Lawsuit: In Session AsexualDinosaur v. Commonwealth of Redmont [2025] DCR 51

asexualdinosaur

asexualdinosaur

Squid Lizard
Public Defender
Justice Department
Education Department
Supporter
Oakridge Resident
Change Maker Staff Popular in the Polls Statesman
AsexualDinosaur
AsexualDinosaur
Public Defender
Joined
Jul 24, 2024
Messages
182

Case Filing


IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION


AsexualDinosaur
Plaintiff

v.

Commonwealth of Redmont
Defendant

COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:

The Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security claimed I had committed a crime in #politics - A few minutes later I was fined $100 by Multiman155.

I opened a ticket with the DHS to dispute this fine, as I do not believe this met the bar for advertising. Being informed that I should take this up with Roryyy_ by Multiman155, I pinged roryyy_ in the channel.

Another employee of the DHS took a look, and I was provided 3 pieces of evidence (two of them the same), one from Secretary Roryyy_ and two from employee Rubilubi55.

It was then clarified by Secretary Roryyy_ that the issue specifically was the image they had posted displaying “Dino for House” in response to a question from Rora_Soul.

The result of this ticket was a denial for my dispute initially by employee Rubilubi55, to which I asked specifically for the Secretary’s input before I put forward a legal appeal, then by employee Lukeyyy7920 (Whom was also not the Secretary or Dep. Secretary), then finally Roryyy_ said they would not be accepting this dispute.



I. PARTIES
1. AsexualDinosaur - Plaintiff
2. The Commonwealth of Redmont - Defendant
4. rora_soul - Witness

II. FACTS
All times and Dates will be in Central Standard Time or CST
1. 7/24/2025 8:36 PM - GraprielJuice says “The WPR is a hivemind” - “We have said this before”
2. 7/24/2025 8:37 PM - Moyfr says “vote casey” - “someone who isnt a hivemind’
3. 7/24/2025 8:45 PM - AsexualDinosaur (plaintiff) says “I for one would vote Dino” - “Maybe even Casey”
4. 7/24/2025 9:01 PM - rora_soul ping replies the plaintiff and says “wait what”
5. 7/24/2025 9:01 PM - AsexualDinosaur (plaintiff) says “Dino for House”
6. 7/24/2025 9:03 PM - rora_soul says “based Dino comeback”
6. 7/25/2025 1:57 AM - roryyy_ ping replies the plaintiff’s “Dino for House” message and says “Illegal Advertising”
7. 7/25/2025 1:57 AM - AsexualDinosaur (plaintiff) says “Not when it’s relevant to the conversation rory smh…”
8. 7/25/2025 2:17 AM - Plaintiff was fined a total of $100 for “Illegal Advertising” by Multiman155
9. 7/25/2025 2.19 AM - Plaintiff opened a ticket with the DHS to dispute this charge.
10. 7/25/2025 2:40 AM - Secretary Roryyy_ provided their screenshot of the offense
11. 7/25/2025 2:41 AM - Rubilubi provided 2 screenshots of the offense
12. 7/25/2025 2:42 AM - Roryyy_ claims “Saying ‘Dino for House’ is advertising a political campaign"
13. 7/25/2025 2:42 AM - AsexualDinosaur (plaintiff) says “They asked me a question” - “It was an answer to their question” - “they pinged me”
14. 7/25/2025 3:10 AM - roryyy_ says “The screenshot saying who you're voting for is irrelevant I sent that one cause Moy has committed illegal advertisment in that one.”
15. 7/25/2025 3:12 AM - AsexualDinosaur (plaintiff) says “So the crime is specifically me answering rora’s question?”
16. 7/25/2025 3:17 AM - roryyy_ says “You saying ‘Dino for House’”
17. The DHS has charged the plaintiff for “Illegal advertising”
18. The DHS applied this charge incorrectly
19. The DHS denied the plaintiff’s appeal in a ticket

III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. In being charged for this crime (Fact 8) I was forced to pay a fine of $100- this should be returned.
2. Giving me the run-around, forcing me to take this issue to court to dispute, and the conduct of the other two employees was quite exhausting- this whole situation is quite outrageous.
3. Rory was made aware that these comments were in response to a question and chose not to appeal the charge, this too is outrageous.

