Appendix Reduction of a single guiltyD.W.I. and multiple not guilty D.U.I.

1. Nicholas Forystek vs. Minnetonka
2. Nicholas Forystek vs. Mall of America
3. Nicholas Forystek vs. Mdewankatwon
4. Nicholas Forystek vs. Minnetrista
5. Nicholas Forystek vs. Minnesota

Overview Statistics and points ofinterest to gather for building the cases

Incidents

• Mall of America falsified dog suicide.
• Mystic Lake, Shakopee and Belmont.
• North Arm boat launch parking lot.
• Toms B.W.I. on Lake Minnetonka.
• Bailiff arraigns outside of court room.

Eight brown jurisdiction officers

• Shakopee incident troopers name.
• Shakopee incident cat or K9s name.
• Restitution incident D.N.R. name.
• 1st of two B.W.I. incident D.N.R. name.
• 2nd of two B.W.I. incident D.N.R. name.
• Mall of America incident troopers name.
• Mall of America incident K9s name.
• Bailiff outside courtroom at settlement.

Localized police department officers

• Shakopee incident local officers name.
• 1st of plethora Mall of America incident police.
• 2nd of plethora Mall of America incident police.
• Restitution incident local officers name.

Security guards in uniform

• 1st of plethora Mall of America incident guard.
• 2nd of plethora Mall of America incident guard.
• 3rd of plethora Mall of America incident guard.
• 1st of plethora Mystic Lake incident guard.
• 2nd of plethora Mystic Lake incident guard.
• 3rd of plethora Mystic Lake incident guard.

One D.W.I. and all D.U.I upon my recordreduced to one D.U.I. on account of character of deformation lien of federalofficers driving.

Opening Argument:

The actions offederal D.N.R. officers placed in motion during a B.W.I. become the course oftwo possible routes to option with no better scenario presented a choice wasmade that continues to defer a character judgment and officers good civic oathand duty with making the wrong decisions such as those I made by drivingfriends in what would be my only D.W.I. to date as well as inopportunitydirectly placed on actions of poor authorities decisions that may risk futuresafety of their performances.

Addendum:

Going over theB.W.I. specifically in memory how it went which enabled the decisions of D.N.R.officers that will effect three other federal decisions in authoritiespositions during their performance and project judgment on my behalf to wadethe options in a state of inebriation, always a false safety, but hinderingchange, giving prelude to multiple D.U.I. that for instance are not misinterpretedbut are infect side effect false for the findings at each driving violation.

Going over eachof the three other cases, where a official of brown jurisdiction becameinvolved, also retained bad judgment and/or is missing from the record,pertaining as well, to two K9 officers, whom by in bestow pass, largelyinstinct the passive actions of the job as all communication not just a falseor true query to the entire picture like that a human may find himself error onaction to the best safety performance of everyones abilities to cooperation.

Going over theD.U.I. and similarities to passive nature of questionable slide scale safetyfirst as a constant reminder that the line walked liens to one direction ifcertain said influence was or was not a projection normality more features thena irrational judgment for something like energy or pain that consistently effects,and the ladder, a high feeling that is physiological that may cloud judgment

Going over due tothe actual fate in play set forth by the B.W.I. and what decision had thedouble driving effect been the wrong of a variant few ways the situation couldbe handled, how this effects the direct console of ones self in a inebriated ornon, such as authorities performing duty, decision making spite the betteroption for both parties involved in a situation of care taking before officersarrive, and care taking as the officers assess arrests and evidence to theinitial charge.

Going over thefacts the officers may well had known the injunction they are using is not thebest viable option to their conscious and noted by their lack of reportingwhere as missing facts present not in the records so far as I am able to query,which is a sign of their escape the situation they may know is not wrong butnot finding the right solution to their continue, thus willingly, undercharacter deformation leave out portions relevant to the case, such as ainitial stopping troopers name or involvement all together, for a pull overthat is passed to local authorities.

Going over forgood reasons what the K9 units have held up as their duty in performance oflast options to spot check the officer in court for the case, least responsibleprobability that the humans on the cases have done said single time duty percase, and really get what is allowed for their signing oath, obtained incherish out values with their rewarding sensibility to by so loyal with outthese distress calls.

ClosingStatement:

It is with out adoubt that the facts and cases have been revisited and sets in motion properrevocation of initial findings for the better of each party involved such thatthe court and police as well as citizen governing systems have justified theconclusion of this said case, providing proof evident the fact not opinion ofdeformation in character judgment on Nicholass entire D.U.I. and D.W.I. recordthat which have been set straight with the providing reduction to concerns wellkept and that future involvement upon the road of this wake are properlyadjusted in first time patterns and not taking up time and mental health ofindividuals involved.

