Lawsuit: Pending Commonwealth of Redmont v. zPokeBr_ [2026] FCR 108

[SplashyAlpaca77]

Case Filing

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CRIMINAL ACTION


The Commonwealth of Redmont
Prosecution

v.

zPokeBr_
Defendant

COMPLAINT
The Prosecution alleges criminal actions committed by the Defendant as follows:

On October 7th, 2026, Defendant did file an objection in the District Court, providing in support thereof a screenshot of the judiciary chat, classified either SECRET or JUD-SECRET. This constitutes Breach of Integrity under the CCA, as they shared classified material without authorisation.

I. PARTIES
1. Commonwealth of Redmont (Prosecution)
2. zPokeBr_ (Defendant)

II. FACTS
1. On October 7th 2026, Defendant Filed an objection in the DCR.
2. That Objection was supported by P-005, a screenshot from the Judiciary Discord.(P-001)
3. A search warrant was procured, and it was validated that no such message was in the judiciary discord not classified as SECRET or JUD-SECRET(P-002,P-003,P-004)

III. CHARGES
The Prosecution hereby alleges the following charges against the Defendant:

1. Breach of Integrity

An individual commits Breach of Integrity under the Criminal Code Act, Part III, §10 when the person:

(a) shares classified information without authorisation.

The test for a. is met, because there was no permission given and the information was shared in a public court setting.

IV. SENTENCING
The Prosecution hereby recommends the following sentence for the Defendant:

1. A fine of 200 Penalty Units (equivalent to $24000)

V. EVIDENCE

Spoiler: P-001-Filing with Classified Information

Lawsuit: Pending - zPokebr_ v. ZapperyDoo [2026] DCR 113

Spoiler: P-002-search warrant requested

P-002:

Spoiler: P-003-warrant carried out

P-003:

Spoiler: P-004- warrant completed

P-004:

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 3rd day of November 2026

 

[CreeperTD]

I recuse from this action due to my involvement in the underlying incident.

 

[Muggy21]

I'll take this under my docket.

Writ of Summons

@Poker is commanded to appear before the Federal Court in the of Commonwealth of Redmont v. zPokebr_ [2026] FCR 108

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.

 

[Poker]

Present, your honor.

 

[Muggy21]

Present, your honor.

Excellent. Present an answer within 48 Hours.


Mug's Extension Rules

1) When the Court issues a deadline, you may grant YOURSELF an additional 48 hours if you advise everyone in this thread. You may only do this once per motion/filing. The Court retains the right to revoke this privilege OR extension at any time.

2) If both parties consent, either or both parties may extend a deadline for all parties for a period no longer than 96 Hours.

3) No party shall provide an IRL reason for an extension if the reason is an IRL in nature. Essentially, if its an IRL reason, just say its an IRL reason.

 

[Poker]

Plea

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
PLEA

The Commonwealth of Redmont
Prosecution

v.

zPokebr_
Defendant

I. ENTRY OF PLEA
1. Not Guilty

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 06 day of September 2026

 

[Muggy21]

Discovery is now open until Nov 11th, 2026 at 9pm EDT.


Discovery may only be extended by consent of the parties or upon application.

 

[Poker]

Motion

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF REDMONT
MOTION TO COMPEL

Your honor, CMA § 8(10) states that "A Court may issue a subpoena to order the disclosure of classified material to a closed or open court as determined by the Judicial Officer". In such grounds, Defendant moves this Court to Compel Chief Justice to produce the following documents and information:

1) In Oct 7, 2026, What was the classification of the discord channel that contained the alleged classified message ([2026] DCR 113 Post #31 P-005)?
2) On that same date, was the channel's classification explicitly marked? (as required by Section 6(1) of the Classified Materials Act)
3) The logs of the explicity marcation with timestamp
4) The appropriate classification of the channel on the classification list (as in Section 6(2)d of the Act), including the designation, scope and duration of the classification with timestamp of when it was last edited.
5) In Oct 7, 2026, had the classification of the channel been reviewed within the timeframe as required by Section 7(4) of the Classified Materials Act? If not, why?
6) The relevant records or logs evidencing the most recent classification review for the channel and its date
7) What is the purpose of the channel containing the alleged classified message?

Defendant have questions about the enforceability of the alleged classification, including questions about procedure and designation, as seen above. According to CMA § 6(1), "A document, file, message, or Discord channel must be explicitly marked by an authorised individual for classification to be enforceable", CMA § 7(4) "No classification may remain in effect for more than one hundred and fifty (150) days without review(...)" and CMA § 4(4) "Materials shall not be given a classification that is unreasonably high". This set of information will enlighten this Court, the Parties and the Community about the alleged crime.

Further, given (1) the gravity of the accusations against an former Magistrate (2) the community interest in the integrity of the Courts (3) T04DS74 v. Commonwealth of Redmont, Defendant requests that this information is made public in this Court thread, so public interest prevail.

Motion

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF REDMONT
INTERROGATORY SUBMISSION

1. Did the Department researched about the the enforceability of the alleged classification? If so, are there any relevant documents?

 

[SplashyAlpaca77]

Objection

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF REDMONT
OBJECTION-COMPOUND QUESTION
Your Honor,
The question posed by the defendant has two(2) parts. The first:

Did the Department researched about the the enforceability of the alleged classification?

The second:

If so, are there any relevant documents?

According to the Guide-Objections, a compound question is "A question that includes multiple inquiries". As such, the Prosecution asks the judge to order the Defense to rephrase the question into multiple inquiries.