Page 2 of 2

Re: Ed & Kathy Wahler found not guilty ....

Posted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 10:09 pm
by David Merrill
You are welcome! Maybe you didn't catch the P.S.

Pursuant to the jury verdict returned Friday, November 20, 2009, which acquitted the Defendants identified herein of all charges, the offenses alleged within the Bill of Indictment with reference to Defendants KATHY RAY WAHLER, EDWARD WILLIAM WAHLER, and LEWIS VINCENT HUGHES, are hereby DISMISSED with prejudice.

It is fun teaching people who they are.

Re: Ed & Kathy Wahler found not guilty ....

Posted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 10:30 pm
by David Merrill
People who know who they are:

Image


P.S. I think maybe Wesley has been less than honest with us - c'mon SERRA, let's have it.
NOTICE RE: REDACTION OF TRANSCRIPTS: The parties have 5 business days to file a Notice of Intent to Request Redaction and 21 calendar days to file a Redaction Request. If no notice is filed, this transcript will be made electronically available to the public without redaction after 90 calendar days. Transcript may be viewed at the court public terminal or purchased through the court reporter before the 90 day deadline. After that date it may be
obtained through PACER. Policy at http://www.ncwd.uscourts.gov

Re: Ed & Kathy Wahler found not guilty ....

Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 1:17 am
by David Merrill
You don't suppose there might actually be Direct Treasury Accounts available?


Discharge Student Loan

Re: Ed & Kathy Wahler found not guilty ....

Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 2:04 am
by Pottapaug1938
David Merrill wrote:You are welcome! Maybe you didn't catch the P.S.

Pursuant to the jury verdict returned Friday, November 20, 2009, which acquitted the Defendants identified herein of all charges, the offenses alleged within the Bill of Indictment with reference to Defendants KATHY RAY WAHLER, EDWARD WILLIAM WAHLER, and LEWIS VINCENT HUGHES, are hereby DISMISSED with prejudice.
No, I caught it all right. I just was laughing at the idiocy of people who twist themselves into pretzels trying to "prove" that they are John Jacob Jingleheimer, of the family Schmidt, instead of John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt.

Re: Ed & Kathy Wahler found not guilty ....

Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 9:30 am
by David Merrill
Pottapaug1938 wrote:
David Merrill wrote:You are welcome! Maybe you didn't catch the P.S.

Pursuant to the jury verdict returned Friday, November 20, 2009, which acquitted the Defendants identified herein of all charges, the offenses alleged within the Bill of Indictment with reference to Defendants KATHY RAY WAHLER, EDWARD WILLIAM WAHLER, and LEWIS VINCENT HUGHES, are hereby DISMISSED with prejudice.
No, I caught it all right. I just was laughing at the idiocy of people who twist themselves into pretzels trying to "prove" that they are John Jacob Jingleheimer, of the family Schmidt, instead of John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt.

By appearing the man, Lewis Vincent he never became trustee for the LEWIS VINCENT HUGHES.

The result was acquittal. Let Wesley dig up that transcript for us? It shows what I mean.

Re: Ed & Kathy Wahler found not guilty ....

Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 10:53 am
by Thule
David Merrill wrote: The result was acquittal. Let Wesley dig up that transcript for us? It shows what I mean.
Why should he? It's your claim that your random words actually works, prove it yourself.

Re: Ed & Kathy Wahler found not guilty ....

Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 2:45 pm
by David Merrill
Thule wrote:
David Merrill wrote: The result was acquittal. Let Wesley dig up that transcript for us? It shows what I mean.
Why should he? It's your claim that your random words actually works, prove it yourself.

Ed & Kathy Wahler found not guilty ....

People who love the truth love that kind of language.

You should just admit that you know in your heart that Lewis Vincent is the name Mr. and Mrs. Hughes gave thier little baby.

Both Wesley and Dezcad have PACER at hand and can easily bring up documentation from the docket. But they will not? Anyway, it is Wesley who brought this thread about in the first place. He should explain why all he did was announce the acquittal - on 32 counts by the way.

It makes it look like all Quatlosers are sadistic cyber-sociopaths who only enjoy when people get clobbered and imprisoned.


Regards,

David Merrill.

Re: Ed & Kathy Wahler found not guilty ....

Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 3:16 pm
by Pottapaug1938
Looking at the top, it looks as if this is a case of jury nullification, rather than of the wahlers' claims withstanding legal challenges.

I will respect the principles claimed by the Wahlers once they have withstood appellate review.

Re: Ed & Kathy Wahler found not guilty ....

Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 3:42 pm
by Judge Roy Bean
Pottapaug1938 wrote:Looking at the top, it looks as if this is a case of jury nullification, rather than of the wahlers' claims withstanding legal challenges.

I will respect the principles claimed by the Wahlers once they have withstood appellate review.
There is no appeal on an acquittal; the jury found the Wahlers not guilty and from what we gather here, the prosecution apparently failed to convince them. But the Wahlers will probably not change their ways and will wind up with another indictment for other acts.

But we see again the twisted mental logic Van Pelt uses to equate his gibberish with a simple event. There is no relationship between the two, but Van Pelt gets all excited about his hit counters and is compelled to re-re-re-re-re-re-regurgitate.

Re: Ed & Kathy Wahler found not guilty ....

Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 4:23 pm
by David Merrill
Judge Roy Bean wrote:
Pottapaug1938 wrote:Looking at the top, it looks as if this is a case of jury nullification, rather than of the wahlers' claims withstanding legal challenges.

I will respect the principles claimed by the Wahlers once they have withstood appellate review.
There is no appeal on an acquittal; the jury found the Wahlers not guilty and from what we gather here, the prosecution apparently failed to convince them. But the Wahlers will probably not change their ways and will wind up with another indictment for other acts.

But we see again the twisted mental logic Van Pelt uses to equate his gibberish with a simple event. There is no relationship between the two, but Van Pelt gets all excited about his hit counters and is compelled to re-re-re-re-re-re-regurgitate.

I thinks you mean David Merrill; not Van Pelt.

And we see that Judge Roy Bean has not gotten his PACER subscription as the point is for Wserra or Dezcad to simply link the transcript I described off the docket above. Why don't you just show us the transcript judge? Then we can decide for ourselves about identity - Lewis Vincent or Lewis HUGHES?


Regards,

David Merrill.

Re: Ed & Kathy Wahler found not guilty ....

Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 4:46 pm
by David Merrill
You really gotta get a kick outa this Quatloser slur:
Minute Entry: JURY TRIAL as to Kathy Ray Wahler, Edward William Wahler, Lewis Vincent Hughes held before District Judge Richard Voorhees. Jury deliberation continues. Jury returns verdict. Government attorney: Jill Rose &Mark Odulio. Standby Counsel: Angela Parrott, Fredilyn Sison, William Terpening &David Burgess. Defendants are Pro Se. Court Reporter Cheryl Nuccio. (cbb) (Entered: 11/23/2009)

Count them! Six government attorners!

Re: Ed & Kathy Wahler found not guilty ....

Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 5:08 pm
by Pottapaug1938
Judge Roy Bean wrote:
Pottapaug1938 wrote:Looking at the top, it looks as if this is a case of jury nullification, rather than of the wahlers' claims withstanding legal challenges.

I will respect the principles claimed by the Wahlers once they have withstood appellate review.
There is no appeal on an acquittal.....
I know that; I was thinking more of similar cases which say the same things that the Wahlers foisted upon the rubes on the jury in their case.

Re: Ed & Kathy Wahler found not guilty ....

Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 5:10 pm
by Pottapaug1938
David Merrill wrote:You really gotta get a kick outa this Quatloser slur:
Minute Entry: JURY TRIAL as to Kathy Ray Wahler, Edward William Wahler, Lewis Vincent Hughes held before District Judge Richard Voorhees. Jury deliberation continues. Jury returns verdict. Government attorney: Jill Rose &Mark Odulio. Standby Counsel: Angela Parrott, Fredilyn Sison, William Terpening &David Burgess. Defendants are Pro Se. Court Reporter Cheryl Nuccio. (cbb) (Entered: 11/23/2009)

Count them! Six government attorners!
Hey, if the jury is willing to go off the rails, it doesn't matter how sound a case you present in court.

Re: Ed & Kathy Wahler found not guilty ....

Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 5:12 pm
by Pottapaug1938
[quote="David Merrill"]


I thinks you mean David Merrill; not Van Pelt.

:lol: :P :lol: :P :lol: :P :lol: :P :lol: :P :lol: :P :lol: :P :lol: :P