Man Asks Judge For A 'Trial By Combat' With Swords To Settle Dispute With Former Wife
Separating or divorcing your partner can be a really messy, complicated thing. Dividing your assets and arguing over who gets to keep the spice rack can tear families apart and leave everyone upset.
But if you thought your divorce was bad, at least it's not as full-on as the one emerging from Iowa.
According to The Des Moines Register, David Ostrom, 40, from Paola, Kansas, is seeking to separate from his ex-wife, Bridgette Ostrom.
Instead of undertaking the usual procedure of having a judge help settle the issue, Mr Ostrom has requested their dispute be settled in a 'trial by combat' with swords. He's keen to meet 'on the field of battle where [he] will rend their souls from their corporal bodies'.
Yep - you read that right.
Incredibly, the 40-year-old has also asked that if his request gets approved, he'll need up to three months to 'source or forge katana and wakizashi swords', reports the Carroll Times Herald.
He told Judge Craig Dreismeier: "To this day, trial by combat has never been explicitly banned or restricted as a right in these United States."
While legislation from other countries usually wouldn't be acknowledged in a courtroom, Mr Ostrom argued that 'trial by combat' has been used 'as recently as 1818 in British Court'.
More Like This
What's even more hilarious is that the complainant reportedly suggested that his former wife's lawyer, Matthew Hudson, could act as Bridgette's 'champion'. If Mr Hudson isn't Ms Ostrom's choice, then she can elect a stand-in fighter.
"I think I've met Mr. Hudson's absurdity with my own absurdity," Ostrom reportedly said in a filing to the court. "If Mr. Hudson is willing to do it, I will meet him. I don't think he has the guts to do it."
Mr Hudson hit back against the suggestion, arguing to Judge Dreismeier that a 'trial by combat' could result in death or serious injury, and 'such ramifications likely outweigh those of property tax and custody issue'.
"It should be noted that just because the U.S. and Iowa constitutions do not specifically prohibit battling another person with a deadly katana sword, it does prohibit a court sitting in equity from ordering same," Hudson wrote.
I mean, he's not wrong there.
Mr Ostrom has also admitted that he has no experience in sword fighting, which is a strange admission when you're literally requesting just that.
Judge Dreismeier hasn't yet ruled on either suggestions because there are irregularities on both sides, according to 7News.
"Until the proper procedural steps to initiate a court proceeding are followed, this court will take no further action concerning any motion, objection or petition filed by either party at this time," the judge said.
Featured Image Credit: HBO