Case: Pending The Irradiated v. Daniel Spezi (2026) CV 30

[jotoho]

[...]

MOTION TO STRIKE

Your Honor, this allegation is unsupported, highly prejudicial, and unrelated to the specific incident at issue in this case. The Plaintiffs have not established that the Defendant initiated any other nuclear detonations, and introducing allegations of unrelated conduct serves primarily to prejudice the Court and support their request for punitive damages rather than prove liability for the alleged June 21 incident. The Defense respectfully moves the Court to strike this allegation and any arguments relying upon it.

MOTION TO STRIKE

Your Honor, this statement asserts as established fact that all properties suffered high levels of radiation and that commercial activity was inhibited on every property. The Plaintiffs have not produced evidence demonstrating that each property listed in the proposed class experienced radiation, nor that each Plaintiff was unable to conduct commercial activity. Because the statement presents unproven factual assertions as established facts, the Defense respectfully moves the Court to strike it.

[...]

First Motion To Strike - Response

Your Honor, the Defendant’s Counsel has clearly stated himself that, to his knowledge, the Defendant detonated five nuclear reactors across the Isles. This was submitted to the court on July 2nd. The Defendant’s Counsel will be called as a witness by the Plaintiffs to further testify to this in his capacity as a Ministry of Urban Development employee who has also been involved with the Ministry of Justice investigations of the incidents. Prior court cases have clearly settled that allegations may not be stricken until after the party making them has had their fair chance to substantiate them with witness testimony.


Second Motion To Strike - Response

Your Honor, we direct the Defendant’s Counsel to read our case filing. Exhibit P-004 shows radiation in excess of 120 rads, a relatively high level of radiation, out on the street, not inside of the complex. Places inside the complex, particularly before any fading of the radiation, experienced higher levels (b002-third-floor was at more than 350 rads, as seen in Exhibit P-003).

With respect to the Defense, their motions hold no basis in fact, and ignore that witness testimony to substantiate claims is still coming up. However, in the interests of cementing the case: I have attached multiple public communications on the day of the detonation and the day after to this response, as additional evidence to refute the Defense’s claims. These messages include public comments attesting to radiation at b003; radiation at b001 (Rory Casperson’s shop); and radiation at spawn, severe enough to kill. The idea that individuals would be dying of radiation at spawn (which indicates severe radiation far beyond the complex), but be unaffected closer to the source of the radiation, is preposterous.

Ruling on Defendant's Motion to Strike #1

By now it has been well established in the Azalean courts' settled jurisprudence that Motions to Strike based on claims of lack of evidence or irrelevance are generally not granted prior to the end of witness cross-examination, because parties have not yet been granted the opportunity to argue their case and present all of their evidence.

Given that the Plaintiff's Counsel has referred to a recording within submitted evidence containing a statement of the Defendant's Counsel that appears to support the allegation, and Plaintiff has indicated their intent to provide further evidence later in this trial in the form of witness testimony, this Motion to Strike is hereby respectfully denied.

Ruling on Defendant's Motion to Strike #2

Once again, it would be premature to strike an initial factual allegation of the Plaintiff, before opportunities for witness examination and opening arguments have been granted. The Defendant will have the opportunity to argue why they might think this alleged fact is not or only partially true later.
As such, this second Motion to Strike is hereby respectfully denied.

The Defendant may reattempt these motions during the closing arguments phase, if they wish. Alternatively, the Court reserves the right to strike these contested factual allegations sua sponte at the end, if the evidence provided is deemed insufficient, then.

---

The Plaintiff has 48 hours beginning now, to present their opening arguments.