u/greald

> "PAPERLESS ORDER SETTING HEARING. A hearing on Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File Under Seal and Plaintiff's Motion for Sanctions under FRCP 37(e)(2) for Defendant's Spoliation of Evidence, ECF Nos. 251, 262 is hereby SET before the undersigned on Wednesday, July 29, 2026, at 2:00 p.m., at the Wilkie D. Ferguson, Jr. Courthouse, Courtroom 11-4, 400 North Miami Avenue, Miami, Florida 33128. Given that the Motions pertain to evidence central to the resolution of Plaintiff's claims, this matter is hereby removed from its current trial calendar and shall be reset after the Court's ruling. Signed by Judge Jacqueline Becerra (drn) (Entered: 06/30/2026)"

This means the trial is on hold and will be rescheduled. Because the judge needs to hold a hearing on Destiny's dodgy evidence and his apparent violation of court rules.

This is Destiny being asked. Why should I not apply trial ending sanctions. This is very very very bad for Destiny.

Can he survive? Sure, if he gives some darn good answers at the hearing. But right now he's in trouble. So much trouble the judge doesn't want to initiate the jury selection, because that could be a waste of time.

Background:

As some you may know in early 2025 speed running youtuber Karl Jobst lost a defamation suit to King of Kong infamous "internet personality" Billy Mitchell. Jobst was widely criticized and mocked for this lose. Jobst was overly confident of a win during the case and misleading about what the case was actually about. Turns out that he gave the impression of being sued for claims about Mitchells Donkey Kong high scores, but in reality was sued for accusing Mitchell for contributing to a fellow speed runners suicide.

After his loss Jobst was forced to declare bankruptcy and still owes Billy Mitchell about 700k USD.

So when Jobst filed a defamation suit against Mitchell not only in America, with its more protective free speech laws and in the very complicated Southern District of Florida court, but also as pro se, representing himself:

People roundly mocked him, which was probably deserved.

Jobst is suing for:

Defamation Per Se.

Unauthorized Publication Of Name or Likeness for Commercial or Advertising Purposes.

Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress.

Now "proper" filings in the case have dropped. A Motion to Dismiss, and a Motion for Security for Costs. The former being a motion that assumes everything Jobst states in his complaint are true but then argues that he still doesn't have a case. The later is asking the judge to order Jobst to put up 80k before proceeding because he will be unable to cover any of Mitchells costs if he loses due to his bankruptcy.

Now before we proceed, I will mention. A lawyer can write the most well cited and well argued motion or reply in the history of litigation and have their opponent write some half assed, left hand work in opposition and still lose. The merits and the law is what rules and judges are independent experts that are perfectly capable of making up their own minds regardless of arguments from the lawyers. An actual "good lawyer" is often one who doesn't fuck up and make fatal mistakes.

Billy Mitchell initially had two lawyers and a very well renowned firm defending him. While one of the lawyers is his daughter and somewhat green, she appeared to have the institutional backing and support of experienced litigators.

Everyone assumed Jobst would be destroyed.

But that was then.

Now the experienced, battle hardened lawyer has left Mitchell's team, so has the renowned firm. Mitchells daughter is still on the case, but as sole attorney and she appears to have left the firm she was working for when the case started according to their website.

She's posting on twitter, about the case, denigrating Jobst in a case about Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress??. Messes up the her electronic filings. And her motions are bad. Not fatally bad, just below average, broad and boilerplate. and her citations are backfiring on her, in that Jobst is reverse unoing them to make his own case.

Jobst meanwhile is filing some excellent replies. His legal research appears to be competent. His citation is on point and his argument is well made. And he filed the replies in respectively 3 and 6 days, he had 14 days to file. Suggesting he's prepared and has had the research down before even starting the case.

There is still some criticism of Jobst filings, he's a tad to aggressive, federal court really likes professionalism, and one of his arguments about "bad faith" was probably better left out.

Does that mean Jobst wins. No. That is far to early to tell and as I mentioned about the law and the merits, the best arguments can still fail if the underlying facts aren't there. But it's certainly not how most people expected this to proceed.