Edit: it also appears the prosecutor is guilty of promoting nazi propaganda!
Evidence: https://osu.ppy.sh/community/forums/posts/6959152
That's not what you called it is.
I clearly explained what it is in the same thread.
Proof:
Edit: it also appears the prosecutor is guilty of promoting nazi propaganda!
Evidence: https://osu.ppy.sh/community/forums/posts/6959152
In a normal civil case, however this one is of enough gravity to necessitate a jury.Vuelo Eluko wrote:
in civil disputes it's not actually required but it is an option, both parties seemed to have waived that right though.
Proof of transaction is not needed. How many times must I reiterate this? In fact, no transaction was ever needed as abraker's technologies, as he has said hiself in the past, were never secured.If proof of transaction is not needed, then you cannot prove that Ashton have bought the rights to abraker's products.
the opposing party is yet to provide evidence of abrakers property ever existing in the first placeI did, and I have provided proof clearly. How else can Ashton claim possession of them if they don't exist? What you said is just absurd.
You cannot prove that the document I have provided is fakeI didn't have to, I simply pointed out how shady and unreliable it is.
The next day, January 20th 2019. Ashton had made another forum thread on OT this time simply titled as " Recruiting!".Even now, I have yet to find any decisive evidence that proves Ashton was recruiting for the test subject of his mind controlling device.
In the forum thread which by now have been highly edited, Ashton was trying to recruit people into "his" company, "Ash.Co" which actually is A-Breaking Laboratory which is rightfully owned by abraker.
To apply for the company, Ashton asked for people's personal information which includes name, reason for joining and any other information that one's willing to share.
Proof:
But as you can see clearly, the thread was edited by Ashton 7 days ago due to community back-lash.
In the original post, Ashton simply asked people to be the test subject to his mind controlling machine which is a dangerous and inhumane product that need to be investigated further.
Sadly, I do not have the original screen shot of the original post so I cannot prove that Ashton said anything of sort. But I will be delighted if someone do have the original post saved and shared with the court so that all of the shady things that Ashton did can be tried by the court of law.
I kindly request the prosecutor to show valid evidence Ashton has possession of abrakers resources.I did not say that Ashton has possession of abraker's property, I said Ashton tried to illegally repossess abraker's property.
I will say again: he did not break any law.That is to be decided by the judge, though I have brought out some evidence that shows the contrary.
No amount of witnesses will change the fact Ashton is innocent and this has dragged on too long.I assure you, witnesses will be the key to solve this case. So you should just sit tight, listen to what they have to say once they've shown up to the court and prepare for the cross-examination.
Exactly, Ashton only edited his thread post only after abraker threatens to pursue legal action.Vuelo Eluko wrote:
Although I did contribute a jovial mocking post (a meme) to the thread that prosecutor tad is referring to, I do not actually recall what the original contained. It was some time ago; all I can say is that the post does appear briefer than it did on the day on which I replied. It would seem to me that something was redacted from its original contents. The intent of this omission is unclear, although it does appear that the edit occurred after Plaintiff abraker's call for legal action due to the original content of said thread.
Vuelo Eluko wrote:
Although I did contribute a jovial mocking post (a meme) to the thread that prosecutor tad is referring to, I do not actually recall what the original contained.
Vuelo Eluko wrote:
It was some time ago; all I can say is that the post does appear briefer than it did on the day on which I replied. It would seem to me that something was redacted from its original contents.
If the original content of the post was in fact illegal activity you would have responded with a much more serious response and immediately claimed evidence.I disagree, no one has took Ashton seriously since he has a reputation of shitposting.
You are right, the original post originally was much longer as it included a rule sheet of what was expected at my company, however that was later edited out as I realized the rules would be given to people who have successfully joined my corporation.I would request that you share that so called "rule sheet" to the court and give sufficient proof that it was in the original post.
The fact it was edited two days after abrakers announcement is also important, I would have edited it immediately after the announcement to increase the chances of anyone snapping evidence.Once again, I disagree.
The fact it was edited two days after abrakers announcement is also important, I would have edited it immediately after the announcement to increase the chances of anyone snapping evidence.That's what you would do but the fact is Ashton did edit his post right after abraker pursuing legal actions.
Meah wrote:
tad01123 asked me to testify
The only thing I remembered before that post was edited are bunch of giraffe pictures and saying he's gonna continue that laboratory thingy
Hold it!Ashton wrote:
(sippingashton)
You are correct on me continueing the laboratory
tad01123 wrote:
Ashton wrote:
(sippingashton)
You are correct on me continueing the laboratory
Hold it!
This is new information. Your last statement only stated that only a rule sheet was missing from the thread post after it was edited.
But you claim to have said that you'd continue the laboratory in the original post.
Please tell us in detail about this laboratory. What is it called? What's it developing and what do you plan to do with it.
And was the recruiting for the company or the laboratory.
Because last I checked, Asht. Co was a corporation and does not need a laboratory for it's businesses.
Continuing the laboratory/corporation includes recruiting members! This is nothing to call me out on.A laboratory and a corporation are two very different things. Asht. Co cannot also be a laboratory.
It’s also a laboratory.
B1rd wrote:
In the first place however, the primary - and only - charge levelled against the defendant to which this court is compelled to find guilt is the charge of mind control of the citizens of OT.
Meah wrote:
Where's the giraffes?
no sir, all of these started because of a giraffe sexually harassed by abrakerpentaqola wrote:
What's with the giraffes and why are you searching for them? The giraffes have nothing to do with this...Meah wrote:
Where's the giraffes?
Notad01123 wrote:
Do we even have OT police?
abraker wrote:
Do we need OT police?
Death wrote:
No