Lawsuit: Pending Commonwealth of Redmont v. Plura72 [2025] DCR 39

aubunny

aubunny

Citizen
Representative
Homeland Security Department
Justice Department
Commerce Department
Education Department
Supporter
Aventura Resident
Statesman 5th Anniversary
malka
malka
Representative
Joined
Apr 7, 2025
Messages
28

Case Filing


IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CRIMINAL ACTION


The Commonwealth of Redmont
Prosecution

v.

Plura72
Defendant

COMPLAINT
The Prosecution alleges criminal actions committed by the Defendant as follows:

In the recent court case FCR 39 2025, the Defendant spoke out of turn and without being summonsed to add conjecture and chaos into the existing court case. This attempt to influence the case's result by speaking while not involved whatsoever may change the end result of the case, both by their presence bringing a sense of immaturity and chaos into the court, and through their statements which insult the standing Plaintiff personally within the case.

I. PARTIES
1. Commonwealth of Redmont. (Defendant in listed case. Victim of Pluras disruption)
2. Plura72 (Defendant.)
3. Dr_Explosive (Presiding judge over the case, victim of Pluras disruption)
4. xEndeavour (Plaintiff in the presiding case listed above, victim of Pluras disruption)

II. FACTS
1. Plura72 was not summonsed to the case, nor were they representing the Attorney General on behalf of the commonwealth
2. Plura72 spoke out of turn in response to the Plaintiffs' Opening Statement.
3. Plura72 insulted the plaintiff directly, accusing them of perjury indirectly by claiming that they were "lying"
4. The charge of Obstruction of Justice was recommended by the presiding judge.
5. Plura72 has an ongoing injunction barring them from appearing in court sans the representation of a lawyer.

III. CHARGES
The Prosecution hereby alleges the following charges against the Defendant:
1. Obstruction of Justice

IV. SENTENCING
The Prosecution hereby recommends the following sentence for the Defendant:
1. 150 dollar fine + 20 minutes jail
2. Extension of the Injunction barring them from posting court cases.

EVIDENCE:

P-01, capturing the accusations of lying against the Plaintiff's opening statement in FCR 39.
1748637182348.png

P-02, listing the honorable judge Dr_Eksplosive pointing out the disruption of court procedures by the defendant.
1748637254909.png
P-03, Plura's injunction preventing appearing in a court case without representation by a lawyer, dated April 18th.
1748637849092.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 30th day of May, 2025.

 
You gotta be kidding me
 
just fine those 150$ already
 

Writ of Summons


@Plura72 is required to appear before the District Court in the case of Commonwealth of Redmont v. Plura72 [2025] DCR 39. In compliance with the injunction against you, please ensure that you have a qualified lawyer represent you.

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.

 
Plura72 said:
just fine those 150$ already
Click to expand...

Court Order


CONTEMPT OF COURT

@Plura72, for speaking in court without representation, in violation of the injunction against you, you're hereby charged with contempt of court. Please refrain from interacting with the courts without representation.

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