Lawsuit: Adjourned GamingFishy727 v. FTGWop [2023] DCR 5

Status
Not open for further replies.
Neemfy

Neemfy

Citizen
Administrator
Justice Department
State Department
Interior Department
Redmont Bar Assoc.
Supporter
Willow Resident
Neemfy
Neemfy
sergeant
Joined
May 13, 2020
Messages
335
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION

GamingFishy727
Plaintiff

v.

FTGWop
Defendant

COMPLAINT:
FTGWop threw a fatman launcher at the plaintiff, nearly getting him charged and damaging his reputation within the DOJ.

I. PARTIES
1. GamingFishy727 (Neemfy representing)
2. FTGWop

II. FACTS
1. On December 26th, 2022, FTGWop threw a fatman launcher at GamingFishy727 in an attempt to frame him for Possession of a WOMD.
2. GamingFishy727’s is a member of the DOJ.
3. It is against the DOJ's Department employee policy for an officer to commit crimes.

III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. GamingFishy727’s employment at the DOJ was endangered.
2. GamingFishy727’s was at risk of being charged.

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The plaintiff seeks the following from the defendant:
1. $2,500 in nominal damages in accordance with the Legal Damages Act.
2. $1,000 in emotional damages in accordance with the Legal Damages Act.
3. $500 in legal fees.

Proof of Representation:
1676145816554.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 11th day of February, 2023.
 
dcr.png
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
WRIT OF SUMMONS

@FTGWop must appear before the court in the case of GamingFishy727 v. FTGWop [2023] DCR 5. Failure to appear within 48 hours of this summons will result in a default judgment.

I'd also like to remind both parties to be aware of the Court Rules and Procedures, including the option of an in-game trial should both parties request one.​
 
1 I have not threw a fatman at anybody it exist no evidence of me throwing a fatman to Gamingfishy
2 its clear that his case is only motivated by money he only want to sue me to earn money and that he claims that I have tried to frame him is a lie
3 Its a big chance this case is politically motivated he sues me because he dont like me as a politican because it exist zero evidence of me throwing a fatman to gamingfishy
 
Thank you to the Defendant for responding to the complaint. We will now move on to Opening Statements.

The Plaintiff now has 48 hours to provide their Opening Statement.
 
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
OPENING STATEMENT

Your Honor, Opposing Counsel,

FTGWop is notorious for “not so legal” activities. He is also well known for his dishonesty, and what can only be explained as trolling.

In my Opening Statement, I will respond to each of the Defendants points in his response.

1. While no image evidence was shown in the initial filing of the case, there is evidence that will be shown later in the form of witness testimony against the Defendant. This is a bit of a tough situation because, similar to the bank robbery cases of yore, the plaintiff is not omniscient. They cannot be ready to hit f2 at any moment, especially if they are AFK when the crime is committed. However, it was witnessed by at least one player.

2. The case is not only motivated by money; the defendant, in throwing a Fatman launcher at the plaintiff, damaged his reputation as a police officer, and put him at risk for fines. In accordance with the Legal Damages Act, these damages can be quantified as a monetary amount.

3. There is absolutely nothing in the case to suggest that the case is politically motivated. The only things stated are that the Defendant attempted to frame the Plaintiff, and that it damaged the plaintiff’s reputation and risked his career as a Police Officer.
 
Thank you to the Plaintiff for your Opening Statement.

The Defendant now has 48 hours to provide their Opening Statement.
 
What I have done before has nothing with this case to do I might have done bad things before but that does not mean that I threw the fatman on GamingFishy. I am innocent and I didnt not throw a fatman at GamingFishy. Also a so called witness is not always a witness some people are acting as witness but making up lies so even if they do have a so called witness the witness will not tell the truth since the crime never did happen it doenst exist any real witness because no crime no witness so in this case the so called witness will be somebody that lies. Also I find it very weird that they blame me for doing something that I never did do I never threw a fatman at GamingFishy and it is very weird that he chooses to sue me now when according to him it allegedly happened on December 26th 2022. I know that I am innocent and I hope you also understands that it is very weird that he chooses to sue me now for something that according to him happened on 26th december 2022. Everything proves that I am innocent and that he only sues me because he think he can earn money off me since I never did throw a fatman at him.
 
