Freedom Enough 026_Magnus Carlsen (and his slimy lawyers) Cheated Against Hans Niemann (in court)

Court Listener docket

Show more

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/65592749/niemann-v-carlsen/

----

https://nypost.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2022/09/chess-tournament-tech-based-cheating-allegations-feat-image.jpg?quality=75&strip=all

Is Magnus Carlsen the best chess player of all time?

Hans Niemann beat Magnus decisively at a tournament, but...

Did Hans Niemann cheat?

Now that Hans Niemann's lawsuit against Magnus, and against Chess.com, has been dismissed, does it restore the integrity of the game of chess?

Or, was it Magnus Carlsen and Chess.com who cheated - not in the game of chess, but in getting Hans Niemann's lawsuit dismissed?

Why did the case, which was brought in St. Louis, the chess capital of the world, boil down to - not whether Hans Nieman cheated - but on who does or does not reside in Connecticut, of all places?

Hello world, I'm Alexander C. Baker, J.D., expert in civil litigation and enthusiatic novice at the game of the chess. I'ts July 9, 2023, Welcome to Freedom Enough # 26, Magnus Carlsen (and his slimy lawyers) Cheated Against Hans Niemann (in court)

I love chess. I learned how to play as a little kid, but never took it seriously. I never really played at all as an adult until just last year, when I discovered online chess at Chess.com. My current rating is just over 900, which places me squarely in the beginner range. But I love playing and I deeply respect the game.

There are a few reasons I love and resepect chess so much. One is the infinite variations on a theme. Every game is played on the same board with the same 64 squares, and the same 32 pieces arranged in the same starting position. There are certain standard openings that have been played literally billions of times. And yet, if the game survives past about move number 20, you might well be playing a game of chess that has never been played before. Mathemeticians tell us that there are more different possible games of chess than ther are atoms in the universe. Think about that.

The other reason I love and respect chess is that the game is 100% objective. There is absolutely no luck involved whatsoever. There is no roll of the dice, no turning of the cards. The rules of the game have been carved in stone for over 500 years. All of my moves are visible to my opponent, and my opponents moves to me. If I win, I can take all the credit. If I lose, if I take my opponent's free bishop, only to have him move his kight and fork my king, my queen and my rook, all in one move, well, it ain't nobody's fault but mine.

https://www.mastercard.com/news/press/2021/september/mastercard-names-world-chess-champion-magnus-carlsen-global-brand-ambassador/

This guy - Magnus Carlsen - is the five time world chess champion. With a rating of 2861, he is the highest rated player ever. At the ripe old age of 33, Magnus is widely regarded as the greatest chess player in history.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlsen%E2%80%93Niemann_controversy

On September 4, 2022, a 19-year-old upstart named Hans Niemann defeated Magnus in a tournament in St. Louis Missouri. St. Louis is the home of the prestigious St. Louis Chess Club, and is considered the chess capital of America.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/04/sports/chess-cheating-hans-niemann-magnus-carlsen.html

Immediately after that game, according to this article in the New York Times, Magnus accused Hans Niemann of cheating, and refused to ever play him again.

In September, when the five-time world chess champion Magnus Carlsen accused a 19-year-old American player named Hans Niemann of cheating at a tournament in St. Louis, an uproar ensued. Carlsen implied that his opponent was surreptitiously playing moves relayed from an outside source, something Niemann strenuously denied.

Magnus quit the trournament, and decided he would never play Neimann again.

https://sports.yahoo.com/magnus-carlsen-resigns-chess-rematch-075158906.html

In fact, Magnus faced Hans Niemann in another match just a few weeks later. Magnus resigned after just one move.

A media frenzy erupted. The story reached far beyond the chess world and into the mainstream. Suddenly seemingly everybody was talking about whether Hans Niemann cheated, how he had a prior HISTORY of cheating in online games, which he now admits. People were speculating about HOW exactly he was able to get real time input from a chess engine.

