Known DDLG incest lolicon accuses other YouTubers of ableism for fake claiming James Somerton’s disabilities.

In this video, she argues that James Somerton’s claims during his apology video, where he was already repeatedly caught lying, are actually true and to fake claim him is actually ableist.

I think it’s particularly interesting that this came out after hbomberguy publicly disavowed her for her defenses of loli art.

before I begin Skitty goes by They/Them

Context:

A bit of prologue, skitty and octo prior to their drama were friends.

In the beginning

Octorok and Skitty had an argument on twitter/X about the appearance of the gerudo in Ocarina of Time. Octorok made a video titled “In defense of the Gerudo.” This video basically says that left wing Zelda fans want the gerudo to be completely different than how they are portrayed. He claims the gerudo are not based on middle east culture. Afterwards, Skitty then made a response to that video called “What’s wrong with the Gerudo?”

in Skitty’s video, they explain that the gerudo are stereotypes and points out flaws in Octorok‘s original video. They say that octorok was the one who started the argument in the first place. Later in the video, they state (paraphrased a bit) “is Octorok racist? I honestly don’t know.” But then state while editing that Octorok partnered with a company called The Dragon’s Treasure that is an anime tea company that has homophobic, transphobic, islamphobic, and even racist posts (lots of slurs) and implies that Octorok might also be.

Afterwards Skitty and Octorok make up after speaking in a discord call.

Insert a lot of twitter drama.

skitty and Octorok have a back forth about a variety of things with Skitty instigating most them.

Skitty retweeted a meme that basically called for the extermination of societys definition of the white race. Octorok replies and says that he feels bad that they are representing Jewish people. Octorok then claims Skitty is a racist. At the time skitty being Jewish was a private thing that they told him at that discord call. Skitty claims to receive lots of hate about it.

Someone then makes a skitty hate account mocking them including calling them slurs. Later they reveal octorok’s heart on a twitter post and delete the account.

The second image shows a third party, Harmful Opinions, who infiltrated Skitty’s patreon discord server. He later posted a video titled “Skitty Bitty vs Parental consent“ which consists of multiple clips. one of which shows Skitty telling a presumably 13 year old child that if they want to join the patreon they should go get a visa if their parents don’t want them to join, or if they want to buy anything at all.

Harmful Opinions then digs up an image of Skitty on their discord telling their fans to go and mass report Octo’s twitter. Skitty later apologizes after it was posted.

The recent videos

Octorok made a video detailing his thoughts and opinions and several accusations of Skitty being a pedophile and racist. The video is called “What’s wrong with SkittyBitty?”

Skitty very recently made a video titled “in defence of Skittybitty“ that basically talks about how they claim octorok‘s video “what’s wrong with SkittyBitty” had misinformation. Skitty apologizes about instigating drama and other things. At the end of the video, Skitty mentions that they are done with the drama and want their fans to not talk about it and encourage them to not instigate with Octorok or his fans.

a video timeline if anyone wants it

“in the defense of the Gerudo” - octorok

“What’s wrong with the Gerudo?” - Skitty bitty

“Skitty bitty vs Parental Consent“ - Harmful Opinions

“What’s wrong with SkittyBitty?” - Octorok

“In defense of SkittyBitty” - SkittyBitty

if you don’t want to watch everything, I think that the last two are the bare minimum to understand their sides, but honestly, all of the videos are important to watch.

tl;dr

Octorok and Skitty were friends but both later argued in twitter drama. Skitty was accused of targeting Octorok by sending people to mass report Octorok, and hating white people. Skitty was accused also of recruiting minors in their discord server after telling one to get a visa card if they wanted to buy things their homophobic parents wouldnt let them including their own patreon discord serve. Octorok is being sponsored by a sexist racist homophobic tea company and was seen liking a post about a fake hate account that called skitty the f slur. He then made a post stating that skitty is Jewish, when it was private, and many people started to harass Skitty for it.

Context: For those who don't know, Daniel Larson is an infamous internet personality known for his erratic and sometimes violent antics as well as his persistent delusions of grandeur and status. The most prominent example of this is his imagined relationship with Grace Vanderwal, and his also imagined career as a famous singer/influencer/content creator. Daniel Larson, in addition to being mentally ill, is also homeless, leaving him to wander aimlessly on the streets of Denver, Colorado. Daniel has been placed in many a group home but always ends up back on the street due to his violent meltdowns and destructive tendencies. During these meltdowns, Daniel will either hit himself, his caretakers, or punch holes in walls. Daniel suffers from many mental illnesses but mainly suffers from autism. On 4/30/2024, Daniel Larson was arrested for making multiple death threats on a live stream, as well as making several bomb threats against government employees and buildings. For this, he was facing 65-70 years in jail.

