Lawsuit: Dismissed dodrio3 v. Commonwealth of Redmont [2023] DCR 52

[dodrio3]

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION


Dodrio3
Plaintiff

v.

Commonwealth of redmont
Defendant

COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows: On the 4th of February, the Violent Offences Amendment Act was signed into law by President Derpy. This law stated that murder is an indicable offence. Which in the Standardized Criminal Code Act states" An Indictable Offence is a crime that needs a trial by jury."
Since this data, I have been arrested for murder 4 times serving a total of 40 mins in jail. Not a single one of the murder charges was taken and proven in court. For each charge, I was arrested and charged $100 in fines totalling $400 in fines.

WRITTEN STATEMENT FROM THE PLAINTIFF


I. PARTIES
1. Dodrio3
2. Department of Justice

II. FACTS
1. The Violent Offences Amendment Act was signed by President Derpy on Feburary 4th.
2. It states Murder as an "Indictable Criminal Offense" meaning it has to be proven in court
3. Since that time, I have been charged with 4 counts of murder, fined a total of $400, and served 40 minutes in prison.
4. All of these murder charges were never taken and proven in court

III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. Wrongfull conviction

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:
1. $400 returned as it was fined for wrongfully convicted crimes
2.$2,000 For the time I spent in jail($50 per minute)
3. Murder Charges removed from dodrio3 Criminal record
4.$480 In legal fees (20% of case value)

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 7 day of 12 2023

 

[ko531]

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
WRIT OF SUMMONS
@SumoMC is required to appear before the District Court in the case of dodrio3 v. Commonwealth of Redmont [2023] DCR 52. 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.​

 

[SumoMC]

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO RECUSE

The Commonwealth of Redmont request the the presiding Magistrate @ko531 recuse himself from this case.

His honor has had a case settled for him similar to this case and has been vocal about it and is currently having an appeal. For this reason it is not unreasonable to assume that they would rule the same way that there case was ruled.

 

[ko531]

I will agree that there is a reasonable fear for biasness so I will be recusing myself. I issued a summons as I believe I could be neutral but will not force myself onto this case. I will be handing this case off to @Mask3D_WOLF

 

[MrFluffy2U94]

Your honor,

I have been assigned to this case, and am ready to proceed.

 

[Mask3D_WOLF]

Your honor,

I have been assigned to this case, and am ready to proceed.

May I know whether you’re representing the plaintiff or defense?

 

[MrFluffy2U94]

IN THE COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO DISMISS

Your Honor,

The defendant would like to motion to dismiss on the grounds that this is a frivolous case. There has been previous precedent set in the judgement for the case of ko531 v. Commonwealth of Redmont [2023] FCR 97. In the judgement item 3, the Federal Court judge stated “3. There is a bill that was proposed and passed after the the filing of this lawsuit which did amend the law from Indictable to Summary which means all arrests after the passing of the bill can be arrested via the auto plugin.”

If you observe the evidence provided in Exhibit A, you will see that the “Violent Offences Act” was officially signed into law upon its Presidential Assent on November 8th, 2023. In the evidence provided by the Plaintiff, two of the murders in question occurred on November 19th 2023, and December 4th 2023.

The other two murder charges occurred on December 21st and 28th of 2022, per the evidence provided by the plaintiff. In the plaintiffs argument, they state that the law was changed in February, referencing February of 2023. This law is in effect AFTER the first 2 murders, yet was changed BEFORE the last 2 murders. This law has no effect on the plaintiffs actions, as none of the crimes listed were performed during this period.

DATED: This 7th day of December 2023.

May I know whether you’re representing the plaintiff or defense?

My apologies, I will be representing the Commonwealth of Redmont as a member of the DLA.

 

[Mask3D_WOLF]

The plaintiff may respond to the motion to dismiss within 72 hours.

 

[dodrio3]

Your Honour, 2 of the murders I'm effect are still valid to be persued thier for thier is not probibal cause for a motion to Dissmiss as thier still remains valid points within the case.

