Facing the Facts
The countdown to appeals is on, so what is on the table?
The next chapter in the Vic Mignogna v. Funimation LLC et al case is about to begin, with the confirmation that the Plaintiff, Vic Mignogna, will indeed pursue an appeal on every single one of the 17 dismissed courses-of-action of his lawsuit.
There is plenty of ripe speculation so it may be a suitable time, while we await dates and filings, to review exactly what is being covered by the lawsuit — and what isn’t.
Who is actually on trial?
The first question that seems to get confused during conversations about the lawsuit, is who actually is on trial here.
For the very basic purpose of understanding: the “Plaintiff” (The person bringing the lawsuit) is Vic Mignogna; the “Defendant(s)” (The person(s) who are being taken to court) are Funimation LLC, Monica Rial, Jamie Marchi and Ronald Toye III.
As things are currently, before appeals, the 17 “causes of action” (The reason the Plaintiff is bringing the Defendants before the Court) were “dismissed with prejudice” (Meaning the Defendants cannot be brought before the Court again, for the same causes of action — not counting appeals).
This particular dismissal was under a Texas state-variation of “anti-SLAPP” (a statute that is in place to protect against frivolous abuse of the Court to silence a person’s free speech. In Texas, this is called a TCPA — Texas Citizen’s Participation Act)
Following any awarded fees/sanctions, the Plaintiff has the option to appeal if they believe the rule of law was not followed correctly (among other reasons). In this case, the Plaintiff (Vic Mignogna) has decided to pursue an appeal.
So, the Defendants won?
The Defendants were successful in the initial stages of the lawsuit, convincing the Court that the lawsuit fell within the protection of the TCPA.
This, however, does not mean that any of the allegations the Defendants’ made that led to the lawsuit being filed, or comments made during the proceedings, have been proven to be true.
The reason for the dismissal via TCPA that was rendered, was that the Plaintiff (Vic) failed to meet an evidentiary standard needed for the Judge to consider the lawsuit to have merit, and therefore would not proceed to trial.
The Judge did not weigh any of the merit/validity of the Defendants’ allegations, nor did the Judge determine that any of the allegations made against the Plaintiff were true or false.
So, what does this mean about the Defendants’ allegations, are they true or false?
Unfortunately, this has never been legally determined.
The allegations that landed Monica Rial and Ron Toye in this lawsuit, (and by-extension, Jamie Marchi and Funimation LLC) were numerous and varied. To understand all of what led to this, we need to look back at the spark that started the fire.
A rumor on twitter had sparked a wildfire of interest, after someone had tweeted to Funimation “Why do you employ a known pedophile?” while the user mistakenly linked a disparaging article naming Vic Mignogna. It would be later discovered that the “pedophile” the user had mistakenly believed to be Vic, was actually another Funimation voice actor entirely — who had actually been charged with sexual assault, with charges later dropped, citing that both the alleged victim and her mother would not cooperate with police investigation.
Due to the original tweet (actually referencing a different voice actor entirely) and subsequent articles beginning to surface on the internet, Funimation asked Sony to investigate the legitimacy of the claims being made against Vic Mignogna.
As has been uncovered by the deposition of the Defendants and the affidavits provided by the Defendants, the scope of Sony’s investigation into the allegations were that Vic Mignogna:
- Suggestively ate a jellybean, insinuating a salacious comment about Monica Rial
- Participated in a consensual kiss with a Funimation employee while in their offices
- Asked two adult women (who were fans) to participate in sexual activity, in a private hotel room
and the result of the investigation, while Funimation fully admits they did not find evidence of sexual misconduct — they decided to terminate Vic Mignogna based on the results of the investigation (not based on any sexual or harassing behavior) anyway. Citing that following the investigation, that Tammi Denbow (of Sony) found the allegations (listed above) to be credible.
During this time, Ron Toye (fiance of Monica Rial) had been making claims on twitter that Vic was “a predator”, making claims that he was “about to be arrested”. Ron went on to state he “knew of at least 4 assaults”, with Monica Rial shortly after coming out and making a claim that she too, was a victim.
As the fervor on social media rose, Jamie Marchi was vocally in support of her friend Monica Rial, and also coming out on twitter to share her story about allegedly being assaulted by Vic.
So far, the only evidence that exists to support the allegations made by Monica, Ron and Jamie is all based on their word. To date, there has not been corroborating evidence to remove any “reasonable doubt”, as the allegations being made are criminal in nature.
That is not to say that the allegations are not true; at this time, there is simply too much information that is left incomplete.
The only allegation that has merit, would be Jamie Marchi’s claim that Vic Mignogna pulled her hair, resulting in her having pain. In Vic’s deposition, he disagreed with the term “pulling” and stated that he playfully “grabbed” her hair.
Taking what Jamie says at face-value, if Vic did touch or “grab” her hair, it could have indeed been a painful or traumatic experience for her.
Funimation, as well, is in an awkward spot; where they have provided evidence that they did not terminate Vic for sexual misconduct, there is still an ambiguity on whether the tweets they made inferred that they had. They did find the three allegations mentioned earlier credible, and that was enough for Funimation to decide to terminate the contract. Though, no clear evidence has been provided that Funimation did not intend (beyond their word) to make the inference.
So while the Defendants have been ambiguous with the evidence they’ve chosen to provide, to refute the Plaintiff’s claims — Jamie has been the only Defendant to show actual evidence to support the allegations she made in her tweets.
All of the filings, including depositions of Vic, Monica and Ron, are available (in their original formats) for searching on re:SearchTX, by searching Vic Mignogna v. Funimation LLC.
The Verdict Remains
Lawsuits are proving to be complex, frustratingly complicated things to understand. There is not so much a clear-cut “winner” to declare, although the first round has been in-favor of the Defendants.
Unfortunately for some, Vic Mignogna is not the one on trial. This lawsuit will not bring any closure to the allegations made by Defendants as a means of their defense, which can ultimately be a frustrating reality for a ravaged fanbase.
No matter the outcome, no matter the sanctions, or fees or penalties levied on any party involved in this case, the simple fact remains — this lawsuit will not settle any facts on the Defendant’s allegations as things are.
For those who may be victims of sexual assault, and who are looking at this case to ring a victory for victims — this is not to be; you will be disappointed.
All that can be determined for the Defendants, is that they were within their rights of Free Speech, to make the comments they made. Such is the nature of this justice system.
There is another outcome that would be equally as devastating for those who are hoping that this will count as a victory for assault victims — if the Plaintiff wins.
Keeping Perspective
It is important to remember what this lawsuit is, and not believe that it is something else.
This lawsuit was brought about because Vic Mignogna believed he was defamed, and had his ability to conduct business stunted by one or more of the Defendants.
It is easy to get lost in the idea that this some kind of method to silence victims, or that this is an attempt to muzzle free-speech.
The reality is that it is none of these things. This is simply one of thousands of lawsuits filed any given year. This is a test of the limits of free-speech on social media, when it starts to infringe on your ability to provide for yourself and your family.
This is not an attack on victims, this is not an attack on freedoms. This is a lawsuit that should be left to play out in a court of law, not a court of public opinion.
It may be tempting to project our own struggles, and past transgressions on this lawsuit and create an emotional bond; it is imperative that we don’t let ourselves do that.
It’s also important to not lose faith in the justice system. For all it’s flaws, it still gets it right more times than it fails, and risking letting our emotions cloud our judgment that lead us to irrational actions is simply not productive to anyone.
Now is the time to step back, and re-evaluate our emotional investment — on all sides.
Appeals are coming, and soon it will be time to face the facts.