Lawsuit: Adjourned pepper5980 v. FTGWop [2023] DCR 4

Status
Not open for further replies.
pepper5980

pepper5980

L’italiano e l’americano
Justice Department
Supporter
3rd Anniversary Grave Digger Change Maker Statesman
pepper5980
pepper5980
Attorney
Joined
Dec 13, 2022
Messages
132
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION


pepper5980
Plaintiff

v.

FTGWop
Defendant

COMPLAINT:
FTGWop called me a traitor and a terrorist with no basis behind his claims, tarnishing my reputation and leaving me feeling sad. I'm thinking it was because I arrested him earlier.


I. PARTIES
1. pepper5980
2. FTGWop

II. FACTS
1. At 1:08 PM EST, the Plaintiff arrested the Defendant for 2 counts of murder.
2. At 1:15 PM, the Defendant accused "P*p*r" of being a traitor. (Evidence 1)
3. Yeet_Boy responded saying "Good job censoring the name", to which the Defendant responded and said, "yes yeet I am sensoring [sic] the name so I cant [sic] get sued". (Also Evidence 1)
4. FTGWop also said "P*p*r is the biggest terrorist he is the reason why some of those terrorists is in the cabinet". (Evidence 2)

III CLAIM FOR RELIEF
1. These claims are slanderous and completely false. They left the Plaintiff feeling offended and angry that FTGWop, a former Representative with not a small amount of influence on the general public, could make these claims without any support or evidence behind them.

IV: PRAYERS FOR RELIEF:
1. $100 delivered from the Defendant to the Plaintiff;
2. A written apology/retraction of the statements by the Defendant.

EVIDENCE:

1. (See photo 1)
In this photo you can clearly see that the Defendant said that "P*p*r is a traitor" and that Yeet_Boy said, "Good job censoring the name" to which FTGWop replied, "yes yeet I am sensoring the name so I cant get sued".

2. (See photo 2)
In this photo you can clearly see that the Defendant also said, "P*p*r is the biggest terrorist he is the reason why some of those terrorists is in the cabinet".

3. (See photo 3 for evidence of arrest)


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 28 day of January, 2023
 

Attachments

  • 1.png
    1.png
    1.8 MB · Views: 126
  • 2.png
    2.png
    1.9 MB · Views: 133
  • 3.png
    3.png
    159.2 KB · Views: 127
dcr.png
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
WRIT OF SUMMONS

FTGWop must appear before the court in the case of pepper5980 v. FTGWop [2023] DCR 4. Failure to appear within 48 hours of this summons will result in a default judgment.

I'd also like to remind both parties to be aware of the Court Rules and Procedures, including the option of an in-game trial should both parties request one.​
 
.Thewaygamer2011 said:
Could I put this court case in my Newspaper
Click to expand...
Please refrain from talking in court cases when you are not involved. Doing so again will result in a charge of Contempt of Court.
 
FTGWop said:
I am innocent
Click to expand...
Please use the proper format for an answer to complaint, or find a lawyer to represent you and do it for you.
 
I only have to appear right you havent opened the opening statements yet
 
1 The plaintiffs reason for suing me is only because he wants money nothing proves I commited slander against him

2 I never said that Pepper was a terrorist or a traitor I said P*p*r is a traitor and a terrorist and that could be anyone I never said that Pepper was one since I said P*p*r that means I could have talked about anybody

3 you can clearly see that he only does this for the money also I would say that this case mostly seems politically motivated.
 
Thank you to the Defendant for your answer to the complaint.

The Plaintiff now has 48 hours to provide their Opening Statement.
 
OPENING STATEMENT
of the Plaintiff

Your honor and opposing counsel,

The Defendant brought up in his answer to complaint that I, the Plaintiff, am only suing the Defendant for money and for political purposes. I would like to remind the Defendant that my reasons for suing him is in my original complaint, quoted, "FTGWop called me a traitor and a terrorist with no basis behind his claims, tarnishing my reputation and leaving me feeling sad." I think that it is abhorrent that the Defendant would once again accuse me of an obvious falsehood. I am not suing the Defendant purely for political or monetary purposes (as $100 is very little in cash), I am suing the Defendant because he made false claims against me that tarnished my reputation and left me feeling sad.

