alleged altered transcripts V

From the plea hearing transcript, page 2 :

I allege the following actually was said :

THE COURT: What's this?

MS. PIEPER: He was in the car with them.

Which I interpret as, what's this pandering charge? because no "official" statements made by Amanda exist in the district court record. The Court, Ms. Pieper and Mr. Parris were all well aware of Amanda's criminal case J328423, which I have alleged contains extensive statements made by Amanda to the Sacramento Police department.

And Ms.Pieper's answer, "he was in the car with them", Ms.Pieper could only fall back on "guilt by association", because I allege Ms.Pieper certainly knew the contents of Amanda's statements in J328423 which simply established I was only Amanda's John, and nothing else. Therefore, obvious motive to keep the knowledge of J328423 away from me.

This allegation was stated in ecf 51, page 13.

Go to alleged altered transcripts VI