APEX Legends – ZDT COFFEE CHAT ONE INCH GRIFT, THE MILKER, TIRE LIAR [ZeroDarkTony] J-Cwq6apipM, compressed, temp / July 12, 2026 / YouTube / J-Cwq6apipM
D’Amato also addressed a separate dispute with a person named Nora, claiming she violated the terms of an agreement between them.
Anthony R. D’Amato, Jr., also known as ZeroDarkTony, spent a substantial portion of a July 12, 2026 YouTube livestream responding to online critics he said had reported him to police and threatened him with legal action. He claimed to have consulted multiple attorneys who confirmed he has a winnable case. He stated on stream that he intends to file suit and that subpoenas could reach the employers of those involved.
“I Am Going to Fucking Show You What That Means in That Courtroom”
D’Amato’s remarks were directed at unnamed individuals he described as having fabricated threats against him and involved a third-party employer. He is likely referring to an online adversary that goes by Johnny Bravo. He challenged them to proceed, then stated his own litigation intent. He also addressed Nora, a person he named by first name, claiming she was fired from her job following their dispute and that she has continued posting about him on social media in a way he characterized as violating an agreement to walk away. D’Amato stated on stream, “She still wants to try and, you know, put hashtags up about me and abuse and things like that. So she’s not following the agreement, you know, that was made just for it to just walk away.” Later in the stream, responding to chat comments about his legal standing, D’Amato stated he had already spoken with more than one attorney. He told viewers, “More than one attorney has looked at this and gone, yep, you got them.” He then said on stream that if an opponent had used workplace resources, he could sue that employer as well.
Exhibit A
D’Amato challenges an unnamed person’s threat of charges against him and states his own intention to appear in court, saying, “I am going to fucking show you what that means in that courtroom.” He then adds that the person’s employer “is really going to appreciate it when they get subpoenaed to come in as a witness because you brought them into this,” before immediately qualifying: “I mean, if any of that’s true, I mean, there’s a real, I doubt that what they’re saying is true about having a family and having a boss in an office. I just, I don’t buy it. So, once again, I’m responding to something that I don’t believe is actually true, so I’m really just fucking around.”
Timestamps: 00:33:58 – 00:35:51 | Watch with a free account
D’Amato’s subpoena remarks here are framed as a response to claims he says he does not believe are true, and he closes by characterizing the exchange as him “fucking around.” The clip establishes that D’Amato invoked courtroom proceedings and employer subpoenas while simultaneously expressing doubt that the opponent or their claimed circumstances exist.
Exhibit B
Discussing Nora by first name, D’Amato states, “from watching Scott, we could see and we know people lie in court,” then describes the history of their dispute and characterizes her continued social media posts as a breach of an agreement. He claims she was fired from her job as a result of their conflict and says, “I don’t even need to talk about Nora anymore. She’s just not, you know, she’s just not worth talking about.”
Timestamps: 00:45:55 – 00:48:06 | Watch with a free account
D’Amato identifies Nora by name before a live audience, states she lost her employment, and characterizes her ongoing posts as violating an agreement. He does not specify the terms of that agreement or how it was formed.
Exhibit C
Addressing chat skepticism about whether he will actually follow through, D’Amato says, “We’ll see if I’m bluffing because… something that happened to me 10 years ago has nothing to do with what I’m talking about, but these invisible scumbags and they grant subpoenas all the time for shit like this.” He states he has “more than enough evidence” and tells critics to “sit there and bark about your little attorneys.”
Timestamps: 00:54:23 – 00:56:32 | Watch with a free account
D’Amato frames the subpoena discussion as a factual claim about standard legal process, not as a stated personal intention at this moment. The clip establishes that he characterized opponents’ counter-legal posturing as attempts to intimidate him into not filing.
Exhibit D
D’Amato tells viewers, “They’re going to try and intimidate me and threaten me so that I don’t do it,” then states, “More than one attorney has looked at this and gone, yep, you got them.” He adds, “go ahead and have another conversation with that boss of yours because they’re going to get subpoenaed too. As a witness. As a witness. If this idiot was using the resources in that office, well, I could sue that office.”
Timestamps: 01:00:13 – 01:05:59 | Watch with a free account
This is D’Amato’s most direct statement of litigation intent in the stream, citing attorney consultations as the basis. He frames the repeated subpoena references as conditional on a lawsuit he claims he can file without counsel. Taken together, the four clips establish a documented pattern across the July 12 stream of D’Amato invoking legal process, specifically subpoenas against opponents’ employers, while claiming attorney backing, and separately naming Nora before a live audience in connection with her stated employment loss.
Sources
- Original YouTube Video
- Full SRT Transcript: for HNZ Supporters
- Full Text Transcript: for HNZ Supporters
- Full Chat Transcript: for HNZ Supporters
- Date: 2026-07-12
- Stream ID: YOUTUBE · J-Cwq6apipM
React to this story