TianiBee

Thank you Counsellor, I have a corporate contract with Mr Langley, and he has opted to stay with DoJ. Please see below, for confirmation. The contract is commercially sensitive, and therefore I will not provide the details, however Mr Langley has indicated that he wishes to stay with DoJ and honour his contract.

I am the lawyer on record for Pitt Langley and SA Lotto Co, Mr Weathers has moved to private practice and Mr Langley has indicated that he wishes to retain me as Counsel. @pinejack @PandaKazii - We await Court hearing details at your convenience.

Thank you for taking the time to submit an application. I am sorry to inform you that your application has been WITHDRAWN at your request. You are able to apply again at a future date.

Thank you for taking the time to submit an application. I am sorry to inform you that your application has been DENIED No response received relating to your application. You may apply again at a future date, if you are still interested.

Thank you for taking the time to submit an application. I am sorry to inform you that your application has been DENIED No response received relating to your application. You may apply again at a future date.

Thank you for taking the time to submit an application. I am sorry to inform you that your application has been DENIED No response received relating to your application. You may apply again at a future date.

Thank you for taking the time to submit an application. I am sorry to inform you that your application has been DENIED No response received relating to your application. You may apply again at a future date.

Thank you for taking the time to submit an application. I am pleased to inform you that your application has been progressed to... PENDING Please speak to a law council member about getting your appropriate interview´╗┐´╗┐. You can easily seek out a Judge by joining Teamspeak´╗┐´╗┐´╗┐´╗┐ (ts.ozzy.life) and joining the District Courtroom.

TianiBee's Court Booking Application ID #10220 Submitted on 12/17/21 at 07:46:19 AM ---------------------- Plaintiff Steam Name BLACK SANTA ---------------------- Plaintiff Name Pitt Langley ---------------------- Defendant Name New South Wales Police Department ---------------------- Claim My client provides instructions as follows: - Following an extensive investigation by Major Crimes Division ("MCD") of the New South Wales Police Department ("NSWPD"), my client's convictions were quashed on 29/09/2021, before an Appeal judge panel - At the first hearing (where Mr Langley was found guilty by Judge Masters) Mr Langley was fined $1,000,000, which he paid diligently - As my client has been found not guilty at Appeal, a refund in the amount of $1,000,000 is requested. This fine is no longer applicable. - As a result of the findings at Appeal, my client is seeking another $1,000,000 under the jurisdictional limit of the Court. The refund of a $1,000,000 organisation fine should not be reviewed under this jurisdictional limit, as my client is not seeking damages and is merely asking for his own fine payment to be reimbursed. My client has suffered financial harm as a result of the trial, investigation by MCD and the subsequent appeal. The compensation sought can be quantified as follows: - Pure financial loss of $700,000, which are earnings lost as Chief Executive Officer of San Andreas Lotto Co. due to Police interviews, Court attendance, and interviews with Legal Counsel - Defamation of character of $200,000, for contracts lost a result of trust issues with business associates due to the proceedings against Mr Langley - Legal fees paid to previous Counsel in the amount of $100,000 for representation at initial trial and subsequent Appeal My client is also seeking for any Police record relating to the matter be expunged by the Court. I have been instructed that there may be further claims against the NSWPD at a further date, which will be passed to the Court and the NSWPD Prosecutors as information becomes available. Olivia (Libby) Moretti-Capone Barrister - Department of Justice ---------------------- Do you confirm all information provided is the truth to the best of your knowledge? Yes

TianiBee's Court Booking Application ID #10219 Submitted on 12/17/21 at 07:15:11 AM ---------------------- Plaintiff Steam Name Rosie ---------------------- Plaintiff Name Heda Langley (AKA Rosie Langley) ---------------------- Defendant Name New South Wales Police Department ---------------------- Claim My client provides instructions as follows: - On or about 10 & 11 September 2021, the Major Crimes Division ("MCD") of the New South Wales Police Department ("NSWPD") conducted a raid at the apartment owned by Mrs Heda Langley at postcode 627 - The MCD provided circumstantial evidence (which contained personal financial records with NO transaction details) to the Court. Mrs Langley states that she has never been involved in weapons trafficking, and there is no physical evidence connecting her to this crime. - In excess of $1,000,000 of items were removed from the apartment by the MCD during the raid - A subsequent investigation ensued, and the MCD could not substantiate any charges against Mrs Langley, as the evidence used to obtain the Search and Seizure Warrant was circumstantial (I refer to the appeal of Pitt Langley v NSPWD 29/09/2021). The Search Warrant signed off by Judge Masters was later voided. On appeal, it was found that Judge Masters' Warrant was issued in error, and Mr Pitt Langley's convictions were overturned. It is my client's position that the Search and Seizure Warrant issued by Judge Masters which resulted in the subsequent raid on her apartment should also be voided, as she wishes to dispute the evidence used to obtain the search warrant. - My client instructs that MCD and the NSWPD decided not to pursue the investigation following the successful appeal of Mr Pitt Langley. My client is seeking for the Court to overturn the Warrant issued by Judge Masters, based on the provisions of Langley v NSWPD. My client seeks financial compensation of all items removed from her apartment as a result of the MCD raids. My client also seeks financial compensation for loss of business and Court legal fees. If it pleases the Court, my is seeking approval by the Court for this appeal to waive the jurisdictional limit due to the absence of legal counsel in the City over the past three months. My client's previous Legal Counsel has not been available since before Mrs Langley was advised by NSWPD that the case would not be pursued. This conversation happened on 29/09/2021 at the Hearing of Pitt Langley, where members of the NSWPD advised Mrs Langley that her case would not be pursued any further. Previous Counsel has not listed any new cases for review after this date, and has not been able to be contacted. Heda Langley also seeks permission to remove the jurisdictional damages limit which exists for this type of case, which would be $1,000,000. Mrs Langley has suffered pure financial loss which well exceeds ,000,000. Personal belongings removed from her apartment during the raid on her apartment well exceed $6,000,000. If the Court approves the motions set out above, my client seeks the following: - Expungement of Court or PD records relating to this incident - Reimbursement of the items taken from her apartment, or compensation in the amount of $6,000,000 (value of items) - $500,000 compensation for lost income due to reputational damage suffered, Court appearances, interview appearances and legal fees My client is seeking to be placed back in the position she was before the MCD raided her apartment and took her belongings. As there was no basis for the Warrant, and the Court of Appeal found that the Warrant for Pitt Langley was issued in error, my client ought to be provided with financial relief. Olivia (Libby) Moretti-Capone Barrister - Department of Justice ---------------------- Do you confirm all information provided is the truth to the best of your knowledge? Yes

Don't nerf landscaping and then buff truck driving maybe? Oh. Too late ­ƒÿé