Kermit the Frog
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2017
There were times you could tell Rochelle was panicking over some of the things Phil was saying. The questions Nancy asked were designed to get Phil to lie and every single time he fell for it. He does own electronics for personal use he didn't report. He didn't disclose he was getting his tips via Streamlabs. He couldn't give specifics about what his business expenses are (muh tax attorney!). He couldn't even answer what kind of business Burnell Productions is (because it's not an actual business and exists in name only). He couldn't give a straight answer about anything because he did exactly 0 seconds of preparation and was completely oblivious to how overmatched he was. I imagine after the meeting was over Rochelle put her head in her hands and asked herself what she did to deserve this dishonest piece of shit as a client. Phil waddled off thinking everything went great.We know when he claimed it, and transfers or expenditures can be presumptively fraudulent within a certain amount of time before then, but they can also be fraudulent a longer time beforehand if the debtor was aware of deepening insolvency and continued to worsen his state. This is why his lawyer didn't want him answering this stuff if possible.
She had no real basis to tell him to refuse to answer but you could notice her being disruptive and interrupting a lot at this point to keep Phil from saying shit any more stupid than he's already seen. If your lawyer seems to be getting agitated, but isn't telling you outright not to answer (because they can't), TAKE THE HINT. Say as little as possible. Get evasive.