Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
R v. Langford
#31
(22 Nov 2016, 00:14:49)Arthur Wrote: Dallin may have committed many wrong things, some of which are highly unacceptable thoughtout his career. But this does not make your "court" proceedings, John, any better. As a matter of fact, I find it pretty disdainful that we keep trying to go onto his mistake and punish him. OK, he made a mistake but you don't have to rub it in his face and create such a big fuss about this. You have been doing these things for like over a month, right (correct me if I am wrong)? This is suo utterly pointless. Can we all just chill out and go back to a normal state, though I doubt there was any state like that recently? For something where so many have been involved, firstly, there is no need for this case. Secondly, if you are proceeding with it, this should all be conducted in a more civil manner. What I mean by civil here is to ensure no conflict of interest and neutrality between the two parties. Indeed it is Loquntias role in this, but I think they should take into consideration how this affects many other national leaders and nations, and respectively allow mediators and neutral judges to ensure a fair trial.

What are you talking about...? You don't seem to understand any of this at all...
[Image: 9768554.png]
Siwa Sopako Wogo Sani-Hong Kunoku
Manu ku awaso yo Tongowa Manuka hehe yoma tise.

If a post doesn't have a question mark, it isn't a question.
If it isn't a question, I'm not asking you anything, I'm telling you.
#32
(22 Nov 2016, 01:31:23)kingjohnthefirst Wrote: One of our Loquntian citizens, and a member of our military, Dallin Langford, appears to have committed a couple of crimes. Therefore, a case was made within one of our courts, as a formality. This court wasn't doing anything, and when asked, he said he wanted to postponed the proceedings--but the case is merely a formality. Neither I nor Langford are 100% interested in this whole case thing.

This court case is simply a formality because I see it as a compromise to my credibility to just banish Langford from Loquntia without holding some sort of formal trial.

This wasn't supposed to be any more or any less, people just like to make #drama and get #triggered and get #exposed and be on #leafy.

So, a trial to you is a "formality" and these proceedings were intended to invariably find him guilty?

Keep talking, this is great.
#33
I've already stated that I am done with you. I will not respect you, nor will I fear you. Stop wasting your time.
[Image: 9768554.png]
Siwa Sopako Wogo Sani-Hong Kunoku
Manu ku awaso yo Tongowa Manuka hehe yoma tise.

If a post doesn't have a question mark, it isn't a question.
If it isn't a question, I'm not asking you anything, I'm telling you.
#34
(22 Nov 2016, 06:04:42)kingjohnthefirst Wrote: I've already stated that I am done with you. I will not respect you, nor will I fear you. Stop wasting your time.

   
#35
An update. We are currently waiting for First Minister Freayth to confirm the first judicial appointments. As soon as this is done, an interpretational hearing will first be held to rule on some of the technicalities of international cases. Following that will be a hearing to determine the validity of the lawsuit Dallin Langford is looking to file.
#36
More news. Horatio Eden has been appointed as Supreme Justice, and the first hearing has just been held. You can read the full judgement here - http://kitmccarthy.wixsite.com/mcarthiao...lawreports
Dylan Callahan has informed me as a result of this he plans to file a lawsuit against John Houston on behalf of Dallin Langford. The Department of Justice is yet to receive his complaint.
Following receipt of this complaint, a hearing will be held to determine the case's validity.
#37
http://kitmccarthy.wixsite.com/mcarthiao...lawreports
Please take a moment to read the above. Supreme Justice Eden has ruled the complaint submitted by Dallin Langford in the case Dallin Langford v. John Houston is jurisdictionally valid, and as such the complaint has been served. The defendant has seven days to respond to the submitted allegations.


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)