Appeal: Denied Case No. 11-2021-06 - Appeal Request

[Banana]

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF REDMONT
Appeal Request


- Client Name: Edogawa_ConanUwU

- Counsel Name: Lovely Law

- Were you originally the plaintiff or the defendant: Defendant

- Reason for the Appeal:
I believe the Federal Court made an incorrect decision that was not based in the principles of law, and does not adhere to court procedure.
First and foremost, the Prosecution failed to provide any evidence that even connected the transactions accused of being connected for tax evasion. This alone should have been enough for the Court to find both Defendants as not guilty. A complete lack of evidence being presented is basis in every legal system in the free world for an acquittal, and yet the Defendants were found erroneously guilty.

The Court furthermore even acknowledged that there is no benefit to Edogawa_ConanUwU to transferring money. Once again, I would like to note that there was no proof of any transaction, no records of Edogawa_ConanUwU paying any money to henry_ngo, or anything of the sort. However, following the Court's logic, seeing as there is no benefit to Edogawa_ConanUwU, there is no crime present. The Court goes on to claim that it suspects malfeasance, and that it is "strange" and "suspicious" to transfer any money. The Court believing a company is non-functional when it has proven records of investment of large sums is not a solid basis for any conviction whatsoever.

The Court has also alleged that "BestBuy could have been used as his personal balance (where taxes are paid) and or for criminal activities", but this is entirely hypothetical, and has no place in an official verdict. It should likewise not be used to convict two people of tax evasion. This unsubstantiated supposition forms the entire grounds for conviction presented by the Court, and as such, the verdict is not valid. The use of the balance of BestBuy as a personal balance, or for criminal activities, was not presented by either the Prosecution or myself, and is something brought completely out of the blue with no evidence at all. Logically, therefore, the conviction of the Defendants based on an assumption that the Defense had no chance to dispute, and the Prosecution had the burden to prove, is inherently invalid.

- Additional Information: I would like to thank the Supreme Court for their time and urge them to accept this appeal, as it forms a dangerous precedent about how verdicts are formed, not only in this case, but in countless others.

 

[Banana]

I would like to ask that this appeal not be granted or denied just yet, because I am still in discussion with my clients about the possible outcomes of an appeal and making sure they are fully aware of everything. Thank you.

 

[Banana]

I have spoken with my clients and they would like to move forward with this appeal request. I appreciate your patience.

 

[Westray]

After carefully considering the outcome of the case in the Federal Court, the Supreme Court has unanimously decided to reject this appeal at this time.

This is because we believe the evidence presented in the case prove the explicit moving of money from a business with a legitimate purpose to a business without a legitimate purpose. Noting that the evidence presented by the Prosecution in timestamps states:

05:58:44 - Withdrawal of $480,000 from BestBuy by Edogawa_ConanUwU
05:58:55 - Deposit of $480,000 into taxheaven2 by henry_ngo

This is an 11 second difference with the exact same funds removed and deposited. While the argument has been made that it does not show the direct payment, we believe that this is an adequate amount of evidence of funds transferred. Not only would it set poor precedent for potential fraud cases when it comes to businesses, but it is simply an unreasonable ask to go through hundreds of commands by each Defendant to find a direct pay log. Unless one is disputing the validity of those business logs, we believe that as long as the exact amount withdrawn was deposited, and it was done within a reasonably short timeframe, it is evident beyond reasonable doubt.

As for the charge to tax evasion, the matter at hand is the moving of funds from a legitimate business with function to a business without function. BestBuy served a purpose with record of its sales presented, whereas TaxHeaven2 did not have any record of sales nor services provided.

While the Defendant did argue that TaxHeaven2 served the purpose of a "source of investment" into the Onyx Exchange, there serves no record, registration, or any other matter to define TaxHeaven2 as an investment company. Instead, such proves that the funds in TaxHeaven2 were used for personal investments, and thus, intended to act as a tax-free personal balance.

Furthermore, we believe that the ruling made by the Hon. Judge Wuutie was a fair and fully justified verdict, and that the principles needed to meet tax evasion were within the realms of law. The Judge did not grant the fully egregious tax bill, but provided a judgement that still acknowledged the unlawful laundering of funds.

Ultimately, the purview that tax evasion applies to laundering money into businesses that serve no legitimate purpose is something we agree with.

Thank you for your time.