Your Honor, its very clear that Mr. Medvedev was massively confused by what was happening to him. He spent months asserting that his things had been stolen by Mr. Chill's associates, even going as far to seek legal action. Your Honor, no man of sound mind would do this if he was aware that he was evicted by the courts.
Your Honor, I've provided photo evidence of the appearance of floor 8, which to my knowledge has not been touched since the eviction. Your Honor, very clearly there is no notice on Mr. Medvedev's door. The only notice is moderately sized, and singular from my observation. One notice in a sea of scribbles, very clearly shown in our evidence. Even if Medvedev happened to enter and exit his apartment once or twice, It's plenty plausible for him to miss this notice, the defense reasons. This is assuming that Mr. Medvedev either left or entered his apartment at Eclipse during the eviction time frame you've described your Honor. Your Honor, Mr. Medvedev of course had a secondary residence at the Banner Hotel. With this in mind the defense believes that it is perfectly reasonable for Mr. Medvedev to not have visited his apartment during this time, whether it was because he took a vacation to the beach or he simply just felt like enjoying the free cable at the Banner Hotel for a couple weeks.
Your Honor, the fact remains that Mr. Medvedev had legal possessions in his apartment, which were taken from him by the state, Frankly Your Honor, the defense believes that Mr. Medvedev's possessions have not been condemned for lawful seizure via due process. If it's civil asset forfeiture, there has been no argument in rem asserting the property to be connected to a crime. If its eminent domain, Mr. Medvedev has to be compensated as is his constitutional right. If its landlord-tenant civil stuff, there needs to civil damages for the landlord to receive relief for to keep those assets. If its landlord abandoned property, did it enter the custody of the Police or of the landlord themselves? If its the police what happened to his belongings and why are they unwilling to give them back? If its the landlord, which is presumably the state itself, is it the DOJ's power and responsibility to manage abandoned property on the state's property? Your Honor, this is what I mean when I wish to see the legal basis for the seizure, and I want to see that this was the reasoning at the time of the seizure, and due process was followed. The defense doesn't believe that an eviction notice leads to total forfeiture of all belongings related to the property without a trial, without due process, and without specific court order, just for the crime of failing to visit one of your places of residence in 5 days.
Again, I just want to see the state's argument for what is the legal basis for the seizure, and why they are refusing to return the assets. That's assuming the state even wishes to refuse, as no arguments or rebuttal besides me lacking an itemized list of what was taken has been presented by the state to even suggest so. @DAO Office @580 A. Sharpe