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:
1. Compensatory Damages of $100
2. Punitive Damages of $1000
3. Legal Fees of $2000
4. Removal of the Illegal Advertising Charge

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 25th day of July 2025

 
Last edited:

Writ of Summons


@gribble19 is required to appear before the District Court of Redmont in the case of AsexualDinosaur v. The Commonwealth of Redmont

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.

 
Your honor,

I wish to amend my filing to read `GraprielJuice` instead of `GaprielJuice` for Fact 1.
This was a typo of the persons name and I wish to have it corrected for the record.

Many apologies,
thank you.
 
asexualdinosaur said:
Your honor,

I wish to amend my filing to read `GraprielJuice` instead of `GaprielJuice` for Fact 1.
This was a typo of the persons name and I wish to have it corrected for the record.

Many apologies,
thank you.
Click to expand...
Granted.
 

Motion


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

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

1. All complaints, even Small Claims, must have details that meet the criteria set out in Rule 2 (Standing); See Court Rules and Procedures, Rule 3.1. Defendant notes that the title of this rule specifically refers to "initial" complaints.

2. In order for a Plaintiff to pursue a case, they must show to the court that they suffered some injury caused by a clear second party or that they are affected by an application of law; See Court Rules and Procedures, Rule 2.1.

3. In order for a Plaintiff fo pursue a case, they must show to the court that the cause of injury was against the law; See Court Rules and Procedures, Rule 2.1.

4. Plaintiff's Complaint did not include any pieces of evidence. Plaintiff therefore could not possibly have shown anything to the court, as the burden of proof is on the Plaintiff; See Judicial Standards Act, §14.

6. Plaintiff's complaint did not refer to any laws and did not show or even attempt to show how the cause of injury was against the law.

7. A person commits illegal advertising if the person advertises a business or political campaign in a public chat not designated for advertising; See Criminal Code Act, Part IX, §11.

8. Plaintiff did not explain or even attempt to explain how the situation that occurred did not involve Plaintiff advertising a business or political campaign in a public chat not designated for advertising.

9. Plaintiff furthermore did not allege that they did not advertise a business or political campaign in a public chat not designated for advertising.

10. A Motion to dismiss may be submitted if the plaintiff fails to have sufficient standing in order to pursue the case; See Court Rules and Procedures, Rule 5.12.

 
gribble19 said:

Motion


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

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

1. All complaints, even Small Claims, must have details that meet the criteria set out in Rule 2 (Standing); See Court Rules and Procedures, Rule 3.1. Defendant notes that the title of this rule specifically refers to "initial" complaints.

2. In order for a Plaintiff to pursue a case, they must show to the court that they suffered some injury caused by a clear second party or that they are affected by an application of law; See Court Rules and Procedures, Rule 2.1.

3. In order for a Plaintiff fo pursue a case, they must show to the court that the cause of injury was against the law; See Court Rules and Procedures, Rule 2.1.

4. Plaintiff's Complaint did not include any pieces of evidence. Plaintiff therefore could not possibly have shown anything to the court, as the burden of proof is on the Plaintiff; See Judicial Standards Act, §14.

6. Plaintiff's complaint did not refer to any laws and did not show or even attempt to show how the cause of injury was against the law.

7. A person commits illegal advertising if the person advertises a business or political campaign in a public chat not designated for advertising; See Criminal Code Act, Part IX, §11.

8. Plaintiff did not explain or even attempt to explain how the situation that occurred did not involve Plaintiff advertising a business or political campaign in a public chat not designated for advertising.

9. Plaintiff furthermore did not allege that they did not advertise a business or political campaign in a public chat not designated for advertising.

10. A Motion to dismiss may be submitted if the plaintiff fails to have sufficient standing in order to pursue the case; See Court Rules and Procedures, Rule 5.12.

Click to expand...
Your honor,

Permission to respond to this motion?
 
Your honor,

It's clear as day I must have been affected by an application of a law.
The DHS as part of the executive applied the law in a method to which they saw fit, and this affected me.
The purpose of this case is to determine whether they had correctly applied the law as this is a novel situation.

