Lawsuit: Adjourned baole444 (Lovely Law Representing) v. Skeppyshop [Case No. 09-2021-25]

Status
Not open for further replies.

ItzBananaMuffin

Citizen
Justice Department
ItzBananaMuffin
ItzBananaMuffin
policeofficer
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION


baole444
Plaintiff

v.

Skeppyshop
Defendant

COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:

"My job is built around my reputation, as in the chat [you] can see that [the Defendant's] action raise henry_ngo reaction leading to others thinking that I'm actually [behaving in a corrupt manner], I was quite panicked for a little but then I get back up and take ss of the private msg [the Defendant] sent me demanding that I buy food for him. I have a slight insecurity about my reputation and I don't want it being damaged."

I. PARTIES
1. baole444 - Plaintiff
2. Skeppyshop - Defendant

II. FACTS
1. The Plaintiff was conversing with the Defendant.
2. The Defendant insulted the Plaintiff and threatened to kill him (Logs Screenshot).
3. The Defendant told the Plaintiff to buy them food followed by an insult (Logs Screenshot).
4. The Plaintiff declined to do so.
5. The Defendant then falsely alleged in the global chat that the Plaintiff had threatened to arrest them if the Defendant did not buy the Plaintiff food (Logs Screenshot).
6. Despite the Plaintiff refuting these allegations, the Defendant continued on to accuse the Plaintiff of being corrupt twice in global chat (Chat Screenshots).
7. There were 39 players online while this event transpired, who could read all of the accusations posed by the Defendant, with some players even going so far as to voice approval for the Defendant.

III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. Slander is defined as: "A purposeful false statement of a player to cause damage to that player's reputation."
2. The Defendant made multiple deliberate false statements against the Plaintiff without a valid cause or basis for these claims.
3. As the Plaintiff is still a Trainee Officer, these accusations of misconduct and being corrupt carry extra weight, and are more likely to be believed by the public, thus causing grievous harm to the Plaintiff's public image and reputation.
4. The Defendant attempted to use these allegations as a weapon against the Plaintiff, as seen by the smirking face sent in private messages to the Plaintiff after the first false accusation was made, as well as the directly proceeding message wherein the Plaintiff refused to provide food to the Defendant.
5. The Plaintiff, being a new officer, suffered great emotional harm from these false allegations of corruption and abuse of power.
6. As established in Case No. 08-2021-12 and Case No. 05-2021-02, Police Officers can sue for damages when falsely accused of corruption.


IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:
1. $300 in compensation for the three total false claims made in Global chat
2. $200 in legal fees

1632544594635.png
1632544567750.png

1632544508584.png
further baole slander evidence.png

baole timestamp.png
baole consent to representation.png

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 24th day of September, 2021
 
Last edited:

Wuutie

Citizen
Judge
district-court-png.12083


IN THE COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
WRIT OF SUMMONS

The Defendant,
@skeppyshop , is required to appear before the court in the case of baole444 v. skeppyshop. Failure to appear within 48 hours of this summons will result in a default judgment in favour of the plaintiff.

I'd also like to remind both parties to be aware of the Court Rules and Procedures.​
 

Wuutie

Citizen
Judge
A Public Defender will be asked to represent the defendant. The chairman of the RBA will chose which one.
 

Prof_Tom

Citizen
Education & Commerce Department
prof_tom
prof_tom
economist
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO DISMISS

baole444 (represented by Lovely Law)
Plaintiff

v.

Skeppyshop (represented by PwC)
Defendant

Apologies for appearing late, your honor. My client did not notice he was sued until I told him today.

MOTION TO DISMISS
Defendant move that the complaint in this case be dismissed, and in support thereof, respectfully alleges:
1. The plaintiff states: "the Defendant continued on to accuse the Plaintiff of being corrupt twice in global chat (Chat Screenshots)". I don't see my client accusing the plaintiff of anything in the first screenshot.
2. The plaintiff states that because he is an Trainee Officer, this accusations carry more weight. The law is the same for everyone, so the position of the plaintiff shouldn't matter at all.
3. The plaintiff claims that the emoji my client sent is proof that my client attempted to use these allegations as a weapon against the Plaintiff. The describe the emoji as a "smirking face", though this doesn't prove anything. The emoji could have literally any meaning, but still the claims that it is a "smirking face" and even says it is proof of a heavy accusation.
4. My client is not being sued for murder, my client is being sued for slander. The plaintiff has still stated that the defendant threatened to murder the plaintiff, and has even screenshots as proof. This is completely irrelevant to this case, because he is not sued for this things, but for slander.
5. Many of the proof screenshots contain private messages. Private messages are no slander, because they are not public, so they can not hurt anyones reputation.
6. Finally, the plaintiff states that baole444 suffered great emotional harm. This has nothing to do with slander, and is again a completely irrelevant fact. The plaintiff also states that this is because he is a new officer, though that has nothing to do with emotional harm!

