Supreme Court of Canada vs Tyler F Durden
Day 829, 19:11
•
Published in Canada 
•
by
•
by Tyler F Durden
eRep Tools
eGobba eMap
Hotsheet Essentials
eCanada Forums
CPF Forums
CPF Chat
Want a View Counter for Your Newspaper? Click here
_________________________________
Click the flags for your eCanada Battle Orders!
_________________________________
We can't stop here! This is 2-clicker country!
Note the terrorized Judge in the back seat...
Coles Notes:The Supreme Court of Canada has placed me under arrest accusing me of Terrorism (lol) and alleging that I would use my power as a Congressman to get the justice I demanded that the courts were unwilling to provide due to their ineptitude. Apparently our judges are beyond question and above the law! For the record, I specified that I would make a public - In Game motion of non confidence in the justices such as this - NOT use my status as a Congressman on the Forums to effect this change. REX is on crack.
Click on the image to enlarge the hilarity!
For those who don't frequent the eCan Forums often, an amusing development has occurred. I have had WAY too much free time on my hands. I had asked the courts to decide whether or not the citizen to be known as The Salty One had slandered me on eCan Forums when he claimed that I PM'd him to sell a Congress seat place in the CPF in exchange for gold when I was PP of the CPF. I called him on it. I demanded he man up and be an ADULT and show evidence of such an allegation. He failed to do so. I asked again - and again he failed. He went on like a broken record about it on the UN Democracy for Sale scandal thread - which had nothing to do with the CPF or me for that matter.
So what did I do? I was bored and am feeling adventurous now that I don't have the shackles of leadership around my neck forcing me to be politically correct, saying yes ma'am, no ma'am, three bags full.
I decided to awaken the cobwebbed Supreme Court of Canada to see what they thought.
olivermellors, the Attorney General and the banned for violating eRepublik Citizen Law #1 Vincent Valentine - who is our Supreme Justice told me I had to provide evidence that I did not send any messages to The Salty One asking for gold in exchange for a Congress seat.
*There is a discrepancy between the actual identity between the citizen that I foun
😛Vincent Valentine, and the one produced by ollivermellors: Vincent Valentine. They both have the same nick. This discrepancy has now been remedied.
I maintain that no such message exists. Obviously, how could I show it if I maintain it doesn't exist? Justice Valentine told me that if I couldn't produce that sent message, then I had no case.
My jaw hit the floor.
I hereby challenge a deaf man to recite Mozart's Etude Nocturne #5.
Not once did the Justices ask The Salty One to produce the evidence to back up his allegations that I attempted to sell a congress seat to him - as had made the UN look so bad in the public image when Caesar exposed them for it.
Got no evidence eh? GUILTY! Give me more adrenaline!
Attorney, take me back to Vegas! There are 2-clickers everywhere!
When I checked to see who these guys are in eRepublik, I found that Justice Valentine was a banned citizen. When I asked to know who was actually standing in judgment of me, the court placed me under arrest!
Canada's antiquated, 2-clicker Supreme Court
Now I know I probably have too much time on my hands these days - relax, that'll change next Wednesday when I go back to work - but am I the crazy one here?
I hereby move for a vote of non confidence in these judges and propose NEW Supreme Justices who KNOW law and are ACTIVE in eRepublik and have the respect of Canadians.
So Tyler is fighting back!
You may view the process of events Here if you have eCan Forum masking.
You may view the Case against me by "Rex", Here
You know what to do...
http://images.paraorkut.com/img/funnypics/images/y/you_fail-12839.jpg">Ban Tyler
http://www.erepublik.com/en/article/as-your-attorney--1225970/1/20">Contact My Attorney
______________________________
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
For Teh Lulz
I..I dont...I dont get whats going on here
Teh Lulz indeed
The revenge of the medium iron monsters. You better get a lawyer Tyler, our courts aren't exactly objective...if you know what I mean.
TFD said he'd see me in Court. We both showed up. When the judges said he had to prove his allegations, he decided to give up and threatened to use his political power to replace them.
You win some, you lose some.
Who will sue me next?
Well, that Saltydog is a real piece of work lol
How many articles do you make in one day? LOL< is that like 4 now today for you? Anyways, to the point...
