APEX Legends, ZDT COFFEE HOUR SUNNY DAY, WISH LIST, NUTTER 2026-05-09 12, 35, ZeroDarkTony / May 9, 2026 / YouTube / ArlOwlzo8L4
Anthony R. D’Amato, Jr., also known as ZeroDarkTony, spent a substantial portion of a May 9, 2026 YouTube livestream warning anonymous online critics that he intends to pursue court subpoenas and John Doe litigation to unmask and sue them. D’Amato also solicited viewer contributions to a self-described “legal freedom fund” via Venmo and CashApp.
D’Amato described the subpoena process in detail, citing conversations with two attorneys and characterizing judicial compulsion of platform disclosures as routine. He claimed to have preserved screenshots of posts and channel descriptions, and stated that anonymous accounts who had engaged with content critical of him could be named as witnesses even if not named as defendants.
The stream also included D’Amato referencing a separate individual’s alleged threat against a church and urging viewers to report it to law enforcement.
“There Is No Objecting. There Is No Fighting It.”
D’Amato framed his stated legal plans not as threats but as certainties, telling his audience the process was already in motion. He stated that some anonymous chat participants would receive emails notifying them their accounts were being subpoenaed, and that others who were not sued outright would be compelled to appear as witnesses to explain their conduct. He named at least one individual, “Jen,” by first name while discussing the subpoena process.
D’Amato also mentioned what he described as someone—apparently referring to Jarred Brooks, the respondent in a restraining order case involving D’Amato—threatening a church, and shared his personal opinion that the local police “would not be very happy” about it.
“I heard a clip, somebody sent me a clip of some very interesting content. Regarding somebody saying that they’re going to, you know, that a particular church in their area is going to see them tomorrow, which doesn’t sound very good to me. Sounds like a threat to me.,,, Yeah, man, like, if somebody calls in and has a clip of him saying that, you know, and reports that shit, remember, guys, you see something, say something, remember.”
That same day, someone called. A police report documents that Officer Bowen Moeller of the Slidell Police Department investigated a complaint from a caller, Lori of Minnesota, who reported YouTube livestreamer, Jarred Brooks (channel: Roastwarz2), for allegedly threatening to go to his wife’s church and “throw a few punches.” Officer Moeller watched the video but observed no threats in the video or comments. Was it a false report?
Exhibit A
D’Amato tells his audience that subpoenas compelling platform disclosures have become standard courtroom procedure, saying the process leaves targets with no recourse: “Court subpoena…it is…it’s become something very common in courtrooms…for invisible accounts to be subpoenaed through a judge that compels the company. So at that point, they’re not going to have a choice. There is no objecting. There is no fighting it.”
Timestamps: 00:16:45 – 00:19:52 | Open clip in new tab
D’Amato describes the John Doe lawsuit as real and imminent, adding, “It’s not a threat. It’s not a threat. It’s a promise.” He also states that anonymous critics “have left me no choice,” framing the litigation as reactive rather than preemptive. The clip establishes D’Amato’s stated intent to pursue legal identification of anonymous accounts and his characterization of that process as already underway.
Exhibit B
Addressing his audience on the subject of the alleged church threat by a separate individual, D’Amato says, “My opinion is, if you see something, say something…you never know if a phone call that you make in a situation like this could actually save people’s lives.” He then pivots to his own legal situation, stating, “The legal action that I am taking against…said individual is just the first domino.”
Timestamps: 00:22:14 – 00:28:40 | Open clip in new tab
D’Amato’s “if you see something, say something” framing is his stated opinion, not a direct instruction, and the police report from that day reflects that a viewer did contact law enforcement. Officer Moeller’s investigation concerned a different streamer entirely and found no actionable threats. This clip also contains D’Amato’s statement that anonymous accounts have evidence preserved against them: “They can’t erase that. They can’t delete it…we’ve already got the screenshots.”
Exhibit C
D’Amato describes the scope of accounts he claims he could pursue, telling viewers, “I could subpoena any anonymous account that is involved…there are some fucking goblins in some chats that are going to be very surprised. And some of them won’t necessarily be sued, but they’ll be witnesses.”
Timestamps: 00:29:34 – 00:32:57 | Open clip in new tab
D’Amato adds a partial hedge, stating that standard commentary is not his target: “If you’re exercising your First Amendment right and you’re doing it in a proper way, well, no one’s going to do that to you.” He then narrows the stated basis to conduct he describes as “repeated” and “malicious.” The clip also references accounts Slopp, Mr. Dark, and Mr. Black by handle, though it is not clear from the transcript whether those are the accounts D’Amato says he is pursuing.
Exhibit D
D’Amato tells his audience that people in certain chats will receive notification that their accounts have been subpoenaed, saying, “Some of the people in those chats are going to be very surprised when they get an email…when they get an email saying that their accounts are being subpoenaed.” He then addresses someone named Jen by name, calling her “a dumb bitch.”
Timestamps: 00:37:13 – 00:39:04 | Open clip in new tab
The clip is notable for naming an individual mid-legal discussion, though no further identifying information about “Jen” is provided on stream. D’Amato’s tone shifts between the legal framing and personal remarks without transition, establishing that named and unnamed individuals are addressed within the same passage.
Exhibit E
Near the end of the broadcast, D’Amato returns to the subpoena theme, telling critics, “We’ll see when that subpoena hits. We’ll see how you feel then,” and later, “That subpoena will even the scales. And…see you at court. Or not. Might not happen.”
Timestamps: 00:56:54 – 00:58:52 | Open clip in new tab
The “or not, might not happen” qualifier is present in the same breath as the subpoena statement, which is consistent with D’Amato’s pattern throughout the stream of pairing legal assertions with occasional hedges. The clip closes the broadcast’s legal thread and shows the subpoena language was sustained across more than 40 minutes of airtime. Taken together, the five clips document D’Amato stating on stream, across multiple segments, that he has consulted attorneys, preserved evidence, and intends to pursue court subpoenas to identify anonymous accounts, with litigation described as the outcome for at least some of those identified.
Sources
- Original YouTube Video
- Full SRT Transcript
- Full Text Transcript
- Date: 2026-05-09
- Stream ID: YOUTUBE · ArlOwlzo8L4