Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Trending Topics
Regional Information
The East Pacific brought to you by,
Where to Start?

Social
Discord
IRC
Skype
Steam Group

Roleplay
Regional Atlas
In-Character
News Broadcasts
Out of Character

Government
Executive Offices
Delegate: Yuno
Magisterium
Provost: Drachen
Conclave
Viceroy: Aelitia





Welcome to The East Pacific. We hope you enjoy your visit.

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you may register an account here!


I'm registered. Where do I start?
When you sign up on our forums, your account may be limited to certain forums, and unable to make requests in our roleplay section. We recommend that you Apply for Citizenship to gain all the benefits of being part of our roleplay community!

Username:   Password:
Multiquote ON Multiquote off
Locked Topic
Criminal Trial CTC1: TEP Vs. East Shlibobia; Trial Portions B-E: Trial
Topic Started: Apr 12 2007, 08:47:51 PM (4,106 Views)
Free Pacific States
Member Avatar
Number One Drone
To be entirely honest, I do not believe, at this time, that the prosecution has proved the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Nonetheless, I'm afraid I must deny that motion, for I feel that the prosecution has presented adequate evidence to allow this trial to move to a full verdict.

East Shlibobia, do you wish to present any evidence or call any witnesses? As a note for the record, you are not required to do either.
The Federated Alliance of Free Pacific States | Lyon Republic | Republic of Xiopothos | East Pacific Treaty Organization
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
East_Sh123
No Avatar
hello, Again
Thank you for your patience, Your Honor. My inexperience is obvious, given Reziel's solid amusement.

With that said, I do not wish to call any witnesses or present any evidence. As I've noted before and as it has been displayed over and over, the case is clear cut.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Free Pacific States
Member Avatar
Number One Drone
So be it. In that case, we shall proceed to closing statements.

Is the prosecution prepared to present its closing statement at this time? If so, please do so. If not...do so as soon as possible, please. I'd like to end this trial soon.
The Federated Alliance of Free Pacific States | Lyon Republic | Republic of Xiopothos | East Pacific Treaty Organization
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Reziel
Member Avatar
Eternal Delegate
[ooc]guys... i beg your mercy. i'll be a bit busy with a brief to be filed in front of the european court of justice next thursady. i'll do my best... but do not expect too much speed![/ooc]
Armis Exposcere Pacem
They demanded peace by force of arms


Posted ImagePosted Image
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Free Pacific States
Member Avatar
Number One Drone
Reziel
Sep 9 2007, 07:29 PM
[ooc]guys... i beg your mercy. i'll be a bit busy with a brief to be filed in front of the european court of justice next thursady. i'll do my best... but do not expect too much speed![/ooc]

Are you trying to tell me, Mr. Reziel, that you hold the European Court of Justice in higher esteem then my own! How dare you! :P
The Federated Alliance of Free Pacific States | Lyon Republic | Republic of Xiopothos | East Pacific Treaty Organization
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Reziel
Member Avatar
Eternal Delegate
Free Pacific States
Sep 9 2007, 10:37 PM
Are you trying to tell me, Mr. Reziel, that you hold the European Court of Justice in higher esteem then my own! How dare you! :P

No I don't, Your Honor. Honest. But sadly my boss does. And considering HE is the one who holds the money bag... :wacko:
Armis Exposcere Pacem
They demanded peace by force of arms


Posted ImagePosted Image
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Free Pacific States
Member Avatar
Number One Drone
Reziel
Sep 10 2007, 06:32 AM
Free Pacific States
Sep 9 2007, 10:37 PM
Are you trying to tell me, Mr. Reziel, that you hold the European Court of Justice in higher esteem then my own! How dare you! :P

No I don't, Your Honor. Honest. But sadly my boss does. And considering HE is the one who holds the money bag... :wacko:

Only because Gnidrah has cut funding to every department except the executive! Which I intend to launch an investigation into!

