Lawsuit: Adjourned The Commonwealth v. supersuperking [2022] FCR 68

[HugeBob]

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CRIMINAL ACTION


The Commonwealth
Prosecution

v.

supersuperking
Defendant

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

The use of one’s public office to benefit themselves is a high crime that endangers the Commonwealth itself and the lives of its citizens. As a part of our broader crackdown on corruption within the Government, we present another lawsuit against an individual who sought to use their office within the Commonwealth Reserve Bank to force the Government to take out a loan of $300,000 from a bank that they personally own. This is Corruption because the action was personally financially beneficial for the Defendant and could not have been done without the powers of their public office. This is Embezzlement because it would have cost the Government 5% in interest without the consent of the Executive or Congress. This is Treason because it undermines the legitimacy of the Commonwealth and endangers the State’s finances which would have damaged our support systems for the general public.

I. PARTIES
1. supersuperking

II. FACTS
1. Defendant used their position within the Commonwealth Reserve Bank to attempt to force the Government to take out a loan from a bank that he personally owned without the consent of the Executive or Congress.

III. CHARGES
The Prosecution hereby alleges the following charges against the Defendant:
1. 1 count of Corruption
2. 1 count of Embezzlement
3. 1 count of Treason
4. 3 counts of Conspiracy to commit a Felony

IV. SENTENCING
The Prosecution hereby recommends the following sentence for the Defendant:
1. For Corruption: Removal from public office and disbarment from public office for a period of 2 months and $25,000 in fines.
2. For Embezzlement: Suspension of the Defendant’s Entrepreneur’s license and ban from registering or owning any company or union.
3. For Treason: Removal from public office and disbarment from public office for a period of 2 months and $25,000 in fines.
4. For Conspiracy to commit a Felony: Fines of $75,000 ($25,000 for each charge) and jail time of 18 hours (6 hours for each charge)
In total we recommend the following sentencing: Removal from public office, disbarment from public office for a period of 4 months, suspension of Entrepreneur’s license, ban from registering and owning any company or union, fines of $125,000, and jail time of 18 hours.

V. EVIDENCE

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 20th day of September 2022

 

[JoeGamer]

This case will be moved to the Federal Court docket as the Supreme Court does not have original jurisdiction over this case. Per the constitution

Only‌ ‌the‌ ‌Supreme‌ ‌Court‌ ‌shall‌ ‌hear‌ ‌cases‌ ‌that‌ ‌would‌ ‌remove‌ ‌a‌ ‌person/persons‌ ‌from‌ ‌the‌ ‌following‌ ‌
positions:‌ ‌Representatives,‌ ‌Secretary,‌ ‌Senator,‌ ‌Judge,‌ ‌Vice-President,‌ ‌Principal‌ ‌Officers,‌ ‌General‌ ‌Advisors,‌ ‌President, Executive Officers.

Given that supersuperking does not hold any of these positions outlined in the Constitution, the Supreme Court will not hear this case in the first instance.

 

[Krix]

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
WRIT OF SUMMONS​

@supersuperking is required to appear before the Federal Court in the case of The Commonwealth v. supersuperking [2022] FCR 68

Failure to appear within 48 hours of this summons will result in a default judgement based on the known facts of the case.

Both parties should make themselves aware of the Court Rules and Procedures, including the option of an in-game trial should both parties request one.​

 

[Cooleagles]

Good Evening, Your Honor

I apologize for my lateness in responding but I have only just recently been asked to represent the Defendant in this case. I would like to ask for a 24-hour extension to finalize a response for the court.
Thank You

 

[Cooleagles]

Additionally, I request that we combine this case along with, The Commonwealth v. Nexalin [2022] FCR 69, as Nexalin proposed the same deal as Supersuperking, the Prosecution has brought forth the same charges for each Defendant, and I will be representing both Defendants.
If this is not possible, I understand, I just believe it will add more convenience for the presiding Judges.

That is all,
Thank You

 

[HugeBob]

The State does not believe that merging these two cases is appropriate due to differences in how the Defendants conducted themselves. We believe that these differences are material and will result in significant differences in how these cases are litigated. If the State wished to prosecute both of these cases in the same manner, we would have filed only one case. Thank you.

