Lawsuit: Adjourned Tan_Head v. The DOJ [2022] DCR 6

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Milqy

Citizen
Supporter
Popular in the Polls 2nd Anniversary Staff Statesman
Milqy
Milqy
Attorney
Joined
Jan 14, 2022
Messages
216
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION

Tan_Head (Lovely Law representing)
PLAINTFIFF

v

Commonwealth of Redmont
DEFENDANT

COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:
The Plaintiff, Tan_Head, was flying to a destination with their friend. The elytra the Plaintiff was using broke mid-flight and landed them atop of the RPD. Trying to get off, the Plaintiff fell where there was an absence of a barrier block. Upon their falling, they were subsequently arrested.

WRITTEN STATEMENT FROM THE PLAINTIFF

PARTIES
1. Tan_Head - Plaintiff
2. Department of Justice - Defendant

FACTS
1. The Plaintiff was flying somewhere when the elytra broke mid-flight.
2. After Elytra broke the Plaintiff fell atop barrier blocks.
3. Trying to get off the barrier blocks and back onto the street, the Plaintiff fell into a no-trespassing zone.
4. A missing barrier block caused the plaintiff to enter the no trespassing zone.
5. While the Plaintiff was trying to explain himself the police officer told him "stop lying it’s only gonna get worse".
6. The Plaintiff didn't get a chance to explain himself and was unjustly arrested.
7. The Plaintiff was unable to complete their original intention of flying to a destination in order to participate in the original activities they had planned.

CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. This violated the Plaintiff's right XIV by denying their right to life and liberty as guarded under the constitution.
2. The Plaintiff was put in a stressful situation because the police officer tried to stop the Plaintiff from explaining himself, by telling the Plaintiff that all he said was a lie and that if he won't stop everything is gonna get worse. The Plaintiff got unjustly arrested after that. The following actions made the Plaintiff experience emotional damage, stress, and confusion.
3. Since there was a hole between the invisible barrier blocks. There was no way for the plaintiff to know
2. (look for further violations)

PRAYERS FOR RELIEF
1. $1,500 in legal fees.
2. $500 for time spent in jail unjustly.
3. This trespass be stricken from the Plaintiff's record.
4. The barrier block to be filled to prevent further misunderstanding in the future.

(evidence)
https://imgur.com/a/Sws0FAl
Untitled recorded with Medal.tv

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 9th day of February 2022
 
district-court-png.12083

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
WRIT OF SUMMONS

The Attorney General, or anyone who is allowed to take the place of the Attorney General is required to appear before the court in the case of the Tan_Head v. The Department of Justice. Failure to appear within 72 hours of this summons will result in a default judgment in favor of the plaintiff.

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.​
 
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT

Tan_head
Plaintiff

v.

The Department of Justice
Defendant

I. ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
1. (1st Claim for Relief) Dispute: Right XIV of the Constitution states the following: “Every citizen has the right to life, liberty, and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.” In this case, due to the plaintiff entering the “No Trespassing” area of the Police Station, the principles of fundamental justice lawfully occurred when they were arrested for trespassing.
2. (2nd Claim for Relief) Dispute: A Police Officer is not obligated to stay and let the person they are imprisoning explain themself. Instead, in the case of a believed wrongful arrest, the person being arrested is encouraged to make a Department of Justice ticket in the Government Support section of the Discord. The plaintiff was not unjustly arrested; if you are in an area designated as “No Trespassing,” it is to be expected that you will be arrested.
3. (3rd Claim for Relief) Dispute: The Department of Justice has no direct bearing on whether a block is missing from a structure, especially one that is inaccessible in regular gameplay (i.e the barrier block).

II. DEFENCES
The Defendant, or, more specifically, the officer in question, was not in violation of the Constitution, the law, or Department policy. They had only carried out their duties as a Police Officer, that of upholding the law.

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 9th day of February, 2022.
 
Thank you Neemfy for your response, and thank you Milqy for the link to the evidence.
We will now move on to opening statements. The Plaintiff has 48 hours from now to present their opening statement followed by the Defendant.
 
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION

Tan_Head (Lovely Law Firm Representing)
Plaintiff

v.

The Department of Justice
Defendant

OPENING STATEMENT

Your Honor, opposing counsel,

To start off, I would like to point out that they believe Right XIV was not violated, and there reasoning was that it was "Fundamental Justice". This is not fundamentals, in any department. The Plaintiff was going about his day and fell atop the barrier blocks above the police station bus. Elytra's have become a staple of travelling on the server, whether for joy, or for business purposes. The police officer on duty, though we do not have a name, was most certainly on a power trip that day. The plaintiff never had a second to explain the mishap, nor did he have a chance to even speak. The police officer on duty at the station was far too quick to pull out his handcuffs. Which could be seen as an inappropriate use of his D.O.J. given instruments.

