Unban Request on Dr Hibbert's behalf (forum)
#1
Your name: [FL:RP] Dr Hibbert 



Your ban ID: N/A (Forum ban)


Banned by: [FL] Raptor


Reason: Lying in the courthouse


Involved: [FL] Raptor, [FL:RP] Cujo, Gray Face


Why we should unban you: "Hi FL Staff, Cujo is going to be posting this UBR on my behalf as I'm now banned from the forums. This is regarding me supposedly lying in the courthouse, and this is how the story went. A BR got posted on both me and Cujo for allegedly prop spamming and prop killing. The player posting the BR had his evidence in form of .dem, a file which I've never encountered before. I opened it and it opened my CS GO and came up with a VAC message which evidently raised some suspicion. A player then decided to come along, this player was named Radde or something like that and he reviewed the .dem and posted it to YouTube. Now admins, watch them 3 videos, you simply can't have proven that Cujo was involved in this or was even bannable for this? Notice how for the whole .dem, I'm not on the cat walk, in fact, I'm no where near the incident. So when the BR is put on me I instantly become involved and as Cujo is my friend, I was sticking up for him using the evidence that Radde has uploaded due to the fact I was un familiar with how to use the .dem. Later Voluptious then uploaded a clip from the whole .dem proving that Cujo was in fact not innocent and he was issued a ban, however I wasn't. So now it leads to this, why have I been issued a forum ban? I didn't lie about anything I was using the evidence that was provided to me in order to make the best case for myself and Cujo and trying to find any mistake or failure in the evidence. I found a lot in Radde's, however I didn't find any in Voluptious', and I promptly rested my case, this doesn't make me a liar, Voluptious just made the evidence stronger. I feel that this ban is very injust as I didn't utter a single lie. The only way I could have lied would be if I were to be punished on Fearless too and I'd lied about the rules which I'd violated however I didn't. So I don't see why this forum ban has been applied?" 

~Dr Hibbert
Sig by Dex. Check it here!
#2
User has been warned for this post. Reason:
Not involved warned - Pinky
[Image: FpROeEz.png]
Barkles is attempting to sleep : )
#3
I'd like to ask Dr. Hibbert a few questions.

Was he there during the time of cujo prop spamming?
Was he aware that cujo aws prop spamming?
#4
"I wasn't aware of who was spamming the props. I was at the bottom of the Nexus however with Gray Face who was recording what was going on. The only evidence that I had to go off at the time was Radde who uploaded 3 short clips to YouTube. I also disconnected half way through as the video shows, I'm not even particularly sure why I was included in the BR in the first place." 
Sig by Dex. Check it here!
#5
If you were not sure about who prop spammed and that you were not sure why you were even involved in it then why did you completely deny the fact that he prop spammed?
#6
"Raptor, what you're failing to understand here is that I could only purely go off of the evidence, I was involved because my name was on the bloody BR and I was sticking up for Cujo as neither I or him deserved to get banned with the evidence that Radde has provided. I never stated that he didn't prop spam, I stated that the evidence was insufficient and couldn't warrant a ban for prop spamming as you have to have pure evidence, which he didn't have. Answer one thing for me, watch the 3 videos that Radde uploaded and tell me, would you have accepted that BR having only them 3 videos as evidence? I can almost GUARENTEEE that you wouldn't have, and that was what I was basing my defence for Cujo off of, a lack of evidence on Gray Face's behalf. Cujo said "First of all, that could be anyone, second of all, I was testing out my stacker because earlier it wasn't working, so I checked and moved the sliders around and voila, it was working. Swiftly after, I deleted the stacked props"  

"Them images literally show nothing they could have been anybodies props Cujo admitted to stacking them once but I don't see that as a violation he did it once and it was only to check his stacker tool."
"Unless you've got some solid proof in that video you've literally got nothing on I or cujo as the images are redundant.". 
All I was doing was fortifying what Cujo said.

I never once made a bald statement saying "Cujo never prop spammed." All I said was that the images didn't provide sufficient evidence and that if he didn't have any solid proof he had nothing on either I or Cujo. I was simply stating facts, not at all did I lie in the courthouse in this case or any case for that matter."
Sig by Dex. Check it here!
#7
Considering the fact that you knew your friend have prop spammed you coming and saying that his evidence was insufficient makes it as if your denying the fact. The whole "testing" part is completely wrong considering your friend's hours and experience on the server he should have known not to "test" the stalker tool with melons falling from the top floor of the nexus.