For The Lulz indeed XD
Uhm... you can't prove a negative.
quick correction without comment: I am not a Justice. I am the Minister of Justice and the Attorney General, the party who initiates criminal code proceedings in Canada, and who prosecutes them on behalf of Canada. The indictment is found here:
http://ecanada.ws/forums/viewtopic.php?f=37&t=5921" target="_blank">http://ecanada.ws/forums/viewtopic.php?f[..]5921
I do not comment outside of the courtroom about the merits of any criminal prosecution.
Free Tyler!
Defamation Tort:
Slander- spoken form
Libel- when written form exists
Durden is plaintiff, saltydog is defendant.
In order to sue, plaintiff has to show that he's suffered damages, otherwise cannot sue.
All plaintiff has to do: show that he's suffered damages from the statement in question. Once he's proven that, he must do nothing.
It's not plaintiff's responsibility to prove whether statement is true or false. That is defendant's duty!
Lawyers use this : "Truth is a defense".
Now, defendant has to show that his statement is true!(hence "truth is a defense"😉
Defendant has to prove that Durden PM'ed him with such statement.
Again, it is not plaintiff's duty to prove anything except that he's suffered damages.
Hitherto, Supreme Court has nothing to do with this case.
Not even Appeal Court.
Trial Court is where you seek justice.
To make it more simple, for the purpose of this game, Supreme Court will take this case into consideration only if application of the Law has been breached and will never take the findings of the Trial Court into consideration!
You appeal the Law, not the Trial Court's findings. The case will NEVER be reopened.
Hope this may help you guys, I am taking Law courses at Ryerson.
What's wrong with you?
That was what I was trying to tell the Justices Dr_Revenue.
When they refused to acknowledge procedure and I called them on it they placed me under arrest on charges of terrorism!
@Bruck,
I'm trying to get 5 articles in Top 5.
It's a lulz thing, I'm sure you'd understand.
😉
Nah, I'm no fun
Oh c'mon...you used to be such a fun guy.
17 MPPs for training wars - now that is lulz I can NEVER touch.
I bow to your balls of V2 Titanium!
Lol, so you have to produce a Private message that doesn't exist in order to prove it doesn't exist? Vincent sounds like a tard lol
[removed]
saltydog sai😛 "When the judges said he had to prove his allegations, he decided to give up...."
At this point, it is clear, these Justices have nothing in common with the law. I am sure they are good cooks or engineers, and definitely NOT lawyers.
I nominate Dr_Revenue for Supreme Justice.
>The Supreme Court of Canada has placed me under arrest accusing me of Terrorism (lol) and alleging that I would use my power as a Congressman to get the justice I demanded that the courts were unwilling to provide due to their ineptitude
Shouldn't that be a charge of Vigilantism? 😁;;
I second Dr_Revenue's nomination for Supreme Jsutice
This guy knows whats goin on
w00t
Long story short....
Durden, prove that people think less of you now, as a result of allegations herein (although, financial losses would be more tangible).
Saltydog, find Durden's PM and defend yourself.
1. If Durden fails, we have NO case to start with.
2. If saltydog fails, he may be found liable.
And thirdly, nothing of this is obligatory - due to eRep Laws.
ah, Dr. Revenue has read and told us precisely what the Supreme Court Justices have already told these litigants more than once. Good for you. Pretty sensible of them after all.
The Supreme Court, by the way, does not initiate criminal prosecutions. Just a point of clarification - which i made previously. Perhaps it would be better now for this matter to proceed in the courts rather than in the newspapers.
The courts had their chance.
Now the Court of Public opinion shall reign supreme!
You're alright TFD. 🙂
Olivermellors, please read it again, more attention to the details this time, thank you.
You may find that Supreme Court's decisions are polar-opposites of the law practice.
TFD HOW COULD YOU
The court of public opinion finds TFD guilty of making too many lulzy articles
Legal advice sold here for 30 G per PM. Send money before you PM
I'm sure you're a terrorist.. as I write this he has exactly 666 subscribers to this paper... if its not true simply produce the pm that the devil sent to you declaring you are not a terrorist...
