Scroll down to video arguments for Feb. 3. It is the first one. I don't know why he lies about using AI.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5836543&forum_id=2,#49681608)

i dont understand his story about uploading the wrong version. why didnt they let him file a corrected brief? something is off on both sides.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5836543&forum_id=2,#49681715)

The saddest part is he turns his head around and he is going bald. It is over.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5836543&forum_id=2,#49681771)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5836543&forum_id=2,#49682195)

it's obviously a retarded argument that would fail no matter what but if that was his excuse he should've committed to the bit and sold it harder, "look i put random placeholders in my drafts all the time, you accidentally got v1. kapish?" instead he let his nervous shaking do the talking.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5836543&forum_id=2,#49682148)

but if this is the case and he filed a motion to replace the brief, it's not clear why he didnt do this in the first place. it's not clear exactly wtf his motion to replace was even about

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5836543&forum_id=2,#49682190)

he should have just withdrawn the appeal and faced whatever consequences with his client, assuming he we past the point of no return on coming clean he didn't use AI in his draft. nut i do understand how this can happen. ive seen plenty of lawyers fuck up and lie without consequence. many get used to it and think they never will.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5836543&forum_id=2,#49683828)

With an hour to go, your best move is controlled candor and damage containment. Judges care far more about integrity than about a flawed brief.

Here is a short, direct script you could use that is truthful without being self-immolating:

“May it please the Court. Before turning to the merits, I need to address an issue with my briefing. After filing, I discovered that certain cited authorities in my brief are not properly verifiable in the Nebraska reporters. That is my responsibility. I regret the error. I am not asking the Court to rely on any authority that cannot be independently confirmed. The legal principles at issue are supported by established Nebraska law, and I am prepared to proceed today relying only on controlling, verifiable authority and the record.”

If pressed:

“Your Honor, I used technological drafting tools in preparing the brief and did not adequately verify every citation before filing. That was my mistake. I take full responsibility, and I apologize to the Court.”

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5836543&forum_id=2,#49683817)

i just wanted to look up whatever motion he might have filed

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5836543&forum_id=2,#49683592)

governments will never give up any revenue stream and only a handful of people care enough about this to want it changed. it's all fraud and lies.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5836543&forum_id=2,#49683924)

Your honor, it's MY writing process

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5836543&forum_id=2,#49683813)

A: a non-lawyer clerk wrote the brief, my boss signed it, i haven't checked it, and it contains multiple hallucinations, Your Honor.

Q: is that how your firm does things?

A: not all the time.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5836543&forum_id=2,#49683819)