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 first day of october 2021

Proof of representation:
skeppyshop client proof.PNG
 
Last edited:

ItzBananaMuffin

Citizen
Justice Department
ItzBananaMuffin
ItzBananaMuffin
policeofficer
REBUTTAL

The Defendant has made several key points in their motion to dismiss, and I will address all in kind, as well as explain how they are not sufficient grounds for dismissal.
  1. The Defense has alleged that there is no evidence of an accusation in the first screenshot. While this may be arguably true, it is easily revealed by looking at the logs provided by the Plaintiff that the Defendant was indeed accusing the Plaintiff of being corrupt. First by addressing the Plaintiff’s name and then using a variation of “Trainee”, the Plaintiff’s rank, and clearly only referring to the Plaintiff. Furthermore, forgetting to include a particular label on one statement of the Facts, that would have only served to help the readability, is completely insufficient grounds for dismissal.
  2. The claim that the law is the same for everyone applies in this situation, and is not being challenged. The Defendant slandered the Plaintiff very clearly and with intent, and is thus being sued lawfully for their actions. Additionally, the Plaintiff’s rank is of concern, because claiming that a new officer with an unestablished reputation is corrupt is far more of a threat to said reputation than accusing a well-known and respected officer.
  3. The smile emoji sent to the Plaintiff immediately after the accusations were made can most definitely not be associated with any other messages exchanged between the two, nor was any attempted correction made. The Defendant was clearly taunting the Plaintiff after bashing his reputation in the Global chat. This particular claim is not the proof of slander, but the proof of willful knowledge of their actions, so alleging that it is being used as “proof of a heavy accusation” is a serious stretch.
  4. The use of the screenshots is not to accuse the Defendant of murder, but rather to establish a motive for slandering the Plaintiff. For that purpose, both the claim and screenshots are entirely valid. They prove that the Defendant had a conflict with the Plaintiff and give rise to a reason for making those ill-willed comments in the chat.
  5. None of the private messages were mentioned as being slanderous, so this claim completely fails to hold water as far as the logic goes. All of the messages cited as being slanderous were sent to the Global channel, which the Plaintiff’s counsel would like to reiterate for clarity is marked with a “G” in the chat. This claim by the Defense is irrelevant, and does not constitute any claim of frivolity.
  6. The Plaintiff’s emotional harm related to this incident absolutely does have to do with the rank. As a new officer, he is still unseasoned, and is now concerned that his reputation has been tarnished before his career even began. This is undue worry caused by the Defendant’s actions, for which they should be held responsible.
 

Prof_Tom

Citizen
Education & Commerce Department
prof_tom
prof_tom
economist
Objection, your honor. The Plaintiff most certainly associated the emoji with other messages between the two in the original complaint;
The Defendant attempted to use these allegations as a weapon against the Plaintiff, as seen by the smirking face sent in private messages to the Plaintiff after the first false accusation was made
First of all, the Plaintiff states here that my client attempted to use these allegations as a weapon against the Plaintiff, and they state that you can see that by the simple emoji sent in the private messages. With using the allegations as a weapon they clearly refer to slander, not to willful knowlegde of my clients actions. They also call the emoji a "smirking face". I already stated that this emoji can mean anything.

The smile emoji sent to the Plaintiff immediately after the accusations were made can most definitely not be associated with any other messages exchanged between the two, nor was any attempted correction made.
Here, the Plaintiff states that the emoji can "most definitely" not be associated with any other messages exchanged between the two. In the first quote in this message the Plaintiff clearly does associate the emoji with the accusations of slander and with other messages, sent before the emoji.

This particular claim is not the proof of slander, but the proof of willful knowledge of their actions, so alleging that it is being used as “proof of a heavy accusation” is a serious stretch.
Here the Plaintif says here the complete opposite of what they said in the first quote in this message. This is clearly contradictory to previous statements of the Plaintiff. They also call the exact words "Proof of a heavy accusation" a serious stretch. This isn't a stretch, it is litterally what happened.

We still think this case should be dismissed, because of the contradictory of the statements made by the plaintiff.
 
Last edited:
AlexanderLove
AlexanderLove
Actually, your honor, Tom's objection should not be permitted since it is out of Court procedure. Rebuttals to rebuttals don't exist and objections should follow the new objection guide. His objection grounds are not legal.

He is attempting to turn it into an argument of fact, which should be done in opening statements.
 

Prof_Tom

Citizen
Education & Commerce Department
prof_tom
prof_tom
economist
Your honor, this is a valid objection.
All I do in my objection is explaining why parts of the Plaintiffs rebuttal aren't relevant/valid. I am most certainly not trying to turn it into an argument of facts. I was objecting for hearsay and lack of relevance, and explaining what I meant with the objection which is perfectly valid according to the Court Procedure. My apologies if I didn't make that clear enough.
 