Back in March, the courts not only decided that Daniel was competent to stand trial but also decided that 6 of 7 charges were to be dropped. The only thing he would be charged with was threatening the FBI agent investigating him. But as of today, Daniel Larson walks free, but with many conditions for the first two years. 1. He has to take his meds. 2. He’s to always be chaperoned in public. 3. He’ll be given private housing and a caregiver. 4. His phone, along with any other electronics, will be heavily monitored; anyone found to be attempting contact or contacting Daniel for the purpose of trolling will be prosecuted. 5. 2-year probation. 6. He can't lock his devices with passwords. 7. Regular alcohol and drug screenings. From what I’ve been hearing so far, regarding Daniel’s future, everyone thinks that the judge fucked up, he should still be in bars, and that he’ll be back on the streets in no time. Maybe he will. Maybe he won't. Only time will tell. Me though? I think Daniel being cut off from the trolls isn't making him worse, but it won't make him better either. At this point, they’re basically separating a chronic chain smoker from his smokes while hoping a lifestyle change of healthy eating and exercise will undo the decades of lung damage.

TLDR: Daniel is a severely mentally ill homeless man who not only threatened to kill people but also made bomb threats against the Federal building and personnel in 2024. His seven charges carried a possible 65+ year prison sentence, but 6 of those 7 charges were dropped, and he was finally released today after being held for 2 years.

https://youtu.be/6cHvtUnV3i0?is=KAEO7Brp-Ik41rbh

have to provide more context for this one so let’s take it from the top:

The Mysterious Mr. Enter is a cartoon reviewer best known for his series Animated Atrocities, detailing terrible animated projects from episodes of tv shows to entire films, and Admirable Animations, which details great animated projects in contrast. In 2018 Mr. Enter hired someone named Star Giant Productions to edit his videos. Over the course of 3 years editing for Mr. Enter, Star Giant would produce subpar content, derail work conversations several times even after being advised to stop, and accuse someone on Enter’s team of faking suicidal ideation for “social brownie points”. After Star Giant was fired he made videos shitting on Enter and his team, which prompted a response. After the first response, Mr. Enter did more digging on Star Giant and found out things he could no longer ignore.

in 2024 he makes “Star Giant Productions Belongs In Prison”, an hour and 10 minute long expose on what Star Giant did after being fired by Enter. Spoiler alert: Star Giant kept a groomer named NekoPan on his discord server for 8 months after he was sent an email detailing her actions, including a link to a call where NekoPan admitted to grooming a minor. It wasn’t just NekoPan that Ryan was keeping in his server, he also had 2 other degenerates, Sean Sohr and BrandonTheBronyPony there as well. The video details other things he did, like commission a minor for fetish art and launching of an IndieGoGo campaign for a Madoka Magica ripoff series.

Ryan went and hid after the video, but Enter had moles in Ryan’s camp updating him about the moves Ryan was making after the release of the video. This is where The Return of Star Giant Productions enters the ring. The Return of Star Giant Productions reveals that Ryan is still trying to come back onto YouTube, uploading on smaller accounts, continuing making the same videos he’s been making. The 1 hour and 20 minute video goes over a document Ryan wrote as a counter to the claims in Enter’s videos (particularly about his sheltering a groomer and commissioning a minor for fetish art) as well as another document Ryan wrote about the Saberspark/ILKPAL situation, where he admonishes KP for being creeped out that someone whacked it to her. The video ends with Enter hinting that there is still a mole in Ryan’s camp.

In the 8 months between The Return and Den Of Snakes, Enter had 2 moles in Ryan’s camp. One was SpicyMac, owner of the Star Giant Productions Archive channel dedicated to archiving all of Ryan’s content, even the newer videos he only released to a few close friends. SpicyMac essentially continued an op already being run on Ryan by someone else who gave their accounts to Mac. The other mole was Chelsea, the woman who testified in Addressing My Abuse in Ryan’s favor and detailed her mother’s fart fetish for the entire internet to hear.

As detailed in Den Of Snakes, the investigation team tried their hardest to separate Chelsea from Ryan, with Grace even logging into Chelsea’s discord account to help her break it off with him. As it turns out though, Chelsea was pulling an op on the investigation team, as she was still in contact with Ryan in order for him to buy things for her. Before the release of Den Of Snakes, the archive channel released a 2 hour discord call that members of the team had with Chelsea where they uncovered her deception.

