# Guo Wengui / Miles Guo (Ho Wan Kwok): community discussion 146

Community discussion, batch 146 (Aug 15, 2026 – Aug 19, 2026), 903 messages, on the Guo Wengui / Miles Guo (Ho Wan Kwok) case. Discussions center on coordinating criminal, bankruptcy, and appellate proceedings, focusing on whether private prosecutions and service rules apply, how victim boundaries and asset ownership are defined, and whether forfeiture and restitution proceed together. Participants dispute procedural specifics within the bankruptcy docket, particularly Docket 5739 and the Second Circuit appeal 26-1853, alongside tactical divides over CIPA, stays, and vacatur. Debates continuously waver between realistic asset recovery prospects and unverified external narratives.

Firsthand participant accounts and investment experiences, preserved with dates, sources and reply context.

English reading guide and paraphrases; Chinese source messages remain authoritative.

## Procedural and Standing Disputes: Private Prosecution Standing, Judicial Assignment, and CVRA Applicability

Participants dispute whether private prosecution standing and Crime Victims' Rights Act protections apply, alongside allegations regarding appellate judicial assignment.

- hah***, Aug 15, 2026: Participant hah*** addresses private prosecution standing and procedural rules, though the specific message text is omitted in the record. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q9c28841e36656fd1b07a)
- kir***, Aug 15, 2026: Participant kir*** contends that an individual interfered with victims' private prosecution rights and obstructed justice, asserting that the Second Circuit judge found malicious destruction of evidence after the individual deleted their Twitter account. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q9b895cc18d783b79c0e9)
- kir***, Aug 15, 2026: Participant kir*** derides another user by alleging they only intervened for payment. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qf80a1e1dcb5c835c27e3)
## Service Compliance Dispute: Personal Service on Defendants, 120-Day Limit, and Social Media Alternatives

Participants debate service compliance requirements, focusing on personal service upon the defendant, the 120-day statutory time limit, and alternative service via social media.

- hah***, Aug 15, 2026: Participant hah*** discusses requirements regarding personal service on the defendant, though the message text is omitted in the record. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q928fe53c48e39204182e)
- hah***, Aug 15, 2026: Participant hah*** addresses the 120-day service deadline, though the message text is omitted in the record. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q13f4c48f8b6570b70f69)
- hah***, Aug 15, 2026: Participant hah*** considers the viability of alternative service via social media platforms, though the message text is omitted in the record. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qa906f48292761c0a42b8)
## Bankruptcy and Criminal Intersection: Receivership, Creditor Boundaries, and Criminal Victims

Participants dispute the jurisdictional boundary between bankruptcy receivership and criminal proceedings, debating whether trustee Luc can intervene in the criminal case.

- joh***, Aug 15, 2026: Participant joh*** quotes user spr*** to argue that the criminal case cannot forfeit G-series assets while Tony is present and contends that bankruptcy trustee Luc lacks standing to enter the criminal case. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q613df2b815ddc6e9cca2)
- joh***, Aug 15, 2026: Participant joh*** reiterates that the bankruptcy proceeding cannot penetrate the criminal case while Tony is involved, urging participants to stop creating confusion. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qa2994849001dc99aac81)
- roy***, Aug 19, 2026: Participant roy*** cites Docket 5739 and ECF 691 to argue that criminal victims and bankruptcy creditors are distinct groups under different distribution schemes, insisting that Luc's prior coordination and stays affecting the criminal prosecution must be scrutinized. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q170ccb92e28f300f9a46)
## Forfeiture and Fund Destination Debate: The 1.4 Billion, Allocation Ratios, and Scapegoating

Participants argue over the destination of 1.4 billion dollars, debating fund distribution ratios and alleging attempts to capture assets across dual tracks.

- joh***, Aug 15, 2026: Participant joh*** argues that individuals seeking self-preservation will inevitably betray and discard their accomplices. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q38044594a2212d8b9e2a)
- joh***, Aug 15, 2026: Participant joh*** contends that parties are hedging across both the bankruptcy creditor and criminal victim tracks to ensure priority in capturing 1.4 billion dollars. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q632671671594803b5b0c)
## Second Circuit and Appellate Paths: CIPA, Stay/Vacate, and Remand Strategies

Participants discuss Second Circuit appellate strategies, debating CIPA rulings, judicial pressure, and procedural options such as stay, vacatur, and remand.

