Goliath2093

See the attached document https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/906719605731491870/921370678605787136/hlres.pdf

This matter has been awaiting response from the DOJ for over a week, does the DOJ intend to respond or has Mr. Powers been denied a trial?

With regards to the booking above, the NSWPF has no objection to the criminal charges being heard before the courts.

Mr. Powers, Before I an issue a formal response to this on behalf of the NSWPF, I have noticed some issues with your submission to the court. Given that you appear to be representing yourself, I have outlined these issues below along with my advice on how you could possibly fix these issues. The main issue is that you are discussing your legal argument in this submission. You are only required (and advised) to say what charges you are contesting and when you were charged with them (if you have that information). Any statements or testimony you provide in this booking can't be used as evidence and could be considered prejudicial. The final paragraph outlines some further claims you would like to make. These claims should be heard before a civil court in a separate case. This paragraph should be removed from this booking and placed in a separate one for a civil case. If you have any further questions, feel free to contact me. Regards, Inspector Arthur Johnson Prosecutor, New South Wales Police Force

To whom it may concern, The NSWPF would like conformation from the DOJ that the case being contested is the armed robbery of a store change that was heard on the 13th of this month. Regards, Inspector Arthur Johnson

To whom it may concern, The New South Wales Police Force vehemently opposes the defence's motion for a retrial. Below, I will outline our responses to the points raised by Mrs Rose and will raise some others to support our position. Point 1: "Judge Selection, Partial to ruling verdict" Mrs Rose argues that since it was revealed during the proceeding that Judge Masters authorised one of the warrants relevant to the case, it could be argued that he did not provide a fair and impartial trial. I would remind Mrs Rose and the court that the warrant in question was provided at the time of the execution of the search warrant and before the case via discovery. If the defence was so concerned about this possible conflict, why was it not addressed before the court date? Additionally, Mrs Rose provides no evidence, only her insistence that this has affected the judgement of Judge Masters, only stating that it "could be argued" that the courts did not provide a fair and impartial trial. Point 2: "Secretive Authoritative Evidence" Mrs Rose argues here that new evidence was introduced to the case and then withheld from her at the time of the trial. She then asserts that this evidence must have been the single critical factor in the judge's decision to find Mr Langley guilty. Before I go into the reasons, I would like to outline why the NSWPF requested the evidence to be withheld. If any of the raw evidence was presented to the court, it would have resulted in compromising the safety of one or more people and would have put their lives in mortal danger. The NSWPF has a responsibility to these people and the public to keep them safe and so does the DOJ. I would like to remind Mrs Rose and the court of a fact that was stated at the time clearly by the NSWPF and Judge Masters, all evidence used in the case was provided to the court before the final time for submissions set by the judge (24 hours before the trial in this case). Second, Mrs Rose's claims that the information was not screened for authenticity or integrity is erroneous. As was stated to Mrs Rose by Judge Masters, the evidence was screened by the DOJ for authenticity and was confirmed by them to be authentic. Furthermore, Judge Masters made it clear that any exculpatory evidence would have been transmitted to the defence. Mrs Rose also states that the evidence that was withheld by the court was authoritative. Ignoring that the court has the right to decide what evidence it does and doesn't hear, this is a baseless claim that Mrs Rose has provided no backing for. Given that the NSWPF has shown the reasons provided by the defense to be baseless, the DOJ should not entertain the possibility of a retrial. Regards, Inspector Arthur Johnson Prosecutor New South Wales Police Force P.S Even if this retrial is granted, there is no scenario in which the New South Wales Police Force could allow the evidence withheld from the defence to be given to them in their raw forms, as doing so would likely result in the deaths of one or more people.

Mr. Paxton, The NSWPF will require some clarification on what charge your client actually wishes to context. Mr. Hooper has committed a large number of offenses, many of them that could be the one in question. To assist you, a copy of Mr. Hooper's record has been provided, with the charges that may be the one in question highlighted. Please respond as soon as it is possible for you to do so. Regards, Inspector Arthur Johnson Prosecutor New South Wales Police Force https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/884329817577766962/885109161556332564/Criminal_Record_of_Mr_Dean_Hooper.docx

Dear Judge Chris Pierce & Mr Jason Spitzer, The New South Wales Police Force does not believe that this case should proceed to a trial. Within the Law Book, it states that individuals and their legal representatives have seven(7) days to contest a charge. The date that Mr Spitzer was charged was the 22nd of August 2021 and lodged this booking a full thirteen(13) days after this. The NSWPF generally advises officers to hold evidence for a week and we believe as such that any evidence relating to this matter has most likely been destroyed. Unless Mr Spitzer can prove that there were exigent circumstances preventing him from lodging this booking, it should be dismissed with prejudice. Regards, Inspector Arthur Johnson Prosecutor, New South Wales Police Force

Dear Mrs. Rose & Mr. Masters, The New South Wales Police Force acknowledges receipt of this booking and look forward dates for discovery, any pre-trial hearings and the trial being set. I can confirm that the video Mrs. Rose is requesting does exist and will be provided to the defense by the discovery date. Regards, Inspector Arthur Johnson Prosecutor New South Wales Police Force.

Dear Mr. Paxton or Whomever else it may concern, The New South Wales Police Force acknowledges receipt of this court booking but would like to point out some administrative errors that we believe should be addressed before this issue is further considered. The claim made raises both criminal (the criminal charges laid against Mr. Hooper) and civil issues (accusations of excessive force and claims for damages resulting from said excessive force). These are entirely separate matters and can not be heard in the same court. The NSWPF Prosecutors Service advises Mr. Paxton to withdraw this booking and instead issue two new separate bookings. One of these bookings should be for a civil suit where Mr. Hooper is the complainant, and the New South Wales Police Force is the respondent and the other a criminal case where the New South Wales Police Force is the Plaintiff and Mr. Hooper the defendant. If any involved parties have any questions or comments about this response, the NSWPF Prosecutors Service can be reached through the government Discord communications system. Regards, Inspector Arthur Johnson Police Prosecutor New South Wales Police Force P.S In future bookings and/or correspondence, please ensure that the name of the legal representative is clearly included so that direct contact is simpler.

@Penthrox I believe that @Curescan confirm for you that the NSWPF is settling this matter out of court with Mr Langley and this trial will no longer be required.

To Whom it may concern, Please find a statement from the NSWPF regarding this appeal attached letter

This is a fantastic cause and you have an awesome selection of charities for the community to choose from! Great to see this, will definitely be opening up my wallet on Saturday :D.

Hi everyone, I generally go buy the name Goliath, not sure what I am going to use on the server yet. Whether you know me from other servers or things or we haven't had any interactions (yet), I look forward to meeting and having a good time with you all.