry person, but living with that abuse year after year got under my skin occasionally.
	She wasn't targeting you because you went along with her face.
	She targeted me over and over and over.
	She would never admit what she was doing, even when literally pointed it out the moment she was doing it.
	That woman is evil.
	And Justice is probably worse, but they are both very similar.
	She doesn't love you.
	She doesn't care about you.
	Son? Yeah.
	Mr. Benchu, you are a cute little pet poodle to showcase to her friends and clients to show how cool she is.
	It's disgusting.
	It's so disrespectful of you.
	So abusive.
	That's been the hardest thing for me to know what she is doing to you and wanting to protect you and stop it.
	That's why I kept trying to explain it to you on Zoom and as in Dava.
	I had to open your eyes to what she has been doing so you would be able to break free of her spells.
	The lawyer and guardian ad litem and judges used it against me.
	Get it?
	I had to play the long game as hard as it has been to help you see It's your own eyes.
	Sun, ooh, I get it.
	I get it.
	get it.
	Thank you.
	It was on for a while, but...
	I'm not going to live for the court, but going on forever.
	I do want to end with one particular example, where, as I mentioned earlier, this is one of the times that Mr. Benshue was trying to get his son to listen into his mother's conversations with his family.
	This is actually just later in the same conversation on January 18th.
	You used to, sorry, quote by Mr. Benchu, you used to sit by the door listening to conversations when you were younger.
	It's perfectly normal for you to be wondering what she is talking to an attorney about.
	You used to sit by the door listening to conversations when you were younger.
	Teenagers are inherently curious, dork.
	Just saying.
	The sun.
	Hmm. True.
	I'll try.
	Mr. Benchu.
	Extendable ears?
	George and Fred.
	Was Harry a coward?
	No. I'm just trying to inspire you to stand up.
	Stop living in fear of what people do.
	End quote.
	I'm just going to pause there in case anyone is not familiar with Harry Potter, the reference there.
	George and Fred were characters of Harry Potter who invented magical, extendable ears where they could listen in on people from far away.
	And then the line was Harry a coward, meaning Harry Potter, is essentially telling his son if Harry was a hero and he could do whatever he needed to do, then the son would be a coward by not following his father's advice.
	Sort of the implication there.
	Mr. Benshoof then ends with a little mini roleplay where he tells his son how the conversation with his mother ship goes.
	Quote, Mr. Benshoof writes, A, the son.
	Yeah, so what?
	Jade, why?
	Son, because I'm curious what a skinny, lying, pleading, child abusing for is up to now.
	Three crying, laughing faces.
	He's literally putting abusive language in his son's mouth to use against his mother.
	Thank you.
	Now, this comes after this last conversation that I just read was from January 18th.
	So this came months after the family court had already been through.
	About nine months of litigation on their side of things, where the judge on that end had gone from first issuing a regular visitation, video visitation, in-person visitation, but there were some restrictions, but there was still a lot of contact between Mr. Ben Schiff and his son, as we saw in trial throughout the course of the year.
	That gradually got whittled down and whittled down as it became clear that this was the kind of language and manipulation that Mr. Banshee was incessantly using on this young boy to manipulate his proceedings, to try to manipulate the court, and most especially to try to interfere with this boy's relationship with his own mother.
	And all of that comes after That court finally, in October of 2022, finally signs a final restraining order, an order of passage that completely restricted Mr. Venture from having any contact whatsoever with his son and granted 100% custody to Ms. Owen all rights and responsibilities.
	I am not a family attorney, it's not my specialty, but even...
	In my limited knowledge, even I know that it's an extremely rare thing for a family court to do.
	It will try to find almost any exception, any way to allow at least some kind of contact between parents and their children, because there is a constitutional right to parent, and it is very important in courts to take that very seriously.
	And yet the judges in family court, after about...
	No, at that point, I'm sorry, it was a year of litigation because it started in September of 2021.
	After a year of litigation, I've seen just the extent of abuse that Mr. Ben Shoup keeps on everybody that ever disagrees with him.
	That court found that the only way To keep their son safe from Mr. Banshee's influence is to not let him contact his son at all.
	And this case is about how he continually violated that for at least a year.
	This case mainly focused on the Discord chats, just because they're the strongest evidence that we have.
	They're all written out, but certainly they aren't the only examples.
	As I mentioned, there were video conversations.
	At Indaba is one of the family court in-person places where visitations can be held under supervision.
	And there were video Visitations between Mr. Venture and his son throughout the year, which the court did initially allow, but he was overstuffing his bounds on that as well by saying similar things to the contents of these messages in those videos.
	Those were not charges.
	There was also continuing even after the son did go to Mr. Venture's house and The officers showed up and tried to arrest Mr. Gonshute as a mandatory arrest for violating the no-contact order.
	He showed himself up in his house and refused to talk to anyone and they had an hours-long hostage negotiation to try to get him out, which ended up with officers leaving at that point because it was the safer option.
	And which then set off an over a year, year and a half long struggle with this city and all of its departments and task forces with federal government.
	And I honestly don't even know how many other different agencies and divisions were involved in having to finally go to his house and...
	arrest him and get him into court for all of his ongoing just behavior Even after that date in January, January 23rd of 2023, an officer showed up and refused to come out.
	He still continued, and he admitted, continuing, trying to contact his son and influence them, in trial, in his own closing statements, argument to the jury, Mr. Bunchu admitted that, yes, he did send, through third parties, he sent other people to his son to get him to sign this declaration that he mentions multiple times throughout this conversation.
	And his son did sign it through Eastern Part of Contacts.
	The city was aware of that, and Mr. Benchik asked why that was not additionally charged.
	I mean, that's a very big question, I guess.
	not That is a good question because it certainly could have been, but I mean, are 80 counts of violations not enough?
	Does there need to be another count?
	I mean, how much does somebody need to be charged with something before they finally stop?
	And yet they don't stop.
	And just this morning, Mr. Genship was in family court again, again, trying to vacate.
	The underlying restraining order and parenting plan, and that forms the foundation of this case, which he did legally go through the process of going through the vexatious litigant process that he had to go through to file that.
	So I'm not saying that he didn't need to file files, but he made exactly the same arguments that he is doing throughout the course of this trial, throughout the course of the entire family court proceeding, and no matter how many times he is told no or disproven, I'm just doing what he wants, what he thinks is right, that there is literally nothing that can change its mind.
	There is no alternative, there is no rehabilitative measure that can be taken.
	He is so self-assured in his rightness in everything that there's nothing any court can do short of keeping him in custody that will ever make him stop.
	And I, in fact, even Judge Sutton this morning said, and she's...
	An extremely experienced family court judge, and she specifically told Mr. Benshuk this morning, with all the many vexatious political orders that she sees and rules on, he is the most vexatious and the most fallacious that she has ever seen.
	And that, in my opinion, is an understatement.
	I know that this is kind of a lot of in custody time to ask for what are misdemeanor counts.
	There are a lot of counts, which is why it ends up adding up to so much time, but 18 days for each violation is really not very much time at all, especially involving a child.
	And it's because this is...
	An extreme example.
	I really can't think of any other defendant who behaves so egregiously.
	And the only way to keep this boy safe, he is still a boy, is to keep him out of the influence of his father, at least until he's an adult, at least for the next five years.
	So the city does ask that the court follow its full recommendation of 364 days for the custodial interference in jail and 18 days in jail for each of the violations of the new concept order.
	Agenda, 1,084 days total.
	And a full five-year violation.
	We're a full five-year no-contact orders for Ms. Owen, obviously, and for their son, ARW, and also for Ms. Owen's fiancé, Madalee Lerman, who is just by necessity, by having to have a relationship with them, has been rubbed into this abusive behavior herself.
	I know that someone is here and she did want to give the court to see a next person.
	All right.
	Good afternoon, Ms. Owen.
	ahead and have a seat there at council table Okay. And so I know who you are, but for the record, why don't you state your name and then go ahead and tell me what you'd like to say.
	My name is Jessica Owen.
	Just so that we made a record for you, I said I know who you are.
	So, and then go ahead and let me know what it is that you'd like to say.
	I'd like to read my victim impact statement.
	Okay. I, Jessica Owens, submit this impact statement on behalf of myself and my minor son, ARW.
	In support of the prosecutor's sentencing recommendation.
	I take no pleasure in being here today.
	I feel no satisfaction in my ex, Kurt Benchufe, being arrested and convicted of 81 criminal charges.
	To be clear, I believe we have all lost by being forced to participate in this process, and yet the singular person responsible for bringing us to this climactic finish is none other than Kurt Benchufe himself.
	I wish for nothing more than to put this whole ordeal behind me.
	I have no desire to revisit the trauma of the last four years of my life.
	But here I am, once again, trying to convey the sprawling and insidious nature of Kurt Benchief's unceasing campaign of abuse so that I can hopefully finally get the relief that my family and I so desperately need to heal.
	I want to escape this man.
	And the overwhelming pain that he has brought my son, my partner, myself, and so many of my friends and family.
	The harassment he has inflicted on me and the people who care about me has been relentless, and it continues even now.
	The sentencing memorandum submitted by the prosecutor includes many examples of Kurt Benchu's incessant abuse of the legal system through scores of frivolous legal filings against me, my friends and family, My lawyers, various judges, city, state, and federal officials, public figures, and many others, all of which has led to his designation as a vexatious litigant in both state and federal courts.
	The sentencing memorandum also includes a reference to him filing new litigation regarding a case a mere three days after he was released from jail for home monitoring in November.
	This was a case that had already been dismissed with prejudice in March of 2023.
	But the larger picture is that over the past four years, I have submitted almost 20 police reports against Ben Kurt Benchu, spent countless hours engaged in writing and reviewing legal filings necessitated by his harassment, gone into significant death by spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on legal fees for my lawyers in both family and civil court.
	I've been present at numerous Zoom court hearings, been involved in two in-person trials, hired a GAL, and paid for her services entirely on my own, and received well over 4,000 pages of legal filings from this man.
	There have been times I have had to respond to two or more of his harassing filings on the same day.
	I have also had to counsel my friends and family members who have been added as defendants in his senseless lawsuits.
	Some friends have distanced themselves from me and my son because of what they fear from this man.
	It has been onerous to keep up with, and it has depleted me in every way.
	But that is just one aspect of the abuse I have endured in my relationship with Kurt Benchufe.
	I began dating Kurt Benchufe in the summer of 2007.
	A year later, I became pregnant and I gave birth to our son, ARW, in April of 2009.
	Kurt and I had a tumultuous relationship for 13 years in which he was emotionally abusive and sometimes violent, even though that violence was mostly directed at things around us and not at our son or myself.
	In many ways, I acquiesced to things in our life together that were profoundly unhealthy and emotionally untenable.
	I did a lot to placate Kurt to prevent our fights from escalating.
	I shrank myself in order to avoid conflicts.
	I continued to do this even after I moved out of our shared house.
	I knew that confronting Kurt would result in the kind of vindictive behavior myself and so many others have experienced over the last four years.
	Even so, during the years that we worked together, I made three separate police reports against him.
	There would have been more, except that I feared what he would do in retaliation if I did.
	I documented many of these incidents with Photos and texts to friends.
	One example was an argument that escalated to the point where he grabbed ARW out of my arms while calling me a lying cunt, slut, and a bitch in front of our son and left a bruise on my arm and hit our son's head on the wall.
	This was because I gave our son candy when Kurt said not to.
	Once he shattered the rear window of my truck after I vented my frustration to him that he had a loaded lumber in my parking space and left it there for several months.
	One morning, he left a dead squirrel on the hood of my truck because he blamed my cat for killing it.
	One afternoon, I came home to find a cardboard box completely covered in packing tape.
	Absolutely every square inch of the box was covered in tape.
	And inside, he had put my cat.
	My cat was there for hours on the porch.
