- Joined
- Feb 21, 2016
We're five days out from Laur's next court date. Filings are still holding steady at 111, but I was reviewing Laur's "evidence" to date, and discovered something interesting.
Laur has made several false claims that were rejected by the lower court, resulting in the 2/9/26 eviction: that her forwarding the $28,800 HRA loan funds to Vincent Jin in July 2025 constituted a new tenancy; and that the $28,800 loan money was an advance payment for rent from 7/1/25 - 12/31/25.
Both Lawyer Dong and Laur's lawyer acknowledged that no new tenancy was created in July 2025, and this was confirmed in the final decision on the 2024 eviction case.
A question Lawyer Dong and Judge Greenberg may want to ask her on Monday: if the $28,800 paid on July 8, 2025 was advance payment for six months of rent, then why did Laur write in the payment memo that the money was "rent payment for past due rent"?

Obviously, this is just one of the numerous lies Laur has reported to the Civil Supreme Court (Earl paralyzed from the neck down; Lillie having "surgeries" preventing them from leaving; APS will block the eviction; Laur is fully paid up on rent; the lower court findings were "illegal"; the landlord is part of a conspiracy to stalk the Truemans; etc.) Laur will have to answer for these and more lies, in person, on the spot, and I wish she really was important enough for the case to be livestreamed, because it's going to be hilarious.
Laur has made several false claims that were rejected by the lower court, resulting in the 2/9/26 eviction: that her forwarding the $28,800 HRA loan funds to Vincent Jin in July 2025 constituted a new tenancy; and that the $28,800 loan money was an advance payment for rent from 7/1/25 - 12/31/25.
Both Lawyer Dong and Laur's lawyer acknowledged that no new tenancy was created in July 2025, and this was confirmed in the final decision on the 2024 eviction case.
A question Lawyer Dong and Judge Greenberg may want to ask her on Monday: if the $28,800 paid on July 8, 2025 was advance payment for six months of rent, then why did Laur write in the payment memo that the money was "rent payment for past due rent"?

Obviously, this is just one of the numerous lies Laur has reported to the Civil Supreme Court (Earl paralyzed from the neck down; Lillie having "surgeries" preventing them from leaving; APS will block the eviction; Laur is fully paid up on rent; the lower court findings were "illegal"; the landlord is part of a conspiracy to stalk the Truemans; etc.) Laur will have to answer for these and more lies, in person, on the spot, and I wish she really was important enough for the case to be livestreamed, because it's going to be hilarious.