Given facts exhibited in hypothesis formin-between open and closing sentences during a case, the following is a caseargument for obstruction to a wall as unjust to be listened with out concernfor discernment a must:

Opening Argument:

Hearing throughwalls or any other solid object may not be heard in origin context.

Hypothesis Theories

1.     A wall is solid

• Experiment: With a solid, such as a rock, attempt to move your hand through it, record finds.
• Control: With a non solid, such as water, attempt to move your hand through it, record finds.
• Test: With a wall, attempt to move your hand through it, record comparison findings.

2.     Sound waves travel

• Experiment: Half way between Point A and C, clock a cap gun bang sound at point A for how long it takes the sound to reach point C.
• Control: On point A, clock a cap gun bang at point A for how long it takes to hear the sound at point A.
• Test: Clock a cap gun bang sound at point A for how long it takes the sound to reach point C.

3.     Solid objects dampen sound

• Experiment: Sound a cap gun near a solid object with hollow interior, and microphone on the exterior opposing side of the cap gun. Record volume findings.
• Control: Sound a cap gun near a solid object with a hollow interior and microphone on the interior. Record volume findings.
• Test: Sound a cap gun with out a solid object and microphones where the solid object was when were in interior and exterior placements. Record volume findings.

4.     Sound collides with solid objects

• Experiment: Sound a cap gun off in an interior small room and microphone inside as well and record the findings of reverb echo.
• Control: Sound a cap gun off outside of any room in wide open spaces and microphone record the findings of reverb echo.
• Test: Sound a cap gun off in an interior small room with a hanging tinfoil sheet next to the gun and microphone record any reverb echo of room and tin.

5.     Ears hear sound

• Experiment: Record for one straight minute and during the minute has someone cap gun behind you with a comment express when you hear it, record findings.
• Control: Record for one straight minute and during have no sound of a cap gun, behind you but raise no at the end of the minute if non-heard.
• Test: Record for one straight minute and during that minute has someone cap gun behind you more then once and comment yes whenever you hear the gun, record findings.

6.     Two sounds maybe only one

• Experiment: Drop a metal can to hit the floor and record the sound that it makes, and then record the findings.
• Control: Drop a plastic cup to hit the floor and record the sound that it makes, and then record the findings.
• Test: Drop a plastic cup and metal can to hit the floor at the same time and record the sound, recording the findings.

Hypothesis Facts

       In space sound bounces around off solid objectsin plenty directions that change course which modifies travel over time inwhich an ear hears

       Travel over time in collision makes divisionthat makes new sounds through adding the deflection itself to the ear bylatency arrival may two.

Closing Statement

Walls mostcertainly cause obstruction to sound waves that may bounce and combine two makeone at the point of hearing in which words combine and English it self maydiscern, thus unable in context to be clearly understood.

Level of attention to projected under craftwith battery vehicle.

OpeningStatement:

Intended toprovide a basic overview of speech 101 lessons as told to me to credit theachievement of attention.

Addendum:

In speech a verybasic lesson is that of ways to grab someones attention, indefinite to knowyou have or have not, and ways to improve attention getting. Singularly getting one persons attention is acritical first step in component to seeking the crowds attention. Knowing you have ones attention includes thedirection they are facing, to or fro and also eye contact, which one may havewith you but their mind maybe still wandering not in attention. When you have direct visual reference theyare facing you, a similarities to the importance of speech with incommunication that also hold true in dire needs of calling for help is thatpossibility they are not still in attention.Using your visual ability and audio ability may still be needed, stufflike flailing your arms profusely would if a cry for help meant life or death,yelling of course, and using the word help, a similarity to a start of a speechgathering the crowd to quiet may need some loud gestures for restlessnessunsettled. Audio response is alsoattractive in calling for help, but not so much in speech, as all silent is theaudio help to deliver a clear uninterrupted monologue. So in calling for help one does not respondwe keep trying until we get that response in return. Sometimes in speech the crowd tends to getboard, and eyes begin to wander again.These are all indicators that the speech is not so thoroughly delivered,reinstruction of quiet or attention may be required considering the speechmaybe critical importance when the president is speaking, or relief effortslocally need organization. Illustrating this there is the negative to attentiongetting which is inversely as effective in drawing the response but not keepingthe attention. Tactics of this meansconsists of stopping what youre doing to get attention when the attentionturns to. Using a very low voice thatdoes not make it concisely hearing thus the turn to attention is also neededwhere as, sometimes direct the attention is not the same true they may alsohear while directed not at the speaker.Being out of range visually so that when attention arrives you furtherback out to hidden easily is the visual equivalent, to the low volume audioattention to halt. When you visuallyplace people in scenery they may disappear easily from obstruction, variousways like a car may use gas speed to do so the same, or just the door closing,but is as not human itself to hear. Atthese negative types of visual and audio reference to attention getting, thereis the human response of which a scenery or car is not capable of thus leavinghollow remnants bestowed upon. Quitepossibly, a kinder tide of mental illness of hearing voices that repeat forsimply bouncing off in defection. Nonethe less, a entire day span of this in constants as if it were which wasappointed in a health purpose negatively adverse on the tale, thesolidification of a repeated attempt to see or get attention response goes without and then it is continued when truly not found and emotion drives the soughtout. Humans in emotion tend to stay in emotion.Someone missing another person and nowhere to be found does not give uphope so easily. Someone with solidcomponent mental illness retardation may be physically missing their ability toreason check every visual non condoning possibility. Someone evading as if was loss not, yet stillnot with another in unjust goodbye, may cause a lot of damage unnecessarily andby no fault of their own.