	Kurt had no idea when I would be home, and he just left him there without telling me.
	On another occasion, after arguing about me accepting an invitation for our family to attend a Christmas party without consulting him first, Kurt slammed the front door hard enough to shatter the glass panes in it and began shouting at me.
	When I told him that if he didn't stop, I would call the police, he escalated by breaking a wooden cutting board in half, slamming multiple dishes in the sink, and then continued screaming in my face.
	At this time, I walked to my bedroom and closed the door and called the police.
	I opened my door to look for my son, who was nine at the time, but I couldn't find him.
	Instead, I saw Kurt ripping a door off the door jamb, still screaming at me from down the hallway.
	I closed the door, and a moment later, I found my son hiding under my bed.
	He refused to come out.
	ARW was terrified and crying.
	I think the trouble with emotional abuse is that it is often so hard to identify, especially by the victims experiencing it.
	For me, it built up over a long period of time, and it was interspersed with normal things like family dinners, board games, and bedtime stories.
	The violence seemed like an anomaly, a result of his bad day or my neglectfulness, but it served to amplify his message, do everything possible not to upset him.
	Even now, as I type this list of things he did, a part of me still feels like it was my fault.
	Remembering these incidents fills me with a familiar sense of guilt and responsibility.
	Some part of me believed that he was justified for terrorizing me in the way that he did.
	That I should have known better than to take up too much room in the refrigerator, or how dare I leave that tin in the sink until morning, and why did I believe that I could take up space by using the coat rack for my belongings?
	And I should definitely have known not to argue that he was being unreasonable.
	I'm very thankful about an invitation to a Christmas party.
	It has taken me years to acknowledge my experience for what it really was, domestic abuse, and to understand how toxic it truly was.
	And it still is toxic and terrifying.
	I have been texted over 1,500 times by Kurt Benshuev and received hundreds of calls from him in the last year alone in clear violation of active restraining orders.
	And of course he has been now convicted of 81 counts focused on his similarly toxic behavior toward and communications with ARW in violation of the same restraining orders.
	The harassment by this man has been relentless and is ongoing to this very day as he is appealing and re-litigating various legal cases against me and others in the community.
	Despite filing innumerable lawsuits, petitions, motions, and other litigation against me, my fiancé, my two lawyers, their business partners, various judges, officers, and city officials, and losing in every single one, Kurt Benchhoof remains undeterred.
	He simply respects no boundaries, and I am afraid when his options to harass me and the people who support me in court run out that he will retaliate physically.
	I am afraid that he will kill me or someone who I care about.
	It feels like the harassment is never ending.
	In March of 2023, my family made the difficult decision to move away from our home because of it.
	We made this decision because we flinched every time the doorbell rang.
	This was due to the large number of friends and associates Kurt sent to our house at all hours of the day and night.
	Ostensibly to deliver legal documents, but which I believe was actually intended to harass us.
	These people would ring our doorbell repeatedly, once long and hard enough to break it.
	They would hide behind trees and cars and around the corner of my garage.
	They were aggressive and often said weird and terrifying things.
	I also lived in constant fear that Kurt Benchief would kidnap our son, something he had done before.
	Every day I would stand at the end of the driveway and watch until our son was picked up by the bus.
	Our friends created phone trees and safety plans for our family so that we had a strategy for a variety of worst-case scenarios.
	Multiple friends signed up for our home camera service so that they too could get notifications when anyone came to our door.
	We were scared every day.
	Our community was scared for us, and this is why we eventually concluded that we had to disappear from a life that we had created here in Seattle.
	I didn't tell anyone except for my closest friends, and I certainly didn't post about it on social media.
	My son began school in a new place, and while it was gratifying to see him grow and flourish away from the malign influence of her bench youth and his hateful communications and poisonous ideas, I don't share the first day of school pictures that all my friends are sharing with their kids because I don't want to give this abusive man any opportunities to find out where we are.
	Even now, many of my friends are surprised when I tell them I don't live in Seattle anymore.
	I have become so secretive because I fear being found by Kurt Benchu.
	In short, I uprooted my entire family to move to an undisclosed location to protect ourselves because for a long time...
	We have little faith in what the legal system can do to protect us.
	Prior to Kurt Benchu's arrest on July 3rd, 2024, he had several outstanding warrants, and yet it took over a year to finally bring him in.
	And during that time, he continued to call and text me to let me know that my time was running out, that I was going to pay for my crimes, and that I was an abuser and a liar who deserves what I have come into me.
	I cannot begin to convey the sheer amount of stress and fear he has created in my life.
	It is impossible to tell you everything that I and my family have endured just to make it to this point safely.
	There are so many things that it borders on unbelievable.
	What I have included here is just a small selection of highlights, but it is by no means exhausted.
	I think it can be hard to understand the climate of fear that Kurt Benchufe has created in my life and that of my family without considering the entire campaign of harassment he has waged for years against us.
	It is vast and overwhelming for me to contemplate, let alone write about.
	I loathe the time I spend thinking about Kurt Benchufe.
	He has occupied years of my life, and the one thing I want more than anything else in the world is to forget about him and the pain he has caused my family and myself.
	It is exhausting and stressful to remember the multitude of ways that he has targeted us and tried to harm us and been successful.
	This harassment is insidious, and it has permeated my entire life for years.
	After enduring a criminal trial during my abuser, And my son's abuser got to cross-examine me in person.
	I am determined to do whatever I can to make sure he spends the maximum amount of time behind bars.
	I'm sure he would argue that he was just exchanging text messages with our son.
	What harm could be in that?
	Even setting aside their vile and damaging nature and the long-term consequences of being subjected to that abuse by the principal victim, my son, The harm is that those texts are just one part of a much larger picture.
	They are a sign of Kurt Benchu's utter disregard for any law and boundary he dislikes.
	They demonstrate that nothing will prevent him from doing whatever he feels he is entitled to, no matter what a judge or a police officer or literally anyone says.
	He clearly was not supposed...
	He knew he was not supposed to be...
	Communicating with our son, he clearly instructed ARW to erase the messages in order to prevent discovery.
	He was violating the temporary restraining order repeatedly on recorded Zoom calls allowed in our temporary parenting plan, and having contact with ARW rescinded because of it in family court.
	And yet he felt entitled to lie and get away with those text messages in Discord because he wanted to.
	He believed it was not a big deal, and he describes it just like that in recent court filings.
	And if you do not punish him in a significant way, you will reinforce this belief in him, and the next time he wants to break the rules or law, it may not be so inconsequential.
	And who will bear the burden of being responsible for letting him believe that he can get away with it?
	He has been getting away with so much for so long.
	Why would he stop now?
	Kurt Benchufe is truly a threat not only to me and my son, but to my fiancé, my friends, my family, lawyers, to judges, officers, the Seattle Public Schools, grocery clerks who saw him brandish a shotgun outside their store when he took exception to the fact that they asked him to put a mask on.
	Really, to anyone who has the audacity to disagree with him.
	When does this end?
	When does my right to exist safely in the world, free from threat and harassment, get to be exercised?
	When will this finally be over?
	But now, there is an opportunity to put a halt to this man's outrageous behavior.
	I want to emphasize that I am deeply grateful to the prosecutors and the victim's advocate, and to this court, and to the jury who convicted him on 81 counts, for finally bringing Kurt Benchup to justice.
	I'm also grateful to the police officers and SWAT team who devoted nearly a day to arresting him as a start to this process of bringing him to justice.
	The only freedom from Kurt Benchufe that I have had in these last four years was when he was finally arrested on July 3rd, 2024, until he was released on November 27th, 2024.
	Even now, while he has been out on an ankle monitor, I fear for my family's and my safety.
	Please give him the maximum time possible.
	I beg you to give my family a chance to heal and to simply exist without the specter of danger that Kurt brings to our lives.
	Please protect my son, my partner, my community, and myself from him.
	Thank you.
	Right, and City, anyone else who would like to be heard from the City side?
	And I'll hear from Mr. Schilling.
	Should I hear from Mr. Schilling next?
	I think that might sound scary.
	Your Honor, I have a footnote.
	I have two counts.
	I have two counts.
	It's not where someone's family is ripped apart.
	It's not where, you know, children were manipulated.
	I have a trespass, and I have Seth.
	Seth was under $100.
	Very forthright.
	But all of that you just heard happened while he was awaiting sentencing for those two counts.
	Complete disregard for a while.
	Complete disregard for the peril he was already in.
	It didn't matter to him.
	All of that.
	This pattern continued.
	My count, trespass.
	Often you see this and it's innocuous.
	You know, it's something that...
	You know, we often don't consider, you know, the same as an assault.
	We don't consider it.
	But this trespass is different.
	This was a man who had been turned away several times because he would not listen, he would not comply, he wouldn't comport with rules, much as he does not comport the law.
	And when asked to leave repeatedly by the store, he would refuse.
	Eventually, he just started taking threats.
	And so that's where we get to the fact.
	Now again, this isn't family ripped apart, but this is what happened first.
	And while all of this is occurring, he's still dodging sentencing on these two counts.
	It's a completely different time period.
	He'd done this back in 2020.
	He'd been convicted in 2021, but had evaded sentencing this entire time.
	And evaded sentencing while he did all of this.
	He didn't stop.
	He didn't learn less than...
	There was nothing that would stop him.
	There's no rule.
	There's no law that would stop him.
	He just kept going.
	The same as he just kept going back to the store each time, even when told he wasn't allowed to feed.
	It's the same habit.
	Now, it's, again, not his family.
	It is society.
	It is everyone else in the world that has to deal with him.
	Again, not as traumatizing an experience, but...
	Very similar experience.
	It's the same song being played.
	It's just that they had to deal with it so much more.
	Your Honor, I'm asking on these two counts for 364 days with 304 suspended, run consecutive on each count and consecutive to any of these other charges.
	This was in line first.
	This was a different period of time.
	These were different crimes.
	And again, none of this brought his attention.
	None of this made him stop.
	He just kept going.
	Now, I do think that there should be a suspended sentence.
	It should, you know, in part be suspended.
	And a condition that I think the court should strongly consider is a mental health evaluation and follow-up treatment with a state-certified provider.
	That's all I can do.
	Thank you.
	Okay, and anyone else from the city side?
	you, Lisa.
	I'll be just simple.
	Nothing else.
	Okay, right.
	Let me hear from defense.
	Go ahead.
	Thank you, Your Honor.
	At the outset, would continue to move from the continuance on the grounds that what we saw, for example, is A lot of talk about the county case, about the reasons to sentence him here, which is because of the facts and the issues alleged in the county case.
	The problem that has for me is that our defense would make a statement, giving a response to the victim at back statement, if we were after the trial in the county case.
	Now that he's having, he has to assert, I have to advise him to assert the amendment at this point, and not...
	Asserve what could reduce its sentence here because it could be used against them in the county case.
	That is why I do renew my continuance request to have the sentencing hearing done after the county trial is over, which starts next month.
	Okay. Well, I understand.
	The court is going to go forward with sentencing.
	This has been pending since last fall, and so we had a status hearing last week, and I know that you had made the motion to continue, which was denied, and the court is going to deny that motion again.
	So, given that, if you'd like to...
	Go ahead.
	Yes, John.
	Just two things procedurally, just to offer proof.
	If we'd had a continuance, I believe we would have been able to show two things.
	Mr. Bensoof would have been able to give an elocution that would have responded to that, that I believe would have led to mitigating factors found by the court.
	The second, just for approved purposes for field preservation, that the actual victim, in this case the son, would have said he was not a victim, that he initiated the conversations, that he wants to talk with his son.
	Through his father, and he wants to have a relationship with his father, and that he objects to his mother removing him from his father.
	And at the age of 15, under Washington State law, he's supposed to have that right.
	So that's just what I believe an offer proof would show how that continues to be great.
	To the issues, note that we heard three things.
	We heard a lot of appeals to emotion.