Erm...man. So much for professionalism. This court is in recess for the moment...I do hope you don't mind, East Shlibobia, I know this has been put on hold a lot...I do apologize for that.
The Federated Alliance of Free Pacific States | Lyon Republic | Republic of Xiopothos | East Pacific Treaty Organization
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
East_Sh123
No Avatar
hello, Again
No problem. Recess = stellar.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Reziel
Member Avatar
Eternal Delegate
Esteemed Citizens of The East Pacific,
Your Honor,
Mr Defendant,

The Prosecution is ready for its final statement on the present case. A case whose judicial phase has lasted for too long, something I do apologize with you all – the Defendant himself above anyone else. A case - however – to decide which we’ll have to examine two main issues: the Defendant’s alleged non-knowledge of the laws of East Pacific and his consequent infringement of said laws – and namely the Revised Endorsements Restriction Act (from now on simply ‘RERA’).

Referring to the first issue, I could well just state “ignorance of the law is not an excuse”, thus closing the whole discussion. But I won’t. Mainly because a deeper perusal of such issue does give us all some hints to evaluate the generality of the Defendant’s behavior in this whole case.

To excuse himself, East Shlibobia basically says “I wasn’t aware my behavior was a crime. I wasn’t aware because I ignored the existence of the law. And I ignored the existence of the law because I didn’t know the forum and I’ve never visited the regional page on Nation States”.

And it’s exactly such defense the reason which has grounded the Defendant’s deep examination during the proper phase. Definitely not an attempt to delay the moment of the decision because of the fear of a dismissal, as improperly suggested. Nor a meaningless cruelty against a delightful newcomer, to quote the Defendant. On the contrary, it has been a way to acquire precious information about the Defendant’s personality, an element whose importance in the present case is definitely relevant.

Because the Defendant’s answers and explanations are not convincing.

Today, September 19th 2007, the nation East Shlibobia has 2.22 billions inhabitants. Which allows us to date its creation back to August-October 2006 (Note: the Prosecutor’s own nation counts 2.96 billions and has been created on May 2006). This means that, at the time of the banning, East Shlibobia was some six months old or so. Hardly a complete newbie, ignorant (in its technical meaning of ‘one who ignores’) of the basic facts of NationStates, like the existence of a regional page… a regional page where (casually…) the Defendant could have well been able to see the reminder to RERA he denies to have ever seen.

Moreover, hardly a newbie if we consider his deeds during the ‘relevant period’ (i.e. the week before and the week after the banning itself). A period during which this alleged newbie has been able to spam 248 endorsements throughout the whole East Pacific. 248. Not 236, as the Delegate’s at the moment of the facts. No. 12 more. 12 endorsements to 12 nations East Shlibobia has been able (according to his own explanation) to locate via a careful cross-examination of dozens of different nations’ webpages. Hardly the behavior of a newbie… hardly the behavior of someone who cries ‘I wasn’t aware, I knew nothing about NS, I did mean no harm’.

Hardly believable, if we consider that just few days after his banning, the Defendant has been able to crawl outside the Rejected Realms (the region he has been banned to) to reach a tiny and unknown region of Music to stay in. Without the slightest hesitation, he has realized where the hell he had been kicked to, he has realized he didn’t like the place… and then he has been able to locate this ‘Music’ region between thousands of others. Something which - incidentally – you cannot do without passing through the NS page of the region. NS pages which the Defendant ignored just some hours before… how has he been able to do it? How could he even know of other regions, if he was such inexperienced to be aware of the existence of his own?

The answer is blatant simple.

At the time of his own banning, East Shlibobia wasn’t the newbie he’s trying to convince us all he was. Probably he wasn’t an uber-experienced player… but sure as hell he was (or at least he should have been) experienced enough to know he was part of a region. To have visited (at least) its NS main page. To suppose such region had laws to respect… and to do his best to examine such laws, complying with them. Because that’s what a good citizen does. He puts himself in the position to know the laws of his country. Laws his country has to make public… and nothing else.

Because, once again, the ignorance of law is not (and cannot be) an excuse. Above all for someone who had all the possible ways to know it… and to comply with it. Something East Shlibobia hasn’t done. Has he been lazy? Did he simply not care? Has he been just incautious? It doesn’t matter. He could have checked if what he was going to do could have been considered unlawful.

He hasn’t.

That’s enough.
Armis Exposcere Pacem
They demanded peace by force of arms


Posted ImagePosted Image
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Reziel
Member Avatar
Eternal Delegate
And now, to satisfy the Defendant’s lust for knowledge, let’s come to the meat of it. Let’s examine why the Defendant is guilty beyond any reasonable doubt. Guilty of having attempted to unlawfully gain the position of Delegate. Attempt. That’s what RERA says. That’s the core of the whole issue. RERA doesn’t say ‘to have unlawfully gained’. Nor it says ‘to have done something which will have 100% caused the take over of the Delegacy’. It could have said that. RERA could have used tons of other expressions. It hasn’t. It has used the verb ‘to attempt’. A verb which has been confirmed in the subsequent version of RERA. So… what’s an attempt? What does ‘to attempt’ mean?

