Should defendant Cproceeding se pro a in forma criminal case) pauperis given in a be the record on appeat of in a second Copy his her direct order to appeal after officials intentionally especially prison set of the record on lost the original appeat during two separate prison transters as puerile acts of egregious retaliation?

Should pro se defendants be granted in forma pauperis status in criminal cases, given that the second copy of the record on appeal was intentionally lost by prison officials, requiring two separate prison transfers as punitive acts of egregious retaliation?