Lawsuit: Adjourned Gavy v Rafa_LIT4 [2026] DCR 169

Status
Not open for further replies.
TheREALWINner

TheREALWINner

Citizen
Aventura Resident
SniperElite508
SniperElite508
Attorney
Joined
Jun 25, 2026
Messages
52

Case Filing


IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION


Gavy
Plaintiff

v.

Rafa_LIT4
Defendant

COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:

WRITTEN STATEMENT FROM THE PLAINTIFF

On or about 10:00 EST on the 29th of July, 2026, a player by the name of Rafa_LIT4 created an illegal ad target at a local Willow farmer by the name of Gavy. This ad, which stated that Rafa_LIT4 would “KILL” Gavy, claimed that Gavy had both murdered Rafa’s employee and had refused to pay “12 before killing my employee.” This was broadcast to the entire server, and Rafa’s actions have met the requirements of Malicious Allegation.
Click to expand...

I. PARTIES
1. Gavy
2. Rafa_LIT4

II. FACTS
1. On or about 10:00 PM EST on the July 29th, 2026, Rafa_LIT4 uploaded an ad stating the following. “Attention GAVY! i will KILL YOU for not paying me 12 bucks before killing MY employee,” as seen in P-001.

2. On or about 10:00 PM EST on the July 29th, 2026, Rafa_LIT4 sent a message to Gavy stating that “gavy, i have a head that SAYS killed by gavy, pay me 12 bucks which is the price for killing my employees and i will let u go. ALTHOUGH! we currently have a offer, 50 percent off for killing a core industries employee!” This can be seen in P-002.


III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. Malicious Allegation (RCCA under Part XIII § 5)

According to the RCCA, a person commits Malicious Allegation when one:
(a) makes a false allegation that another person committed a crime or civil violation; and
(b) knew or could reasonably infer that the allegation was false; and
(c) the allegation causes harm to the accused person’s reputation, livelihood, or wellbeing.

Notably as well, the RCCA notes that this violation shall not occur where:
(d) the allegation was substantially true; or
(e) the person had reasonable grounds to believe the allegation was true; or
(f) the allegation was made in good faith to the appropriate authorities for investigation.

We, as the Plaintiffs, believe that these facts have been met for the following reasons:

I. A False Allegation was Made.
The Plaintiff in this case asserts and will testify that he did not murder any supposed employee of the Defendant's company. The Plaintiff in this case has a clean criminal record and as of today's date has never been charged with any counts of murder on any grounds.

II. The Defendant could reasonably infer that the Allegation was false.
The Defendant in the proceedings of this case may try to present proof that he would have reasonable grounds to believe the allegation was true, but according to the statements made by the Defendant, the Plaintiff finds it difficult to believe that to be the case.

While the Defendant claims that they were in possession of a head attributing the Plaintiff in this case of being an assailant, such proof will need to be brought before this court after the Defendant is summoned. This being done, the Plaintiff also believes that a head alone is not enough proof to build a reasonable allegation to be stated for the truth of the matter. Heads can be dropped in cases of self-defense. Thus, the appropriate avenue for the reasonable suspicion created by the head was for the Defendant to report such to the proper authorities. It should not have been to broadcast a death threat to the entire server via a /ad accusing the Plaintiff of a murder.

III. The Allegation caused harm to the accused person's livelihood and wellbeing.
As was stated in the above response in post #8, the Defendant's actions caused harm to the accused person's livelihood and wellbeing.

Whereas the nature of such a statement made in the form of a /ad is broadcasted to the entire server, the Plaintiff felt the need to seek legal counsel and had to, for a period of three days, cease business operations in discussion about his rights in this case. Since the Plaintiff at the time was a new player to the server, the statement caused the Plaintiff losses as he had to hire legal counsel in the amount of $1,500 to see what could be done about the matter. (See P-004)

Additionally, as seen in the provided transactional evidence, (P-005) the plaintiff's business, (BackywoodBoyzCo.), now makes around $12,500k in net profit a month on average. Witness KorroMF, who developed the bot pictured in the screenshot, will be testifying to the nature of the statistics bot, to establish it as a reliable source of information that cannot be edited from an external source. Additional screenshots can be submitted though from in-game sources should the court require it.

Since the nature of having to hire and confer with legal counsel required the Plaintiff to delay the building of his business for three days, as will be testified to by our witnesses, this indirectly hampered their ability to turn a profit sooner, in effect hindering them from three additional days of profit. If this monthly profit is divided by thirty-one that results in approximately $1,200 in damages for the three-day period, since no profit was made during the period as the plaintiff was hindered in his ability to finish setting up his business by having to confer with legal counsel.

On the matter of wellbeing, the Plaintiff in this case will testify and reasonably would conclude that he had reason to fear for his safety as the Defendant was threatening to "Kill" the Plaintiff on the grounds of his alleged murder.

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:

1. A Court Order for the public retraction of the accusatory statement.

2. $2,700 in Compensatory Damages, to reimburse the Plaintiff for the losses incurred in the issue of this case.

3. $7,500 in Nominal Damages, to recognize the legal action that has been taken.

4. $15,000 in Consequential Damages, on the basis of Worsening of Conditions.

5. $15,000 in Consequential Damages, on the basis of Loss of Enjoyment.

6. $25,000 in Punitive Damages due to the outrageous nature of the Defendant's conduct.

7. $19,560 in Legal Fees, or 30% of the award actually granted if the plaintiff prevails, per Part III § 7 of the RCCA.

For ease of calculation on the part of the Magistrate in this case, the total amount sought for relief in this case totals $84,760.00.

