RIDGEWAY SUPERIOR COURT
LIKILLY,
Plaintiff,
v.
JURIS P. PRUDENCE, et al.,
Defendant.
Case No. RSC-CV-554
ANSWER TO CIVIL COMPLAINT,
DEFENSES, AND COUNTERCLAIMS
DEFENDANT, Clifford2 (hereinafter “Juris Prudence,” “Ms. Prudence”), for her answers to the
complaint alleges, and denies all claims unless affirmative accepted, as follows:
1. Deny except for the date.
2. Deny and affirmatively state that the owner of the vehicle is Zr_n and the Plaintiff swung
his axe at least four times before he was shot.
3. Deny and affirmatively State Plaintiff did not attempt to back away from the car, and the
second he got out, he was killed and that Techiey did not contribute to the death of the
Plaintiff.
4. Deny.
JURISDICTION
5. Accept.
6. Accept.
PARTIES
7. Accept.
8. Accept.
9. Accept.
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
10. Deny.
11. Deny.
12. Deny.
DEFENSES
FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Self-defense)
13. The allegations in this answer are incorporated in full as reference.
14. Defendant retains a constitutional right to defend himself against reasonable threats to his
life.
15. Defendant was at Bloxmart on or around July 23, 2022 purchasing goods from the store.
16. When Defendant walked back outside to get into their car and leave the area, Plaintiff,
likilly, walked up to their vehicle.
17. Likilly had an axe on his person and was in the general area at the time that the
Defendant exited the store.
18. Plaintiff waited for the vehicle to unlock and quickly got into the vehicle without
permission or invitation from any of the parties, still having his axe in his hand.
19. Plaintiff took his axe out, while sitting in the back right passenger seat.
20. With his axe out, Plaintiff swung his axe at least four times.
21. While the Plaintiff was swinging his axe, two other individuals were in the car. Techiey
sat directly in front of the Plaintiff, and Zr_n sat adjacent to the Plaintiff.
22. Ms. Juris Prudence was also in extremely close proximity to the Plaintiff as he was
swinging the axe, but was outside of the car.
23. Ms. Juris Prudence feared the threat of death or severe bodily harm done to either
occupants of the vehicle—her dear friends—as well as herself, because all of the
individuals were extremely close to being struck by the Plaintiff’s intentional swinging of
his axe.
24. Plaintiff had both forced his way into a car, took a deadly weapon out and began
swinging his axe wildly and recklessly.
25. Defendant took out her firearm and began firing at the Plaintiff as he continued to swing
his deadly weapon in the direction of three individuals.
26. The Plaintiff then tried to get out of the vehicle, making Ms. Prudence even more fearful
that he was going to attack her, and she fired the killing shots before he could move any
further.
27. While Plaintiff was inside the vehicle, he continuously screamed at the driver to drive the
vehicle to the “CD.”
28. The Plaintiff’s hostile screaming contributed to his threatening demeanor and Defendant
reasonably concluded that he was going to continue trying to harm us if we did not drive
him, as if to hold us captive.
29. Plaintiff additionally has 51 criminal records. 22 of them are associated with assault or
murder of some variety.
30. This criminal record was known to the Defendant at the time of the incident because
there is a criminal case currently pending against the Plaintiff in the Superior Court for
attempted murder, and Defendant’s position as Attorney General at the time of the filing
made him aware of this individual’s criminal propensities.
31. The understanding that the Plaintiff has on a number of occasions killed, assaulted, and
battered individuals throughout the State contributed to the Defendant’s fear of death or
bodily harm marginally.
32. Plaintiff intentionally caused a threat of life or severe bodily harm to Ms. Prudence and
those around her when he intentionally forced his way into their car, screamed at them
and ordered them to drive, and then swung his axe multiple times in their direction.
COUNTERCLAIMS
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
(1 R. Stat. § 203 Assault)
33. The allegations in this answer are incorporated in full as reference.
34. On July 23, 2022, Defendants were at Bloxmart in Palmer, and were purchasing goods
from the store.
35. When Defendants exited the store to return to the vehicle they were traveling in, Plaintiff
entered the vehicle, which was owned by Zr_n, without permission or invitation.
36. Plaintiff was in possession of an axe at the time that he entered the car.
37. Once inside the car, Plaintiff took out his axe and began swinging it recklessly.
38. There were two other occupants in the vehicle.
39. Techiey was sitting in the seat directly in front of the Plaintiff.
40. Zr_n was sitting in the seat across and adjacent to the Plaintiff.
41. Juris Prudence was standing just outside the car, almost within swinging range of the axe.
42. Each individual felt extremely threatened by the Plaintiff’s actions after he had not
entered the vehicle without permission, but then took out a deadly weapon and swung it
several times in extremely close proximity to all persons, causing a reasonable fear of
death or severe bodily harm perpetrated by the Plaintiff.
43. Plaintiff intended to cause this reasonable fear when he unlawfully entered the vehicle
and began swinging his deadly weapon at the individuals.
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
(1 R. Stat. § 112 Abuse of Legal Process )
44. The allegations in this answer are incorporated in full as reference.
45. Plaintiff and his counsel were provided video evidence indicating that the actions taken
by the Defendants were done in the defense of their life, because of a reasonable threat of
bodily harm, prior to Plaintiff’s filing.
46. Plaintiff’s counsel discussed with his client after seeing that they did not have a case, and
asked about why the Defendant had needlessly swung his axe in such close proximity to
beautiful women (defendants here.)
47. Plaintiff admitted to his counsel that he “did the axe” after Plaintiff’s counsel noted to the
Plaintiff that they could “see a[n] axe swinging at their door.”
48. Plaintiff and his counsel knew, or reasonably should have known, that the conduct
engaged in by each defendant was done well within the lawful confines of self-defense.
49. Nevertheless, Plaintiff has filed claims to the State Bar, Department of Justice, and to this
court, seeking to destroy their good reputations and career in the process.
50. Plaintiff’s Counsel, on behalf of Plaintiff, met with Solicitor General Turntable on July
24, 2022 at their home.
51. There, counsel expressed that the “game is over for them [defendants].”
52. Counsel even expressed that they had hoped that the Defendants had justification for their
actions. When the Solicitor General said “i rlly hope they had justification” counsel
responded, “me too…me too.”
53. Both counsel, and Plaintiff have arbitrarily obstructed legal processes by filing to the
State Bar, Department of Justice, and to this court knowing that the conduct engaged in
by the Defendants was lawful.
RELIEF
54. Defendant seeks a judgement as follows:
a. Deny all relief as to Plaintiff’s only cause of action.
b. Order compensatory damages of $3,500 for assault.
c. Order punitive damages of $1,500 for assault.
d. An injunction prohibiting the Plaintiff from pursuing any further action by legal
process regarding the facts of the case.
e. Order punitive damages of $2,500 for abuse of legal process.
Date: July 24, 2022 Respectfully submitted.
CLIFFORD
Pro-se