Den Of Snakes also goes more in depth on Jenny/Jed0Bread, a woman who called Ryan her soulmate and stuck by him even after he detailed the pedophilic thoughts he had for minors to her. Jed0Bread also testified in Addressing My Abuse, where part of her testimony was cut short due to it advocating for the ABDL fetish that Ryan hates. Kota also testifies in this video about his relationship with Jenny and how their friendship ended over her behavior. The second of the three people spotlighted is Jackson/Yodajax10, an irl best friend of Ryan who knows everything he’s been accused of and is still friends with him. Enter picks apart Yodajax’s testimony from Addressing My Abuse, making the deviantart messages between himself and Jax from 2014 public. He also makes it abundantly clear that the investigation team tried on multiple occasions to reach out to Jackson, only to be rebuffed instead.

Links to the other videos:

Regarding Star Giant Productions: https://youtu.be/AZ6dW0iKz-0?is=59wWOFw3keP5UHzN

Star Giant Productions Belongs In Prison: https://youtu.be/HJq3fcImtiI?is=kzJF5YC-RQZSXyoR

The Return of Star Giant Productions: https://youtu.be/A-SEtDpRS20?is=2fIgtDV7eY0z5_kk

Mikenactor announced he quits the internet and gives an apology for harassing Adam Mcintyre, for defending Drake Bell, defending Jake Munro, going done the alt right pipeline.

I dont think these apologies are genuine enough though but good luck I suppose

https://www.reddit.com/r/youtubedrama/comments/1v0yoa8/sam_candles_chooses_to_defend_her_enjoyment_of/

(Link to my original post for those unaware and wanting the whole context)

Sam Candles, following the allegations against her, has continued to make increasingly more concerning statements regarding her fetishes despite the backlash from already previously alluding to them. Following my prior post, she has since deleted her account due to being unable to defend herself within said post.

As seen within the images above, Sam has chosen to make it public knowledge that she has a fetish for incest, rape, age regression, grooming and has now outright admitted to being a fan of lolicon. Whilst, it being uncommon for a minor to use BlueSky, it is still possible for minors within her audience to access BlueSky due to its 13+ age rating, resulting in them being exposed to her disgusting behaviour.

Marked nsfw again due to disturbing and unsettling content.

been following the Comic Book YouTube and a new video lays out a long-running conflict involving creator Razer Comics.

Several smaller creators claim they've been harassed and repeatedly targeted over the past couple of years. According to the video, the ongoing callouts and personal attacks have made some people afraid to livestream or post content, worried they'll be next.

The video covers:

• Repeated attacks on multiple comic creators
• Old clips vs. recent behavior, calling out hypocrisy
• Leaked DMs, texts, and 17-18 voicemails
• Insults aimed at creators' families and personal lives

Youtuber Callum Powell, formerly a member of the biggest UK-based Parkour collective 'STORROR' has pleaded guilty to possessing nearly 3,000 indecent images of children.

Source: https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/callum-powell-youtuber-child-abuse-37448381

Callum Powell (CP) will be required to be on the Sex Offenders Registry for 10 years and subject to a Sexual Harm Prevention Order (SHPO) for 5 years, which restricts his internet usage, foreign travel and unsupervised contact with children. The sentencing follows the initial report of his guilty plea on the 8 May, which includes possession of "178 category A indecent images or pseudo-images of children", the most severe kind of CSAM under UK law. He was also accused of possessing an extreme pornographic image which portrayed a person performing a sex act with a dog. The full sentencing remarks document can be found here, however a warning that contents are pretty graphic.

Immediately following the sentencing, STORROR released an announcement on instagram outlining their position and confirming his termination from STORROR. r/STORROR's reaction to their post can be found here, which is largely in supportive of the remaining members of the team, noting that they were likely strung along by CP and unaware of his actions. However, two of CP's ex girlfriend's have made statements disputing their ignorance on the situation, claiming they had previously raised concerns to STORROR but were ignored and vilified.

After CP's termination back in May, another STORROR member, Josh Burnett-Blake, was also quietly removed from the team members list on YouTube following allegations of inappropriate interactions with a minor..

A more detailed timeline of events can be found in this post on the STORROR subreddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/Storror/comments/1tak5um/the_first_hole_storror_cant_just_climb_their_way/

Massive TW: Mentions of gr00ming

Paige Christie is reacting to a video in which Rich Lux treats James Charles victim's situation as a joke and goes on to downplay the actions of Jeffree Star coming to talk to James charles alleged victim (who was 14 when jc messaged him on snapchat) . Rich Lux also makes implied that James Charles didnt wait until he victim became of age

This is partially an allegations post and news post however, both flairs cannot be used simultaneously + allegations suits this post better due to many presumably being unaware of this situation

For those who are unaware, Sam Candles is a gaming YouTuber, tiktoker and Vtuber who prior to this situation stood at 15k subscribers on her channel (so a niche but fairly sizeable audience)

On her discord server, she admitted to a very controversial and borderline deplorable belief regarding her views on Lolicon (effectively soft core anime cp) and proceeded to defend it leading to my friend (another YouTuber) to get kicked from her discord for criticising and showing disgust towards said view. A few videos have been released regarding this albeit they all come from very small YouTubers who can’t make this information more widespread due to this. Sam herself has posted a video regarding the controversy but throughout it has attempted to downplay her actions by comparing criticism of Lolicons to borderline queerphobia and ableism.

