Lawsuit: Adjourned Dartanboy v. Bepus [2025] DCR 22

[Dartanboy]

Case Filing

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION


Dartanboy
Plaintiff

v.

Bepus
Defendant

COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:

On March 6, shortly before 5:00 PM CST, Bepus falsely accused me of murdering Eenza, a fellow citizen of Redmont. Not only did I not murder Eenza, but I didn't even kill Eenza. Bepus did.

I. PARTIES
1. Dartanboy
2. Bepus

II. FACTS
1. On March 6, at 4:55:48 PM, Dartanboy reported a murder to the DHS [Exhibit P-001].
2. At 4:56:28 PM, Bepus falsely proclaimed that he "just watched eenza get murdered by dartanman" [Exhibit P-001].
3. After Dartanboy claimed Bepus was lying, Bepus doubled down on his statement and said "Coptop ... dartanman is blaming me for the murder of eenza ... when I watched him do it" [Exhibit P-002].
3. At 4:57:55 PM, CopTop_YT, a Senator, believed the statement made by Bepus and said, "dartanman is a stone cold killer" [Exhibit P-002].
4. Around this same time, CaseyLeFaye, a Detective, was investigating the murder [Exhibit P-002].
5. At 4:59 PM, CaseyLeFaye finished the investigation, and determined Bepus was the killer [Exhibit P-003].

III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. The Defendant slandered Dartanboy, an upstanding citizen of the Commonwealth of Redmont. Reputational damage is shown by the comments of a Senator calling Dartanboy "a stone cold killer."
2. Committing a Murder and then blaming someone else for it is outrageous and illegal.

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:
1. $4,000 in Nominal Damages, per the Legal Damages Act.
2. $6,000 in Punitive Damages, for outrageous, illegal conduct.
3. $5,000 in Legal Fees, per the Legal Damages Act.
4. A public apology from the Defendant, which specifically addresses the false claim that I murdered Eenza.
Total: $15,000 and a public apology

Evidence:

Spoiler: Exhibit P-001

Spoiler: Exhibit P-002

Spoiler: Exhibit P-003

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 6th day of March 2025.

 

[ko531]

Writ of Summons

@Bepus is required to appear before the District Court in the case of Dartanboy v Bepus [2025] DCR 22

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.

 

[Dartanboy]

Motion

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO AMEND

I made a slight error in Fact 1 of the case. I wish to make the following amendment:
1. On March 6, at 4:55:48 PM, Dartanboy reported a murder to the DHS [Exhibit A P-001].

 

[ko531]

Motion

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO AMEND

I made a slight error in Fact 1 of the case. I wish to make the following amendment:
1. On March 6, at 4:55:48 PM, Dartanboy reported a murder to the DHS [Exhibit A P-001].

Granted

 

[Dartanboy]

Motion

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGEMENT

The Defendant has been reasonably active and thus, under the court rules, forfeits his right to a Public Defender, despite not appearing in over 72 hours.

I request a Default Judgement.

Spoiler: He Was Active

 

[ko531]

Motion

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGEMENT

The Defendant has been reasonably active and thus, under the court rules, forfeits his right to a Public Defender, despite not appearing in over 72 hours.

I request a Default Judgement.

Spoiler: He Was Active

View attachment 53275
View attachment 53276

Granted. Case in recess pending verdict

 

[ko531]

Verdict

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
Dartanboy v. Bepus [2025] DCR 22.

I. PLAINTIFF'S POSITION
1. The defendant slandered Dart by making a false statement accusing him of a murder he did not commit.
2. Someone took this false statement to be true cause Dart reputational harm.

II. DEFENDANT'S POSITION
1. the Defense did not appear in court.

III. THE COURT OPINION
This is a very straight forward case as it is clear a false accusation was made by the defendant when claiming Dart killed a person in which the defense knew was false shown by the fact that they were the ones to actually kill the person. It is also clear to see that reputational harm did occur when CopTop took the statement to be true. The court therefore will be granting the plaintiff's entire claim of relief except for the public apology as a forced apology is just as good as no apology.


IV. DECISION
The District Court rules in favor of the Plaintiff with a modified prayer of relief.

The DOJ is ordered to fine Bepus a total of $15,000 and unfine Dartanboy the same amount.


The District Court thanks all involved.