Rejected Wrong decision | Dom Salvatore

[CommanderMalo]

Regarding this forum: Reviewed - SR 2.5, GR 6.4 | 99128,135347,141372


This ruling makes 0 sense. How does a judge get to decide what is valid evidence if they are also using it against someone? Did I suddenly wake up and judges are perfect individuals? Last I checked, they’re human like the rest of us, and we all make mistakes, so it’s up to the court to prove that the paperwork is in order, which INCLUDES the defense attorney.

Also, a judge was literally charged with corruption a month ago. How can you sit there and say “oh it’s the judges decision” as if they can’t also do something like that?

Let’s break it down:

DOJ opens a case file on a first person. This requires a OFPI (Order of First Person Investigation) which requires TWO signatures, something the DOJ has never showed us during the entire trial, immediately breaking SR 2.5 and ICly 1.3 in the civil code regarding rules of discovery.

Therefore, if they want to open a case file, an investigation was required, which means that investigation is being used as evidence FOR a case file which in turn makes it AGAINST the individual, and thus makes it evidence.

And how did it take him one whole week to come up with a one sentence reply to that entire forum? Are you kidding me? After all the evidence, THIS is the justice we get? Someone gets mixing from our side but NOTHING about the blatant corruption and failure to follow the laws of the city?

I don’t have any issues with Dom, but this needs to be re-reviewed, and I would be more than glad to sit in a meeting to explain how the rules of discovery work.

 

[Maarsh Walker]

Regarding this forum: Reviewed - SR 2.5, GR 6.4 | 99128,135347,141372


This ruling makes 0 sense. How does a judge get to decide what is valid evidence if they are also using it against someone? Did I suddenly wake up and judges are perfect individuals? Last I checked, they’re human like the rest of us, and we all make mistakes, so it’s up to the court to prove that the paperwork is in order, which INCLUDES the defense attorney.

Also, a judge was literally charged with corruption a month ago. How can you sit there and say “oh it’s the judges decision” as if they can’t also do something like that?

Let’s break it down:

DOJ opens a case file on a first person. This requires a OFPI (Order of First Person Investigation) which requires TWO signatures, something the DOJ has never showed us during the entire trial, immediately breaking SR 2.5 and ICly 1.3 in the civil code regarding rules of discovery.

Therefore, if they want to open a case file, an investigation was required, which means that investigation is being used as evidence FOR a case file which in turn makes it AGAINST the individual, and thus makes it evidence.

And how did it take him one whole week to come up with a one sentence reply to that entire forum? Are you kidding me? After all the evidence, THIS is the justice we get? Someone gets mixing from our side but NOTHING about the blatant corruption and failure to follow the laws of the city?

I don’t have any issues with Dom, but this needs to be re-reviewed, and I would be more than glad to sit in a meeting to explain how the rules of discovery w

Regarding this forum: Reviewed - SR 2.5, GR 6.4 | 99128,135347,141372


This ruling makes 0 sense. How does a judge get to decide what is valid evidence if they are also using it against someone? Did I suddenly wake up and judges are perfect individuals? Last I checked, they’re human like the rest of us, and we all make mistakes, so it’s up to the court to prove that the paperwork is in order, which INCLUDES the defense attorney.

Also, a judge was literally charged with corruption a month ago. How can you sit there and say “oh it’s the judges decision” as if they can’t also do something like that?

Let’s break it down:

DOJ opens a case file on a first person. This requires a OFPI (Order of First Person Investigation) which requires TWO signatures, something the DOJ has never showed us during the entire trial, immediately breaking SR 2.5 and ICly 1.3 in the civil code regarding rules of discovery.

Therefore, if they want to open a case file, an investigation was required, which means that investigation is being used as evidence FOR a case file which in turn makes it AGAINST the individual, and thus makes it evidence.

And how did it take him one whole week to come up with a one sentence reply to that entire forum? Are you kidding me? After all the evidence, THIS is the justice we get? Someone gets mixing from our side but NOTHING about the blatant corruption and failure to follow the laws of the city?

I don’t have any issues with Dom, but this needs to be re-reviewed, and I would be more than glad to sit in a meeting to explain how the rules of discovery work.

Since you talking about law why did you not resolve it icly ?

You can open a case-file on a Judge can you not ?

 

[CommanderMalo]

You can open a case-file on a Judge can you not ?

Oh yea and who’s going to review it? The same corrupt ass DOJ who handled this case?

Or the same DOJ that handled the Vee Case?

Where’s the proof of perjury that you slapped on Bam, and refused to tell us how or why?

Wait for the admins.

 

[Maarsh Walker]

Oh yea and who’s going to review it? The same corrupt ass DOJ who handled this case?

Or the same DOJ that handled the Vee Case?

Where’s the proof of perjury that you slapped on Bam, and refused to tell us how or why?

Wait for the admins.

Just because you do not have proper conversation with your partner DA is not my fault he was told everything in the last court hearing.
So before slapping us with Corruption charge look into your own matter.

 

[Maarsh Walker]

Pleass read point 2 of this message by SERVER ADMIN YASWANTH TRIGGER Post in thread 'State Rule 1.8 | FIB' Rejected - State Rule 1.8 | FIB

 

[Pablo Schmidt]

Rejected
Your forum account is banned currently, you can make appeal after your forum gets unbanned​