Hello, Guest

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.
By:
Advanced search…
What's new

Azalea Isles v. Krix (2024) CR 01

If I may be allowed this simple addition to the above evidence. The statistical analysis made the assumption that 8 chances had a zero balance.

This is made on the following assumptions:
  • 5/8 Dusty currently has a negative balance.
  • 2/8 xBlu3 transferred her balance to SimplyMadi after being robbed multiple times.
  • 1/8 Donut is the defendant's counsel and is assumed to state that he transferred his balance (or kept it in his company) prior to being killed by the defendant on that day.
 
ON THE MOTION FOR RECUSAL
Counsellor,

I acknowledge the submission of your motion for recusal and understand your hope for sanctions in the form of dismissal due to the extent of the trial.

It's important to consider that this is the first case, and therefore, I have extended leniency towards both the prosecution and the defence.

This case has always been criminal in nature; a formatting mistake does not constitute a get-out-of-jail-free card. As for the motion of perjury, the prosecution did give an answer, which turned out to be factually incorrect or misleading. However, there was no evidence that this was done knowingly, and the issue was quickly resolved.

It appears that the entire motion is based on a lack of sanctions for the opposing counsel and a conditional warning that would be issued if the defendant made an unsubstantiated claim, along with a reminder to both parties to adhere to the rules of decorum. These are not valid reasons for recusal.

Therefore, I see no reason to interpret this as bias and will not issue a recusal. You are welcome to petition the Queen for further redress; however, as far as this court is concerned, the motion is denied and this issue has been settled.

The evidence presented by the prosecution is entered into the record and the defence has 48 hours to submit their opening statement (by the 5th of June 2024 7 pm GMT +1).
 
Your honor, we still have a Motion to Strike with regards to the murder charges unanswered.
 
The_Donuticus said:
Your honor, we still have a Motion to Strike with regards to the murder charges unanswered.
Click to expand...
The motion to strike is denied, the alert from the crime-watcher system for the murder charge is compelling enough evidence to continue. However, the court will take due notice of the lack of information provided by the crime-watcher system when looking at the evidence presented in favour of any affirmative defences.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
After talking with the defence the new deadline is amended to the 8th of June at 11:59 pm GMT+1, extension granted for personal reasons.
 
Opening Statement

Your honor,

I had intended to write a much more comprehensive opening statement, however personal reasons have resulted in me not being as available as I would have liked for this case. However I do not wish to delay the court anymore and so will submit the following opening statement, and instead present the majority of our arguments in more detail throughout witness discovery and our closing statement.

From the beginning of this case we have seen nothing but police misconduct. There was misconduct when the police failed to correctly gather evidence of any wrongdoing, there was misconduct when the police illegally arrested my client - dragging him through the streets in a public shaming, and there was misconduct when the Prosecution sought to deprive my client of his counsel. At every single point in this trial the Prosecution has sought to deny my client his rights, and even now after 2 weeks my client still finds himself at their mercy - despite overwhelming evidence of their failures.

At this point in the trial it should be painfully obvious to anyone that it is completely impossible for the Prosecution to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that crimes were in fact committed. I mean let us look at the evidence:

1) Alerts gathered from their 'crime watchers system', alerts that they have admitted can easily be false reports of a crime. Furthermore these alerts fail to provide any material evidence on the nature of the alleged crime: they do not report who was affected, the time, the date, where it took place, nothing.
2) The Prosecution provides frankly bizarre "statistical analysis", the bulk of which is using data gathered from the 31st of May - when the alleged crimes took place on the 19th. Now you don't have to be a data scientist to know that data gathered on the 31st does not give you ANY insight on what happened on the 19th. If I were planning a garden party for the 19th, I would not check the weather report for the 31st - it simply makes no sense as a point in which to collect data.
3) The Prosecution, in a last ditch effort to build a case against my client, went out into the public and begged anyone who wanted to come forward as a witness, or even in some cases potential victim, to my clients alleged crimes. Let me be very clear, what the Prosecution will be presenting in these witnesses is unverified and very likely to be fantastical - anyone could have come forward to the Prosecution and claimed that they were a victim of my client, and the Prosecution being so desperate would accept them and put them on the stand. We will prove that these witnesses have zero credibility or believability.