	We heard very little law.
	And we heard every case except this one.
	And about 80 to 90% of what was discussed.
	I get that there's a domestic dispute that's gone on in multiple forums and formats and courts, but 90% of what Ms. Owen describes refers to the county case to come.
	She's saying, Judge, please sentence him here for what is going to happen in that case.
	That is not appropriate as to this case.
	To this case, we're here on him texting his son.
	That's it.
	And the legal standard in Washington under Thorne and under Court 921-P2-514.
	The Washington Supreme Court made clear that the Washington State Constitution's requirement against cruel and unusual punishment is very equal protection oriented.
	In other words, it's focused on, will our similarly situated people being given similar sentencing outcomes?
	And so they've focused on looking at the nature of the offense charged in this case.
	Look at the focal point of the policy priorities and sentencing that the legislature has passed.
	The court recommended in Thorne look at what other similarly situated defendants would get, both in Washington and in other states, and in comparable kinds of allegations.
	So that's that constitutional analysis.
	If we look at that, we go to the statistical summary of adult felonies sentencing here in Washington for last year, published by Caseload Forecast Council.
	The 57% of people convicted of felonies did no prison time in Washington.
	The average sentence range was 23.8 months.
	This was for assaults, for batteries, animal cruelty, arson, rape, sexual assault.
	For animal cruelty, convicted animal cruelty, 21 months, and over half got probation.
	For arson, half got probation.
	Average sentence, 24 months.
	Cyber stalking.
	Everybody got probation, convicted of cyber stalking.
	Of those convicted of domestic, violent, court-ordered violations, and these were felony violations that had underlying assaults, rape, beatings, etc., 40% got no prison time at all, got probation, and the average sentence was 21 months.
	Yet what they asked for is a sentence for misdemeanors for a middle-aged defendant with no allegation of actual violence, no conviction of violence here, no conviction on drugs, no gang history, no long criminal road to the map.
	Someone that is a middle-aged defendant with little criminal history would be sentenced more than twice harsher than any other defendant in this state.
	In fact, I could find no case in America where anybody has been sentenced to five years over nonviolent violation of a contact order, least of all for texting his own son, which is what we're here for.
	They want to talk about the other cases.
	Because this case doesn't warrant this sentence.
	We follow the thorn factors.
	We look at other jurisdictions.
	Other jurisdictions are issuing sentences more like time served or less in the state of Washington.
	They're issuing usually probation in like areas.
	So what we're seeing is they're asking for something that's way out of time.
	Now let's look at what we're asking for.
	We're not asking for a generous sentence.
	We're asking for a harsher sentence than most.
	Most assault convicts got in the state of Washington.
	Most battery convicts got in the state of Washington.
	Most robbery convicts got in the state of Washington.
	Most felony convicts got in the state of Washington.
	We're asking for time served, plus probation for five years.
	So, under time served, in this case, he's already done the electronic monitoring counts as time served in Washington.
	He's already done seven months of that.
	That's equal to a 15-month-plus sentence, under the way a sentence would typically function here in the state of Washington.
	That is longer than 60% of felony domestic violent court order cases got.
	So we're still asking for something that is a harsher, meaner, more punitive sentence than most defendants that were convicted of felonies got.
	They're asking for a sentence that's never been given anywhere in the history of the country, at least of all the state of Washington.
	I get they feel punitive.
	They'll get a second shot, they get a literal second bite of the apple here in a week in a county case.
	And that's 90% of what they're talking about is what's in the county case.
	That's where there's a stalking charge.
	That's where there's a harassment charge.
	Those are over there.
	So I would say from a constitutional perspective, we look at similarly situated individuals under these foreign standards that would recommend our sentence, not recommend the prosecution sentence.
	The second factor is concurrent versus consecutive.
	The entire basis of any sentence above a year.
	About time served, is based on, let's treat all of this as concurrent sentences.
	Well, here the Porter case is almost directly on point.
	This is 942, T2, 974, Act 976, Washington Supreme Court, 1997.
	They said, when you're looking for concurrent sentencing, look for, you know, if someone is repeating the same crime or the same victim over a compressed time period, That, the court said, is the classic definition of concurrent sentencing.
	That is not going to be due to consecutive sentencing.
	And so I would say under the Porter standard, there's no grounds to issue a consecutive sentence in here.
	And the consecutive sentence of the kind the government is asking would be a violation of the Porter standard.
	The third aspect is looking at collateral issues.
	So they acknowledge...
	In their own description, the collateral consequences.
	So I understand that Ms. Owen sees herself solely as a victim.
	She often initiated a lot of these cases.
	He sought to recover and take from Mr. Benzouf his car.
	She succeeded.
	She asked to take away his home.
	She succeeded.
	She asked, as punishment for this, as the prosecution laid out, part of the reason why he doesn't have any contact or any custody of his son right now, the reason why he can't even seek A change in the parenting order is because of him texting his son previously.
	They laid it out.
	That was what that court issued as punishment.
	So you're talking about someone who's lost his car, lost his house, lost his son.
	Now they ask, take away his liberty and take away it more than any court has ever done in the student country.
	And they say, don't worry, it's just a coincidence that both Ms. Owen and the prosecutor keep talking about cases other than this one.
	Keep talking about paying.
	Punish him because he sued judges.
	Punish him because he sued prosecutors.
	Punish him because he sued companies.
	Punish him because he opposed the vaccine mandate on his son.
	Punish him because he opposed the mask mandate at a local school.
	That's what we, after the store's restraining order was entered, he never went back into that school.
	That he believed that he had a religious right to not wear the mask at a public accommodation.
	By the way, the law supports him.
	I get that here in Washington.
	Some of these rules are considered abhorrent.
	They disagree with the politics of Mr. Benson.
	But that's never the permissible basis of punishment.
	That's what the Supreme Court made clear in the Dawson case.
	Dawson, which is cited in 503 U.S. 159, said evidence of a person's beliefs should not come into their senses, because that is a First Amendment violation.
	Then we get to the last component, where they want to use this case.
	To strip him of any right to ever have any parental contact with his son.
	To even respond to his son's message, even when his son is an adult.
	They want this to apply when his son is 19, when his son is 20. We have two objections there.
	One is an issue for the future appeal, which is whether this underlying court order is itself constitutional.
	There is a process the Supreme Court has laid out for when we're going to terminate parental rights.
	That process was not followed here by the family court.
	The government implicitly acknowledges that.
	So they just went ahead with it.
	It says it's extremely rare what the court is doing.
	That's right, because it's unconstitutional what the court's been doing.
	And they asked this court to compound that by punishing him for asserting his constitutional right of parenthood, which, to my knowledge, has never been done before.
	Because they didn't follow the termination procedures, those termination procedures, they said, well, that's the delinquency statute, and that's the other statute.
	That delinquency process exists because that's a constitutional requirement.
	That's what the Supreme Court made clear and latter.
	452, U.S. 18, which said the fundamental right to parent is a due process right, which requires all these procedural components before that right can be taken away.
	But here they asked the court to compound that.
	By the court now super overriding the family court, Apparently, the family court has no problem resolving these issues it has consistently, and issuing a no-contact order that would supersede the family court.
	Any issue with his contact or custody of his son should be dealt with in the family court, but he clearly has no problem doing so in favor of his own.
	In the end, what we're looking at is someone, they're asking the court to issue the harshest, most vicious, Punitive sentence in the history of this state or anywhere that I can talk for a similar case.
	Where the facts in this case are about talking to a son.
	An important look at all those texts.
	The prosecution read their son, but as the prosecution acknowledged, most of those texts are normal, healthy, happy texts between a father and a son.
	Many of those are a father responding to a son.
	And how will it look?
	If the harshest sentence ever issued in the state of Washington in this kind of case or anywhere in the country just happens to be done with someone who has accused the courts of corruption, the prosecutor of corruption, brought legal complaints and ethics complaints.
	They seem to suggest that that would lead people to think, oh, there is no corruption in the system.
	Instead, everybody's going to think, well, look, he's got the harshest sentence in the history of Maine on a charge that was related to charges he's going to face next month, the next week, where the arguments are...
	The same as what they're going to make here.
	That's where that sentencing should occur.
	So if we follow the legal constitutional standard, if we consider the collateral harm he's already suffered, if we look at concurrent versus consecutive sentences, all of those point to the same thing, which is a time-served sentence, giving him credit for the electronic monitoring and the time he's been in custody, and he's under the court's continued custodial control with probation.
	He screws up or does anything that they're talking about that's illegal, you have complete, real, effective remedy.
	Because that's what the probation offers.
	What happens if he goes to prison for the five years they're talking about?
	His relationship with his son is dumb.
	There's no chance of that, even if his son wanted it.
	He's destroyed.
	The state of Washington used to be a state I was proud of because it was moving away from this incarceration-obsessed system.
	We have a system that is cancerous to us.
	We know putting him in prison for a long time doesn't work.
	We've seen it now for 50 years.
	And yet now we're going back to it because we happen to not like them politically, is the message I'm here.
	That he brings suits, he makes life difficult, he's a pro se litigant.
	Don't we want people to do that?
	We want to send a message, hey, don't come to court, you might end up like Kurt Benz who's been in prison for life.
	Instead, resolve your problems outside of court.
	We have these courts for a reason, because we want people to come to the court.
	If he's got a disagreement on the family issue, he should have to go to the court process to do it.
	That's what we should be encouraging him, not punishing him as the government is now calling folks.
	So, we request, Your Honor, the only sentence a constitutionally conforming and just sentence could recommend, which is conserved plus ovation.
	Thank you, Your Honor.
	Thank you.
	All right.
	Mr. Benchiff did you want to say anything or impose a sentence.
	Thank you, Your Honor.
	Your Honor, if I may say a few words on Mr. Benchu's behalf as well.
	All right, go ahead.
	Can you just state your name for the record, please?
	Richard Sy, Brandy, local Pro-Hawk Beach Council.
	I would note that exactly two weeks ago, I was in a divorce trial where the other side was attending from DOC.
	She was in prison.
	She had initially been charged with 19 separate counts of violation of...
	No contact order out of Anacortes Municipal Court.
	Eventually she graduated to felony violations, no contact orders, residential burglary, many counts.
	She had at one point 29 felony counts, including two counts of malicious prosecution for taking the kids to the police to convince them to tell the police that their father had been sexually abusing them in a particularly heinous way.
	And, of course, it was false.
	Many of the elements in that particular case are similar to this case, where there's parental alienation alleged, where there is a disregard for a no-contact order, repeated over and over again disregard of a no-contact order.
	Many of those elements are all the same in that case.
	But in that particular case, and I could cite the case number for you if you wanted to look it up.
	However, she was sentenced to a total of 34 months.
	That included multiple felonies and multiple misdemeanor counts that originated almost 50. And these were felony counts with particularly heinous allegations with regard to alienation.
	So I would just give that, and that was a Skagit County Superior Court case.
	So I would give the court some caution based on that kind of a standard.
	Again, it's sort of an equivalent case, or at least the allegation makes it an equivalent case, and a far, far less severe, and much more severe allegations, including residential burglary, and she was convicted of those things.
	Again, 34 months.
	I would tell the court, I've done this for 30 years.
	I've probably represented 10 to 20,000 defendants in courts of limited jurisdiction.
	Many of those counts have been, countless of them have been for violation of a contact order.
	And many, many have been for multiple counts, where sometimes it's 20 or 30 counts, where I've still...
	To this day, never seen, under those circumstances, misdemeanor convictions resulting in consecutive sentences.
	They've always, every time for the last 30 years, has been a concurrent sentence.
	So that's about the only things I'd have to say about that.
	Thank you.
	All right.
	Thank you.
	Okay. I am going to take a recess to prepare the judgment and sentence.
	So we'll be in recess for...
	Let's see, I think I'll need at least 15 minutes.
