Lawsuit: Dismissed Lex404 v. Commonwealth of Redmont [2023] DCR 57

[dodrio3]

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION


Lex404
Plaintiff

v.

Commonwealth Of Redmont
Defendant

COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows: On the 4th of February, the Violent Offences Amendment Act was signed into law by President Derpy. This law stated that murder is an indicable offence. Which in the Standardized Criminal Code Act states" An Indictable Offence is a crime that needs a trial by jury."
Since this date the Plaintiff has been arested for murder 27 times serving a total of 270 minutes in jail. Not a single one of the murder charges was taken and proven in court. For each charge, The Plaintiff was arrested and charged $100 in fines totalling $2700.

WRITTEN STATEMENT FROM THE PLAINTIFF


I. PARTIES
1. Lex404
2. Department of Justice

II. FACTS
1. The Violent Offences Amendment Act was signed by President Derpy on Feburary 4th.
2. It states Murder as an "Indictable Criminal Offense" meaning it has to be proven in court by jury.
3. Since that time, The Plaintiff has been charged with 27 counts of murder and fined a total of $2700.Has served 270 minutes in prison.
4. All of these murder charges were never taken and proven in court

III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. Wrongfull conviction

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:
1. $2700 returned as it was fined for wrongfully convicted crimes
2. 13500 For the time the Plaintiff spent in jail $50 per minute
3. Murder Charges removed from the Plaintiffs Criminal record
4. $3240 in legal fees payed to Lovely Inc (20% of total case value)

By making this submission, I agree I understand the penalties of lying in court and the fact that I am subject to perjury should I knowingly make a false statement in court.

DATED: This 18 day of 12 2023

 

[MrFluffy2U94]

Your honor,

I will be taking this case on behalf of the DLA and the Commonwealth.

 

[MrFluffy2U94]

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO DISMISS

The defence moves that the complaint in this case be dismissed, and in support thereof, respectfully alleges:

Rule 5.5 - Lack of Claim

Your honor,

According to rule 5.5 of the criteria available for a motion to dismiss, "A Motion to Dismiss may be filed for failure to state a claim for relief, or against a claim for relief that has insufficient evidence to support the civil or criminal charge."

The claims for relief in this case clearly meet the last half of this sentence in which it states "or against a claim for relief that has insufficient evidence to support the civil or criminal charge." The plaintiff provided no evidence that any of these arrests took place, assuming that they did actually happen, the plaintiff provided no evidence whatsoever that there was time served, that fines were ever paid, or that these arrests happened within the timeframe that this law was enacted.

The defence seeks to have this case dismissed and all prayers for relief denied. We are also seeking Frivolous Case charges be brought against the Plaintiff as the plaintiff has filed many of these cases without evidence and wastes the courts and DLA’s time by not providing the evidence up front, and forcing these motions.

Thank you.

DATED: This 17th day of December 2023

 

[MrFluffy2U94]

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO DISMISS

The defence moves that the complaint in this case be dismissed, and in support thereof, respectfully alleges:

Rule 5.4 Jurisdiction

Your honor,

According to the Plaintiffs council, they have filed this case in the “district/federal” court of Redmont. To my knowledge, no such hybrid court exists, therefore this case should be dismissed until it is filed in the proper manner in the proper court.

DATED: This 17th day of December 2023.

 

[dodrio3]

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO DISMISS

The defence moves that the complaint in this case be dismissed, and in support thereof, respectfully alleges:

Rule 5.5 - Lack of Claim

Your honor,

According to rule 5.5 of the criteria available for a motion to dismiss, "A Motion to Dismiss may be filed for failure to state a claim for relief, or against a claim for relief that has insufficient evidence to support the civil or criminal charge."

The claims for relief in this case clearly meet the last half of this sentence in which it states "or against a claim for relief that has insufficient evidence to support the civil or criminal charge." The plaintiff provided no evidence that any of these arrests took place, assuming that they did actually happen, the plaintiff provided no evidence whatsoever that there was time served, that fines were ever paid, or that these arrests happened within the timeframe that this law was enacted.

The defence seeks to have this case dismissed and all prayers for relief denied. We are also seeking Frivolous Case charges be brought against the Plaintiff as the plaintiff has filed many of these cases without evidence and wastes the courts and DLA’s time by not providing the evidence up front, and forcing these motions.

Thank you.

DATED: This 17th day of December 2023

Objection, Your Honor
Breach of procedure. The prosecution responded to my motion to reconsider without being prompted to make a response. The prosecution has therefore spoken out of turn and I motion to strike these remarks from the record.

