Lawsuit: Pending The Commonwealth of Redmont v. Nebrasken64 [2025] FCR 23

juniperfig

god's favourite princess
Moderator
State Department
Justice Department
Education Department
Supporter
Aventura Resident
Solicitor General
Staff Popular in the Polls
juniperfig
juniperfig
Chief Of Staff
Joined
Jan 4, 2025
Messages
43

Case Filing


IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CRIMINAL ACTION

The People of the Commonwealth of Redmont through The Department of Justice
Prosecution

v.

Nebrasken64
Defendant

COMPLAINT
The Prosecution alleges criminal actions committed by the Defendant as follows:
On February 7, 2025, during the Presidential Election, Nebrasken64 launched a violent assault on democracy itself. Armed with an RPG, he fired on a polling station, blasting a hole in the building before storming inside. As voters exercised their sacred right, he callously declared, “What if I shot an RPG at the voting booth…”—then did exactly that.

The explosion rocked the polling site, catching MissAndrist and CaseyLeFaye in the blow, and destroying the literal foundation of our elections. He must be held accountable for his crimes—treason, harassment, and the sheer terror he inflicted. The law will not bend to those who seek to destroy it. Justice must be swift, and it must be absolute.

I. PARTIES
1. The Commonwealth of Redmont (Prosecution)
2. Nebrasken64 (Perpetrator)
3. MissAndrist (Victim and Witness)
4. CaseyLeFaye (Victim and Witness)
5. tortenwashere (Victim and Witness)

II. FACTS
1. On February 7, 2025, MissAndrist, CaseyLeFaye, and tortenwashere were at DOS HQ polling site (P-001).
2. This was during the February 2025 Presidential Election (P-002).
3. Nebrasken64 was outside of the polling location, brandishing an RPG (P-001).
4. Nebrasken64 shot the exterior of the polling location, creating a massive hole in the building’s structure (P-001).
5. Nebrasken64 entered the polling location (P-001).
6. Nebrasken64 said “What if I shot an RPG at the voting booth…” (P-001), (P-002).
7. Nebrasken64 shot the RPG inside the polling location, catching both CaseyLeFaye and Missandrist in an explosion (P-001).
8. Nebrasken64 is a Redmont citizen.

III. CHARGES
The Prosecution hereby alleges the following charges against the Defendant:

1. Two counts of Treason (Corruption and Espionage Offenses Act).
Treason, as defined by Redmont law, applies to a party in federal office who maliciously sabotages or undermines the stability, sovereignty, and/or national security of the government. While Nebrasken64 did not hold an elected position, he was nonetheless in office under the Oxford definition: “a position or post to which certain duties are attached, especially one of a more or less public character”.

By virtue of citizenship, every Redmont citizen holds a federal office, bound by a duty to vote. The Constitution guarantees the right to vote, but this right is contingent on civic responsibility. The Constitution states that to vote in elections and referendums, a citizen must:

a. Have been online within one month before votes are counted.
b. Have accrued six or more hours of playtime in the last 30 days.

If voting were just a right with no responsibilities, anyone could do it at any time, no matter how disconnected they were from the community. But Redmont requires citizens to stay engaged before they can vote. That means the government isn’t just saying, "You can vote if you want." It’s saying, "You need to be involved in Redmont to have a say in its future."

That expectation—that citizens must be active to vote—makes voting a civic duty. It's not optional in the way a privilege is; it's something Redmont believes citizens should do as part of their role in the community. And because civic duties are part of citizenship, that means every citizen holds a "federal office" with responsibilities to uphold democracy.

The Oxford definition of duty reinforces this, describing it as “an act that is due in the way of moral or legal obligation. Civic duty specifically refers to responsibilities expected of citizens, including voting, which ensures the legitimacy and stability of the democratic system.

By deliberately launching an RPG attack on a polling station—twice—Nebrasken64 did not merely interfere with an election; he actively sabotaged the process itself. He disrupted a core function of government, threatening its stability and national security. This was not an act of ignorance or recklessness—it was a direct, malicious assault on Redmont’s sovereignty.

Since citizenship inherently places individuals in an office of civic duty, Nebrasken64 qualifies as a party in federal office under the Corruption and Espionage Offenses Act. His actions meet every criterion for treason, as he attempted to sabotage and destabilize the electoral system, an institution critical to Redmont’s governance.

2. Two counts of Harassment, Alarm, or Distress (Violent Offences Act).
The perpetrator caused both alarm and distress to the victims, who had reason to believe they were in a secure location.

