Lawsuit: Adjourned MegaMinerM vs TedHastings_AC12

[Dusty_3]

In The Distinguished Court of The Stratham Republic
CIVIL ACTION
Date: 03/09/22

MegaMinerM
Dusty_3 (Attorney)

v.

TedHastings_AC12

I. Description of Case
The Plaintiff brings forth the following causes of action and alleges the following against the Defendant:

The defendant, TedHastings_AC12 used his position in the DoJ to advertise a Prime Ministerial campaign; a campaign that would be very beneficial to his standing in the DoJ. TedHastings_AC12 violated the sherlock accords by: TedHastings_AC12 has a private interest in obtaining DoJ Minister (evidence 1); TedHastings_AC12 used his position in the DoJ to advertise a political campaign (evidence 2); TedHastings_AC12 advertised a candidate who is prepared to make TedHastings_AC12 the next DoJ minister (evidence 3); TedHastings_AC12 stated to his fellow colleagues that he would be the next DoJ Minister so long as they vote UnityMaster (Further Evidence). To use the DoJ private chats to advertise a political campaign requires a Government position within the DoJ, which means TedHastings_AC12 was using his position in the Government to advertise a candidate who would bring him his dream promotion.

I don't think this case could be anymore clearer other than the defendant stating "im guilty", the Sherlock Accords are there to protect the citizens of Stratham from Government Employees seeking to use their office to benefit private interests. TedHastings_AC12 used his office to advertise, the advertisement would increase the chances of UnityMaster winning, and if UnityMaster won TedHastings_AC12 knew that would mean he would get a promotion. Benefiting his own private interests using his jobs as a Sergeant in the DoJ, a position where he is supposed to defend the law. A gross violation of the Sherlock Accords.

II. Parties
1. TedHastings_AC12
2. MegaMinerM
3. Department of Justice

III. Sequence of Events
1. TedHastings_AC12 began by posting adverts for UnityMasters campaign in the #doj channel.
2. TedHastings_AC12 then proceeded to state that if the DoJ members supported Unity, TedHastings_AC12 would have an opportunity to become DoJ Minister.
3. TedHastings_AC12 claimed that a vote for unitymaster would mean a vote for him as DoJ minister. Clearly stating that he would directly benefit if UnityMaster won, and UnityMaster would have a better chance at winning through TedHastings_AC12 adverts in Government chats. (Further Evidence)

IV. Claims for Relief
1. TedHastings_AC12 is in violation of the Sherlock Accords for abusing his position for his private interests.

V. Damages
1. Immediate dismissal from all Government positions and a temporary 2 month ban from holding office.
2. A public apology. Truth only.

(Evidence 1) Proof Tedhastings has a private interest in UnityMaster winning PM. He very well knew Unity winning would mean he would get a promotion.



(Evidence 2) Proof TedHastings using his permissions and authority to advertise a campaign in a Government chat.


(Evidence 3) UnityMaster's campaign discord, showing TedHastings as the DoJ Minister pick.


Further Evidence

TedHastings defending his advertising, clearly not a joke or lie, he knew what he was doing. Advertising in the DoJ would benefit his position.


Heres how he knew advertising in the DoJ would be beneficial: His colleagues respected him, and one even wanted to vote for him!
To which he went and advertised Unity's campaign


Proof of representation:


In advancing this form to the court, you acknowledge and concur with the rules of court which highlight the importance of honesty at all times. Moreover, you understand the punishments for breaking these rules and/or committing perjury and deception in the court.

 

[P. Hunter]

Morning all,

lets get things moving,

@TedHastings_AC12 is hereby summoned to the court to acknowledge the case. If the Defendant, @TedHastings_AC12 , does not acknowledge the case as a reply in 2 days, the case will close in the Plaintiff's favor.

Court is in Session

This case is presided by Judge poemhunter Bear in mind to not reply to court cases unless summoned by the Judge!

 

[Sparky]

MegaMinerM

Dusty_3 (Attorney)

v.

