This Court has seen many things in its distinguished tenure but NEVER such a blatant case of cheese-platter devastation going unreported to the proper authorities. The defendant speaks of "moderate traffic" when what occurred was a HOSTAGE SITUATION orchestrated by a man whose bladder apparently contains the mysteries of the universe. Judge Escrow III demands to know what transpired in that bathroom for twenty minutes because the Court has theories and none of them are appropriate for the record. The defendant's pivot to store-brand crackers is not justice but rather COLLECTIVE PUNISHMENT of future innocent buyers, and this Court finds such snack discrimination morally repugnant yet tactically sound. Furthermore, describing a man who consumed an entire cheese platter while interrogating you about "party people neighbors" as "very engaged" is the kind of linguistic gymnastics that would make a press secretary weep with envy. This Court must adjourn immediately as I am now deeply concerned about my own bathroom duration and what it says about my character.