I'm surprised it isn't filed already.

•TEXAS A&M OFFERING $1200 REWARD to find who is responsible for leaving racially-charged messages of hate on the car windshield of a Texas A&M student outside an apartment building.

More details here -> https://t.co/QX6PYggxsN https://t.co/lq478qgiot

— Rusty Surette (@KBTXRusty) June 25, 2020

OUR MONIES

WHERE IS IT

$1200

EDIT

So excellent images asking where my money is are auto flag evidently .... so

MONIES
NOW

RiskManager93 said:

---

I'm a lawyer, though not licensed in Texas. There's a case here albeit it with very little payout in the end.

But discovery would be glorious.

---

Do you think there's a sovereign immunity defense?

_mpaul said:

---

RiskManager93 said:

---

I'm a lawyer, though not licensed in Texas. There's a case here albeit it with very little payout in the end.

But discovery would be glorious.

---

Do you think there's a sovereign immunity defense?

---

Wasn't it Young that offered it? As an indivdual I don't think he can claim sovereign immunity.

A FOIA on all emails pertaining to this would be wonderful too. Can anyone do a FOIA request for all emails containing @tamu.edu that were sent to Young and his response?

Irish 2.0 said:

---

_mpaul said:

---

RiskManager93 said:

---

I'm a lawyer, though not licensed in Texas. There's a case here albeit it with very little payout in the end.

But discovery would be glorious.

---

Do you think there's a sovereign immunity defense?

---

Wasn't it Young that offered it? As an indivdual I don't think he can claim sovereign immunity.

A FOIA on all emails pertaining to this would be wonderful too. Can anyone do a FOIA request for all emails containing @tamu.edu that were sent to Young and his response?

---

This has already been done by several individuals

Jarrin' Jay said:

---

BenFiasco14 said:

---

Cannot believe A&M will do nothing about this

---

Cannot believe he wasn't expelled from school, as he should have been. Not suspended, expelled.

---

Amen

TheTodd said:

---

Irish 2.0 said:

---

_mpaul said:

---

RiskManager93 said:

---

I'm a lawyer, though not licensed in Texas. There's a case here albeit it with very little payout in the end.

But discovery would be glorious.

---

Do you think there's a sovereign immunity defense?

---

Wasn't it Young that offered it? As an indivdual I don't think he can claim sovereign immunity.

A FOIA on all emails pertaining to this would be wonderful too. Can anyone do a FOIA request for all emails containing @tamu.edu that were sent to Young and his response?

---

This has already been done by several individuals

---

What'd they find?

Jarrin' Jay said:

---

BenFiasco14 said:

---

Cannot believe A&M will do nothing about this

---

Cannot believe he wasn't expelled from school, as he should have been. Not suspended, expelled.

---

They got rid of Cheesecake Girl who wrote the notes. Admin was probably scared of the media backlash for expelling a black (possibly LGTBQ+) student when he/she/zee/zee/it was never charged with anything. The police/DA determined he/she/zee/zee/it did not file the report, so no charges.

Admin did the risk calculations and figured it was better for the university to sell out their principles and upset a a few TexAgs user than expel him/her/them/zer/zee/it.

Did she even go to school here ?

WOKE.....please make this **** stop. That person should be kicked out of school yesterday.

hedge said:

---

Did she even go to school here ?

---

I am not in the registrar office, but I understand that she DID at one point but was not enrolled when the event happened

It's sad that a handful of activist racists are trying to ruin A&M.

Do we have any big wigs here that can make sure it doesn't graduate?

Burdizzo said:

---

TJaggie14 said:

---

Jarrin' Jay said:

---

BenFiasco14 said:

---

Cannot believe A&M will do nothing about this

---

Cannot believe he wasn't expelled from school, as he should have been. Not suspended, expelled.

---

They got rid of Cheesecake Girl who wrote the notes. Admin was probably scared of the media backlash for expelling a black (possibly LGTBQ+) student when he/she/zee/zee/it was never charged with anything. The police/DA determined he/she/zee/zee/it did not file the report, so no charges.

