Looking at UpChuck’s latest attempt to smear a victim., I see that he has misunderstood the court documents cited in his award-winning research and mistakenly understood 12 entries to mean 12 citations, when in fact there are only six unique citations referenced.

Checking the case numbers:
9102008713102I —> 9102008713102IF
9102009007176I —> 9102009007176IF
9102010710215I —> 9102010710215IF
9102011007117C —> 9102011007117CR
9102011739288C —> 9102011739288CR
9102012746797C —> 9102012746797CR

I’m assuming that I is initial and F is final, and the R means resolved. There are also only six unique citations.

So, he has failed reading comprehension yet again.

The website he used is courtsentry.com, which does not include details for “local charges,” which I assume include infractions like littering and parking violations.