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/kelseyweekman/chess-cheating-anal-beads-conspiracy-hans-niemann

One of the leading "conspiracy theories" is that Niemann had an accomplice signal him by operating the remote control on some vibrating anal love beads. Could you imagine that you are a relatively anonumous person, a teenager, who just scored a major accomplishment by beating the world's greatest chess player. Suddenly, the whole world is talking about you, but not in a good way. The whole world is accusing you a cheating. And, to add insult to injury, of having vibrating anal love beads up your ass?

Like professional athletes, world-class chess players potentially have commercial endorsement opportunities. One day Hans Niemann had a very promising future, the next day, he was ruined.

Hans Neimann sued Magnus Carlsen and Chess.com and others in federal court in St. Louis. The claims were for defamation, i.e. libel and slander, and for Anti-Trust. That case was recently dismissed. The anti trust case was dismissed with prejudice, meaning it's over and cannot be re-filed. The defamation case was dismissed without prejudice on jurisdictional grounds. In theory it could be re-filed in state court.

https://youtu.be/byUOJAH4j20?t=746

I'm going to go through this case and explain some of the dirty lawyer tricks that the defense lawyers pulled, and how they have cheated Hans Niemann out of his day in court. But first, I want to call out Levi Rosman. Levi Rosman is an International Master chess player, and as Gotham Chess, a very poupular chess streamer and YouTuber.

Levi, you have reported on the Hans Niemann cheating scandal, and I want to reach out specifically to you as a representive of the chess community. I know you care deeply about the integrity of the game, and believe that by taking a zero-tolerance policy on cheating, that the integrity of the game is upheld.

I would like to pursuade you that, once you really understand what has gone down in this lawsuit, you should realize that the integrity of the game of chess has been thrown in the garbage, because Hans Niemann was cheated out of his day in court.

[12:26] Essentially this dismissal...predetermined knowledge that something is incorrect, saying it anyway, which I don't think applies in this case"

Levi, you're wrong on 2 counts. First, defamation is where the defedant makes a false statement that injures the reputation of the Plaintiff, causing damages. Whether the Defendant knows the statement is false, or has a reckless disregard for it being false, only comes up if the Plaintiff, here Hans Niemann is held to be a "public figure." That's called the "actual malice" standard, And we can argue about what that means.

Secondly, even if the actual malice standard applies in this case, that is a FACTUAL dispute, not a legal dispute. Niether you nor anybody else has considered the evidence on what Magnus Carlsen knew or didn't know. So you, Levi Rosman, as a juror in the court of public opinion, have pre-judged the case. That's unfair.

Levi Rosman, you are an expert at chess, while I am a Noob. I've learned a lot about chess from you, and others. Although I am improving, and I greatly enjoy the challegne and excitement of chess, in all liklihood I will never be more than novice.

Now, when it comes to civil litigation, I am the expert and you are the Noob. While I am not a licensed attorney, I hold a juris doctorate. More importantly, my profession for the last decade is researching and drafting civil litigation in state and federal courts, trial court, appeals and the supreme court. The fact that I don't have license means I am free to speak the truth about what happens in court, and the way people get unfairly screwed over, the way very, VERY few lawyers ever will - for fear that they will be disbarred.

Before we dive into the Hans Niemann case, let me start to teach you what civil litigation is like, with a thought experiment about chess. I'll start with a question, and I want you to really think about it ...

Would you still respect the game of chess if a judge could interpret the rules in the middle of the game?

https://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1008361

In chess, White plays first, and then Black and White alternate turns. But suppose there was a rule that said, upon a timely showing of good cause, and in the discretion of the Judge, one player may be allowed to move twice in a row? Suppose the rules did not actually say what constitutes " a showing of good cause" to allow one player to move twice. Rather, precedent, in prior games, has established that "good cause" for allowing one player to move twice is that the opponent played a move that "extraordinarily sneaky." Not just a "sneaky" move, but one that that the judge finds to be "extraordinarily sneaky."