 

[dodrio3]

IN THE COURT OF TH8E COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO DISMISS

Your Honor,

The defendant would like to motion to dismiss on the grounds that this is a frivolous case. There has been previous precedent set in the judgement for the case of ko531 v. Commonwealth of Redmont [2023] FCR 97. In the judgement item 3, the Federal Court judge stated “3. There is a bill that was proposed and passed after the the filing of this lawsuit which did amend the law from Indictable to Summary which means all arrests after the passing of the bill can be arrested via the auto plugin.”

If you observe the evidence provided in Exhibit A, you will see that the “Violent Offences Act” was officially signed into law upon its Presidential Assent on November 8th, 2023. In the evidence provided by the Plaintiff, two of the murders in question occurred on November 19th 2023, and December 4th 2023.

The other two murder charges occurred on December 21st and 28th of 2022, per the evidence provided by the plaintiff. In the plaintiffs argument, they state that the law was changed in February, referencing February of 2023. This law is in effect AFTER the first 2 murders, yet was changed BEFORE the last 2 murders. This law has no effect on the plaintiffs actions, as none of the crimes listed were performed during this period.

DATED: This 7th day of December 2023.

My apologies, I will be representing the Commonwealth of Redmont as a member of the DLA.

Objection

Although I did make a typo in my original statement the law was passed in December 2021 no where need in which the data that is claimed by the defense

 

[dodrio3]

You're hour may I have both the above strikes from the records. And respond again still within thr 72h period

 

[dodrio3]

The Plaintiff wishes to Dismiss this case

 

[Mask3D_WOLF]

Your Honour, 2 of the murders I'm effect are still valid to be persued thier for thier is not probibal cause for a motion to Dissmiss as thier still remains valid points within the case.

The above message is hereby stricken from the record. Do not speak out of turn.

I will allow the defense to respond to the objection.

I ask the plaintiff give a brief explaination on why they would like to nolle proseqi?

 

[MrFluffy2U94]

Your honor,

The defense is unclear what exactly the plaintiff is objecting to, but I will respond to this statement below:
“Although I did make a typo in my original statement the law was passed in December 2021 no where need in which the data that is claimed by the defense”
Your honor, there were many typos in the original statement, however if you review the case from Ko531 v. The Commonwealth of Redmont [2023] FCR 97 it appears that the plaintiff literally copied and pasted the exact argument for this case in an attempt to use it for their own. However the DLA has studied this subject diligently as it has massive implications for our department. The original law, the Violent Offenses Act, was enacted December 4, 2021 by Former President LilDigiVert. See first screenshot below item (7) as it pertains to murder. President Derpy_Bird then enacted an amendment to this law on Feb 4th 2023, (the law mentioned in the plaintiffs argument, incorrectly applied to this case) on Feb. 4th 2023. See 2nd screenshot. That means between December 4, 2021 and Feb 4, 2023, the timeframe in which the first 2 murders took place, that murder was a summary offense and the officers had full authority to assess the punishments as performed. (Kudos to our valiant police officers for performing their jobs properly and understanding the law.)
Next, in our history lesson on murder, we see that this was amended again as mentioned above in the “Murder Quick Fix Act” which changed murder back to a summary offense as of November 8th, 2023 when President xLayzur approved with Presidential Assent see screenshots 3 and 4. This happened a month BEFORE the last 2 murders in question.

This goes to show that the consequences that the plaintiff received were just and appropriate given the laws that were in place at the time of the arrests.

The defense would like to move forward with the Motion to Dismiss on the grounds of a frivolous case as previously requested.

 

[dodrio3]

The Plaintiff wishes to Dismiss this case

Your Honour you missed this statement

 

[Mask3D_WOLF]

Your Honour you missed this statement

I did not. I asked you to "give a brief explaination on why [you] would like to nolle proseqi?"

 

[Mask3D_WOLF]

You have 24 hours from this point to respond.

 

[dodrio3]

Busy with other cases and this is too small to be worth the time that it requires.

 

[Mask3D_WOLF]

Busy with other cases and this is too small to be worth the time that it requires.

Thank you.

 

[Mask3D_WOLF]

I hereby grant the motion to dismiss with prejudice. I hereby charge dodrio3 with filing a frivolous court case, the DOJ is ordered to fine or jail them appropriately. The court thanks MrFluffy2U94, ko531, dodrio3, and SumoMC.