 

[Cooleagles]

Your Honor,

If I may, I find it very hard to believe there to be any “differences in how the Defendants conducted themselves.” Both cases have been presented to the court with the exact same story, exact same complaint, exact same charges, and exact same punishments.

Matter of fact, if there is such significant differences in the two cases, then where is the evidence that says so? Surely such important details and facts would be presented in their complaints.

That is all,
Thank You Your Honor.

 

[HugeBob]

Your honor, requesting permission to deliberate further? I don't want this case to devolve into the both of us speaking out of turn.

 

[Krix]

Sorry for the delayed response on my side to both parties, my computer has broken and I am dealing with that at the moment.

 

[Krix]

Good Evening, Your Honor

I apologize for my lateness in responding but I have only just recently been asked to represent the Defendant in this case. I would like to ask for a 24-hour extension to finalize a response for the court.
Thank You

12 hours granted from now.

The State does not believe that merging these two cases is appropriate due to differences in how the Defendants conducted themselves. We believe that these differences are material and will result in significant differences in how these cases are litigated. If the State wished to prosecute both of these cases in the same manner, we would have filed only one case. Thank you.

I will be rejecting the request to merge the two cases, however FCR 69 will not be ruled on or further deliberated until the conclusion of this case.

Once the Defendant has answered the complaint we will move in to opening statements.

 

[Cooleagles]

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO DISMISS

The Commonwealth
Prosecution

v.

supersuperking
Defendant

MOTION TO DISMISS
Defendant move that all charges be dismissed, and in support thereof, respectfully alleges:

1. The Prosecution has failed to provide reasoning and evidence to support the elements of their cause of action.

2. Corruption - By its definition one is guilty when one, “use a government position to act to give some advantage inconsistent with official duty and the rights of others to unfairly benefit oneself, or someone else.” The prosecution has failed to provide the reasoning, in collaboration with their evidence, to give rise to the charge of corruption by the standards of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

3. Embezzlement - By its definition, “The act of withholding assets for the purpose of conversion of such assets,” the prosecution has failed to provide any evidence to prove that my clients have ever withheld government money; moreover, convert and/or use it. All money discussed in rotation throughout this alleged crime was the bank’s money, including the 5% interest as that would have been debt owed to the bank.

4. Treason & Conspiracy to Felony - By their definitions,
Treason - One is guilty when they are “caught attempting to maliciously sabotage or undermine the stability, sovereignty, and/or national security of the government of Redmont.”

5. Conspiracy to Felony - One is guilty, “If An Individual/entity(business/organization) intends to commit a crime they can be charged with “Conspiracy”. At no point has the prosecution provided evidence that my client has any malicious intentions, to undermine the government. They were doing the exact opposite by trying to support the government, which was experiencing financial difficulties.

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 24th day of September 2022

 

[Krix]

Review of Motion to Dismiss -
Most of your points are valid and it is the Court's opinion that sufficient evidence for each individual charge would be needed for them to be levied against your client, which as of now has not been the case as only 1 screenshot of evidence has been presented. However, I do believe the Plaintiff's argument and evidence is sufficient enough to move this case to Opening Statements from both parties, as I would like to further hear both of your arguments in further detail before coming to a decision.

I will therefore be denying this motion to dismiss.

I request that the plaintiff proceeds with presenting their opening statement within the next 24 hours.

 

[HugeBob]

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT

OPENING STATEMENT

The definition of Corruption is “To use a government position to act to give some advantage inconsistent with official duty and the rights of others to unfairly benefit oneself, or someone else. By applying, being appointed to, or being elected into a position in government, the player agrees to serve the server over themselves.”

The Defendant in this case used their position as a Commercial Board member (a Government position) to give their own bank ownership of $300,000 in government debt plus 5% interest (some advantage), which is NOT a power granted to the CRB (inconsistent with official duty). This is a significant financial advantage that is not available to the average player (unfairly benefit oneself).

The Defendant in this case has sufficiently fulfilled every clause in the definition of Corruption.

Your honor, I recognize that this opening statement has been posted beyond the allotted window. Seeing as neither the presiding Judge nor the opposing counsel has made a post seeking to move this along, the State has elected to post this anyways.

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 25th day of September 2022

 

[Krix]

The Defence may now make their opening Statement

 

[Cooleagles]

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
OPENING STATEMENT

Your Honor and members of the court, I will start right off by asking the one question everyone ought to be asking. Where is the evidence? The Prosecution has brought these claims and allegations against my client, all very serious in nature and certainly in punishment. Yet, where is the evidence?