	So, we can go ahead and go off the record.
	Before we take a break, can I just correct the standard, the set standard?
	The waters may have been muddied a little bit.
	Yes, go ahead.
	The defense is correct that under the Washington Constitution that balancing the act that the court to apply is whether the punishment is seriously disproportionately committed to the offense.
	However, what they fail to know is that the fairness and proportionality is for each individual conviction.
	And the vast majority of cases, and I cited two of the good six in my brief, just as an easy example off the top of a mess law, a slight example of square point of health consecutive.
	In fact, it's far more rare that a court would consider maybe cumulative practice of consecutive All right, thank you.
	Okay, we'll be in recess.
	you.
	We'll be seated.
	So guys, Viva is not here.
	It is just me and Kryptus here at the moment.
	He is not back at the moment.
	He'll be back in a few minutes.
	We're just going to be on recess until then.
	Bear with me.
	I'm not a podcaster.
	you.
	Yes. To people asking in chat, she did say 15 minutes.
	We've got about 15 minutes now.
	minutes.
	I see a lot of people asking who I am.
	I'm just a guy hiding in the background.
	Viva's producer at this point, focusing on handling technology and stuff.
	Again, not a guy for the camera, so you won't see me very much.
	They can be more as Jamie to Joe Rogan.
	you.
	Well, thanks for the kind words, everybody.
	Greatly appreciate it.
	He's actually in the car filming his next vlog.
	He'll be coming on air tonight.
	I definitely agree.
	He should have scheduled some break entertainment.
	Next time this happens, there will be some B-roll ready to go.
	I would gladly play some music, but chances are the stream would end up getting copyright stream.
	They wouldn't want to do that.
	Encryptus is speaking.
	That's who it is.
	Just trying to feel some dead air at the moment while we wait for Viva.
	All right.
	right. All right.
	All right.
	Thank you.
	Some people are asking about one of the projects that I've been working on, going through the JFK files.
	I wrote some software using AI to scrub through all of the existing JFK files as well as ready to process any of the new ones that drop, being able to ingest them all into a single AI that can answer questions and write long-form content.
	That's me.
	Someone's asking what my background is in relation to that.
	I'm an AI architect, developer, coder, prompt engineer.
	I'm a tech nerd.
	I'm a tech nerd.
	Yeah, America's Untold Stories.
	Eric Hundley is the person who originally asked me to process the JFK files.
	That's where that kind of started.
	Thank you.
	You guys are seeing the link that NeuroDivergent is posting in the chat.
	That's the give, send, go for my project trying to raise funds for AI processing of the JFK files.
	Thank you.
	I've been a tech nerd for over 40 years.
	you.
	Looks like we've only got a few more minutes left and you won't have to listen to my voice anymore.
	you. Thank you.
	People are asking about AI.
	Grok3 compared to other AIs, it's very different.
	So Gronk is real-time information, real-time knowledge in relation to tweets and things that are coming up on that platform.
	There's active training constantly being added to it.
	So it adds more relevant, up-to-date information compared to ChatGPT, which has a training cut off of a few months ago.
	Google Gemini is also a good model, but it won't let you talk about anything political, political people, anything along those lines.
	Google Gemini is much larger than anything else, so you can fit larger documents, things of that nature inside of it.
	My personal preference is using open source models, things that are easier to control, can't run on my own machines, and are less censored than some of the big tech ones.
	Questions asked, am I going to do the MLK files as well?
	Yes. MLK, RFK, JFK.
	Already working with Brett Sears from X, who's got the Teresa Tam email files.
	I've already been working on processing those through the same software that I wrote from JFK files.
	You can find me on X as agentguru.io.
	You'll see some of the things that I've already processed
	you.
	Yes, to those asking, yes, I live in Greece at the moment.
	For me, it's 1 o'clock in the morning.
	you.
	It's Agent Guru.
	G-U-R-U. G-U-R-U.
	No, GROC is not limited only to the X space.
	It just utilizes that as the main source of its information.
	you.
	For those of you late to joining the party, I'm Encryptus.
	I'm Viva's producer.
	Viva's out at the moment.
	We're waiting for the judge to come back to give her sentencing in relation to the case Barnes is arguing.
	Thank you.
	Pretty close game, really.
	really.
	Happy to answer the questions, at least fill the time so it's not completely dead air.
	answer the questions.
	I believe Viva is currently recording his afternoon car vlog.
	you.
	Since I'm live on a podcast, I'm not going to comment on recent censorship.
	Thank you.
	Maybe someday I'll get on camera.
	For now, stay in the background.
	Yeah. Thank you.
	Now that's a wonderful question, Colorado Watch.
	What percent of Greek women are unibrows?
	Not as many as you think.
	you.
	You made my wife crack up in the background.
	I happen to live in Greece because I married a Greek woman. Yes, most replays are pretty hot.
	People ask me what I like about Greece.
	It's the beaches, the women, and the Tsikoro.
	You could always distill liquor made grapes.
	that's my wife giggling in the That's a wonderful question.
	What impact do you think that the advancements Microsoft has made with the Majorana quantum chip will have an AI?
	The reality is it's going to change the game.
	Inference speeds are going to increase somewhere between 1,000 to 10,000 pecs, which would allow for significantly larger models, things that are even smarter than ChatGPT, Afora, which has 1.4 trillion parameters currently.
	That number could easily go to 1000x, 10,000x.
	What that really means is the quantity of data that it can process at the same time would be unfathomable.
	Thank you.
	I'm reading both chats, actually.
	you.
	Yes, the giggling you heard in the background was my wife laughing at some of the comments.
	you.
	Be fair, I'm not buying the Microsoft chip hype either.
	They have not been able to deliver most of the claims that they've made in the last few years.
	And it'd be very cool if true.
	you.
	Agent Guru.
	Not Aged Guru.
	Thanks. The reason for the name is because a lot of my business is focused on developing AI agents for businesses and enterprises.
	I agree, Lisa.
	What the fuck?
	Where is Viva?
	I'd like to know myself.
	He's recording a car vlog.
	I'm here just helping out in the background so the stream can How did I meet Viva?
	Met him through the community, one of the original community members.
	Went to one of the live events and quickly became friends.
	The earthquakes are kind of crazy.
	We've had a whole bunch of pretty strong ones last week or so.
	Yes, I know Dave will hire quite well.
	Thank you.
	No, I have the feed from the courtroom still on audio.
	There's no mute.
	Whenever it comes live, I will shut up and allow that to continue.
	15 minutes is definitely up.
	now we're waiting on the judge.
	you.
	all the time, everybody.
	Chad Force, your comment is, so AI is basically a super fast search engine with the cognitive ability of a seven-year-old human.
	No, it's actually a terrible search engine.
	One of the main misconceptions about large language models is that it has knowledge.
	It is not a fact engine.
	It cannot do math.
	It makes inference.
	Inference are essentially guesses, which means that it makes mistakes.
	Even the best model today is a...
	Highest quality rating, about 87% accuracy.
	Basically, don't trust it.
	And the reason for that is it doesn't actually know anything.
	But there are ways to make it work.
	There are ways to get factual information out of it.
	There are ways to make it 99.99% accurate.
	There's a lot of work involved, and it's definitely not just what you see in ChatGPT.
	That's what I do for a living and build these things for people, businesses.
	you. Thank you.
	We're pushing about 20 minutes, and she said 15-minute recess.
	15-minute recess.
	Started about an hour and 40 minutes ago.
	Thank you.
	It's a wonderful comment.
	If there is artificial intelligence, can there be artificial stupidity?
	Well, I think there's enough real stupidity out there to not justify creating an artificial one.
	Thank you.
	That is a spectacular comment.
	I find, unless I'm meticulous about prompts and wording, AI is much more likely to respond in a way that it thinks I want it to versus factual and objective.
	That's actually exactly how these systems are built.
	They're designed to answer things the way the user wants to hear them, which is why you get hallucinations and fake answers.
	Instead, it needs to be very specifically prompted in order to give you factual information.
	Or say, I don't know.
	Give it documentation to give answers from is a better way to get factual answers than it is to go on chat GPT and ask it a question.
	Thank you.
	Thank you.
	Unfortunately, all AI models are left to say, as most of big tech is.
	You can't believe it.
	Which is also why I do what I do.
	So not all tech is left to say.
	you.
	Wonderful question.
	Should you use ChatCIA or ChatCCP?
	That's essentially your two choices.
	There's not much in between.
	And for those who don't know, we're referring to DeepSeq or ChatGPT.
	call it a little bit better than DeepSeq, but DeepSeq is significantly less expensive.
	you. Thank you.
	there are NSA people on the board of OpenAI.
	Thank you.
	I would definitely not recommend using DeepSeq on their servers and API.
	If you want to use DeepSeq, Download the model and use some type of hosted GPU farm to utilize it so that at least your data stays within that instance and doesn't get sent back to CCP China.
	That's a wonderful question.
	What about internal AI for business?
	If we have the CPU, is it worth it?
	100%. That's exactly what I do for a living.
	I build...
	Useable AI in businesses and enterprise.
	I would say that anything that you watch on YouTube in relation to AI, building an AI agent or using AI in a business is generally bunk.
	And I would not recommend following any of those tutorials.
	The reality is to get something working on a consistent base in an enterprise.
	It takes a lot of work.
	It's extraordinarily complex.
	Yeah, it's just not something easy to do.
	You need to hire someone like me that works in this field and has been for years in order to be able to build something that's useful in your business that does not make mistakes because mistakes happen.
	Another good question.
	What's a typical business problem solved beyond writing marketing copy?
	Anything that a human can do that is a repetitive task can be done with automations and AI.
	Responding to emails, answering, checking emails, moving data from one system to another.
	For example, accounting software, spreadsheets.
	You can make intelligent decisions.
	Trigger actions in outside software.
	They're basically endless.
	I build them for all types of businesses and all types of industries, for all types of use cases.
	you.
	The security concerns of running AI internally are next to nothing.
	If you want to keep your data secure, run it on your own machines.
	That's exactly how I do it.
	Scraping data from public web pages is a great use case.
	Using it to be able to build yourself a search engine also wonderful use case You Thank you.
	I'm not a fan of Llama.
	If you're going to use something local, try Mistral Nemo.
	I live here most of the time.
	The question is, do I live in Greece?
	Are you in Greece for business or do I live here?
	live here most of the time.
	It's a good question.
	Medicos use AI in medical settings.
	Do they risk turning themselves into vending machines of medicine?
	No, I don't think so.
	I think humans will always have a place in things that machines can't.
	I think humans will always have a place in the world.
	I'm not quite sure what I understand by that question.
	Do you say to run AI on a different machine?
	If you're going to use AI in a business and you value the data that you're using within that AI, you want to run it on your own machine.
	Do not send your data outside if you don't want it to go somewhere else.
	not send your data outside if you don't want it to go somewhere else.
	That's a good one.
	What about cleaning a rest record offline with AI?
	Never charge a convicted asking for a friend.
	I would never condone or advise anything in relation to hacking, and it's probably quite easy.
	Yes, I do think we're going to get the judge's ruling.
	She's just late by about 10 minutes.
	just late.
	Yes, it's a very, very long 15-minute recess.
	Yes, it's a very long 15-minute recess.
	Someone's asking, what's my opinion of ExpressVPN?
	I think the majority of VPN providers are junk, and I think that the majority of them log the data and then send it back to the governments of the countries that they operate in.
	There's a handful of decent ones.
	Wotan VPN is probably the best.
	Question from Dee Thomas.
	Was the son not allowed to issue a statement?
	No, that's exactly why Bonds was asking for the continuance so the Sun could make the statement that this was not right.
	you.
	It's great to see a number of Proton users in there.
	excellent it's one of the best platforms that are out there Maybe we can get them to sponsor Viva.
	Thank you.
	Thank you.