Closing Argument:

There is not enough supportingevidence to consider the requesting party was properly addressing therespondent.

Identity Theft of the Most Try

Opening Argument:

Aim to clearlyoutline ways identity theft by trait of vets is far more harsh and able whenand should be taken literal is definite use.

Addendum:

A parent has aright to sign for his children so long as they are minor of age. A parent also has the right to deny or allowhis children into opportunity of what could be early ownership assets such aschild acting does by the child gaining an income. The relative of any family member is a in house opportunity that minors are not able avoid inclose quarters, and neither a parent raising their children. A parent names neither their children, not anill literal unable to walk nor cognitive reasoning mentally yet developed inmemory. When is it that with the adventof the Junior and Senior suffix to names is going to be added to the MinnesotaName change form which only includes three parts of a name, where as thetechnical Junior and Senior in fact in case in hand represents a fourth atexpense of three parts of a name, being the first, middle and last as exactly thesame, then and only then is the Junior and Senior relevant. When a parent names their child and uses theJunior and Senior it may or may not be intent that they are the same name onpaper at any given time of their life, or belated to be a interchangeableposture to use of services one or the either has enlisted with the name, but incase in hand, by ways of naming conventionally of the children there is farmore then one sign of this likely intent manifesting even so if did not, andwhether expressed right away or late, the proverb of the naming of the child inthe beginning is at fault to identity theft.In Nicholas family there is Thomas John Forystek Junior his brother andSenior, his father and as well a cousin of his Nicole K. Forystek which non similarto Nicholas R. Forystek if could suffix, yet is slightly similar to Nicole M.Forystek a deceased of his mothers first pregnancy whom was aborted in acontroversial 3^rd trimester procedure at 11months old. It is likely hoof of the naming ability ofThomas John Forystek and Mary K. Forystek that Thomas John Forystek is in foridentity theft he can not instant manage the escape of, just as his father,would they both, par one sets it up, the other the use of, an account namedNich0ls. While Nicholas did express theword for username he added a zero not to be cool but pass on what he did notbelieve his brother would do, which he then asked him to not make one, becausehe wouldnt use it, is when his brother proceeded to give it to his father foruse. A man who by his own childs name,quite likely planed to would do such perverse tactics in identity theft. As blood related, there is not need toexpress asset least the child know about it and it is in the development of,where as a care taking foster situation one that child abuse warrants prison,there is a reason to trick the child into thinking your blood related such thatyou do not have to explain their accompanied assets, such as the money stolenfrom Nicholas and the guilty party of use in his name, just as the man wouldname his son himself as himself after himself, and to be continued as identitytheft for expression of dealt.

ClosingStatement:

The mans fatherfigure, a close member of his growing up, outright has no conscious or sorryfor the use of others names in overwriting uniqueness by reason of naming themhimself with exhibited use undeniable.

Environmental cleanup uniquely first timeoccurs a class of attraction when gone on unknown, in two party biasess theirtime better well spent not the environment timing defense.

Open Statement:

When unknownfactors occur that can be harmful to community, humans or the environmentitself as a quality of life plant or otherwise livable probabilities, a cleanup effort may be going on prior to actual maintaining clean up of the largerissue.

