In court documents initially obtained by the Carroll Times Herald , David Ostrom, 40, from Paola, Kansas mentioned he would like to meet his ex-wife and her lawyer on the field of battle where (he) will rend their souls from their corporal bodies.
He added this his ex-wife, Bridget, had destroyed (him) legally, and kindly requested the Iowa District Court give him 12 weeks lead time to source or forge katana and wakizashi swords for battle.
Ostrom, however, is fine not dueling with his ex-wife. He said that his ex-wife can choose her attorney as a "champion," or an alternate stand-in fighter.
Bridgets lawyer, Matthew Hudson, responded to the motion by noting that Ostrom misspelled corporeal. (Seems rather odd that that is what the lawyer chose to focus on first.)
"Surely (Ostrom) meant 'corporeal' bodies which Merriam Webster defines as having, consisting of, or relating to, a physical material body," the attorney wrote.
Hudson continued, "Although (Ostrom) and potential combatant do have souls to be rended, they respectfully request that the court not order this done."
While this all may sound completely outrageous, it seems like thats Ostroms entire point.
"I think I've met Mr. Hudson's absurdity with my own absurdity," .
And while theres no legal precedent for Japanese sword fights in the United States court system, theres also not not a precedent. And duels, technically, have never been abolished.
To this day, trial by combat has never been explicitly banned or restricted as a right in these United States," Ostrom argued in court records, adding that it was used "as recently as 1818 in British Court."
Hudson argued that the outcome of a duel isnt suitable because it can end with one or both parties untimely demise. The outcome of death, Hudson asserts, doesnt equate to that of the disputed property tax and custody claims.
Honestly though, thats not that strong of an argument. Some parents rather die than never be able to communicate with their children again, so perhaps, to Ostrom, the outcomes hold relatively equal weight.
Hudson then asked the court to suspend Ostrom's visitation rights and administer a psychological evaluation, to which Ostrom responded by admitting his "corporal" spelling error, but denying any mental health issues.
The Iowa District Court hasnt issued a ruling of either partys motion yet, but we can hope, dream, that they choose to proceed with Ostrom's.