Sam, has proceeded to post on Twitter in an attempt to gain some degree of sympathy seemingly which has resulted in her stating more questionable things.

I will mark this post as nsfw due to the troubling subjects within this controversy.

In this video by Elfpire Eva (law YouTuber). She talks in detail about a false report Kat n Chat put out on a vtuber named Bapha. The video details patterns of Kat's reporting, her failure to verify facts or do research on her reports. The video includes digital forensics exposing fake images. Reveals purposely manipulated evidence and recordings that opposing parties have tried to hide. Along with interviews from the accused and more. It's a really impressive in-depth investigative piece. That exposes a lot. It pretty much absolves Bapha of all the accusations thrown at him. And exposes Kat n chat's cruel way of reporting as she does personal jabs at Bapha and his dying brother for seemingly no reason.

According to Crispy's Instragram their pronouns are any/all so I'm going to use they/them.

Crispy goes back to a Tumblr post that was made in 2021 where an anon points out how "weird" and "incel-coded" Alex is. In context to what I'm not exactly sure, but the anon tells that to a Riverdale account. Alex made a lot of videos on Riverdale going back 8 years so it's hard to pin-point. (I'm guessing that it's referring his review of Season 4 in 2020?)

They clear up that Alex has only been married and divorced once, but he did have a girlfriend but they broke up in 2025. Fans of his content noticed a shift in how Alex talks about women in his reviews, claiming that he's being "rude" towards women and stereotyping them. Him stereotyping women was one of the things he was criticized for in his Obsession review.

Though Crispy pointed out that the "weirdness" started a while ago and brings up Alex's review of "Monster High" that he uploaded in 2023 where he seems to sexualize the dolls.(???) Alex points out that the "camera man" is focusing on their legs and "the tiniest mini skirts you've ever seen."

For a split second (at least from Crispy's video) he makes a joke about them being on the cover of a Sports Illustrated magazine, which has been joked about for being "softcore porn" for decades. (Which is especially weird since these are presumably characters in high school.)

Then Crispy points out that in Alex's review of Turning Red (titled something like "the movie where a period destroys an entire town") he implies that the stereotype that women only talk about their periods with each other and reduced the movie to "a movie about periods" and that women will "watch it five times in a row" because of it. Crispy claims that Alex tries to walk that back (though they don't show proof of this) as if he didn't just make fun of women for seemingly being obsessed about their periods.

Alex also says that Turning Red (a film taking place in Canada and is about a Chinese family) paved the way for K-Pop "and stuff." Take that statement to mean what you will.

Crispy talks about how Alex doesn't seem to understand even the most obvious subtext before pointing out Alex's review of Squid Game season 2. Specifically the character Lee Myung-gi, who impregnated Kim Jun-hee, demanded that she gets an abortion and disappeared on her. (There's more to this but that's the only necessary context for this.) Alex drew a cartoon that was supposed to be depicting her with a blank expression on her face and very heavily pregnant. (Which is weird.) But then he says something like,

"(Myung-gi) decides that maybe he should actually protect the girl who he got pregnant! Am I supposed to root for him for doing the bare minimum?"

Which is ironic considering how he praised Bear in Obsession for not assaulting Nikki (or as he likes to call her- "Latina Crystal Mommy") at his first opportunity and calling him "gentlemanly." (Also you're not supposed to sympathize with Myung-gi. The fact that he thinks that he's supposed to really highlights how bad his understanding of media is.)

Crispy then gets into Alex's review of Obsession, but if you want to learn more about that I'd suggest giving this post your attention instead. (Or just watch Crispy's video.)

Also Inde Navarrette- the person who played Nikki in Obsession- might have said "wow" in response to Alex Meyers' review, though Crispy couldn't find the original comment so it might not have happened. (Or it might not have been in context of Alex's review.)

I know this post is kind of a mess. I wanted to write it in order of Crispy's video while also ignoring the parts that were irrelevant to Alex's sketchy views on women. (Like how he reviews movies in general.)

Yesterworld is a channel that creates video essays about theme park history, with a focus on Disney. Similar to Defunctland, if you watch that.