Addendum:

Large or small, everything is alearning experience and we are not always right, sometimes making effort inirreversible non permanent solutions to the best of our ability. Efforts unfinished include two that are notknown by each other where as one finalized another in a better permanentsolution. Efforts are man made and onlyhuman, they do not include environments state of truly happening with or with outour guidance results in pursuant of when the calamity is disastrous orotherwise detrimental to our health as a union.Before a sequential likely hood of another solution, not readilyavailable is actualized, a emergency act is in motionwhen we cite the effects it has harming our health. These solutions liner likea case management in court, have people in the parallel attempting to react inurgency where needed, and think in long term for emergency that is with outreversible change. Thus the component ofnon resolve or less then capable full resolve has a lasting effect until lightmaybe shed and that is only as depth as responsibility where we may never havenon for non issues confined to out grasp of knowledge, also rather suchprofound reasoning and would be conclusive solutions that they are laterallyunattained by; individuals who have by in numbers agreed upon their reasoning asolution whether or not it is little to large help, still non resolve, andparties who believe that while unknown not a spoken token by the other party,still no sign of relief continues their personal experience to distrustfalsified resolve. Providing twoparallel realities on a liner gauge, a offsetting as such maybe religiouslysought in support, or criminally foreign in attack, ladder effect is ignorantunknown to logical arrogance bestow. Aeventual event may happen with only the parallel experience and not heenvironment that which is acceptance, with out grievance for the venture ofurgency having a effect, of that which is also denial to distain sought outresolve in whether god or man, a environment distrust that community wont letdown their fight for regaining grounds of a happier health to all and then tosuch goes the spoils. These spoils maynever arise resulting of a allocation of what it is inextreme environment issues or very little everyday things we dont do forourselves, the reason to which party you may be on the side of in same timeframe of environment occurrence. A thirdlogical external to the detrimental effects as a party also is liaison toeither of these formidable parties responses to the quality of environment ofwhich, may enter the refute and choose their side, well in fact, not so truefor the first of unknown health may prosper well more, with a solution to the asure thing, graces.

Closing Argument;

Either of these two parties citesan example of the cause, and has an opinionated bias to their actions over thetime of an environmental health hindering hindsight their actions foregoing theoption in the same.

Child support case of the business kind in a draw out judgment ofcourts appealing decision well includes council confined in preface case ifopinion.

Opening Statement:

Contempt of court holds up tiltof cases when in pinball apparent the pusher waiver of wins so while outsidethe mends you need see the judge, not a third party to fuzz detectors of humanspreaching their child protectors.

Addendum:

Go over major prospects of ways court is foreigndiplomatically under fire in a war, for establishing none use with in its ownsystem. Holding up court as not regular sick or holiday paid vacationssimilarly characterizes a all left or all right standard starting first inhistory to resolve of reach the pinnacle combats new case entry by relate tocase agenda at hand. In two partysupport of playing with themselves, excuse the expression, the condemn it thesame for ways dates and individuals must be placed in harmony. Go over no fight is rightfully allowed incourt, plenty of sue is just that when involved two parties as individual nonbusiness defined inanimate objects of a influence, such as the environment,sometimes bites, seemingly a fight but one for all, all afford when may casemanagement uncover interest in revisiting with out reason of reproach. Two parties in a dispute such as that in sueone another is a technical fight and while with words appreciating the courtsappeal, like behaved adults, it is still neither a will enough to peak ajudges topic response decision on case priority for not lasting what maybeplaying with themselves and/or hold up built tilts. Tilts like in pinball are only capable of byforce from what the ball touches, thus the parent object to the ball, capableof continued tilt, when with a lobbyist in part together nor neither to do whetheror not holds out by off, the ball then has no control in single player, twoperson pinball playing push the machine toggling the ball at unrest or capableitself reach the decision to play at all.These are technical non use of the courts with the court resources and aJudge sitting center stage does not capable have not already entered instanding position to court itself, and likely on invasion by silent enemy, thisis probable easy waivers for foreign attacks on U.S.A. soil, as well,preprocessed standard ignorant of unaware to their cause may deemed better,come and go type of repeat case daily habit.

Closing Argument:

There is a definite out of play indicator by the judge,and therefore placing the opening statements at peril to the factor of theentry requirements that such in business it is considered late child supportpayments only resolved by representative backing out of the case to concludetheir dissolving of for selfish purpose that neither the judge apprehends fornor the pretends poor the perquisite payments when once before cases as suchwere closed, the judge importantly pertains to business and the adult ablepresent a statement, arraigns with out retainer, case in hand, pointing noright even when just words to ask a judge to finish their fight against theyouth whom with they known control is the courts too appealing.

Some peoples timebetter spent in their own allocation must not be reasonably those of disasterefforts cleaning up, or neither profit of a natural disaster in effort onestime.

