Dartanboy
Citizen
President of the Senate
Senator
Homeland Security Department
Redmont Bar Assoc.
Aventura Resident
Dartanman
presidentofthesenate
- Joined
- May 10, 2022
- Messages
- 1,114
- Thread Author
- #1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CRIMINAL ACTION
Commonwealth of Redmont
Prosecution
v.
d3froggy
Defendant
COMPLAINT
The Prosecution alleges criminal actions committed by the Defendant as follows:
The Defendant proposed an illegal law which passed, against the Constitution of Oakridge. This action of a government official, which was inconsistent with their official duty, ultimately unfairly benefited the Defendant and the rest of the Oakridge Town Council.
I. PARTIES
1. Commonwealth of Redmont (Prosecution)
2. d3froggy (Defendant)
II. FACTS
1. On June 27, 2023, d3froggy proposed the law in Exhibit A, which would give each member of the Town Council, including themself, $30,000 each.
2. On June 28, 2023, the law was passed and actioned, giving each member of the Town Council $30,000 (Exhibit B).
3. This money was taken from Oakridge’s balance (Exhibit B).
4. The Constitution of Oakridge (Constitution - Town Constitution) states:
“The Town Council shall have the power to author, propose, and pass laws on any topic through a majority of its members with the only stipulations that such legislation may not conflict with laws passed by the Federal Government of Redmont and any bill which intends to modify this Constitution must abide by the process outlined in Article IV.”
5. Thus, it is illegal, and thus inconsistent with the Council’s official duty, to pass a law that conflicts “with laws passed by the Federal Government of Redmont.”
6. The Wages Act (Act of Congress - Wages Act) states
III. CHARGES
The Prosecution hereby alleges the following charges against the Defendant:
1. One count of Corruption, for using their government position to benefit themself and the other members of the Town Council, acting inconsistently with their official duty, and ignoring the rights of the people of Oakridge.
IV. SENTENCING
The Prosecution hereby recommends the following sentence for the Defendant:
1. For Corruption, the maximum penalty of a $25,000 fine and 2 months barred from public office.
EVIDENCE:
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 5th day of July 2023.
CRIMINAL ACTION
Commonwealth of Redmont
Prosecution
v.
d3froggy
Defendant
COMPLAINT
The Prosecution alleges criminal actions committed by the Defendant as follows:
The Defendant proposed an illegal law which passed, against the Constitution of Oakridge. This action of a government official, which was inconsistent with their official duty, ultimately unfairly benefited the Defendant and the rest of the Oakridge Town Council.
I. PARTIES
1. Commonwealth of Redmont (Prosecution)
2. d3froggy (Defendant)
II. FACTS
1. On June 27, 2023, d3froggy proposed the law in Exhibit A, which would give each member of the Town Council, including themself, $30,000 each.
2. On June 28, 2023, the law was passed and actioned, giving each member of the Town Council $30,000 (Exhibit B).
3. This money was taken from Oakridge’s balance (Exhibit B).
4. The Constitution of Oakridge (Constitution - Town Constitution) states:
“The Town Council shall have the power to author, propose, and pass laws on any topic through a majority of its members with the only stipulations that such legislation may not conflict with laws passed by the Federal Government of Redmont and any bill which intends to modify this Constitution must abide by the process outlined in Article IV.”
5. Thus, it is illegal, and thus inconsistent with the Council’s official duty, to pass a law that conflicts “with laws passed by the Federal Government of Redmont.”
6. The Wages Act (Act of Congress - Wages Act) states
- “The Executive will maintain a guide on forums called 'Government Pay' that will list Government pay levels and their associated occupations.” and
- “The Executive has exclusive jurisdiction as to what salary level occupations fall into.”
III. CHARGES
The Prosecution hereby alleges the following charges against the Defendant:
1. One count of Corruption, for using their government position to benefit themself and the other members of the Town Council, acting inconsistently with their official duty, and ignoring the rights of the people of Oakridge.
IV. SENTENCING
The Prosecution hereby recommends the following sentence for the Defendant:
1. For Corruption, the maximum penalty of a $25,000 fine and 2 months barred from public office.
EVIDENCE:
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 5th day of July 2023.
Last edited:
