Guo Wengui / Miles Guo (Ho Wan Kwok): community discussion 125

ntp*** contends that others mistakenly believe people are scheming to seize power, deceive the judge, and fraudulently obtain compensation.

cin*** maintains that if their assessment proves wrong and a reversal occurs, it would be an extraordinarily positive event.

ntp*** argues that outside opinions do not matter as long as there is willingness to litigate.

cin*** states that their sole objective is watching whether a reversal can actually happen.

ntp*** contends that those not actively litigating should simply watch from the sidelines.

cin*** argues that attempting to steer public sentiment at this stage is already too late.

.an*** rebukes another member for discouraging private prosecutors who are actively confronting the prosecution.

ntp*** contends that nobody can prevent claimants from attempting to recover their money.

chu*** argues that reclaiming funds under the current premise requires the defendant to die in prison, disputing that members should pursue such an end.

cin*** argues that criminal judges routinely reduce sentences if they believe victims have shown leniency, regardless of compensation amounts.

hel*** contends that 853(n) and CVRA can be used simultaneously without conflicting.

him*** contends that 853(n) serves no practical purpose from any perspective.

mia*** argues that forfeited assets are inadequate to pay full compensation, making an audit of alliance farm accounts essential to trace funds and evaluate forfeiture legality.

chu*** contends that the group's primary focus should instead be attacking procedural issues.

joh*** argues that existing prosecution and bankruptcy proceedings prioritize luc and PAX, leaving individual claimants with mere scraps through remission.

kir*** notes that an arrest occurred.

joh*** contends that auditing the accounts would expose alleged perjury committed by prosecution witnesses.

joh*** alleges that key cooperating witnesses rehearsed their courtroom testimony together to appear convincing and avoid contradictions.

beg*** contends that the lack of formal clothing requests suggests no in-person appearance on Jun 29, 2026, arguing an immediate harsh sentence is impossible because the Second Circuit would swiftly overturn it.

beg*** argues that external stillness reflects behind-the-scenes interaction, speculating that Judge Torres could pressure prosecutors to dismiss the case.

beg*** contends that third-party submissions, particularly ECF 733 and mandamus filings, have thoroughly disrupted the proceedings.

beg*** argues that political leadership changes make judicial promotion for Judge Torres unlikely.

kir*** contends that intervention by the Department of Justice is quite probable.

beg*** cites the positions of Ed Martin and Jay Clayton to argue that political scrutiny surrounds the Southern District case.

sar*** asks whether the group should submit a Final Pre-Sentencing Alert directly to the Second Circuit.

may*** outlines core messaging four days before Jun 29, 2026, arguing that prosecutors failed to rebut third-party accounting ledgers while the defense neglected its duties.

may*** contends that comprehensive Second Circuit intervention through a writ of mandamus or stay order would halt sentencing, force an accounting audit, and lead to bail.

spr*** expresses shock upon discovering that their real name was published in a shared file.

sar*** describes discovering that text highlighted black in Word remains readable after PDF conversion, explaining that replacing sensitive text with placeholder characters ensures effective redaction.

sar*** describes reviewing the file more carefully and acknowledging that the relevant section had simply not been redacted.