On April 12th 2023 there will be another hearing. We are at the point of the proceedings where the Discovery and Disclosure has been exchanged and yet to be determined under Federal Rules of Evidence. Here is where the Defense wins or throws the case. So far the Federal Public Defender Attorneys have been extremely passive in the defense of Neil Suresh Chandran's Civil Liberties (Constitutionally Protected Rights under the Bill of Rights).
One of the first questions pertaining to evidence is whether the prosecution fulfilled the obligations of Brady Disclosure to be given to the defense, ordered by the California District Magistrate Judge at the conclusion of his initial arraignment. Public Records (Audio On June 29th 2022) Realize that allegations, even in the form of a Grand Jury Indictment, are still not facts but the charges that the prosecution is alleging what happened. It is as good as a guess or opinion not to be confused with what a fact really is.
All of the "Data Dump" Disclosure and Discovery by the Prosecution has to go through the Rules of Evidence. (one million documents according to the statements by the prosecution.)
This "Data Dump" may also be seen a form of harassment and cause for denying Neil Suresh Chandran's 6th Amendment right to a Speedy Trial. Relevance was not established by the prosecution or ruled on by the District Court Magistrate Judge which may be considered Fraud on the Court. The Magistrate Judge was the first to suggest that the case was a complex case without the it being stated by the Prosecution's attorney or submitted in their required cover sheet and documents.
Important Evidence that should be introduced by the Defense.
ARTICLE IV. RELEVANCE AND ITS LIMITS
9 Months later from the time of the arrest we review the allegations and present facts so nobody is confused by the DOJ and SEC Jedi Mind Tricks.
Excerpts of the Petition:
"On June 29, 2022, the Department of Justice press release cited that entrepreneur Neil Suresh Chandran was indicted for investment fraud that involved over 10,000 “victims” from June 2018 to present in the amount of $45 million. " (It was actually charges of Wire Fraud which is an overbroad charge, and Money Laundering.)
"To the contrary, the above was alleged under the assumption that all involved are victims, when in fact it is just the perception of only a few of the so-called 10,000 (as the Judge at the hearing stated) disgruntled, impatient and evil people. Every person (Collateral Loan Partner) involved in this matter were fully aware of the non-guaranteed pledges they made and fully made their own decision to participate. Each participant was fully informed and aware, as most were required to sign an agreement attesting to the non-guarantee of same.
Key Points
1. This legal process at hand does not express the views of all concerned. In particular, Neil Suresh Chandran Supporters (“the People”) have not had the opportunity to have our voices heard in FULL SUPPORT of the falsely accused Neil Suresh Chandran.
2. To clarify, the People, a great number of us are not investors and we do not agree with the arrest, detainment, or incarceration of Neil Suresh Chandran or the way he is being treated by authorities. He is innocent until proven guilty. He should be released.
3. It should be noted that while the indictment states that the People are victims of Mr. Chandran, the People only learned about the name Neil Suresh Chandran within the last few months, as the detailed facts of the Coin Deal was not disclosed – we operated on our own, fully aware of the outcome, a non-guaranteed outcome.
4. While one may conclude that this process will be for the good of all concerned, it is not in the best interest of the public, but in the best interest of the governmental agencies who will reap the fines sought from the charges.
5. There are no facts implicating Mr. Chandran’s inability to close the acquisition without the use of the collateralized loans that the People voluntarily pledged to participate in.
6. Maxims of Law 1, 2, 4, 9 & 10 are provided for your perusal below, and all matters thereon should be adhered to accordingly.
1. In dubio pro reo – “When in doubt, in favor of the defendant.” A maxim meaning that, when the applicable laws or the relevant facts are unclear or ambiguous, all doubt should be resolved in a manner favorable to the defendant.
2. Tutius Semper Est Errare Acquietando Quam In Puniendo - It is always safe to err in aquitting, than punishing. It is better that 10 guilty persons escape than one innocent person suffer.
4. Nullum Crimen Sin Lege Nulla Poena Sine Lege - There is no crime without a law, there is no penalty without a law. No one shall be held guilty of any penal offense on account of any act or omission, which did not constitute a penal offense under national or international law at the time when it was committed.
9. Ignorantia Legis Non Excusat - Ignorance of law excuses not. Nobody is thought to be ignorant of the law. Nemo censetaur ignorate legem - Everyone is presumed to know the law and its consequences.
10. Ignorantia Facti Excusat - Ignorance of a fact excuses. Any act done under a mistake impression. The rule “ignorance of the law is no excuse” really means that people can't defend their actions by claiming they didn't know the law.
In summary, this Petition is in full support of the release of incarceration for Neil Suresh Chandran, and the release of all of his assets that has been seized. The indictment as cited does not reflect the majority of those concerned and is at best not done in due process of the law, as the People are innocent until proven guilty.
In final, All signatures on this petition agree with the above expressed statements.
We do not believe the U.S. Department of Justice is operating in good faith or in the interest of the people."
Over 2500 People, Collateral Loan Partners, were recorded on the Change.org site with still more on a downloaded list being forwarded to the Federal Public Defense Attorneys.
The Evidence of an Executive Summary of the Components of ViMarket, included in the White Pages PDF, illustrates there was no Intent to commit fraud. It was a business plan.
The Elements of Wire Fraud
The prosecution must prove certain elements are present in a crime in order to secure a conviction of wire fraud. While the precise list of elements that may vary from one federal circuit court to another, they tend to be very similar to each other and can be summarized as the following:
1. A scheme to commit fraud
2. Specific intent to commit fraud
It is the burden of the Prosecution to prove its case through facts not allegations.
Burden of Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt.
Let's See If The Jedi Mind Trick stands up to Federal Rules of Evidence.
Ok Dino, I am to assume that the defense attorney will enter our petition to the court. Further that the judge will actually read it and act uoon it. Is there a second path we may take if they do not submit or look at this petition?