Guo Wengui / Miles Guo (Ho Wan Kwok): community discussion 131

cin*** asks to check whether the claims match historical chat records.

cin*** recalls having stated earlier that they had uncovered relevant material.

cin*** contends that the uncovered materials have lost substantial credibility.

sug*** contends that the circulating item is fake.

sug*** argues that the profile picture is merely a generic image taken from the internet.

sug*** asserts that the content of the post is completely fabricated.

kir*** argues that the development signifies official confirmation of the prior sentencing.

kir*** describes the earlier sentencing as having been delivered only orally.

kir*** claims that the Second Circuit is now formally in full management of the case.

may*** contends that if the case cannot pass the Second Circuit, the ruling is essentially finalized.

may*** argues that the judges of the Second Circuit hold the ultimate authority.

spr*** asks whether parties are barred from seeking to vacate a sentence once a formal judgment has been entered.

sug*** observes that some viewed the outcome favorably compared to an anticipated 45-year term.

joh*** satirizes the sentencing targets, remarking on a missed reward for a 45-year sentence.

joh*** contends that forfeiture in Wang's case remained stayed until Guo's sentencing, making the final forfeiture order effective only thereafter.

him*** questions why prosecutors challenged four CVRA participants in the Second Circuit rather than allowing victims to express their views under the statute.

him*** contends that if the prosecution considered everyone a victim, it should have allowed them to invoke the CVRA.

him*** argues that even when a company commits fraud, not every customer is necessarily a victim.

fei*** disputes assertions that Wang Yanping only pled to GTV conduct, pointing out her guilty pleas to conspiracy to commit wire fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 1349 and money laundering conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. § 1956(h).

joh*** argues that Wang's motion claimed her plea covered only two counts involving GTV, despite her consent to forfeiture encompassing the entire G-series.

reb*** contends that docket entry 484 responded to government victim statements, disclaimed RICO liability for the enterprise, and highlighted her subordinate employment state under Guo.

him*** argues that it is impossible for third parties to overturn Guo's case.

him*** contends that the inherent nature of the case prevents any third party from reversing the outcome.

him*** states that third parties can nonetheless submit evidence.

kir*** urges teams to save ECF electronic filing receipts and timestamped docket screenshots for six emergency vacate motions as proof that the district court improperly rushed the judgment.

kir*** queries what tactical position remains if they do not pursue a stay and vacate in the Second Circuit.

spr*** advises participants that at least one month remains to assemble and submit any necessary filings.

hel*** remarks that even opponents of Guo find the group's actions intolerable while circulating external social media commentary.

beg*** contends that 99.99 percent of filings from the Southern District were never uploaded.

kir*** urges others to give up, claiming that Guo's case has overturned and further action is futile.