Lawsuit: Adjourned royalsnakee v. IIKermitII [2024] DCR 7

Status
Not open for further replies.
Towloo said:
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF REDMONT
MOTION TO RECONSIDER


royalsnakee
Plaintiff


V


IIKermitII
Defendant


MOTION TO RECONSIDER

  1. Your honor, there is a way to recover chat logs, and the screenshot previously provided shows the chat logs highlighted in the attached video. To be clear, these logs are not editable (you can try it for yourself if needed [if on a Macintosh]).


ATTACHMENTS
Click to expand...
Your honor, a good friend of mine (who has supporter in-game chat) has provided me with proof that the logs are legitimate. I would like to submit https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachme...8582845f61b13bea0fffaac4ca4a1c8222dfcfc120ca& into evidence.
 
Towloo said:
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF REDMONT
MOTION TO RECONSIDER


royalsnakee
Plaintiff


V


IIKermitII
Defendant


MOTION TO RECONSIDER

  1. Your honor, there is a way to recover chat logs, and the screenshot previously provided shows the chat logs highlighted in the attached video. To be clear, these logs are not editable (you can try it for yourself if needed [if on a Macintosh]).


ATTACHMENTS
Click to expand...

Denied. Just because a video of the evidence was taken does not mean it could not have been edited prior. These files are editable. You can open up a .Log file with TextEdit on Mac, edit the log file, and then save. I just did so on my MacBook to verify.

Perjury is "The act of giving knowingly incorrect testimony in Court" (see Act of Congress - Corruption and Espionage Offenses Act). It is an indictable offense. I am going to leave the situation as is because you may not have been aware that the text files are editable.

Going forward @Towloo, I am telling you now to please double check the truth of any statement that you make in Court, especially if you're going to try and use that statement in an argument to convince the court. I am saying this specifically to you because we are in District Court and you are representing someone, you need to be careful in any submission that can harm your client's case.

As a reminder, there is a little more then 24 hours left in Discovery.

There is a pending request for either summary judgment or trial by combat from the plaintiff. Can the Defendant please inform me their stance on the matter?
 
I unfortunately did not see the new evidence because of the jump to the new page. This would have been legitimate cross-evidence verifying. This motion to dismiss is still being denied. In the future, please ask the court to amend your motion to reconsider.
 
Your Honor Motion, For a Summary Judgement. As this is getting all over the place, Thank you so much for your time as for as sake of time can we please speed this up and do a summary judgement?
 
Towloo said:
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT


royalsnakee
Plaintiff

V


IIKermitII
Defendant


ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
  1. The defense disputes fact one because although both parties were guilty of harming one another, there is no proof to show my client started it
  2. The defense affirms fact two, however, notes that it has nothing to do with my client
  3. The defense disputes fact three because the plaintiff quite literally stated it was for money, and that there was no reason (The attached file).


DEFENSES
  1. Although my client did in fact murder the plaintiff multiple times, in all cases, it was in self-defense, as the plaintiff remarks he was punished for murders (the murders of IIKermitII). Assaulting is enough to qualify for self-defense, and therefore my client’s murders were made in self-defense.
  2. Opposing counsel is right about Serial Killings, however, as Anthony’s Amicus Brief shows, those are supposed to go through a DOJ ticket (which they weren’t). None of this matters, however, due to the fact that the crimes were committed in self-defense. Even if what the plaintiff said was true, he never used the command “/complaint” to make my client wanted, and therefore, didn’t want my client to be punished for them (likely so he had a stronger standing in court).
  3. The evidence shown by opposing counsel only shows one rude remark by my client, who is remorseful about making it. Being repeatedly ganged up on by the plaintiff and acting in self-defense would make anyone say something to the offending party. Additionally, respect is a rule that staff would handle, so if the plaintiff wishes to take up the matter, he may make a staff ticket.
Click to expand...

In order for their to be a summary judgment, both sides must agree to the facts and there must not be any factual dispute (see Guide - Motions Guide, quoted below).

This motion asks the judge to make a decision on the case without going to trial. Such a motion can only occur if none of the facts of the case are in dispute, thus all that needs to be decided is a final ruling on the case.
Click to expand...

Currently there is a factual dispute on point one and point three. Does the defendant wish to amend their answer? They can still do so prior to the end of discovery.
 
Given that we're outside of Discovery by several hours and the court has not heard a request to amend the answer, we will not be doing a summary judgment. The plaintiff now has 72 hours to post their opening statement.
 
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
OPENING STATEMENT


Your Honor,
Opposing counsel's claim is straightforward: they are pursuing monetary gain, not seeking redress for any genuine emotional harm. The plaintiff, royalsnakee, has failed to demonstrate any psychological trauma resulting from the events in question. In fact, evidence from the Discovery process reveals the plaintiff's cavalier attitude, even jesting about suing my client for financial gain. Such behavior does not align with someone genuinely suffering emotional distress but rather suggests opportunism.

Moreover, royalsnakee's request for $500 in legal fees lacks merit as he is representing himself. Legal fees are typically awarded to cover the expenses incurred by legal representation, not for self-representation. This further underscores the plaintiff's true motivation – financial gain.

As for the $2,500 in punitive damages sought by the plaintiff, such damages are intended to deter egregious behavior. However, in this case, both parties acknowledge their roles in the events leading to this dispute, making punitive damages unjustifiable. It is unfair to single out one party for civil punishment when both were complicit.

Furthermore, the plaintiff's assertion that only they were penalized for the alleged wrongdoing is misguided. Criminal offenses, such as murder, fall under the jurisdiction of the Department of Justice or Legal Affairs, not civil court. If the plaintiff believes my client should face criminal consequences, they should pursue appropriate legal channels, rather than seeking retribution in a civil case.