The Prosecution claims my client used their Government position to benefit themselves over the people. How does offering the government $300,000, to not go bankrupt, not help the Commonwealth? How is it inconsistent with official duty? The purpose of the Commonwealth Reserve Bank is to “ensure that the monetary and banking policy of the CRB is directed to the greatest advantage of the people of Redmont;” moreover, this institution has been vested the powers of, “minting, introducing, and distributing currency.” So, let’s take a step back, what did my client actually do? He offered a loan to the government. He offered a solution to an ever-growing problem, a solution to introduce more money into the bank and help the Government from going bankrupt. Last time I checked as well, the government having money is better for the people than not having money. So, don’t let the Prosecution trick you into thinking this was some elaborate plot of some sort. Don’t let the Prosecution let you think the Government was tricked, the Government was forced, it is simply not true. The Government was given a loan, a deal, an offering. They had all right to say no, they had all right to take the deal and improve upon it, they had the right. Why? Because my client wasn’t there for a gold star, for publicity, certainly not for money. My client was there to help the people he swore to help.

Next, the Government claims my client embezzled the government. My only question is, how do you embezzle your own money? How do you steal your own money? They argue that the 5% interest was what drove this charge, yet even that is still the bank’s money. Think about it, my client lends the Government a loan of $300,000 with 5% interest. Despite that 5% interest being added to the $300,000, it is still the bank’s as the government is in debt to the bank. The $300,000 plus the 5% interest is one total debt that belongs to the bank, it is the bank’s money. Therefore, I ask again, how can my client embezzle and/or steal their own money? At no point were they withholding Government money, as the money in the rotation never officially was the “Government’s money.”

Finally, the treason and conspiracy charges. The keyword in both of these definitions is malicious. The definition of treason states, “maliciously sabotage,” and the definition of conspiracy states, “malicious intentions.” Once again, where is the evidence that shows an ounce of malicious behavior? The only evidence posted in this case so far is the original proposal made by my client to the CRB. Notice that the reason listed by my client is not to rob the government or to sabotage operations it is to, “subvert unnecessary inflation.” Does that sound malicious? Does that sound like my client is a traitor to their government? Does that sound like my client is going to commit a crime? No. It sounds like they are trying to help the government and thus the Commonwealth.

Let it be clear, what is not there. There is no evidence to prove my client guilty, there is no evidence to even suggest my client had the slightest of bad intentions. Matter of fact, you can’t even find a mention for the other charges besides corruption in the Prosecution’s opening. They are grabbing on threads and presenting this illusion that simply is not true. Who really is robbing the people? My client or the Government.

Thank you,
Your Honor.

 

[Krix]

The Court asks that both parties provide a list of witnesses they wish to call within 24 hours.

 

[HugeBob]

Your honor, 24 hours have elapsed.

 

[Krix]

We will now move on to closing statements as neither party wishes to call a witness. The plantiff has 24 hours to deliver their closing statement.

 

[HugeBob]

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CLOSING STATEMENT

The Commonwealth of Redmont
Prosecution

v

supersuperking
Defendant

Your honor,

This is a case in which the Defendant used their Government position to directly enrich themselves. The incumbent Administration DID NOT sign off on these loans. These loans carry a high interest rate, it CANNOT be argued that these loans were made in good faith to benefit the Government. They would directly increase the Government's expenses at a time when the Government was already running at a perilous deficit. These loans were issued for one reason: profit. Profit for who? The Defendant. The Defendant used their CRB position to unfairly benefit themselves in a manner inconsistent with their regular duties. This is textbook Corruption, Embezzlement, and Treason. Or at least Conspiracy for the three wink wink .

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 October 2022

 

[Krix]

The deference may now deliver their closing statement within the next 24 hours.

 

[Cooleagles]

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CLOSING STATEMENT

The Commonwealth of Redmont
Prosecution

v

supersuperking
Defendant

Your honor and members of the court,
The evidence of this case makes the ruling quite a simple one. That being, the lack of evidence proves my client wouldn't and certainly didn't commit the accused crimes. In no way, shape, or form has the prosecution even grazed their burden; moreover, met it.

