Azalea Isles v. OCG (2024)

[MrFluffy2U94]

The Royal Colony of the Azalea Isles, Plaintiff.

v.

OCG, Defendant.

Criminal Complaint:
OCG is formally being accused by the plaintiff, The Royal Colony of the Azalea Isles, of committing the following crimes:
3x counts of article 2.6 bribery.
3x counts of article 2.4 Corruption.
5x counts of article 2.4 Incitement of Corruption.

Parties:
The Plaintiff : The Royal Colony of the Azalea Isles

The Defendant : OCG

Factual Allegations:
Facts :
1. On 9/14 at 3:47 pm (CST) a message was posted in the #ads channel on the CityRP discord as seen below in Exhibit A. This was posted by a bot titled "RP Mobile". The defendant immediately responds with the following: "thats right!!! I will pay you off!! send me a message"

Spoiler: Exhibit A

2. Furthermore, the defendant follows this up with an admission of guilt and confirmation of their intent to commit corruption, and their successful "buying" of a candidate in the current election. See exhibit B where the defendant states, "one candidate already bought!! nobody has or will have a clue who they are, join your colleagues today" See Exhibit B below.

Spoiler: Exhibit B

3. On 9/15 at 10:56 PM (CST) the defendant yet again advertises their intent to commit corruption and confirms that 2 total acts of bribery have been committed where they post "2 candidates bought, 1 in negotiation!!grow your platform and funding, think of it as an anonymous partnership instead of a bribe. grow with me today!!" Here the defendant admits they are committing bribery. See spoiler below.

Spoiler: Exhibit C

4. The fourth act of incitement of corruption is committed on 9/18 at 3:07 PM when the defendant posted again. See spoiler below. They stated "15k to the next parliament member to join the ocg alliance .. if you know what I mean" clearly referring to their previous attempts to bribe our legislative officials.

Spoiler: Exhibit D

Legal Claims:

All legal claims correspond to the factual allegations above.

1. This is the first and second counts of incitement of corruption, as the defendant essentially confirms that the RP Mobile post was made by them.

2. This constitutes the first charge of bribery, and the third charge of incitement of corruption.

3. This constitutes the second and third count of bribery as they have confirmed three successful or attempted bribes and constitutes the fourth charge of incitement of corruption. The two successful bribes and attempted bribe also meet the definition of article 2.4 corruption.

4. This action constitutes the fifth charge of incitement of corruption.

Prayer for Relief:
Upon a successful conviction, we are seeking the maximum sentence for all of the legal claims listed as follows :

3x counts of 2.6 Bribery : $10,000 + 40 minutes jail time for each successful charge.
3x counts of 2.4 Corruption : $10,000 + 60 minutes jail time for each successful charge.
5x counts of 2.4 Incitement of Corruption : $10,000 + 60 minute jail time for each successful charge.

Note, these charges and prayers for relief may be amended as evidence is presented through discovery.

Verification:
I, Mister Fluffy, hereby affirm that the allegations in the complaint AND all subsequent statements made in court are true and correct to the best of the plaintiff's knowledge, information, and belief and that any falsehoods may bring the penalty of perjury.

 

[MilkCrack]

Writ of Summons

Azalea Isles Criminal Court (CR)
Case No. CR-24-0002-01

Prosecutor: MrFluffy2U94
Accused: ocg

A criminal complaint has been filed on behalf of the Royal Colony of Azalea Isles. You the accused are hereby required to file an answer to the complaint within 48 hours. Failure to appear will result in a default judgment against you.

In accordance with the Sovereign's mandate for the Isles, you have the right to the assistance of counsel in your defence. Should you choose to represent yourself, please familiarize yourself with the relevant court documents, including proper formats, as well as the laws referenced in the complaint. Ensure that you comply with any court orders.

Signature:
Judge Milk Crack​

 

[ocg]

hey

 

[MrFluffy2U94]

Your honor,

The defendant has failed to provide a proper response and has not responded with an answer to the complaint within the allotted timeframe.

The prosecution requests that in accordance with the previously given court order that their lack of proper response result in a default judgment.

Thank you for your time.

 

[ocg]

Your honor,

I am a working student currently dealing with a medical disaster. I apologize that I could not have a "proper response" prepared in 48 hours, let me know if you need a letter from any medical professionals stating why I was unable to commit to minecraft in a timely manner. I am currently trying to find a lawyer, but the server is not as active as it used to be and it has proven to be difficult. I ask that with these legal challenges caused by inactivity and my real life health issues if any extension could be granted so I can get my bearings. I just wish to represent myself properly.

Thank you for your time.

 

[MrFluffy2U94]

The prosecution has no qualms with this, so long as any extension does not interfere with either parties right to a fair and speedy trial.