Witnesses:
1. KorroMF
2. PeekDaWindows
3. Gavy

Evidence:
Image1 (1).webp

“Attention GAVY! i will KILL YOU for not paying me 12 bucks before killing MY employee”

Image2 (1).webp

gavy, i have a head that SAYS killed by gavy, pay me 12 bucks which is the price for killing my employees and i will let u go. ALTHOUGH! we currently have a offer, 50 percent off for killing a core industries employee!

To: Rafa_LIT4
From: The Law Offices of SingeHeart, Addams & Associates

Good evening. My name is Jacob Wolfe, aka SniperElite508. I am sending this letter on behalf of my client, Gavy. Gavy has approached us with the intent to file charges against you for the following infractions committed on July 29, 2026 in the Minecraft server, Democracy Craft:

1. One (1) count of Defamation.
2. One (1) count of Slander.
3. One (1) count of Nuisance.

Gavy has presented adequate evidence to file said charges including but not limited to:

1. Screenshots proving both Slander and Defamation.
2. Additional screenshots proving Nuisance.

These charges are indictable crimes according to the Criminal Code Act of Redmont and, should the courts punish you to the fullest extent of our requests, it would result in the following fines and orders:

1. A court order for a public retraction of the Defamatory/Slanderous statement.

2. A court order for the Defendant to abate the aforementioned Nuisance by requiring him to refrain from broadcasting further defamatory/slanderous statements on the server, but in particular about Gavy, his intellectual property, and any of his associates or businesses.

3. $3,000 in Civil Penalty units for the charge of Nuisance.

4. $3,000 in legal fees as outlined by the minimal legal fee requirements in Part III §7 of the RCCA.

In short, this letter is a notice for the following:

1. This is a Cease-and-Desist notice for the player Rafa_LIT4 to cease and desist his use of Gavy's name in further public communication pertaining to any breach of contract transaction between Gavy and Rafa_LIT4. The use of Gavy's name in this way violates the RCCA on the basis of Trademark law. Gavy's name is a recognizable expression used to identify both his business and services that he offers and Rafa_LIT4's use of Gavy's name in Rafa's /ad was not for purposes of criticism, commentary, news reporting, and/or teaching, but rather defamation and/or slander.
An affirmation here that such action will not be done again will be enough to meet the requirements of this Cease and Desist, provided that this infringement is not committed again.

2. Beyond this, the plaintiff requests that a public apology be made on the server for your false accusations raised against Gavy on the 29th of July, 2026. The plaintiff requests that a message be made to global chat stating the following: (1) Gavy had not refused to pay you $12, as you had not informed him of any charge before making an ad in chat, and (2) that Gavy had not murdered your employee wrongfully as he was acting in self-defense. After making such apology on global chat, please upload a screenshot here.

Upon delivery of this official notice, you will have 24 hours to respond. You may meet the requirements of your cease-and-desist letter by following the demands of the first point. Any charges related to Trademark Infringement will be dropped upon the fulfillment of the first point. All charges shall be dropped should both points be met. The charges of Defamation and/or Slander would be re-raised should an apology be made but further Defamation and/or Slander persits nonetheless. Additionally, should a promise to cease and desist be made here but is not kept, the charges pertaining to your infringement of trademark shall be re-raised. Should we not receive a response for all or part of this notice/cease-and-desist letter within this time frame, we will assume you have rejected this offer, whether in whole or in part, and will proceed to file the respective charges against you according to the terms outlined above.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Regards,
- Jacob Wolfe, aka SniperElite508
- The Law Offices of SingeHeart, Addams & Associates
Screenshot 2026-08-01 020358.png

Screenshot 2026-08-01 020408.png

Screenshot 2026-08-01 020418.png

Screenshot 2026-08-01 020430.png

payment (1).webp

payment2 (1).webp

"BUSINESS >> Paid $1,000 into SHAAssociates"
"BUSINESS >> Paid $500 into SHAAssociates"

Sales (1).webp

"BackwoodBoysCo Sales"
"Period: Month"
"Revenue | Items Sold | Transactions"
"$12,633.38 | 135,040 | 7171"
"Customers | Avg. Sale"
"92 | $1.76"

Screenshot 2026-08-01 083155.png

"I, Gavy, am willing to have @SniperElite508 represent me in all matters pertaining to this case.

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 20th day of September, 2026

 

Writ of Summons


@Rafa_lit4 is required to appear before the District Court in the case of Gavy v. Rafa_lit4 [2026] DCR 169.​

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.

 
Defendant failed to appear.

Noting Defendant's prolonged absence from Redmont, the Court will continue in an inquest. See Rule 3.6.1 of the Court Rules & Procedures.

The deadline to file a Motion to Vacate Default shall be set 7 days from now, the 2nd of October 2026 pursuant to Rule 3.6.3.

The following is the structure of the inquest proceeding:
a) discovery in full, unless Plaintiff moves to end it early;
b) witness testimony; and
c) a legal brief submitted by Plaintiff.

Furthermore, Plaintiff is asked to respond to this message within 48 hours to acknowledge it.
 
Johnes said:
Defendant failed to appear.

Noting Defendant's prolonged absence from Redmont, the Court will continue in an inquest. See Rule 3.6.1 of the Court Rules & Procedures.

The deadline to file a Motion to Vacate Default shall be set 7 days from now, the 2nd of October 2026 pursuant to Rule 3.6.3.

The following is the structure of the inquest proceeding:
a) discovery in full, unless Plaintiff moves to end it early;
b) witness testimony; and
c) a legal brief submitted by Plaintiff.

Furthermore, Plaintiff is asked to respond to this message within 48 hours to acknowledge it.
Click to expand...
The Plaintiff acknowledges that Inquest Proceedings have begun and will prepare for such accordingly.
 
Discovery elapsed.

We shall now continue to witness summons.

Court Order


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

@KorroMF, @PeekDaWindows, @Gavy are hereby commanded to appear as witnesses before the District Court in the case of Gavy v Rafa_LIT4 [2026] DCR 169.