Further, this is a process of disputing a charge made against me. I would argue that any dispute of a charge inherently has standing by virtue of having been charged, which is verifiable and can be provided during discovery. The DCR is the very court intended to handle criminal disputes, this is written into the constitution.
'The‌ ‌District‌ ‌Court‌ of Redmont ‌hears ‌all‌ ‌minor‌ ‌civil‌ ‌and‌ ‌criminal‌ ‌disputes‌ ‌in‌ ‌the‌ ‌first‌ ‌instance.‌'

The cause of injury is directly related to the application of the very law I was charged with- and this can be elaborated upon further in opening and closing statements, or pre-trial through discovery and interrogatories


It is not necessary that I provide any evidence in my filing, this is actually what the entire pre-trial section we refer to as discovery is for, and when I intend to submit evidence- I am not contesting the burden of proof, but this is pre-trial and pre-discovery.


It can be very much implied that the plaintiff is disputing their charge, so I fail to understand the defence's perspective when it comes to #9, very clearly the plaintiff is saying - "I don't believe I did this thing I was charged with"


If it is strictly necessary that I link in what ways I was effected- I find it pretty clear that this runs against a
constitutional right or freedom. "Freedom of Political Communication" [PartIV.32.(7)]


I would also note that the ability to amend your complaint is available through discovery.
If there is a necessary change to be made, it may be amended in- a dismissal is not necessary especially at this stage of the case- pre-trial, pre-discovery.


I simply ask that this a motion to dismiss under these rules be delayed until after discovery, prior to opening statements so that the case can be heard justly.



Thank you.
 
gribble19 said:

Motion


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

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

1. All complaints, even Small Claims, must have details that meet the criteria set out in Rule 2 (Standing); See Court Rules and Procedures, Rule 3.1. Defendant notes that the title of this rule specifically refers to "initial" complaints.

2. In order for a Plaintiff to pursue a case, they must show to the court that they suffered some injury caused by a clear second party or that they are affected by an application of law; See Court Rules and Procedures, Rule 2.1.

3. In order for a Plaintiff fo pursue a case, they must show to the court that the cause of injury was against the law; See Court Rules and Procedures, Rule 2.1.

4. Plaintiff's Complaint did not include any pieces of evidence. Plaintiff therefore could not possibly have shown anything to the court, as the burden of proof is on the Plaintiff; See Judicial Standards Act, §14.

6. Plaintiff's complaint did not refer to any laws and did not show or even attempt to show how the cause of injury was against the law.

7. A person commits illegal advertising if the person advertises a business or political campaign in a public chat not designated for advertising; See Criminal Code Act, Part IX, §11.

8. Plaintiff did not explain or even attempt to explain how the situation that occurred did not involve Plaintiff advertising a business or political campaign in a public chat not designated for advertising.

9. Plaintiff furthermore did not allege that they did not advertise a business or political campaign in a public chat not designated for advertising.

10. A Motion to dismiss may be submitted if the plaintiff fails to have sufficient standing in order to pursue the case; See Court Rules and Procedures, Rule 5.12.

Click to expand...
Motion to Dismiss is denied. There is still the entire period of Discovery for plaintiff to provide evidence. I will be happy for you to file another Motion to Dismiss at the end of discovery. For the time being however I do believe that plaintiff's case holds sufficient water to continue.

Furthermore, the Commonwealth has 48 hours to provide an Answer to Complaint.
 
Last edited:

Answer to Complaint


IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT

AsexualDinosaur
Plaintiff

v.

Commonwealth of Redmont
Defendant

I. ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
1. The Defendant AFFIRMS facts 1 to 9 of Plaintiff's Complaint.
2. The Defendant lacks information or knowledge to form a belief about the truth of facts 10 and 11 of Plaintiff's Complaint, and therefore DENIES this.
3. The Defendant AFFIRMS facts 12 to 17 of Plaintiff's Complaint.
4. The Defendant DENIES fact 18 of Plaintiff's Complaint.
5. The Defendant AFFIRMS fact 19 of Plaintiff's Complaint.

II. DEFENCES
1. A person commits illegal advertising if the person advertises a business or political campaign in a public chat not designated for advertising; See Criminal Code Act, Part IX, §11.
2. Plaintiff committed illegal advertising by advertising a political campaign in a public chat not designated for advertising and was correctly charged with the crime, the fine should thus not be returned.
3. The conduct of Defendant's employees in the ticket was respectful and by no means outrageous, unlike Plaintiff's own behavior in the ticket.
4. The law does not state anything about comments in response to a question not being considered as illegal advertising, the decision to not accept the appeal was therefore not at all outrageous.

