Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Defense Response topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Defense urges tribunal to reject removal, says evidence falls short
Summary
Respondent's counsel told judges the petitioners failed to prove charges by a preponderance of the evidence and urged answers of "no" to charge questions, arguing the record lacks direct proof of wrongdoing or disclosure of confidential deliberations.
Respondent's lead counsel disputed the petitioners' reading of the record and urged the tribunal to apply the jury charge and the preponderance standard strictly. "When you strip away the rhetoric and you look only at the evidence, the answer to those questions is no," counsel said, arguing petitioners lacked proof that the mayor knowingly participated in or aided fraud.
The defense emphasized that the altered screenshot and the contested narrative do not automatically establish the mayor's knowledge or intent, and that there was no witness or document conclusively showing disclosure of protected EDC deliberations. Counsel also pointed to the timing and content of investigative reports and depositions to argue the record contained gaps that precluded the tribunal from making the removals findings required under the charter.
