Diminutive YouTuber Jose “Chille” DeCastro returned to form on Tuesday after a manic Monday, with a new livestream featuring anti-police videos and new action in both his Ironton, Ohio based lawsuit, which he has refiled in Nevada, and his Nevada based lawsuit against the Las Vegas Metro Police Department.
Starting with the Ironton case that is being held in Nevada. This lawsuit originated from a lawsuit against members of the Ironton, Ohio, and Lawrence County, Ohio, police forces and was filed in an Ohio District Court.
When DeCastro ultimately lost the case and was in the process of appealing the verdict based on “new information” that had been filed in response to the verdict, he refiled the case in Nevada District Court, claiming he had standing because his customers lived in Nevada.
The case has lingered with DeCastro showing a pattern of ignoring deadlines to serve the defendants in the case and making required timely responses to motions. As DeCastro is continuing patterns that he used in the previous lawsuit, some have said that it is a deliberate effort by DeCastro to extend the lawsuit for as long as possible.
In this lawsuit, DeCastro was presented with two motions to dismiss within days of each other; one from each set of defendants. He replied to the Ironton defendants, but seemed to ignore the May 12, 2025, deadline to reply to the Lawrence County defendants.
After six weeks of waiting, the Lawrence County defendants asked for the Judge in the lawsuit to dismiss them from the lawsuit in late June, citing DeCastro’s failure to reply in a timely manner.
In his new filing, DeCastro says that he should be given leeway as he is a pro se litigant and his error was “inadvertent and not intended to delay the proceedings or prejudice any party.” He goes on to claim that he acted immediately upon discovery of his error and in a timely fashion.
On May 19, a week after the May 12 deadline, DeCastro filed a sur-reply in response to the Ironton defendants, only identified as such through DeCastro citing he was reply to Document 31 in the lawsuit. Document 31 is a reply to the motion to dismiss by the Ironton defendants.
This sur-reply was stricken from the lawsuit on May 22, 2025, as DeCastro failed to ask for permission to file the reply.
DeCastro asked for permission to file the sur-reply again on June 18, 2025, which would be another response to the Ironton defendants and not the Lawrence County defendants. No ruling has been made on that request.
In the new filing, DeCastro says that the sur-reply was a response to the Lawrence County defendants, despite not naming them directly and filing the original sur-reply in response to the Ironton defendants. It is unclear how the logic works with his assurances due to the circumstances behind his filing.
It is also noted that despite his statement that he had no intention of delaying the case, DeCastro’s filing comes three weeks after the Lawrence County defendants made the request to be dismissed from the case and a week after the deadline for a reply to that motion.
Things look a bit better for DeCastro in his lawsuit against the LVMPD. Judge Andrew P. Gordon set a trial date for February 9, 2026. Settlement conferences will be handled by U.S. Magistrate Judge Elayna J. Youchah.
DeCastro’s Tuesday livestream was largely yet another rehash of his grievances against police in America. At one point he announced that police cars are now fitted with “AI recording devices” that analyze individuals’ information but showed no proof to back the claims.
The livestream followed a mornings spent on Twitter where he spoke out against the moon landing and assured his followers that the Israeli secret service controlled the Epstein files.
DeCastro has a new livestream scheduled for Wednesday.
So let me start by getting this straight
He filed his Ohio lawsuit in Nevada.
His Mass lawsuit in Cali then back again in Mass
Soon to see his Nevada lawsuit filed in Cali?