 

[MilkCrack]

Your honor,

I am a working student currently dealing with a medical disaster. I apologize that I could not have a "proper response" prepared in 48 hours, let me know if you need a letter from any medical professionals stating why I was unable to commit to minecraft in a timely manner. I am currently trying to find a lawyer, but the server is not as active as it used to be and it has proven to be difficult. I ask that with these legal challenges caused by inactivity and my real life health issues if any extension could be granted so I can get my bearings. I just wish to represent myself properly.

Thank you for your time.

I noticed you did confirm your presence in the lawsuit closely after the deadline, it is important to note that you did not request an extension until much later. Although I am not privy to the specific details of the emergency, and I am not inclined to investigate further, I must emphasize that where possible (I understand it might not have been), requests for extensions should be made before the deadline.

As for the issue of the council:
As per the mandate of the Isles, every defendant has the right to the assistance of counsel. Given that the defence is seeking legal representation but has yet to secure it, I am temporarily halting the trial until such counsel can be found.

If the prosecution has objections or has identified suitable counsel (be it government-sponsored or otherwise), they may present their position in this trial.

 

[MrFluffy2U94]

Your honor,

I have no problem with providing a public defender so long as the defendant agrees to waive their right to a mistrial due to having a public defender. We do not want any excuse for a mistrial due to a perceived "conflict of interest" since it would be the Ministry of Justice both suing and defending in this case.

It has been more than double the allotted time, can we please set a time limit or something on the defendant's "search" for an attorney?

Since the trial has been posted, evidence has been deleted from the #ads channel, and I fear that as time goes on, additional evidence may be deleted in a similar manner. Furthermore, additional "copycat" offenders have performed similar acts. We are looking to take a strong stance against corruption and bribery and request that this trial either get underway or be pushed to summary judgment as soon as possible.

Thank you.

 

[Westray]

Your honour,

The offer was put out that if Liam Wolfe (ocg) was unable to find an attorney within a reasonable timeframe, I may offer my services. Since he was unable to find representation, I have been retained as counsel for the time being.

An answer to this criminal complaint will be forthcoming. Thank you again to the court and to respectable Prosecutor MrFluffy for their patience while the Defendant was acquiring representation.



Raymond West, Esq.

 

[Westray]

Answer to Criminal Complaint:

The Defendant enters a plea of NOT GUILTY to the crimes they are accused of in this case. It will be argued that the evidence provided by the Prosecution cannot by any means prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

Parties:
1. Prosecuting Authority: The Royal Colony of the Azalea Isles, lead by prosecutor MrFluffy
2. Defendant: Liam Wolfe (ocg), represented by Raymond West, Esq.

Factual Defences or Challenges:
1. The Defendant claims that such advertisements were posted as part of a strategic operation aimed at exposing potential corruption within Azalea Isles. The concept was that politicians would message the Defendant, and such messages would be forwarded to the public. No money was paid and no action was taken.
2. The Defendant argues that the way the messages were presented show a lack of serious intent to commit any criminal act. The use of exaggerated language combined with the public nature of such messages show that the Defendant did not attempt to conceal or hide such messages. Instead, this was an intentional public provocation aimed at drawing out unethical politicians.
3. While the Prosecution has provided evidence of the Defendant saying they are offering bribes, they have provided no evidence to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the Defendant was actually intending to follow through with their claims. To punish the Defendant purely for speech without corroborating evidence of intent or action, would constitute a miscarriage of justice.

Legal Defenses or Challenges:
1. The Defendant pleads NOT GUILTY to three counts of Corruption, challenged based on the language of the law. This statute distinguishes between “Corruption,” which applies to government officials acting corruptly in their official duties, and “Incitement of Corruption,” which applies to non-government individuals attempting to corrupt officials. The Defendant is not a government official, therefore the charge of Corruption alone should not apply to them.
2. The Defendant pleads NOT GUILTY to three counts of Bribery, challenged due to lack of evidence. The Defendant has not paid nor genuinely attempted to pay a person with a government job. Any "offers" made in the public channels were part of a strategic attempt to bait unethical actors, and not genuine attempts.
3. The Defendant pleads NOT GUILTY to five counts of Incitement of Corruption, challenged due to lack of evidence. The Prosecution has not provided any evidence that a government official was actually influenced or that any improper behavior occurred as a result of the Defendant.

Verification:
I, Raymond West, hereby affirm that the allegations in the answer AND all subsequent statements made in court are true and correct to the best of the defendant’s knowledge, information, and belief and that any falsehoods may bring the penalty of perjury.

