OPPT (One Person's Public Trial) - Tucci-Jarraf

[waylonmercy]

I got hung up in the drama about them not being allowed to do their laundry in what I can only assume is the laundry room the hotel uses to clean the linens because they found some kind of fleas in the flea bag hotel they obviously chose and then checked out of early.

It was bed bugs. The interesting thing about that whole conversation was that Sheila and her friends only brought enough clothes for 2 days. They thought they were coming to Knoxville to pick Randy up and take him home .

[NYGman]

The interesting thing about that whole conversation was that Sheila and her friends only brought enough clothes for 2 days. They thought they were coming to Knoxville to pick Randy up and take him home .

Too funny... now that is what we all should be laughing at...

[TheNewSaint]

I wonder if cognitive dissonance will ever hit any of these people. They're ignorant, starstruck, greedy, and stupid, yes. But the reality is just so different than what they've been told, it has to be making a dent in someone's brain.

[Resume]

I tried listening to one of these videos and the associated cackling just makes that task impossible. This is quite serious for HTAJ and Rand, yet they are laughing at what seems to be every aspect of the prosecutions case. They don't seem to understand how a trial works, and really believe this whole thing is a joke. Incredible...

They throw around terms like quantum or frequency or multiverse as if they had a concrete notion of what they mean contextually. As Feynman once opined, "It is safe to say that nobody understands quantum mechanics," and it would be even safer to say this cargo-cult sure doesn't. He also noted however that we must not fool ourselves, as we are the easiest to fool, which is where these folks excel. We should be cautiously kind to some of them though because they are so very obviously damaged, and easily manipulated by those that toss the woo their way.

[TheNewSaint]

Ok, here's a hypothetical... if you were the prosecuting attorney, who would you examine first: Heather or Randy?

Randy is facing more charges, but he's too dumb to blow his nose without directions from Heather. Do you put him on the stand first and let him try to defend himself without having seen Heather first? Or do you put Heather up first, and hope she spews enough crazy to sink them both?

[TheNewSaint]

Sheila and her friends only brought enough clothes for 2 days. They thought they were coming to Knoxville to pick Randy up and take him home .

They need to come back in about 10 years.

With a coffin.

[wserra]

Ok, here's a hypothetical... if you were the prosecuting attorney, who would you examine first: Heather or Randy?

Neither. Prosecutors can't call defendants. Fifth Amendment.

[wserra]

The day before the trial was to start, the govt did something that made me raise my eyebrows a little - they moved to amend the indictment. Moreover, the part of the indictment they moved to amend was Count Seven, the one that charges conspiracy to commit money laundering, and the only count that charges Giraffe Tuchas. The day before trial is quite late in the game to amend the indictment, and typically amending an indictment requires grand jury action. Still, the black-letter law is that the Court can permit it so long as the amendment (1) changes "form" and not "substance", and (2) does not prejudice the defendant(s).

The part of the indictment the govt moved to amend is one of the three statutes that the indictment alleges Beane and Giraffe conspired to violate - the language of the indictment suffices to allege violation of that statute, but the govt got the cite wrong. Given that the language of the indictment charges violation of the statute, there is case law that the amendment is in fact one of "form", and thus permissible in the absence of prejudice. Especially since that count is the only one charging her, were I Giraffe's lawyer, I would have scoured the field for any possible prejudice. There may in fact be no real prejudice, so the govt might well win the day anyway. But I would try.

The Court just issued its written ruling (according to which it had orally ruled immediately before jury selection). Given that the govt had just moved the day before, the judge gave Dumb and Dumber (because he listens to Dumb) an opportunity to reply orally. This was the time to describe in as great detail as the Court would permit how the amendment would irreparably prejudice the entire world, by damn. Instead, this is what happened:

Defendant Beane offered no further response to the government’s motion to amend. Defendant Tucci-Jarraf did not respond to the merits of this motion, but rather reiterated her belief that this Court—and the federal government as a whole—lack any jurisdiction or authority over her.

Needless to say, that didn't do the trick.

[Jeffrey]

It was described as a typographical error, was that not accurate?

[Resume]

Grounds for appeal?

[wserra]

It was described as a typographical error, was that not accurate?

Does "1956(a)(1)(B)(i)" instead of "1956(a)(1)(A)(i)" look like a typo? I suppose it could be, but it seems much more likely that it was an AUSA asleep at the keyboard. Especially since "1956(a)(1)(B)(i)" exists.

[wserra]

Grounds for appeal?

Not on this record. No claim of prejudice. Instead, a claim of dumbass.

[Jeffrey]

It was described as a typographical error, was that not accurate?

Does "1956(a)(1)(B)(i)" instead of "1956(a)(1)(A)(i)" look like a typo? I suppose it could be, but it seems much more likely that it was an AUSA asleep at the keyboard. Especially since "1956(a)(1)(B)(i)" exists.

Rechecked and (as usual) it looks like you're right. In the amendment they say the paragraph "tracks the proper language of the citation" however if you go to the indictment, it reads "the proceeds from some sort of unlawful activity". That language is from 1956(a)(1)(B)(i). 1956(a)(1)(A)(i) is for "with the intent to promote the carrying on of specified unlawful activity".

So yeah it's a substance change. They could have left the indictment as is, why did they change it? B makes more sense because he obtained the money from unlawful activity (wire fraud), A doesn't make sense to me.