	For those of you asking who's talking, I'm Cryptus, I'm Viva's producer, community member, and just feeling the dead air while we wait for this show to start again.
	No opinion on NordVPN.
	opinion.
	Yes, a proper...
	Self-run VPN sitting up using a virtual private server as well as TORs.
	obviously the best way to do it, but it's also the most complicated way to do it.
	Thank you.
	The VPN on Brave doesn't protect your computer, it only protects your browser.
	Which means that it constantly calls home to Microsoft if you have a Windows machine.
	And yes, Proton is excellent.
	Yes, I use TailScale.
	for business use.
	I think in today's market, the question is, what do you think of AMD GPUs?
	I want to get rid of Nvidia.
	I think it's six of one, half dozen of another today.
	Okay. Okay.
	And sorry, you're just having to listen to me answer questions.
	I don't know what else to talk about.
	you.
	Someone's asking a silly question, what is Proton?
	Proton is an email service provider who is branched out into VPN services and other similar related services, similar to...
	Google with Google Workspace, calendars, similar stuff.
	No, Virtual Shield is not a good one.
	They carry logs.
	Any VPN that has logs means that they have those available for the governments and companies to send them to.
	Thank you.
	Yes, Proton also has Drive and Calendar.
	Drive is really nice because it is encrypted.
	ProtonMail is end-to-end encrypted.
	It's only end-to-end encrypted if someone else has ProtonMail as well, though.
	Keep that in mind.
	Brave is the search engine that I use on a regular basis.
	It's better than Google and DuckDuckGo.
	you.
	That's a wonderful question.
	Any good free antivirus out there?
	You don't need antivirus.
	That's kind of a misnomer in 2025.
	Don't go to porn sites.
	Don't go to scam sites.
	You don't need antivirus.
	Operating systems have enough built in.
	Yeah, it's ProtonPass.
	ProtonFest every day.
	What do I think about Safari?
	I hate it.
	I hate just about everything in the Apple ecosystem.
	Yeah, DuckDuckGo is just as woke leftist as Google has become.
	Happy to help.
	Happy to help.
	Viva just sent me a message saying, you don't mind if I don't come back?
	No, Viva, it's all good.
	They should be back shortly.
	It's supposed to be a 15-minute recess, but we're going on, what, 30 minutes now.
	Copilot. Now, that is an interesting topic.
	Give me your opinion on MS Copilot.
	That is the devil.
	MS Copilot will destroy end-to-end encryption along with privacy forever.
	Anything in relation to co-pilot is absolutely going to destroy personal security.
	What that does is it allows for the AI to read everything on the machine, including screenshots every three seconds before things are encrypted, which is done in the process of transmission.
	basically microsoft is going to have all your data even if it's encrypted you you Thank you.
	Linux is absolutely the safest thing out there.
	And the only reason for that is because it is built by communities of people who constantly review it.
	Thank you.
	There are ways to get rid of Copilot.
	There are not easy ones.
	There's a great channel called Chris Titus Tech, and he has built some tools and has some tutorials on how to handle that.
	recommend it.
	Thank you.
	Chris Titus Tech has a tool called WinUtil.
	Basically, we'll strip out all the bad stuff inside of Windows.
	Highly recommend using it if you use Windows.
	I could not live a day without Linux.
	of a developer and most things don't work outside of the works. Looks like the judge is coming back now.
	I'm going back on.
	Enjoy, guys.
	Enjoy. Enjoy.
	All right, let me.
	I just unmuted Bebex.
	Okay, the court was...
	Made aware that Mr. Benchiff had included me in a federal lawsuit recently.
	That's my understanding.
	I don't know whether there's services happened, but I was concerned about that and had consulted the State of Washington Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee, and I was referred to Opinion 96.17.
	Which the court found appropriate in this situation.
	It indicates the judge should not be disqualified from presiding over a criminal case because the defendant has named the judge as a party in a civil lawsuit.
	So even though I've been apparently named in a lawsuit by Mr. Benshuf, that fact has no bearing on my objectivity.
	My impartiality in this case.
	My decision, as far as sentence, will be based on the evidence produced at trial and all other applicable statutory standards required to be impartially considered and applied in going forward.
	So I just want to note that for the record.
	Okay, so I think care one for their patients.
	There's quite a bit here.
	I have to start out.
	By saying that this had to have been the worst case of domestic violence abuse that this court has seen.
	And granted, this is a Seattle Municipal Court.
	We're not a felony court.
	Defense's characterization of the situation, of all the evidence that we've heard at this trial, as simply Mr. Benchu wanting to trade tax with his son is not correct.
	And the court doesn't appreciate the trivialization of that.
	It's a mischaracterization of what was going on during a full year, or just about a year, where Mr. Banshoof was engaged in manipulating his son, a child who loved him, probably still does, and using that love to turn him against his mother.
	To teach him that it was okay to lie, to be deceitful, to spy on his mother, to try and tell him, to brainwash him into thinking that his mother didn't love him.
	This is egregious, and I cannot even imagine the degree of trauma that has occurred to this child, and he was a child.
	Mr. Benshiv, you cannot place the blame on your child for wanting to have contact with you.
	That is all you're doing, everything that happened.
	Now, this court sat and listened through two weeks of a trial.
	There was lots of testimony.
	And again, this wasn't just Mr. Benshiv wanting to contact his son.
	I have to agree with...
	Ms. Atlan, that for a family law court to get to the point of saying that a parent can have no contact with their child, that is highly unusual.
	And the court has also heard bits and pieces of all the things that happened from the time the court, family court, was involved, where at the beginning, Mr. Banshoof was allowed contact with his child.
	But because of Mr. Benshue's actions, things spiraled out from there until the court appeared to have no other choice but to indicate that or to order that Mr. Benshue was to have no contact with ARW.
	And so then that's where the that's what this case was about.
	Also, defense, it's not well taken that you keep saying that, you know, this was about other things going on, but it was really about, it was about, and the way the city has put it, it was about the systematic manipulation of ARW for a year by Mr. Benchu, knowing that there was a no-contact order, trying to turn this child against his mother.
	I also have to say that I cannot imagine.
	The trauma that Ms. Owen has gone through, I am so sorry that this has happened to you and that I can only imagine that going through this living hell must have been terrible, and I know that there's got to be concern for you and your family in the future.
	Now, on the other hand, the court is also mindful that this is a misdemeanor court.
	So. So...
	Thank you.
	This is what the court is going to do.
	So the parties will just listen.
	So for the attorneys, what I've done, I've got paper judgment and sentence orders that I prepared to have time just to have it rather than trying to do this electronically.
	Okay, so this is case number 671384.
	This is the case that includes one count of Custodial interference, and also six counts of violation of the domestic violence court order.
	Okay, so on count one, the custodial interference count, this is the overarching count that encompasses everything that Mr. Benchu did for an entire year to try and get ARW to turn on his mother.
	To run away from home, to be with Mr. Banschoof when he knew that this was not allowed under the court order.
	All right, so on count one, the court is going to order 364 days in jail and suspend zero.
	So I'm imposing a full year.
	On count two, the court is imposing 364 days in jail.
	With 156 days suspended.
	On count 3, 364 days in jail with 156 suspended.
	On count 4, 364 days with 156 suspended.
	On count 5, 364 days in jail with 156 suspended.
	On count 6, 364 days in jail with 156 suspended.
	Count seven, 364 days in jail, 156 days suspended.
	So let me explain.
	Mr. Benshuf has 148 days credit already from the time he served in custody last year.
	So the court, as I said, is imposing the full year on count one.
	Each count, all seven counts on 671384 are going to run consecutively.
	The court's intent is to impose, in addition to the year on count one, is imposing an additional 60 days on counts two through seven.
	That's a total of 360 days.
	So it'll be a total of almost two years.
	But the court is imposing as jail.
	And additionally, I want to make sure that there will be 936 days hanging over your head.
	I have not heard anything that would convince me that you would follow any court order, that you would engage in any treatment.
	And so I hear what the city's saying.
	I think keeping you in jail for a period of time just to give the community some peace of mind, those people who've been affected, is about all this court is going to be able to do.
	I understand, though, as I said, these are misdemeanors.
	So that's the court's sentence on 671384.
	And then what I'm going to do...
	On the other domestic violence cases, and those are counts, or excuse me, cases 676175, case 676207, case 676216, Okay, 676463.
	And 676492.
	On each of those cases, the court will impose 48 days, credit four times served, and closed jurisdiction on those matters.
	Now, back to 671384.
	In addition to the In addition to the The first thing that I'm going to do is to To the next thing that I'm going to do Is to the next thing that I'm going to do Is to the next thing that I'm going to do Is to the next thing that I'm going to do In addition to the almost two years in custody, the crimes charged in counts one through seven, domestic violence, other was pled and proved.
	The court is not referring Mr. Benshub to probation.
	It doesn't believe that that would be productive in any way.
	The other conditions the court is setting include no criminal law violations, report change of address, To the court within 24 hours of obtaining a new address.
	Abide by a written no contact order with Jessica Owen, Magali Lerman, and ARW, which the court will go over in just a moment.
	Possess no weapons.
	Forfeit any weapons in SPD custody.
	and surrender any weapons.
	you.
	As to the fines and fees, the court is imposing a $43 criminal conviction fee, a $30.75 domestic violence protection order fee, a $100 domestic violence DVOA fee of $100 and a DVPA of $15.
	That's $188.75 pronunciation.
	Okay, and then turning to the criminal trespass theft case.
	On each count, criminal trespass one and theft, the court is going to impose.
	The court is going to impose 364 days in jail and 216 suspended.
	Thank you.
	Mr. Benship will serve a total of 48 days with credit for time served and the court is going to run this case concurrent to all of the other cases.
	I want to say that I appreciate The City's recommendation for a mental health evaluation and follow-up treatment.
	In a perfect world, I think that that would be best for Mr. Bentschoof and the community.
	However, again, the court has dealt with Mr. Bentschoof at length, gone through a lengthy trial.
	And simply does not believe that a referral to probation would result in any good at this point.
	All right, so the court's also going to include no criminal law violations, report change of address, no entry into all PCC markets in Seattle, Washington, possess no weapons, $43 criminal conviction fee, All right, and those will be the conditions of sentence.
	Let's see.
	Ms. Allen, the no contact orders, are those in Adobe?
	Yes. Okay.
	Does the court have a position on the city's cost under the DDT sits?
	Yes, the court will include that as well.
	Thank you.
	That was an oversight on my part.
	you.
	Okay, so I've added that condition of stay 1000 feet from 1716 North 128th street in Seattle.
	Okay. Okay.
	Okay.
	All right, Mr. Bench, if the court has in front of it a harassment no-contact order, under this order, you are to have no contact with Magalie Lerman.
	You would have no contact with this person directly, indirectly, through three parties or by any electronic means.
	You are to stay 500 feet from this person's home, school, business, place of employment, any location where she is.
	If you're found to be in violation of this order, you could be facing additional criminal charges.
	I'm going to go ahead and sign the order at this time All right,
	Mr. Bench, if the court has another order, this is a domestic violence no contact order.
	The protected party is ARW.
	You already have no contact with ARW directly, indirectly, through third parties or by any electronic means.
	You would remain 1,000 feet from this person's residence, school, workplace, any place where he is present.
	If you're found to be in violation of this order, you could be facing additional criminal charges.
	And the court will note that this court is imposing a domestic violence no contact order for a period of five years.
	Thank you.
	All right.
	Mr. Benchiff, the court has an order.
	It's a domestic violence no contact order.
	Mr. Benchiff, will you wake up?
	I'm awake.
	Okay. All right.
	All right.
	The court is imposing a domestic violence no contact order.
	The protected party is Jessica Owen.
	You are to have no contact with her directly, indirectly, through third parties or any electronic means.
	Do not enter and stay with 1,000 feet.
	From 1716 North 128th Street in Seattle.
