Lawsuit: Dismissed The Commonwealth of Redmont v. UnityMaster [2024] SCR 18

Status
Not open for further replies.
Nacho

Nacho

Manager
Manager
Chief Justice
Construction & Transport Department
Commerce Department
Redmont Bar Assoc.
Supporter
Oakridge Resident
Nacholebraa
Nacholebraa
constructor
Joined
Jul 22, 2020
Messages
932
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
EMERGENCY INJUNCTION

The prosecution requests that Senator UnityMaster be removed temporarily from his office or his office be froze, for the actions outlined within the case. As defined previously by this court, emergency injunctions are designed to prevent further harm. Currently, Senator UnityMaster is the Senate's presiding officer. Senator UnityMaster has violated the voting rights of fellow senators and has shown a pattern of misuse of their office by condoning illegal actions even after being informed by the Attorney General of the illicit actions. These actions have led to unlawful vote switching, a clear sign of no care of legal requirements for the office they hold, and an apparent misuse of public office.
 
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
The Commonwealth of Redmont
Prosecution

v.

UnityMaster
Defendant

COMPLAINT
On February 27th, during the secretary confirmation vote, UnityMaster presided over the proceedings. Under the vote designation PN.7.23, three senators cast nay ballots while Senator Vernicia voted in the affirmative. However, UnityMaster announced a count of 0 aye, 2 nay, and 1 abstention during the vote tally.

This discrepancy raises serious legal concerns regarding UnityMaster's handling of the voting process. By inaccurately representing the vote count and failing to uphold the duty of impartiality and accuracy in tallying votes, UnityMaster has violated legal and procedural standards governing the conduct of voting procedures.

Furthermore, the failure to accurately reflect Senator Vernicia's affirmative vote disenfranchises their representation within the governing body.

Such actions undermine the integrity of the voting process and erode trust in the legitimacy and stability of the government's decision-making mechanisms.

Another example of Unity Master's complete disregard for the sanctity and power of voting is in motion pn . 1. 23, in which Unity himself voted abstain and then proceeded not to include his vote, contrasted to pn 5.23 in which he counts his vote and every senator who voted.

Furthermore, that same day, Unitymaster displayed contempt for the Constitution and the rule of law by introducing Motion S.23.23, violating impeachment procedures outlined by the Constitution and the Peach Act. This motion prematurely concluded a trial for justice before they could defend themselves, infringing upon the right to a fair trial guaranteed to all citizens. Such actions undermine fundamental legal principles and raise concerns about the integrity of the political process. The Attorney General brought the illegality of the motion to UnityMaster’s attention. However, the motion was not taken down. After the attorney general notified him of the illegality of the motion, UnityMaster proceeded to pass it.


I. PARTIES
1. The Commonwealth of Redmont (plaintiff)
2. UnityMaster (defendant)

II. FACTS
1. UnityMaster was the presiding officer of PN. 7.23
2. During the confirmation vote, PN. 7.23 Three senators voted nay, while Senator Vernicia voted aye.
3. Unity master announced that 0 senators voted aye, 2 voted nay, and 1 voted abstain.
4. In doing so, he falsified voting records, disenfranchised Vernicia’s vote of affirmation and destabilized the commonwealth.
5. UnityMaster introduced motion S.23.23 to the floor that same day.
6. Motion S.23.23 actioned the conclusion of an impeachment trial before any trial was given.
7. This violates both the Constitution and the Peach Act.
8. This violation was brought to the attention of UnityMaster by the attorney general however, the motion was not taken down.
9, Unitymaster proceeded to pass the motion.

III. CHARGES
The Prosecution hereby alleges the following charges against the Defendant:

1. 1 count of treason for falsifying voting records and disenfranchising a Senator's vote.

IV. SENTENCING
The Prosecution hereby recommends the following sentence for the Defendant:
1. A $25,000 fine for his infractions against the Commonwealth of redmont.
2. The removal of UnityMaster from the government office for 2 months.



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 2024
 
Seal_Judiciary.png




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

The defendant is required to appear before the court in The Commonwealth of Redmont v. UnityMaster [2024] SCR 18. Failure to appear within 72 hours of this summons will result in a default judgment.

I'd 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.​
 
The Defendant is herby charged with one count of Contempt of court for failing to appear before the court. As the defendant has failed to appear a public defender has been requested.

Until one is assigned to the case, the court is herby in recess.
 
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT

Commonwealth of Redmont
Prosecution

v.

UnityMaster
Defendant

I. ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
1. The Defense AFFIRMS UnityMaster was the presiding officer of PN. 7.23
2. The Defense AFFIRMS During the confirmation vote, PN. 7.23 Three senators voted nay, while Senator Vernicia voted aye.
3. The Defense AFFIRMS UnityMaster announced that 0 senators voted aye, 2 voted nay, and 1 voted abstain.
4. The Defense DISPUTES that In doing so, he falsified voting records, disenfranchised Vernicia’s vote of affirmation and destabilized the commonwealth.
5. The Defense AFFIRMS UnityMaster introduced motion S.23.23 to the floor that same day.
6. The Defense AFFIRMS Motion S.23.23 actioned the conclusion of an impeachment trial before any trial was given.
7. The Defense neither AFFIRMS nor DISPUTES This violates both the Constitution and the Peach Act.
8. The Defense AFFIRMS This violation was brought to the attention of UnityMaster by the attorney general however, the motion was not taken down.
9, The Defense AFFIRMS Unitymaster proceeded to pass the motion.

