Appeal: Denied [2025] DCR 10 - Appeal

[Dartanboy]

Username: Dartanboy

I am representing a client

Who is your Client?: juniperfig

File(s) attached

What Case are you Appealing?: [2025] DCR 10

Link to the Original Case: Lawsuit: Adjourned - The Commonwealth of Redmont v. juniperfig [2025] DCR 10

Basis for Appeal: Magistrate ignored one major fact and one major legal issue:
Legal Issue: Bounties are legal, according to the Violent Offense Act:

(i) Bounties are considered legal, and the Department of Justice may not arrest a citizen for setting one.
(ii) No citizen may be persecuted for setting a bounty in a court of law.

Even though the bounty was not set via /bounty, it's still a bounty. The law does not care how the bounty is set. Nonetheless, not only was my client prosecuted, she was convicted.

Fact: My client asked EpsteinGaming392 to KILL AlexanderLove, not MURDER AlexanderLove. While it appears to be true that EpsteinGaming392 chose to murder him, this was not a requirement and thus, my client should not have been found guilty of incitement.

Supporting Evidence:

 

[Dartanboy]

Your honor, I was hoping to avoid posting this appeal until this one has been resolved: Appeal: Pending - [2025] DCR 10 - Appeal

However, it has gone weeks with no response, so I had to post this one.

 

[ko531]

Verdict

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT

Following careful deliberation, the Federal Court has decided to deny this appeal.

The court fails to see a true connection that would constitute what the plaintiff did as a bounty for the purposes of this law. Looking at the Make Bounties Legal and Amend the Violent Offences Act and specifically the reasoning that law was created, it is quite easy to see the act being legalized was the use of the bounty plugin in a time where the Attorney General was prosecuting people for such. While what the plaintiff did was very much parallel and for the same purpose as the bounty plugin, it is not the same act the law was designed to legalize.

As such, the decision by the lower court will be upheld.

Thank you for your patience.

​