Lawsuit: In Session Thritystone v. Crown, Case 6 (Mag. Ct., 2026)

IN THE MAGISTRATES COURT OF THE KINGDOM OF ALEXANDRIA
OPENING STATEMENT

I. INTRODUCTION
On April 7th, Defendant Thritystone unlawfully killed Capt11543, a former Prime Minister and sitting Member of Parliament. The former Prime Minister neither consented to this killing, nor had he enabled consent in-game. That same day, the Noble PhillinDeBlanc, Constable and Commander of the New Hamilton Police Department, attempted to lawfully detain and arrest the Defendant based on Ministry of Justice wanted records. Despite being ordered to freeze, the Defendant decided to flee from the arresting officer in an attempt to avoid the consequences of his illegal actions.

This case does not merely concern, as the Defense would have you believe, a true misunderstanding in which the Defendant fled to protect himself from the threat of vigilantism. The Defense has asked this Court to accept that a reasonable person, having Ministry of Justice issued equipment utilized against them, and having been issued an order to freeze from a New Hamilton Police Department Constable, would plausibly believe themselves to have been the victim of a vigilante attack. Rather, this case concerns a Defendant who unlawfully and brutally killed a former Prime Minister and cherished member of the Alexandrian community, and who, when justice came knocking at his door, did everything in his power to avoid accountability.

II. MURDER
The former Prime Minister, Capt11543, will testify directly to his own murder and the absence of any consent. Ministry of Justice records will further corroborate this testimony, establishing that Thritystone unlawfully killed Capt11543 without his consent, and did so with criminal intent. Under §7(1) of the Criminal Code Act, this conduct satisfies the statutory elements for Murder.

(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​
Click to expand...

III. EVADING OR RESISTING ARREST
When, on the same day, the Defendant attempted to flee from a lawful arrest by the Noble PhillinDeBlanc, the circumstances were such that any reasonable person would have understood they were being placed under arrest. The arresting officer issued a lawful order to freeze and utilized Ministry of Justice issued equipment, including a taser and handcuffs. Under §10(13) of the Criminal Code Act, this conduct satisfies the statutory elements of Evading or Resisting Arrest.

(13) Evading or Resisting Arrest - A player is guilty of evading or resisting arrest if they attempt to escape from a peace officer when that peace officer is at that moment attempting to legally arrest or detain them.
(a) Offense Type: Summary​
(b) Maximum Penalty: 8 Penalty Units fine + 10 minutes in jail​
Click to expand...

IV. CONCLUSION
Following testimony, the evidence will speak plainly and unambiguously. This Court will hear from two witnesses, each of whom has a direct connection to this case. The first is the victim, who was murdered by the Defendant, and the second is the arresting officer, from whom the Defendant fled. The Ministry of Justice records in combination with this testimony will demonstrate beyond a reasonable doubt that Thritystone is guilty of both Murder and Evading or Resisting Arrest. The Crown invites this Court to consider the testimony which shall now be presented, reflect on the evidence introduced, and ultimately find the Defendant guilty as charged.

Respectfully submitted,

Soggeh T. Oast
Minister of Justice
Kingdom of Alexandria
 
IN THE HONOURABLE MAGISTRATE OF THE KINGDOM OF ALEXANDRIA
CRIMINAL ACTION
Case No.: 6
OPENING STATEMENT


I. INTRODUCTION
The truth is what we should be looking for. Beyond the smoke and mirrors of opening statements that particular individuals have spent a long time carefully crafting, there is the truth: veritas. As in verification, because as of this time the Defense has not seen the Prosecution verify anything, and does not think they can without there being reason to doubt the veracity of the Prosecution's case.

The Defense does not argue that Thritystone didn't kill Capt11543, but rather that it wasn't an unlawful killing. The Defense does not argue there was a struggle between PhillinDeBlanc and Thritystone, but rather that it couldn't be resisting arrest. The evidence submitted so far does not speak to that, but upon witness testimony the Defense believes the truth of the matter will come out. Because the Prosecution from the testimony of its witnesses has to prove two big things in response to all off his charges: That the Defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, as per §4(1)(a) of A.P.04-019., and that his actions show a guilty mind and guilty action, meaning that he acted knowingly, intentionally, and that he acted in a defined way to commit the crime as per §2(3) of A.P.04-020.

