Search results

@Julia_ @Superwoops You have 72 Hours to offer a Closing Statement and Sentencing Recommendation.

Certainly, you have 24 Hours. @ToadKing the Court did ping Officers of BOR in their discord to give them a heads up about the near expiration of this summons.

@Savannah Proceed on cross-examination if you chose. Advise if you won't.

Granted, this was effectively answered. The specificity of the cross-examination doesn't change that.

@Dr_Eksplosive

Noted, I'll extend courtesies to both parties.

The Public Defender has failed to offer cross-examination after a requested extension. He shall be held in Contempt of Court. He shall be fined $500 and jailed for 5 minutes. @_budo You have 72 Hours to offer a Closing Statement. In this statement, please include the basis for your sentencing...

@Kaiserin_ @ElysiaCrynn When you have a chance, if you could respond to cross-examination.

Objection #1 -> OVERRULED. I'm not sure what question you're referring to. Objection #2 -> OVERRULED. Secretary of <Dept> is an office, not a person. The Sec of Commerce should be able to answer a question regarding his or her Dept's activities. If the CURRENT Secretary doesn't know, that's an...

Granted. The Federal Court does warn Counselor that in filing a Complaint, he did assert that his claims were meritorious and not frivolous. Although discovery may show a different light on the claims, the Court does not wish to be used a sandbox for claims.

@Rookieblue14 @12700k Please answer these questions and all other followups from Amity. @AmityBlamity Continually question the witnesses, advise when done.

Q5 is struck, the Court can't apply any weight to opinions of any witness with regards to a verdict. This is based on evidence and argument presented by the CW. Q4 is likewise struck. Objection to Q3 for " Relevance, Facts Not in Evidence" is OVERRULED*, except that no evidence will be...

OVERRULED.

Do you intend to rectify or otherwise respond to CW's objections regarding Q3-5?

https://www.democracycraft.net/threads/regulations-of-the-federal-court.34234/

Yes

Overruled. A delay of 55 minutes is hardly enough to warrant to infringe on Plaintiff's ability to cross examine.

@Nacho, is required to appear before the Federal Court in the case of [2025] DCR 108 - Appeal | [2026] FCR 7

On review of the filings herein by Plaintiff, the Federal Court accepts the Appeal for review. The Federal Court will summon the CEO of Bank of Reveille to offer a brief in opposition.

@ToadKing Court receives the Appeal. Client was rep'd by PD and now by ToadKing. Do you know who BOR's lawyer is? I recall BlueRiverOtter leaving DC at some point.