According to modern theories, a ‘crime’ is the final result of a behavior/psychological element which has material consequences on the world, basically realizing an ‘event’ (a death, a plane crash, wounds, a situation of possible danger… whatever).

The ‘attempt’, on the contrary, is realized whenever the first part of this pair (behavior + event) has been performed, but the event does not happen because of something which interrupts the natural (i.e. “normal”) development of things. And here’s the gist of the issue.

External facts. Facts which cannot be influenced by the attempter himself. Events, facts, happenings which come from the outside world and change the material repercussions of a behavior which has already been realized. The target moves. The bullet fails. The virus you’ve spread does not work. Whatever.

Where’s the threshold, one could ask? Is everything passable of being considered ‘attempt’, then? Is the ‘attempt’ theory a keen way to justify Holy Inquisitions against phantom enemies?

No.

The threshold stands within the behavior itself, and that threshold is named “suitability / relevancy”. The ‘attempt’ triggers when and only when the behavior is suitable to cause the final event. So, throwing a candy against somebody is not enough to kill him: consequently, throwing a candy cannot be considered an attempt to kill. While throwing a dagger is. The behavior (in this case, the act to throw) is just the same… but we can all see the difference. Trying to simplify tons of pages written on this issue, we can say that the ‘attempt’ is realized when the (potential) criminal’s behavior is enough in and by itself to realize the crime, but something does prevent the fact to actually happen.

This proceeding-wise, spamming ten endorsements wouldn’t have been enough to be considered an attempt to take over the Delegacy. 100 endorsements wouldn’t have been… in the end, probably not even 235 would have. But 248 is beyond the relevancy threshold.

Let’s peruse an example. Why is a shooter passable of being condemned for a killing attempt? Because he has a rifle, he has put himself in the right position to shoot… and he has shot. But the bullet missed: because the aim has not been accurate, because the target has dodged… or because a policeman has shielded him. It doesn’t matter. Just as it doesn’t matter which was the real purpose of the shooter. Did he want to kill? Did he want to see what would have happened? Did he just want to test the rifle? Irrelevant. Completely irrelevant. The one important thing is he has shot. And that shot could have been enough to kill the target. Even if the shooter was far, far away and the chance for him to hit were low. Even if those chances were extremely low. It really doesn’t matter.

He has shot… and the shot in and by itself was enough to kill.

And that’s exactly what the Defendant has done, here. He had a suitable gun (i.e. the chance to endorse) he has made all the needed preparations to aim and shot (checking and re-checking the list of endorsable nations, whichever damned way he has done it)… and then he has shot/endorsed. And endorsed. And endorsed again. And when he had spammed enough endorsements to possibly take over the Delegacy… he has actively looked for more nations to endorse. And he has endorsed them. With no hesitation.

Moreover, the suitability of his behavior is strengthened by a simple consideration. He has not spammed such an incredible amount of endorsements in weeks or months. No. According to the evidence whose reliability cannot be challenged, of those 246 endorsements, 149 have been spammed within a single day (February 10th 2007, according to the scan performed by the Delegate just before the arrest and the ban). A single day of endospamming frenzy which was aimed at… what? At some kind of inexplicable unity with our region, as the Defendant has told us all? At overthrowing the Delegate? At seeing what would happened? We’ll never know. But it doesn’t matter.

What matters… the one thing which matters is that East Shlibobia has realized his behavior, endospamming a number of nation high enough to put the Delegacy at risk. It’s completely irrelevant such a takeover was highly improbable. The fact is that had those nations endorsed East Shlibobia back, the Delegacy would have been taken. It has not happened, luckily. That’s why we are here talking about an attempt and not about an accomplished takeover. But such non-realization is not due to a behavior of the Defendant. It’s due to (and only to) external circumstances which were beyond his own control: the bullet has not exploded (i.e. the nations haven’t endorsed him back fast enough) and then the policemen have captured him. But that’s not the Defendant’s merit. It has been just a case. An external element which has “sterilized” a suitable behavior, preventing the event to happen. Which is exactly the core of the attempted crime.
Armis Exposcere Pacem
They demanded peace by force of arms


Posted ImagePosted Image
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Reziel
Member Avatar
Eternal Delegate
Could have the Delegate warned him? Yes, he could… but that would have increased the risks for the attempt to fulfill its purposes.

