Appeal: Accepted FCR 95 - Appeal Request - [2022] SCR 28

[lawanoesepr]

- Client Name: lawanoesepr
- Counsel Name: lawanoesepr
- Were you originally the plaintiff or the defendant: Defendant
- Reason for the Appeal:
I have multiple reasons for appealing this case, The court ruled based on a fact that was not proven by the prosecution,
The court speculated that I had already done it to another citizen.
The court stated this:
"Furthermore, it is extremely likely that Lawanoesepr, despite not winning the election, still got more people to vote for him by paying them."
In criminal cases there is generally a "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard of proof. Extremely likely does not fall into beyond a reasonable doubt.
Furthermore, The prosecution did not prove that I did this to another citizen.
Nobody I messaged was acting as within a legal capacity, Nor did anybody accept my offer
In SCR 10 the court stated:
"Without fulfilling either acting within a legal capacity nor the holding of a public office, the charge of bribery has not been fulfilled. As a result, the charge of electoral fraud has not been fulfilled either."
- Additional Information:

Lawsuit: Adjourned - Commonwealth of Redmont v. Lawanoesepr [2022] FCR 95

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT CRIMINAL ACTION Commonwealth of Redmont Prosecution v. Lawanoesepr Defendant COMPLAINT The Prosecution alleges criminal actions committed by the Defendant as follows: Lawanoesepr offered money to people to vote for him in the House of...

www.democracycraft.net

 

[Nacho]

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT

The Supreme court will accept this appeal for not upholding the required burden of proof for criminal charges. This court agrees, based on the statement by Federal Court Judge dygyee that the burden of the proof requirement was not met. The Supreme Court will grant a Writ of Certiorari and remand the case back to the trial level for further review.​