Hit the link to read that, for some reason I cannot fathom, the trial judge will be required to accept these lies as true because, I guess, there was no live witness to claim the opposite. That is -- I'm thinking -- the rule is that if one side puts on some evidence, and the other side does not rebut with any evidence, you have to give the issue to the side with some evidence?

Even if that "evidence" is obvious lies and self-serving alibis?

Ugh. That doesn't get Fani out of the woods entirely, because the judge will, I hope, point out that she was required by regulations to note every gift of more than $100 she received, which she did not do. She chose to pretend these gifts never happened, because she alleges she paid the gifts back with completely untraceable Phantom Cash that apparently was never from any place that keeps records.