That is checkbox #1 and #2. Let's go through the rest of check boxes for the other charges.


II. MURDER
The testimony of Capt11543 must establish beyond a reasonable doubt that my client's actions towards Capt was Murder, done with a guilty mind and guilty action. Specifically, guilty mind has to show it was done either Knowingly and Intentionally, or with "extreme" recklessness. This is all under the definition of Murder the Prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt. Keep that checkbox in mind during the testimony of Capt11543.


III. EVADING OR RESISTING ARREST
The testimony of PhillinDeBlanc must establish beyond a reasonable doubt that my client's actions during the botched detainment attempt was Resisting Arrest, and that this was all done with a guilty mind and guilty action.

The Prosecution and the Defense agrees on at least one thing: in this case The Defense does ask the court to put themselves into the Defendant's shoes as a reasonable person and see how it could be seen as a vigilante attack:

You are minding your own business, when suddenly you are tazed and then pepper sprayed. Then told to Freeze, and then handcuffed. What is going through a reasonable persons mind? When you see the person's role in-game is Noble and they are cuffing you, do you know who they are or what they represent? Can you knowingly commit resisting arrest if you do not know you are being arrested? Wouldn't you reasonably as a particular individual minding your own business want to get away from such a vicious assault?

Keep in mind that the above scenario is not imagined, it is the exact events that happened from the chat logs in Prosecution's Evidence #2 (P-002). Keep in mind that scenario and those questions when listening to PhillinDeBlanc's testimony. Another checkbox for the Prosecution to address.


IV. CONCLUSION
The Truth is what will set anybody free, and it is what I know will set my client free. He is innocent until proven guilty by this court of law, and it is the Prosecution's job to prove guilty beyond any reasonable doubt. If at any point during this testimony and reviewing the evidence as presented in this case, you can find yourself saying when seeing the Prosecution's point of view: "It could have happened that another way" or "That doesn't make sense" or "Those checkboxes don't seem to be checked off", that is reasonable doubt.

Keep in mind the Defense will be asking their own questions of the same witnesses the Prosecution is using to prove its case. If the evidence and testimony show the reasonable plausibility of the truth present Defense's case, that is enough under reasonable doubt to break the Prosecution's case. The court in that circumstance would ultimately have to find my client innocent of the charges he faces if any of those checkboxes are left unticked.


Respectfully Submitted,

ConsequencesInc
5/07/2026
 
Last edited:
@SoggehToast
We will now move on to what the Criminal Procedure Act calls your "case-in-chief."

I will issue a summons for the witnesses on your list. You will have 24 hours to question them following their appearance in court. Then, the defense will have 24 hours to cross examine your witnesses. Following that, I will issue a summons for the defense's witness list. They will have 24 hours to conduct questioning. Following that, you will have 24 hours to cross examine them.
 
MagistrateSeal.png
IN THE MAGISTRATES COURT OF THE KINGDOM OF ALEXANDRIA
WRIT OF SUMMONS


@Capt11543 and @PhillinDeBlanc are commanded to appear before the Magistrates Court of the Kingdom of Alexandria in

Case 6 (Mag Ct., 2026)
Thritystone
Applicant/Defendant

v.

The Crown
Respondent/Prosecution


They are hereby required to do so within twenty-four (24) hours. Failure to do so may result in a contempt of court charge.

So ordered,
Magistrate Dogeington​
 
IN THE MAGISTRATE'S COURT OF THE KINGDOM OF ALEXANDRIA
RESPONSE TO SUMMONS

Dogeington said:
MagistrateSeal.png
IN THE MAGISTRATES COURT OF THE KINGDOM OF ALEXANDRIA
WRIT OF SUMMONS


@Capt11543 and @PhillinDeBlanc are commanded to appear before the Magistrates Court of the Kingdom of Alexandria in

Case 6 (Mag Ct., 2026)
Thritystone
Applicant/Defendant

v.