In summary, Your Honor, the plaintiff's claims lack merit and are driven by a desire for monetary gain rather than genuine harm. We urge the court to dismiss these baseless allegations and uphold the integrity of the legal system. Thank you.
 
Matthew100x said:
Denied. Just because a video of the evidence was taken does not mean it could not have been edited prior. These files are editable. You can open up a .Log file with TextEdit on Mac, edit the log file, and then save. I just did so on my MacBook to verify.

Perjury is "The act of giving knowingly incorrect testimony in Court" (see Act of Congress - Corruption and Espionage Offenses Act). It is an indictable offense. I am going to leave the situation as is because you may not have been aware that the text files are editable.

Going forward @Towloo, I am telling you now to please double check the truth of any statement that you make in Court, especially if you're going to try and use that statement in an argument to convince the court. I am saying this specifically to you because we are in District Court and you are representing someone, you need to be careful in any submission that can harm your client's case.

As a reminder, there is a little more then 24 hours left in Discovery.

There is a pending request for either summary judgment or trial by combat from the plaintiff. Can the Defendant please inform me their stance on the matter?
Click to expand...
I want to start by stating that I am sincerely remorseful about the minecraft logs-I had no idea they were editable, as for me, they weren't (of course, I can't prove this). As for trial by combat and summary judgement, the defence will be rejecting both of these proposals. The trial by combat due to the fact that I would not be able to represent my client as a PVPer (my client is also legally inactive), and the summary judgement because I feel there are arguments to be made.
 
Towloo said:
I want to start by stating that I am sincerely remorseful about the minecraft logs-I had no idea they were editable, as for me, they weren't (of course, I can't prove this). As for trial by combat and summary judgement, the defence will be rejecting both of these proposals. The trial by combat due to the fact that I would not be able to represent my client as a PVPer (my client is also legally inactive), and the summary judgement because I feel there are arguments to be made.
Click to expand...
Thank you - both proposals shall be denied.

The plaintiff missed the opportunity to file the Opening Statement, as previously indicated by the court. We will move on from their opening statement because of their clear lack of concern for the court's time. The plaintiff is charged with one count of contempt of court. The DOJ is ordered to charge accordingly.

The defense took it upon themselves to provide their opening statement. The defense is warned not to speak when they are not requested to do so. I will give both parties the opportunity to submit their witnesses to the court within 48 hours.
 
Both sides did not submit any witnesses when given the opportunity to do so. We will be moving on to closing statements.

The plaintiff can submit their closing statements within the next 48 hours.
 
Given that the Plaintiff failed to submit their closing statements within the allotted time, I hold them in contempt and direct the Department of Justice to charge them accordingly.

The Defendant may file this closing statement within 48 hours.
 
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CLOSING STATEMENT
Your Honor,

In closing, it is evident that the plaintiff's claims lack the substantive basis necessary to warrant consideration. Throughout this trial, it has become increasingly clear that the plaintiff's motivations are rooted not in a genuine pursuit of justice but rather in the pursuit of financial gain, as seen in the discovery submission. Despite attempts by opposing counsel to portray my client as the exclusive wrongdoer, the evidence presented fails to support such assertions. The plaintiff's failure to demonstrate enduring emotional distress, coupled with their flippant attitude towards litigation, undermines the credibility of their claims.

Moreover, the request for legal fees and punitive damages lacks merit. The plaintiff's decision to represent themselves renders the request for legal fees unfounded, as such fees are awarded to cover expenses incurred by legal representation. Additionally, punitive damages are unwarranted given the responsibility was shared by both parties in the events leading to this dispute.

Furthermore, the plaintiff's attempt to seek retribution for alleged criminal offenses through civil court is misguided. Matters such as murder fall under the jurisdiction of the Department of Justice or Legal Affairs, not civil litigation. This highlights a fundamental misunderstanding of legal processes and further underscores the opportunistic nature of the plaintiff's actions.

In conclusion, Your Honor, we urge the court to dismiss the plaintiff's baseless allegations and uphold the integrity of the legal system. Justice cannot be served through frivolous claims driven by financial motivations. Thank you for your attention to this matter.
 
The court would like to thank both parties for their time, as with the filing of the last closing statement the court is ready to go into recess to begin drafting a verdict.
 

Verdict


IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
VERDICT
royalsnakee v. IIKermitII [2024] DCR 7

I. PLAINTIFF'S POSITION
1. The Defendant murdered them and threatened them further with death threats.
2. The DOJ must watch more inside the prison for crimes committed.

II. DEFENDANT'S POSITION
1. There is no proof to show that the defendant started the fight, although it affirms that violence was exchanged.
2. The DOJ's failure to watch the prison is not the defendant's fault.
3.. The Plaintiff admitted that this was for monetary purposes.

III. THE COURT OPINION
As highlighted in the amicus brief filed by Anthony, the crimes listed are supposed to be put in a DOJ ticket for further action. The plaintiff did not do this. The plaintiff seems to have sued for monetary gain instead of justice based on the fact that they did not report it in a DOJ ticket.

The plaintiff claims that the Defendant said, "I bitched you and get bitched, and I'm going to really kill you now" the Plaintiff only provided the chat logs of "[royaIsnakee] bitched this guy twice." The words said in chat do not constitute a threat; as defined in law, a Verbal Threat is "This is active...any forms of communication to put them in danger or prompt them to commit an action." In this chat log, we do not see anything suggesting that they were putting them in danger or prompting them to commit an action.

The Plaintiff has not proved that the defendant's actions have affected them negatively; no evidence was presented that they damaged their earnings or reputation.

The request for legal fees needs more merit as he is representing himself.

IV. DECISION
The District Court rules in favor of the Defendant.

The District Court thanks all involved.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top