Witnesses are asked to familiarize themselves with the case and to respond to all questions during direct and cross examination.

Witnesses are ordered to appear within 72 hours.

 
I am here your honor.
 
KorroMF:

#1. Can you identify yourself and your occupation for this court?
#2. Do you recognize the style of report from P-005?
#3. Does this report come from a product you have developed?
#4. If you are able to answer yes to #2 and #3, what might qualify you to speak on this product?
#5. If you are able to answer yes to #2, #3, and #4, what is this product designed to do?
#6. Additionally, if this is a product you have developed, how might this product collect the finical data presented in P-005?
#7 Finally, if this was a product you have developed, is there any way that such finical data can be edited by a user of this product through the product's User Interface?

PeekDaWindows:

#1. Can you identify yourself and your relation to the Plaintiff, Gavy, in this case?
#2. Where were you on the date of 10:00 PM July 29th, 2026?
#3. Do you recognize the statement made in P-001?
#4. Assuming you recognize P-001, what was your initial reaction to the statements made in P-001?
#5. Assuming you recognize P-001, were there any finical decisions you felt compelled to make in response to the statement?
#6. Assuming you recognize P-001, and assuming that you felt compelled to make finical decisions, how long did such decisions affect you, particularly in how such decisions may have affected your relation to Gavy finically?
#7. Assuming you recognize the statement in P-001, how did Gavy, from your personal observation, emotionally react to the statement in P-001?
#8. How much time have you spent with Gavy during your time in Redmont?
#9. Have you ever personally observed Gavy engage in purposeful criminal activity?

Gavy:

#1. Can you identify yourself for this court?
#2. Where were you on the date of 10:00 PM July 29th, 2026?
#3. Do you recognize the statement made in P-001?
#4. Assuming you recognize P-001, what was your initial reaction to the statements made in P-001?
#5. Assuming you recognize P-001, were there any finical decisions you felt compelled to make in response to the statement?
#6. Assuming you recognize P-001, and assuming that you felt compelled to make finical decisions, how long did such decisions affect you?
#7. Assuming you recognize the statement in P-001, how did the statement effect your sense of wellbeing?
#8. How much time have you spent in Redmont?
#9. Have you ever personally engaged in purposeful criminal activity?
 
1. My first name is Gavy.
2. I was at my leased farm plot, wl-f020, working on construction of my farm floors.
3. I affirm that I recognize the statement made in P-001.
4. My initial reaction to the statements made in P-001 was shock and confusion. I had no idea what RAFA_lit4 was talking about. I began to fear for my safety.
5. Yes, I felt compelled to seek legal help immediately. I paid out most of what I had for my balance, at the time, to pay for legal consultation and filing for this case. I also had to handsell my stock rapidly to build my funds back up. Finical decisions that were supposed to be made for the business halted during this time.
6. The finical decisions that were taken affected me for several days. My personal balance fluctuated from rock bottom back to my necessities and down again. I was a new player who was trying to gather as much resources as I could to start my business, and these decisions affected myself and the business for at least several days while I tried to build the funds back up.
7. The statement in P-001 skewed my wellbeing on the server. I began to fear for my physical safety, as I had never been threatened like this before. Any time I began receiving visitors at my farm, I immediately felt anxious. I can recall one instance, in a separate situation, in which another player visited my farm and attempted to kill me. I immediately felt there was a connection between these two events, but this was only because my sense of wellbeing had be severely disturbed. I became hyper-vigilant, especially after that, watching out for anybody who could be a threat to me or the farm for weeks. It took a significant amount of time before I began to feel safe again on my own property.
8. I have spent over 11 days and 15 hours in Redmont total.
9. I have never, personally engaged in any kind of purposeful criminal activity. I have a clean criminal record.

Thank you, your Honor.
 
1. I'm PeekDaWindows and I am Co-Owner/Co-Founder of BackwoodBoyzCo, Gavy's business partner.
2. I was on plot wl-f020.
3. Yes.
4. I was very confused as to what RAFA_lit4 was talking about.
5. Yes, I felt like paying the $12 so the threat/harassment would stop. I spoke with Gavy over Discord and we decided he should seek legal help instead. I felt compelled to support him in this case and helped support Gavy financially in the filing.
6. I had to spend more time harvesting and handselling to make the funds back from the financial decisions relating to this case. I would estimate about 4 days of harvesting and handselling to recover.
7. At first he was confused and alarmed. Then he was upset because he knew the statement in the ad was not true. While talking to Gavy via Discord and voice chat we decided to seek legal.
8. We joined together, with Gavy joining a day or two before. Gavy is the reason I started playing on the DemocracyCraft.
9. Absolutely not.
 
Johnes said:
@KorroMF please answer within 24 hours.
Click to expand...
#1. Can you identify yourself and your occupation for this court? My name is Korro Fontaine, current DoE Secretary and Oakridge Mayor, as well as owner of DC Sales Tracker and Fontaine Development

#2. Do you recognize the style of report from P-005? I do as I made it.

#3. Does this report come from a product you have developed? Yes

#4. If you are able to answer yes to #2 and #3, what might qualify you to speak on this product? I made the sales tracker. I made the entire code for it.

#5. If you are able to answer yes to #2, #3, and #4, what is this product designed to do? The product is designed to help businesses track sales, business balance, top selling items and top customers.

#6. Additionally, if this is a product you have developed, how might this product collect the finical data presented in P-005? You can see your daily, weekly, and monthly sales for your business allowing them to see if they are going up or down.

#7 Finally, if this was a product you have developed, is there any way that such finical data can be edited by a user of this product through the product's User Interface?
There is no way for the result to be edited by the user.
 
Yes, your Honor.