Also, the Defendant brought up in his answer to complaint, quote, "I never said that Pepper was a terrorist or a traitor I said P*p*r is a traitor and a terrorist and that could be anyone I never said that Pepper was one since I said P*p*r that means I could have talked about anybody". Although the Plaintiff does acknowledge that it is possible that "P*p*r" could have meant someone else, I believe that it is implausible. As I said in my original complaint, FTGWop is quoted as saying, "yes yeet I am sensoring [sic] the name so I cant [sic] get sued", meaning two things.

1. The Defendant wasn't talking about just "anybody", or just a broad or vague group of people; the Defendant was talking about a specific person.
2. All this court requires is that it is proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the Defendant was in fact talking about me, the Plaintiff. Saying my full name (pepper5980) is not the only basis for a lawsuit. Rather, given the circumstantial evidence surrounding the slanderous statement the Defendant made, and also the fact that the Defendant censored the name so as not to be sued, I believe that it is much more than beyond a reasonable doubt that the Defendant was in fact referring to me.

Allow me to present your honor and the opposing counsel with the definition of Slander as provided by the Rules and Laws of Democracy Craft.
"A purposeful false statement of a player to cause damage to that player's reputation."
Your honor, slander does not have to be by full name basis only. For something to be considered slander, it doesn't have to be "Username123 is a traitor." Rather, somebody could be talking about Username123 and the slanderer could say "He is a traitor" e.g. Or the defendant could shorten the name of who he is trying to slander: "User is a traitor," e.g.

I know I am using hypotheticals and examples that are somewhat different from the nature of this case, but my point is this: the Defendant doesn't have to say my full name in order for what he said to be considered slander. If the Defendant says something to refer to me, even if he uses obscure language, and people around him know that he is referring to me, it is still slanderous. And if P*p*r, which I believe is an obvious reference to me, the Plaintiff, is not enough of a source to say that the Defendant was slandering me, where does it end? Even if the Defendant had said "Pepper", there are a plethora of pepper's in Minecraft. He could very well have been talking about someone else. But I believe the obviousness of the remark, plus the circumstantial evidence, give enough evidence that "P*p*r" was in fact a reference to me.

In conclusion, I believe that this court has a very important precedent to set: whether the circumstances and the obviousness of the referencing is enough to convict the Defendant or not. And for the reasons listed above, I believe that it is.

Thus concludes my Opening Statement.
 
Thank you to the Plaintiff for providing your Opening Statement.

The Defense now has 48 hours to provide their Opening Statement.
 
OBJECTION
Speculation

Your honor, in addition to my Opening Statements, I would like to object to points 1(a) and 3 specifically of the Defendant’s answer to complaint for being purely speculative and having no relevance to this case whatsoever. (1(a) being “The plaintiffs reason for suing me is only because he wants money”).
 
pepper5980 said:
OBJECTION
Speculation

Your honor, in addition to my Opening Statements, I would like to object to points 1(a) and 3 specifically of the Defendant’s answer to complaint for being purely speculative and having no relevance to this case whatsoever. (1(a) being “The plaintiffs reason for suing me is only because he wants money”).
Click to expand...
Overruled.

Whilst many objections are acceptable when objecting to remarks made by the opposing counsel, Speculation is reserved for witness testimony, specifically if a witness is "asked to testify about something they have not directly observed." The reasoning for this is that "Witnesses are only allowed to testify about their own direct experiences and thoughts."
 
Understood. You honor, with your permission I would like to change my objection to be on the basis of irrelevance.
Because, my motives in this trial are irrelevant to the actual trial itself.
(If you allow I will present an actual and official objection to the court)
 
pepper5980 said:
Understood. You honor, with your permission I would like to change my objection to be on the basis of irrelevance.
Because, my motives in this trial are irrelevant to the actual trial itself.
(If you allow I will present an actual and official objection to the court)
Click to expand...
In general, you can post an Objection without asking.
 
Understood your honor, I was unsure whether or not I could make an objection on the same thing more than once.
 
OBJECTION
Relevance

Your honor, I would like to object specifically points 1a and 3 of the Defendant’s answer to complaint as my motives behind filing this lawsuit is irrelevant evidence in this trial and proves nothing. (1a is “The plaintiffs reason for suing me is only because he wants money”)
 
pepper5980 said:
OBJECTION
Relevance

Your honor, I would like to object specifically points 1a and 3 of the Defendant’s answer to complaint as my motives behind filing this lawsuit is irrelevant evidence in this trial and proves nothing. (1a is “The plaintiffs reason for suing me is only because he wants money”)
Click to expand...
Overruled.