Could have the Region found a better way to bring the Defendant’s attention on its laws? Yes… but it hadn’t to. Just as RL nations in the end do not anything to ease the citizens in knowing the law. The law is there. Go out and buy a copy of it. If you don’t… a pity for you.

Did East Shlibobia really want the Delegacy for himself? Once again, we’ll never know. But – once again – it doesn’t matter.

Because this is not a matter of stubbornly persecuting an innocent. Nor it’s a matter of making an example out of the Defendant. Nor, finally, it’s a matter of kicking out of The East Pacific one we do not consider as a member of some kind of ‘club’. This is – far more simply – a matter of applying a law.

Because at the time of the facts East Shlibobia was experienced enough to suppose the region he lived into could have had laws regulating endorsements… and he has done nothing to know that laws.

Because when he has started his endospamming, East Shlibobia was aware such behavior could have been unlawful… but he has decided to take the risk.

Because, be it probable or improbable, East Shlibobia’s endospamming could have determined the fall of the actual Delegacy. In a word, the Defendant’s behavior was fit to determine the realization of the crime. The fact such realization has not happened is due to (and only to) external facts which have worked against him.

Because (and consequently), according to the law en force at the time of the facts, the Defendant is guilty of an indictable offense against The East Pacific, for having unlawfully attempted to gain the position of Delegate.

Therefore, the Prosecution of The East Pacific, in person of the Solicitor General Reziel does respectfully request this Court to confirm the unlawfulness of the Defendant East Shlibobia’s behavior, condemning him to 3 (three) overall years of banning from the region, starting from the date and the time of the first ban, which started approximately at 13.50 (01.50 PM) UTC, February 20th 2007.

However, considering the Defendant’s statements about his own willingness to help and to participate to the life of the region, the Prosecution will be ready to accept a reduction of the abovementioned period to 12 (twelve) months of overall banning, under the proviso the Defendant will renounce to his UN status for an additional period of 6 (six) months starting from the lift of the ban and his consequent re-admittance in the region.

Thank you.
Armis Exposcere Pacem
They demanded peace by force of arms


Posted ImagePosted Image
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Free Pacific States
Member Avatar
Number One Drone
Thank you, prosecutor.

Is the defense prepared to proceed?
The Federated Alliance of Free Pacific States | Lyon Republic | Republic of Xiopothos | East Pacific Treaty Organization
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
East_Sh123
No Avatar
hello, Again
I am ready.

It is my understanding and solid belief that when someone is motivated by malicious intent and breaks the law, he or she must be punished accordingly. Being malicious and deliberate are two of the seminal aspects of criminal behavior and they merit punishment. However, this whole situation was not done deliberately or maliciously by myself. How is it fair and justified to punish someone tremendously for something that was not done on purpose? It isn't fair, it isn't right. That isn't law or the legal system. Instead, this whole trial has become a witch hunt, searching for even the slightest evidence in a weak attempt to establish a case to justify erratic behavior by Gnidrah. All he had to do was message me and I would have stopped and backed down. Period.

This was a tremendous misunderstanding, as I was not aware of the rules and regulations. It was not that I was avoiding the knowledge. I just did not know.

Banishment, no matter what the length, is not a punishment that fits this "crime." This was an innocent mistake that can be dealt with in another way that doesn't involve ridiculous sanctions on how long I must stay away from the Region. I have learned my lesson of my ignorance and lack of knowledge/information, and I have moved on. I wish that I would be allowed to do so more fully by this court.

East Shlibobia is guilty of making an innocent mistake. But the question is - was there evil intent or a hidden, power driven agenda? No and no. Therefore, the punishment suggested by the prosecution does not fit this crime. Furthermore, this case does not fit this court. There is no case and a tremendous lack of evidence. Let me go in peace with the option of returng to the region sooner than later.

Thank you.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Free Pacific States
Member Avatar
Number One Drone
Thank you to you both.

