The Lane Myers Experience continued Wednesday night as he released news interviews to Andrea “Illuminate the Dark” Dotson’s YouTube channel and the 857 Tucson YouTube channel while promising nightly “bedtime stories” would follow as he addresses the accusations of violating his parole that he will face at a hearing on August 11.
The social media influencer started with the appearance on 857 Tucson’s channel, who he had previously spoken with last week in an interview that has since been removed from that channel.
Myers addressed why he took a plea deal in the interview, stating:
I think that that was the that is what happened when I decided to plead guilty and uh not going to have a five day trial that would have cost the county a half a million dollars and exposed them all even worse and then leave more content for YouTubers and then There’s even then I could have put the victim and the victim’s husband on the stand and then we could have that video forever for comedy loops and then so I was like, Okay, just send me home and leave me alone and I’ll leave you alone So I went home on probation and I didn’t post on YouTube for eleven months thinking, all right, let’s give it some time to blow over. These are grown ups, they should be able to move on at some point. But then I found out that uh the entire now area I have proof that the entire time I’ve been on probation, the victim and the victim’s husband have been actually running my probation.
They’ve been meeting with my probation. They’ve been constantly uh seeking to have me violated by my probation department for any little thing. They would seek out any little comment I would make on government social media.
They would seek out anything anywhere at any time. than trying to ’cause it because ultimately the victim and her husband wanted me sent to prison and the judge didn’t do it. So they’ve been mad ever since the day I got sentenced to probation that I didn’t get prison and so they’ve been doing anything they can to make to make it that I go to prison, which I don’t understand why they want me to go to prison, because once I go to prison I can talk about them all I want Now when I get out I can talk about them all I want, but that’s a different topic.
He also commented on how he was working on overturning his plea deal:
And also I’m working on having the charges, the original plea bargain overturned, uh, because it was uh there was no factual basis, so I it was an illegal plea bargain I knew they were going to I knew they were giving me an illegal pre-bargain and I could get it overturned later. So that’ll also be that next step. But it it’s hard to do that from jail.
They know that. They know that I’m working to get the charges overturned, which would mean I’m not on probation anymore And then that would mean that all this other [[Expletive Deleted]] is irrelevant because I’m not even um because I was never convicted, you know. So once I get the conviction overturned.
then they can’t obviously I’m a free man with no charter that can never happen. And that’s their biggest worry right now is because they know and I know The plea bargain I signed was illegal or there’s no factual basis and the and the evidence that they had to take me to trial was never strong enough to convict me. So that’s the war that we’re having right now back and forth.
I they know I’m working on getting my conviction overturned. I try to get my tr conditions of probation modified to be illegal uh legal So they quit the di because you remember there was no problems for eleven months and then as soon as I asked to modify the conditions of probation and told them that I was working to overturn the conviction, they hurried up and made up reasons to hold me in jail which goes back to the when I was originally held in jail this time with no bond. Which brings us to between George to Tuesday.
So the cleanest way out to answer your question is that I get found not guilty and I walk out that day home alone, right? even if the judge finds some stupid little violation which is not a violation, like I said, he can put me back on probation or he can send me to prison. But ultimately, no matter what happens at trial will be overturned by the appeals court because these conditions are illegal.
You can’t tell me I can’t talk about my own case, okay? You can’t tell me I can’t post a document for my own case. And and ultimately they’ve conceded that, which if we go to our you know, sort so does that answer the cleanest way I I think you’re trying to say is there a way can I can just like be bargained or something like that?
During that interview, he also clarified that while he things that Zachary “Liberty Troll” Kueker is an idiot, his hard feelings are based on Kueker’s usage of Myers’ victims name and likenesses during the interview. Kueker had originally removed the video at Myers’ command then reposted this week.
Turning towards the interview with Dotson, he went into his strategies to defend himself against the allegations he is facing at the next hearing.