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 11 day of February 2022
 
The Defendant has 48 hours to post his opening statement.
 
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
OPENING STATEMENT

Tan_head
Plaintiff

v.

The Department of Justice
Defendant

I. OPENING STATEMENT

The Plaintiff has repeated that their rights have been violated, and that the Police Officer that had arrested them strayed from Department of Justice policy.

The chances of falling in a 1 block by 1 block hole in the barriers preventing you from trespassing because of a broken elytra are slim to none. However, in the extremely rare case that the plaintiff did fall into the small hole in the barriers, it is still their responsibility. The Department of Justice had no impact on the durability of the plaintiff’s elytra, nor the hole in the Police Station’s barriers.

The Officer who made the arrest (still unnamed by the plaintiff) was doing their job the way they were told to. If you enter an area that has at least one “No Trespassing” sign, you are, as the law describes, trespassing. The duty of a Police Officer is to punish law-breakers. The plaintiff, in this case, was breaking the law, whether intentional or not. If the Officer had not punished them for this, it would have been an actual violation of DOJ policy, and negligence of their job.

The plaintiff claims that the officer was "far too quick to pull out his handcuffs." That is the only job of a police officer in-game, to make the arrest quickly and without fuss. If the plaintiff had wanted to explain themselves, they should have made a DOJ ticket on Discord.
 
Thank you both parties for your opening statements you both have 24 hours from now to list all of your witnesses, or tell the court that you have none.
 
The Defendant calls RelaxedGV as a witness.
 
The plaintiff's council would like to call TheRukia as a witness.

We also request to add to our prayers for relief that the Department of Justice revisit and update the policy layout that disregards the arrestee's explanation of the events which led up to the arrest with the exception of murder cases and in-game wanted points.
 
district-court-png.12083

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
WRIT OF SUMMONS

@RelaxedGV and @TheRukia are hereby summoned to the District court of the Commonwealth of Redmont in Case [2022] DCR 5 as witnesses. Please familiarize yourself with the case as it stands at present, and inform the court that you are here within 48 hours. You will first receive questions from the party that called you as a witness, and then you may also be cross-examined.

I am hereby informing each witness to ensure they are aware of the provisions of the law of perjury and its severity. Giving knowingly false testimony is highly illegal. Witnesses are required to tell the truth in their testimonies, pursuant of the Perjury Act.​
 
I’m here and have already familiarized myself with this case
 
I am present
 
TheRukia, Please try to be more aware of the time limits in the future. But since you were only late by 15 minutes, and it was your first offense, you will not be charged with contempt of court.

The Plaintiff has 48 hours to list their questions for TheRukia only. TheRukia will have 48 hours to answer the questions. After this the defendant may cross-examine TheRukia and post their questions for RelaxedGV at the same time.
 
I am sorry TheRukia for my mistake. You were not late, and I fully admit that I got mixed up and made a mistake.

On a seperate note, the Plaintiff's time limit to produce their questions is still 48 hours from the previous post.
 
Your honor, I have the following questions for the witness:

1. Can you confirm that you were the arresting officer on scene?

2. Did you give the plaintiff any time to explain himself?

3. Did it look like Tan_Head was trying to get down from the barrier blocks when he fell through and trespassed?
 
TheRukia, you have 48 hours to answer the Plaintiff's questions.
 
1. Yes

2. No

3. I only seen them in the no trespassing area I did not see them on the barriers
 
Thank you TheRukia. The Defense now has 48 hours to list their questions for TheRukia, and RelaxedGV.
 
For RelaxedGV:
1. Did Tan_head fall through the barriers?
2. Was there an officer on scene when they fell through the barriers?

For TheRukia:
1. Did Tan_head make a DOJ Ticket on the discord after they were arrested?
 
Each witness has 48 hours to answer the questions. When they do, the plaintiff will have 48 hours to cross-examine relaxedGV.
 
1. From what i saw they went through the gate and were NOT on top of the barriers when going in

2. There was an officer on scene
 
1. Yes
 
The Plaintiff has 48 hours to post any questions they have for relaxedGV, or state that they have none.
 
Due to the fact that the Plaintiff’s counsel failed to respond, I hereby order the DOJ to fine Milqy $250 for his first offense of contempt of court.

We will now move onto closing statements. The Plaintiff has 48 hours to post their closing statement.
 
