On the next episode of @popobawa4u, Attorney At Law:
"Your Honor, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, we cannot look at the facts of the case, we need to look at the meaning of the facts. And in this case, the facts have no meaning, so the facts don’t matter, so we need to look beyond the meaning of the facts. When my client walked into the bank, pointed a gun at the teller, and said, “This is a robbery,” he was commenting about the juxtaposition between John Locke’s Second Treatise of value and property and the ideology of Occupy Wall Street. And when my client said, “Give me all the money!” we cannot actually know whose money it is!
Since we can only admit we know nothing, we cannot know for certain whether the surveillance cameras that filmed my client actually filmed him, his car, and his license plates. When police searched my client’s house and found sacks of money with serial numbers registered to the bank, we cannot know this is actually money! Indeed, Rene Descartes would point out the question isn’t whether the police found sacks or money, but rather, was the money in the sacks at all? The money and the sacks don’t think, therefore they aren’t, and might not be!
Finally, when my client said, “You got me, I did it,” he was referencing the works of Thomas Hobbes and Emmanuel Kant by questioning the exact nature of “me” and “it”! Since we cannot know the true nature of self, we cannot know “me,” or for that matter, “it!” Clearly, the entire case against my client is built upon a shaky foundation of questions that demand answers, but since we have no answers, the questions remain unanswered, and without answers, we have no proof! Without proof, there is no guilt, and in our system of jurisprudence, my client is innocent until proven guilty!"
