Sustained. I don't believe the question poses relevance to the case and it is therefore is should not be considered in Hugebob's testimony. The witness may proceed to answer question 1 and 2.Objection the third question is in simple terms an admittance. The Defendant admits that she was there at all time and also she saying she broke the vault door.
When did I say I broke the vault door.Objection the third question is in simple terms an admittance. The Defendant admits that she was there at all time and also she saying she broke the vault door.
Please do not speak out of turn.When did I say I broke the vault door.
Overruled. Please allow the witness to answer your first 2 questions.Objection I’m being slandered
The defendant and I have previously served as members of the same political party and are currently married.I would like to ask both of the defence's witnesses the following question. How would you describe your relationship with the defendant?
Please do not speak out of turn and answer the question appropriately.
This has been noted. However, what are you objecting to? Are you objecting to have the witness' statement struck from the record?Objection to krix's statement, hadn't the defendant stated previously that you were building alongside her. If you weren't on at the time then wouldn't the defendant be committing an act of perjury through that statement.
Please save the remarks for your closing statements, not for objections.No, I'm objecting to the fact that the defendant call upon an irrelevant witness who had a close personal connection to her in hopes that he would perjure himself to save her skin.
You've had your chance to question the witnesses. Please allow for the witness to answer the questions of the cross-examination.Accusing me of perjury is ridiculous. I believe Krix is remembering things incorrectly as it's been several days. H is a busy guy after all so a lawsuit on a Minecraft server is the least of his concerns. I believe he was on at the time because I was building alongside him. How could he have been offline if I was building next to him and in a VC with him at the time? Lmao
Depends on the day, we got on well most of the time thoughI would like to ask both of the defence's witnesses the following question. How would you describe your relationship with the defendant?
Could you expand as to why?I object
IN THE COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
VERDICT
Case No. 04-2021-21-03
I. PROSECUTION'S POSITION
1. The Prosecution, represented by Aladeen22, allege that the defendant has violated the Bank Robbery law.
2. The Prosecution asserts that the Defendant was caught at the vault at the time the alarms went off.
II. DEFENDANTS POSITION
1. The Defendant, didna, denies all allegations made by the Prosecution, claiming that they were in the build world at the time of the alleged robbery.
2. The Defendant claims that they were a witness to the prosecutor, Aladeen22, robbing such a bank; and asserts that they were framed for the robbery.
III. THE COURT OPINION
1. In the evidence and testimonies we have heard throughout this case, several eyewitnesses have confirmed the whereabouts of the Defendant during the alleged robbery.
2. The burden of proof is weighed upon the prosecution, which I believe they have proven with the multiple testimonies and evidence, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the Defendant committed such a crime.
3. The Defendant claims that Krix was an eyewitness to their alternate whereabouts at the time, however Krix denies that. The lack of any sort of other eyewitness to her whereabouts, in comparison to the testimonies from the other witnesses we have seen, proves that she was not in the location she claimed to be.
4. The Defendant has continuously contradicted themselves throughout this case - claiming that they were in the build world at the time of the alleged robbery, whereas also claiming they witnessed someone else rob the bank.
5. The court finds that the Defendant has committed perjury, in an attempt to mislead the courts in regards to her whereabouts at the time of the crime. This repugnant behaviour came with an intent to falsely accuse another of committing such crime.
6. The court would implore the RBA to consider the removal of the defendant's license to practice law, pursuant of Section 5 of the Legal Board Act.
IV. DECISION
The Court hereby finds the Defendant guilty of the charge of Bank Robbery, and additionally guilty of the charge of Perjury.
The recommended sentence brought by the prosecution, pursuant of the provisions of the charge of Bank Robbery, have been accepted by the court. Seeing as the jail time to Bank Robbery has already been issued, the court sees no reason to issue any further jail time on that charge, as for the fine and the other charge, I've noted the sentence below;
I hereby sentence the Defendant to a:
(a) Fine of $1000 for Bank Robbery
(b) Fine of $500 for Perjury
This case is hereby adjourned.