 

[MilkCrack]

Your honor,

I have no problem with providing a public defender so long as the defendant agrees to waive their right to a mistrial due to having a public defender. We do not want any excuse for a mistrial due to a perceived "conflict of interest" since it would be the Ministry of Justice both suing and defending in this case.

It has been more than double the allotted time, can we please set a time limit or something on the defendant's "search" for an attorney?

Since the trial has been posted, evidence has been deleted from the #ads channel, and I fear that as time goes on, additional evidence may be deleted in a similar manner. Furthermore, additional "copycat" offenders have performed similar acts. We are looking to take a strong stance against corruption and bribery and request that this trial either get underway or be pushed to summary judgment as soon as possible.

Thank you.

I understand your hesitance regarding the appointment of a public defender. However, it has now become clear that the defendant has successfully retained legal counsel through other means.

 

[MilkCrack]

I would like to thank the defence for promptly submitting their response to the complaint. With this submission, the pleading stage of the trial has formally concluded.

Before we proceed to trial, I require the following information from the prosecution within 48 hours:
1. Please clearly explain how the facts presented substantiate the charge of corruption. Specifically, how does this charge apply to the defendant, considering it has not been alleged that the defendant has a government job?
2. Is the prosecution requesting any additional evidence before moving forward with the trial? Note that potential witnesses will be addressed during trial proceedings but a preliminary witness list would be welcome.
3. Is the prosecution opting for an in-game trial?

Once the prosecution has provided its response, the defence will have 48 hours to answer the following:
1. Is the defence requesting any additional evidence before moving forward with the trial? As mentioned, potential witnesses will be addressed during the trial but a preliminary witness list would be welcome.
2. Is the defence opting for an in-game trial?

 

[MrFluffy2U94]

I would like to thank the defence for promptly submitting their response to the complaint. With this submission, the pleading stage of the trial has formally concluded.

Before we proceed to trial, I require the following information from the prosecution within 48 hours:
1. Please clearly explain how the facts presented substantiate the charge of corruption. Specifically, how does this charge apply to the defendant, considering it has not been alleged that the defendant has a government job?
2. Is the prosecution requesting any additional evidence before moving forward with the trial? Note that potential witnesses will be addressed during trial proceedings but a preliminary witness list would be welcome.
3. Is the prosecution opting for an in-game trial?

Once the prosecution has provided its response, the defence will have 48 hours to answer the following:
1. Is the defence requesting any additional evidence before moving forward with the trial? As mentioned, potential witnesses will be addressed during the trial but a preliminary witness list would be welcome.
2. Is the defence opting for an in-game trial?

Your honor,

1. The Ministry of Justice is willing to withdraw the 3 charges of corruption as it was my understanding at the time that the defendant did have a role as a government official. Seeing as how I was mistaken, the proper thing is to withdraw those charges.

2. Yes I do have several pieces of evidence that I would like to request.

First, I would like to request a transaction history from the defendant for their in game transactions as well as any bank accounts between the dates of 9/14 and 9/16. This represents the time period in which the defendant ran their first ad allegedly attempting to "buy" politicians, and their message stating that they have successfully bought 2, and were negotiating with a third. The defendant's apparent admittance to this act should suffice as reasonable suspicion to warrant further investigation.

Next, I would like to request a transcript of any direct messages from the defendant to then sitting parliament members, and candidates in the upcoming election between the aforementioned dates. Again, the admittance from the defendant in the #ads channel should give more than enough probable cause to justify the request. They literally admitted to successfully purchasing 2 candidates and negotiating with a third.

As far as a potential witness list goes, currently I would be looking to call all of the members of parliament at the time that the #ads were posted, and all current members for questioning to determine if any further direct solicitations were made.

3. Due to the complexity of the case and my stringent work schedule, I would prefer that the case NOT be tried in game.

 

[Westray]

Your honour,

1. The Defence would find it acceptable to call all current Members of Parliament (MPs) to testify should the Proseuction wish to do so. However, we object to calling any former MPs as they would have no bearing on this case due to the dates involved. To call both current and former (6+6 = 12 total witnesses) would be a burdensome effort and cause undue delay on the trial. Multiple former MPs have also went inactive since the latest election and therefore would not be able to respond to the Court in a timely manner.

2. The Defence is open to an in-game trial should it be in the interests of the Court. Given the Prosecution's work schedule, we are also fine with doing it on forums.

The Defence respectfully objects to the Prosecution's evidentary requests beyond the witness testimony. Allowing direct message history to be published to a court of law on the public record would be premature when the Court can hear from the MPs themselves in their testimony.

We continue to reject assertion that the Defendant "literally admitted" to the successful purchase of 2 candidates, noting that this was a only attempt to trick politically corrupt candidates into revealing themselves. As the Court will likely hear from the MPs themselves, not a single one of them were purchased in any way.

