Ban Request - chocbar98

[§upra]

snip

To the best of my knowledge and regarding your actions, you weren't there to roleplay. You weren't there to buy fish or black market goods. You were there to cause trouble and only trouble.

On that matter, earlier on in the roleplay, you were punchwhoring the door, and continued to do so after being told to leave.

No we weren't. This was the first time we were there, and after the footage we did not return. Either you're mistaking us for someone else, or you're straight up lying.

I have no evidence to support this, however this is clearly defined through Charlie's claim of "harassment" in which I can support as both an eye witness and a victim. I would most certainly define your actions as annoyance, if not harassment. Thus the theft of the note was conducted under similar intentions - to "troll" and harass.

The harassment accusation mostly stems from Scotch insisting that we are bullying him because me and Dave have both submitted ban requests on him showing him clearly ignoring the rules a few months back, and insisting he was framed. Most of this harassment claim seems to be some excuse to whine about us.

The fact that you got yourself killed is cannot be blamed on mine nor Charlie's shoulders;

You clearly aggravated the situation and resulted in your own death.

[/quote]
Your only reason for saying that we aggravated the situation is we returned, however you've already clearly stated the first time we were there was identical to the footage in the video, as you fired a full magazine as we were leaving, which can very easilly be said as a straight up attempt to kill me. So you can't say we were "aggravating you" and "harassing you" as your reason to kill us.

You attempted to kill me over a note, and then proceeded to kill Dave over it. There were no other IC forms of "harassment" or "provoking" other than picking up the note. Whether or not the apparent backstory is an acceptable reason to kill us over picking up a note once(since you fired upon me with intent to kill the first time) is down to the admins, but the vague accusations of (mostly OOC)harassment have nothing to do with this story, and gives you no reason to kill us.
[/quote]

So you don't think that stealing is an aggressive act?[b/] You don't think that stealing is going to trigger any problems? You're mighty wrong, and need to sort out your moral justification for stealing in the first place. The bottom line is, you stole from us, who at the time had ties with the [b]Bermuda Mafia. Whether or not you were aware of this was a different scenario -in that case, it was simply lack of understanding on your part.

Again, I will restate - I did not RANDOM death match. My actions were intentional; you TRIGGERED an aggressive roleplay. Triggered. Triggered death match, not random.

In response to your crude statement -

Most of this harassment claim seems to be some excuse to whine about us.

I believe it is you who are whining, due to the fact you are complaining that you got killed, due to your own actions and are upset as the roleplay did not fall in your favor. [b]Tough. Additionally, you two filed the ban request - it is you who are whining, not us.

Charlie and I are merely fighting our case, due to the fact that your reasoning behind this ban request is unjust and lacks sufficient evidence to imply that this was a case of random deathmatch.

Regarding the harassment, I can say that you were certainly punchwhoring the door, and have been harassing Charlie for a duration of time on CityRP.

No we weren't. This was the first time we were there, and after the footage we did not return. Either you're mistaking us for someone else, or you're straight up lying.

I am certain that you had visited our store prior to the event, and were punching the door. I highly doubt that I am mistaken. Additionally, your ludicrous statement,

you're straight up lying.

is far from correct. With all due respect, if anyone is lying here, it is you and ilmon3y, due to the fact that you are covering up the point that you completely disregarded to presence of the Bermuda Mafia by using petty excuses such as:

Pay attention to detail, my time spent on the server had increased in this snippet compared to the video, meaning that this was well after the incident had occurred.

Despite the fact the Bermuda Mafia had formed long before the incident regarding the note occured. The only way to back up this point, is by reviewing the server log, and seeing if lewisb98 (FL:RP Sauce) changed his job to Bermuda Mafia member before I killed you.


Summary:
1) Dr Tosspot and Dave entered the store (being welcomed) , firstly being warned for stealing the note.
2) Dave returns after being warned (and is not welcomed by ANYONE) at gunpoint and by warning burst (Violation of FearRP) in order to obtain evidence (also metagaming)
3) Chocbar98 engages Dave, due to an important document (note) being stolen from behind the desk, affiliated with the Bermuda Mafia.
4) A ban request is filed for Random Death Match despite the engagement from Chocbar98 being triggered.

Overall
From both mine and Charlie's perspective, I can say with confidence that this event was triggered, in either an attempt to provoke or aggravate to gather evidence. This is an act of metagaming, as well as violating FearRP as part of the roleplay.

I, Chocbar98 used two magazines of rifle ammo in this roleplay, first magazine being the warning burst towards the truck, second being the magazine that killed Dave.

Therefore, I can state with absolute confidence that I am not guilty of any act of Random Death Match, and therefore can conclude that this ban request does not hold sufficient evidence for a ban request prosecution.

I will continue to deny any act of random death match as part of this scenario. I have fully conveyed the events which occured during the event to the best of my knowledge, with support both from ilmon3y's evidence and two eye-witnesses, Charlie4kwl (Scotch Mc Greg) and lewisb98.

If needed, I can confirm that the roleplay was already based aggressively as the SRU kept hostage was called 'SP1CY BUR1TT0' and I am more than willing to contact him as an eye-witness.