 

[dodrio3]

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO DISMISS

The defence moves that the complaint in this case be dismissed, and in support thereof, respectfully alleges:

Rule 5.4 Jurisdiction

Your honor,

According to the Plaintiffs council, they have filed this case in the “district/federal” court of Redmont. To my knowledge, no such hybrid court exists, therefore this case should be dismissed until it is filed in the proper manner in the proper court.

DATED: This 17th day of December 2023.

Objection, Your Honor
Breach of procedure. The prosecution responded to my motion to reconsider without being prompted to make a response. The prosecution has therefore spoken out of turn and I motion to strike these remarks from the record.

 

[Mask3D_WOLF]

All statements above are hereby stricken from the record. Do not respond to cases until summoned.

I will be unavailable until the 28th. Do both parties agree to resume this case then?

 

[MrFluffy2U94]

I do apologize for speaking out of turn. Hard to keep track of all of the different lawsuits, I thought that I had already been summoned to this one. But that’s fine, enjoy your holiday!

 

[dodrio3]

Yes your Honour,

Have a merry Christmas

 

[Mask3D_WOLF]

Thank you all. Court is in recess. Happy holidays!

 

[Mask3D_WOLF]

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
WRIT OF SUMMONS

The Attorney General is required to appear before the District Court in the case of Plaintiff v. Defendant. Failure to appear within 72 hours of this summons will result in a default judgement based on the known facts of the case. Both parties should make themselves aware of the Court Rules and Procedures, including the option of an in-game trial should both parties request one.​

Court is out of recess.

 

[MrFluffy2U94]

Your honor,

I will be taking this case on behalf of the DLA and the Commonwealth.

 

[Mask3D_WOLF]

Your honor,

I will be taking this case on behalf of the DLA and the Commonwealth.

Thank you.

 

[MrFluffy2U94]

Your honor,

The defense responds to complaint as follows:

1. The defense affirms this point.

2. The defense affirms this point.

3. The defense disputes this point, as there has been no evidence to support either of these points.

4. The defense challenges this point as well.

Furthermore, the plaintiffs “claims for relief” state wrongful conviction, yet the plaintiffs counsel has already attested that the plaintiff was “never taken and proven in court”. So I ask, how can the court grant a claim for relief when the plaintiffs own council contradicts that very claim?

 

[Mask3D_WOLF]

We will now enter the discovery period for the next 7 days.

 

[ultrapvpnoob]

Your honor, the plaintiff would like to submit these pieces of evidence

Spoiler: Pages 1-7

 

[Mask3D_WOLF]

Thank you. Both parties, please present a list of witnesses.

 

[MrFluffy2U94]

Your honor, the plaintiff would like to submit these pieces of evidence

Spoiler: Pages 1-7

View attachment 40379View attachment 40380View attachment 40381View attachment 40382View attachment 40383View attachment 40384View attachment 40385

OBJECTION
RELEVANCE

Your honor, the majority of the evidence submitted is irrelevant to this case. The defense requests that this evidence be stricken from the record and that the plaintiffs counsel only provide evidence to the 27 counts of murder that were mentioned in the complaint.

 

[Mask3D_WOLF]

OBJECTION
RELEVANCE

Your honor, the majority of the evidence submitted is irrelevant to this case. The defense requests that this evidence be stricken from the record and that the plaintiffs counsel only provide evidence to the 27 counts of murder that were mentioned in the complaint.

Objection sustained.

 

[MrFluffy2U94]

We will now enter the discovery period for the next 7 days.

MOTION TO DISMISS
Rule 5.5 - Lack of Claim

Your honor,

Discovery began on January 2nd, and was only active for 7 days. The plaintiff has failed to provide any evidence that is admissible in court within the allowed time to justify their claims for relief. Therefore the State is seeking that this case be dismissed under Rule 5.5.

Signed this 12th day of January 2024.

 

[Mask3D_WOLF]

MOTION TO DISMISS
Rule 5.5 - Lack of Claim

Your honor,

Discovery began on January 2nd, and was only active for 7 days. The plaintiff has failed to provide any evidence that is admissible in court within the allowed time to justify their claims for relief. Therefore the State is seeking that this case be dismissed under Rule 5.5.

Signed this 12th day of January 2024.

The motion to dismiss is rejected. The plaintiff submitted their evidence around 5 hours before the deadline. I ask the Commonwealth to make sure they are not wasting the court's time before filing motions in the future.

The plaintiff has 72 hours to present an opening statement.

