| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
JudgeDredd Esq
District Court of Adirainia
Adirainia
1
   |
Posted - 2015.10.21 00:07:53 -
[1] - Quote
It seems that the accuracy of the evidence or possible spoliation is at issue? Perhaps a change in venue is needed? I would be more than happy to take this case on through the Adirain District Court and Court of Common Tears. Mr. Thermal, a Son of our beloved Adirain by adoption, should be entitled to a fair trial as well as all other parties involved. I, Judge Dredd, have a long and outstanding history of ruling fairly, albeit most ruling do tend to be in favor of the falsely accused corp theifs. I advise for a motion in change of venue. |
JudgeDredd Esq
District Court of Adirainia
Adirainia
2
|
Posted - 2015.10.21 02:35:16 -
[2] - Quote
This is interesting. I would agree with your assessment. Given your second statement; that the plaintiff in this case knowingly destroyed evidence that has already been entered and cannot meet their burden of proof, then this should be thrown out of court. I feel defense should be compensated for any costs associated with their defense as well, 3B seems like an appropriate sum. This of course, is much different than Adirainin law, whereas the guilty and worthless are exiled to Shadow Cartel. |
JudgeDredd Esq
District Court of Adirainia
Adirainia
3
|
Posted - 2015.10.21 15:18:04 -
[3] - Quote
Not Amarr wrote:
....
Ruling on destruction of evidence is a joke. It's still there, if you look at the quotes. Maybe the person in question edited the evidence post out of panic because of bad reputation of the legislatures and misuse of the evidence? The screenshots lack basic safety measures, such as blurring out vital informations like chat windows, system informations etc. that are irrelevant for the current case. Presenting them in this forum, especially after realizing that the accusant, the defender and the judge openly advertise and support each other, is a tragic slip.
.
You admit that the evidence was possibly editted or deleted? This can only mean deliberate spoiliation if true,
Without evidence, the accusers accusations are merely hearsay. The accusers posted in ex. 3 their proof which came from their alleged spy. They later deleted this evidence in an attempt to mislead this court
See exhibit 3:
[URL]
http://s1.postimg.org/gfl2lrk8f/2015_10_19_21_14_52.png
[/URL]
Such violations should not stand.
|
| |
|