AHMED85
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2009
- Messages
- 2,562
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Why? If the prosecution couldn't provide valid proof of the Sharifs' ownership doesn't the money-earning trail become irrelevant?...The only way to reverse the judgement is to provide a valid money earning trail which they don't have...
Yeah lets completely ignore the fact that the defense itself failed to provide any admissible proof at all but forged documents and lets talk about the stacks of evidence provided by prosecution and find fault with one or two, lol, very strong logic indeed.If these objections are sustained on appeal I don't see why the judgment won't be reversed.
Why? If the prosecution couldn't provide valid proof of the Sharifs' ownership doesn't the money-earning trail become irrelevant?
And no, I'm not a "fan boy" of N.S. by any means.
Yeah lets believe that Hussain, Hassan and Maryam Nawaz were born with a money bag attached to their proverbial and that was their source of accumulating all the assets in their name when they were dependents of Nawaz Sharif. Simply Sublime.Why? If the prosecution couldn't provide valid proof of the Sharifs' ownership doesn't the money-earning trail become irrelevant?
If the Sharifs didn't own Avenfield the case falls apart.Yeah lets completely ignore the fact that the defense itself failed to provide any admissible proof at all -
Yes, that avenue could have been strongly pursued with less chance of a successful appeal.but forged documents -
Not just "one or two" but many.and lets talk about the stacks of evidence provided by prosecution and find fault with one or two, lol, very strong logic indeed.
If the Sharifs didn't own Avenfield the case falls apart.
Yes, that avenue could have been strongly pursued with less chance of a successful appeal.
Not just "one or two" but many.
In his closing argument the prosecutor stated Hussain Nawaz admitted ownership, not N.S. When did N.S. admit ownership?Nope the evidence against owner ship has been considered complete Sharif admitted it him self without any pressure.
If the Sharifs didn't own Avenfield the case falls apart.
The court did not rule on the basis of "this thread".This thread is filled with documentary evidence obtained through MLA that proves asset ownership beyond any doubts dear and you are stuck at "If Avenfield apartments..." LOL.
You shouldn't do that. Better to read the judgment.Yes, lets take your word for it indeed.
The court did not rule on the basis of "this thread".
You shouldn't do that. Better to read the judgment.
You are giving attention to a guy who thinks that fake holocaust was real?LOL to that, MLA is for evidence for courts and this thread only got it after it was submitted as evidence in court dear, lol.
@PakSword can you guess? Who here has suddenly become Nawaz case supporter and assuming Nawaz will win his appeal as evidence is not credible all of a sudden when the claim for posting that lame lawyer's article was that "I was only looking for a rebuttal". How convenient. From NAB law is inappropriate to Evidence is not up to legal standards, the twists and turns are remarkable indeed.
Yes.. Maryam's bhoota has also been fitted in the same frame.. Harami khandaan is coming for bloodshed.. I am telling you..@PakSword are you listening to Nawaz press conference?