 

[MrFluffy2U94]

The motion to dismiss is rejected. The plaintiff submitted their evidence around 5 hours before the deadline. I ask the Commonwealth to make sure they are not wasting the court's time before filing motions in the future.

The plaintiff has 72 hours to present an opening statement.

Your honor,

In my objection I requested that the evidence provided be struck due to the majority of it being irrelevant. That objection was sustained, I was under the impression that since the court sustained my objection that this evidence was struck. Is that not the case?

 

[Mask3D_WOLF]

Your honor,

In my objection I requested that the evidence provided be struck due to the majority of it being irrelevant. That objection was sustained, I was under the impression that since the court sustained my objection that this evidence was struck. Is that not the case?

The evidence, except for the relevant evidence, is struck from the record.

 

[MrFluffy2U94]

The evidence, except for the relevant evidence, is struck from the record.

MOTION TO RECONSIDER

Your honor,

The defense cannot make heads or tails out of any of the evidence provided and my assumption is that the court cannot accurately identify which of the counts are the counts that the plaintiff is suing over from the ones that they aren't. The plaintiff is suing for only 27 counts of murder, yet there are far more that are included in the random assortment of evidence provided. This evidence is improper and extremely unclear as to which 27 counts of murder are being tried in this case. I would request that all of this evidence be struck from the record, as the court cannot accurately identify which counts should and should not be included in this case.

 

[Mask3D_WOLF]

MOTION TO RECONSIDER

Your honor,

The defense cannot make heads or tails out of any of the evidence provided and my assumption is that the court cannot accurately identify which of the counts are the counts that the plaintiff is suing over from the ones that they aren't. The plaintiff is suing for only 27 counts of murder, yet there are far more that are included in the random assortment of evidence provided. This evidence is improper and extremely unclear as to which 27 counts of murder are being tried in this case. I would request that all of this evidence be struck from the record, as the court cannot accurately identify which counts should and should not be included in this case.

Okay then, the defendant is to attach the 27 counts with their opening statement or within 24 hours of it. Otherwise the case will be dismissed.

 

[ultrapvpnoob]

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
OPENING STATEMENT

Your Honor,

Our client was wrongfully convicted for murder 27 times and spent over 4 hours in jail. That is 4 hours they could have spent enjoying Redmont, making money, or any other number of activities. This experience negatively impacted his enjoyment drastically.

The prosecution claims that our client cannot have been wrongfully convicted as they were never taken to court, however that is a misunderstanding of the meaning of "convicted". Precedent has been set by FCR 97 that being arrested counts as conviction.

The facts of the case are that our client was arrested 27 times since the Violent Offences Act was signed, and that they were not taken to court for any of them. This entitles them to a repayment of the fines, $50 for every minute spent in jail, and the removing of the murder charges from their record.

I am currently having some technical problems with posting images here, and will post the evidence as soon as I can

 

[MrFluffy2U94]

MOTION TO DISMISS
Lack of Claim

Your honor,

I wanted to bring to your attention the recent bill that was passed. Murder Quick Fix v2 Act. This bill states that Ex-post Facto will not apply to the misclassification of Murder from a criminal offense to a summary offense. This act clears the government of any wrong doing, and allows those parties to open a DLA support ticket to be reimbursed for their fines.

I have attached a link to this bill that was enacted by the President yesterday for your convenience.

Act of Congress - Murder Quick Fix v2 Act

House: 6-2-0 Senate: 5-0-0 A BILL To Waive Liability of the Government The people of Democracy Craft, through their elected Representatives in the Congress and the force of law ordained to that Congress by the people through the constitution, do hereby enact the following provisions into law...

www.democracycraft.net

Thank you for your time and professionalism in this case.

 

[Mask3D_WOLF]

MOTION TO DISMISS
Lack of Claim

Your honor,

I wanted to bring to your attention the recent bill that was passed. Murder Quick Fix v2 Act. This bill states that Ex-post Facto will not apply to the misclassification of Murder from a criminal offense to a summary offense. This act clears the government of any wrong doing, and allows those parties to open a DLA support ticket to be reimbursed for their fines.

I have attached a link to this bill that was enacted by the President yesterday for your convenience.

Act of Congress - Murder Quick Fix v2 Act

House: 6-2-0 Senate: 5-0-0 A BILL To Waive Liability of the Government The people of Democracy Craft, through their elected Representatives in the Congress and the force of law ordained to that Congress by the people through the constitution, do hereby enact the following provisions into law...

www.democracycraft.net

Thank you for your time and professionalism in this case.

The motion to dismiss is granted, I thank all parties.