Thank you to the Defendant for your Opening Statement.

Both parties now have 48 hours to inform the court of any witnesses they wish to call, or state that they have none.
 
The plaintiff calls Vernicia as a witness.
 
dcr.png
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
WRIT OF SUMMONS

@Vernicia is required to appear before the District Court in the case of GamingFishy727 v. FTGWop [2023] DCR 5 as a witness.

Please ensure you familiarize yourself with the case. You will receive questions and may be cross-examined.

I would also like to remind the witness to ensure they are aware of the provisions of the law of perjury and its severity. Witnesses are required to tell the truth in their testimonies, pursuant to the Perjury Act.

Once the witness has announced their presence in the court, the Plaintiff will have 48 hours to post their questions. I ask that all questions be made in one post, unless a question must be withheld pending an answer to another question.

If you intend to ask another question in a second post, please let the court know beforehand.​
 
Good evening Court i am here.
I am familiar with a case.
 
1. Did you see FTGWop throw a Fatman launcher to GamingFishy727?

2. As a police officer, did you witness the subsequent consequences for GamingFishy727?
 
1. Yes i saw it directly even took screenshot few secconds later
2. It was looking pretty badly when FTG reported Fishy via ticket(Atleast i belive it was via ticket as i was not at the time at main discord and was told by different doj member about ticket being created by FTG, ticket was solved by skywat4 if i am not mistaken) As he was new recruit it was looking badly for him as it was his first days at work. Lucky for him i saw it on my own eyes and had knowlage of FTG doing same thing even before sooo investigation prevented worst scenario but i belive it must been stressfull for Fishy as i needed reasure him it will all be fine. It can be sayed consequences woud be propably much worse if it was not investigated.
Sooo to answer shortly only his reputation was damaged i belive no other punishment was issued.
(Sorry for english)
 
Thank you, Vernicia. No further questions, Your Honor.
 
The Defendant now has 48 hours to either cross-examine the witness (ask questions) or state that they do not have any questions.
 
1 You did not see anything because I am innocent and you have no screenshots proving I throwed it
2 did not damage his reputation since nothing even happened
 
1) Actualy i saw it on my own eyes,becose seeing something on your own eyes is not hard prof. investigation was needed to clean fishy, as Fishy never get punished for criminal charges its means there is prof fatman was throwed in his hands by someone else. And its likely he is sueing person who throwed fatman in his hands. Meaning innocent part is propably big no but its on court to decide
2) You actualy did, when you frame someone for crime they did not commit you damage the person reputation especialy if they are in DOJ where members of department are expected to not commit crimes themselfs. If fishy was never cleaned it cound result of him getting in troubles in DOJ
Any more cross-examination or i can open my bottle of wine ?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
OBJECTION
Relevance

Those were not questions, they were statements that should have been reserved for Closing Statements.
 
OBJECTION
Arguing with the Witness

Some clear argumentative hostility towards the witness from the Defendant.
 
The Objection on Relevance is overruled, as if phrased as a question, the relevance is not in question, however the Objection on Arguing with the Witness is sustained.

The response to the Defendant's cross-examination has been struck from the record and the Defendant has 24 hours to rephrase their questions to be questions -- not statements. Alternatively, the Defendant may inform the court they do not wish to ask their questions.
 
Thank you to the witness for your time.

We will now move on to Closing Statements.

The Plaintiff has 48 hours to post their Closing Statement.
 
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CLOSING STATEMENT

Your Honor, Opposing Counsel,

One of the clear problems with this case was lack of image evidence. I acknowledge this, and attempt to rectify it with a reliable witness testimony.