And in sight of all this "evidence" we are faced with one truth, my client still has not been told what he is being put on trial for. The defence has not been given receiprical discovery - we do not know who my client is accused of having murdered, we do not know who my client is accused of robbing, we do not know how much my client is accused of having stolen - it is a complete impossibility for the defence to put up a defence to these crimes. In order to prove that my client has not murdered anyone, for example, we would have to prove all of his activities since the day he was born - because the claim is not specific, just that at some point in his life my client is alleged to have murdered someone. This entire case is built on one thing, the 'crime watchers system', however the system doesn't work. And if the system doesn't work, the case doesn't either.
 
The Defence would like to call:
  • Dusty_3, to attest they are NOT a victim of any crimes.
  • WaffleSlime, to attest they are NOT a victim of any crimes.
  • The_Donuticus, to attest they are NOT a victim of any crimes.
  • Reppal, to attest they are NOT a victim of any crimes.
  • Soundi83, as a witness of the events.
  • xLayzur, as a witness of the events.
  • Welsh_Mongoose, as an expert on probabilities & data analysis.
  • SimplyMadi, as the officer who illegally arrested my client.
  • TeafLeaf, as the MoJ Minister at the time.
Matthew100x, as the Prosecutor who goaded the MoJ into this case - and the one who calculated the defences probabilities.
 
Writ of Summons

Azalea Isles Criminal Court (CR)

Case No. CR-24-0001-01

Witnesses for the prosecution.

The following people are hereby required to appear in court regarding Azalea Isles v. Krix, (2024) CR 01 to testify and provide any requested documents related to the case: xBlu3, Ansgard, RandomIntruder and SimplyMadi

Please answer the questions promptly, after 48 hours of being asked, and to the best of your ability.

All witnesses are advised that they are under oath and should they give knowingly false information they will be subject to perjury charges, which carry a minimum fine of $500 per instance.


Signature:

Judge Milk Crack​
 
MilkCrack said:
Writ of Summons

Azalea Isles Criminal Court (CR)

Case No. CR-24-0001-01

Witnesses for the prosecution.

The following people are hereby required to appear in court regarding Azalea Isles v. Krix, (2024) CR 01 to testify and provide any requested documents related to the case: xBlu3, Ansgard, RandomIntruder and SimplyMadi

Please answer the questions promptly, after 48 hours of being asked, and to the best of your ability.

All witnesses are advised that they are under oath and should they give knowingly false information they will be subject to perjury charges, which carry a minimum fine of $500 per instance.


Signature:

Judge Milk Crack​
Click to expand...
Present, your honor.
 
xBlu3
1. The evidence says that you were killed by Krix 6 times, is this true?
2. You mentioned that at some point, you transferred your balance to SimplyMadi. Do you have an estimate of how many times you were robbed before making that transfer?
3. Have you ever had to transfer your balance before or after the attacks due to excessive robberies?

Ansgardd
1. The evidence says that you were killed by Krix 2 times, is this true?
2. Did both robberies happen while you were carrying a balance?

RandomIntruder
1. In your view, what do you think of the statistical probability calculations over the given situation.
2. In your view, does the accounting of baltop on 04/31/24 create a sampling bias on who could or could not have had $0 or less dollars?
3. Is it possible that present data could have been indicative of past data?
4. Given the data, what are the minimum amount of robbery charges that could stick on the defendant given 14 robberies over 19 deaths and 8 possible instances where the victim had a $0 dollar balance?
5. Given the data, what is the likely maximum amount of robber charges that could stick on the defendant given 14 robberies over 19 deaths and 8 possible instances where the victim had a $0 dollar balance?

SimplyMadi
1. Did xBlu3 transfer her balance to you?
2. How often do you or your friends transfer balances when there is a serial robber making their rounds?
 
Matthew100x said:
xBlu3
1. The evidence says that you were killed by Krix 6 times, is this true?
2. You mentioned that at some point, you transferred your balance to SimplyMadi. Do you have an estimate of how many times you were robbed before making that transfer?
3. Have you ever had to transfer your balance before or after the attacks due to excessive robberies?

