Lawsuit: Dismissed RylandW v. Krix [2024] FCR 94

Status
Not open for further replies.
Present your honor
 
itsBlazeX said:
Breach of Procedure
Your honor, the remarks made by the Defendant’s counsel are disruptive to the courtroom. Regardless of whether you decide to agree with that, this motion is not formatted properly.

EDIT: Plaintiff -> Defendant
Click to expand...
Overruled. I would like to remind both sides to keep the court proceedings orderly.
 
Alexander P. Love said:
Yeah well I explained why I didn’t so. Fine me 5k for being tired after work, fine. But that’s your cross to bear. Consider this a motion to reconsider.
Click to expand...
Overruled. I did speak with the DHS to ensure the fine is adjusted appropriately for minor contempt issues compared to larger ones.
 
Present, Your Honour.
 
@Soundi83 Is held in contempt.

@itsBlazeX You may begin questioning the witnesses you called (@Dartanboy and @Intercepticon). Please direct your questions toward both witnesses at the same time within the next 24 hours. Witnesses, please respond within 24 hours. Any follow-up questions should also be asked within 24 hours after the witnesses' responses.
 
1. (To Dartanman) Have you known Krix to falsify images or documents, with the intent of slandering another in the past?

2. (To Intercepticon) In the public channel that Krix posted a slanderous image in, your remarks show that you believe that the image is not forged, and is in fact true. Did this image change your view of RylandW?
 
itsBlazeX said:
Have you known Krix to falsify images or documents, with the intent of slandering another in the past?
Click to expand...
Objection, your honor. Question calls for speculation as to the defendant's intent, which can only be divined by the defendant himself.
 
itsBlazeX said:
Have you known Krix to falsify images or documents, with the intent of slandering another in the past?
Click to expand...
Yes. Krix utilized falsified evidence in order to slander me a few months ago.
 
itsBlazeX said:
In the public channel that Krix posted a slanderous image in, your remarks show that you believe that the image is not forged, and is in fact true. Did this image change your view of RylandW?
Click to expand...
Objection, your honor. Vague / ambiguous. "Change your view" is pretty broadly encompassing.
 
itsBlazeX said:
1. (To Dartanman) Have you known Krix to falsify images or documents, with the intent of slandering another in the past?

2. (To Intercepticon) In the public channel that Krix posted a slanderous image in, your remarks show that you believe that the image is not forged, and is in fact true. Did this image change your view of RylandW?
Click to expand...
Of course not, only people with room temperature IQ can think this screenshot is real. Look at the times. If you ask me, those who think this screenshot actually impacted anyone's thoughts or opinions on Ryland are so incredibly dense, light bends around them.
 
Intercepticon said:
Of course not, only people with room temperature IQ can think this screenshot is real. Look at the times. If you ask me, those who think this screenshot actually impacted anyone's thoughts or opinions on Ryland are so incredibly dense, light bends around them.
Click to expand...
OBJECTION
Nothing Pending, your honor this was a simple yes or no question. The witness is adding unnecessary details.
 
Unseatedduke1 said:
Sustained. @Intercepticon Please simply answer the question.
Click to expand...
Motion to Reconsider

Your honor, the witness has provided the court with much valuable insight on the situation. The details provided by the witness seem rather fundamental to fully answering the vague question asked by the plaintiff. I even remarked earlier that a vague question will lead to an equally broad question. This is a consequence the plaintiff should accept. If the plaintiff cannot control their own witness, they shouldn’t have called him.
 
Alexander P. Love said:
Motion to Reconsider

Your honor, the witness has provided the court with much valuable insight on the situation. The details provided by the witness seem rather fundamental to fully answering the vague question asked by the plaintiff. I even remarked earlier that a vague question will lead to an equally broad question. This is a consequence the plaintiff should accept. If the plaintiff cannot control their own witness, they shouldn’t have called him.
Click to expand...
Overruled. You can ask any questions you like to obtain further information during cross-examination.
 
Since no questions have been asked in 24 hours, we will allow the defense to cross.


@Alexander P. Love You may begin questioning all the witnesses including the two you may cross-examine. Please direct your questions to all witnesses at the same time within the next 24 hours. Witnesses, please respond within 24 hours. Any follow-up questions should also be asked within 24 hours of the witnesses' responses.

Unseatedduke1 said:
Sustained. @Intercepticon Please simply answer the question.
Click to expand...
@Intercepticon Please answer the question within 24 hours or be held in contempt.
 
itsBlazeX said:
1. (To Dartanman) Have you known Krix to falsify images or documents, with the intent of slandering another in the past?

2. (To Intercepticon) In the public channel that Krix posted a slanderous image in, your remarks show that you believe that the image is not forged, and is in fact true. Did this image change your view of RylandW?
Click to expand...
No.
 
Dartanman:
1. Isn’t it true that you and Krix have been political opponents in the past?
 
Alexander P. Love said:
Dartanman:
1. Isn’t it true that you and Krix have been political opponents in the past?
Click to expand...
I'm not comfortable answering a leading question, could it possibly be rephrased?
 
Dartanboy said:
I'm not comfortable answering a leading question, could it possibly be rephrased?
Click to expand...
You are being cross examined. You will answer the question. Leading is allowed on cross.
 
I allow the question.
 
@RylandW, I understand your lawyer left DC. Please inform the court of your new lawyer within 24 hours.
 
With no response, we will be moving on to closings. @RylandW, please either have your lawyer or you post your closing statement in the next 72 hours.
 
Unseatedduke1 said:
With no response, we will be moving on to closings. @RylandW, please either have your lawyer or you post your closing statement in the next 72 hours.
Click to expand...
My apologies. My lawyer has just quit DC. As I understand, a new lawyer should be assigned to represent me. I request a 72 hour extension.

Edit: I just saw the second message. I was unaware of this post and that is entirely my fault. I still request a 72 hour extension as I have not been informed of my new lawyer.
 
Denied. You still have 72 hours from earlier today which should be plenty of time for a new lawyer.
 
I am dropping the lawsuit. As a Christian, I should not be seeking to sue; rather, I should forgive Krix.
 
Accepted. Mr. Love, if you wish to pursue your counterclaim, please file it promptly. Thank you all.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top