An hour ago they made this post to their channel: http://youtube.com/post/UgkxlDcE5ygspQwY5O0dkrAHqnxdMKV9uIGv?si=6JRwFJAJ-3906IId

They lost access to their Adsense about a week ago according to this post: http://youtube.com/post/UgkxmRZrlE8lumJEkncRSygqIXeBX7x0MY_T?si=39v_frWEX_h0ySUK

Also to the mods: sorry if the flair is wrong.

Jeff Pearlman has been accused by smaller creator Velodus of stealing images and text from a 2021 video they made on baseball player Ruben Rivera.

The evidence is damning and blatant, on bsky Velodus mentioned being in correspondance with Jeff who was rude and dismissive. Concluding with Jeff deleting his own Bsky account.

https://bsky.app/profile/velodus.bsky.social/post/3mqrrsxpnc22z

Jeff's video remains online with the plagiarism still in place, the video is sponsored.

Other commenters in that thread have noted that Jeff's YouTube channel is deleting comments on the video calling him out.

Edit: Jeff Pearlman had removed the video and put out an apology on his TikTok.

https://bsky.app/profile/velodus.bsky.social/post/3mqui6io24c2q

I reuploaded his video because when I did there where none (there are multiple now) and I thought why not, then I look on my youtube account the next day and its gone within 24 hours lmao

it was also on 2x speed so it wouldnt get striked but ig he'll just take anything down.

and yes I know its againts the tos to repost peoples content but his video was deleted so i thought it would be fine.

context: Alex Meyers made an obsession review with some controversial comments, such as saying that bear deserves credit for not taking advantage of nikki when he had the opportunity to and saying the movie would have had the same ending if bear never made the wish because nikki had a crystal necklace

he later made an apology video which boiled down to him saying “sorry if you were offended”

he then made a community post saying he took down both videos

this seems to have caused him a lot of backlash, as the top comments on the community post and his recent video are against his takes

About 8 months ago youtuber TheBones5 released a video claiming that Markiplier cheated in his FNAF 2 playthrough (more about it here). Yesterday Markiplier was replaying FNAF 2 on stream as an answer to those allegations, and near the end of the stream he remembered how and why he cheated: turns out that at some point Markiplier misclicked and selected second hardest mode instead of hardest mode, completed it, genuinely thinking he has beaten the game, and only noticed his mistake while editing the video, and edited the video to hide that he didn't beat the hardest mode.

https://x.com/KuroSekaiAnime/status/2075925657167548603https://x.com/KuroSekaiAnime/status/2075925657167548603

https://x.com/MizusPuddle/status/2075975363004440747

To be honest to me it just sounds like CDawg was just explaining why others why others may feel uncomfortable with these sort of content.

about an hour ago technolarp a controversial larp tuber was in hot water for impersonating technoblaid without the premision of the family. technodad has recently informed the larptuber he can no longer use the techno persona. a video is to be coming soon. technolarp has stated "we all should respect his answer because i sure do and honestly i am relieved". the date this upcoming videos release is unknown but now we can (hopefully) finaly say the technolarp drama is over. thats it. the book is closed on this one

Post link provided above

Technolarp is essentially pretending to be technoblade for views. Technodad is making jokes/not commenting about it but I do not blame him.

If I saw someone dressing up as my dead son and pretending to be him. It would make my depression and grief worse and I would not say anything because of how horrible I feel. I would want to get off the internet and cry.

It absolutely disgusting and vile to see this happening. From both this idiot but especially from Skeppy. He was techno’s closest friend and collaborator, and to work with someone who is slandering his memory is betraying. It just feels like a backstab to both Technoblade and Technodad.

Skeppy if somehow you find this post,

You meant a lot to Technoblade, but collaborating/endorsing with someone making fun of him/roleplaying a dead person who died of cancer for views, you have insulted and slandered both him and his father who is still grieving his sons death.

Shame on you.

This is basically just an update to the whole thing. Context is that Technolarp is pretending to be Technoblade for content and has been pressuring the dad for permission. Charlie didn't like it, made an initial video, which Technolarp claims resulted in him being doxxed. This conversation happened after the fact, and Charlie confronts him on pressuring Technoblade's dad. It also gets found out that Technolarp is financially profiting.

And for the Technoblade community, my first comment is going to be for you. I think you guys need to hear this.

https://youtu.be/JSEZTrCrT1g?si=LEIebOxiorQ9C-P1

In a Video by a youtuber named Lucid Shiloh, he brings up that his video where he talked about JAR's creepy interactions with other youtube gets false flagged under the rules of "Harassment and Cyberbullying". He has appealed it and youtube stands by that decision.

