Lawsuit: Dismissed Reppal v. The Department of Justice

[flyingzebra7]

In The Distinguished Court of The Stratham Republic
CIVIL ACTION
Date: 2/1/23

Reppal (KnivesKot)
flyingzebra7 Representing

v.

Department of Justice (DoJ)

I. Description of Case
The Plaintiff brings forth the following causes of action and alleges the following against the Defendant:
The Department of Justice arrested Reppal (KnivesKot) after they murdered Delsworth. Reppal had made a contract saying that if Delsworth agreed, he would be consenting to the 20 minute murder charge in exchange for a fight to the death. Delsworth did agree. Even after Delsworth consenting to the murder, a DoJ Police Officer arrested Reppal.

II. Parties
1. Reppal (KnivesKot)
2. Delsworth
3. Department of Justice

III. Sequence of Events
1. Reppal murdered Delsworth
2. Reppal evaded the arrest
3. Reppal creates a contract
4. Delsworth signs the contract, giving full consent to Reppal murdering them
5. A Police Officer under the Department of Justice arrests Reppal

IV. Claims for Relief
1. While no laws were broken, the Department of Justice specifically broke part of a laws description:
Murder: The purposeful act of killing another player without the victimized party giving consent to the murder.

V. Damages
1. A 500 Kr fine from the Police Officer that arrested Reppal

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/1070488304769830952/1070501250174554203/image.png

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/998271468964167882/1066893066033713192/image.png

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]

I will be recusing myself from this case as I have already seen facts of it in the DoJ server.

I will however summon the DoJ minister @Ryan_88 on behalf of my colleague Cooleagles so things may begin.

 

[Reppal]

Sorry, my lawyer has not accurately outlined the case, may I request a 24 hour period to restate the introduction?

 

[Cooleagles2005]

Good Evening,

Before I review any motion to dismiss, I want the Plaintiff's outline to be correct. Therefore, I will strike the Motion To Dismiss from the record and allow 24 hours for the Plaintiff to fix their case. The Defense will then have 48 hours to resubmit their answer to the complaint or motion to dismiss. Additionally, I will not be summoning the Defense as they have already marked themselves present within the court.

I will make another request to the Plaintiff that they thoroughly explain the terms of the contract in their updated response as what has already been provided is confusing.

If either party has any questions, they may feel free to ask.
That is all,
Thank You

 

[flyingzebra7]

In The Distinguished Court of The Stratham Republic
CIVIL ACTION
Date: 2/2/23 (Original Date)

Reppal (KnivesKot)
flyingzebra7 Representing

v.

Department of Justice (DoJ)

I. Description of Case
The Plaintiff brings forth the following causes of action and alleges the following against the Defendant:
The Department of Justice arrested Reppal (KnivesKot) after he evaded arrest ensuing the murder of Delsworth. Delsworth and Reppal made a contractual agreement wherein Delsworth consented to the murder charge, however the responding officer detained, and arrested Reppal for the warrant opened by Delsworth's murder, and he was charged of it, even though Delsworth consented to the murder, and by DoJ policy, would invalidate the arrest.

II. Parties
1. Reppal (KnivesKot)
2. Delsworth
3. Department of Justice

III. Sequence of Events
1. Reppal murdered Delsworth
2. Reppal evaded arrest
3. Reppal creates a contract
4. Delsworth signs the contract, giving full consent to Reppal murdering them
5. A Police Officer under the Department of Justice arrests Reppal and charges them for Delsworth's murder

IV. Claims for Relief
1. While no laws were broken, the Department of Justice specifically broke part of a laws description:
Murder: The purposeful act of killing another player without the victimized party giving consent to the murder.

V. Damages
A 500 Kr payment from the Police Officer that arrested Reppal to Reppal

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/1070488304769830952/1070501250174554203/image.png

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/998271468964167882/1066893066033713192/image.png

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.

 

[Reppal]

Sorry, the reproduced introduction does not meet the specification of more explanation to the contract between me and Delsworth. I will step in to provide clarification so we can continue this case in the same timeframe. For the purposes of the Department of Justice, Delsworth has agreed to waive (ergo consent) to the murder I was charged with previously in exchange for a fight to the death which would completely waive the charge, for the winner, and the loser would pay a fine and go to jail (the same punishments for the murder of an MP). It seems to be lost that the contract was not fulfilled, so I will specify that the death match did not happen, as I was arrested before it could materialize.

 

[Ryan_88]

In The Distinguished Court of The Stratham Republic
MOTION TO DISMISS
Date: 02/01/23

Reppal
Flyingzebra7

v.