White cites the 1956 case of Donald Byrne v. Bobby Fisher, where on the 17th move, Fischer allowed Byrne's bishop to capture his Queen on the square B6. After a few more moves, it bacame clear that the then 13-year-old Bobby Fisher had tricked the older and much more accomplished chess player Donald Byrne, allowing Fisher to employ a Windmill Tactic, re-capturing even more material than the value of the Queen.

Suppose Byrne moved the Judge for an order allowing him to move twice. After reviewing the facts, the judge found that a queen sacrifice, by Black, in the middle of the game, was held to be "extraordinarily sneaky." Byrne was allowed to move his rook twice, capturing Fisher's rook on E8, trapping Fisher's king in the corner, and ultimately leading to Byrne's victory.

OK? Would you still respect the game of chess if the rules were flexible like that?

https://ceasefiremagazine.co.uk/bobby-fischer-%E2%80%98the-game-century%E2%80%99/

In reality, of course, the 1956 game between a very young Bobby Fischer and Donald Byrne is known as the game of the century. Fischer did sacrifice his Queen in the middle of the game, and went on to checkmate Byrne. That Queen sacrifice was one of more outstanding moves in chess history.

I sincerely hope that you agree with me that "no," you would not respect the game of chess if they allowed arbitrary rulings favoring one player and destroying the other player, in the middle of the damn game. In my view, the law - that is, a civil lawsuit - should be like chess in the sense that the rules should be the same from one case to the next, and certainly should not be subject to interpretation by a judge in the middle of the game.

https://nypost.com/2022/09/14/huge-chess-world-upset-of-grandmaster-magnus-carlsen-sparks-wild-claims-of-cheating-with-vibrating-sex-toy/

In any lawsuit, you have both the facts and the law. In my opinion, a lawsuit should be about a search for the truth, not a dispute about what the damn rules mean. In this case, it should be a search for whether Hans Niemann cheated in the game against Magnus Carlsen. If he did, then he deserves the bad reputation that he certainly has now. But if he didn't cheat, then he deserves major compensation from Magnus and Chess.com and whoever else was behind the MASSIVE media campaign to destroy his reputation.

So did Hans Niemann cheat in that game? I have no idea, and neither do you. Supposedly, that is why we have a trial. It is a jury who is supposed to weigh the evidence, and decide who is liable. Unfortunately, in today's world, a civil lawsuit almost NEVER goes to trial. Cases very often never reach the stage where the facts and evidence are even considered.

Why not? This Hans Niemann v. Magnus Carlsen case makes a good example to answer that question. I will also touch on 3 other prominent defamation cases form the last decade or so, none of which made it to trial either. These are the recent Dominion Voiting Sytems v. Fox News fake lawsuit case (which I did a whole podcast about a few weeks ago), Gerald Posner v. Jim Fetzer defamation case, about Fetzer's contention that the Sandy Hook shootings were a staged false flag event, and the George Zimmerman defamation case against NBC news, related to the malicious editing of Zimmerman's 911 call after he shot Trayvon Martin dead.

[Main Photo]

https://nypost.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2022/09/chess-tournament-tech-based-cheating-allegations-feat-image.jpg?quality=75&strip=all

• Neiman files suit in federal court in St. Louis
• 2 ways to get into federal - (1) federal question (2) diversity
• If Any defendant is held to be citizen of stame state as Plaintiff, no jurisdiction
• Neimann plead both (1) Sherman Anti-Trust and Clayton Anti-Trust are federal statutes, (2) Diversity because MAgnus is a citizen of Norway, Hikaru is citizen of Florida, Danny Rensch is a citizen of Utah, and Chess.com is an LLC, part of a very large corporate structure
• Corporation - Organized in one state, heaquartered in another, domiciled in another, sufficient minimum contacts with a dozen other states.

• 095-1 Email, p. 2

• 137 - Chess.com Notice "discovers" Connecticut citizenship.

• Where is a coporation located for legal purporses? Why, the location is wherever the judge says

• Would you still respect the game of chess if the location of a piece on the board was subject to interpretation in the middle of the game?

• Well, I know it looks like my dark bishop is located on G5, but after due dilligece, I've discovered that it is also located on H6, and I'm allowed to choose. Now I've got mate in 1, so you can resign.

