Wist 376 Posted April 13, 2016 I would like to forward the motion that it was an awful call Quote Share this post Link to post
Rory 509 Posted April 13, 2016 (edited) CEASE AND DESIST [12/10/420] By Certified Mail Mr. Rory 31 Frag central Belfast,Antrim BT15 4AD Dear Mr. Biggles: This law firm represents Rory. If you are represented by legal counsel, please direct this letter to your attorney immediately and have your attorney notify us of such representation. You are hereby directed to CEASE AND DESIST ALL DEFAMATION OF Rory’S CHARACTER AND REPUTATION. Rory is an educated, respected professional in Outbreak. He has spent years serving the community in his profession and building a positive reputation. Rory has learned that you have engaged in spreading false, destructive, and defamatory rumors about him. Under Outbreak law, it is unlawful to engage in defamation of another’s character and reputation. Defamation consists of (1) a statement that tends to injure reputation; (2) communicated to another; and (3) that the speaker knew or should have known was false. (4) Edited videos of false calls Your defamatory statements involved creating malicious videos with intent to defame my client. Accordingly, we demand that you (A) immediately cease and desist your unlawful defamation of Rory and (B) provide us with prompt written assurance within ten (10) days that you will cease and desist from further defamation of Rory’s character and reputation. If you do not comply with this cease and desist demand within this time period, Rory is entitled to seek monetary damages and equitable relief for your defamation. In the event you fail to meet this demand, please be advised that Rory has asked us to communicate to you that she will pursue all available legal remedies, including seeking monetary damages, injunctive relief, and an order that you pay court costs and attorney’s fees. Your liability and exposure under such legal action could be considerable. Before taking these steps, however, my client wished to give you one opportunity to discontinue your illegal conduct by complying with this demand within ten (10) days. Accordingly, please sign and return the attached Defamation Settlement Agreement within ten (10) days to Big boys Law firm 31 frag central Frag City I recommend that you consult with a Senior moderator regarding this matter. If you or your attorney have any questions, please contact me directly. Sincerely, Rory Edited April 13, 2016 by Guest Quote Share this post Link to post
Jaydog! 179 Posted April 13, 2016 I would like to forward the motion that it was an awful call I'm not going to repeat the person above me, but... Quote Share this post Link to post
Biggles 44 Posted April 13, 2016 I will forward this onto our Human resources manager Quote Share this post Link to post
rhyse1317 150 Posted April 13, 2016 They would've been able to draw if it wasn't for you :( Quote Share this post Link to post
Lewis 1,276 Posted April 13, 2016 wist 3rd in an mg2 game how times have changed Quote Share this post Link to post
Wist 376 Posted April 13, 2016 FORMAL RULING OF THE OUTBREAK SUPREME COURT In the case of Biggles vs. Rory The court set out to establish whether defamation of character had occurred with regards to the prosecution, hereby referred to as Rory. On account of three votes to nil, with one abstention and one possible jury-death-in-situ, the court has ruled that no defamation has occurred. In the matter of the injunction first introduced by Rory, the court, on account of three votes to two, has ruled that the call made no difference to the round, though the individual in question was indeed not long. The sentences are as follows: The defence is NOT required to pay the prosecution the demanded sum of 1,000 credits. The prosecution, for both lengthy opening statement and revelation of earlier outrageous comments made is hereby sentenced to watch the entirety of the following: As ruled on this day, the thirteenth of April, 2016, in the year of our Lord, under the righteous and high station of the Outbreak Supreme Court. Quote Share this post Link to post
Rory 509 Posted April 13, 2016 has ruled that the call made no difference to the round, though the individual in question was indeed not long. has ruled that the call made no difference to the round, though the individual in question was indeed not long. has ruled that the call made no difference to the round, though the individual in question was indeed not long. has ruled that the call made no difference to the round, though the individual in question was indeed not long. Quote Share this post Link to post
rhyse1317 150 Posted April 13, 2016 The punishment maybe considered a bit by some, however it is deserved for his crimes against humanity. Quote Share this post Link to post
Serotonin 0 Posted April 13, 2016 The punishment maybe considered a bit by some, however it is deserved for his crimes against humanity. Coming from a corrupt Jury Member! Quote Share this post Link to post
rhyse1317 150 Posted April 13, 2016 The punishment maybe considered a bit by some, however it is deserved for his crimes against humanity. Coming from a corrupt Jury Member! ;) Quote Share this post Link to post
Rory 509 Posted April 13, 2016 The punishment maybe considered a bit by some, however it is deserved for his crimes against humanity. Coming from a corrupt Jury Member! NT ruling in favour of Biggles on every motion. NT Quote Share this post Link to post
Biggles 44 Posted April 14, 2016 Did biggles win the case? I won in the original case of defamation & the fact he was not long, Rory won the fact that it would have made no difference in the round Quote Share this post Link to post