- beg***, Aug 16, 2026: Participant beg*** contends that Judge Torres suppressing CIPA issues serves as a key ground for appeal. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qd560b6d0c6a8aac21d13)
- kir***, Aug 16, 2026: Participant kir*** argues that issuing an order requires written justification and that even an outright denial subjects the judge to immense pressure. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qd96a3dd52603e55e9268)
- roy***, Aug 19, 2026: Participant roy*** argues that Luc preserved contingent rights should forfeiture be reversed in appeal 26-1853, noting that Docket 5739 from Aug 18, 2026 is post-judgment material that cannot simply be added to the appellate appendix under FRAP 10(e). [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q01b5325bc0b39dff8421)
## Evidentiary Chain and External Source Credibility: Reliability of Screenshots, Links, and Redacted Content

Participants contest the evidentiary value of external sources, questioning the reliability of screenshots, social media links, and redacted materials.

- kir***, Aug 15, 2026: Participant kir*** shares a link to a Gettr account targeting user qmay. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q4bdeb87b0cb662a5e76d)
- kir***, Aug 16, 2026: Participant kir*** posts an external link to a post on X. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qf40aec47a2ac018f3f59)
- ntp***, Aug 15, 2026: Participant ntp*** remarks that user qmay appears not to read Gettr. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qbdf26210bfdc34823aed)
## Docket 5739 and Third-Party Disputes: No Third-Party Beneficiaries and Collateral Relief Implications

Participants examine Docket 5739, debating the clause excluding third-party beneficiaries and its evidentiary impact on ownership claims in related proceedings.

- roy***, Aug 19, 2026: Participant roy*** contends that Docket 5739 explicitly excludes third-party beneficiaries from direct payout rights but establishes critical evidence for appeal 26-1853 by demonstrating substantial property ownership disputes between Luc and the government rather than simple criminal proceeds. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qbf82c54abc571f6a4e68)
- roy***, Aug 19, 2026: Participant roy*** explains that Luc reduced his immediate exposure as an opposing forfeiture claimant while reserving the right to reassert claims if appeal 26-1853 overturns the forfeiture order, adding that Docket 5739 cannot be routinely added to the record under FRAP 10(e). [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q01b5325bc0b39dff8421)
- roy***, Aug 19, 2026: Participant roy*** contends that Docket 5739 demonstrates Luc previously stayed key portions of the bankruptcy case for the criminal prosecution, showing that bankruptcy claims and criminal victims are governed by separate legal frameworks. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q170ccb92e28f300f9a46)
## Key Evidentiary Chain Framework: Matching the Same Individuals and Funds Across Proceedings

Participants propose an evidentiary framework to cross-match identical individuals and fund flows between bankruptcy claims registers and criminal victim rosters.

- roy***, Aug 19, 2026: Participant roy*** contends that if an initial complainant filed a bankruptcy claim later deemed fraudulent or an obstruction of justice, counsel in appeal 26-1853 must verify whether the government simultaneously used that individual's claimed loss in criminal sentencing. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q925867baff6380cd1526)
- chu***, Aug 19, 2026: Participant chu*** asks how to address a situation where an original criminal complainant filed a bankruptcy claim that prosecutors and the judge deemed a fraudulent claim and an obstruction of justice. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q187304f6134e779ae45d)
- roy***, Aug 19, 2026: Participant roy*** outlines a four-step framework under 18 U.S.C. § 152(4) to cross-check whether bankruptcy claims rejected as fraudulent were used by prosecutors to substantiate criminal loss figures, noting that the government has seized approximately 642 million dollars. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q72d503c5b733faeeeb84)
## Narrative Conflicts Over Identity and Communication: Message Sources, Miles Guo's Phone Calls, and Organizational Speculation

Participants dispute narratives surrounding communication channels, reacting to reported phone calls from Miles Guo and debating organizational relationships.

- kir***, Aug 15, 2026: Participant kir*** uses vulgar language to attack another user for suggesting that invoking the Crime Victims' Rights Act would disadvantage Guo. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q8aba043d2c6231c2701b)
- beg***, Aug 16, 2026: Participant beg*** observes with amusement that a phone call has finally arrived. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q54c98a49592ce3cc2bd4)
- kir***, Aug 16, 2026: Participant kir*** points out that no intended recipient was specified for the call. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q114f2216e9b713945a4c)
## Outcome Expectations and Practical Demands: Whether Winning Equals Recovery, Amount Shortfalls, and Representation Disputes

Participants contest expectations regarding financial recovery, debating unreconciled fund shortfalls, representation rights, and whether winning legal battles yields restitution.

- beg***, Aug 17, 2026: Participant beg*** questions where the funds are located for a victim who was allegedly defrauded of one million dollars by Guo. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q4c5c8f825b5505178a61)
- reb***, Aug 19, 2026: Participant reb*** contends that combining Luc's 150 million dollars with the Southern District's 630 million dollars leaves an unreconciled gap of 109 million dollars that was embezzled by various actors. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q3488e56de165bdbcd51b)
- may***, Aug 17, 2026: Participant may*** presses another participant on how they intend to achieve their objective of destruction. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qde2e1b4ca8e239cff740)