Guo Wengui / Miles Guo (Ho Wan Kwok): community discussion 071

kir*** relayed that, according to Ryan, the case had not yet been filed, which participants treated as the baseline state for later strategy. Community statements, not court findings.

beg*** said Guo’s lawyer should be in the same position as well. Community statements, not court findings.

kir*** argued that if a case is not filed, counsel cannot pierce the lawyer’s risk model. Community statements, not court findings.

ntp*** asked how prosecutors could proceed to charge or arrest when the court had not yet determined victim status. Community statements, not court findings.

chu*** claimed prosecution decisions are made by the grand jury and that this stage is not a public process. Community statements, not court findings.

ntp*** countered that CVRA had already been invoked, treating that citation itself as a present fact in the thread. Community statements, not court findings.

him*** said the victim status of a 853(n) motion was still unclear and was not firmly settled in the discussion. Community statements, not court findings.

him*** claimed that, in principle, 853(n) should not be treated simply as a victim label. Community statements, not court findings.

ntp*** said victim status requires court qualification and suggested 853(i) operates only after the forfeiture stage. Community statements, not court findings.

kir*** argued that CVRA victim materials filed in court are judicial submissions and cannot be automatically treated as remission or a miscellaneous complaint by relabeling. Community statements, not court findings.

kir*** restated that a filing is a CVRA judicial submission unless it expressly presents a petition for remission under 28 C.F.R. Part 9. Community statements, not court findings.

reb*** claimed the supposed rule that using CVRA or 853(i) blocks 853(n) is unsupported and argued that 853(i) is discretionary and does not decide ownership, so relabeling could create due-process concerns. Community statements, not court findings.

him*** summarized that the hearing transcript reportedly calls restitution applicants in remission to be victims, while warning the same parties may remain general creditors and not qualify for 853(n) recovery. Community statements, not court findings.

him*** claimed remission applicants are the ones called victims. Community statements, not court findings.

kir*** claimed 853(i) and 853(n) are treated as mutually exclusive tracks in the discussion. Community statements, not court findings.

beg*** said the filing could be sent to the judge in the Southern District as either a petition or a motion. Community statements, not court findings.

him*** described a proposed first supplemental preliminary forfeiture request seeking G Club Operations LLC funds and Kin Ming Je/Sin Ting Rong accounts, including a Banco Popular check number 103130500012442 for $2,112,510.70 and Barclays accounts in the same and $2,437,677.01 range, with reference to Dkt. 720 and statutes 18 U.S.C. §§ 981(a)(1)(C), 1963, 982(a)(1), and 28 U.S.C. §2461(c). Community statements, not court findings.

reb*** claimed judge and prosecution filings appear to be uploaded through ECF from home while the clerk’s office was not doing overtime. Community statements, not court findings.

siy*** asked where the latest case progress could be checked. Community statements, not court findings.

spr*** asked whether a hearing listed for the next day meant an updated court status. Community statements, not court findings.

ntp*** said the process had only removed public in-person attendance. Community statements, not court findings.

sar*** posted the Courtlistener docket link for United States v. Guo, docket number 67012324. Community statements, not court findings.

sar*** asked what the number 790 refers to in the case context. Community statements, not court findings.

reb*** claimed that the record may be uploaded with delay rather than instantly. Community statements, not court findings.

kir*** said the judge was going to use a special master. Community statements, not court findings.

kir*** added that she seemed unable to clarify things herself. Community statements, not court findings.

him*** argued the special master is not being used to split money. Community statements, not court findings.

beg*** noted that alliance members appeared cooperative in posting victim narratives and questioned what those narratives were meant to convey at that stage. Community statements, not court findings.

kir*** asserted that the prosecution is the party that brought charges. Community statements, not court findings.

kir*** agreed with that assertion as highly likely. Community statements, not court findings.

xia*** asked how to join New China Federation. Community statements, not court findings.

xia*** said they needed asylum in a Snowden-like situation. Community statements, not court findings.

xia*** asked if anyone had seen Snowden, reinforcing the security-themed framing. Community statements, not court findings.