Guo Wengui / Miles Guo (Ho Wan Kwok): community discussion 101

A participant claims judicial fraud, saying the prosecution could secure no confiscated funds. Community statements, not court findings.

A participant confirms agreement with the bias allegation. Community statements, not court findings.

A participant contends even the assigned judge cannot fix core process issues, citing refusal of third-party filing access and incomplete records. Community statements, not court findings.

A participant links the 6000/1800 issue to the earlier 6000-person creditor argument as the same pattern. Community statements, not court findings.

A participant clarifies they see creditor updates as validating real creditors, not deleting them. Community statements, not court findings.

A participant references an earlier note marked 733 and says fake creditor registration was said to make Guo ineligible for bail. Community statements, not court findings.

A participant asks if someone was helping delete creditors from the list. Community statements, not court findings.

A participant confirms agreement with the creditor-deletion question. Community statements, not court findings.

A participant asks whether the no-deletion claim was still influenced or directed by Guo. Community statements, not court findings.

A participant argues that without that theory, the prosecution would have no meaningful case. Community statements, not court findings.

A participant claims indicators already existed that the prosecution sold Luc. Community statements, not court findings.

A participant argues the prosecution cannot be the party bearing blame. Community statements, not court findings.

A participant says a second cert filing was denied, saying it required circuit court pre-review, and they stopped filing clerk-direct motions. Community statements, not court findings.

A participant says they used cert rather than mandamus and expect denial for similar reasons. Community statements, not court findings.

A participant contends Guo’s main appeal would involve all second-circuit judges. Community statements, not court findings.

A participant observes a live broadcast tying defense and a group called Three-Fire as awkward and contentious. Community statements, not court findings.

A participant claims multiple electronic motions and one paper filing sent since last September were not uploaded by the court, arguing victim rights were not protected. Community statements, not court findings.

A participant says they have not yet drafted the required filing and do not know how to write it yet. Community statements, not court findings.

A participant claims the case effectively ends if Guo does not appeal after sentencing. Community statements, not court findings.

A participant advises pre-sentencing letters to the Southern District and second circuit to preserve rights and avoid mootness. Community statements, not court findings.

A participant argues that filings fail if those who filed do not continue through appeal. Community statements, not court findings.

A participant argues that a CVRA motion not pushed in the second circuit before sentencing may be effectively lost afterward. Community statements, not court findings.

A participant says 853n and CVRA rights can continue after sentencing only if actively pursued. Community statements, not court findings.

A participant says 853n denials are appealable but assesses the case as unlikely to win on appeal. Community statements, not court findings.

A participant argues the creditor list is the core basis for bringing criminal charges. Community statements, not court findings.

A participant claims company claims target corporate entities as Guo’s alter ego and therefore support asset forfeiture. Community statements, not court findings.

A participant raises whether defendants and defense counsel were served with 817-related file copies at the time. Community statements, not court findings.

A participant suggests someone is effectively giving strategic ideas to lawyers. Community statements, not court findings.

A participant says counsel should be judged by whether it represents Guo or the broader alliance. Community statements, not court findings.

A participant claims lawyers may be sacrificing Guo to protect themselves. Community statements, not court findings.

A participant says it is enough to explain the point clearly to AI, signaling a demand for structured argument. Community statements, not court findings.

A participant claims to have proof of TDCCP purchase. Community statements, not court findings.

A participant challenges how prosecutors can assert Guo issued the coin absent direct proof. Community statements, not court findings.

A participant claims a person showed nervousness around Percy-related posts and kept sharing social posts, implying unstable positioning. Community statements, not court findings.

A participant equates the Gai 6000-person creditor idea with the same recurring claim pattern. Community statements, not court findings.

A participant asserts that the Qing group is controlling TDCCP tokens. Community statements, not court findings.