Lawsuit: In Session The Crown v. Stratton LLC, Emmet99, Maelzarun, Mr_GrapeJelly, Talion77, Case 11 (Mag. Ct., 2025)

Nyeogmi said:

IN THE MAGISTRATE COURT OF THE KINGDOM OF ALEXANDRIA
OBJECTIONS

[...]

OBJECTIONS: Talion77, pricelessAgrari, 12700k

[...]
12 (Ambiguity) "Consistent with continuing operations" is unclear. Are these the methods from question 10, or are these "any methods at all? "
[...]

Click to expand...

With regard to @pricelessAgrari, the defense withdraws objections to 12. (But not with regard to 12700k or Talion77.)

1. Please describe your background and career experience, including any positions you have held that are relevant to your investigative work and credibility.

Hello everyone, My name is Joseph Ibney, and I am a now retired lawyer and former Justice Minister for Alexandria. I wrote the Criminal Code and Procedures Act, along with much of the other legislation which established the rule of law here in Alexandria, and additionally conducted the investigation in this case. Outside of Alexandria, I have worked on both the prosecution and defense sides of many different roleplay servers on several different games. I also hold a Bachelors degree in Criminal Justice, and am currently attending law school with intentions to practice law in the criminal field when I graduate next year.

2. What specific evidence and data, if any, did you collect during your investigation of this matter?

I originally led this investigation. During the course of my investigation I obtained a frankly absurd amount of data. I obtained full downloads of the existing Stratton LLC discords, chat logs, private messages between Stratton employees and staff, and financial information from server staff. I also obtained admin privileges to the Stratton discord to determine whether Stratton had taken steps to attempt to hide their actions from Alexandrian authorities. I obtained all the exhibits in this case. These materials, along with anything else I may have forgotten to mention,. were sufficient to come to my conclusions in this case.

3. What methods or procedures did you use to investigate this case?

I used both interviews and warrants to investigate this case. Due to the nature of minecraft, forensic investigation techniques are mostly irrelevant, however, I did use them to conduct an analysis of some of the exhibits, such as Stratton LLC's discord server.

4. Do you believe these methods produce accurate results?

I do. They're the only way you can really investigate crimes in minecraft.

5. How did you apply these procedures and methods to the facts and data in this case?

I used the investigation techniques in order to find the evidence central to the case at issue today. I interviewed former members of Stratton, I used warrants to obtain the chat logs, and I used the forensic techniques I mentioned earlier to obtain the chat logs and full Discord Server admin access from the defendants.

1. Please provide an overview of Stratton LLC's business model as you understand it.

As far as I understand, Stratton LLC's business model was exchanging DemocracyCraft Dollars for Alexandrian Pounds, at a default rate of 6:1

2. What type of customers did Stratton conduct business with?

As far as I remember, new players with 6 hours or less of playtime.

3. To your knowledge, did Stratton LLC management make efforts to have employees target new players specifically?

In training, employees were directed to only make deals with players with 6 hours of playtime or less on DemocracyCraft.

4. What was the reason, if any, that new players were targeted?

I could only answer this question through an assumption, I assume it was because of their percieved inexperience.

5. How, if at all, did the Criminal Code and Procedures Act affect Stratton's business?

The Criminal Code Act outlawed Stratton's business model to my experience.

7. What directives, if any, did Manager Maelzarun give to Stratton employees on or around June 9th?

If I remember correctly, it was a directive to continue operations as normal. I could very well be wrong on this issue, as my memory is not perfect.

8. What response, if any, did Mr_GrapeJelly and any other members present in the channel give to those directives?

I do not remember.

13. What actions, if any, did CEO Emmet99 take when he learned the Ministry of Justice was investigating Stratton LLC?

Initially, he provided the Ministry of Justice with administrator permissions. After a period of time, he deleted the discord server.

1. They purchased Pounds from people and sold them for a profit.

2. They conducted business with players of Alexandria.

3. I don't believe so.

4. I don't believe new players were specifically targeted.

5. It didn't.

7. No clue.

8. No clue.

13. He wanted to make sure he got in contact with a lawyer. Which he did. Obviously, he wanted to defend himself.

Thank you.

No objections re: Ibney0, Talion77 testimony, 12700k testimony, and non-struck pricelessAgrari testimony round 1.

(That is, we have no objections to the responses so far. We are not waiving the right to cross-examination -- nor are we waiving the right to object to future questions.)

IN THE MAGISTRATE COURT OF THE KINGDOM OF ALEXANDRIA
ENTREATY OF PROMPTING

With apologies (no one likes being poked) -- it's been a little over 24 hours since the defense declined to object. Initial deadlines were 24 hours, so it seems like that's passed -- maybe we should set a 24-hour deadline soon?

