We do not actually know for certain if Seungri admitted guilt (in the sense of personal responsibility) for any of the 8 contested charges during the appeal process, was forced into a plea deal, or... ⬇️
...simply decided to not contest some charges any more.
We have not heard from Seungri himself during the appeal process, which was conducted entirely behind closed doors: There were ZERO reports about the proceedings after both Seungri and the prosecution submitted... ⬇️
...appeals to the Higher Military Court and before the announcement of the outcome. In the case of the appeal to the Supreme Court, it was not even publicly announced that the appeal was happening at all before the final verdict was reported! ⬇️
This lack of transparency itself is a huge red flag for violation of the defendant's rights and other unethical behavior by police, prosecutors and judges, which has previously been exposed multiple times during the investigation and first trial (e.g. coercion of witnesses... ⬇️
...and falsification of their written statements).
The outcome of the Higher Military Court appeal was announced through a military spokesperson, and we know that either this statement or the reporting on it must have been at least partially wrong. Why? Because the... ⬇️
...statement said that Seungri had supposedly admitted ALL charges, and yet he appealed the habitual gambling charge in the Supreme Court trial.
I expect that we will not know what actually went down behind closed doors during the appeal process unless a whistleblower... ⬇️
...from the police, prosecution or courts appears, or Seungri decides to speak publicly about it after his release.
There is ZERO evidence that Seungri is guilty of any of the 8 contested charges (the foreign exchange transaction violation is a financial, victimless crime). ⬇️
No person has ever claimed to be a victim of any kind of criminal behaviour by Seungri. Witnesses for the prosecution (!) were saying in court that he was NOT GUILTY, ffs.
The media went so far as to fabricate evidence... ⬇️
...(manipulated chats, wrongly identifying him as "Singer Lee") to implicate Seungri in unrelated criminal cases. Do you really think if evidence for his guilt came out during the court hearings the very same media would not have reported on it?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
When talking about #Seungri 's legal case, I often note that he was sentenced even though prosecution (!) witnesses were speaking in favour of his innocence. #JusticeForSeungri
But there are even more troubling aspects which call the fairness of the trial into question:
🧵⬇️
Yoo In Seok was named by witnesses as the actual responsible for the prostitution mediation charges (meaning hiring sex workers for others). Why was he allowed to repeatedly absent himself from questioning, despite being called as a witness? ⬇️
A Japanese businessman was specifically named as the recipient of prostitution services by the court. However, he had previously denied this in a public social media post and moreover was accompanied by his spouse on the day in question (confirmed by photographic evidence). ⬇️