Admin did the risk calculations and figured it was better for the university to sell out their principles and upset a a few TexAgs user than expel him/her/them/zer/zee/it.

---

From my understanding of details, Cheesecake was not a student at the time of the incident, although she let everyone think she was to the point that she even had a meeting with the administration. When the admin found out they had called in a non-student who they thought was a student there was a certain amount of embarrassment that was quickly swept under the rug.

There was so much mishandling of this by the university it isn't even funny.

---

Edit: The first post on this thread explains everything clearly.
How everything ties together so far... | TexAgs

TJaggie14 said:

---

Burdizzo said:

---

TJaggie14 said:

---

Jarrin' Jay said:

---

BenFiasco14 said:

---

Cannot believe A&M will do nothing about this

---

Cannot believe he wasn't expelled from school, as he should have been. Not suspended, expelled.

---

They got rid of Cheesecake Girl who wrote the notes. Admin was probably scared of the media backlash for expelling a black (possibly LGTBQ+) student when he/she/zee/zee/it was never charged with anything. The police/DA determined he/she/zee/zee/it did not file the report, so no charges.

Admin did the risk calculations and figured it was better for the university to sell out their principles and upset a a few TexAgs user than expel him/her/them/zer/zee/it.

---

From my understanding of details, Cheesecake was not a student at the time of the incident, although she let everyone think she was to the point that she even had a meeting with the administration. When the admin found out they had called in a non-student who they thought was a student there was a certain amount of embarrassment that was quickly swept under the rug.

There was so much mishandling of this by the university it isn't even funny.

---

Edit: The first post on this thread explains everything clearly.
How everything ties together so far... | TexAgs

---

Yes, that was done.

Point being is that you don't have to be a current student to write a hoax note. The admin called her in thinking she was a student, and she was not at the time. Yet everyone thought she was.

Somebody should file a lawsuit for the 1200.

Makes everything public.

I'd like to see video of him walking across the stage to a crowd full of hissing

So she dropped out

_mpaul said:

---

RiskManager93 said:

---

I'm a lawyer, though not licensed in Texas. There's a case here albeit it with very little payout in the end.

But discovery would be glorious.

---

Do you think there's a sovereign immunity defense?

---

It's a breach of contract, not a tort claim, so sovereign immunity wouldn't apply. Contractors are allowed to sue the state for breach of contract -- but there are catches. The state gets to dictate when it can be sued and it usually requires a written contract to include a dispute resolution clause, and there are proper notice requirements. An individual has to give the state notice of intent to sue within 180 days of the alleged breach and you aren't allowed to sue for fees incurred in enforcing the contract.

It's pretty clear this is an oral contract. Offer, Acceptance, Consideration, Competency and Intent. And oral contracts are valid in Texas.

What would be FUNNY would be if the individual who met the terms of President Young's offer sent the office a letter telling him he intended to sue, then simply file in Small Claims Court. Force the university to respond and make them go through the motions of offering the qualified reasons why it can't be sued (i.e., not an enforceable contract, etc.). Force their hand on the issue -- and then MAKE IT PUBLIC.

My guess is they would simply pay the $1200 rather than incur the legal fees defending itself.

I would recommend having an attorney handle it for the plaintiff in this instance, though. You can sue anonymously under certain circumstances including when there is a reasonable fear of retaliation. I think claiming you're in fear the university would deny admission to your children or something benign would work. Tell the attorney they can have half the money and all the attention from the press.

Again, though, it's Small Claims and such a de minimus amount, I bet they would pay.

Would be funny as hell...

hedge said:

---

So she dropped out

---

I thought she graduated, but not sure Just that she wasn't scared Sully would oppress her on her first day of school. That came later once she properly brainwashed

RiskManager93 said:

---

_mpaul said:

---

RiskManager93 said:

---

I'm a lawyer, though not licensed in Texas. There's a case here albeit it with very little payout in the end.

But discovery would be glorious.

---

Do you think there's a sovereign immunity defense?

---

It's a breach of contract, not a tort claim, so sovereign immunity wouldn't apply. Contractors are allowed to sue the state for breach of contract -- but there are catches. The state gets to dictate when it can be sued and it usually requires a written contract to include a dispute resolution clause, and there are proper notice requirements. An individual has to give the state notice of intent to sue within 180 days of the alleged breach and you aren't allowed to sue for fees incurred in enforcing the contract.