[Athis]

HATJ RKB DAY 3 Evening Wrap Up Alleged Case

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jvQvNO0en0k

BZ really goes to town on reframing and spinning everything this woman Katie has to say about events in court yesterday
For example when anyone on the prosecution side consults their notes they are really reading a prepared script...!
They are learning their lines...!
If they hesitate it's because they are trying to remember their line...!
When the Fed guy says the Fed only has accounts for banks not for individuals....BZ distorts that to mean when they claim they dont have accounts for individuals... that means they do have accounts for other people (?)
...and therefore they do have an account for Randy...!
I know, makes zero sense
It's a complete distortion, but she cannot let it go; she has to reframe everything for the followers
BZ is a compulsive reframer - she reminds me of a medieval theologian of the Inquisition
making sure everyone has the canonical perception of events
I can't listen to her constant distortions and cackling
As others have said, woo woo is not harmless; especially in the mind of a person like BZ (edit: a manipulative influencer)
The woman is toxic
Who is she?
What's her provenance?

[waylonmercy]

Interesting that USA Today did not cover day 3 of the trial. The only information provided on BZ's IUV website was that a Federal Reserve fraud investigator testified yesterday. Heather's lemmings are now coming to the defense of the pervert who molested all of those gymnasts: Larry Nassar, M.D. They believe poor Larry was tried and convicted so the for-profit prison system could make money off of his 175 years sentence.

[TheNewSaint]

Interesting that USA Today did not cover day 3 of the trial. The only information provided on BZ's IUV website was that a Federal Reserve fraud investigator testified yesterday.

Probably because "One person testified today" doesn't rise to the level of newsworthy, except in the grandest of court cases. Especially when that testimony was probably mostly technical jargon about the inner workings of bank transfers. I suspect there will be a piece to catch up multiple days when there's enough information for a full article.

[wserra]

B makes more sense because he obtained the money from unlawful activity (wire fraud), A doesn't make sense to me.

B makes more sense as to Beane, A ("with the intent to promote the carrying on of specified unlawful activity") makes more sense as to Giraffe. Now they have both.

[waylonmercy]

From a news site Backdoor Knox:

The case involves over 300,000+ financial transactions and over $31,000,000, including the purchase of a $500,000 marble floored camper from Buddy Gregg Motor Homes in Farragut. The money was apparently added to Randall Keith Beane's real bank account by using his social security number as an account number and a bank routing number. He is representing himself.

Heather Ann Tucci-Jarraf is also representing herself on charges of conspiracy to commit money laundering in regards to the alleged scheme. She had good composer in the courtroom today as she questioned a Federal Reserve Bank Senior Vice President, Sean O'Malley.

O'Malley stated that banks are part owners of the Federal Reserve, in theory, and that individuals do not have accounts. There are 12 Reserve Banks and they serve about 100 central banks. He also stated that over 100 countries have an account at the Federal Reserve in New York.

The Board Of Governors is a not a Private entity, according to O'Malley, and that the Federal Reserve was created by congress and is owned by the People of the United States.

Mr. O'Malley went on to say that there are no secret accounts at the Federal Reserve, and that out of the 300k+ transitions, Mr Beane's transaction stuck out the most as it was the only one to execute the fraud successfully.

No hacking was involved. And no, this is not a bitcoin related issue.

The Federal Indictment says that Mr. Beane was part of the scheme to make numerous attempts using a valid routing number and fictitious bank account number to purchase CD (certificates of deposits) until a transfer was complete, and then those CD's were liquidated. Those proceeds would go to Mr. Beane's personal bank account.

A supporter of the Defendant stated, "It's not the accounts...this entire case is all about showing the corruption that is going on, not just in this country, but in the world. In a manner in which no one can refute it. No one.”

[NYGman]

A supporter of the Defendant stated, "It's not the accounts...this entire case is all about showing the corruption that is going on, not just in this country, but in the world. In a manner in which no one can refute it. No one.”

Wonder which wack-a-doodle said that. Well then, that must explain why Heather and Randy are making no attempt at a defense, this was never their intent. They want to fight the "corruption in the system" for the good of mankind. Next we will hear cries of "Help, help, I'm being repressed!" as they are being dragged from the courtroom.

[Resume]

HATJ RKB DAY 3 Evening Wrap Up Alleged Case

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jvQvNO0en0k

BZ really goes to town on reframing and spinning everything this woman Katie has to say about events in court yesterday
For example when anyone on the prosecution side consults their notes they are really reading a prepared script...!
They are learning their lines...!
If they hesitate it's because they are trying to remember their line...!
When the Fed guy says the Fed only has accounts for banks not for individuals....BZ distorts that to mean when they claim they dont have accounts for individuals... that means they do have accounts for other people (?)
...and therefore they do have an account for Randy...!
I know, makes zero sense
It's a complete distortion, but she cannot let it go; she has to reframe everything for the followers
BZ is a compulsive reframer - she reminds me of a medieval theologian of the Inquisition
making sure everyone has the canonical perception of events
I can't listen to her constant distortions and cackling
As others have said, woo woo is not harmless; especially in the mind of a person like BZ (edit: a manipulative influencer)
The woman is toxic
Who is she?
What's her provenance?

She appears to be just another crazy-ass woo-slinger.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/bzriger
https://www.amazon.com/Books-BZ-Riger-H ... Riger-Hull

Too bad the feds don't have something on her.*

* At about the 56 minute mark in the video, the cackling person admits she tried to access "her account" for 1.5 mildo and succeeded, but it was reversed. She waves paperwork, claiming they allowed her to keep the interest, which she claims she used to pay off the reversal fee. Now, IANAL, but that seems like some sort of admission. Unless she's just lying, of course.