Leaderboard

Alexis's Court Booking Application ID #10018 Submitted on 09/17/21 at 10:23:01 AM ---------------------- Plaintiff Steam Name BLACK SANTA ---------------------- Plaintiff Name Pitt Langley ---------------------- Defendant Name NSWPD ---------------------- Claim Motion for Re-trial. Court Case https://www.ozzygaming.com.au/topic/16139-alexiss-court-booking/ A Court Booking was set for 6pm Tuesday 14th September 2021. Reason for Retrial Two items were revealed to be in conflict with a fair and impartial trial. 1. Judge Selection, Partial to ruling verdict. During the Court Proceedings it was revealed that the same judge that signed the warrant for the arrest, search and seizure of items of my clients property was responsible for their verdict. In this instance it can be argued that the courts did not provide a fair and impartial trial. REF: Justice System Protocol https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YBKXkvyH25Jsffi8IGEk176RZoANoZ3JpM4kWIwZyLE/edit Page 2, Paragraph 2 Line 2. "They must give all parties a reasonable chance to state their case, evidence and reasoning. They must rule on the evidence presented and the quality of the argument, ignoring any preconceived ideas or OOC knowledge of the case. Their judgements are final. Appeals will only be heard if suitable evidence is provided that material information was omitted/misrepresented or the circumstance warrants (such as a miscarriage of justice). In extreme cases, the government may order a retrial." 2. Secretive Authoritative Evidence. Under the rules governing submission of evidence, both the plaintiff and defendant are required to submit to the courts evidence prior to the trial. This information is to be provided to the courts and then distributed to the opposing counsel in order to represent the evidence for their client. In the case Pitt Langley vs NSWPD held on Tuesday 14th September 2021 new evidence was presented prior to the final verdict. This information was not provided to the defense counsel and was not able to be screened for authenticity of information, qualification of the witness nor the integrity for which the information was gathered. During the trial, the defense counsel was not able to view, hear or examine the evidence that had been provided to the courts. Given that this information was provided at the trial, it may be concluded that it was the sole piece of information used to indict my client. To promote a fair and balanced court system I feel it is necessary to have this case scheduled for Re-trial. Request: If the Secretive Authoritative Evidence that was used in the previous case is required in the next scheduling, I would like to ask the courts that this information be made available to the defense prior to the next court date. I also ask that the courts consider assigning a judge who was not involved in the signing of the warrant to oversee the re-trial for this case. ---------------------- Do you confirm all information provided is the truth to the best of your knowledge? Yes