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 25th day of July 2025

 
Thank you for the prompt reply.

We shall now enter Discovery, which shall last 5 days or end sooner if both parties agree to such.
 
Your honor, I respectfully submit the following evidence.

P-001.png
P-002.png
P-003.png
P-004.png
P-005.png
 

Motion


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

The plaintiff requests any internal policy, documentation, interpretation, or direction from leadership the Department of Homeland Security has for charging for the crime of “Illegal Advertising”



Motion


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

The plaintiff requests any department discussions relating to the charge of AsexualDinosaur for “Illegal Advertising”




Motion


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

The plaintiff requests the image uploaded in the DHS ticket by roryyy_ seen in P-002



Motion


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

The plaintiff requests the 2 images uploaded in the DHS ticket by Rubilubi55 seen in P-002

 
asexualdinosaur said:

Motion


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

The plaintiff requests any internal policy, documentation, interpretation, or direction from leadership the Department of Homeland Security has for charging for the crime of “Illegal Advertising”



Motion


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

The plaintiff requests any department discussions relating to the charge of AsexualDinosaur for “Illegal Advertising”




Motion


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

The plaintiff requests the image uploaded in the DHS ticket by roryyy_ seen in P-002



Motion


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

The plaintiff requests the 2 images uploaded in the DHS ticket by Rubilubi55 seen in P-002

Click to expand...
The Defendant may respond to these motions if they so choose.
 
asexualdinosaur said:

Motion


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

The plaintiff requests any internal policy, documentation, interpretation, or direction from leadership the Department of Homeland Security has for charging for the crime of “Illegal Advertising”



Motion


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

The plaintiff requests any department discussions relating to the charge of AsexualDinosaur for “Illegal Advertising”




Motion


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

The plaintiff requests the image uploaded in the DHS ticket by roryyy_ seen in P-002



Motion


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

The plaintiff requests the 2 images uploaded in the DHS ticket by Rubilubi55 seen in P-002

Click to expand...
I will be granting the Motions to Compel. I hereby order the Attorney General to turn over the above materials in the next forty-eight hours.
 
I will be extending Discovery while we await for the Attorney General to turn over the requested materials. The original deadline remains in effect (a bit less than 5 hours).
 
The Defendant hereby submits the following into evidence:

asexualdinosaur said:

Motion


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

The plaintiff requests any internal policy, documentation, interpretation, or direction from leadership the Department of Homeland Security has for charging for the crime of “Illegal Advertising”

Click to expand...
dinod001.png
asexualdinosaur said:

Motion


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

The plaintiff requests any department discussions relating to the charge of AsexualDinosaur for “Illegal Advertising”

Click to expand...
dinod002.png
asexualdinosaur said:

Motion


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

The plaintiff requests the image uploaded in the DHS ticket by roryyy_ seen in P-002



Motion


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

The plaintiff requests the 2 images uploaded in the DHS ticket by Rubilubi55 seen in P-002

Click to expand...
dinod003.jpg
dinod004.jpg
 
Discovery has now ended. The plaintiff has 48 hours to give their Opening Statement.
 
Your honor,

I am requesting a two hour extension for my opening- I'll have a filing for the court in this time.

Thank you and many apologies for the delay.
 
asexualdinosaur said:
Your honor,

I am requesting a two hour extension for my opening- I'll have a filing for the court in this time.

Thank you and many apologies for the delay.
Click to expand...
Granted.
 
The plaintiff has failed to deliver their opening statement within the deadline. The defendant has 48 hours to deliver their opening statement.
 
Your honor, I would like to request a 48 hour extension for my opening statement

Thank you.
 