Thank you.

 

[MrFluffy2U94]

We continue to reject assertion that the Defendant "literally admitted" to the successful purchase of 2 candidates, noting that this was a only attempt to trick politically corrupt candidates into revealing themselves. As the Court will likely hear from the MPs themselves, not a single one of them were purchased in any way.

Thank you.

In the Court of the Azalea Isles

Objection your honor.

Assumes Facts not in Evidence.

Your honor,

The defense is asserting that the defendants' actions were "only attempt to trick politically corrupt candidates into revealing themselves", yet they have provided no evidence of such, and these actions were not condoned, mentioned to or authorized by the Ministry of Justice (whose literal job is to fight corruption, NOT the defendant's as we have already established they had no official government position), this is (to this point) merely a narrative that has been spewed since the government chose to press charges without any evidence provided to substantiate their narrative. The defense chose not to admit any evidence of their claim in their response to the complaint, so I simply ask that this be considered when making a determination on this request for evidence.

It is worth noting that prior to the case being filed, they openly claimed that they HAD successfully "bought" two candidates, and once confronted with these charges, they immediately changed their story. My request for evidence is the only way to substantiate a claim either way. I understand the defenses hesitance to release DM's in open court and would be willing to compromise that all DM's be released in a closed court setting, with only portions that are relevant to this case being provided publicly if any are found.

 

[MilkCrack]

Your honor,

1. The Ministry of Justice is willing to ...

Very well, I will be dismissing the three counts of corruption charges.

Regarding the requested documents.

The prosecution has requested a transaction history from the defendant for their in-game transactions and bank accounts between the dates of 9/14 and 9/16. The court finds this a reasonable request given the evidence and crime.

The relevant records are hereby subpoenaed and all entities with this information are ordered to comply with the prosecution's request. Should it be physically required that the defendants themselves take any action to assist in obtaining this information please report back with a detailed explanation of what would be required, so we can determine whether this would violate the defendant's right against self-incrimination.

As for the direct messages, I will not be requiring the defendant to provide any discord direct messages as that would require the defendant to acknowledge the existence of such messages and would fall under the right to refuse self-incrimination.

Regarding the witnesses.

I will not be calling witnesses to the stand to eliminate the possibility that they might be involved in the alleged crimes. The prosecution is allowed to approach any potential witnesses (under penalty of perjury should they lie), to inquire whether they have any personal knowledge about the alleged crimes or know of any communications between the defendant and any member of parliament regarding the alleged offences. Should they have more information, you may call them to the stand.

Please report back within 48 hours about the status of the investigation and whether we can move on to trial.

 

[MilkCrack]

In the Court of the Azalea Isles

Objection your honor.

Assumes Facts not in Evidence...

I believe the defence was simply re-iterating their factual defence to your re-iteration of the factual allegation. And it would appear that by filing your objection, you are re-iterating your allegation once more.

While that is not the point of this stage of the proceeding, I will not be too strict on this. However, objects do take up more of the court's time so I would suggest using them sparingly and only when necessary. The objections listed in the court guides are generally aimed at questions directed towards witnesses.

As an experienced arbiter of the law, familiar with the details of this case I am able to discern between contested and uncontested facts. So need to object on my behalf. Overulled

 

[MrFluffy2U94]

Your honor,

You requested a 48 hour update, so I apologize for the delay but I was giving the defense time to respond. However, the defense has yet to turn over any of the court ordered materials.

 

[Westray]

Your honour,

The Defence has received no communication from the Prosecution as to what evidence they request or how they expect the Defendant to produce it. To our understanding, the ball was in the Prosecution's court and the deadline elapsed. We continue to emphasize that, as of this submission, no substantive evidence of a criminal act has been presented, and rather the case relies on an exaggerated public statement.

As a matter of good faith to this court and to the public, the Defendant has opted to voluntarily share screenshots of his messages with all MPs in order to prove that no bribery had occurred. As you can see in the attached images, the Defendant has no direct message history with these MPs.



Explanation of Attachments: Sent to me by the Defendant on September 30, 2024, indicating no message history with any of the current six MPs - listed from left to right -Aladeen22, Casey Lefaye, Tonga1, Bezzer Geezer, Sir Unity, and Stoppers Adisia.

Thank you for such considerations.

 

[MilkCrack]

Your honor,

You requested a 48 hour update, so I apologize for the delay but I was giving the defense time to respond. However, the defense has yet to turn over any of the court ordered materials.

The defendant did not need to respond as they weren't subpoenaed. Since you made no progress in your investigation and responded past the deadline, I will move on to the opening statements. Please present your opening statement within 48 hours.