Whether evidence of Giglio/Napue violations can be utilized as new evidence under Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure 33(b)(1) or if it is limited to the fourteen day rule under Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure 33(b)(2)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED ; I Whether evidence of Giglio/Napue violations can be utilized as new evidence under Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure 33(b)(1) or if it is limited to the fourteen day rule under Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure 33({b)(2). Il Whether if defense counsel's failure to object to Giglio violations at trial isa bar to post conviction relief even when the defendant directly addressed the court specifying counsel's refusal to challenge the Government. Ill Whether if the false presentation of numerous facts at trial including . falsely claiming the victim is an FDIC insured financial institution is a new species of Giglio violations when that presentation at trial is premeditated with the cooperation of defense attorneys. IV Whether if it is incumbent upon the Government to clarify matters for the Court when it issues conflicting opinions in the same case which undermine jurisdiction for the entire conviction. Whether there is a point at which Giglio/Napue violations can be asserted as law of the case, or in so asserting, is the Government attorney who capitalizes on a colleague's known misrepresentations, , committing a new subset of Giglio. v Whether when prosecutors explain counts in closing arguments and state, "that's why it matters", must the context of this statement be considered material. -i VI Whether when a court ignores or sanctions violations of federal ; court rules if such is grounds for prejudice and must the Court provide a reasoned response for the striking of motions and whether when the court is presented with facts undermining the court's jurisdiction if the court is compelled to respond by thoughtful examination of the motion or petition despite the type and style if presented by a pro se defendant.