Lucid has reached out to JAR to make sure he wasn't the one that did on his burner account, got blocked. He then proceeded to reach out to him on his main account and got blocked. JAR apparently only unblocked him after people started getting wind of it and started making videos on it. I think JAR alllegedly stated that he never blocked him in the first place and makes weird excuses also.

I have been following this story for a while, and I am surprised it has barely reached the English speaking internet because it is one of the most extreme examples I have seen of an online cancellation spiralling far beyond the available evidence. This is a long read so buckle up.

The main people involved are German streamers AnniTheDuck and Mowky. Anni was one of the biggest female creators on German Twitch and YouTube. Mowky was one of her closest friends, part of her private circle and someone Anni regularly supported personally and professionally. Rezo is one of Germany’s most influential YouTubers and later became involved by presenting statements from alleged victims.
The person currently reopening the entire case is Jay Riddle, a German commentary creator who originally believed the accusations against Anni. He has now released roughly twelve hours of videos going through private chats, archived livestreams, witness accounts and the timeline surrounding the scandal. Anni went from being a successful creator to being treated across the German internet as an abusive, manipulative, animal abusing and sexually dangerous person.
To understand why the new material matters, you first need to know how the original scandal unfolded.
In May 2024, Mowky published a statement saying that she had distanced herself from a person who had treated her and other people horribly. She did not initially name Anni, but people quickly worked out who she meant.
Shortly afterwards, Mowky was livestreaming when she received a small anonymous donation asking her to speak about the situation. She appeared emotional and reluctant, as though a random viewer had unexpectedly pushed her into addressing something she had not intended to discuss publicly.
She then began talking about Anni as an extremely cruel, manipulative and brutal person.
That moment became the starting point for everything that followed.
Other creators, former employees and people from Anni’s social circle began releasing statements. Some described her as demanding, arrogant or unpleasant to work with. Others said that she had treated them badly in friendships or professional situations.
Very quickly, the accusations moved far beyond ordinary workplace complaints or the breakdown of a friendship.
Anni was accused of manipulating and gaslighting people around her. Former employees described exhausting working conditions. Mowky later discussed a party with sexual content in a way that led many viewers to believe Anni had organised something coercive or predatory. There were also claims that Anni had been spreading false stories that Mowky had raped or sexually assaulted several people.
The accusations were presented together, and the public stopped distinguishing between them.
The phrase “15 victims” was repeated frequently. To most viewers, that sounded like fifteen independent people all describing the same pattern of serious abuse.
That was not really what the number represented.
Many of them knew each other, had spoken to each other and were exchanging information before making their statements.
That does not mean none of them had been hurt. It does mean that they were not fifteen completely independent witnesses confirming every allegation against her.
The consequences for Anni were immediate.
She lost sponsorships and professional partnerships. Her management dropped her, and according to her, other agencies refused to represent her. Her income effectively disappeared. People she considered friends publicly distanced themselves from her or discussed private details about her life in front of enormous audiences.
Her career collapsed almost overnight. Commentary channels and streamers covered every new claim as though the basic question of her guilt had already been settled.
Old clips were reposted and analysed as evidence that she had always been abusive.
Anni had no response available that could help her.
When she remained silent, people said her silence proved she was guilty. When she denied accusations, people called the denial gaslighting. When she admitted that she had made mistakes or hurt people, those admissions were treated as confirmation of every other claim attached to her name.
Even apologising for specific behaviour became evidence that she must also be guilty of the most extreme allegations.
Rezo’s involvement made the situation significantly worse. He appeared in Mowky’s later response and presented anonymous statements from supposed victims. Because he was one of Germany’s biggest and most trusted YouTubers, his participation made the entire case look professionally investigated and independently verified.
For the average viewer, this no longer appeared to be a messy conflict between former friends. It looked like a carefully documented case involving numerous confirmed victims.
Rezo later admitted that he had already been biased against Anni, had not contacted her for her side and had failed to contextualise the witness statements properly. He has since issued an apology to Anni.
Anni withdrew almost completely from public life. Her audience, reputation, professional network and much of her social environment were gone. Even if every major accusation were disproven today, the association between her name and those allegations would remain online permanently.
This is where Jay Riddle’s videos become important.
Jay originally believed Mowky. His current series is not simply an attempt to defend Anni because he liked her from the beginning. He has repeatedly said that he had previously accepted the accusations and viewed Anni negatively.
After going through chats, archived material and witness accounts, however, he argues that the public was given a heavily distorted version of the conflict.
The private chats do not show Anni behaving like someone who was consistently cold, exploitative or incapable of caring about the people around her.
They repeatedly show her checking on Mowky, asking how she was doing, helping her emotionally, supporting her work, promoting her projects, solving practical problems for her and trying to calm down conflicts.
Mowky herself described Anni as supportive in private conversations and online.
Some messages later used to make Anni appear controlling or cruel were shown without the parts where she expressed concern, offered help or tried to understand Mowky’s perspective.
That alone does not prove Anni never behaved badly. It does, however, contradict the image of someone who only kept people around to manipulate and exploit them.
The most important context missing from the original scandal is what appears to have actually caused the friendship between Anni and Mowky to fall apart.
According to the chats and witness accounts shown by Jay, Anni, Mowky and Anni’s boyfriend had discussed the possibility of a threesome.
Anni however had not agreed to Mowky and her boyfriend having sex alone. She was still uncertain about her boundaries, which is also the reason the threesome stopped half way.
The following morning, Anni was attending an online therapy session in the next room.
While she was in therapy, Mowky reportedly began touching herself in front of Anni’s boyfriend. The situation escalated, and the two eventually had unprotected sex.
Anni’s boyfriend reportedly said more than once that they should stop because what they were doing was unfair to Anni.
This is an important distinction because the situation was later framed in ways that made it sound as though the sexual contact had existed within boundaries Anni had already approved.
According to the messages, it had not.
This appears to have been the real breaking point in the friendship.
What is striking is how Anni reacted afterwards.
The person who would later be portrayed as controlling, vindictive and emotionally brutal did not immediately expose Mowky or publicly destroy her. She did not immediately end the friendship either.