Some things that we would like to see if possible:

- the prosecution's response to remaining objections (especially the privilege objection)
- the prosecution's next round of follow-up

We would likely not object to a request for continuance if the deadline is too soon, but we would prefer to have one if possible so that the trial moves forward!

Nyeogmi Choi
Director, Public Defense
Kingdom of Alexandria

IN THE MAGISTRATE COURT OF THE KINGDOM OF ALEXANDRIA
RESPONSE TO OBJECTIONS

RESPONSE TO OBJECTIONS 6, 10, 11, 12

Your Honor, sustaining this objection would establish a dangerous precedent, where defendants could simply hire their co-conspirators as attorneys and claim that all of their communications are protected under privilege, regardless of the criminal nature of their actions. The defendant broke attorney-client privilege when they used their privilege as a shield to conceal criminal conduct by hiring a co-conspirator.

Respectfully submitted,

Soggeh T. Oast
Minister of Justice
Kingdom of Alexandria

IN THE MAGISTRATE COURT OF THE KINGDOM OF ALEXANDRIA
QUESTIONS FOR WITNESSES

For @Talion77, @pricelessAgrari, and @12700k,

12. To your knowledge, did Stratton LLC make any efforts to continue business operations after the Criminal Codes and Procedures Act received royal assent?

14. To your knowledge, were any Ministry of Justice members, including Ibney0, banned or removed from the Stratton LLC Discord server?

15. P-019-01 and P-019-02 indicate that Emmet99 deleted messages on the Stratton server immediately before lifting Ibney0's ban. To your knowledge, what was the content of these messages?

Respectfully submitted,

Soggeh T. Oast
Minister of Justice
Kingdom of Alexandria

IN THE MAGISTRATE COURT OF THE KINGDOM OF ALEXANDRIA
ENTREATY FOR CONTINUANCE

Your Honor,

@Ibney0 investigated this case while serving with the Ministry of Justice. Based on the witness's testimony regarding his professional background, investigative experience, the methods he employed, and the application of those methods to the facts of this case, the Crown moves that the Court qualify @Ibney0 as an expert witness in this case, consistent with Section 11(2) of the Rules of Evidence Act.

With the consent of the Court, the Crown requires an additional 24-hour continuance to ask the witness expert opinion questions based on his investigative findings in this case.

Respectfully submitted,

Soggeh T. Oast
Minister of Justice
Kingdom of Alexandria

IN THE MAGISTRATE COURT OF THE KINGDOM OF ALEXANDRIA
NOTICE OF INTENT NOT TO OBJECT

The defense maintains its pending attorney-client privilege objection to the rephrased questions 12 and 15, but has no other objections to rephrased 12a, 14a, and 15a.

We agree that Ibney0 is a suitable expert and fact witness regarding authentication and providence of evidence in this case, and have no objection to his qualification.

In the interest of time, we request that the Crown post their questions for Ibney0 in anticipation that he will be qualified as an expert, to save one round of back-and-forth, with apologies to the Court for the disruption if this is a nuisance rather than a helpful shortcut.

Nyeogmi Choi
Director, Public Defense
Kingdom of Alexandria

12. To your knowledge, did Stratton LLC make any efforts to continue business operations after the Criminal Codes and Procedures Act received royal assent? yes

14. To your knowledge, were any Ministry of Justice members, including Ibney0, banned or removed from the Stratton LLC Discord server? yes

15. P-019-01 and P-019-02 indicate that Emmet99 deleted messages on the Stratton server immediately before lifting Ibney0's ban. To your knowledge, what was the content of these messages? no clue

12. To your knowledge, did Stratton LLC make any efforts to continue business operations after the Criminal Codes and Procedures Act received royal assent?

Yes.

14. To your knowledge, were any Ministry of Justice members, including Ibney0, banned or removed from the Stratton LLC Discord server?

Yes.

15. P-019-01 and P-019-02 indicate that Emmet99 deleted messages on the Stratton server immediately before lifting Ibney0's ban. To your knowledge, what was the content of these messages?

I do not know.

IN THE MAGISTRATE COURT OF THE KINGDOM OF ALEXANDRIA
ENTREATY OF PROMPTING
With apologies to those who are busy, the US holiday recently ended.

It might be useful for the court (if it can) to rule on:

• the prosecutor's response to the privilege objection
• qualification for the expert witness

It might also be useful for the Crown to be on a deadline for follow-ups on any witness, including the expert witness.

