Post: ENZO, INC., a California corporation, Plaintiff, v. DAVE., LTD, Defendants.
Options
07-04-2012, 11:39 AM
#1
Deadpool
Cake is a lie
I . EVIDENCE
I. EXHIBIT A
You must login or register to view this content.
An image displaying Dave, userid 137399, creating and manipulating plugin 6041 multiple times.
II. EXHIBIT B
You must login or register to view this content.
An image of plugin 6041, that was created by Dave. This shows the plugin was intended to impact on the postbit.
III. EXHIBIT C
You must login or register to view this content.
A syntax check of pluign 6041, showing that it was not function at time of creation.
An image displaying Dave, userid 137399, creating and manipulating plugin 6041 multiple times.
II. EXHIBIT B
You must login or register to view this content.
An image of plugin 6041, that was created by Dave. This shows the plugin was intended to impact on the postbit.
III. EXHIBIT C
You must login or register to view this content.
A syntax check of pluign 6041, showing that it was not function at time of creation.
ENZO, INC is motioning to receive damages from having to find the cause and repair the issues created by DAVE., LTD in the amount of $80,000 and requests that the other side, DAVE., LTD; it's officers, directors, partners, agents, servants, employees, attorneys, subsidiaries, and those acting in concert with any of them, cover the $20,000 in legal fees faced by ENZO, INC.
The following 16 users say thank you to Deadpool for this useful post:
The following 7 users groaned at Deadpool for this awful post:
07-04-2012, 11:59 AM
#4
NeedaLifeSoon
Retired Life
07-04-2012, 12:13 PM
#5
Jake
One Man Army
Under Section 918.13 of the Statue Title XLVII, the tampering of evidence defined as the 'destruction, alteration, removal or concealment of objects, records or documents marked as evidence'. The statue does require that the tampering of the evidence is 'intentional, with the purpose of making the evidence unavailable or impairing its value in court'.
The defence feels the deliberate removal of ENZO, INC from the administrator archive qualifies directly as a 'concealment of objects'.
Section 918.13 makes it a crime to 'present any objects, records or documents marked as evidence knowing that evidence is false'.
The defence demands that all evidence presented be ceased from the trial at once. We also ask that the original source code which has not been tampered with by the prosecutor, be taken into account, which has been verified by many syntax checkers as perfectly fine:
You must login or register to view this content.
The defence also questions whether the minimum age requirement to testify in court is being enforced.
The defence feels the deliberate removal of ENZO, INC from the administrator archive qualifies directly as a 'concealment of objects'.
Section 918.13 makes it a crime to 'present any objects, records or documents marked as evidence knowing that evidence is false'.
Originally posted by another user
Anyone found guilty of fabricating or tampering with evidence under Section 918.13 is subject to imprisonment as set forth in Section 775.082. Under Section 775.082(3)(d), the penalty for a third-degree felony is up to five years in prison. The court also has the discretion to sentence the defendant to "a nonstate prison sanction.
The defence demands that all evidence presented be ceased from the trial at once. We also ask that the original source code which has not been tampered with by the prosecutor, be taken into account, which has been verified by many syntax checkers as perfectly fine:
You must login or register to view this content.
The defence also questions whether the minimum age requirement to testify in court is being enforced.
07-04-2012, 01:06 PM
#9
The following user thanked Gobz for this useful post:
kay:
The following user thanked -Rhys- for this useful post:
Copyright © 2026, NextGenUpdate.
All Rights Reserved.
