JameZ

"Your Honor, We are simply stating that there is no substantial evidence to prove that the alleged firearm is an actual weapon, so yes it could be a toy gun. The prosecution brought a precedent regarding unloaded firearms; which requires a firearm to begin with, none of the attached reports provide us with logging of this alleged firearm." (( @ThatGuy @Wright ))

"I'm sorry your honor, did I say that? To reiterate I meant that it shouldn't apply." (( @ThatGuy ))

"Your Honor, The precedent given by the prosecution speaks about unloaded firearms which is not the case here. There is no evidence that proves there was a real firearm in the first place, no reports have been attached to the original filing regarding any firearms that Mr. Gibson allegedly possessed. The firearm shown in Exhibit 2 was possessed by another individual as seen in other exhibits, therefore the defense believes that this precedent should apply in this case." (( @ThatGuy @Wright ))

"Very well, the defense is done cross-examining the trooper your honor." (( @Urshankov ))

"Trooper. Before you searched the cellphone, were you aware of any facts that may have led you to believe that the occupants of the vehicle might've been planning to ambush police on scene?" (( @Swanker @Zebulon ))

"Your Honor, The defense would like to make the point that no firearm was found on Mr. Gibson and there's no way we can confirm that was a real firearm held by Mr. Gibson and not some sort of toy gun, therefore the defense asks that the prosecution expunges these firearm related charges unless they can produce evidence of the firearm which they they're allegedly accusing my client about. This also brings us to the point that my client should be charged with conspiracy to armed robbery and not the actual charge unless the prosecution can provide substantial evidence to prove otherwise, as there's no evidence of a firearm found on my client and the fact that my client did not physically take any items by himself. Additionally, the defense is not sure why the prosecution is pursuing the "assault with a firearm" charge when it wasn't my client opening fire at the police as clearly instructed in Exhibit 5, so we ask that that charge is also expunged. The defense would additionally like to seek bail your honor." (( @ThatGuy @Wright ))

"And that your honor has already been answered by the witness, the prosecution is merely trying to grasp at straws here and simply wasting the court's time instead of asking questions relevant to what has the witness seen." (( @ThatGuy @Zebulon )

"Objection, your honor. Relevance?" (( @ThatGuy @Zebulon ))

"Objection, leading." (( @ThatGuy @Zebulon ))

Would love to see this implemented, yes from me.

"Your Honor, We argue that the niner originally did not supply us with any details that can directly throw this crime to my client. My client's precense at the location of the crime is merely circumstantial evidence, and as far as I am concerned it's a public property my client was standing at. Additionally, my client was not found holding or using any tools to support Mr. Huston in executing the crime. Is the prosecution really inclined to believe that we are simply going assume my client's guilt over circumstantial evidence? Furthermore, the burden of proof lies on the prosecution and not the defense, so I'm not really sure why the defense is being asked continuously to provide evidence to prove Mr. Hieu's innocence." (( @ThatGuy @Zebulon ))

"Your Honor, This appears to be like a twist of events by the prosecution in this case, they're claiming my client was involved in this burglary attempt. However, there is no evidence to suggest that my client was doing so apart from being at the place of the crime. Mr. Huston took a plea guilty as he knew he committed the aforementioned crimes and therefore, the defense asks the prosecution to provide substantial evidence or witnesses forward if they still wish to pursue these charges. None of the narratives given by the arresting officers mention my client being visually seen aiding or being involved in the burglary attempt, so we believe it's simply unfair to assume that my client is guilty of those charges." (( @ThatGuy @Zebulon @GenuinePork ))

Need SEMC perms for @WorthlessNights.

my best mates @DxRK @EPICxNUTS @Ixosis grats to swanker on getting script tester x

Name: L Bid: Buyout

Name: L Bid: Starting

"Your Honor, There's nothing argumentative about the previous question, the defense is only trying to gather facts about the aforementioned situation in-order to determine the legality of the search." (( @Urshankov ))

"No, you did not. The prosecution would've objected if this were to be the case, again I ask that you answer this simple question with either a yes or a no." (( @Swanker @Zebulon ))

"Trooper, please answer the question with either a yes or a no." (( @Swanker @Zebulon ))

"Not guilty." (( @ThatGuy @Wright ))

"Defense is present." (( @ThatGuy ))