The long national nightmare is finally over. YouTuber Jeremy Hambly and independent game designer Matt Loter reached an out-of-court settlement. Hambly accused Loter of physically attacking him in the early morning hours outside a bar in Indianapolis.
The two men were in town for Gen Con, touted as the best four days in gaming. According to Hambly, Indianapolis police refused to do anything about the incident. This prompted Hambly to file a lawsuit against Loter, funded by a GoFundMe legal fund organized by comic book artist Ethan Van Sciver.
Details of the settlement are confidential. Hambly published the following video:
The video includes a scripted statement from Loter. He apologized to Hambly and took full responsibility for the incident.
The apology didn’t seem sincere. Loter looked to be grinning throughout most of the prepared statement. He went on to say he attacked Hambly because of statements Hambly said about him. This would indicate Loter did not attack Hambly for his political views as Hambly originally claimed.
My guess is Loter was referring to when Hambly suggested Loter was a pedophile.
The video also included a scripted statement from Hambly. He said he accepted Loter’s apology. He went on to say he removed all videos about Loter and the incident from his channel.
Did Matt Loter have to pay Jeremy Hambly money?
Because the out-of-court settlement was confidential, we’ll never know if any money changed hands. That said, I don’t think it did. Hambly didn’t suffer any damages. The attack didn’t require him to get medical treatment.
Hambly said he donated the remaining money in the GoFundMe legal fund to the Humane Society.
In conclusion
Hambly was the big loser in this. He wanted to create a legal precedent that political violence carried an expensive financial cost. He failed to do that.
The attack had nothing to do with political violence. It was because of what Hambly said about Loter. Both sides had to approve of each other’s prepared statements. That means Hambly had to agree to Loter’s assertion that he attacked Hambly out of anger over something he said about Loter. Therefore, the attack had nothing to do with Hambly’s politics.
I still think they should have gone on Judge Judy.
If the attack wasn’t politically motivated, why did the attacker call the victim a ‘nazi’? A popular trope to use against anyone to the right of Bernie Sanders? Why is it if you say ‘f*g’ or the N bomb during a unprovoked beating you get hit with a hate crime, but calling someone on the other side of the political spectrum a ‘nazi’ while assaulting them isn’t a hate crime?
The attack was not politically motivated. I know this from watching the above video. At around the 28-second mark, Loter states he attacked Hambly over statements he made about him previously.
Originally Hambly claimed to have never interacted with Loter. This turned out not to be true. Before the attack, Hambly implied Loter has sex with young boys. Since this was the only “statement” Hambly ever made about Loter, I’m assuming this was the statement Loter was referencing to.
Remember, Loter’s prepared statement had to be approved by Hambly and his lawyer. If he believed the attack was not motivated by prior statements, that it was, in fact, political violence, I highly doubt Hambly and his lawyer would approve Loter’s statement.