The Crown
Respondent/Prosecution


They are hereby required to do so within twenty-four (24) hours. Failure to do so may result in a contempt of court charge.

So ordered,
Magistrate Dogeington​
Click to expand...

Checking in, Your Honor.

Respectfully submitted,
Capt11543
 
Dogeington said:
MagistrateSeal.png
IN THE MAGISTRATES COURT OF THE KINGDOM OF ALEXANDRIA
WRIT OF SUMMONS


@Capt11543 and @PhillinDeBlanc are commanded to appear before the Magistrates Court of the Kingdom of Alexandria in

Case 6 (Mag Ct., 2026)
Thritystone
Applicant/Defendant

v.

The Crown
Respondent/Prosecution


They are hereby required to do so within twenty-four (24) hours. Failure to do so may result in a contempt of court charge.

So ordered,
Magistrate Dogeington​
Click to expand...
IN THE MAGISTRATE'S COURT OF THE KINGDOM OF ALEXANDRIA
RESPONSE TO SUMMONS

Present, Your Honour.

Nobley submitted,
The Noble, PhilAnthropy
Duke
 
IN THE MAGISTRATES COURT OF THE KINGDOM OF ALEXANDRIA
QUESTIONS FOR WITNESSES

For @Capt11543:

1. P-002 reflect that you were killed by Thritystone on or around April 7th. Please identify, to the best of your knowledge, the interaction that gave rise to this record.
2. Did any violent encounters occur between you and the Defendant on or around April 7th? If so, please describe your recollection of those events, including the moments leading up to and following the encounter.
3. To the best of your knowledge, did you have consent enabled in-game on or around April 7th?
4. To the best of your knowledge, did you at any point on April 7th give the Defendant explicit consent to kill you?

For the Noble @PhillinDeBlanc:

1. P-001 includes your Officer Witness Statement, in which you describe the Defendant as having “escaped” following his arrest. Please describe the events leading up to the incident you reported on, and the actions taken by yourself and the Defendant thereafter, up until the Defendant was sent to the Alexandrian jail.

Respectfully submitted,

Soggeh T. Oast
Minister of Justice
Kingdom of Alexandria
 
Last edited by a moderator:
IN THE HONOURABLE MAGISTRATE OF THE KINGDOM OF ALEXANDRIA
CRIMINAL ACTION
Case No.: 6
OBJECTIONS TO QUESTIONING

Your honor,

The Defense objects to the following questions asked by the Crown of the witnesses:


Objection 1 - Leading the Witness and Compound Question (Question 2 for Capt11543)
While the Defense has conceded that Thritystone killed Capt11543, the nature of the initial and any other encounters as allegedly "violent" is not an established fact and is in question. If the Crown wants to go there, they have to back it up and let the witness testify without being lead before continuing down that path, or rephrase.

Furthermore, this is multiple questions in one: about if alleged interactions occurred, the witnesses recollection of interaction(s), and what happened before, and what happened after. I count 4 separate questions there, not one.

If the Crown wants to discover the nature of the initial interaction, they have to wait for the witness to answer Question 1 and/or ask specially in a separate rephrased question. If they want to inquire about other events on April 7th, they must not compound it into one question. If they want to enquire about the nature of said events, they need to wait for the witness to answer about those events and/or ask in a separate question in a rephrased manner.


Objection 2 - Compound Question (Question 1 for PhillinDeBlanc)
This question is asking about several separate matters: The events leading up to a particular incident, the actions taken by the witness, the actions taken by the defendant. I count 3 separate questions. They need to be separated out into multiple questions. This is not proper form and is compound questioning.


Objection 3 - Objection to Form: Not a Question (Question 1 for PhillinDeBlanc; Question 1 for Capt11543)
The Defense is objecting to the fact that these are not phrased as questions, and is requesting the Crown to please ask them in the form of questions.