Ansgardd
1. The evidence says that you were killed by Krix 2 times, is this true?
2. Did both robberies happen while you were carrying a balance?

RandomIntruder
1. In your view, what do you think of the statistical probability calculations over the given situation.
2. In your view, does the accounting of baltop on 04/31/24 create a sampling bias on who could or could not have had $0 or less dollars?
3. Is it possible that present data could have been indicative of past data?
4. Given the data, what are the minimum amount of robbery charges that could stick on the defendant given 14 robberies over 19 deaths and 8 possible instances where the victim had a $0 dollar balance?
5. Given the data, what is the likely maximum amount of robber charges that could stick on the defendant given 14 robberies over 19 deaths and 8 possible instances where the victim had a $0 dollar balance?

SimplyMadi
1. Did xBlu3 transfer her balance to you?
2. How often do you or your friends transfer balances when there is a serial robber making their rounds?
Click to expand...

1. In your view, what do you think of the statistical probability calculations over the given situation.
After reviewing the analysis, I believe that your argument about the data having been collected on the 31st, after the 19th, is a valid concern. However, Dusty_3, the main person who could have had a 0 balance based on the list, has not been on the server since that day. Everything else regarding the statistics seems to hold up, as long as the assumption of people who had balances on the 31st also had balances on the 19th, with the exception of the transfer, holds to be valid, the numbers work out.

2. In your view, does the accounting of baltop on 04/31/24 create a sampling bias on who could or could not have had $0 or less dollars?
I am not aware of any accounting for baltop from April at all nor would it create sampling bias as it's not a sample but rather an analysis of everyone.

3. Is it possible that present data could have been indicative of past data?
Yes, especially when identifying whether data could have changed since the past.

4. Given the data, what are the minimum amount of robbery charges that could stick on the defendant given 14 robberies over 19 deaths and 8 possible instances where the victim had a $0 dollar balance?
The 19 deaths are irrelevant. The minimum would result from all 8 possibilities being instances of robbery on $0. 14-8 is 6. This is unlikely since it would require the 14 robberies to have been committed on all 8 possibilities without missing one.

5. Given the data, what is the likely maximum amount of robber charges that could stick on the defendant given 14 robberies over 19 deaths and 8 possible instances where the victim had a $0 dollar balance?
Again, the 19 deaths are irrelevant. The maximum would be that every instance of the 8 possibilities was actually a valid robbery, resulting in 14 cases of robbery. This is unlikely, in my opinion, because Dusty never logged back in so his balance never changed, so assuming that 2/5 attempts to rob Dusty was successful, a good estimate would be 12 robberies. This works under the assumption that Blue transferred her balance after being last murdered.

1719621089478.png

I would like to add this as part of the analysis for Dusty's last /seen since it was used several times in my answers.
 
1. Yes, xBlu3 did transfer their balance to me.

2. It is not very often that there is a serial robber. Though, typically when there is one, whoever seems to be getting robbed the most will typically transfer their balance elsewhere.
 
OBJECTIONS

Matthew100x Questions to xBlu3:
2. You mentioned that at some point, you transferred your balance to SimplyMadi. Do you have an estimate of how many times you were robbed before making that transfer? - Speculation: Questions that call for the witness to speculate about something.
3. Have you ever had to transfer your balance before or after the attacks due to excessive robberies? - Relevance: The testimony pursuant to a question asked or the particular item of evidence is not relevant to the case. (It is not relevant to ask if the witness has EVER had to transfer they balance, but if they had to transfer their balance in the events around this case)
3. Have you ever had to transfer your balance before or after the attacks due to excessive robberies? - Repetitive: The question has already been asked and answered. (As highlighted in a previous question, the witness has already highlighted this in evidence)

Matthew100x Questions to RandomIntruder:
ALL QUESTIONS - Relevance: The testimony pursuant to a question asked or the particular item of evidence is not relevant to the case. (RandomIntruder is not a part of this case, their testimony on this question has no relevance to the case - the Prosecution attest them to be an 'expert' but provides no credentials or questions attempting to establish that fact)
ALL QUESTIONS - Speculation: Questions that call for the witness to speculate about something.
ALL QUESTIONS - Conclusory: A conclusion is a deduction drawn from a fact or series of facts. Witnesses should testify only to facts. (The presentation of this "data" is corrupted by the use of the baltop figures from the 31st, when the events took place two weeks prior - any conclusion arrived at is a complete deduction therefore)
ALL QUESTIONS - Assumes Facts not in Evidence: asks the witness to accept the questioner’s summary, inference, or conclusion of the question vs asking a question about a fact in the case.

