Am I addressing only my witnesses? I question, then defense crosses? Then Defense?

Or am I examining everyone at once?

MilkCrack:

Writ of Summons

Azalea Isles Criminal Court (CR)

Case No. CR-24-0001-01

Witnesses for the prosecution.

The following people are hereby required to appear in court regarding Azalea Isles v. Krix, (2024) CR 01 to testify and provide any requested documents related to the case: xBlu3, Ansgard, RandomIntruder and SimplyMadi

Please answer the questions promptly, after 48 hours of being asked, and to the best of your ability.

All witnesses are advised that they are under oath and should they give knowingly false information they will be subject to perjury charges, which carry a minimum fine of $500 per instance.
 

Signature:

Judge Milkcrack

 

Present, your honor.

Matthew100x:

Am I addressing only my witnesses? I question, then defense crosses? Then Defense?

 

Or am I examining everyone at once?

You are addressing your witnesses first, then the defence will get an opportunity to cross them and afterwards, the defence will address their witnesses and you may cross them. If a witness's testimony is dependent on another witness's testimony, you may call them (again) afterwards.

Witnesses are not required to state they are present, answering the questions is sufficient.

xBlu3

1. The evidence says that you were killed by Krix 6 times, is this true?

2. You mentioned that at some point, you transferred your balance to SimplyMadi. Do you have an estimate of how many times you were robbed before making that transfer?

3. Have you ever had to transfer your balance before or after the attacks due to excessive robberies?

Ansgardd

1. The evidence says that you were killed by Krix 2 times, is this true?

2.Did both robberies happen while you were carrying a balance?

RandomIntruder 

1. In your view, what do you think of the statistical probability calculations over the given situation.

2. In your view, does the accounting of baltop on 04/31/24 create a sampling bias on who could or could not have had $0 or less dollars?

3. Is it possible that present data could have been indicative of past data?

4. Given the data, what are the minimum amount of robbery charges that could stick on the defendant given 14 robberies over 19 deaths and 8 possible instances where the victim had a $0 dollar balance?

5. Given the data, what is the likely maximum amount of robber charges that could stick on the defendant given 14 robberies over 19 deaths and 8 possible instances where the victim had a $0 dollar balance?

SimplyMadi

1. Did xBlu3 transfer her balance to you?

2. How often do you or your friends transfer balances when there is a serial robber making their rounds? 

1. In your view, what do you think of the statistical probability calculations over the given situation.

After reviewing the analysis, I believe that your argument about the data having been collected on the 31st, after the 19th, is a valid concern. However, Dusty_3, the main person who could have had a 0 balance based on the list, has not been on the server since that day. 

Everything else regarding the statistics seems to hold up, as long as the assumption of people who had balances on the 31st also had balances on the 19th, with the exception of the transfer, holds to be valid, the numbers work out. 

2. In your view, does the accounting of baltop on 04/31/24 create a sampling bias on who could or could not have had $0 or less dollars?

I am not aware of any accounting for baltop from April at all nor would it create sampling bias as it's not a sample but rather an analysis of everyone. 

3. Is it possible that present data could have been indicative of past data?

Yes, especially when identifying whether data could have changed since the past. 

4. Given the data, what are the minimum amount of robbery charges that could stick on the defendant given 14 robberies over 19 deaths and 8 possible instances where the victim had a $0 dollar balance?

The 19 deaths are irrelevant. The minimum would result from all 8 possibilities being instances of robbery on $0. 14-8 is 6. This is unlikely since it would require the 14 robberies to have been committed on all 8 possibilities without missing one. 

5. Given the data, what is the likely maximum amount of robber charges that could stick on the defendant given 14 robberies over 19 deaths and 8 possible instances where the victim had a $0 dollar balance?

Again, the 19 deaths are irrelevant. The maximum would be that every instance of the 8 possibilities was actually a valid robbery, resulting in 14 cases of robbery. This is unlikely, in my opinion, because Dusty never logged back in so his balance never changed, so assuming that 2/5 attempts to rob Dusty was successful, a good estimate would be 12 robberies. This works under the assumption that Blue transferred her balance after being last murdered. 

I would like to add this as part of the analysis for Dusty's last /seen since it was used several times in my answers.

1. Yes, xBlu3 did transfer their balance to me.

2. It is not very often that there is a serial robber. Though, typically when there is one, whoever seems to be getting robbed the most will typically transfer their balance elsewhere.

OBJECTIONS

Matthew100x Questions to xBlu3:

2. You mentioned that at some point, you transferred your balance to SimplyMadi. Do you have an estimate of how many times you were robbed before making that transfer? - Speculation: Questions that call for the witness to speculate about something.

3. Have you ever had to transfer your balance before or after the attacks due to excessive robberies? - Relevance:  The testimony pursuant to a question asked or the particular item of evidence is not relevant to the case. (It is not relevant to ask if the witness has EVER had to transfer they balance, but if they had to transfer their balance in the events around this case)

3. Have you ever had to transfer your balance before or after the attacks due to excessive robberies? - Repetitive: The question has already been asked and answered. (As highlighted in a previous question, the witness has already highlighted this in evidence)

Matthew100x Questions to RandomIntruder:

ALL QUESTIONS - Relevance:  The testimony pursuant to a question asked or the particular item of evidence is not relevant to the case. (RandomIntruder is not a part of this case, their testimony on this question has no relevance to the case - the Prosecution attest them to be an 'expert' but provides no credentials or questions attempting to establish that fact)

ALL QUESTIONS - Speculation: Questions that call for the witness to speculate about something.

ALL QUESTIONS - Conclusory: A conclusion is a deduction drawn from a fact or series of facts. Witnesses should testify only to facts. (The presentation of this "data" is corrupted by the use of the baltop figures from the 31st, when the events took place two weeks prior - any conclusion arrived at is a complete deduction therefore)

ALL QUESTIONS - Assumes Facts not in Evidence: asks the witness to accept the questioner’s summary, inference, or conclusion of the question vs asking a question about a fact in the case.

Matthew100x Questions to SimplyMadi:

2. How often do you or your friends transfer balances when there is a serial robber making their rounds? - Just all the objections your honor, the Prosecution is asking SimplyMadi to testify on behalf of her friends, has made an leading assertion using the term "serial robber" and is asking the witness to speculate. 

(Will be objecting to the answers in a separate post should the questions not be stricken)

Ansgardd

1. The evidence says that you were killed by Krix 2 times, is this true?

 Yes, I do recall being killed twice by Krix.

2.Did both robberies happen while you were carrying a balance?

Yes, both robberies did happen while I was carrying a balance.

Alright, thank you. Does the defence have any questions for these witnesses?