ZeroDarkTony is live [ZeroDarkTony] / October 26, 2026 / YouTube / x2thgN0-6Hs
Anthony R. D’Amato, Jr., also known as ZeroDarkTony, spent a substantial portion of his October 26, 2026 YouTube livestream describing a civil tort he said he was assembling against Scott Hochstetter, known online as DOA, who streams on YouTube at @thelordofthegadflies. D’Amato named additional parties he said would be included in the filing and cited California’s Ralph Act, statutory damages starting at $25,000, and an existing restraining order as mechanisms he intended to use. He also stated on stream that a person identified as “JB” had posted his home address to a forum with five million views.
“He Might Just Get Served at His Next Court Date”
D’Amato opened the legal discussion by confirming he had been monitoring Hochstetter’s content. He told the stream he would spend that time instead drafting filings. Within a few minutes he named Hochstetter, and two others he referred to as Ashley and Chee, as intended defendants. The named-defendant list and the service-at-court-date remark appeared together in the same stretch of the broadcast, before D’Amato shifted to discussing the Ralph Act’s three-year statute of limitations and its treble-damages provision.
Later in the stream D’Amato disclosed that he said he had previously issued subpoenas in an earlier proceeding, and referenced a fee hearing he said was approximately three days away as of the October 26 date. He also invoked a restraining order he described as a “mechanism” for pursuing additional legal steps against people he characterized as connected to Hochstetter.
Exhibit A
D’Amato states his intent to add an unnamed individual to pending litigation: “Yeah, this fat fuck is gonna be added to a lawsuit. You know. I actually have evidence. Rather than him saying he wants to sue me and I’ve done nothing of what he speaks of… he said I didn’t do any of that shit.”
Timestamps: 00:11:07 – 00:13:04 | Watch with a free account
D’Amato frames the lawsuit as a response to what he characterizes as false accusations against him, claiming he possesses evidence the opposing party lacks. The clip establishes the opening statement of his legal intentions for the session.
Exhibit B
D’Amato describes the tort as active and names additional parties, saying: “We got a nice little tort that we’re putting together for him. And he might just get served at his next court date.” He then adds: “If I put Ashley on a lawsuit too, do you think she’s gonna be cooperative… because she’s gonna be on the lawsuit too. And so’s Chee.”
Timestamps: 00:15:09 – 00:20:11 | Watch with a free account
D’Amato explicitly names Hochstetter as the primary target and identifies Ashley and Chee as additional named defendants he says he is considering. The clip also captures his speculation that co-defendants may cooperate against Hochstetter once served.
Exhibit C
D’Amato outlines the Ralph Act theory directly to the stream: “We have a little civil tort we’re putting together and putting Scott on there. So Scott’s gonna get sued.” He goes on to claim the act’s mandatory starting fees are $25,000 and that “any punitive and compensatory damages are tripled.”
Timestamps: 00:20:57 – 00:25:33 | Watch with a free account
D’Amato states he has been working with paralegals and characterizes the alleged targeting as a hate crime based on perceived religious affiliation, pointing to flyers he says placed him among Scientologists as evidence of a course of conduct spanning approximately three years. He adds that Hochstetter’s associates Chee and Ashley would also appear on the filing.
Exhibit D
D’Amato discloses on stream that a person he identifies as “JB” published his home address publicly: “JB put my whole ass address on a, um, in a forum that had five million views.”
Timestamps: 00:33:10 – 00:35:03 | Watch with a free account
D’Amato presents the forum post as part of the background to his legal claims, framing it as an example of the conduct he says he is documenting. The clip does not include independent verification of the forum post; the account is D’Amato’s own on-stream statement.
Exhibit E
D’Amato references prior subpoenas and an upcoming fee hearing: “When I subpoenaed them previously, they all ran.” He adds: “The RO that I have on him is gonna be a great mechanism for me to do the other things I need to do.”
Noone ran. In fact, people he subpoenaed filed objections and there was a motion to quash filed that resulted in his attorney, Steven Tamer, being sanctioned.
Timestamps: 00:55:09 – 00:59:53 | Watch with a free account
D’Amato states that a fee hearing is “in a few days” from the October 26 date, placing at least one related proceeding within the immediate near term. This is his fee motion against Krackhead Kenny, aka Jarred Brooks. He describes the existing restraining order as an instrument he intends to leverage alongside the new tort action.
Exhibit F
D’Amato addresses the swatting DOA allegation directly: “I called the police on him. That’s not illegal. And for him to say I swatted him is absolute defamation.” He also states he has identified what he characterizes as “guaranteed dismissal” grounds in Hochstetter’s own filings.
Timestamps: 01:03:39 – 01:05:34 | Watch with a free account
D’Amato acknowledges that he contacted law enforcement regarding Hochstetter while denying the conduct constitutes swatting, and counters that characterizing it as swatting is itself actionable defamation. The clip adds his own account of that specific incident to the documentary record.
Taken together, the six clips from the October 26, 2026 stream constitute D’Amato’s own on-stream account of a civil action he says is in active preparation, naming Hochstetter and at least two additional parties as intended defendants, with a fee hearing in a related proceeding he said was days away.
Sources
- Original YouTube Video
- Full SRT Transcript: for HNZ Supporters
- Full Text Transcript: for HNZ Supporters
- Full Chat Transcript: for HNZ Supporters
- Date: 2026-10-26
- Stream ID: YOUTUBE · x2thgN0-6Hs
React to this story