	And this will be for a jurisdictional period of years.
	okay mr bench if the court has what's called a notice of ineligibility to possess a firearm let me this out and i will go over it with you and you'll receive a copy Let's see.
	Outland, can you remind me of the conviction date?
	handy.
	I'm sorry?
	Yeah, so on the notice of ineligible to possess a firearm, it says to the defendant, you advise that you've been convicted on this day of September 27th.
	September 27th.
	you.
	Okay, so Mr. Benshiff, based on the conviction on September 27, 2025, of the custodial interference and 80 counts of violation of a domestic violence court order, as a result, you must immediately surrender all firearms and any concealed pistol license or licenses.
	ZES owner have under your control a firearm and under federal law any firearm or ammunition or concealed pistol license until your right has been restored.
	Violation of these laws is a felony.
	And I'm going to go ahead and sign.
	Let's see.
	Lower bench, I will provide a copy of Mr.
	from DOL as well.
	you.
	All right, let me ask the parties, is there anything else that we need to address this afternoon?
	Yes, Your Honor, the city would like to address any potential state funding appeal.
	The default under 4.2b is that there is no state funding appeal unless the tenant requests it.
	Just to stay on top of things, the city is requesting that there In the case that there is an appeal that the court does not cite any of the sentences, either the no contact or the jail time, I do have additional authority of the court who would like to hear that, that it's certainly within the court's authority to grant that, as long as the court is trying to save other ends.
	Okay. This is under Article 995, Section 062, as long as the court determines by the conduct of the evidence that either a defendant is likely to clear the danger to the safety of any other person of the community in the judgment state, if that delay from the state will unduly diminish the deterrent of the fact of the punishment.
	A stay of the judgment will cause unreasonable trauma to the Okay.
	factors are certainly relevant in this case for the city would ask the court to deny any state in the case there is a appeal and so how can the servant sheet for method to custody be okay um Let's see. First things first.
	Mr. Bailiff, do you have a Notice of Appellate Rights?
	Yeah, go ahead.
	Thank you.
	Okay. So, Mr. Benshoof, I want to read your Notice of Appellate Rights under Criminal Rule 7.2, be effective September 1st, 1995.
	The judge must immediately, after sentencing, unless the judgment and sentence are based on a plea of guilty, advise you of the following rights.
	You have the right to appeal this conviction.
	You have the right to a lawyer on appeal.
	If you're unable to afford a lawyer, a lawyer will be appointed to represent you, and the portions of the trial record necessary for review of your case will be prepared at public expense.
	A notice of appeal must be filed in Seattle Municipal Court within 30 days, or the right to appeal will be waived.
	The notice of appeal must be served on all other parties.
	The court clerk, upon request of a defendant appearing without a lawyer, will supply a notice of appeal form.
	A petition collaterally attacking this conviction must be filed within one year from today's date, unless the issue raised in the petition comes within one of the exceptions of RCW 10.73.100.
	Okay, so I'm going to ask that this be given to Mr. Van Schoof.
	Okay, so as far as conditions, Mr. Barnes, is there anything you wanted to say with regard to a stay of conditions at this point?
	Yes, sure.
	One on the no contact order to Claire.
	I think it benefits Claire's patients.
	It doesn't apply to my ability to represent it in the county case because, for example, I may need to subpoena.
	Ms. Owens, someone else.
	I'm assuming that that part of the no count doesn't prohibit me from discharging, but it's just some sort of clarity that doesn't apply to a council in defending Mr. Spence.
	Let's see.
	moment.
	Just a moment.
	Thank you.
	Okay, CD, did you want to add anything with regard to Mr Barnes being able to contact.
	No. Definitely not as a standard.
	Acceptable.
	I'm sorry.
	Did you want to?
	I'm sorry.
	Your position was?
	I believe that is legally sound.
	Yes, Your Honor.
	Okay. That Mr. Barnes may contact her with regard to the county case.
	Okay. And I don't know if that necessarily needs to be included as part of the order.
	So, Mr. Barnes, is that what you're asking?
	Yes, Your Honor.
	Just so there's no confusing down there.
	Okay. Hold on.
	Let's see.
	I don't want to come in too hot on the mic because I know that the courtroom audio is less loud than my voice.
	I caught up on Barnes' pleading, although it was exactly what he was arguing during our streams or presenting.
	I know when Barnes is in prep mode for his pleadings when he delivers the siloqui.
	Lower your input on the interface.
	Okay, hold on.
	Maybe like that.
	Okay. No, is that...
	Encryptus, tell me if I did it.
	I don't even know which one.
	Which one's my interface?
	Okay, this one, I'm trying to talk softly.
	This is Kafkaesque insanity.
	What's up?
	You want to tell the world what happened?
	You're doing nothing.
	What are you doing?
	Okay, well, get out of here.
	You can close it.
	Okay. Now, if I might, Ms. Allen, I have a...
	The judge didn't have the pending King County Superior Court case handy.
	What I'm intending to do is include it under other defendants, counsel may contact protected party for the sole purpose of preparing defense.
	In King County Superior Court number, and then I was going to add that case.
	Do you have that number, Your Honor?
	I don't...
	I understand the King Court's verification.
	I don't know if it's necessary to actually add that into the no-contact order because that is how they operate in the state.
	I was informed by Owen that if she...
	If defense counsel is to contact her about the pending county case, but they do so through the county's advocate office.
	I'm sorry, the county's...
	Sorry, the county's advocate office.
	Oh, advocate office.
	Okay. I am...
	Okay. So, Mr. Barnes, I don't know, were you aware of that, that in order to contact Ms. Owen, you should go through the advocate's office with the King County Superior Court?
	Yeah. Okay.
	Okay. Well, Ms. Outland, what I'll just add is this.
	Oh, okay.
	Go ahead.
	It's 24-1-02680-7.
	Okay. All right.
	Thank you.
	Okay, lower bench, we're going to...
	Okay, lower bench, we're going to have to go.
	Okay, so I also need to clarify on the domestic violence, no contact orders, and the anti-harassment orders, since I am imposing jail and, well, actually...
	Okay, no, I take that back.
	Okay, so the court also, let me amend this.
	So on the cases where the court imposed jail...
	And closed.
	Can she give us a total yet?
	I believe the court may still include the domestic violence no contact order as a condition.
	Domestic violence.
	Let me hear from the parties if you believe that that's otherwise.
	domestic violence by way of texts.
	Not sick violence, no contact orders to outlast the jurisdiction of the case.
	Okay. Mr. Barnes, did you want to add anything?
	Nothing, Bill.
	I'm briefing, Your Honor.
	We maintain our constitutional intention.
	Okay. All right.
	Thank you.
	Constitution? Give me just a moment.
	Let me...
	What's that?
	Let me make an amendment here.
	Let me make an amendment here.
	I'm going to make a little constitutional thing there.
	Yeah, there's no constitution in this Seattle courtroom.
	I'm surprised they let Barnes plead.
	Lock Barnes up.
	I don't want to give anybody any bad ideas.
	Yeah, she hasn't given the total yet.
	Please, Viva, whisper to talk.
	Hold on.
	Everyone in the chat, in locals, tell me.
	I'm going to lower this one.
	Did that one lower anything?
	No, I don't think that one did anything.
	I think it's this one.
	This should be good.
	That might be a little bit better.
	I can't hear myself anymore.
	Careful, Viva Barnes isn't out of there yet.
	Higher? Okay.
	How about now?
	If we do like this, still loud.
	A bit higher.
	How about now?
	We're going to do this?
	Okay. Perfect.
	Viva, the judge can hear you.
	The judge reminds me of...
	People are going to say it's politically incorrect.
	She reminds me of Olivia Chow out of Toronto's mayor.
	Equally as much of a commie.
	What's the judge's name again?
	The judge's name is...
	Hold on.
	I can talk.
	I'm a power clerk.
	I'm going to stop talking when they start talking.
	Right now, it's just silence.
	Judge Karen.
	Judge Kami.
	Andrea Chin.
	Okay, good.
	Let me just see where she's from.
	Judge Andrea Chin.
	All right, so the judgment and sentence now reflects that the domestic violence no contact orders with Ms. Owen and ARW are included on each case.
	And then, Mr. Bench, let me give you this, the domestic violence no contact order in which Ms. Owen is a protected party.
	I have the, this version is the one that I'd like you to use.
	Okay. And then, Mr. Barnes, anything with, did Mr. Bench have received the notice of appellate rights?
	Still. Oh, okay.
	All right.
	So, he'll receive that.
	And then Mr.
	Barnes, anything that you wanted to add with regard to an appeal?
	Yes, two things.
	One, we would request bail pending appeal.
	There's a chance that if he were to win on appeal, he'll have served all of his time before he would appeal.
	Second thing, at a minimum, currently he's technically kind of in county custody and in city custody.
	His trial starts next week.
	If he is remanded now, that entire trial date is impossible.
	He is the critical person.
	Probably need to prepare for his defense.
	So it would completely throw off that entire case and jeopardize that case.
	So at a minimum, we would request that bail continue until that trial is finished.
	But all the law I read is that bail is generally favored in Washington, pending appeal, because of the risk that if it turns out the appeals court said, you know what, some need you.
	When he argued constitutionally about the order is correct, or he actually wasn't served, or some other, whatever the other basis are, which there are unique constitutional issues implicated, he'll have already served a sentence by the time the appeal is exhausted.
	We would request, definitely for the trial, it can start next week, but for the purposes of meaningfully preserving his appellate rights that bail-pending appeal be granted.
	I would note, Your Honor, that when I told you back in November that he would not violate this Gordon's conditions on release, he hasn't.
	He hasn't at all.
	In fact, he didn't even serve papers that he was supposed to serve.
	He notified the court, I'm under another court, I'm under a court order.
	And I can't do that unless I know for sure it's the right thing to do.
	So he's going out of his way to not violate this court's conditions of release at all.
	So we would just, at a minimum, request it so we can meaningfully do the trial next week, but also request it pending appeal as is traditionally granted in Washington.
	Potential danger to the community, specifically Ms. Owen, her partner, ARW.
	Also, the trauma that that could further in those three individuals if the court stays conditions while the case is on appeal.
	The court has very serious concerns about that.
	Mr. Benship might not have done anything out of order recently, but there's such a long history.
	The court...
	Does not have faith that he would abide by any court order going forward.
	I realize that he has the case set for trial next week.
	And again, it comes down to the court trying to give Mr. Benshift the benefit of the doubt when this all started.
	But he has proven over and over again that He cannot be trusted.
	The court sat through evidence, listening to everything that had happened, led up to the year-long episode of the underlying facts of this case.
	It observed Mr. Bentschoof's outrageous behavior during trial.
	And for all those reasons, the court feels like there is a potential danger if he is not.
	Remanded into custody today.
	So I understand that you are representing him in the trial starts next week.
	However, the court is going to remand Mr. Benshoof into custody today.
	The court after denying him continuous so you could railroad him at trial, now denying him a chance to, meaning if we participate in this next trial, so you're going to railroad him in that case.
	I mean, come on.
	Mr. Barnes.
	Mr. Barnes, your objection is noted.
	Mr. Benschiff is being taken into custody today.
	I would move to disqualify.
	I believe this court was being dishonest earlier when it said it was not personally prejudiced.
	What the court has said is clear that it is personally prejudiced.
	It's not able to put its personal prejudice aside and be impartial.
	So I move to disqualify the court on due process grounds, refuse and reschedule the sentencing hearing with a court that is not compromised by a personal bias against the defendant.
	All right, Mr. Barnes, that motion is denied and it's noted.
	Okay. All right, I do have...
	Okay, Mr. Bailiff, I have the judgment and sentence.
	Please let the record reflect that now the court has again removed the defendant from his own proceeding.
	Let's see.
	Mr. Bailiff can stay.
	Maybe I missed something.
	Can we have him stand by?