To begin, two of their main three charges (embezzlement and treason) were utterly neglected in their opening and closing. Not once did they make an argument for either of the two charges. The only time they were mentioned was when they piggybacked off the Prosecution's faulty corruption arguments, almost as if the three go hand and hand.

Despite the ridiculousness of it, your honor, that is what the Prosecution is trying to get you and everyone else to believe. They want you to believe that my client committed corruption by giving away money through a standard loan. They want you to believe that my client embezzled their own money. They want you to believe that my client is a traitor to this nation for giving that said money to the government and therefore the people. They want you to believe yet have only provided one piece of evidence to this case, that being the original proposal by my client. Not even reactions or the vote, just the deal. The same deal where my client literally states, "The government is in dire need of immediate funding until new revenue streams become active thus Tello will be lending this money as a means to subvert unnecessary inflation." The only value this piece of evidence has to the court is showing my client's motivation behind the proposal, which was to help the people.

So in the storm of the Prosecution's tale, a tale where they think they can wink away the truth. Remember and believe this, my client is a good person. He was a member of the CRB to serve the government and its people. Anything less is simply twisted lies to get "corrupt people out of government." Who really is corrupt here, your honor? The person trying to make a change, or the people preventing it.

Thank You
I rest my case.

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 8th day of October 2022

 

[HugeBob]

Your honor, merely bumping this thread as it has been some time since it was last active.

 

[Krix]

Verdict

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
The Commonwealth v. supersuperking [2022] FCR 68

I. PLAINTIFF’S POSITION
- Supersuperking used his position within the CRB to enrich himself by giving the Government a loan when it was in a state of deficit which would be tied to a 5% interest repayment.

-Supersuperking had an unfair advantage over other banks and citizens as he used his CRB position to lobby for this loan on behalf of his own bank.

-Supersuperking acted against the interests of the Commonwealth by motioning for such a loan to be considered given the government's financial circumstance.

II. DEFENDANT’S POSITION
- Supersuperking was seeking to solve the Governments's financial difficulties by offering a viable solution through the means of a loan.

- The Interest repayment the Government would have to make to the Tello Bank pay is not embezzlement as it is the bank's money being lent.

- Supersuperking did not commit treason as he was attempting to act in the National interest to help prevent an economic downturn.

III. COURT’S OPINION
Embezzlement Charge - The Court concurs with the defense that ample evidence has not been provided to prove Embezzlement.

Treason Charge - In the case of Treason, no evidence of the defendant attempting to "maliciously sabotage or undermine the stability, sovereignty, and/or national security of the government of Redmont." has been shown by the Plaintiff whatsoever therefore both these charges are being thrown out.

Conspiracy to Commit a Felony - The Plaintiff has brought forward 3 charges of Conspiracy. Conspiracy must fall under one of the following:
(1)If An Individual/entity(business/organisation) intends to commit a crime they can be charged with “Conspiracy”.
(2) If any other individuals/entities(business’s/organisation’s) are involved in the “Conspiracy” but are not the primary culprit they can also be charged.

(3) If an individual/entity has knowledge of someone preparing to commit a crime, and has not presented this information to the relevant authorities eg. the Department of Justice. They then can also be charged

The Plaintiff has failed to provide any evidence of the plaintiff Conspiring to commit a felony.

Corruption - It is the Court's opinion that the defendant did in fact "use a government position to act to give some advantage" and "unfairly benefit oneself" by putting forward a motion for the Government to take a loan from their own bank within the CRB.
The Loan to the Government with a 5% interest rate would have "unfairly benefit oneself" supersuperking in this instance as he would have gained $15,000 from the transaction.
This opportunity was not available to other citizens of Redmont and was only available to supersuperking due to his CRB membership, therefore supersuperking "used a government position to act to give some advantage" by using it to serve himself over others and the Nation as a whole.


IV. VERDICT
In the case, The Commonwealth v. supersuperking [2022] FCR 68 the Court hereby finds the defendant on the following charges.

1. One Count of Embezzlement: Not Guilty
2. One Count of Treason: Not Guilty
3. Three Counts of Conspiracy to commit a Felony: Not Guilty
4. One Count of Corruption: Guilty

I hereby order that supersuperking be fined $25,000 by the DOJ, and be barred from holding public office for a period of two months.

The Court thanks each party for their time. This case is now adjourned.