Opening Statement:

During events of disasters whether unknown or seen, thoseefforts of the kind cherish well before the proposed determination of timeallotted the same for all individuals who place will in their purposing.

Addendum:

Priority of natural disasters may not be known or advancedof human health may always see more in areas not predestine but human increation. When there is a potential offbalance those too may also not me known by most but certainly some symptoms ofmental illnesses illustrate when a person or people become in need ofhelp. The signs alone may be the helpfor the guidance where as someone doesnt ignore the initial but not potentialraised community problem someone could be exhibiting. This like habit can go on in nature but thereis also posture of whom helps who in emerges apriority. Possibilities that involvementare ones aspiration of time are to be set aside for anothers, and likely thatsomeone is a hospital respondent or emergency respondent like the police orfiremen, are both time consuming and most likely a choice whether demand orbothered to enforced. When we speak ofthe environment a similarity to a chemical spill, verses a company dumping, or a already chemical company, this maybe going on with littleor potential large risks for long run that is not immediate in operationknowledge of the future of. Consider theincident it is, and consider three parties of action, and three parties outsideaction whom have voice. One party is thecompany, another two are the public, one is ignoring with out listen, andanother is concerned. One company maybecome concerned should the concern approach, but one thing for certain of theproblem being at problem to the future is that the outcome is benefits tohealth whether mental or physical.Should the company not become on board and concern still continues, theignoring maybe made aware and join help efforts of petitions, abiding to threeother non exhibiting parties are the same parties at all these types of healthrisk events that maybe not seen or will be eventually those in history like aoil spill in the cleanup effort stage. To propose others whom ultimately didnthave involvement one way or another is not happening at events unknown in whatmay better the environment still just ideas uncreated. To be concerned and not the company ispossibly the ill fated reign check of what was payment to the invalid partythey would rather had heard. What isneither of these are the mental issues of those who take effort to gain on theevents using the damage of the down fall in light of the reaction not changingor really efforts of a foreign outbreak of war in anothers country. So much so that it becomes the child supportcase for selfish payments unvalued in efforts maybe neutral to non existentbefore they are head on damaging with providing no the information of enlightenrather just chalking it up to unexplained,, with out haste, later in historicalis just a boat spilled, those who had their effort to provide no changewatching along maybe not the best metal status of child support in extremityand therefore proprietors of mental disorders.Illness aside, disorder remains no orderly, unless maybe corrected but environmentposing a challenge has no time for let another make the challenge harder forspeaking unknown depths of the solution or know what is happening being a way tknow how the fix comes about.

Closing Argument:

There is capitalizing however so be fit the time of an actfor bipartisan parties for to be with in their own respect supporting their ownchildren neighbor or environment otherwise that does not reflect all will ofothers over a same time period, more then one party may have spoken for theirpiece forever held in non help the ordering of mental abilities over their lifein crutch of environmental abusive, ignorance, strategy or war.

Ensure of issuesreused insurance instance of case definition as seconds neither commits personscontinue with said names portrayal in predisposition carry propone know willdefined nuisance firm.

Opening Argument:

Then it is with out grace that I declare my will be assumemy name with in a case of any due process has process before thrown out,affords fort, and with out a doubt as adult, arraign or summons on width outdetainee nor bench warrant, the ability when and if case opening for interestendurances, council then presents as two more parties of public kept asdiscreet as transcripts to conclude a firm basis of said propone knowallowances library becomes two by in defined interest handled fiscal incumbentto reason of cases made interest the individual.

Addendum:

To appropriate funding of monetary cash note value misspenton what the interest of the issue has means for, the case must be made for theentire time results of needs met while the providing funding is set apartindifferent from able use for any funding, but never spend with any fundingfor. To show up providing two or morecases in chain by named individual as receipted, the health of the courts haveby in operation concluded a propone know for raster knowledge there of and notsaid inclusion, happens to be width out doubt a intrusion of securitiesprospected by the courts own contempt with including the public or definingpropone know at the risk of including real situations, there in a clause ofwar, allowed respectable business may thus in private courtship, has a error ofdoubt to the validity of one or more cases continuum, also suffered one moreexpense at any given time, with out charge or arrest, maintained on soil ofUnited States courtship contended by none interaction well with or whethertricked, where in might due process be trove.

Closing Statement:

To set apart money providing proof needs of a unit togetherbest just reasons other then said court interest in appeal the issue of ensure,unit or otherwise does not captivate nor include by advance real name allowancefrom case to case more for lack of unofficially delivering a providing featureof court case itself, sequentially has a propone know effect when the councilallows continuance.