Failed Power Ranger Jose “Chille” DeCastro made a brief return to the spotlight on Thursday when he announced that he had filed a sur-reply in his on-going lawsuit against the city of Duncan, Oklahoma, over outstanding warrants for charges he picked up in 2025 for allegedly molesting multiple police vehicles.
DeCastro used to be a frequent subject of articles, however, in recent days has retreated to an ever-growing empire based on near daily livestreamed marathons for his First and Fifth Amendment products. Lasting up to 11 hours a time and starting in the early morning hours on both coasts of the United States, DeCastro has found an audience of people who literally throw money at him via YouTube’s super chat feature.
The inventor of the Jock Sock’s increased popularity has seen him pick up over 20,000 new subscribers to his channel in under a month and each extended livestream has brought in between $200.00 and $700.00 in new super chats per stream. Even with streaming in vertical format bringing in under $200.00 per stream for up to one million views per stream, DeCastro’s lucrative donations from the super chats have made the extended informercials worth continuing.
The streams themselves have been an unexpected windfall for the diminutive YouTuber, who struggled to fund his YouVeGotBail.AI product and to fund his personal attorney for a July 3 arrest in Las Vegas through crowd sourcing campaigns. The failure of both campaigns apparently made DeCastro reevaluate the YouVeGotBail.AI, which he no longer is pitching as a place where users can go to crowdsource for bond for themselves or loved ones.
DeCastro’s final GoFundMe campaign, which seeks funding for friend Heather Chandler to help defend her from charges that have since been dropped by authorities in Oklahoma, joined the entire market in goose egg territory for Friday. No donations were observed for any of the campaigns that we follow for the day.
The YouTuber had been granted the ability to file the sur-reply earlier this month and he waited until the deadline to file the document, which he explained in a YouTube Community post:
FILED. Federal case against Duncan PD, Oklahoma
Quick explainer on what this is.
I currently have an active warrant for my arrest in Oklahoma because I did a First Amendment audit. On September 8, 2025, I documented firearms left unsecured in marked patrol cars at Duncan PD. I walked inside and reported it immediately to the deputy chief, the major. Then I went home to California. The detective who was in that building wrote a probable cause affidavit against me the next morning. They waited 92 days, three months, to seek the warrant. By then I was long gone, and the warrant is what keeps me from coming back.
That is what THIS federal case is about.
When you sue, the other side files a motion to dismiss. That means “throw this case out before it starts.” I responded to it. Then Detective Smith’s lawyers filed a reply, and in that reply they built a completely different argument using five court cases they never mentioned the first time around.
You don’t normally get to answer a reply. That’s supposed to be the last word. So I asked the judge for permission to respond to the new material, and he granted it. This is that filing, a sur-reply, stamped by the federal court clerk in Oklahoma City today.
What it means practically: the motion to dismiss is now fully briefed and sitting with Judge Goodwin. He decides whether this case moves forward into discovery or gets thrown out. There is no date on that ruling.
DeCastro did indeed file his sur-reply on Thursday, which, in an unusual move, was revised from the document that he submitted to be filed earlier this year and the document that he actually filed on Thursday.
He is essentially seeking to have a participant in the case’s motion to dismiss thrown out. As he stated, it’s usually a three-step process with the filing party filing a motion, which the other side is given a chance to reply to, then the filing party gets a chance to rebut their counter argument. In this case, DeCastro got a chance to counter the counter argument.
While his sur-reply is unlikely to be successful, his unusual explainer to his audience is of note as he usually keeps them out of his on-going legal maneuvers as they’re rarely of note. We will continue to monitor his actions and report on his legal updates and discussion with his audience if they continue to present themselves in the future.
This is an on-going news story.