Here is the evidence that was provided by multiple players;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yGdHAxChuWs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5MVS2-HWslk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M32F96iAP1I

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vbh28Ynhshc


As well as the evidence I've provided myself.

v2d [02:01:03] [FL:RP] Cujo (STEAM_0:0:78475157) has spawned models/props_junk/watermelon01.mdl
v2d [02:01:19] [FL:RP] Cujo (STEAM_0:0:78475157) has spawned models/props_junk/watermelon01.mdl
v2d [02:01:27] [FL:RP] Cujo (STEAM_0:0:78475157) has spawned models/props_junk/watermelon01.mdl
v2d [02:02:02] [FL:RP] Cujo (STEAM_0:0:78475157) has spawned models/props_junk/watermelon01.mdl
v2d [02:02:21] [FL:RP] Cujo (STEAM_0:0:78475157) has spawned models/props_junk/watermelon01.mdl
v2d [02:02:45] [FL:RP] Cujo (STEAM_0:0:78475157) has spawned models/props_junk/watermelon01.mdl
v2d [02:02:52] [FL:RP] Cujo (STEAM_0:0:78475157) said: Yes
v2d [02:03:02] [FL:RP] Cujo (STEAM_0:0:78475157) has spawned models/props_junk/watermelon01.mdl
v2d [02:03:22] [FL:RP] Cujo (STEAM_0:0:78475157) has spawned models/props_junk/watermelon01.mdl
v2d [02:03:48] [FL:RP] Cujo (STEAM_0:0:78475157) has spawned models/props_junk/watermelon01.mdl
v2d [02:03:51] [FL:RP] Cujo (STEAM_0:0:78475157) has spawned models/props_junk/watermelon01.mdl
v2d [02:03:58] [FL:RP] Cujo (STEAM_0:0:78475157) Tried to Prop kill: [FL:RP] Dr Hibbert (STEAM_0:1:32019399) using models/props_junk/watermelon01.mdl
v2d [02:04:20] [FL:RP] Cujo (STEAM_0:0:78475157) has spawned models/props_junk/watermelon01.mdl
v2d [02:05:46] [FL:RP] Cujo (STEAM_0:0:78475157) has spawned models/props_junk/watermelon01.mdl
v2d [02:06:56] [FL:RP] Cujo (STEAM_0:0:78475157) has spawned models/props_junk/wood_crate001a.mdl
#8
(01-23-2015, 12:02 AM)Raptor Wrote: Considering the fact that you knew your friend have prop spammed you coming and saying that his evidence was insufficient makes it as if your denying the fact. The whole "testing" part is completely wrong considering your friend's hours and experience on the server he should have known not to "test" the stalker tool with melons falling from the top floor of the nexus.

Here is the evidence that was provided by multiple players;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yGdHAxChuWs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5MVS2-HWslk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M32F96iAP1I

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vbh28Ynhshc


As well as the evidence I've provided myself.

v2d [02:01:03] [FL:RP] Cujo (STEAM_0:0:78475157) has spawned models/props_junk/watermelon01.mdl
v2d [02:01:19] [FL:RP] Cujo (STEAM_0:0:78475157) has spawned models/props_junk/watermelon01.mdl
v2d [02:01:27] [FL:RP] Cujo (STEAM_0:0:78475157) has spawned models/props_junk/watermelon01.mdl
v2d [02:02:02] [FL:RP] Cujo (STEAM_0:0:78475157) has spawned models/props_junk/watermelon01.mdl
v2d [02:02:21] [FL:RP] Cujo (STEAM_0:0:78475157) has spawned models/props_junk/watermelon01.mdl
v2d [02:02:45] [FL:RP] Cujo (STEAM_0:0:78475157) has spawned models/props_junk/watermelon01.mdl
v2d [02:02:52] [FL:RP] Cujo (STEAM_0:0:78475157) said: Yes
v2d [02:03:02] [FL:RP] Cujo (STEAM_0:0:78475157) has spawned models/props_junk/watermelon01.mdl
v2d [02:03:22] [FL:RP] Cujo (STEAM_0:0:78475157) has spawned models/props_junk/watermelon01.mdl
v2d [02:03:48] [FL:RP] Cujo (STEAM_0:0:78475157) has spawned models/props_junk/watermelon01.mdl
v2d [02:03:51] [FL:RP] Cujo (STEAM_0:0:78475157) has spawned models/props_junk/watermelon01.mdl
v2d [02:03:58] [FL:RP] Cujo (STEAM_0:0:78475157) Tried to Prop kill: [FL:RP] Dr Hibbert (STEAM_0:1:32019399) using models/props_junk/watermelon01.mdl
v2d [02:04:20] [FL:RP] Cujo (STEAM_0:0:78475157) has spawned models/props_junk/watermelon01.mdl
v2d [02:05:46] [FL:RP] Cujo (STEAM_0:0:78475157) has spawned models/props_junk/watermelon01.mdl
v2d [02:06:56] [FL:RP] Cujo (STEAM_0:0:78475157) has spawned models/props_junk/wood_crate001a.mdl

It's quite apparent that you've not read Hibbert's last post, because he quite clearly says that he was going off the evidence posted in the UBR. You're giving evidence as to why I should be banned from the game rather than why Hibbert should be banned from the forums. Hibbert is here trying to argue his case that he didn't lie in the courthouse, yet you're replying with evidence as to why I am banned. He was saying the evidence was insufficient when it WAS in fact insufficient, therefore he was going off the evidence he saw, which was, at the time, insufficient. He clearly left half way through and what makes you so sure he knew I was propspamming? You're making links that ought not to be made. I suggest you actually review Hibbert's crimes, if any, and decide whether he actually deserved to be banned, because all he was doing was telling the truth. 
This is from me, not Hibbert, you know because he's a little bit banned from the forums and everything. 
Sig by Dex. Check it here!
#9
Approved.


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)