It's pretty clear this is an oral contract. Offer, Acceptance, Consideration, Competency and Intent. And oral contracts are valid in Texas.

What would be FUNNY would be if the individual who met the terms of President Young's offer sent the office a letter telling him he intended to sue, then simply file in Small Claims Court. Force the university to respond and make them go through the motions of offering the qualified reasons why it can't be sued (i.e., not an enforceable contract, etc.). Force their hand on the issue -- and then MAKE IT PUBLIC.

My guess is they would simply pay the $1200 rather than incur the legal fees defending itself.

I would recommend having an attorney handle it for the plaintiff in this instance, though. You can sue anonymously under certain circumstances including when there is a reasonable fear of retaliation. I think claiming you're in fear the university would deny admission to your children or something benign would work. Tell the attorney they can have half the money and all the attention from the press.

Again, though, it's Small Claims and such a de minimus amount, I bet they would pay.

Would be funny as hell...

---

IANAL.

I think it would hard to prove standing in this case. It really would go nowhere over $1200 and an event that most of the public have already forgotten about.

The best option is to threaten to sue and then issue a press release on the facts. Hope that a news outlet will pick it up.

Burdizzo said:

---

IANAL.

I think it would hard to prove standing in this case. It really would go nowhere over $1200 and an event that most of the public have already forgotten about.

The best option is to threaten to sue and then issue a press release on the facts. Hope that a news outlet will pick it up.

---

The only condition for the reward was the identity of the person who placed the "racist" letter on the windshield. That's it. The poster "Look It Up" is the one who did all of the work and cooperated with the police, and he or she absolutely has standing. All s/he has to do is have the investigating officer who reviewed the video testify as to the identity of responsible party. Case closed. Terms of the contract are met.

Hell, you wouldn't even have to do that. The report itself had the conversation between the officer and Isiah. You could just use it and not even need the officer.

Whether the public has forgotten about it or not is irrelevant.

The press won't care about a threat to sue. Now, get yourself a judgment or have the university go on record as to why they aren't fulfilling their end of the deal and you've got yourself a Tucker-worthy segment.

RiskManager93 said:

---

Burdizzo said:

---

IANAL.

I think it would hard to prove standing in this case. It really would go nowhere over $1200 and an event that most of the public have already forgotten about.

The best option is to threaten to sue and then issue a press release on the facts. Hope that a news outlet will pick it up.

---

The only condition for the reward was the identity of the person who placed the "racist" letter on the windshield. That's it. The poster "Look It Up" is the one who did all of the work and cooperated with the police, and he or she absolutely has standing. All s/he has to do is have the investigating officer who reviewed the video testify as to the identity of responsible party. Case closed. Terms of the contract are met.

Whether the public has forgotten about it or not is irrelevant.

The press won't care about a threat to sue. Now, get yourself a judgment or have the university go on record as to why they aren't fulfilling their end of the deal and you've got yourself a Tucker-worthy segment.

---

Redstone claims he solved it too. Does he have standing?

It was a public offering -- $1200 for anyone who identifies the person who left the note. Whoever turned over the video to police has standing. I forget the names of everyone involved...

RiskManager93 said:

---

It was a public offering -- $1200 for anyone who identifies the person who left the note. Whoever turned over the video to police has standing. I forget the names of everyone involved...

---

Sounds like you should volunteer to be on Tucker m

Nope.

I've always said I was a PART of the team that solved and verified, and that Ben, who also did, should help to facilitate distribution.

I'm also happy to not receive payment if it wasn't a team effort.

Regardless

LET'S SEE THE MONEY

Here is the other kicker, we still don't officially have a perp. Like OJ, we all know he did it, but he was never even up on charges.

So for $1200 we/y'all are going to say "Isaiah did it" and we are going to expect a state agency to agree to that when not even the police have said it. The police just quietly closed the case.


I am all for shining a light on this to expose these roaches, but I don't think everyone realizes what this going to take.