• 075 SAC, p.1 Nature of the case - Defamation and Anti-Trust

• 075 SAC, p.2 King of Chess

• 075 SAC, p.3 cheating and demanding disqualification

• What is a Motion to Dismiss? Judge must assume as true all facts alleged by Niemann. A motion to dismiss says "so what?" It still doesn't add up to a violation of the law.

• What law - Anti-Trust and Defamation.

• What is Anti-Trust? Supposedly to reign in monopolies, I could do a whole show on how it is the opposite - it's about awarding big companies monopolies.

• Like everything else, anti-trust is whatever a judge says it is.

• Entire 31-page dismissal order is disussing Anti-Trust, not defamation.

• 149 Dismissal - p. 23 - Judge Fleissig conclusion

• Defendants also moved to dismiss the defamation case under Anti-SLAPP. Not just any Anti-SLAPP law, but Connecticut's very strong Anti-SLAPP law, as opposed to Missouri's much weaker Anti-SLAPP law.

• What is Anti-SLAPP?

• This is really where Defendants lawyers get slimy. They KNOW that there is NO REASON to invoke Connecticut law.

• 108 Opp to MTD, p. 18, "Missouri is the only state tying these parties together. "

• 108 Opp to MTD, p. 22 - Conn. Anti-SLAPP law, no go.

• I agree, and I'm sure the judge - Audrey G. Fleissig - agreed too, WHICH IS WHY she refused jurisdiction

• Niemann might bring case again in State Court, but what about jurisdiciton?

• What is Public Figure Plaintiff?

• Niemann's lawyers bring up an EXCELLENT point about the media being able to manufacture a "public figure."

• 108 Opp to MTD,p. 19 "Niemann is only famous because Defendants falsely accused him of cheating."

• Reminds me of George Zimmerman

https://www.pmjmp.org/false-flags-talk [last slide]

• Did NBC intentionally maliciously edit the 911 call?

• Intent is a factual matter - how can judge find no malice?

• Reminds me of Dominion v. Fox - Algorithmic voter fraud? - Settled for $ 800 million - pmjmp.org/archives

• Reminds me of Pozer v. Jim Fetzer - Sandy Hook - False Death Cert. - liable at Summary judgment

• Common thread - the facts were NEVER tried to a jury in any of these cases.

[6:00 to end]

Now that you know about the arbitary nature of civil litigation, do you still respect it? I don't. There is no law. The law is whatever a judge says.

Will Hans Niemann's lawyers appeal the Anti-Trust dismissal? Will they re-file the defamation case in state court? If they had problems with personal jurisdiction suing in federal court, I cannot imagine how they are going to sue Norweigian Magnus Carlsen in State Court, but we'll see.

Did Hans Niemann cheat when he defedated Magnus Carlesn? I have no idea, and that's exactly the point. Supposedly, that's why we have a court of law - to provide a forum, a venue, where the evidence and testimony is presented, and a jury decides who is telling the truth. We don't really.

I appreciate that Chess.com wants to take a zero-tolerance policy to cheating at chess. But they don't have a zero-tolerance policy for cheating Hans Niemann out of his day in court. If Hans Niemann was really cheating, then why not answer the complaint and let the lawsuit go forward?

Is Magnus Carlsen a false accuser? Again, I have no idea. But what I do know is that the government hardly ever punishes false accusers. There are laws on the books that supposedly allow for punishing false accuseres, but they are enforced very selectively. One case that pops into my mind is that of Wanetta Gibson falsely accusing a promising young high school football player Brian Banks of rape. Banks ended up spending several years in prison, because his own slimy lawyer pressured him into taking plea deal. Then, Wanetta admitted that she made the whole thing up. What happened to Wanetta? Absolutely nothing.

Hans Niemann is in a different sort of prison right now, but a prison nonetheless. Of course we should pushish cheaters. What happened to the players on the Houston Astros who cheated their way to a world series title in 2017? Absolutely nothing. I hate that.