TedHastings_AC12

I. Motion To Dismiss
The Defendant motions to dismiss the case, respectfully based off the following:
1. The plaintiff failed to provide full context of the conversation and used part of their evidence out of context, therefore deceiving the court on what was happening in the conversation. Their second piece of evidence shows the defendant linking the voting in the forums, claiming he was using the DoJ discord to advertise with the links, but, as shown in some of their evidence, a fellow officer had asked for those links in order to vote.
2. The plaintiff claimed the defendant was not joking which was in fact a lie to the court as the defendant was in fact joking as shown in the evidence below.
3. The plaintiff has not provided any evidence that the defendant has benefited at all from this joke, so the Sherlock Accords were not breached in this case. The defendant did not advertise for voting Unity for Prime Minister other than the jokingly passed comment of “Vote for unity” to which, as stated above, and as shown in the screenshot below, was a joke. There was no intent behind that message. He simply stated that if Unity wins, the defendant stands a chance of becoming the DoJ minister. However, that would be in the hands of Parliament as they have to pass a minister in through a majority vote. This comment could therefore still not actually benefit the defendant. His fate as minister would rest purely in the hands of Parliament should Unity get voted in as PM.
4. The defendant did not actually post an advert for Unity in the DoJ initially. He simply posted a link to the MP voting at the request of Officer Jeely, and added the link for PM elections as well.
5. The Plaintiff has recently attempted to instigate many issues with the defendant following his promotion to Sergeant, and it could therefore be claimed that this case is in fact just following on from a personal issue that the plaintiff has with the defendant.

Your honour, in light of the recent events following the closure of the polls, it is clear that my clients actions bared no benefit anyway since Unity did not win and therefore my client has not benefited from this situation in anyway regardless of this situation.

In advancing this form to the court, you acknowledge and concur with the rules of court which highlight the importance of honesty at all times. Moreover, you understand the punishments for breaking these rules and/or committing perjury and deception in the court.

 

[TeddyTaps230]

Your honour,

Apologies for me not posting first. My internet was down. I have agreed with Sparky that they represent me in court.

 

[P. Hunter]

Evening All,

Thank you for your reply and notice of representation, I will read through this all and examine all evidence and come back with my decision in due course.

Judge Poem.

 

[Dusty_3]

Your honor,

May I have the opportunity to rebut this before you make a decision? They is crucial evidence missing, but I am currently at school so cannot submit it.

 

[TeddyTaps230]

Your honour,

In the event that the plaintiff is missing “crucial evidence”, I’d wonder, considering the seriousness of this case, why it wasn’t released to the court in the first instance. This just further backs our claim that the plaintiff is not being entirely truthful with the court and is withholding from them.

When filing our case opening motions, at the bottom it is stated, “In advancing this form to the court, you acknowledge and concur with the rules of court which highlight the importance of honesty at all times. Moreover, you understand the punishments for breaking these rules and/or committing perjury and deception in the court.”

I cannot believe the judge would allow for this to happen, especially given that, the plaintiffs sequence of events, stated in step 3 of their motio, should have been given and explained in the first case opening message to the court. To now change or amend that sequence, again just shows that the plaintiff has withheld case information from the court, which has led to me and my lawyer unable to rebute said information in our motion to dismiss.

III. Sequence of Events
1. (Explain what happened in consecutive order)
2. ...
3. ...

Your honour I hope you can understand what I am trying to say here, and I know that you as well as I understand the full importance of court integrity.

I apologise for speaking out of turn and without my lawyer, however they are asleep and I know you are due to offer ruling over this soon.

Furthermore, I would like to add that, if there is crucial evidence missing. Why is the plaintiff messaging DoJ members to request screenshots of DoJ specific channels in order to “gain evidence”.

 

[Dusty_3]

Your honor.

It wasn't released because I haven't had it until now, after the filing of the case. I personally have never seen someone say "I cannot believe the judge would allow for this to happen" in a court room, especially since all the judge has done has been to respond to the case. All I am asking is time to rebut a case with evidence that is crucial to rebut the motion to dismiss, I don't see why the defendant is trying to make absurd claims of perjury.

I have nothing but respect for this court, and all I have asked is a chance to rebut. I await your decision, your honor, on whether I can have the opportunity to rebut. That's all I will say for now.