Objecting on relevance is reserved for "When a party has presented evidence that is not relevant to the case, or asks a witness a question that may not be relevant."

The statements being objected to are not presenting evidence or asking a witness a question.

This message also serves as a reminder to the Defendant that they have a little under 42 hours remaining to post their Opening Statement.
 
Your honor, I do heartily apologize. I’m still rather new to all of this and I thank you for your patience.
 
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO STRIKE

Your honor, I move that points 1(a) (which is “The plaintiffs reason for suing me is only because he wants money”) and 3 of the Defendant’s Answer to Complaint be stricken from this court’s record as the information presented there is impertinent and not backed by any evidence.
 
this case is not about slander he just wants to make money from me. Pepper only sued me because he didnt like me as a politican and I see this as an attemtp to try and quiet the opposition by suing them for not having the same political ideas as they themselfs have. Also it exist no evidence that I was talking about Pepper the evidence is weak and again I said P*p*r not pepper is a big difference between those two things first of all Pepper has one more letter than the censored name. This case should get dismissed since its fully clear he made this for political reasons.
 
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO STRIKE

Your honor,
I move to have “this case is not about slander he just wants to make money from me. Pepper only sued me because he didnt like me as a politican and I see this as an attemtp to try and quiet the opposition by suing them for not having the same political ideas as they themselfs have.” from the Defendant’s Opening Statements stricken from this court due to the fact that it is slanderous and impertinent, lacks evidence, and is purely an opinionated statement made by the Defendant that is unnecessary for this court.
 
pepper5980 said:
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO STRIKE

Your honor, I move that points 1(a) (which is “The plaintiffs reason for suing me is only because he wants money”) and 3 of the Defendant’s Answer to Complaint be stricken from this court’s record as the information presented there is impertinent and not backed by any evidence.
Click to expand...
Overruled.

This court does not find the information to be impertinent.

Additionally, lack of evidence is historically not a reason to dismiss or strike portions of legal cases.
 
pepper5980 said:
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO STRIKE

Your honor,
I move to have “this case is not about slander he just wants to make money from me. Pepper only sued me because he didnt like me as a politican and I see this as an attemtp to try and quiet the opposition by suing them for not having the same political ideas as they themselfs have.” from the Defendant’s Opening Statements stricken from this court due to the fact that it is slanderous and impertinent, lacks evidence, and is purely an opinionated statement made by the Defendant that is unnecessary for this court.
Click to expand...
Overruled.

While it is an opinionated statement, most legal arguments are based on opinions to some degree. Nothing in the Defendant's closing statement warrants being stricken from the record.
 
Thank you to both parties for filing their Opening Statements.

We will now move on to witness testimonies.

Both parties now have 48 hours to list any witnesses they wish to call, or state that they have none.
 
I have no witness that I wish to call
 
Your honor, I have no witnesses that I wish to call.
 
We will now move on to Closing Statements.

The Plaintiff has 48 hours to post their Closing Statement.
 
CLOSING STATEMENT
of the Plaintiff

Your honor and opposing counsel,

In the Defendant's opening statement, the Defendant again made baseless claims against me saying that I am only doing this case for money and political reasons. And although this court has decided to keep these statements on the record, I do hope that your honor does not take these accusations made without any evidence as a proper defense. As I would like to remind this court, my trial is on the basis of slander committed by the Defendant. In fact, this trial has nothing to do with motives whatsoever, either on my side or on the Defendant's side. The Defendant saying that I am only suing him for monetary and political reasons is skirting the real issue. The Defendant has refused to provide a defense for his actions.

The only defense that the Defendant has brought up is the "I did not say Pepper, I said P*p*r" spiel. (I would like the court to note that the Defendant is not saying that he denies my accusations, he is merely saying that he did not refer to me using my common name). To answer this defense again, I ask for your honor to reread my Opening Statement.