Proof of Damages:
Tyler....I think less of you and I know that my opinion matters to you
There you go - now you have some to sue for
May I just point out the irony of Samuel calling TFD a terrorist...
Oh...not you Rolo...but you have my Soap in your avatar from the war!
@TFD
That first comment is patented by TCO!
Peut-être que Samuel de Champlain et Tyler F Durden partageront la même cellule en prison!
Faites attention de ne pas échapper vos savons!
Anyone else think a charge of Terrorism against Tyler F Durden is all too appropriate, considering how that movie Fight Club went? XD
LOL @ SpockPQ!
Now that was a good one!
Bravo!
"Faites attention de ne pas échapper vos savons!"
loooool
So the courts are "inept" when they don't judge your way? Way to promote judicial independence, TFD.
No Saya, when they do not permit subpoena evidence for discovery.
We didn't get anywhere remotely close to a judgment.
Read the article.
I hereby challenge a deaf man to recite Mozart's Etude Nocturne #5.
WIN 😃
Pfft that's not terrorism. Burring down the courthouse is though! I have some pitchforks if some one want's to start a mob.
you continue to allege that the Supreme Court has charged you. That is false. I have brought that to your attention repeatedly.
Vincent Valentine (two spaces after the first name) is a player of long standing:
http://www.erepublik.com/en/citizen/profile/1529302" target="_blank">http://www.erepublik.com/en/citizen/prof[..]9302
I discovered his profile after a 30 second search.
You should not make allegations of fact which are not true, and you should correct them when error is brought to your attention.
Here mellors, learn your history.
http://www.erepublik.com/en/article/president-jacobi-ignores-congress-supreme-court-in-fresh-scandal-830112/1/all#commentsall" target="_blank">http://www.erepublik.com/en/article/pres[..]sall
It's funny how I called for a clean up of the judiciary 9 months ago, and now we have this going on.
Take out the "9 months ago" part, and you can plug in most of those comments here and they would still make sense.
ollivermellors, I edited the article.
Obviously I mistook one Vincent Valentine for another.
Funny how one Vincent Valentine would take the exact name of another without being the same entity coming back after being banned.
Those are some odds, eh?
tyler: happens i guess - on the forum there is a Tyler F. Durden and a Tyler F Durden both 33 - think its on the forum - but in any event thank you for your consideration.
As a congressman I find it in poor taste that another congressman decided to use public opinion to influence the decisions of the court. It is your prerogative as a legislator to overturn members of the judiciary if you belief them to be biased, but that must go through congress, not through open media. It's not the first time that you have done this to proof that you are "right".
Furthermore, you have yourself voted these justices to be the arbitrator to the courts. Apparently you are only against them when they holding charges against you - when clearly it doesn't benefit them personally doing so. Furthermore, as olivermellors have stated, the charge is held by the Minister of Justice - and that is part of the executive.
Saya, Saya, Saya...
You jump at any opportunity to TRY and join the bandwagon when it's heading for me. Same in Congress - actually mostly in Congress.
FYI I bring to the public's attention the bizarro world legal understanding our courts have. I suppose you would just sweep it under the carpet then? Just have me forget it? What if it was I accusing you of something on the forums? Are you aware that you would have to prove a negative to receive justice?
Did you READ the article or the threads involved???
That is my DUTY as a representative, as I understand it being a six term Congressman - NOT to just roll over and take it. It is my DUTY to press the boundaries of the law to ensure that they are as close to perfection as they can be. I am the only one who has even made all of Canada's laws available to the public
( http://www.erepublik.com/en/article/ecanadian-laws-1075689/1/20" target="_blank">http://www.erepublik.com/en/article/ecan[..]/1/20 ), so save it. You can have your politically correct little bleeding heart world if you want it - but I demand better!
Furthermore Saya, if I were to propose of change of Justices as a Congressman while a case is in process against me it would be a conflict of interest and HIGHLY CORRUPT, so go candy stripe someone else's plight.
The court of public opinion is the ONLY option I have left.
I will not walk down the road of corruption just for teh lulz.
I forgot to put my yogurt in the refrigerator and now I should probably throw it out ... or should I?