II. DEFENCES
1. Former President of the Senate UnityMaster did not disenfranchise Senator Vernicia, he simply made a mistake during the process of posting of the results, PoS is a very stressful job and on top of that it was a very turbulent time in our nations history, mistakes even minor ones like this one were bound to be made.
2. The Defendant as the Presiding Officer motioned to conclude the trial, he was acting on legal advice that he was well within his power to do so.

(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 30th day of march 2024
 
The defense hereby motions for summary judgement
 
Motion Withdrawn, i made a mistake
 
SumoMC said:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT

Commonwealth of Redmont
Prosecution

v.

UnityMaster
Defendant

I. ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
1. The Defense AFFIRMS UnityMaster was the presiding officer of PN. 7.23
2. The Defense AFFIRMS During the confirmation vote, PN. 7.23 Three senators voted nay, while Senator Vernicia voted aye.
3. The Defense AFFIRMS UnityMaster announced that 0 senators voted aye, 2 voted nay, and 1 voted abstain.
4. The Defense DISPUTES that In doing so, he falsified voting records, disenfranchised Vernicia’s vote of affirmation and destabilized the commonwealth.
5. The Defense AFFIRMS UnityMaster introduced motion S.23.23 to the floor that same day.
6. The Defense AFFIRMS Motion S.23.23 actioned the conclusion of an impeachment trial before any trial was given.
7. The Defense neither AFFIRMS nor DISPUTES This violates both the Constitution and the Peach Act.
8. The Defense AFFIRMS This violation was brought to the attention of UnityMaster by the attorney general however, the motion was not taken down.
9, The Defense AFFIRMS Unitymaster proceeded to pass the motion.

II. DEFENCES
1. Former President of the Senate UnityMaster did not disenfranchise Senator Vernicia, he simply made a mistake during the process of posting of the results, PoS is a very stressful job and on top of that it was a very turbulent time in our nations history, mistakes even minor ones like this one were bound to be made.
2. The Defendant as the Presiding Officer motioned to conclude the trial, he was acting on legal advice that he was well within his power to do so.

(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 30th day of march 2024
Click to expand...

This is a criminal prosecution. Please resubmit the answer and file the plea to the charges being filed against the defendant.
 
Your Honor the defense will be entering a plea of not guilty
 
The court thanks you for providing the plea.

We will now transition into a 7-day discovery period. Should either party wish to end discovery early, please note that both parties will need to consent.
 
With the conclusion of Discovery, the court will now proceed to the prosecutions opening statement. Please submit your opening statement within 48 hours.
 
Sorry your honors, there appears to be a pretty significant legal miscommunication. I've been Unity's lawyer since the 22nd of March. Sumo no longer represents UnityMasters legal interests, including this case.

The defense has been greatly unaware of any of these proceedings as of late, given the lack of communication between Sumo and UnityMaster, and the recent change of legal representation. We request time to repost a response to the initial complaint, and any statements Sumo made on behalf of UnityMaster since March 22nd be stricken.

1712750587058.png
 
Motion to Recuse

I motion to recuse Chief Justice Nacholebraa for the following:

The grounds for recusal are as follows:
● Interest in the subject matter, or relationship with someone who is interested in it
● Background or experience, such as the Judge’s prior work as a lawyer
● Personal knowledge about the parties, or the facts of the case
● Rulings, comments, or conduct

Nacho as Attorney General posted the initial filing of this case. He posted an emergency injuction where he said "Senator UnityMaster has violated the voting rights of fellow senators and has shown a pattern of misuse of their office by condoning illegal actions even after being informed by the Attorney General of the illicit actions. These actions have led to unlawful vote switching, a clear sign of no care of legal requirements for the office they hold, and an apparent misuse of public office."

Nacho has already given a verdict on this case with the initial filing he did as acting-Attorney General. This is as biased as any judge can get, and honestly I'm shocked he hasn't recused himself. He has interest in the subject matter because he initiated the case when he was AG, he has background in this case for the same reasons, he has personal knowledge on the case for the same reasons, and he has already commented on his opinion of the case.

Thank you.
 
Alright, Nacholebraa has voluntarily recused themselves from this case. Given that only me and Justice Neemfy will be presiding over the remainder of this case.

I also will be charged the Prosecution with Contempt of Court for failure to provide Opening Statement.
Dusty_3 said:
Sorry your honors, there appears to be a pretty significant legal miscommunication. I've been Unity's lawyer since the 22nd of March. Sumo no longer represents UnityMasters legal interests, including this case.

The defense has been greatly unaware of any of these proceedings as of late, given the lack of communication between Sumo and UnityMaster, and the recent change of legal representation. We request time to repost a response to the initial complaint, and any statements Sumo made on behalf of UnityMaster since March 22nd be stricken.

View attachment 42793
Click to expand...
You have 48 hours to post a new Answer to Complaint. We will not continue Opening Statements given this.
 
Due to Justice Neemfy's resignation and Chief Justice Nacholebraa's recusal, this case must be put into recess pending another available Justice.
 
IN THE COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
Motion to Nolle Prosequi
The Commonwealth no longer wishes to prosecute this case. Thank you to the court and the defendant for their time.

DATED: This 16th day of April 2024​
 
Due to me being the only available Supreme Court Justice that can take this case, I would like to ask if the Defense has any grievances with me dismissing this case?

Should both sides agree then this case will be dismissed otherwise, this case will remain in recess.
 
Yes we agree for the case to be dismissed
 
Alright, given neither side has objections, this case is hereby dismissed at request of the Plaintiff.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top