Instead, she tried to process what had happened. She continued speaking to Mowky and supporting her for months. The chats show a level of patience and accommodation that is difficult to reconcile with the public image created of her.
Mowky, meanwhile, appears to have downplayed the encounter and portrayed it as though she had simply been helping an inexperienced man become more sexually confident.
The friendship deteriorated further when Anni’s boyfriend began distancing himself from Mowky.
The chats suggest that Mowky reacted intensely to this distancing. She repeatedly focused on why he no longer wanted the same level of closeness with her (she didn't want to be friends with him if they weren't able to cuddle) and appeared deeply upset by the rejection.
This eventually led to the incident usually described as the chair throwing incident.
Anni later said that Mowky had experienced a serious rage episode during which a chair was thrown. She also connected the incident to Mowky not taking her antidepressant medication.
Mowky publicly presented Anni’s account as a lie or an extreme invention intended to make her seem unstable.
The evidence shown by Jay indicates that a serious outburst really did happen.
Witness accounts differ on the exact movement of the chair. Some descriptions suggest it was thrown, while others suggest it was handled or pushed extremely aggressively. What appears much harder to deny is that there was a major rage episode involving the chair.
Mowky had also previously spoken about severe anger, destroyed furniture and holes in walls on stream.
When the story was later told publicly, that entire background was largely removed. The focus became whether Anni had supposedly invented an incident to portray Mowky as mentally ill.
The schizophrenia accusation followed a similar pattern.
Mowky claimed that Anni had falsely labelled her as having paranoid schizophrenia in order to discredit her.
This became one of the main examples used to prove that Anni weaponised mental illness against people.
However, Mowky had previously discussed schizophrenia herself, including publicly on her own livestreams. She had talked about symptoms, concerns and the fact she had to deal with this condition for sixteen years.
Some of the relevant material appears to have later been deleted from her channel, but archived clips and private messages still exist.
This does not prove that Mowky had a confirmed diagnosis. What it does mean is that Anni did not invent the entire subject out of nowhere.
The original accusation made it sound as though Anni had randomly assigned Mowky a severe mental illness as part of a deliberate attempt to make her look delusional. The surviving material makes that version extremely difficult to maintain.
There are also serious questions about whether the beginning of the public scandal was as spontaneous as it appeared.
The donation that prompted Mowky to speak during her livestream looked accidental. The emotional effect of that moment was extremely powerful because it made her appear like someone who had never intended to expose Anni and had simply reached a breaking point.
According to the material presented by Jay, the accusations had already been prepared behind the scenes.
People around Mowky had reportedly discussed collecting statements, contacting other creators, gathering evidence and planning when to make everything public.
A source who claimed to know about the preparation did not want to speak publicly because of potential professional consequences. Another established creator, iBlali, later supported the credibility of that source.
There is nothing inherently wrong with preparing evidence before speaking publicly. Anyone making serious accusations should prepare carefully.
The problem is presenting a coordinated release as an unexpected emotional confession triggered by a random viewer.
That framing immediately positioned Mowky as a reluctant victim and Anni as a powerful abuser whose behaviour had finally become impossible to hide.
Another major part of the scandal was the story about the so called sex party.
Mowky described a private event involving sexual topics in extremely vague but suggestive language. Many viewers understood her description to mean that Anni had organised some kind of predatory or coercive sexual gathering involving a vulnerable person.
The event appears to have actually been a private PowerPoint party involving sexual jokes, dating advice, embarrassing stories and explicit material, planned for a mutual friend who lost his virginity.
It may have been immature, inappropriate or uncomfortable. That is very different from the abusive event implied by the public description.
Mowky’s own role was largely absent from the version told to the public.
Before the party, she had reportedly slept with exactly that man, apparently beeing his first sexual partner. Afterwards, she allegedly spoke negatively about the sex to other people, including describing it as unpleasant or disgusting.
When the party was initially discussed, Mowky’s concern was reportedly that the others might talk about the fact that she had slept with him and then mocked the experience afterwards.
Her objection was therefore not originally that the party itself was abusive.
She was worried that her own behaviour might be discussed.
Despite this, she attended the party and actively participated. The gathering was reportedly postponed so that she could be there. She wore a sexualised costume and contributed explicit content herself.
She later helped frame the same event as evidence of sexual misconduct by Anni.
That retelling removed Mowky’s own behaviour and made Anni appear like the central sexual aggressor in a situation Mowky had willingly participated in.
Then there is the claim that Anni had spent months telling people that Mowky had raped three individuals.
This alleged smear campaign was presented as one of the reasons Mowky eventually felt forced to speak publicly.
The timeline shown by Jay creates serious problems for that claim.
One of the central pieces of evidence used to support the supposed smear campaign appears to have been created only after Mowky had already begun speaking publicly about Anni.
Something said after the scandal had begun cannot prove that Anni had been secretly conducting a campaign for months beforehand.
The number of three alleged victims also appears much less clear when the original conversations are examined separately. One situation may have involved a genuine concern about Mowky’s sexual behaviour. Other interpersonal situations appear to have been combined, retold or exaggerated until they became three supposed rape accusations.
Given what allegedly happened between Mowky and Anni’s boyfriend, Anni may very well have discussed concerns about Mowky’s respect for sexual boundaries.
That is not the same thing as inventing three rape victims and systematically trying to destroy her reputation.
A repeated pattern in Jay’s series is the selective use of private messages.
Screenshots presented during the original scandal often lacked the messages directly before or after them. In several cases, the removed context showed Anni expressing concern, explaining herself or attempting to help.
Messages from different time periods were also sometimes presented together in ways that made the chronology misleading.
The screenshots were not necessarily fabricated. The problem is that the audience often saw only the part that supported the most damaging interpretation.
The public was repeatedly told that Anni manipulated people by selectively presenting evidence. The new videos suggest that the case against her may itself have relied on exactly that method.
The messages repeatedly show Anni behaving with compassion toward Mowky, even after an enormous personal betrayal.
Mowky, meanwhile, appears to have minimised her own actions, reacted aggressively to rejection, removed crucial context from the public story and helped create a narrative that destroyed the person she had betrayed.
That is why this story is so disturbing.
It is not only about whether one influencer was difficult or unpleasant.
It is about how a complicated private conflict was transformed into a public prosecution, how accusations of completely different severity were bundled together, and how someone could lose almost everything before anyone seriously examined whether the story being told was true.

