Lawsuit: Dismissed The Commonwealth of Redmont v. itzRazubi [2021] FCR 75

Status
Not open for further replies.

SumoMC

Citizen
Supporter
4th Anniversary 2nd Anniversary Statesman Change Maker
SumoMC
SumoMC
attorney
Joined
May 19, 2021
Messages
714
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT

CRIMINAL ACTION





The Commonwealth of Redmont

Prosecution



v.



itzRazubi

Defendant



COMPLAINT

The Prosecution alleges criminal actions committed by the Defendant as follows:



PROSECUTING AUTHORITY REPORT

The Defendant was intentionally infecting Doctors and others. They refused treatment and the police had to get involved.



I. PARTIES

  1. SumoMC (Attorney General)
2. itRazubi (Defendant)

3. Baole444 (Officer on Scene)

4. Bel (Secretary of Health)

5. SuSsyAnt (Infected Persons)

6. awwimnicki0202 (Officer)

7. Darvamfo (Doctor)



II. FACTS

1. The Defendant refused the cure

2 the Defendant intentionally and willing allowed himself infect the people around him by not taking the cure after the officer offered to pay for it.

3 The Defendant took time and resources form the Department of Justice by wasting the time of two officers that could of been patrolling the streets

4 disrupted the smooth functioning of the hospital by not being cooperative and intentionally putting the lives of the people around him at risk.

5 The Defendant resisted and evaded the arrest of officers.



III. CHARGES

The Prosecution hereby alleges the following charges against the Defendant:

  1. 12.2 - Contagious Diseases
  2. 15.9 - Resisting Arrest
...



IV. SENTENCING

The Prosecution hereby recommends the following sentence for the Defendant:

1. 10 minutes of jail time for wasting 2 hours of police time and evading arrest

2. Be fined 160 dollars for resisting arrest and fines.



(Attach evidence and a list of witnesses at the bottom if applicable)







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 13th day of July, 2021
 

Attachments

  • 721A618B-C3A9-4A2A-87AD-475327656D70.png
    721A618B-C3A9-4A2A-87AD-475327656D70.png
    745.2 KB · Views: 123
  • 976908D1-926B-4142-8CBE-B58A5DC5A547.jpeg
    976908D1-926B-4142-8CBE-B58A5DC5A547.jpeg
    260.5 KB · Views: 128
  • F7893068-19A5-4A3C-BA05-A529192003E3.png
    F7893068-19A5-4A3C-BA05-A529192003E3.png
    807.8 KB · Views: 136
  • A993B20D-6CD0-4350-9013-062D4B3D4D66.png
    A993B20D-6CD0-4350-9013-062D4B3D4D66.png
    222.4 KB · Views: 132
  • 7CD30A05-4A27-45B5-AE89-7425A38D0499.png
    7CD30A05-4A27-45B5-AE89-7425A38D0499.png
    509.1 KB · Views: 138
  • 28034CB6-14D6-48C9-B996-D172EADA56DA.png
    28034CB6-14D6-48C9-B996-D172EADA56DA.png
    368.5 KB · Views: 138
  • 2FD47A4E-8E4C-4794-A1A9-6E2F9ECDCF55.png
    2FD47A4E-8E4C-4794-A1A9-6E2F9ECDCF55.png
    273.4 KB · Views: 154
  • DD711975-5CDD-495D-92D8-7E9C4D91243B.png
    DD711975-5CDD-495D-92D8-7E9C4D91243B.png
    257.3 KB · Views: 126
  • 91E04B85-D537-459C-A325-70A8D4EF236F.png
    91E04B85-D537-459C-A325-70A8D4EF236F.png
    187.9 KB · Views: 128
  • 0BBE0D83-DC69-45C1-ABDE-CB5082BD0E8B.png
    0BBE0D83-DC69-45C1-ABDE-CB5082BD0E8B.png
    348.5 KB · Views: 123
More evidence^
 

Attachments

  • 1C08D19D-9A4C-4E7C-BB66-310F162232B5.png
    1C08D19D-9A4C-4E7C-BB66-310F162232B5.png
    193.5 KB · Views: 137
  • 1845DD1D-7DCD-453E-A2B9-B13F52A21A92.png
    1845DD1D-7DCD-453E-A2B9-B13F52A21A92.png
    273.4 KB · Views: 128
  • CE23F781-F306-4A50-BD39-1D795665901C.png
    CE23F781-F306-4A50-BD39-1D795665901C.png
    368.5 KB · Views: 125

Verdict

This Case is dismissed because the Court does not have jurisdiction due to the Amend the Criminal Jurisdiction Act, "The Court shall have jurisdiction over all summary and indictable offenses, alongside all DEC offenses, whereby a fine of over $500, or jail time of over 30 minutes is imposed, subjection to subsection 3."

I have asked Congress in Politics chat to please review over 12.2 since the fine is so low that it would not invoke criminal procedure within this court. I believe that the matter personally is within the police's jurisdiction and not within the Court's jurisdiction. The only time that such an issue will become a Court matter is if a plaintiff alleges police misconduct in regards to taking medicine. The DoJ should handle this matter as it sees fit and the Court will decide if that action is correct if someone were to bring a suit against it.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top