For @Gavy:

#10: You mentioned that you recalled one instance, in a separate situation, in which another player visited your farm and attempted to kill you. When did this assault happen?

#11: What caused you to believe that there was a connection between the assault and the prior message from the Defendant?

For @PeekDaWindows:

#10: Was there ever a time in which you observed Gavy experience harm directed toward his person in the weeks following the threat?

#11: If so, can you describe how this harm played out?

There are no more questions for @KorroMF.
 
TheREALWINner said:
Yes, your Honor.

For @Gavy:

#10: You mentioned that you recalled one instance, in a separate situation, in which another player visited your farm and attempted to kill you. When did this assault happen?

#11: What caused you to believe that there was a connection between the assault and the prior message from the Defendant?

For @PeekDaWindows:

#10: Was there ever a time in which you observed Gavy experience harm directed toward his person in the weeks following the threat?

#11: If so, can you describe how this harm played out?

There are no more questions for @KorroMF.
Click to expand...
@Gavy, @PeekDaWindows respond within 24 hours please.
 
10. This assault occurred just 3 days after the threat from RAFA_lit4, on August 1st, 2026. In this incident, a player named "KaberBaber069" lit a firework on the top of my plot, whilst I was working on my underground farms. I came to the top of the plot and, at that point, I saw Kaber standing in one of my fields. When I asked what he was doing he said in chat "tonight is the night". At that point, Kaber struck me with some weapon that had fire aspect on it multiple times and attempted to murder me. However, Kaber was at his maximum murder limit and was unable to kill me. PeekDaWindows, my co-owner, came to my defense once I had told him I was being attacked. He attempted to kill Kaber, to stop the assault, to which Kaber murdered him. He was able to murder him, as Peek technically started combat. Despite doing this in my defense, and this taking place on our land, PeekDaWindows was jailed for this incident. I did make a DHS ticket, and "KaberBaber069" was charged for this crime. I have evidence in screenshots, if needed.

11. I believe that the connection between the assault and the initial threat was the intimidation and that there was money involved/being paid for my death/assault. The initial threat put my guard up, and I felt like I had to be vigilant for intruders during that time. When the assault happened, this only confirmed that I did have to be vigilant and scared for my safety. This worsened my loss of enjoyment while I pondered if these two events were related. These two events were so close together and, despite being separate, combined to worsen the lack of security and safety I felt on my own property.
 
10. Yes, within the days that the first threat happened, a player showed up on our farm and said he was getting paid to kill Gavy. This player attempted to kill him.


11. A player showed up on our plot and claimed to be a “serial killer” and tried to kill Gavy. When Gavy told me he was being attacked, I tried to defend him, and in response this player killed me. I was then jailed for combat against this player, even though it was an attempt to defend my Co-Owner. I served 15 minutes in prison because of this. I could tell Gavy was anxious during this time and was not enjoying the experience.
 

Brief


IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
LEGAL BRIEF

Your Honor and may it please the court.

The inquest proceedings now concluded, this court has petitioned the Plaintiff for a summary legal brief, and we most happily comply. Doing such, we shall now summarize the following two points.

1. Repeat and summarize all facts of the case.

2. Show how those facts meet the charges alleged.

I. FACTS
1. As stated in the case filing, on or about 10:00 PM EST on the July 29th, 2026, Rafa_LIT4 uploaded an ad stating the following. “Attention GAVY! i will KILL YOU for not paying me 12 bucks before killing MY employee,” as seen in P-001.

2. As stated in the case filling, on or about 10:00 PM EST on the July 29th, 2026, Rafa_LIT4 sent a message to Gavy stating that “gavy, i have a head that SAYS killed by gavy, pay me 12 bucks which is the price for killing my employees and i will let u go. ALTHOUGH! we currently have a offer, 50 percent off for killing a core industries employee!” This can be seen in P-002.

3. According to witness testimony in posts numbers #19 and #20, the Plaintiff was assaulted 3 days after this threat by a player named ""KaberBaber069."

4. According to witness testimony in posts numbers #12 and #13, the threat made by the Defendant caused extreme unrest for the Defendant for his own safety, both before and after the assault by player "KaberBaber069."

5. According to witness testimony in posts numbers #12 and #13, the threat also caused the defendant harm in livelihood as he felt compelled to seek legal counsel to seek a defense against the accusation made by the Defense.

6. According to witness testimony in posts #12 and #13, the seeking of legal counsel required the defendant to re-allocate funds from his business, which caused severe setbacks in the crucial founding states of his enterprise.

7. According to witness testimony in posts #12 and #13, the plaintiff has no criminal record and has not purposefully engaged in criminal conduct in his time on the server.

8. According to P-005 and the corresponding witness testimony in post #15, P-005 is evidence of BackwoodBoyzCo's monthly sales.

II. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. Malicious Allegation (RCCA under Part XIII § 5)

According to the RCCA, a person commits Malicious Allegation when one:
(a) makes a false allegation that another person committed a crime or civil violation; and
(b) knew or could reasonably infer that the allegation was false; and
(c) the allegation causes harm to the accused person’s reputation, livelihood, or wellbeing.

Notably as well, the RCCA notes that this violation shall not occur where:
(d) the allegation was substantially true; or
(e) the person had reasonable grounds to believe the allegation was true; or
(f) the allegation was made in good faith to the appropriate authorities for investigation.

We, as the Plaintiff, believe that these facts have been met for the following reasons:

I. A False Allegation was Made.
The Plaintiff and @PeekDaWindows have both testified that the Plaintiff has not murdered any supposed employee of the Defendant's company. Additionally, the Plaintiff in this case has a clean criminal record and as of the filing of this case has never been charged with any counts of murder on any grounds. This can be seen as in Post #12 and #13 where the witnesses said the following:

@Gavy: (Speaking of the /ad in P-001) "I had no idea what RAFA_lit4 was talking about." & " I have never, personally engaged in any kind of purposeful criminal activity. I have a clean criminal record."
Click to expand...