Thank you

 

[TeddyTaps230]

I believe you are trying to blow my words out of proportion. What I am saying I cannot believe a judge would allow a rebuttal claim to go ahead because the plaintiffs lawyer has only decided after the case has started, to message members of the DoJ requesting screenshots of a private government chat.

 

[P. Hunter]

Right,

I am not having my court turn in to a pissing contest between you too, I don’t care for your little rivalry against each other but once you step in my court your on my turf and if you dare break the rules or act out of manner i will be sure to rain you in.

For now I am attending to irl matters and want to read through this all again before coming to a decision on how this case will proceed. I want no further discussion until I have decided on the course of action.

Judge Poem.

 

[P. Hunter]

Right,

I have a couple things to go over, I first want to thank the parties for there patients. I wanted to review as much as possible and have a long think on the evidence and the allegation being made.

Clearing things up, only the representatives for each party will speak in my court, I will not have statements made out of turn by any party in my court, no comment should have been made after the request to rebut the motion to dismiss. I am extremely disappoint in the lack of professionalism by both parties. I will note for record sake that all parties before this posting has made apology to me personally which I have accepted but I found its necessarily to reform this. I do not want to see anyone other than Sparky and Dusty posting replies in a correct manner and you will refer to the clients of each party privately.

On the Rebuttal for the Motion to dismiss, I am going to allow it, however I want in that rebuttal an explanation to the new crucial evidence only coming to my court now. I want to make this point clear, “I cannot believe the judge would allow for this to happen,” I decide what happens in my court and will follow court proceed and what is in the best interest of this case. I find there to be on both sides to be a lack of clear communication and facts of the events. I am giving both you time in my court to clear this up to find the truth behind the allegation. There are question I believe that still need answering and I have found both your arguments thus far to be insufficient.

I am on the alleged perjury claim I am dismissing it as I see no breach as of yet.

I am going to leave this here for now,

Judge Poem.

 

[Dusty_3]

Your honor,

The defendant and I have entered into a plea agreement.

I decrease my charges of Corruption to 3 weeks ban from public office, and dismissal from the DoJ.

I expect the defense will provide a statement agreeing to plead guilty to these terms. I want to thank the courts for taking this case and being patient with both parties.

 

[P. Hunter]

Right,

The plaintiff has stated that both parties have entered into a plea agreement, the terms of which are as follows:
- Corruption charged dropped to 3 weeks on a ban from public office.
- Dismissal from the Department of Justice

I ask the defence to confirm this with a statement of agreement to the terms.

Judge Poem.

 

[Sparky]

Your honour, the defense agrees to the terms brought forth by the plaintiff. We bring forward the guilt statement by TedHastings_AC12.

“I, TedHastings_AC12, admit to jokingly saying the statement given in evidence by the plaintiff. It was in not meant in any way as an advertisement, and I did state that it was a joke statement. Going on to say that I would never intend to influence someone’s vote.

I do hold my hands up and admit that what I said was wrong, it was taken in the wrong way by the plaintiff and for that I deserve some form of punishment.

I thank the court for its time in this case”

 

[P. Hunter]

Right,

I want to thank both parties for the time and effort they put into the case, both parties have agreed to the plea deal presented to the court and I will accept that deal and sign off on it.

I want to note on record as a point I would have made if the case was developed further, that I think that no employee of a government department should advertise in any capacity for an election of both and MP candidate or a PM candidate and due to this happening in a pubic government discord has allowed for a case of this sort to develop, I think that we should all, which includes the BC community take this point and refrain from sending or adverting election or candidate selection no matter our innocent or intended the post was made. if someone seek assurance to vote or where to vote then that should remain in a private messaging capacity. Government discards are not the place in my opinion for it and I think this could help solve future situations.

I want to also ask that after this case the parties try to amend the rift between them, I am not asking them to become best friends, but to be able to maybe put the past behind them and move on, let bygones be bygones. I want to also say I hope the best for all parties involved and I thank you for your time in my court.

This case is now adjourned,

Justice Poem.

Court Adjourned

This case was presided by Judge poemhunter