Lawsuit: Pending Commonwealth of Redmont v. Carrottt_

[Matthew100x]

Case Filing

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CRIMINAL ACTION

Commonwealth of Redmont
Prosecution

v.

Carrottt_
Defendant

COMPLAINT

The Commonwealth of Redmont alleges criminal conduct committed by the Defendant as follows:

The Commonwealth alleges that Carrottt_ obtained recorded passing results on DOE-administered legal examinations by using cheating, thereby failing to validly and successfully complete the statutory examination process. The Commonwealth further alleges that Carrottt_ thereafter engaged in the practice of law while relying on the resulting legal rank. This prosecution proceeds under the second prong of Legal Qualification Fraud: engaging in the practice of law without a valid legal qualification (see Part III, § 12(a), Act of Congress - Criminal Code Act).

I. PARTIES
1. The Commonwealth of Redmont is the prosecuting authority in this criminal action.
2. Carrottt_ is the Defendant.

II. FACTS
1. On August 7, 2026, the Defendant obtained recorded passing results on the Solicitor Examination, each of the six Barrister specialization examinations, and the Attorney Examination. (P-001).

2. The examination records contained in P-001 record the Defendant as passing the Solicitor Examination at approximately 05:14:31.42 and the Attorney Examination at approximately 05:34:58.10 on August 7, 2026, an interval of approximately twenty minutes and twenty-six seconds between those two recorded passing events. (P-001).

3. Between those recorded events, P-001 records the Defendant passing the Criminal Law specialization at approximately 05:18:51.80, Administrative Law at 05:21:23.60, Corporate Law at 05:25:10.75, Constitutional Law at 05:27:26.44, Contracts Law at 05:28:56.05, and Property Law at 05:30:42.59. (P-001).

4. The intervals between those recorded passes were approximately four minutes twenty seconds, two minutes thirty-two seconds, three minutes forty-seven seconds, two minutes sixteen seconds, one minute thirty seconds, one minute forty-seven seconds, and four minutes sixteen seconds, respectively. (P-001).

5. The Solicitor Examination contained twenty questions, each Barrister specialization examination contained fifteen questions, and the Attorney Examination contained twenty-five questions, for a total of approximately 135 questions across the examinations at issue.

6. The Defendant has separately been accused of Academic Misconduct arising from the examination conduct described herein.

7. Redmont law requires DOE to ensure examination security and authorizes DOE to issue the appropriate legal rank upon successful completion of the relevant legal examinations. (see Part VII, § 2(2)(a)–(c), Act of Congress - Redmont Civil Code Act).

8. Membership in the Bar Association is predicated on holding a valid legal qualification under the RBA Act. (see Part III, § 1(1), Act of Congress - Redmont Civil Code Act).

9. Because the Defendant obtained the examination results at issue through cheating, the Defendant did not successfully complete the affected examinations and did not thereby obtain a valid legal qualification within the meaning of the RBA Act.

10. On September 4, 2026, the Defendant engaged in the practice of law by filing the action Megamango800 vs. JackalGG [2026] DCR 156 (see Lawsuit: Pending - Megamango800 vs. JackalGG [2026] DCR XXX), while relying upon the legal qualification obtained from the examinations described above.

11. The conduct described in Paragraph 10 constituted a privilege of legal practice reserved by the RBA Act to qualified legal practitioners. (see Part VI, §§ 2–4, Act of Congress - Redmont Civil Code Act).

III. CHARGE
COUNT I — LEGAL QUALIFICATION FRAUD

1. Part III, § 12(a) of the Criminal Code Act makes Legal Qualification Fraud an indictable offense where a person engages in the practice of law without a valid legal qualification. The maximum authorized penalty is 300 Penalty Units and four months' disbarment. (see Part III, § 12(a), Act of Congress - Criminal Code Act).

2. The Defendant engaged in the practice of law as alleged in Paragraph 10.

3. At the time of that conduct, the Defendant did not possess a valid legal qualification because the purported qualification upon which the Defendant relied was obtained through legal examinations that the Defendant did not successfully complete, having knowingly used cheated examination answers rather than completing the statutory examination process on the Defendant's own merits. (P-001).

4. The statutory distinction between merely possessing a rank designation and possessing a valid legal qualification, together with DOE's duty to issue rank designations upon successful completion and ensure examination security, requires the affected qualification to be treated as invalid where its purported completion was procured by the knowing use of cheated answers. (see Part III, § 1(1); Part VII, § 2(2)(a)–(c), Act of Congress - Redmont Civil Code Act).

5. Accordingly, the Defendant engaged in the practice of law without a valid legal qualification and committed Legal Qualification Fraud, contrary to Part III, § 12(a) of the Criminal Code Act.

IV. SENTENCING
1. Legal Qualification Fraud authorizes a sentence of up to 300 Penalty Units and up to four months' disbarment. (see Part III, § 12(a), Act of Congress - Criminal Code Act).

2. The Commonwealth gives notice that it seeks the statutory maximum of 300 Penalty Units and four months' disbarment, subject to the Court's punishment phase and sentencing discretion. The Criminal Code directs sentencing courts to consider the seriousness of the offense, the offender's intent and conduct, aggravating and mitigating circumstances, criminal history, protection of the community, and deterrence. (see Part I, § 5(1)–(2), Act of Congress - Criminal Code Act).

3. Should the Defendant be convicted, the Commonwealth reserves its complete sentencing argument for the punishment phase required by Court Rule 1.11. (see Rule 1.11, Information - Court Rules and Procedures).

Evidence:
P-001 — Examination Pass Records. Screenshot showing Carrottt_'s recorded passes of the Solicitor, six Barrister specialization, and Attorney examinations on August 7, 2026.

P-002 — DOE Document of Pass time Intervals.

By making this submission, I agree that 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.

Respectfully submitted,

Matthew100x
Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Redmont

DATED: This 6th day of September, 2026.