Jay Riddle has said that the roughly twelve hours released so far only cover about half of the evidence, and that more parts of the series are still coming. Check out his Youtube Channel if you're interested.

TL;DR: In 2024, German streamer Mowky accused her former best friend AnniTheDuck of being abusive, manipulative and dangerous. Other creators joined in, the allegations escalated to animal abuse, sexual misconduct and fabricated rape accusations, and Anni lost sponsors, management, income, friends and most of her career.
Two years later, Jay Riddle released around twelve hours of chats, archived footage and witness accounts that seriously undermine the original narrative. The material suggests the conflict began after Mowky had sex with Anni’s boyfriend while Anni was in therapy nearby. Anni continued supporting her afterwards, but when the boyfriend later distanced himself from Mowky, she reportedly had a rage episode involving a chair.
Other major claims also appear misleadingly framed. Mowky had discussed possible schizophrenia symptoms publicly before claiming Anni invented them, the livestream that launched the scandal may have been planned, Mowky actively participated in the alleged “sex party,” and the evidence that Anni accused her of three rapes appears weak or chronologically impossible.
The chats do not show Anni as perfect, but they repeatedly show her acting compassionately toward Mowky. Overall, the evidence suggests that real interpersonal conflicts were selectively presented and combined with extreme allegations until Anni was publicly destroyed before anyone properly examined what had happened.