Tseemyeej and Tou,

Since Ncaimtsemnco claims himself a juror in the case of the incident
allegedly involving LyTek at Hin Heup and as a juror he has received
overwhelming evidence in court testimonies to establish mea culpae
against Lytek, the defendant, I would like you both to challenge
Ncaimtseemnco on the basis of (1) the evidence and (1) the credentials
of Ncaimtseemnco as a qualified juror in this case.

(1) Evidence in the court of law must be gathered, certified and
presented by independent, impartial and qualified authorities.
Evidence may include testimonies by witnesses, forensic evidence
gathered by experts and other relevant evidentiary testimonies that
bear direct judicial implications on the case. Here Ncaimtseemnco must
prove that the evidence meets judicial requirements: allegation versus
truth. Unless truth is established beyond any reasonable doubt, the
evidence is disqualified and the case is dismissed.