“I Want People to Start Looking Into This Individual”: ZeroDarkTony Urges Audience to Investigate Nasty Nathanial

ZeroDarkTony wasn’t entirely clear about who he meant, but he might have been referring to HNZ contributor “Hero Light Cody,” who attended the motion to quash hearing related to the subpoena issue. D’Amato’s subpoenas were actually issued in the Mindy Willens matter, where Nora Ames personal information was subpoenaed from YouTube along with several others. Although D’Amato has a legal agreement not to discuss Willens or the case, he may have referenced it here by referring to it as the Nora RO matter.

“Cody” was present for the motion to quash hearing and said so online, as he was active in opposing the subpoenas into his and many critics’ personal information. D’Amato nor his lawyer, Steven Tamer, were present for the hearing.  Tamer was later sanctioned for the subpoenas.

Whether he was referring to Cody or some other unnamed individual as the person present at that hearing, D’Amato identified that person, on the basis of a post and a photograph, as Plotner, stating: “I believe this individual to be involved 100%. And that is my belief.” He then told his audience, “I want people to start looking into this individual, for yourselves so you can see who exactly it is.” D’Amato added that he believed Plotner operates multiple alternate accounts and is being paid. 

He was explicit that his conclusion about Plotner’s involvement rested on belief, not documented proof: “it is but natural for me to think that this person is heavily involved with this situation.” That didn’t stop him from naming someone publicly again, however wrong he might be.

Later in the stream D’Amato addressed accusations that he doxxes people by acknowledging a related but distinct pattern of conduct: contacting employers. He stated, “have there been situations where I’ve gotten people fired? Yes, because they were doing vicious, horrible things and it involved their work. And I don’t care. I would do it again.” He denied involvement in one specific termination he referenced by role, saying, “I had nothing to do with the respondent being fired from there.” The respondent he is referring to is Jarred Brooks, known online to his fans as Krackhead Kenny. D’Amato originally took credit for the termination but soon denied it.

Exhibit A

Describing the subpoena activity in the “Nora RO matter,” D’Amato states that “with those subpoenas came a very panicked response, in my opinion,” and explains that one individual claimed online to have attended the associated hearing.

Timestamps: 00:05:44 – 00:07:57 | Watch with a free account

D’Amato presents the subpoena process as having drawn a reaction from at least one party he had not yet identified publicly. He characterizes the response as “panicked” while attributing that reading to his own opinion. The clip establishes the legal backdrop against which D’Amato frames the Plotner accusations that follow.

Exhibit B

D’Amato names Nathaniel Thomas Plotner by implication through accumulated detail and then tells his live audience, “I want people to start looking into this individual, for yourselves so you can see who exactly it is,” after asserting that Plotner “makes threats, extortion, things like that.”

Timestamps: 00:08:45 – 00:12:30 | Watch with a free account

D’Amato frames his conclusions as personal belief throughout, stating “I believe this individual to be involved 100%. And that is my belief,” and acknowledges he has not said this publicly before. The audience solicitation, “I want people to start looking into this individual,” is a request directed at viewers rather than an explicit instruction to take a specific action, but it follows D’Amato’s recitation of Plotner’s alleged criminal history and asserted group connections to his own dispute.

Exhibit C

D’Amato responds to an accusation that he doxxes people by denying the label while confirming a related practice: “have there been situations where I’ve gotten people fired? Yes, because they were doing vicious, horrible things and it involved their work. And I don’t care. I would do it again.”

Timestamps: 00:38:55 – 00:40:49 | Watch with a free account

D’Amato’s stated justification is that the people he targeted were engaged in conduct he characterizes as “vicious, horrible things” connected to their workplaces. He draws a distinction between contacting employers and doxxing, then separately denies involvement in one specific termination he identifies by the phrase “the respondent.” Aka Krackhead Kenny.

Exhibit D

D’Amato states, “when you post things about drones outside someone’s house, that is… that’s exactly the definition of criminal harassment,” framing drone surveillance imagery as conduct intended to create fear.

Timestamps: 00:56:24 – 00:58:22 | Watch with a free account

D’Amato offers this as a definition of criminal harassment tied to intent, stating “the intention is to create fear.” The remark is presented as commentary on conduct directed at him, not as a self-description. What he leaves out is that he had talked about shooting missiles into Nora’s home and that a character named Johnny Bravo posted about drones in response. 

It establishes D’Amato’s own articulated standard for what constitutes criminal harassment in the context of his ongoing dispute, while leaving out his own behavior. Taken together, the four clips document D’Amato publicly naming a specific individual as a suspected participant in a harassment campaign against him, soliciting audience investigation of that individual, admitting to a pattern of employer contact resulting in terminations, and articulating a legal framework for harassment based on surveillance conduct he attributes to his adversaries.

Sources

• Original YouTube Video
• Full SRT Transcript: for HNZ Supporters
• Full Text Transcript: for HNZ Supporters
• Full Chat Transcript: for HNZ Supporters
• Date: 2026-09-29
• Stream ID: YOUTUBE · dPNXepJPtT8