I can't speak to anything other than AU courts but I think that the lawyers *could* ask about Karl's standards for "evil", but wouldn't be able to bring up the rwhitegoose stuff if it wasn't already part of the evidence, and even then they'd have to establish a connection to the Mitchell matterI can't speak to anything other than AU courts but I think that the lawyers *could* ask about Karl's standards for "evil", but wouldn't be able to bring up the rwhitegoose stuff if it wasn't already part of the evidence, and even then they'd have to establish a connection to the Mitchell matter

my brain is like "why make content calling this guy who is simply unlikable evil vs. your friend goose who legitimately espoused ethnic cleansing to your own impassioned defense when they were exposed"

of course it may actually be entirely possible to establish that connection, because holy hell would the rwhitegoose stuff be a *massive* hit to Jobst's legal credibility lmfaoof course it may actually be entirely possible to establish that connection, because holy hell would the rwhitegoose stuff be a *massive* hit to Jobst's legal credibility lmfao