IV. SENTENCING
The Prosecution hereby recommends the following sentence for the Defendant:
1. For each count of Treason, we request a fine of $7,500.
2. For each count of Harassment, Alarm, or Distress, we request a fine of $7,500 and 40 minutes in prison.
IN TOTAL, the prosecution recommends a fine of $30,000 and 80 minutes in jail for this barbaric act of terror and anti-democratic behavior.

V. EVIDENCE

AD_4nXdQoMEtZBACu_AxC8C73sp8LoGj2T_MEtKHt4uTrb06_YiCXStYQv_Vu_kWnsM1U1Ldg58FSbE7RltooLsYKrTNj-FzhzUlH8_xkNps61WrNiVfIzs0fq7TsJilI3ghYcXV6TWtvg


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 25th day of Februrary, 2025

 
Last edited:

Writ of Summons


Nebrasken64 is hereby summoned to the Federal Court of the Commonwealth of Redmont in the case of The Commonwealth of Redmont v. Nebrasken64 [2025] FCR 23.

Failure to appear within 72 hours of this summons will result in a default judgement based on the known facts of the case.

Both parties should make themselves aware of the Court Rules and Procedures, including the option of an in-game trial should both parties request one.

 
I hereby find Nebrasken64 in Contempt of Court for failing to appear. The sentencing will be announced later.

I am also appointing a Public Defender, as this is a criminal case.
 
Your Honor, I will be representing the Defendant in this case as a Public Defender.
 
Your Honor, I will be representing the Defendant in this case as a Public Defender.
The Defense has 72 hours to file an Answer to Complaint
 

Case Filing


IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CRIMINAL ACTION

The People of the Commonwealth of Redmont through The Department of Justice
Prosecution

v.

Nebrasken64
Defendant

COMPLAINT
The Prosecution alleges criminal actions committed by the Defendant as follows:
On February 7, 2025, during the Presidential Election, Nebrasken64 launched a violent assault on democracy itself. Armed with an RPG, he fired on a polling station, blasting a hole in the building before storming inside. As voters exercised their sacred right, he callously declared, “What if I shot an RPG at the voting booth…”—then did exactly that.

The explosion rocked the polling site, catching MissAndrist and CaseyLeFaye in the blow, and destroying the literal foundation of our elections. He must be held accountable for his crimes—treason, harassment, and the sheer terror he inflicted. The law will not bend to those who seek to destroy it. Justice must be swift, and it must be absolute.

I. PARTIES
1. Nebrasken64 (Perpetrator)
2. MissAndrist (Victim and Witness)
3. CaseyLeFaye (Victim and Witness)
4. tortenwashere (Victim and Witness)

II. FACTS
1. On February 7, 2025, MissAndrist, CaseyLeFaye, and tortenwashere were at DOS HQ polling site (P-001).
2. This was during the February 2025 Presidential Election (P-002).
3. Nebrasken64 was outside of the polling location, brandishing an RPG (P-001).
4. Nebrasken64 shot the exterior of the polling location, creating a massive hole in the building’s structure (P-001).
5. Nebrasken64 entered the polling location (P-001).
6. Nebrasken64 said “What if I shot an RPG at the voting booth…” (P-001), (P-002).
7. Nebrasken64 shot the RPG inside the polling location, catching both CaseyLeFaye and Missandrist in an explosion (P-001).
8. Nebrasken64 is a Redmont citizen.

III. CHARGES
The Prosecution hereby alleges the following charges against the Defendant:

1. Two counts of Treason (Corruption and Espionage Offenses Act).
Treason, as defined by Redmont law, applies to a party in federal office who maliciously sabotages or undermines the stability, sovereignty, and/or national security of the government. While Nebrasken64 did not hold an elected position, he was nonetheless in office under the Oxford definition: “a position or post to which certain duties are attached, especially one of a more or less public character”.

By virtue of citizenship, every Redmont citizen holds a federal office, bound by a duty to vote. The Constitution guarantees the right to vote, but this right is contingent on civic responsibility. The Constitution states that to vote in elections and referendums, a citizen must:

a. Have been online within one month before votes are counted.
b. Have accrued six or more hours of playtime in the last 30 days.

If voting were just a right with no responsibilities, anyone could do it at any time, no matter how disconnected they were from the community. But Redmont requires citizens to stay engaged before they can vote. That means the government isn’t just saying, "You can vote if you want." It’s saying, "You need to be involved in Redmont to have a say in its future."

That expectation—that citizens must be active to vote—makes voting a civic duty. It's not optional in the way a privilege is; it's something Redmont believes citizens should do as part of their role in the community. And because civic duties are part of citizenship, that means every citizen holds a "federal office" with responsibilities to uphold democracy.

The Oxford definition of duty reinforces this, describing it as “an act that is due in the way of moral or legal obligation. Civic duty specifically refers to responsibilities expected of citizens, including voting, which ensures the legitimacy and stability of the democratic system.