@PeekDaWindows: "At first he was confused and alarmed. Then he was upset because he knew the statement in the ad was not true." & (Speaking of whether the witness had ever observed the Plaintiff engage in purposeful criminal activity) "Absolutely not."
Click to expand...

Additionally, the Defendant, by failing to appear before this court, has not offered any positive evidence that such a murder has happened. The only positive claim we have is that the defense allegedly possessed a "head that SAYS killed by Gavy" but for all this court knows, such a head is could be a construct of the defense, especially when one considers that the defense was attempting to extort the Plaintiff for money under threat of death as seen in P-001 & P-002.

In short, upon a preponderance of the evidence, the Plaintiff argues that such a murder never happened, and even if a head existed, such a head only existed due to an instance of self-defense and not due to murder as the defense has alleged in evidence.

II. The Defendant could reasonably infer that the Allegation was false.
The Defendant in the proceedings of this case has failed to present proof that he would have reasonable grounds to believe the allegation was true, but even if he had, according to the statements made by the Defendant, the Plaintiff finds it difficult to believe that to be the case.

While the Defendant in evidence claimed that he was in possession of a head attributing the Plaintiff in this case of being an assailant of the Defendant's employee, such proof was not given. Due to the lack of any further argument, this fact alone destroys any claim that the Defense could not have inferred that the allegation was false. But even if this is not enough, the Plaintiff also believes that a head alone is not enough proof to build a reasonable allegation to be stated for the truth of the matter. Heads can be dropped in cases of self-defense. Thus, the appropriate avenue for the reasonable suspicion created by the head was for the Defendant to report such to the proper authorities. It should not have been to broadcast a death threat to the entire server via a /ad accusing the Plaintiff of a murder.

III. The Allegation caused harm to the accused person's livelihood and wellbeing.
As was stated by witness testimony, the Defendant's actions caused harm to the accused person's livelihood and wellbeing.

Whereas the nature of such a statement made in the form of a /ad is broadcasted to the entire server, the Plaintiff felt the need to seek legal counsel and had to, for a period of 3-4 days, cease business operations in discussion about his rights in this case. (See witness response in posts #12 and #13) Since the Plaintiff at the time was a new player to the server, the statement caused the Plaintiff losses as he had to hire legal counsel in the amount of $1,500 to see what could be done about the matter. (See P-004)

Additionally, as seen in the provided transactional evidence, (P-005) the plaintiff's business, (BackywoodBoyzCo.), now makes around $12,500k in net profit a month on average. Witness KorroMF, who developed the bot pictured in the screenshot, testified in post #15 to the nature of the statistics bot, to establish it as a reliable source of information that cannot be edited from an external source.

Since the nature of having to hire and confer with legal counsel required the Plaintiff to delay the building of his business for at least three days, as was testified to by our witnesses, this indirectly hampered their ability to turn a profit sooner, in effect hindering them from three additional days of profit. If this monthly profit is divided by thirty-one this results in approximately $1,200 in damages for the three-day period, since no profit was made during the period as the plaintiff was hindered in his ability to finish setting up his business by having to confer with legal counsel.

On the matter of wellbeing, the Plaintiff and @PeekDaWindows have both testified to the nature of the Plaintiff's wellbeing. The Defendant was threatening to "Kill" the Plaintiff on the grounds of his alleged murder. Additionally, while it may be unclear whether or not the player "KaberBaber069" was indeed working with the Defendant, the nearness of the assault and the nature of the statement that the Defendant was seeking to "Kill" the Plaintiff caused the Plaintiff extreme concern for his own safety, as is seen in post #12 and post #19:

@Gavy: "The statement in P-001 skewed my wellbeing on the server. I began to fear for my physical safety, as I had never been threatened like this before. Any time I began receiving visitors at my farm, I immediately felt anxious. I can recall one instance, in a separate situation, in which another player visited my farm and attempted to kill me. I immediately felt there was a connection between these two events, but this was only because my sense of wellbeing had be severely disturbed. I became hyper-vigilant, especially after that, watching out for anybody who could be a threat to me or the farm for weeks. It took a significant amount of time before I began to feel safe again on my own property."
Click to expand...

@Gavy: "This assault occurred just 3 days after the threat from RAFA_lit4, on August 1st, 2026. In this incident, a player named "KaberBaber069" lit a firework on the top of my plot, whilst I was working on my underground farms. I came to the top of the plot and, at that point, I saw Kaber standing in one of my fields. When I asked what he was doing he said in chat "tonight is the night". At that point, Kaber struck me with some weapon that had fire aspect on it multiple times and attempted to murder me. However, Kaber was at his maximum murder limit and was unable to kill me. PeekDaWindows, my co-owner, came to my defense once I had told him I was being attacked. He attempted to kill Kaber, to stop the assault, to which Kaber murdered him. He was able to murder him, as Peek technically started combat. Despite doing this in my defense, and this taking place on our land, PeekDaWindows was jailed for this incident. I did make a DHS ticket, and "KaberBaber069" was charged for this crime. I have evidence in screenshots, if needed."
Click to expand...

@Gavy: "I believe that the connection between the assault and the initial threat was the intimidation and that there was money involved/being paid for my death/assault. The initial threat put my guard up, and I felt like I had to be vigilant for intruders during that time. When the assault happened, this only confirmed that I did have to be vigilant and scared for my safety. This worsened my loss of enjoyment while I pondered if these two events were related. These two events were so close together and, despite being separate, combined to worsen the lack of security and safety I felt on my own property."
Click to expand...