Please note, that when Myers states “new charges” against him, no new criminal charges have been filed against him. What he calls “charges” are instead, listings of alleged violations of his probation in response to the Motion to Dismiss his attorney filed last month.
Myers stated:
You claim that uh in the video on June 30th Better not miss it. I displayed the victim’s name, discussed the case, and showed the case numbers demonstrating he was talking about the victim in these cases. Well as we just went over, I can talk about my case. I just can’t talk to the victim. I can’t contact the victim. I can talk about the case.
But here’s where it gets really silly, Rachel, and I cannot wait for the world to react to your stupidity next Tuesday when you bring your buddy in there, the professional witness, who’s going to come in there and say that he displayed the victim’s name and then we’re going to look at the screen and there’s going to be a picture of a black man with his Wikipedia page showing I cannot wait for you to actually come in a court of law and argue that I displayed the victim’s name of a picture when it’s a picture of a black man and the and his Wikipedia page. And and since Lane is showing the case number, and here’s your logic. Well we know who wrote this though, the professional uh witness wrote this.
On June 30th, uh he he showed the case numbers demonstrating he was talking about the victim So showing the case numbers means you’re talking about the victim? Well you better go remove my name and case numbers off the up the uh Arizona Supreme Court website where you posted that my name and the case numbers. So I don’t want you to get in trouble, professional witness, for posting the case number in discussing the case, including my name.
The defendant’s name and the case numbers are posted on a government website. Well you better believe The case is going to be posted on my YouTube channel. And this isn’t going to go away as we’ll get to tomorrow when I tell you what’s going to happen next if you don’t dismiss this [[Expletive Deleted]].
He further addressed the same subject:
It’s the same argument. You posted my name and case number on the government website, so anybody could just go from there and see the same stuff, right? Okay.
So I don’t know how calling her a professional victim he uh I don’t know how calling uh uh said she was a liar conniving He it says he this is on the charging document, uh so it’s public record and I can read it. This includes discussing the victim’s workplace and where to locate it, naming the victim and the victim’s spouse. He also called the victim a professional victim, said she was a liar conniving and alleged she conspired with her spouse against him.
Well I’d say that’s uh a statement of fact. So it’s not defamation. It’s a pure speech ’cause it’s an opinion. It’s not directed at her ’cause I didn’t tag her or send it to her. So that’s certainly the purest form of pure speech you could have, my opinion. And I would say that not only is it my opinion, but it’s quite I’d say it’s the popular opinion. That she was a liar conniving in alleged she can swear. That’s what it says on the document. So does that mean if I read the document?
I mean you’re putting me in you’re putting yourself in this position. So Again, you’re gonna say that on the video, better not miss it. I displayed the victim’s name, discussed the case, and showed the case numbers demonstrating he was talking about the victim in the case.
Well, professional witness, there’s only one problem with that. I did not display the victim’s name. I’m allowed to discuss the case because that is not information about the victim. And showing the case numbers is also perfectly legal. And the case numbers are not information about the victim. The case numbers are information about the case.
Discussing the case is not information about the victim, it’s discussing the case But here’s the most here’s the laughable one. In the video titled Send This One, which you can probably find somewhere or you’ll be able to shortly. It says I showed the name of the victim.
Myers promised nightly “bedtime stories” to follow his appearance on the channel.
Dotson herself was tried for Assault – 4th Degree – Pursuant to Subdivision (6) special Victims and Resisting/Interfering with Arrest, Detention or Stop in Missouri on Monday. While the bench trial was held, no verdict has been announced on the Missouri courts website as of press time.
This is an on-going news story.
[Full disclosure: Mr. Myers has both threatened to sue and/or to file an injunction against ReallyCoolNews. If you’d like to contribute to our fund set up to fight possible legal action/keep the lights on/keep the cats fed, our GoFundMe is located at https://www.gofundme.com/f/reallycoolsite-ongoing-expenses.]
