------

Generalized.

Without presumed specifics.

 

Sometimes GPT completely deviates and asserts whatever things.

 

I have to correct it.

 

 

------------

Fatigue, unwell.

Need to rest a bit.

 

 

"I wrote music for an attack on titan game." (Screenshot)

This avatar was previously associated with Festus I believe.

If Festus continues, he must be charged on pursuit of harm alongside Steve.

 

He has a history of lying (1)

and communication was clear through the emails. (2)

If there was something significant he contributed, he would have mentioned.

As well as, his initial stance was different and later changed (3)

 

Whichever is a baseless accusation is simply pursuit of harm,

AFTER he has already lied and confessed.

He is only persisting another variation of harm.

 

He must be charged fully by the law.

 

Baseless accusations cannot be rewarded with ambiguity or plausibility by the law.

But especially when it stands on previous offenses of deceit and confession.

This only perpetuates victim's suffering, and cunts like this finds it an portal to abuse further.

 

The law must apply charges as pursuit of harm.

 

 

Now I would apologize if I got that relay wrong.

 

 

If otherwise, knowing the stakes of his actions.

Knowing that diluting my credibility is helping Steve.

This person, as he has attempted before, goes hand-in-hand with Steve.

And so goes the same with other perpetrators whose helped Steve.

And charges will result to same.

They are acolytes with the same intent to frame.

 

 

I am serious, this person is on pursuit of harm.

If he continues.

He has nothing to do with my ideas.

That is the reason why 1% commission for financial projections,

based on my completed website presentation.

And that is why before he contributes anything, I severed with him

knowing that I can do so myself and he is someone not to be trusted,

stating he is sick. There were relays stating he is lying.

I sent that upvote directly to him.  

And there was a deadline.

There were no assertions as ideas from him that was significant in any form.

I am in the position to tell him what I want and what my plans are,

and he is to create a financial projection based on that.

 

So this person, witnesses must attest to when he came online,

and to which duration he stayed in acknolwedgement my ideas are mine,

and when he's stance suddenly changed.

Is it after trying to support Steve and confessing?

Then this is another adaptation to dismantle his charges that is not being forgiven.

Or even if before it, the law must understand his intent by his previous attempts.

 

This is an adaptation for self-preservation. Knowing that he was in proximity.

But the motive and the reason for him being there is already clear.

And if he had contributed, knowing that there was investor association directly linked.

He would state this immediately over the emails to leave records.

This person is a fraud.  

 

 

"Best tiger roar ever."

 

Ok. So it is happening then.

 

Full charges on to Festus please.

 

That is how the law works.

 

These idiots think by creating stories and doubt,

they can be dismantled of initial charges.

 

But it works AGAINST them,

after their offense applied and confessed.

 

It is and must be treated as pursuit of harm.

Confession and staying there is the only way to show that there will be no further harm.

And hence leniency.

 

But deceit, at my expense and sacrifice is what they aim for.

This is framing.

Framing is aiming for total control.

Framing is 100% intent.

 

When the framing is based on baseless lies.

This person MUST be charged as an prominent acolyte to Steve.

 

It does not matter whether he has helped prior or not against Steve.

THAT is only being leveraged as an sympathetic portal to build imaginary credibility on to yourselves.

His value systems in FRAMING has already been confessed,

and this was tolerable to him.

And the law must logically understand that this is another try.

 

I suggest you confess you fucking cunt.

 

You deserve capital punisment by the law.

You know the stakes.

You are essentially supporting Steve, once again,

by defaming me, and framing me.

As you raise yourself.

 

Your  accusations are baseless.

I know this, because whatever the hell you are saying did not exist.

My ideas are my own, and I would give fair credit if otherwise.

You were falsifying your contribution.

If it were true, KNOWING that there is an investment connection,

you would immediately send me an email to confirm your contribution.

THAT IS THE WHOLE FUCKING POINT OF THAT BUSINESS EMAIL.

STARTING WITH THE INTRODUCTION.

And you being in business, with an MBA.

You would know that better than anyone you fucking cunt.

 

YOU ARE LYING THROUGH YOUR TEETH.

AND THIS WILL BE COUNTED AS PURSUIT OF HARM.

WHICH IS BUILT DIRECTLY FROM YOUR PREVIOUS ATTEMPTS THAT WAS CONFESSED.

Framing itself, would not have happened, if anything you say is true.

This is embedded in your fucking value system.

This is embedded in your fucked up character.

 

And the court, with your baseless accusation, will attest to that.

 

 

As you can see from the emails, it was brief meetings, I believe twice.

Before the connection was severed due to lack of trust.

 

If he has contributed significantly, that would have been asserted in the emails.

And it would also deviate from the motive of the meeting.

Which is 1% for financial projections.

Why would I include him suddenly as a partner and allow contributions?

He would first need to establish a permission with me in an large involvement.

And this is improbable in that short 2 meetings. We are not acquainted enough.

If there were contributions of significance despite that, I would not use it.

Knowing and warning him that we are being monitored.

He would be present in the channel one way or another at some point.

I am predicting this, as well as towards Steve.

I would not dare use something that is theirs.

 

And he himself would immediately assert this in the emails.

NOR would he have lied trying to support Steve and then confessing.

 

I don't even know what he tried supporting Steve on and then confessing initially.

But if he is claiming something now, was it present then? Or is this an adaptation

after his initial appearance and for a long duration?

Was this idea asserted by me BEFORE my brief involvement with Festus?

 

In any case, IF such framing is happening,

it must be understood as continued pursuit of harm.

 

 

Now, I do not entirely understand Festus' character.

Nor do I even know if this person tried supporting Steve by framing and confessed.

If that's happened. But it is in my memory somehow.

 

If that is the case, that is what it is.

 

No. I would simply give it, if I am using his idea.

Whatever it is.

 

I can't be that cheap. Ideas come dime a dozen.

As I have proven to yourselves.

 

Why not.

 

But if he is claiming that he is, that is a lie.