I take issue with the fact that this case depends on the timing with
another CFJ ruling that a certain proposal existed in the proposal
pool. I find guilt requirements (a) and (d) are awfully weak: The
two hour time interval between the CFJ ruling that declared the
proposal in question to be in the pool and the attempt to ratify
challenges the notion that the attempt to ratify the suddenly-
incorrect pool report was made knowingly. This questions whether (a)
the Defendant did in fact break R2202 and (d) whether the Defendant
reasonably believed that eir attempt to ratify the pool broke R2202.
I cannot find guilt beyond reasonable doubt. I consider guilt
likely, but I consider my doubt reasonable. I therefore rule NOT
GUILTY.
If need be, I destroy the Rests created in the Defendant's possession
from the NoV in this case.
Trial Judge OscarMeyr
-----
Benjamin Schultz KE3OM