	Because there are several judgment and sentence forms that the parties are going to need to review.
	They're going to hold them in contempt.
	Okay. Mr. Bailiff, may I give these to you?
	Okay. Just so everybody knows, feel very free to make clips and make the world understand what's going on here.
	This is the most insane thing.
	Barnes has been going off.
	Okay, so just for the parties, the judgment and sentence forms, I said, I know we're using paper.
	It's going to take a bit.
	I just want to make sure the parties go through it and have time to do that carefully.
	I'm going to step off the bench for a few minutes.
	If there is an issue, I can sort of come back and clarify the judgment sentence, but I'll stand by.
	But I'm going to step off right now.
	She's quite clearly been spooked by something.
	I'm going to talk since we're only going to hear...
	I don't know if they mute the court.
	That judge is...
	Look at the prosecutor, the person on the left, how happy she is.
	on the left.
	It's actually insane, certifiably.
	Yeah, the real man says she's running to her law clerk and get some advice from her Soros handler.
	I mean, it's not...
	Do I think she's going to see if she can arrest Barnes?
	No. She would have warned him about being out of order.
	I think right now she's going to check on whether or not she just didn't screw everything up big time by removing the defendant from his own trial.
	It's beyond Kafkaesque.
	This is like a mix between Kafka, Kurt Vonnegut, George Orwell.
	One, two, three.
	Yeah, Barnes was pissed.
	I've never actually seen Barnes pissed like that.
	He often makes jokes about a lawyer needing to be ready to go to jail for his client.
	She didn't reprimand him yet, and I was mildly surprised about that.
	I thought she was going to say, Barnes, you're scaring me too.
	Mr. Barnes, would you please lower your voice?
	You're scaring my inner child.
	80 charges of domestic violence, all of which, maybe there were some breaking things, were texts.
	They were text messages.
	Manipulation. And I can appreciate how people look at that and say it's manipulation.
	But that's the domestic violence words.
	Because up in Canada, by the way, we had a similar thing where misgendering a trans confused kid could be deemed to be domestic violence.
	There was a judge who actually said that out of British Columbia.
	In a very similar case, I think, where father was stripped of all his parental rights.
	I won't swear too much because I know we're in our Locals community.
	Let me read some of the tips over here in Locals.
	Zoji sent a $1 tip before, and it said, the emails, as far as I am hearing, are unsavory no matter how much you hate the other parent.
	Don't badmouth to the kid.
	But I don't see how this arises to any kind of formal offense, let alone one that would land someone in jail.
	Zoji, it is manipulation, and I mean, it could be arguably manipulative.
	No more than, I guess the only thing the mother did right was, you know, not in writing.
	Of course, it's tough for the father to have any communications with this kid.
	The father might be right.
	It's not because something's manipulative that it's necessarily wrong or evil.
	They definitely sounded manipulative and like it's trying to pit a kid against the mother, but welcome to divorce.
	You think this court cares?
	I appreciate Barnes was pleading not for this judge, but for the appellate judges.
	This judge, Andrea Chin, I want to know if she's born in America.
	The Honorable Andrea Chin, elected term January 2023 to January 2027, was first elected to the Seattle Municipal Court in November 2018.
	She brings 26 years of public service as an assistant city attorney for the city of Seattle.
	A Seattle native, Chin grew up in the Mount Baker neighborhood.
	She graduated from Occidental College.
	She spent several years working as an assistant director of admissions at the California Institute of Technology.
	Following graduation from Loyola Law School, Judge Chin returned to her native Seattle and began a career with the Seattle City's Attorney's Office, where she tried criminal cases and argued appeals at all levels of state appellate courts.
	As the supervisor of the specialty court unit, Her duties included oversight of the city's participation in Mental Health Court and Veterans Treatment Court.
	Judge Chin is a longtime member of the Asian Bar Association of Washington, the ABAL, ABAW.
	She served on the Joint Asian Judicial Evaluation Committee from 2011 to 2014 and as an ABAW board member from 2013 to 2016 and as ABAW president in 2017.
	I'm going to go to the chat here on Rumble, see what's going on.
	Is she with the CCP?
	No, it said native to Seattle.
	Judge Andrea Chin.
	Well, let me go to Grok is actually the best one for this stuff now.
	Where was she born?
	X. Where was Andrea Chin born?
	Judge Andrea Trin was born in Los Angeles, California, where she has roots.
	While she has deep roots in Seattle, where her family settled and she grew, her birthplace is noted as Los Angeles based on available information.
	Thank you.
	Holy crap.
	Sorry, I just blasted my mic.
	So what's she doing?
	I think she's going to see if she...
	Barnes, he made a motion to recuse the court.
	And I'm fairly certain, you know, she might have...
	Why is the defendant not there?
	Are they moving?
	Did I put something on pause?
	StreamYard? No, no, no, they're moving.
	Okay. They put it on mute now, so...
	And sorry, by the way, I don't have the chat in StreamYard because we're only on Rumble and VivaBarnesLaw.locals.com.
	Let me go back to the chat over on Locals.
	So Zoji, we got that.
	Outlook.com.
	By the way, I'm lisping even more than normal because I bit my flipping tongue yesterday.
	Oh my gosh.
	I'll spare you the details and I won't show you, but I bit it somehow magically on the top and it bled.
	Did I talk about this today?
	I feel like I talked about this today.
	No, I was talking about it with Jana after the stream to explain why I might have been lisping.
	Chris Craft Sent a $50 tip.
	It says, is now a good time to raise a little bail for Robert?
	And Chris Craft with another $50 tip said, Barnes Law School first semester.
	Charles Greiner says, 100% right.
	Welcome to divorce.
	And Jameson2012 says, can we get a shirt with defendant turned into a pinata and all the others taking swings at him with a stick?
	Total bullcrap.
	Standard chat.
	Use saline rinse, Viva.
	I've only been eating my entire life, and it was one of the ones where you bite it, and it didn't even...
	I felt it, pressure, and I knew that it was like a lateral incision.
	Oh my gosh.
	It doesn't matter.
	You guys want to see it?
	Okay, I won't do that.
	Yeah, Barnes was pissed, by the way.
	It does have the habit of getting in the way, says Corporate G. Salkop won on Rumble?
	What was I just about to say?
	Oh, I mean...
	Oh, the guy...
	No, I was going to say the guy's...
	Ben Suf is back in, but I'm looking at an old screen.
	It doesn't help...
	Oh, Ben Suf is back in.
	Well, Mr. Barnes, now that I've brought him back in, all of your motions are dismissed, and you are held in contempt, and you get a spanking, and Ben Souf goes back to jail.
	I think he's wearing a hoodie over his head, like he's wearing a sweater, and that's the hood over the back of his head.
	I mean, the thing is, it's going to sound like I'm blaming the defendant for the injustice.
	He's an abrasive person.
	He's not...
	Respecting the decorum of the court.
	And they have all the power in his world right now.
	It's such an amazing thing.
	They have control over his life right now.
	This is an Orwellian, Soviet-style tribunal.
	And they've latched their claws into Ben's hoof, into his marriage, into his parental rights, and now into his life.
	And he could not show enough contrition.
	For that judge to do anything different.
	Not that he should be compelled to show contrition, but there's nothing...
	That court has it in for him, and there's literally nothing on earth he can do.
	Hold on a second, I gotta...
	No, what I meant is put the red eyes on the guy on the right, comma, and don't include dark brand and smiley face.
	Just... The guy with the...
	Getting my thumbnail from my Dan Bongino rant.
	I can feel the rage.
	This is like...
	It's terrible.
	you said like the world needs people like Barnes to fight this crap you. But you have to be a special type of person to be able to actually Cope with this type of injustice.
	And you have to be...
	They want...
	And I don't want to jinx anything because I don't know...
	It seems Ben Suf has been using judicial means.
	He's been using judicial means.
	They want Ben Suf to snap, to do something, so they can then say, look, we were right all along in our treatment of him.
	We broke him.
	And we were right to treat him that way in a manner that led to him breaking because of how he reacted after we broke him.
	Take away everything that this guy's...
	Take away everything.
	And then after they lash out, after you do it, well then you say, look, we were justified in our torture all along.
	So let me go back over here to VivaBarnesLaw.locals.com Until is empty, says Barnes wasn't only arguing for the appellate court, he was arguing for the U.S. and all of our constitutional rights.
	He breathes the fire of liberty.
	Encryptus did a great job filling in for you, Viva.
	I got scared.
	I heard someone talking.
	He's talking.
	Encryptus and I have discussed it.
	Being able to address people live is...
	Okay, I just heard some audio.
	I'm scared for Barnes, Viva.
	If something happens, can you bail him out?
	Zach the cat.
	I've got, I've got, I don't say, uh-oh.
	Gina, Beck, Gina.
	Gina! We got Beck on verified.
	Did I lose something here?
	Let me go over to this.
	Did I do that?
	Did I do that?
	Hold on a second.
	Let me just see what's going on here in the layout.
	So I want to bring this one here.
	I thought, how do I bring the court one back?
	I didn't do anything.
	Layout. Stack.
	Grid. Do we like the grid?
	No, we want side by side.
	But how did Beck become the screen here?
	Full screen view.
	Hide participants.
	Okay, fine.
	This is what I figured it out.
	Okay. Grid is the only one.
	Well, this actually looks pretty good.
	Now I kind of feel stupid that I didn't...
	We had it like this the whole time.
	Okay, fine.
	This is the same one now.
	Let me just go ahead and remove what I'm looking at there.
	How do I get rid of that?
	Okay, there we go.
	So they took him back out.
	That's his family behind.
	That's her family behind.
	This is like straight up...
	You know, it's kind of like Jerry Springer or Judge Joe Brown or...
	People's court.
	Except instead of fines, they lock you away for years.
	Consecutive, by the way.
	Not concurrent.
	Consecutive. Okay, well, okay, we got the...
	I think we got that taken care of.
	So what's going on here?
	Sorry, I'm trying not to talk too loud.
	What a terrible injustice, says Arizoni.
	You can also start the sentence with at...
	Okay, that's something else.
	Judge let him finish the paperwork, then they took him away again.
	It's actually...
	It is amazing, because they're going to lock him up, leading up to the trial that he's going for next week, on misdemeanor domestic violence, which consists of text messages, so that he can't usefully prepare...
	Oh, that's it?
	They're out?
	Is that it?
	That's very anticlimactic.
	Wasn't the judge supposed to come back and say, I have investigated myself and I'm fine.
	I did not even know that I was being sued because I didn't get service.
	Bullshit! Thank you, everybody.
	That concludes today's hearing.
	We'll be turning off the WebEx now.
	Everybody, I know that that term, you know, make someone famous generally has nefarious, nefarious undertones to it in terms of like doxing private citizens and, you know, make them famous, find this person.
	Do feel free to snip, clip, and broadcast the madness to the world.
	I missed a portion of it, but I got everything that I needed to get.
	We're going to have an amazing...
	I don't know if Barnes is going to do a bourbon with Barnes tonight.
	I think he might, but they're three hours early, so it's going to be tough to organize that.
	What time is it?
	So that's it.
	Detention. What is it?
	What's the word I'm looking for?
	Not detention.
	It's incarceration.
	Can we get Barnes on for a quick recap?
	Let me see if I can get him.
	Hold on.
	Invite. Good idea.
	Encryptus. Let's see if we can do this.
	Barnes. Let's see here.
	Barnes. Biggity Barnes.
	Here. Boom.
	Can you pop?
	I don't know if he's going to be with him.
	Are you able to pop on and rage?
	I'm going to text Barnes and see if he can get on.
	We watched everything.
	You came close to contempt.
	Winky face.
	We are live now.
	So we'll see if Barnes is going to get these.
	He might be with Ben's hoof now.
	Holy sweet, merciful crab apples.
	Other than that, Mr. Ben's hoof, how was the show?