By deliberately launching an RPG attack on a polling station—twice—Nebrasken64 did not merely interfere with an election; he actively sabotaged the process itself. He disrupted a core function of government, threatening its stability and national security. This was not an act of ignorance or recklessness—it was a direct, malicious assault on Redmont’s sovereignty.

Since citizenship inherently places individuals in an office of civic duty, Nebrasken64 qualifies as a party in federal office under the Corruption and Espionage Offenses Act. His actions meet every criterion for treason, as he attempted to sabotage and destabilize the electoral system, an institution critical to Redmont’s governance.

2. Two counts of Harassment, Alarm, or Distress (Violent Offences Act).
The perpetrator caused both alarm and distress to the victims, who had reason to believe they were in a secure location.

IV. SENTENCING
The Prosecution hereby recommends the following sentence for the Defendant:
1. For each count of Treason, we request a fine of $7,500.
2. For each count of Harassment, Alarm, or Distress, we request a fine of $7,500 and 40 minutes in prison.
IN TOTAL, the prosecution recommends a fine of $30,000 and 80 minutes in jail for this barbaric act of terror and anti-democratic behavior.

V. EVIDENCE

AD_4nXdQoMEtZBACu_AxC8C73sp8LoGj2T_MEtKHt4uTrb06_YiCXStYQv_Vu_kWnsM1U1Ldg58FSbE7RltooLsYKrTNj-FzhzUlH8_xkNps61WrNiVfIzs0fq7TsJilI3ghYcXV6TWtvg

Objection


IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
OBJECTION - BREACH OF PROCEDURE

The Prosecution’s case filing does not include agreement to understanding the penalties of lying in the court and the fact that they are subject to perjury should they knowingly make a false statement in court. It is also not dated properly. Both of these things are required for a Criminal Action case filing per the Guide - Templates of this court. The Defendant respectfully requests the case filing be struck from the record due to this failure in following basic court procedure.

 

Plea


IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
PLEA

The People of the Commonwealth of Redmont through The Department of Justice
Prosecution

v.

Nebrasken64
Defendant

I. ENTRY OF PLEA
1. Defendant pleads NOT GUILTY to the two counts of treason.
2. Defendant pleads NOT GUILTY to the two counts of Harassment, Alarm, or Distress.

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 fourth day of March 2025

 

Motion


IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO DISMISS

The defence moves that the complaint in this case be dismissed, and in support thereof, respectfully alleges:

Rule 5.7 (Failure to Include Party) of our Court Rules and Procedures states that a Motion to Dismiss can be filed for the plaintiff’s failure to join all appropriate parties to the case. Defendant reasonably concludes from this that a Motion to Dismiss can similarly be filed for the prosecution’s failure to join all appropriate parties to the case. The prosecution and the defendant are the two most basic parties that exist in every single Criminal Action case. The Prosecution has not included the prosecution as a party in their case filing and the Defendant therefore moves that the complaint in this case be dismissed in accordance with Rule 5.7.

 

Objection


IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
OBJECTION - BREACH OF PROCEDURE

The Prosecution’s case filing does not include agreement to understanding the penalties of lying in the court and the fact that they are subject to perjury should they knowingly make a false statement in court. It is also not dated properly. Both of these things are required for a Criminal Action case filing per the Guide - Templates of this court. The Defendant respectfully requests the case filing be struck from the record due to this failure in following basic court procedure.

Overruled, I'm not striking an entire case for a small clerical error.

@juniperfig please amend the filing to include the phrase during Discovery.
 

Motion


IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO DISMISS

The defence moves that the complaint in this case be dismissed, and in support thereof, respectfully alleges:

Rule 5.7 (Failure to Include Party) of our Court Rules and Procedures states that a Motion to Dismiss can be filed for the plaintiff’s failure to join all appropriate parties to the case. Defendant reasonably concludes from this that a Motion to Dismiss can similarly be filed for the prosecution’s failure to join all appropriate parties to the case. The prosecution and the defendant are the two most basic parties that exist in every single Criminal Action case. The Prosecution has not included the prosecution as a party in their case filing and the Defendant therefore moves that the complaint in this case be dismissed in accordance with Rule 5.7.

Overruled, for the same reason as the previous objection.

Furthermore, there is no legal requirement stating who must be listed under the Parties.
 
Discovery begins now, and is set to last 72 hours.
 
I will be taking over this case for the meanwhile due to the departure of Frmr. Judge Dartanboy.

As the time allotted for Discovery has now elapsed, the Plaintiff now has 72 hours to file their opening statements.
Please request an extension if necessary.
 
Back
Top