Lawsuit: In Session McBrittle419 v. Crown, Case 7 (Mag. Ct., 2026)

[ConsequencesInc]

IN THE HONOURABLE MAGISTRATE OF THE KINGDOM OF ALEXANDRIA
APPEAL AND CRIMINAL MATTER

Case No.: 7

BETWEEN:
McBrittle419
Applicant/Defendant

v.

THE CROWN OF THE KINGDOM OF ALEXANDRIA
Respondent/Prosecution


I. JURISDICTIONAL STATEMENT AND VENUE

1. This Court has jurisdiction over this suit pursuant to Part III, §14 of the Constitution of the Kingdom of Alexandria which vests judicial power in the courts to interpret and administer the law.

2. The Magistrate Court is the proper venue for this suit as an appeal to a summary offense, pursuant to §9 (2) of the A.P. 4-019 | Criminal Procedure Act which grants this particular court jurisdiction over appeals to summary offenses.


II. Appeal Request

3. On April 21st, 2026, my client the former Queen of Alexandria and particular individual Her Majesty McBrittle419, was arrested by Peace Officer and particular individual PhillinDeBlanc and summarily charged with Murder, incurring a fine of £600 and a sentence of 30 seconds in jail.

4. As Her Majesty's Legal Representative and a particular individual, I contacted the Ministry of Justice directly to try and appeal this summary charge. On April 24th, I was told by the particular individual and Minister of Justice SoggehToast that it was denied and to challenge further I should file with this particular court, the Magistrates Court.

5. Pursuant to §9 (2) and (3) of the A.P. 4-019 | Criminal Procedure Act, this filing before the honorable court constitutes my client's official notice of appeal as a particular individual. We request this be granted posthaste as the Criminal Procedure Act guarantees that my client as a particular individual shall receive a full trial before the court upon appeal, wherein the Crown as a particular individual shall prove my client's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt as a particular individual, or else these charges and punishment she has received will be reversed.

6. For the criminal trial that occurs after appeal, I request that it be held as a direct continuation of this action and that the Crown, as a particular individual, brings the charges that it assumes to suppose to believe should continue to be held against my client as a particular individual, as is now established procedure in these cases. See Thritystone v. Crown, Case 6 (Mag. Ct. 2026).

Respectfully Submitted,

ConsequencesInc
4/27/2026


Proof of Representation of the Applicant/Defendant

Spoiler: Proof of Representation

 

[Dogeington]

The Magistrates Court of the Kingdom of Alexandria accepts this appeal.

 

[Dogeington]

IN THE MAGISTRATES COURT OF THE KINGDOM OF ALEXANDRIA
WRIT OF SUMMONS


The Crown's rightfully appointed counsel is commanded to appear before the Magistrates Court of the Kingdom of Alexandria in

Case 7 (Mag Ct., 2026)
McBrittle419
Appellant/Defendant

v.

The Crown
Appellee/Prosecution


They are hereby required to do so within seventy-two (72) hours. Failure to do so may result in a default judgment.

So ordered,
Magistrate Dogeington​

 

[Capt11543]

IN THE MAGISTRATE'S COURT OF THE KINGDOM OF ALEXANDRIA
RESPONSE TO SUMMONS

Checking in for the Crown, Your Honor.

Respectfully submitted,
Capt11543
Crown Counsel

 

[Dogeington]

@Capt11543

You have 72 hours to present the Crown's case against McBrittle419. Please present the case as if you were bringing a criminal action against McBrittle419. We will proceed from there as if this were a criminal trial.

 

[Capt11543]

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

@Capt11543

You have 72 hours to present the Crown's case against McBrittle419. Please present the case as if you were bringing a criminal action against McBrittle419. We will proceed from there as if this were a criminal trial.

Your Honor, with apologies to this Court and the Plaintiff's Counsel, my work schedule and responsibilities to other cases have delayed me in finishing the required brief. The Crown respectfully petitions the Court for a 24-hour continuance.

Respectfully submitted,
Capt11543
Crown Counsel

 

[Dogeington]

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



Your Honor, with apologies to this Court and the Plaintiff's Counsel, my work schedule and responsibilities to other cases have delayed me in finishing the required brief. The Crown respectfully petitions the Court for a 24-hour continuance.

Respectfully submitted,
Capt11543
Crown Counsel

Continuance granted.

 

[Capt11543]

IN THE MAGISTRATE'S COURT OF THE KINGDOM OF ALEXANDRIA
CRIMINAL ACTION

The Crown, Prosecution

v.

McBrittle419, Defendant​

I. CRIMINAL COMPLAINT
On or about April 20, 2026, the Defendant, McBrittle419, murdered Thritystone. The Defendant was arrested and issued a summary punishment on April 21, 2026, on the basis of her wanted points.

II. PARTIES

1. The Crown, Prosecution​
2. McBrittle419, Defendant​

III. FACTS

1. Ministry of Justice records show that on or about April 20, 2026, the Defendant killed Thritystone.
2. The victim did not consent to being killed in that instance.
3. Constable PhillinDeBlanc arrested the Defendant on April 21, 2026, and issued a summary punishment of 30 seconds in jail and £600 for 1 count of Murder.
4. The Constable possessed probable cause to arrest the Defendant on the basis of her wanted points.

IV. ARGUMENT
By killing Thritystone without consent or any other lawful excuse, the Defendant committed Murder. See A.P. 04-020 | Criminal Code Act §7(1):

(1) Murder - A player is guilty of murder if they intentionally and knowingly, or with extreme recklessness, kill another player without consent from that player.

(a) Offense Type: Summary​

(b) Maximum Penalty: 4 Penalty Units fine + 30 minutes in jail​

V. CHARGES
Against Defendant McBrittle419:

• 1 count of Murder

VI. EVIDENCE

Spoiler: P-001

Automated logs from the Server plugin linking the Defendant to the death of Thritystone.