Nyeogmi Choi
Director, Public Defense
Kingdom of Alexandria

IN THE MAGISTRATE COURT OF THE KINGDOM OF ALEXANDRIA
QUESTIONS FOR WITNESSES
ENTREATY FOR CONTINUANCE

Your honor,

I apologize for the delay in this response. For expert witness testimony, I respectfully request a 48-hour continuance so I can ask the expert witness all of the relevant follow-up questions.

Questions for @Talion77 and @12700k:

1. You both responded "yes" to question 12. If possible, could you please elaborate on specific efforts within your knowledge that Stratton made to continue business operations after the Criminal Codes and Procedures Act received royal assent?

Questions for @Ibney0:

1. What prompted the initial investigation into Stratton?

2. Following your initial investigation into Stratton, what further steps did you take?

3. How did the investigation proceed following the passage of the CCPA?

Respectfully submitted,

Soggeh T. Oast
Minister of Justice
Kingdom of Alexandria

IN THE MAGISTRATE COURT OF THE KINGDOM OF ALEXANDRIA
NOTICE OF INTENT NOT TO OBJECT (AND ENTREATY OF PROMPTING)

Defendants have no objections to questions 1-3 in entry #217.

Defendants encourage the Crown to post its followups whenever they are ready -- potentially before the witness responds. (under the assumption that the Crown knows how its own witness is going to answer)

To the court, Defendants observe a nascent procedural issue:

- The Crown entered evidence in discovery and has implied that it intends to use it.
- This round of questioning is ostensibly going to be the last; that is, we are going to do cross-examination and then the Crown is going to be forced to rest its case.

Effectively, the Crown in its left hand has the evidence and in its right hand has the claims from its complaint and opening statement. The Crown is specifically required (by CCPA 10(5)(d)) to put those things together -- a specific and separate action called "presentation of evidence." The effect of doing so is to legally establish those claims as valid to incorporate in closing statements, creating the basis for the defense by setting out what Defendants are accused of.

The Crown has now had six weeks since the start of the trial to do this, but hasn't. Now it is running up on its last chance.

To the extent that presenting nothing is harmful to the Crown's case, Defendants have no objection. However, what Defendants anticipate is the following:

- The Crown will, as repeatedly before, follow this round of questioning by immediately requesting another continuance, this time in order to present the evidence properly.
- The Crown will, as repeatedly before, describe its opinions on why the evidence meets a bare relevance standard without taking any stance on what the evidence is supposed to signify.
- Its first attempt to connect the evidence to the crime in any way will be its closing statement -- made immediately after the Defendants' closing statement. (CCPA 10(5)(d), 10(5)(e))

The immediate effect of this would be further unnecessary delays during which Defendants' funds continue to remain frozen.

The ultimate effect of this would be to take away Defendants' access to a genuine defense. It is logically impossible for Defendants to respond to accusations made days after their response, just as it's logically impossible to plan a conspiracy days after committing it.

So, Defendants propose:

- The Crown should be given a new deadline for presentation of evidence in service of any concrete theory of the crime.
- This deadline should be close to the deadline for the Crown's final round of questioning; maybe within 24 hours after that, or concurrent with the end of cross.
- This should be the Crown's last opportunity to take trial actions: the Crown is already free to take these actions, has been since November 4th, and should not require any further continuances to do so now.
- If the Crown fails to meet this minimum standard, the case must be dismissed with prejudice, since the Crown's failure to present any concrete theory of the crime will have spanned two prosecutors, two magistrates, the replacement of the entire Chancery -- and, imminently -- the end of my office and the total restructuring of the court system.

Nyeogmi Choi
Director, Public Defense
Kingdom of Alexandria

IN THE MAGISTRATE COURT OF THE KINGDOM OF ALEXANDRIA
RESPONSE TO ENTREATY OF PROMPTING

Both CCPA 10(5)(d) and CCPA 10(5)(e) are intended to limit the scope of closing statements to evidence admitted during the trial. The Defenses interpretation, which would require the Crown to explain how each piece of evidence is relevant to every charge prior to cross-examination, is simply not what the statute provides.

The Crown properly informed the Defendants of the charges against them in the criminal complaint which initiated this case. The Crown will address the connection between the evidence, to which the Defendants have full access, and the charges during its closing statements.

Respectfully submitted,

Soggeh T. Oast
Minister of Justice
Kingdom of Alexandria

Apologise for the delay:

1. You both responded "yes" to question 12. If possible, could you please elaborate on specific efforts within your knowledge that Stratton made to continue business operations after the Criminal Codes and Procedures Act received royal assent?

From my knowledge, there were internal discussions regarding continuing operations, including using financial institutions as facades.