This assault was also testified to by @PeekDaWindows in post #20:

@PeekDaWindows: "A player showed up on our plot and claimed to be a “serial killer” and tried to kill Gavy. When Gavy told me he was being attacked, I tried to defend him, and in response this player killed me. I was then jailed for combat against this player, even though it was an attempt to defend my Co-Owner. I served 15 minutes in prison because of this. I could tell Gavy was anxious during this time and was not enjoying the experience."
Click to expand...

The Plaintiff's concern was amplified by the statement and created a state of paranoia harming the Plaintiff's wellbeing that would have been otherwise absent had the statement not been made.

In summary, the facts of the case show that the Defendant has met the conditions necessary to be found liable for Malicious Allegation for the following reasons:

1. The Defendant accused the Plaintiff of a crime, namely murder, by stating that the Plaintiff killed the Defendant's employee.

2. The Defendant could reasonably infer that the allegation was false for the reasons stated above in Point II.

3. The allegation made by the Defendant caused harm to the Plaintiff's wellbeing and livelihood by hampering business relations and causing intense concern for the Plaintiff's safety in his right to life.

4. The allegation was not and has not been proven to be substantially true, according to witness testimony and a lack of argument from the Defense.

5. The Defendant has no reasonable grounds to believe the allegation to be true.

6. The allegation made by the Defendant was not made in good faith to the appropriate authorities for investigation, instead being broadcast to the entire server via an /ad command.

Thus, it is for these reasons we respectfully request this court to rule in favor of the Plaintiff.

Respectfully submitted,
SniperElite508

 
TheREALWINner said:

Brief


IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
LEGAL BRIEF

Your Honor and may it please the court.

The inquest proceedings now concluded, this court has petitioned the Plaintiff for a summary legal brief, and we most happily comply. Doing such, we shall now summarize the following two points.

1. Repeat and summarize all facts of the case.

2. Show how those facts meet the charges alleged.

I. FACTS
1. As stated in the case filing, on or about 10:00 PM EST on the July 29th, 2026, Rafa_LIT4 uploaded an ad stating the following. “Attention GAVY! i will KILL YOU for not paying me 12 bucks before killing MY employee,” as seen in P-001.

2. As stated in the case filling, on or about 10:00 PM EST on the July 29th, 2026, Rafa_LIT4 sent a message to Gavy stating that “gavy, i have a head that SAYS killed by gavy, pay me 12 bucks which is the price for killing my employees and i will let u go. ALTHOUGH! we currently have a offer, 50 percent off for killing a core industries employee!” This can be seen in P-002.

3. According to witness testimony in posts numbers #19 and #20, the Plaintiff was assaulted 3 days after this threat by a player named ""KaberBaber069."

4. According to witness testimony in posts numbers #12 and #13, the threat made by the Defendant caused extreme unrest for the Defendant for his own safety, both before and after the assault by player "KaberBaber069."

5. According to witness testimony in posts numbers #12 and #13, the threat also caused the defendant harm in livelihood as he felt compelled to seek legal counsel to seek a defense against the accusation made by the Defense.

6. According to witness testimony in posts #12 and #13, the seeking of legal counsel required the defendant to re-allocate funds from his business, which caused severe setbacks in the crucial founding states of his enterprise.

7. According to witness testimony in posts #12 and #13, the plaintiff has no criminal record and has not purposefully engaged in criminal conduct in his time on the server.

8. According to P-005 and the corresponding witness testimony in post #15, P-005 is evidence of BackwoodBoyzCo's monthly sales.

II. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. Malicious Allegation (RCCA under Part XIII § 5)

According to the RCCA, a person commits Malicious Allegation when one:
(a) makes a false allegation that another person committed a crime or civil violation; and
(b) knew or could reasonably infer that the allegation was false; and
(c) the allegation causes harm to the accused person’s reputation, livelihood, or wellbeing.

Notably as well, the RCCA notes that this violation shall not occur where:
(d) the allegation was substantially true; or
(e) the person had reasonable grounds to believe the allegation was true; or
(f) the allegation was made in good faith to the appropriate authorities for investigation.

We, as the Plaintiff, believe that these facts have been met for the following reasons:

I. A False Allegation was Made.
The Plaintiff and @PeekDaWindows have both testified that the Plaintiff has not murdered any supposed employee of the Defendant's company. Additionally, the Plaintiff in this case has a clean criminal record and as of the filing of this case has never been charged with any counts of murder on any grounds. This can be seen as in Post #12 and #13 where the witnesses said the following:





Additionally, the Defendant, by failing to appear before this court, has not offered any positive evidence that such a murder has happened. The only positive claim we have is that the defense allegedly possessed a "head that SAYS killed by Gavy" but for all this court knows, such a head is could be a construct of the defense, especially when one considers that the defense was attempting to extort the Plaintiff for money under threat of death as seen in P-001 & P-002.

In short, upon a preponderance of the evidence, the Plaintiff argues that such a murder never happened, and even if a head existed, such a head only existed due to an instance of self-defense and not due to murder as the defense has alleged in evidence.

II. The Defendant could reasonably infer that the Allegation was false.
The Defendant in the proceedings of this case has failed to present proof that he would have reasonable grounds to believe the allegation was true, but even if he had, according to the statements made by the Defendant, the Plaintiff finds it difficult to believe that to be the case.

While the Defendant in evidence claimed that he was in possession of a head attributing the Plaintiff in this case of being an assailant of the Defendant's employee, such proof was not given. Due to the lack of any further argument, this fact alone destroys any claim that the Defense could not have inferred that the allegation was false. But even if this is not enough, the Plaintiff also believes that a head alone is not enough proof to build a reasonable allegation to be stated for the truth of the matter. Heads can be dropped in cases of self-defense. Thus, the appropriate avenue for the reasonable suspicion created by the head was for the Defendant to report such to the proper authorities. It should not have been to broadcast a death threat to the entire server via a /ad accusing the Plaintiff of a murder.