Opening Statement


IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
OPENING STATEMENT


On July 25, 2025, the Plaintiff was fined by a Police Officer after a notification from the Deputy Secretary of DHS Roryyy___ for Illegal advertisement as he advertised himself in #politics, which is illegal because, according to the DemocracyCraft Criminal Code Act , advertisements are not allowed in any public chat. Also in the chat logs, number 5 Plaintiff is telling in the public chat (#politics) “Dino for House” where this sentence clearly is an advertisement. In addition, the Plaintiff claims that the “ Illegal Advertising charge” was an answer to a player (rora_soul), but the Plaintiff said before rora_soul joined the conversation, “I for one would vote Dino.” Which means that he advertised himself before answering the witness rora_soul in the chat. Moreover, the law about Illegal Advertisement doesn’t include anything about any exception to the violation, when someone violates it while it is in the form of a reply or even a message.
Later the fine notification, the Plaintiff opened a ticket at the Department of Homeland Security and requested to unfine him the amount. Then, two police officers served the Plaintiff with total kindness and tried to explain to him that the messages by him in the Public chat were clearly an advertisement. See: Exhibit P-005
And, Exhibit P-003
but the Plaintiff was disrespectful and insolent, then the Plaintiff took them out wrong and asked to contact the Deputy Secretary, who told the Plaintiff that he had violated the law of illegal advertising. At that time, the Plaintiff finished the ticket and said that he would take the case to the courts.


 
Last edited:

Writ of Summons



@rora_soul is required to appear before the Supreme Court in the case of AsexualDinosaur v. Commonwealth of Redmont

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.

 
As the witness is present, the plaintiff has 24 hours to ask their questions
 
Thank you your honor,

My questions for the Witness are:

When you said "Wait what", was this a question?

Was this question directed toward the plaintiff?

Will you elaborate on what you were asking with this question?

Did you believe the plaintiff had answered your question when they had responded?
 
When you said "Wait what", was this a question?
Click to expand...
Yes.

Was this question directed toward the plaintiff?
Click to expand...
Yes.

Will you elaborate on what you were asking with this question?
Click to expand...
I was surprised by seeing AsexualDinosaur run for office after believing he was taking a break from DemocracyCraft. I meant it as both a sign of surprise and as a question for more information.

Did you believe the plaintiff had answered your question when they had responded?
Click to expand...
Yes.
 
Does the plaintiff have any follow-up questions?
 
The defendant has 24 hours to ask their questions of the witness.
 
The plaintiff has 48 hours to present their Closing Arguments.
 

Closing Statement


IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CLOSING STATEMENT


Criminal Code Act, §5.IX.11.(a) - ‘advertises a business or political campaign in a public chat not designated for advertising.’

Commercial Standards Act §18.(10) - ‘Political Advertisement: An advertisement intended to promote a political message, influence public opinion of a social issue, or persuade individuals to support a candidate, party or policy.’

The commercial standards act sets out a definition for political advertisements which is an advertisement intended to promote a political message [...] or persuade individuals to support a candidate, party, or policy.



The law is clearly intended to capture instances of intentional advertising- wherein the advertiser would be attempting to get the reader or viewer to support the thing they’re showcasing in some way- and further to restrict political speech to this extent would be to infringe on one of the rights and freedoms we have in Redmont.

While the plaintiff maintains that this was NOT an advertisement- if the court should agree with the defence that it were, the plaintiff would suggest that this would not be a reasonable limitation of the rights and freedoms set out in the Constitution. In the past this charge was levied against individuals who were not utilizing set out advertising channels or responding to a question from another citizen -- this new law carves out no such exceptions and is overreaching in its application.



We also see in D-001, in response to a request for internal policy or interpretation- a link to the currently named Criminal Code Act, and a definition that includes the following phrase ‘not responding to a question that someone else asked [...]’

This suggests that this policy or interpretation was indeed edited or posted after the passing of
the new law, yet maintained that if it was in response to a question asked, that it was not considered ‘illegal advertisement’, thus the DHS improperly applied their own policy and carved out an exemption to charge the plaintiff specifically.



Despite what the defence has claimed in their opening statements, the charge was applied for the use of the phrase ‘Dino for house’, and NOT the prior statements the plaintiff had made.

P-004 shows the ‘problematic’ statement is when the plaintiff had said ‘Dino for house’ in response to rora_soul. Rora_soul having asked a question toward the plaintiff as they confirmed in their testimony - rora_soul Witness Testimony


I believe it’s more than obvious that with the internal interpretation of ‘not responding to a question that someone else asked’, as well as the lack of ‘intent’ to advertise that this charge was incorrectly applied and the plaintiff’s charge should be removed.


Thank you.

 
The defendant has 48 hours to post their Closing Statement.
 
Your honor, I would like to request a 48 hour extension for my closing statement due to personal reasons.

Thank you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top