Respectfully Submitted,

ConsequencesInc
5/08/2026
 
IN THE MAGISTRATES COURT OF THE KINGDOM OF ALEXANDRIA
RESPONSE TO OBJECTIONS TO QUESTIONING

RESPONSE TO OBJECTION 1
Objection 1 - Leading the Witness and Compound Question (Question 2 for Capt11543)
While the Defense has conceded that Thritystone killed Capt11543, the nature of the initial and any other encounters as allegedly "violent" is not an established fact and is in question. If the Crown wants to go there, they have to back it up and let the witness testify without being lead before continuing down that path, or rephrase.
Click to expand...
This is simply not a leading question, as it is not designed to elicit a preferred answer. The witness is free to answer in whatever manner they choose, whether affirmatively or negatively. Nor does the question presuppose that a violent encounter occurred. Rather, it asks the witness whether such an encounter occurred at all and, if so, invites the witness to describe it.

Additionally, the question is not objectionable as compound. The compound-question objection applies only where multiple distinct questions are combined in a manner that creates ambiguity to the meaning of the witness's response. The question being asked to the witness is clear, and the Defense could not be reasonably prejudiced by its structure.

RESPONSE TO OBJECTION 2
Objection 2 - Compound Question (Question 1 for PhillinDeBlanc)
This question is asking about several separate matters: The events leading up to a particular incident, the actions taken by the witness, the actions taken by the defendant. I count 3 separate questions. They need to be separated out into multiple questions. This is not proper form and is compound questioning.
Click to expand...
My response to this objection is largely the same as my response to the previous objection. However, this objection is even less persuasive, as the Defense is incorrect in asserting that multiple questions are being asked at all. The phrasing “including the moments leading up to and following the encounter” merely delineates the time and scope of the question. It does not introduce any additional questions.

RESPONSE TO OBJECTION 3
Objection 3 - Objection to Form: Not a Question (Question 1 for PhillinDeBlanc; Question 1 for Capt11543)
The Defense is objecting to the fact that these are not phrased as questions, and is requesting the Crown to please ask them in the form of questions.
Click to expand...
Direct examination is not strictly limited to questions.

Respectfully submitted,

Soggeh T. Oast
Minister of Justice
Kingdom of Alexandria
 
IN THE MAGISTRATE'S COURT OF THE KINGDOM OF ALEXANDRIA
ANSWER TO QUESTION


1.
I arrived to work on April 8th and checked the wanted board (using the /wanted command) I saw Thritystone was on there with one star for the murder of Capt11543 so I set out to catch him. I entered StonedCorp HQ and looked around for him but could not find him there. Finally I found the suspect, Thritystone at an adjacent plot. I suspected he might run if I announce my intention to arrest him so I approached the suspect, pepper sprayed the suspect, tased the suspect, and finally handcuffed the suspect. I did not know how to use /moj-notify at the time so I typed out in local chat "You are under arrest for the murder of Capt11543". I began to type out an iteration (from memory) of 'you have the right to remain silent anything you say can be used against you in a court of law' but before I could finish, the suspect broke free from my handcuffs and fled the scene. I chased after him but could not catch him before he flew to the Outback.

Stumped, I asked an anonymous citizen for help apprehending the suspect. The anonymous citizen agreed and lured the suspect back to Alexandria. When the suspect was distracted I leapt in, arrested the suspect and brought them back to the Ministry of Justice for processing.

I promptly charged the suspect and booked them for a 30m jail sentence and fined them £300 for Murder & £300 for Evading Arrest (£600 total).


Nobley submitted,
The Noble, PhilAnthropy
Duke
 
IN THE HONOURABLE MAGISTRATE OF THE KINGDOM OF ALEXANDRIA
CRIMINAL ACTION
Case No.: 6
NOTICE OF WITHDRAWL OF OBJECTIONS


Your Honor,

Given the strength of the Crown's reasoning and the persuasiveness of their arguments, I see no reason to maintain some of my objections. I withdraw Objections 2 and 3 as to not waste the Court's time.

Objection 1 remains to be ruled on now.


Respectfully Submitted,

ConsequencesInc
5/09/2026
 
In regard to Objection 1, the court sustains in part.

The court agrees with the Plaintiff that this question is in no way leading. The Crown is asking whether a violent encounter occurred between the witness and the defendant on that date; it does not presuppose that the killing, as recorded in P-002, was violent. If no violent event occurred, the witness would simply deny any such occurrence.

