1. Why did the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, Western District,
Docket No. 474 WAL 2018, not answer any of my questions?

2. Because of the accusers' differences in their testimony,
why can't I impeach the accusers' under Rule 6%3(a), because
of their untruthfulness?

3. Was I deprived of my Sixth Amendment of effective counsel,
when the accusers' where never questioned about the inconsistencies of what they said happened, where they said things happened
and when they said things happened, that were never brought up
during my trial that I have shown in the Concise Statement of
the Case?

4, Was I deprived of my Fourteenth Amendment of Due Process,
when the accusers' where never questioned about the inconsisten- .
; cies of what they said happened, where they said things happened
and when they said things happened, that were never brought up
during my trial that I have shown in the Concise Statement of
the Case? .

5. Did the Superior Court error on page 13, of the Non-Preced- .
ential Decision - see Superior Court I.0.P. 65.37, by stating:
By the way of background, during his cross-examination of
the victims, trial counsel pointed out several of the
inconsistencies that Appellant references. .
When in fact my trial Attorney only pointed out 3 of the
inconsistencies by the way of background, but never directly
question them about the inconsistencies?

6. Did the Superior Court error on page 13, of the NonPrecedential Decision - see Superior Court I.0.P.6537 stating:
Trial counsel also cross-examined S.A. as to her testimony
that her memory was clear that she had been abused but
but that she did not completely remember everything

Whether the petitioner's Fourth Amendment rights were violated when the police conducted a warrantless search of their home without exigent circumstances