Department of Justice



I. Motion To Dismiss

The Defendant motions to dismiss the case, respectfully based off the following:
1. The Department of Justice is not a party of the listed contract provided by the plaintiff. Delsworth replied to police officer Queenichu "No consent" when asked if they consent to the murder committed by reppal. Therefore, Delsworth did not consent to the murder entirely justifying the arrest of Reppal. The Department was not made aware of the contract beforehand and we had no way of knowing it's existence before arresting reppal. However Delsworth is a party of that contract and stated that he does agree to "a 20 minute suspension of the murder charge". He violated that by not consenting. (defense1.png)

2. The Department of Justice broke did not break the law claimed by the plaintiff therefore it is illegal to have the arresting officer fined for that.

3. Reppal and Delsworth do not have the legal authority to suspend a murder charge.

4. The contract was agreed to by Delsworth at 6:30 PM and is legally binding for the next 20 minutes (6:50 PM), the kill occurred more than an hour after at 8:04 PM. Therefore the contract is no longer active and is no longer legally binding. (defense2.png)

5. Although reppal may be in MST time zone which is 2 hours behind my timezone (EST). Following EST the contract would be signed by Delsworth at 8:30 PM and is binding until 8:50 PM and the kill occurred at 8:04 PM which is 26 minutes before the contract was made. (defense3.png)

6. Following their sequence of events it once again shows that the contract was made after the the murder happened and Delsworth establishing that he did not consent to the murder.
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.

 

[Cooleagles2005]

Good Evening,

I originally was going to try and dwell deeper into the contract and fully try to understand it; however, even if I did, the nature of it would still be confusing. I am of the opinion that if a contract is confusing from the start, it will always be confusing. That being said, in the future, do NOT try and write your own contracts. It is a much more intricate task than many will think, and those who know the laws best need to be the ones to take on such a task. There is nothing wrong with growing the legal field by spending a few bucks, especially if you want to get away with murder.

So with that being said, I am going to dismiss this case; however, not without a few points to be made. I am dismissing this case not because of the legality of having a contract that consents to murder. I believe that if a contract is written stating that one or both parties, no matter the outcome, will consent to a murder, then that is the law. I believe that a contract in this sense is no different from asking an individual after the murder if they consent.
Look at it this way. Two individuals make a contract, let's call them A and B. The contract states that A and B will fight, and if A wins B will consent to the murder, and if B wins, A will give B 500kr. Let's say A wins. Well when a police officer asks B if they consent, they have two answers. One, they can say that they do consent, following the contract, which then nothing wrong occurs. Or, they can say they do not consent. At this point, A will go to jail; however, B has now violated a contract, which is equal under the law to murder. B broke the law just as much as A broke the law. So if A gets punished, wrongly at that, they have the merit to bring a case to this court. The main question is, who does A sue? Does A sue B because B broke their contract, or does A sue the Department of Justice because they wrongly arrested them? Well, ideally you would have to sue both. You would have to sue B first to show that B broke the contract, and then sue the Department of Justice (granted you win the first case) and get your relief. A much simpler solution to this is just showing the police the contract of course and allowing them to follow through with it there and then. For example, rather than letting B break the contract and not consent, just let the police see the contract. Now if B says they don't consent, the police already know that he does. Now let's say B wins. A is asked if they consent or not. A can either say yes or no and not face the punishment as before. This is because the contract did not state A had to consent to the murder, it stated A had to pay B 500kr. So only if A does not pay 500kr to B, they may answer how they please.

Additionally, when it comes to the point of "suspending" a murder charge, I would compare that to consenting. If you consent to the murder, you suspend the charge. If you consent, the murderer does not get arrested or fined. However, suspended alone can be a poor choice of wording, which I will dwell on a tiny bit more following this.

My final point in regards to contracts and their relation to consenting a murder. What if the contract is made after the murder, which is what appears to have happened in this case? Well, although I am not 100% sure, I am pretty sure that once the consent has been asked and answered, that is finalized. This would make the most sense anyway. Therefore, if you can't change the consent after it has already been made, then a contract would not change it either. So if it is true that the contract, in this case, was made after the murder, then you can consider this added to the reason for dismissing the case, as the contract would be invalid.

Nonetheless, a large point of my rattling is that a contract is essentially the law. Granted it does not interfere with other laws or the Constitution, it is the law. When you bring contract cases to court, we are not referring to other laws (unless arguing the actual legality of the contract) we are referring to the contract to make a verdict.

So with all that being said, why am I dismissing this case? Because the contract, in its actual verbiage, is confusing, poorly written, and not up to standard. I commend the Plaintiff and Defendant for writing a contract, as it was the right thing to do. However, they need to make sure it is a little cleaner before acting on it.

If either party has any questions, they may feel free to ask/reach out to me.
That is all,
Thank You

CASE DISMISSED