III. The Allegation caused harm to the accused person's livelihood and wellbeing.
As was stated by witness testimony, the Defendant's actions caused harm to the accused person's livelihood and wellbeing.

Whereas the nature of such a statement made in the form of a /ad is broadcasted to the entire server, the Plaintiff felt the need to seek legal counsel and had to, for a period of 3-4 days, cease business operations in discussion about his rights in this case. (See witness response in posts #12 and #13) Since the Plaintiff at the time was a new player to the server, the statement caused the Plaintiff losses as he had to hire legal counsel in the amount of $1,500 to see what could be done about the matter. (See P-004)

Additionally, as seen in the provided transactional evidence, (P-005) the plaintiff's business, (BackywoodBoyzCo.), now makes around $12,500k in net profit a month on average. Witness KorroMF, who developed the bot pictured in the screenshot, testified in post #15 to the nature of the statistics bot, to establish it as a reliable source of information that cannot be edited from an external source.

Since the nature of having to hire and confer with legal counsel required the Plaintiff to delay the building of his business for at least three days, as was testified to by our witnesses, this indirectly hampered their ability to turn a profit sooner, in effect hindering them from three additional days of profit. If this monthly profit is divided by thirty-one this results in approximately $1,200 in damages for the three-day period, since no profit was made during the period as the plaintiff was hindered in his ability to finish setting up his business by having to confer with legal counsel.

On the matter of wellbeing, the Plaintiff and @PeekDaWindows have both testified to the nature of the Plaintiff's wellbeing. The Defendant was threatening to "Kill" the Plaintiff on the grounds of his alleged murder. Additionally, while it may be unclear whether or not the player "KaberBaber069" was indeed working with the Defendant, the nearness of the assault and the nature of the statement that the Defendant was seeking to "Kill" the Plaintiff caused the Plaintiff extreme concern for his own safety, as is seen in post #12 and post #19:







This assault was also testified to by @PeekDaWindows in post #20:



The Plaintiff's concern was amplified by the statement and created a state of paranoia harming the Plaintiff's wellbeing that would have been otherwise absent had the statement not been made.

In summary, the facts of the case show that the Defendant has met the conditions necessary to be found liable for Malicious Allegation for the following reasons:

1. The Defendant accused the Plaintiff of a crime, namely murder, by stating that the Plaintiff killed the Defendant's employee.

2. The Defendant could reasonably infer that the allegation was false for the reasons stated above in Point II.

3. The allegation made by the Defendant caused harm to the Plaintiff's wellbeing and livelihood by hampering business relations and causing intense concern for the Plaintiff's safety in his right to life.

4. The allegation was not and has not been proven to be substantially true, according to witness testimony and a lack of argument from the Defense.

5. The Defendant has no reasonable grounds to believe the allegation to be true.

6. The allegation made by the Defendant was not made in good faith to the appropriate authorities for investigation, instead being broadcast to the entire server via an /ad command.

Thus, it is for these reasons we respectfully request this court to rule in favor of the Plaintiff.

Respectfully submitted,
SniperElite508

Click to expand...
Court is in recess.
 

Verdict


IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
Gavy v Rafa_LIT4 [2026] DCR 169

I. Summary of Complaint​

Plaintiff Gavy approached this Court seeking relief for alleged malicious allegation conducted by Defendant Rafa_LIT4. Defendant failed to appear and the Complaint continued in default judgment in an inquest proceeding.

II. Findings of Fact​

1. Defendant’s messages​

Defendant posted a public ad stating that “i [sic] will KILL YOU for not paying me 12 bucks before killing MY employee.” Defendant then followed up with a private message to Plaintiff in which he stated that “i [sic] have a head that SAYS killed by gavy, pay me 12 bucks which is the price for killing my employees and i will let u go. ALTHOUGH! we currently have a [sic] offer, 50 percent off for killing a core industries employee!”

The messages were corroborated by Plaintiff's sworn testimony and the testimony of witness PeekDaWindows. Both individuals testified that they suffered harm as a result of the ad and private message and that they had not engaged in any criminal activity, contrary to Defendant's allegations.

2. Plaintiff’s financial harm​

Plaintiff, in his pleading and testimony, alleges financial harm in the sum of $1,200 for having to seek out counsel and stop production in fear of his safety. To corroborate the profit Plaintiff’s business venture makes, witness KorroMF was called to testify. The witness testified about a product he developed for Plaintiff’s venture, which allowed Plaintiff to track the sales of his farm.

Plaintiff further seeks $1,500 for having to seek out and pay counsel, for a total of $2,700 in compensatory damages. This is supported by P-004.

3. Plaintiff’s Worsening of Conditions and Loss of Enjoyment​

Plaintiff seeks a total of $30,000 in consequential damages, divided equally between claims for Worsening of Conditions and Loss of Enjoyment.

In support of these claims, Plaintiff testified that he began to fear for his safety and had to seek legal help to remedy this situation and to combat the statements made. Plaintiff’s business partner also testified that they began harvesting and selling their product en masse to offset losses after Plaintiff sought out legal help.

III. Issue​

The main issue of this case is whether Defendant’s statements constitute Malicious Allegation under Part XIII § 5 of the Redmont Civil Code Act (“RCCA”) and whether Plaintiff is entitled to the relief requested.