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CLOSING STATEMENT

Tan_Head (Lovely Law representing)
PLAINTIFF

v

Commonwealth of Redmont
DEFENDANT

Your Honor,
First, I would like to apologize for negligence and failing to respond in the allocated 48 hours above. The plaintiff was flying around spawn, going about lawfully, when his Elytra happened to break. This series of unfortunate events landed him atop the barrier blocks above the Prison Bus. Thus, with the help of bad luck, and a missing barrier block the plaintiff found himself inside the no trespassing zone. As there is no other way to get into the no trespassing zone, besides through the barrier blocks, as all of the doors have a special lock on them which negates him from doing so. And as Tan_Head's profession is a Doctor, there would be no physical way of accessing the bus zone.
The plaintiff wishes that the D.O.J. makes their policies on arrests public, and secondly, they add a question before arresting in simple matters such as these. As Tan_Head simply fell onto the barrier blocks from above, a simple question from the officer before immediately taking out the handcuffs would have resolved this, with no fines given, and no time spent in jail.
The Plaintiff rests.
 
Thank you to the Plaintiff for his apology. This court understands that everyone makes mistakes sometimes, and apologizing is the right thing to do.
Thank you to the Plaintiff for his closing statement, the Defendant now has 48 hours to give their closing statement.
 
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CLOSING STATEMENT

Tan_head
Plaintiff

v.

The Department of Justice
Defendant

Although a series of unfortunate events could have led to the crime, it is still the responsibility of the person to serve the time in jail and pay the fine should they commit the crime. The Department of Justice had no part in the durability of the plaintiff’s elytra or the missing barrier block.

Furthermore, both witnesses stated that they did not see Tan_head on top of the barrier blocks. TheRukia answered that they only saw them inside the area, not on the barrier blocks. RelaxedGV stated that they saw the plaintiff enter through the gate of the bus area. There has been no evidence even placing Tan_head on top of the barriers at the time of the incident.

Anyone can enter the bus area through the gate, regardless of occupation, if it is previously opened by an officer. Why it was open to give Tan_head an opportunity to enter, I do not know. However, an open door is not an invitation to trespass. The “No Trespassing” sign is even next to the door. If you are not an officer, you should not be entering that area.

Additionally, TheRukia, a Superintendent of the Department of Justice, confirmed that they made a Department of Justice ticket on Discord. Tan_head did not need the time to explain themselves in game, because they had shown that they knew proper procedure in an event like this by opening the ticket. A determination that an arrest was lawful is no cause for changing Department-wide policy.

No part of this incident can be blamed on the Department of Justice, nor the arresting officer. At the risk of sounding like a broken record, TheRukia was simply doing their job. They do not have to give time to explain, and those who wish to dispute their charges can make a Discord ticket if they want to, which the Plaintiff did.

Thank you Your Honor, and Opposing Counsel.
 
Thank you to the defendant for their closing statement. This court will now go into recess and a verdict will be posted as soon as possible.
 

Verdict


IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
VERDICT
Tan_Head v. The DOJ [2022] DCR 6

I. PLAINTIFF'S POSITION
1. The Plaintiff was arrested for trespassing, even though the only reason for this was due to a series of unfortunate events when the Plaintiff's elytra broke and he fell threw the hole in the barrier blocks.
2. The arresting officer didn't give the Plaintiff a chance to explain what had happened.
3. Due to this unfair arrest, the Plaintiff missed out on his planned activities.

II. DEFENDANT'S POSITION
1. The chance that the Plaintiff fell through this 1 by 1 hole after having his elytra break mid-flight is extremely unlikely.
2. Even if this did happen, he was still trespassing, and the officer did his job.
3. The officer doesn't need to let the Plaintiff explain what happened as the Plaintiff could have created a discord ticket which they did.
4. Lastly both witnesses say that they didn't see the Plaintiff on top of the barriers, and one of the witnesses saw the Plaintiff walk through the gate.

III. THE COURT OPINION
1. Whether or not the Plaintiff was trespassing on accident, he was still trespassing.
2. The police officer simply did his job by arresting someone who was committing a crime.
3. The photo and video that the Plaintiff posted at the beginning of this case proves that there is a hole in the barrier blocks, however doesn't prove the highly unlikely event that the Plaintiff fell through that block after their elytra broke while flying.

IV. SENTENCE
1. This court hereby rules in favor of the Defendant, and would like to tell the Plaintiff that if they want this crime to be stricken from their criminal record, they can file an expungement request at least 2 months after the incident occurred.

The District Court thanks all involved.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top