Matthew100x Questions to SimplyMadi:
2. How often do you or your friends transfer balances when there is a serial robber making their rounds? - Just all the objections your honor, the Prosecution is asking SimplyMadi to testify on behalf of her friends, has made an leading assertion using the term "serial robber" and is asking the witness to speculate.

(Will be objecting to the answers in a separate post should the questions not be stricken)
 
1. The evidence says that you were killed by Krix 2 times, is this true?
Yes, I do recall being killed twice by Krix.

2.Did both robberies happen while you were carrying a balance?
Yes, both robberies did happen while I was carrying a balance.
 
Alright, thank you. Does the defence have any questions for these witnesses?
 
The_Donuticus said:
We objected to the questioning your honor?
Click to expand...
Noted, you are correct.

RULING ON THE OBJECTIONS

Matthew100x Questions to xBlu3:

2. You mentioned that at some point, you transferred your balance to SimplyMadi. Do you have an estimate of how many times you were robbed before making that transfer? - Speculation: Questions that call for the witness to speculate about something.

Overruled, the witness is allowed to give an estimation pertaining to their knowledge of events.

3. Have you ever had to transfer your balance before or after the attacks due to excessive robberies? - Relevance: The testimony pursuant to a question asked or the particular item of evidence is not relevant to the case. (It is not relevant to ask if the witness has EVER had to transfer they balance, but if they had to transfer their balance in the events around this case)

Overruled, the witness is allowed to answer.

3. Have you ever had to transfer your balance before or after the attacks due to excessive robberies? - Repetitive: The question has already been asked and answered. (As highlighted in a previous question, the witness has already highlighted this in evidence)

Sustained, unnecessary.

Matthew100x Questions to RandomIntruder:

Could RandomIntruder please state why they believe to be an expert on this issue?

As for the other objections, if the witness is indeed an expert witness, they are allowed to testify about their conclusions, as long as their analysis is scientifically sound. The defence may challenge the validity and applicability of the analysis during cross.

Matthew100x Questions to SimplyMadi:

2. How often do you or your friends transfer balances when there is a serial robber making their rounds? - Just all the objections your honor, the Prosecution is asking SimplyMadi to testify on behalf of her friends, has made an leading assertion using the term "serial robber" and is asking the witness to speculate.

Sustained, the question's relevance to this case is not clear and it's partly hearsay. The answer is stricken from the record.
 
xBlu3 please answer the questions within the next 48 hours (by 20-6-2024 1 am GMT+2) or you will be held in contempt:
1. The evidence says that you were killed by Krix 6 times, is this true?
2. You mentioned that at some point, you transferred your balance to SimplyMadi. Do you have an estimate of how many times you were robbed before making that transfer?
3. Have you ever had to transfer your balance before or after the attacks due to excessive robberies

The same goes for RandomIntruder please answer within 48 hours:
Please state your expertise on the issue of probabilities.
 
I am the leading math scholar in the Isles University (I am one class away from a Bachelors in Applied Mathematics in real life).
 
MilkCrack said:
xBlu3 please answer the questions within the next 48 hours (by 20-6-2024 1 am GMT+2) or you will be held in contempt:
1. The evidence says that you were killed by Krix 6 times, is this true?
2. You mentioned that at some point, you transferred your balance to SimplyMadi. Do you have an estimate of how many times you were robbed before making that transfer?
3. Have you ever had to transfer your balance before or after the attacks due to excessive robberies

The same goes for RandomIntruder please answer within 48 hours:
Please state your expertise on the issue of probabilities.
Click to expand...
I was killed by Krix at least 6+ times. And in terms of how many deaths I sustained before transferring my funds, I'd estimate at least 10. It had gotten to the point where the /911 command failed to report them. I had never had to go to such lengths as transferring my funds prior to the incident, and have not since the incident occurred.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top