Vernicia is a Sergeant in the Department of Justice, and witnessed everything first hand, from the actual framing taking place to the subsequent fallout within the DOJ. She even stated that the Defendant had done something like this before.

Additionally, Vernicia confirmed and justified one of the main parts of the case: Emotional Damages. In her testimony, she stated that it “must have been stressful for Fishy” and she “needed to reassure him.” This confirms that not only did it put his job at risk, it also caused him emotional duress.

Finally, the Defendant’s arguments throughout the case have not been based on fact, but purely speculation. Stating that it is only for the money, only because he hates him as a politician, even arguing with the witnesses testimony while under oath. This has basically been the equivalent of being charged with murder, and only saying “I didn’t do it.”
 
Thank you to the Plaintiff for your Closing Statement.

The Defendant now has 48 hours to provide their Closing Statement.
 
This is a very weak case first of all it exist no evidence of me actually doing this crime. also Vernicia is not a reliable witness in this case since it seems like Vernicia has something against me for no reason since I am banned from her store. So Vernicia is not a reliable witness in this case also it is very weird that both the so called plaintiff and the so called witness are both cops. I mean if this crime did happen which it did not would it not be a big chance that another person who where not a cop saw this. Also it was never stressful for Fishy because I never threw a fatman at him. Also I hope you also understands that it is something weird that he sues me now for something he claimed happened on 26th december 2022 also isnt it even more weird that he also sues me less than a month after another cop lost a case when they tried to sue me but the weirdest thing is that both the plaintiff and the witness in this case are cops. We can all understand that it is not a coincidence that I am getting sued after I won a case against a cop that tried to sue me and that the plaintiff and the witness in this case are cops this is something organised because the DOJ hates me. Also Vernicia is a very high ranking member of the DOJ and it seems like Vernicia has something against me so it is not impossible that this case is ordered from the higher ranks of DOJ I know for a fact that I am innocent and I hope you also understand that I am innocent it exist no evidence of me doing this crime because I never did it. I have done alot of bad things earlier but I did not threw the fatman at Fishy I am innocent. Also Vernicia claimed to have a screenshot but did not show it everything in this case points to that I am innocent. I did not throw a fatman at Fishy
 
Thank you to the Defendant for your Closing Statement.

This court is now in recess until a verdict is delivered.
 

Verdict


IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
VERDICT
GamingFishy727 v. FTGWop [2023] DCR 5

I. PLAINTIFF’S POSITION
1. On December 26, 2022, the Defendant threw a Fatman Launcher at the Plaintiff.
2. This could have gotten him charged with a crime and damaged his reputation as a member of the Department of Justice.
3. This caused stress to the Plaintiff.
4. FTGWop is notorious for “not so legal” activities.

II. DEFENDANT’S POSITION
1. The Defendant never threw a Fatman Launcher at the Plaintiff.
2. This case is just a way to earn money and the Plaintiff has no real reason to sue the Defendant.
3. This case is politically motivated.

III. THE COURT OPINION
1. No evidence exists showing that FTGWop even possessed a Fatman Launcher on December 26, 2022, let alone threw one at GamingFishy727.
2. The only thing implicating FTGWop in the alleged activities is a single witness testimony.
3. Having merely one witness is simply insufficient when trying to prove damages (or any cause of action) have occurred, regardless of whether or not the Defendant has an extensive record of illegal activity.
4. The burden of proof is on the Plaintiff in Civil Cases.
5. Although the burden of proof is a balance of probabilities (as opposed to proof beyond a reasonable doubt), there is insufficient evidence in this case to lead this court to conclude whether or not it is more likely the Defendant committed the actions they are accused of.

IV. VERDICT
Because no damages and no cause of action has been shown in this case, I hereby rule in favor of the Defendant.

The District Court thanks all involved.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top