We should also punish false accusers. But before we punish cheaters or false accusers, we need a trial by jury. Cases need to be about what happened in the world. We need to get rid of the idea that judges decide cases by endlessly interpreting the rules of the game. Civil litigation should be more like chess - where the judge is only there to make sure we have a fair proceeding, but NOT to decide the outcome.

Hans Niemann did not get a fair trial. Hans Niemann did not get any trial. Like so many others, Hans Niemann was brutally denied his day in court. He was Railroaded, Stonewalled, and Gaslit. Suprise, surprise, the side with the most money, and is most connected to the government wins. Make no mistake about it, Chess.com and Magnus Inc. is very well funded, it is a news outlet, and very, VERY political in nature.

Look no further than their stance on the war in the Ukraine. Did you know that a player on chess.com is not allowed to display a Russian flag? Every player on their profile can choose their country and a little flag appears next to the name. But if you choose Russia, your flag is grayed out, and if you click on that grayed out flag- it takes you to a political opinion piece referring to Russia as the sole agressor, and Ukraine as being completely in the right.

This Hans Niemann v. Magnus et. al case was not unique. Far from it. This lawlessness is not just about this case. It's not just about defamation law, or anti-trust law. It's every civil lawsuit. It's every family law, or probate or child welfare case out there. You have no rights and there is no law. The law is whatever a judge says.

So I ask again - Would you stil respect the game of chess if a judge could interpret the rules in the middle of the game? No? Then you should not respect civil litigation. Not if you want justice. Not if you want fairness. Not if you want freedom.

I know you want freedom. But do you want freedom enough? Enough to say enough is enough. Enough to stop beliving in the fairy tale of good government.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/04/sports/chess-cheating-hans-niemann-magnus-carlsen.html

Chess’s Governing Body Delays Report on Cheating Scandal

https://www.chess.com/news/view/hans-niemann-lawsuit-dismissed

June 28, 2023
Hans Niemann's $100 Million Defamation Lawsuit Dismissed
Peter Doggers

The judge in the U.S. District Court in the Eastern District of Missouri noted that "counts 3 and 4," both regarding a possible antitrust injury, were dismissed "with prejudice," meaning they cannot be brought again. The other counts were dismissed for lack of jurisdiction but "without prejudice," meaning that the court dismissed federal claims and declined to hear state claims. This leaves the door open for the case to be re-filed in a state court, for instance if new evidence appears.

"We are pleased the court has rejected Hans Niemann’s attempt to recover an undeserved windfall in Missouri federal court, and that Niemann’s attempt to chill speech through strategic litigation in that forum has failed," said Craig Reiser, a partner at Axinn and an attorney for Carlsen.

https://www.chess.com/news/view/chesscom-files-motion-to-dismiss-niemann-lawsuit

Dec 3, 2022
Chess.com Files Motion To Dismiss Hans Niemann Lawsuit
Peter Doggers

Chess.com's answer to Niemann's complaints comes 43 days after the lawsuit was brought to court by Niemann's lawyers on October 20.

https://www.chess.com/news/view/nakamura-files-motion-to-dismiss-niemann-lawsuit
Dec. 9, 2023
Hikaru Nakamura Files Motion To Dismiss Hans Niemann Lawsuit

The 15-page document argues that the court does not have personal jurisdiction over Defendant Nakamura, who resides in Florida and made comments online, in the state of Missouri. It further argues that all of the claims are "wholly defective" and should be dismissed and that Nakamura should be "awarded his attorney's fees and costs."

• When State law claims are at issue in federal court, the Court will apply the substantive law of the state in which the case is filed. [See Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins, 304 U.S. 64 (1938), the Erie Doctrine]

• Defendants argue the case should be dismissed under Connecticut's Anti-SLAPP law. But, the case is in Missouri.

Citing no authority, Magnus contends that "Missouri federal courts apply the law of the jurisdiction in which the plaintiff resides—here, Connecticut—when evaluating state-law claims that, like Niemann’s, are rooted in alleged defamation." [44 MPA ISO MTD by Magnus, p. 2]

Show less