IV. Rule​

Malicious Allegation is a tort that applies when a person “(a) makes a false allegation that another person committed a crime or civil violation; and
(b) knew or could reasonably infer that the allegation was false; and
(c) the allegation causes harm to the accused person’s reputation, livelihood, or wellbeing.” Id. To establish liability, the plaintiff must show that the defendant acted with the purpose of causing harm or with substantial certainty that harm would result from the defendant's conduct. Id. at Part II § 7(2).
Compensatory Damages shall be granted only with proof of pecuniary loss, including harm to property or earning capacity. Id. at Part III § 2(2)(a). Punitive Damages shall be granted to punish defendants for their outrageous conduct and to deter others in the future. The conduct has to be outrageous in order for the damages to be granted. Id. at § 3(2). Outrageous conduct is defined as “completely indecent, totally atrocious, and fully intolerable in a civilized community.” Lightiago v. FuriousPaladin [2023] SCR 20. Consequential Damages are damages that are otherwise incalculable; Congress has identified three non-exhaustive types of Consequential Damages: (a) Humiliation; (b) Worsening of Conditions; and (c) Loss of Enjoyment. Id. at § 5(1). Consequential damages are further defined by case law. Nominal Damages are damages awarded to a plaintiff to establish that a legal cause of action has been established, but otherwise no other damages, apart from Legal Fees, are granted. Id. at § 4(1)(a).

The plaintiff bears the burden of proof and must establish the claim on the balance of probabilities. Judicial Standards Act, Part II §§ 2(1)(a) and 3(1)(a).

V. Analysis​

1. Malicious Allegation​

First we will discuss the primary issue of this case, and that is whether Defendant’s public and private statements constitute Malicious Allegation. Defendant publicly posted messages in which he accused Plaintiff of killing his employee. He demanded payment of $12.

Absent any proof on the contrary, the Court will assume on a balance of probabilities Plaintiff has not indeed killed Defendant’s employee. The issue here is whether Defendant’s statement fits the provision of “had reasonable grounds to believe the allegation was true,” and whether it fits the criteria for intentional conduct. Id. at Part XIII § 5(e).

The Court finds that Plaintiff has met the burden of proof by a slim margin. As is the definition of the civil burden of proof, “more likely than not” this is one of these cases. For one, the head mentioned by Defendant in P-002 is absent in evidence, and therefore the Court cannot ascertain the validity of Defendant’s statements contained therein. It will therefore assume that the head doesn’t exist, insofar as it has evidentiary value to probe and evaluate the verity of the statement.

Now we will continue to analyse the conduct of Defendant and whether it was intentional. From the messages provided, Defendant seems certain about the accusations he makes. He is definitely aware of the accusation and threat he makes, but might not be fully aware of any potential civil liability arising from the statement he makes. Defendant should have known that his conduct would be problematic, especially with publicly accusing someone of murder via /ad. On the balance of probabilities, the criteria for intentional conduct are met.

2. Compensatory Damages​

Plaintiff requests $2,700 in Compensatory Damages to reimburse the alleged loss of income for having to seek out counsel and for having to pay counsel. The Court rejects both claims.

First, we will examine the latter claim. Plaintiff’s argument in support fails on the grounds as it would constitute double recovery. Double recovery is when a plaintiff is reimbursed twice for the same exact loss. All legal fees are awarded separately and awarding compensatory damages on top of that would be impermissible.

As for Plaintiff’s former argument, the Court declines this claim too. Seeking out counsel is not a reason to suspend construction. A lawyer is supposed to do most of the work; why would anyone hire them if they required the client to do the work? Plaintiff’s claim hinges on this fact and the Court finds no reason to award it.

3. Consequential Damages​

Plaintiff requests $30,000 in Consequential Damages for the Loss of Enjoyment and Worsening of Conditions Defendant’s conduct allegedly caused. The Court rejects both claims.

First we will examine the Loss of Enjoyment claim. Plaintiff’s claim hinges on the fact that their enjoyment of Redmont was damaged by Defendant’s threat and that they became paranoid of their surroundings and passersby. Murder is a common occurrence in Redmont. A threat to murder somebody would not severely impact someone’s enjoyment here, inasmuch as the act itself is not going to severely hamper anyone’s enjoyment unless such conduct is followed by repeated acts of violence directly linked to the person threatening. This reasoning is supported by Congress by setting the penalty of threatening someone to 1 PU. See Criminal Code Act, Part V § 4. Defendant’s threat/accusation on its face isn’t enough to sustain the $15,000 prayer and the Court declines to award the prayer in full and will award $120, equaling to one Penalty Unit.

The Court will follow the same reasoning with the second claim. There was no sufficient proof provided to suggest that there was a sufficient worsening of conditions. The Court will also award $120, in total $240 in Consequential Damages.

4. Punitive Damages​

Plaintiff seeks $25,000 in Punitive Damages for the outrageous conduct of Defendant. The Court rejects this.

Plaintiff requests this relief, alleging that Defendant’s conduct was outrageous. Congress generalized six principles on which to judge whether outrageous conduct occurred. See RCCA, Part III § 3(2)(b). We will use these to judge whether Defendant’s conduct was outrageous.

Defendant’s statements, while they were very accusatory and Defendant seems sure when he issued them, were not intentional enough for the Court to award $25,000 on outrageous conduct alone. While Defendant’s statements would not be acceptable in a civilized society, they do not constitute any grave departure from standards. The Court also has no indication that the conduct was repeated, nor has Plaintiff stated it in his pleadings to the Court. The Court will therefore award triple the statutory punishment for the crime of threats, that being $360 in Punitive Damages to also take into account the relative size of the infraction.

VI. Order of the Court​

The Court finds Defendant liable to Plaintiff and orders the payment of the following:
  • $240 in Consequential Damages, divided evenly between claims for Loss of Enjoyment and Worsening of Conditions;
  • $360 in Punitive Damages; and
  • $3000 in Legal Fees paid to Plaintiff’s legal counsel.
The Court thanks all parties for their time.

So ordered,
Magistrate Johnes

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top