• P-002 - Client-side chat logs, submitted to the Ministry of Justice by Constable PhillinDeBlanc, from the time of the Defendant's arrest.

VII. WITNESSES

• PhillinDeBlanc

Respectfully submitted,
Capt11543
Crown Counsel

 

[Dogeington]

@ConsequencesInc

You have 48 hours to present a Plea before the court.

 

[ConsequencesInc]

IN THE HONOURABLE MAGISTRATE OF THE KINGDOM OF ALEXANDRIA
CRIMINAL ACTION

Case No.: 7

BETWEEN:
THE CROWN OF THE KINGDOM OF ALEXANDRIA
Prosecution

v.

McBrittle419
Defendant


I. Plea
Her Grace McBrittle419 pleads NOT GUILTY to the charge of Murder.


II. Response to Facts
1. The Defense DENIES that Ministry of Justice records demonstrate that on or about April 20, 2026, the Defendant unlawfully killed Thritystone
2. The Defense NEITHER AFFIRMS NOR DENIES that the victim did not consent to being killed in that instance.
3. The Defense:

• AFFFIRMS that Constable PhillinDeBlanc arrested the Defendant on April 21, 2026, and issued a summary punishment of 30 seconds in jail
• DENIES that the Defendant was charged £600 for 1 count of Murder.

4. The Defense DENIES the Constable possessed probable cause to arrest the Defendant on the basis of her wanted points.


III. DEFENSES

1. It must be Murder, without an inkling of reasonable doubt.
First and foremost, the Crown has a lot to prove. Mostly that it was Murder and beyond a reasonable doubt. Let me lay out what all must be proved:

1. Reasonable Doubt, defined by §4(1)(a) of A.P.04-019 of the Criminal Procedure Act means "proof that precludes every reasonable hypothesis of innocence and would produce in a reasonable person’s mind a firm belief in the defendant's guilt"
   
   AND
   
   
2. That at the alleged Murder was done either:
   Knowingly and Intentionally, as per §3(3) and (4) of A.P.04-020 of the Criminal Code Act, Or
   with "extreme" recklessness, as per §3(2) of A.P.04-020 of the Criminal Code Act.
   
   AND
   
   
3. that the Defendant had a guilty mind and a guilty action (mens rea and actus reus )as per §2(3) of A.P.04-020 of the Criminal Code Act.

2. A Wanted Star is not enough for Probable Cause
What is a wanted star in the State of Alexandria? Because under the current code there is no steadfast or solid definition under the Law, and no case law has touched this. I think it is just assumed that because the crime analyzer determines someone killed someone, it is taken as proof beyond a reasonable doubt of murder. This, I believe, should be challenged and proven up to snuff.

The fact remains that it is up to the Ministry of Justice to investigate, either via its detectives or peace officers, but they do not as far as I can tell. All I see here so far is that the New Hamilton Police Department chases down people without doing proper gumshoe or dick work. I will admit that my client her Grace McBrittle419 as a particular individual had a Wanted Star, but that is not a determination of proof of guilt or criminal intent. It is simply a statement of fact of who killed whom, who was the "victim" and whom killed them. Just because someone is a victim of something, such as death, does not mean it is lawful or unlawful.


3. Arrests for summary offenses have no defined Standard of Proof.
Furthermore, §9(1) of A.P.04-019 of the Criminal Procedure Act notes that: "Where a peace officer believes a player committed a Summary Offense, the officer may immediately impose the prescribed punishment, including fines and imprisonment."

This, I believe is a grave oversight in justice that the Court must ask the Crown to answer for. What is the standard of the word "believes"? The Crown here has said Probable Cause, but in The Criminal Procedure Act §4 of A.P.04-019 provides no standard of proof for summary arrest. Is it beyond a reasonable doubt? Or probable cause? Or balance of probabilities? Or reasonable articulable suspicion? This I believe is a direct violation of my client's Constitutional Rights under Part V, §22 (10) of the Constitution of the Kingdom of Alexandria: Every person is equal before and under the Law. As a particular individual, I think that my client was not treated equally before the law and, in fact, couldn't be treated equally under the law due to the vagueness of the Statute under which she was arrested.


4. PhillinDeBlanc did not properly identify himself, did not investigate and was incapacitated at the time of the arrest.

It is the assertion of the Defense that the Noble Constable PhillinDeBlanc was not on his best behavior or in his right state of mind as a particular individual on April 21st, 2026. Let me lay out the following issues with this arrest:

1. PhillinDeBlanc did not investigate, question or look into the reason behind the Wanted Star
2. PhillinDeBlanc did not have the role identifying him as a police officer or identified himself as one during the arrest
3. PhillinDeBlanc did not Bernandize my client with their rights before or during the detainment
4. PhillinDeBlanc gave my client £200 after arresting them (See D-002) bringing confusion around the total they were fined and why her Grace was given money.
5. PhillinDeBlanc during the arrest was high on drugs (See D-001) and likely not in the right state of mind to perform the duties of a Peace Officer.

All off this is to say: He did not have probable cause, he did not properly identify himself as a Police Offiicer when he should have, he did not properly inform my client of their rights, he gave them money for some odd reason, and he was high on drugs.

PhillinDeBlanc as a particular individual on April 21st, 2026 was not in his right mind and therefore could not possibly be able to perform his duties as a police officer or have probable cause to be convinced of my client doing anything. He was likely just chasing her because he confused her for a Star like from Mario Kart 8 and was chasing his next high. The sad fact is that the Noble PhillinDeBlanc has fallen on hard times and needs help. My client does not, they need to be clear of her charges.


Respectfully Submitted,

ConsequencesInc
5/07/2026