Last edited:

ItzBananaMuffin

Citizen
Justice Department
ItzBananaMuffin
ItzBananaMuffin
policeofficer
May it please the Court,
The Defense's reasoning for allowing the objection does not hold up, as there is no evidence that is unexplained or unaccounted for, thus eliminating any claim of lack of relevance. There is also no witness to call hearsay into question. We respectfully move that the Plaintiff's objection be stricken from the record and ignored.
 

Wuutie

Citizen
Judge
Everyone speaking out of turn right now will be found in contempt! This is not a circus and procedures have to be followed. I will review everything tomorrow. Everyone talking before that moment will be found in contempt.
 

Wuutie

Citizen
Judge
Objection, your honor. The Plaintiff most certainly associated the emoji with other messages between the two in the original complaint;

First of all, the Plaintiff states here that my client attempted to use these allegations as a weapon against the Plaintiff, and they state that you can see that by the simple emoji sent in the private messages. With using the allegations as a weapon they clearly refer to slander, not to willful knowlegde of my clients actions. They also call the emoji a "smirking face". I already stated that this emoji can mean anything.


Here, the Plaintiff states that the emoji can "most definitely" not be associated with any other messages exchanged between the two. In the first quote in this message the Plaintiff clearly does associate the emoji with the accusations of slander and with other messages, sent before the emoji.


Here the Plaintif says here the complete opposite of what they said in the first quote in this message. This is clearly contradictory to previous statements of the Plaintiff. They also call the exact words "Proof of a heavy accusation" a serious stretch. This isn't a stretch, it is litterally what happened.

We still think this case should be dismissed, because of the contradictory of the statements made by the plaintiff.
When you object you will have to clarify which objections. An example: Objection, relevance! Then you can explain what and how.

Actually, your honor, Tom's objection should not be permitted since it is out of Court procedure. Rebuttals to rebuttals don't exist and objections should follow the new objection guide. His objection grounds are not legal.

He is attempting to turn it into an argument of fact, which should be done in opening statements.
Please if there are any concerns in a case you can contact me in a dm but you can't talk free in court when not asked or not a part of it. I know he is an associate but you can talk through him or through me. This is your final warning.

Your honor, this is a valid objection.
All I do in my objection is explaining why parts of the Plaintiffs rebuttal aren't relevant/valid. I am most certainly not trying to turn it into an argument of facts. I was objecting for hearsay and lack of relevance, and explaining what I meant with the objection which is perfectly valid according to the Court Procedure. My apologies if I didn't make that clear enough.
This is more valid then your first objection and will review it after this.

Overall please wait your turn because this is not a place for a discussion, respect in Court must be shown. Thank you.
 

Wuutie

Citizen
Judge
Furthermore I will reject the motion for dismissal because there is a case and I can't deny it. Some of the points made are accurate but some not. So I want to get to the bottom of this and see what damages has been caused or if there was slander in the first place. That is why I ask the Defendant to present his opening statement.
 

Prof_Tom

Citizen
Education & Commerce Department
prof_tom
prof_tom
economist
Your honor, I have many important school tests this week. I also need more time to gather evidence and screenshots, and I can not do this tests and this case in combination. That is why I would like to request a 7 days delay. In a week, I can work enough on this case, and I think this is how we can get the most justice out of this case.

Also, my apologies for the incidents earlier in this case.
 

Wuutie

Citizen
Judge
Then the session is in recess for 5 more days. I do request to give your opening statement within 6 days from now.
 
Last edited:

Wuutie

Citizen
Judge
@Prof_Tom your time limit is actually over but because of the delay Ill give you another 24 hours. If you fail to present your opening statement within this timeframe we will move on.
 

Prof_Tom

Citizen
Education & Commerce Department
prof_tom
prof_tom
economist
Your honor, I can't move forward with this case because my client doesn't answer to me anymore. I can't contact him, which means I do not have his permission to do anything, and I do not have information from the client. There is proof of him not reacting properly in the images I attached. The white rectangles are conversations related to this case, and are protected by attorney - client privilege. I purely attach this proof for the dates.
 

Attachments

  • norespond.PNG
    norespond.PNG
    44.9 KB · Views: 11
  • norespond2.PNG
    norespond2.PNG
    35.5 KB · Views: 11

Wuutie

Citizen
Judge

Verdict



Since the defendant decided to quit this lawsuit, I am obligated to move on to a default judgment. I rule in the favor of the Plaintiff and order the following:
- A fine of in total 500 dollars paid by Skeppyshop and transferred to the Plaintiff, baole444.

This case is now adjourned.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top