However, as defined by the court rules and procedures, “Compound Question: When a question includes multiple inquiries, the question should be rephrased into separate questions.” See General Court Rules and Procedures (JuniperFig, 2025). The question posed by the Crown is made up of multiple inquiries, the first being whether the event took place, with the following inquiries addressing the event in the case that it did, in fact, happen. This question is nearly four in one, and the Crown is ordered to split this question into multiple components in such a fashion that only one inquiry is answered by the witness in each question. Question 2 for Capt11543 will be struck from the record.

The court earnestly thanks both the Plaintiff and Defendant for their speedy objections and responses to objections; it is much appreciated.
@ConsequencesInc @SoggehToast
 
IN THE MAGISTRATES COURT OF THE KINGDOM OF ALEXANDRIA
QUESTIONS FOR WITNESS

For @Capt11543
5. Did any violent encounter occur between you and the Defendant on or around April 7, 2026?
6. If so, describe the events leading up to the encounter.
7. If so, describe the encounter itself.
8. If so, please describe the events following the encounter.


Respectfully submitted,

Soggeh T. Oast
Minister of Justice
Kingdom of Alexandria
 
IN THE MAGISTRATE'S COURT OF THE KINGDOM OF ALEXANDRIA
TESTIMONY

SoggehToast said:
IN THE MAGISTRATES COURT OF THE KINGDOM OF ALEXANDRIA
QUESTIONS FOR WITNESSES

For @Capt11543:

1. P-002 reflect that you were killed by Thritystone on or around April 7th. Please identify, to the best of your knowledge, the interaction that gave rise to this record.
2. Did any violent encounters occur between you and the Defendant on or around April 7th? If so, please describe your recollection of those events, including the moments leading up to and following the encounter.
3. To the best of your knowledge, did you have consent enabled in-game on or around April 7th?
4. To the best of your knowledge, did you at any point on April 7th give the Defendant explicit consent to kill you?

For the Noble @PhillinDeBlanc:

1. P-001 includes your Officer Witness Statement, in which you describe the Defendant as having “escaped” following his arrest. Please describe the events leading up to the incident you reported on, and the actions taken by yourself and the Defendant thereafter, up until the Defendant was sent to the Alexandrian jail.

Respectfully submitted,

Soggeh T. Oast
Minister of Justice
Kingdom of Alexandria
Click to expand...

1. I was going about my business in New Hamilton when I accidentally destroyed a block in the street near the main road. I was standing directly on top of the block, and there is a one-block gap underneath, so I was stuck there, and I hadn't expected to be able to break that block, so I was flustered and disoriented. While I was stuck there, Thritystone happened upon me and killed me.
2. N/A
3. No, I didn't have consent enabled.
4. No, I didn't consent to being killed in that instance.

SoggehToast said:
IN THE MAGISTRATES COURT OF THE KINGDOM OF ALEXANDRIA
QUESTIONS FOR WITNESS

For @Capt11543
5. Did any violent encounter occur between you and the Defendant on or around April 7, 2026?
6. If so, describe the events leading up to the encounter.
7. If so, describe the encounter itself.
8. If so, please describe the events following the encounter.


Respectfully submitted,

Soggeh T. Oast
Minister of Justice
Kingdom of Alexandria
Click to expand...

5. Yes, he killed me.
6. See my answer to Q1
7. While I was stuck in the hole in the ground, Thritystone drew his bow back all the way and killed me in one shot.
8. I reported the killing to the police using /999. That was the extent of the violent encounters I had with Thrity that day. I was eventually able to patch the hole in the road.
 
IN THE MAGISTRATES COURT OF THE KINGDOM OF ALEXANDRIA
RESPONSE TO THE HONORABLE MAGISTRATE
Dogeington said:
@SoggehToast
Should the Crown have no further questions we will continue to cross examination.
Click to expand...

That is all, Your Honor.

Respectfully submitted,

Soggeh T. Oast
Minister of Justice
Kingdom of Alexandria
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top