In conclusion, I believe that this court has a very important decision to make. A decision that will either allow slander in some circumstances or end it. A decision that says, "slander is appropriate if you censor the name", or a decision that says, "slander is inappropriate every time." This court must ask itself: "is slander ever appropriate? And if so, at what point does it become appropriate?" This case may be used as precedent for future cases to come, and thus, the decision made by this court will affect more than just this one circumstance.

Thus concludes my Closing Statement.
 
Thank you to the Plaintiff for your Closing Statement.

The Defendant now has 48 hours to post their Closing Statement.
 
I am innocent I have not done slander the defendants claims against me has very weak evidence and we both can see that I have not commited slander on him. In my opinion it is very clear that I havent commited slander on Pepper I didnt even mention Pepper at all so its very weird that he tries to sue me when I didnt even mention him. For example if another player said that another player was a terrorist I can not just sue that player for slander just because I want to do it because that its a frivoulous case if a player calls another player a terrorist the only person that can sue is the player that got called a terrorist not anybody else and in this case Its clear I am not talking about Pepper he just does this for political reasons and we all can see it. He tries to sue me for slander when he wasnt even the person that got called a terrorist just because he wants money.
 
Thank you to the Defendant for providing your Closing Statement.

This court is now in recess until a verdict is delivered.
 

Verdict


IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
VERDICT
pepper5980 v. FTGWop [2023] DCR 4

I. PLAINTIFF’S POSITION
1. The Defendant committed Slander against the Plaintiff.
2. They did this by calling the Plaintiff a traitor and terrorist.
3. Although the Defendant used asterisks to censor parts of their name, it is clear that the Defendant was talking about the Plaintiff.

II. DEFENDANT’S POSITION
1. The Defendant did not commit Slander against the Plaintiff.
2. They didn’t call pepper5980 a traitor, they called p*p*r a traitor.
3. Because of this, the Plaintiff is wrong and should not be granted relief.

III. THE COURT OPINION
1. The burden of proof in a Civil Case is a balance of probabilities.
2. Thus, while it is technically true that the Defendant could have been talking about someone else, the circumstances around the interaction indicate that the Defendant was clearly talking about the Plaintiff.
3. However, slander goes beyond merely saying something that the other party does not like. To be granted relief for Slander, it must be shown that the statement is false, unprivileged, caused damage, and that the person making the statement did so with intent to harm.
4. It is clear that the Defendant called the Plaintiff a traitor and terrorist, and any reasonable person can reasonably see that this is likely false, so the statement is probably false.
5. Because of the totality of the circumstances, there is much to unpack around whether the statement was unprivileged:
a. The Defendant was recently arrested by the Plaintiff. It is possible that the Defendant did not believe they were being arrested fairly, and thus honestly believed that the Plaintiff was a traitor or terrorist.
b. That being said, whenever looking at a slander case, the Court must look at the totality of the circumstances around the statements. In this case, we see the Defendant was clearly arrested and fined, and the Defendant has not made any claims about the arrest and has evidently made an appeal regarding it. As such, it seems likely that the Defendant was well-aware of the reason for the arrest, and it was likely a reasonable arrest.
c. Thus, this court believes the statement was in-fact unprivileged.
6. There is no evidence that the statement caused any damage, apart from the Plaintiff claiming it made them feel sad.
7. Finally, the Court must look at the circumstances and ask: was there evidently intent to harm? Again, I would say yes, there was evidently intent to harm, most likely by trying to convince people that the Plaintiff should not be a police officer or have another sort of public duty.
8. Thus, at first glance, this seems like a clear-cut slander case, where the Defendant committed Slander against the Plaintiff, however, up until this point in the Court Opinion, we’ve solely been looking at this situation through this court’s understanding of the Defamation Act October 2020 – we haven’t touched upon the Constitution yet.
9. Looking back on this case, we see that the Defendant was recently arrested by the Plaintiff, who was performing their duty as a Police Officer, and it is suggested that the reason the Plaintiff was called these things was because of the recent arrest. Speaking out against the actions of the police – and the Government as a whole – is by nature political communication, which is one of the rights enshrined within our Constitution.
10. Thus, although the Defendant may have made statements that are slanderously false, it is the Court’s opinion that the actions in this case are protected by the Freedom of Political Communication given to all citizens by the Constitution.

IV. VERDICT
1. I hereby rule in favor of the Defendant, and do not order any relief to be given to the Plaintiff.

The District Court thanks all involved.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top