Guo Wengui / Miles Guo (Ho Wan Kwok): community discussion 016

chu*** plans to post a brief speculative thread on X regarding upcoming courtroom developments.

chu*** notes that the provided response was generated by an automated bot.

ntp*** argues that having fewer participants increases the likelihood of a dismissal by the court.

chu*** contends that the 6,700 individuals represented by Gair qualify as victims while also falling under third parties.

ntp*** contends that Gair intervened as a third party whose represented individuals were recognized as victims by prosecutors.

chu*** argues that everyone other than defendants qualifies as a third party and contends that Gair sought funds a second time under victim status.

hon*** argues that dual identities create conflicting stances between co-conspirators and prosecutors.

him*** contends that invoking Rule 853(n) does not require claimants to acknowledge themselves as victims.

him*** suggests checking an automated bot to research legal standards.

ntp*** argues that creditor registration is a poisonous tree, making 315 and subsequent actions tainted fruit.

rui*** agrees and offers to organize the underlying legal arguments.

ntp*** contends that dismantling creditor registration is necessary to nullify all resulting proceedings.

gon*** recounts that community members faced CCP threats when investing and disputes the prosecution's claim that CCP interference is unrelated to fraud allegations.

gon*** asks whether experiences of CCP threats can be included in court filings.

rui*** contends that the court is behaving unfairly by prohibiting any mention of CCP interference.

him*** describes how community members were misled into registering as creditors or signing up with the Himalaya Exchange.

gon*** recounts registering with the Himalaya Exchange while not registering as a creditor.

him*** argues that motions should focus exclusively on firsthand personal experiences and individual property.

rui*** claims to have uncovered a major procedural injustice in the case.

rui*** argues that pro se litigants can legitimately raise this issue in court filings.

rui*** asks him*** and chu*** how much time the defense was given to review tens of thousands of Brady documents.

ntp*** contends that investors should be permitted to inquire about the distribution of funds.

rui*** disputes this by arguing that only creditors have standing to participate.

rui*** emphasizes that court submissions must maintain a respectful tone.

him*** states that the maximum issuance volume is 640,000,000 TDCCP.

him*** states that 640 million coins were issued at an initial price of $0.10 each.

gun*** contends that online commentaries spread falsehoods intended to discredit the New Federal State of China.

rui*** asks chu*** which specific court document mentions thousands of victims.

chu*** identifies Document 10, Document 10-1, and Document 11 as the filings setting out victim notification procedures.

chu*** recounts that the judge dismissed the inquiry directly without allowing further questioning.