	It's so wild when all you have to do is rely on my feelings.
	I felt...
	Very. She's never seen a domestic violence case like this in her life?
	Oh, do all of the other ones only actually use stones and sticks and stones and not names?
	Manipulation via text message, even if that's what it is and we can say it might be that with a caveat, is domestic violence.
	Okay, if you're a snowflake commie Karen living out of Seattle.
	We'll see if we can get Barnes to come on.
	Let me go back over here into the Viva Barnes law and see what's going on in the chat.
	Mistrial. There's no mistrial.
	Here we go.
	You got the nipple and Goron in the house.
	Clown court is in session, says special SOV.
	Oh, I lost all of the messages.
	Load more messages.
	Call Barnes.
	No, I texted him.
	Barnes is...
	Yeah, you know what?
	Let's do it.
	I'm going to call.
	Nobody uses the phone anymore.
	Let me see if he picks up.
	I don't think he's going to pick up, but we'll see.
	Can we get a recap?
	Says Chabad 770.
	In a sec.
	Yeah, okay, fine.
	We'll let Barnes reply to the text.
	Lefson says, I expect he's with the defendant and kind of busy and will need to de-stress before venting on channel.
	No, Barnes likes to do things when it's fresh in his heart.
	That was messed up.
	Huge, says Paracleric.
	I need light up.
	LOL, says the special SOV.
	All right, so what happened?
	The summary?
	Barnes has been describing this case for a while, and it consists of accusations or charges of domestic violence because of what might be, at worst, an angry parent.
	Trying to get his kid to like him.
	I think that's the least charitable way of doing it.
	Yep. A father is in a messy divorce with a wife who...
	The father might also be right.
	We don't know who's right or wrong.
	Even if he's right, some of you might say, well, it's not the way to do it.
	You don't try to pit one kid against one parent in the context of a divorce.
	If you think the mother was not doing something similar just verbally because she had custody, they're both doing it.
	Does it make it wrong?
	Or right, whatever.
	The father was contacting the kid despite a no-contact order, which, from what I understand, was issued, I don't want to say ex parte, but I don't think that the defendant was there when they issued that no-contact order in another case.
	The father contacted his kid when his kid was contacting him and getting into text, you know, your mother doesn't love you as much as I do.
	She's trying to manipulate you, yada, yada, yada.
	Would you do this to help me out?
	If I do it, the court won't appreciate it as well.
	Okay. He's doing that.
	However you take that, I think we can probably all agree it's not domestic violence.
	80 charges of this.
	And Barnes was arguing constitutional violations in terms of parental rights, constitutional violations in terms of First Amendment rights.
	And basically, he came into this knowing that the guy was going to get railroaded.
	And as you could see, it was a question of preserving all objections and preserving all violations of rules of evidence for appeal.
	Oh, the judge.
	I missed a bit of the portion where the judge was notified that she's being sued civilly by the defendant.
	By Ben's hoof.
	So she purports to have not known that she got served.
	Bullshit of the highest order.
	And she came back after that, what was supposed to be a 15-minute break, turned into a 40-minute break, saying, yeah, I didn't realize I was sued, but don't worry.
	I can be objective nonetheless, so don't worry about it.
	I can still sit on this trial and adjudicate the guilt of the man who, as far as she's concerned, and I can understand that she feels harassed by the guy, judicially harassed.
	Does she want the guy who's suing her, judicially harassing her, out on the street while While his potential lawsuit is pending.
	If you think someone is a danger because of texts, that they are harassing, violating court orders, etc., and they're currently suing you, the first and only place you want that person to be is behind bars.
	And when you're the judge, you're the one who has the legal authority to do that.
	That would maybe qualify in most people's minds as the overt conflict of interest that would cause one to recuse herself from adjudicating on the sentence, culpability and sentence, although he had already been adjudicated culpable, of the sentence of the individual who's suing you.
	She comes back and says, no, I can remain perfectly objective, which is exactly what biased people say, and sentence them to consecutive, I don't even know that we got a total on it, multiple consecutive sentences of A year less a day, which I suspect is the statutory limit for misdemeanors, less time served.
	But to get past the time served, she made these sentences run consecutive, not concurrent, one after the other, not all at the same time, so that she could make this guy rot away for years.
	Then Barnes said, well, at least grant a bond bail pending appeal.
	A, because it's freaking misdemeanors to begin with, and that's the rule.
	And B, he's got to prep for another trial next week, and then he's got to attend that trial.
	Which extends for a month.
	And she said, no, you don't get that either.
	So that's the summary.
	She was looking out for the good of the community.
	Remember, judges are impartial.
	Once they put on the black robes, you dare refuse this?
	Says Corporate G Sol Cop 1 over on Rumble.
	So that's the summary.
	Kiki Blue.
	In a tip question says she probably added the gun restrictions after learning of the lawsuit against her.
	They were going to do that regardless.
	I didn't know that they even had gun rights in Seattle.
	Encryptus says that 40-minute break got the stream derailed into a tech and AI discussion with the chat.
	Well, it was good.
	When I saw you rolling and riffing there, Encryptus, I didn't want to get involved because I've got a big fat zero to add when it comes to tech and other stuff.
	But Encryptus, the dongle.
	That I need, because next Sunday I want to start the show with Dexter Taylor, speaking of civil rights violations.
	Could you, if I may ask you, Encrypta, send me the Amazon affiliate link.
	An Amazon link for the thing that I need to get so I don't screw it up.
	Encrypta said, the Barnes was at his best in the courtroom.
	We need more of these.
	It was a masterclass in litigation.
	He's not just a shit-talking podcaster.
	He's a legit damn good lawyer, Bravo Barnes.
	And people will say, People will say because people are dishonest idiots.
	Look, another one of Barnes' clients just got sentenced with a terrible judgment.
	You never lose a case if you never take a hard case.
	I'm always skeptical if any lawyer says my success rate is a 90 plus percent.
	If that's the case, you're not taking hard cases.
	Barnes is good.
	You notice he changes his demeanor from Podcasts from Sunday night shows with Barris.
	He almost adopted a bit of the, not the vernacular, but the method of speech of those in the courtroom.
	Wasn't going to do anything, but he was talking with a bit more of a higher pitched voice.
	Definitely a slower cadence.
	He's amazing.
	And it's not because his clients or the people that he chooses to represent get railroaded that is any negative reflection on his capacity as an attorney.
	It's actually a reflection of his capacity to take on cases that most people wouldn't take on.
	I don't know Ben Suf at all, period.
	It would not shock me to learn that he's a very difficult person to get along with.
	Although I am surprised at the amount of people behind him supporting Ben Suf and reacting to this outrage.
	It wouldn't surprise me if he's a very difficult client.
	But Barnes has taken a case and not a personality.
	Is the judge...
	If the judge and the prosecution left before the end of the trial, mistrial, says Paraclex.
	There'll be no mistrial here.
	She'll let it all...
	She's living with it like Angeron.
	Let the Court of Appeal figure it out.
	Cougar1985 says, Viva, did you hear the judge say this is the worst domestic violence case she has ever seen?
	I did hear that.
	I can't believe it.
	It's a load of shit is what that is.
	The railman says, for the Barnes preemptive bail fund.
	I mean, it's laughably stupid to call this the worst domestic violence case, unless she's never dealt with any domestic violence cases involving actual domestic violence.
	This is at worst manipulation.
	And maybe narcissism, you know, maybe a little bit of the DARVO, I can see, but this is at worst verbal manipulation, not physical manipulation.
	Okay, Viva.
	What seems to be the main deterrent is the judge's bias.
	If the judge is fair, then a lawyer like Barnes will have a high...
	No, I'll have a success rate.
	A judge in a liberal shithole, the best lawyer won't help, says corporate G. So...
	Not even.
	I mean, it's...
	Well, I mean, I appreciate what you're saying.
	Yeah. With a biased judge, there's nothing you can do.
	They will find a way.
	It's mental gymnastics.
	They will argue towards that...
	They will argue from that conclusion.
	I could draft it.
	This is the worst case of domestic violence I've ever seen.
	Years of defying court orders over 80 different occasions.
	Manipulating his son against his mother.
	Abusing of his violating court orders for psychological harassment on a minor.
	How are they going to enforce a five-year no contact when the kid turns 18?
	Kid's 17 now, from what I understand.
	It's about the appeal.
	At that point, and Barnes did a great job setting the table for appeal, says DThomas125.
	Yep. Okay, so I don't think we're going to get Barnes to come on now, but he might do a bourbon with Barnes.
	And that's it.
	What I'm going to do, so everybody make Barnes famous.
	Post some clips.
	A section that will probably have public appeal.
	Is where Barnes says the rage at the end.
	How much more abuse are you going to inflict upon him?
	You've kicked him out of his own trial.
	Can the record reflect that?
	Someone do it.
	I'll probably do it after this.
	I'll do it right now, but I've got to finish a bunch of things and see if we had a minor, minor boo-boo, minor injury because someone was not wearing a helmet.
	So I'm going to go do that.
	Everybody, I'll leave.
	How long are you on for?
	Asks my wife.
	I'm going to say, getting off now.
	What's up?
	My wife, she wants me to...
	Okay, I better do this right now.
	Everybody, I'm going to...
	I'll leave the chat open on Locals.
	I think we can do that.
	And I think I can leave the chat open on Rumble as well.
	I think we need to pick up a child.
	It's okay.
	Life is about being a perpetual...
	Parenthood is about being a perpetual chauffeur.
	What time?
	I hope everyone enjoyed that.
	I did not because it reminds me of what it's...
	I once had a...
	Now. Okay, okay, okay, okay, okay.
	Two minutes.
	All right, I better do this.
	You know, I had a terrible file where the client was an unsavory client.
	Behavior terrible.
	Abrasive character.
	Very much reminiscent of Leonardo DiCaprio in Catch Me If You Can.
	And was objectively up to no good.
	But nothing illegal.
	Nothing uncivil.
	Nothing that had any legal protections.
	Just, you know, stuff that's not cool, dog.
	But you imagine having a foreigner.
	My client was a foreigner from a foreign country in a Sherbrooke courtroom.
	Going after injuring a local Quebec well-known company, it was a lost case from the get-go.
	It was a very interesting case.
	It revolved around Lego.
	And that once the patent is over, there's no legal protection.
	So in as much as what you might have done to copy the design might have been outright copying, when there's no patent and there's no legal protection, it can be as dirty as you want it to be.
	It's not unlawful, civilly or criminally.
	But that's when they invoked parasitism, a very unknown concept of French law that they imported into Quebec law.
	And my client, a foreign country, foreign individual, arrogant, young, very much like Leonardo DiCaprio with an accent, was never going to get the sympathy of a Sherbrooke judge or a Sherbrooke court, and didn't.
	One of my more very irritating cases.
	So, okay, people.
	Go on and enjoy the day.
	I'm going to end this and see if I can get to Barnes and see.
	Viva is being sequestered for bedroom gymnastics.
	See, I wish.
	That was from King Ruby.
	No, I'm being sequestered for parental duties.
	Duties. Okay, I'm going to do it.
	I'm going to end it.
	And thank you all for being here.
	I hope this was good enough.
	And Encryptus, thank you very much for reminding me and getting me to set this thing up because this was worthwhile for everybody.
	Let me see here in the tip questions.
	She probably added the gun.
	Okay, so I think I can leave the chat open.
	I'm just going to end the stream, and I will see you all tomorrow at some point in time because we will have a stream tomorrow.
	So thank you all.
	Locals, Godspeed.
	Rumble, God bless.
	Rumble, Godspeed.
	Locals, God bless.
	I will see you all tomorrow, and I hope you enjoyed the show, and I hope Barnes does a Bourbon with Barnes night to properly vent after he's able to coordinate with his client who's now going to go to jail for, what was it, five years for text messages.
	All right, go.
	Be good.

▲