I'll be rendering my decision as soon as possible.
The Federated Alliance of Free Pacific States | Lyon Republic | Republic of Xiopothos | East Pacific Treaty Organization
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Free Pacific States
Member Avatar
Number One Drone
At this time, having examined the evidence presented during the course of this case and having reviewed the laws of the East Pacific, I do believe I have come to a conclusion regarding the guilt of the defendant.

On the first count of the indictment, violation of the now defunct Revised Endorsement Restriction Act, I find the defendant NOT GUILTY. This act prohibits two things: endorsement swapping and exceeding the endorsement cap. There is no provision in this act allowing for prosecution for mass endorsing other nations; there is no provision in this act allowing for prosecution for attempting to overthrow the East Pacific Government. Additionally, I should note, it does not have any clause relating to the arrest of a person that, in time, will most likely overcome the endorsement cap. Instead, this act merely relates to the above stated crimes, and nothing more. As such, the prosecution has made no case (and indeed has no evidence) pointing to his having violated this law.

On the second count of the indictment, violation of Chapter 1, Section 1, Subsection 8, I have no decision. Instead, at this time, I am DISMISSING the charge. It is my belief that this clause is completely irrelevant to these proceedings. Its functionality, in my opinion, is to instruct the Legislature to create something akin to the RERA; nothing more.

On the third count of the indictment, violation of Chapter 2, Section 2, Subsection 1, I find the defendant GUILTY. For records sake, I will remind the courtroom that this clause states the following: "no nation shall seek to overthrow the government of the East Pacific, or by their actions, to see it weakened." Once again, i case the capitalized letters above did not make it clear, I do believe the defendant is guilty of having violated this subsection. In fact, not only is it my belief that the defendant violated this subsection; it is my belief he violated it twofold.

To begin, let me address the simpler guilt of the defendant, that relating to the second portion of the subsection. The defendant violated the second portion of this clause in his endorsing of 250 other nations. This portion states that a nation shall not, by its actions, see the East Pacific Government weakened. To begin, then, let me note that complete irrelevance of motive in this clause; the defendant may not have meant to dethrone or weaken the Delegate. It does not matter. What matters is that his actions would have weakened the Delegate and thus the Regional Government.

My reasoning for this is simple albeit extrapolative. Assuming the Delegate had not placed the defendant under arrest when he did, the defendant undoubtedly would have received reciprocal endorsements. Realistically speaking, he would not have received enough to take the Delegacy (let us be realistic here, people). However, he may very well have received enough to raise his influence by one to two levels. When the Delegate then proceeded to arrest him for violating the RERA, and ban him, the result would be a serious drain on the Delegate's influence. Something that, in the case of a coordinated assault on the East Pacific, would most certainly weaken the region's defenses. As such, in my opinion, the defendant was weakening the region, and thus committing a crime by breaking this subsection of the East Pacific Charter.

Next, secondly, and lastly, allow me to address the more complex guilt of the defendant. The first portion of this subsection states that it is illegal to "seek to overthrow the Delegate." The word seek, in my opinion, implies intent. In other words, in order to violate this clause, I do believe a person must intend to overthrow the Delegate. It cannot be by accident; it can't be a side-affect. They must be trying flat out.

Throughout this case, truly, this has been the matter of debate. Whether the defendant was trying to overthrow the Delegate or merely endorsing about. After extreme examination, despite my true internal wish to rule for innocence, I'm afraid I must state that I have no reasonable doubt that the defendant was doing anything but attempting to undermine the rule of the Delegate. There is simply no other logical explanation for endorsing 250 nations in the course of a few days. At least, none that I can think of, and none that has been provided by the defense.

In conclusion, allow me to compliment both the defense and prosecution. You both presented equally adequate cases. Ultimately, however, the evidence just stacked up against the defendant. As such, at this time, having made a finding in this case, I am once again calling a recess.

I'll return with my decision on sentencing momentarily.
The Federated Alliance of Free Pacific States | Lyon Republic | Republic of Xiopothos | East Pacific Treaty Organization
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Enjoy forums? Start your own community for free.
« Previous Topic · Archive: Judiciary Exhibit · Next Topic »
Locked Topic

Infinite is a customized version of Simple ZB created by Protego of Outline & Zetaboards Theme Zone
Icons by Paomedia and hosted by imgur


© The East Pacific 2003-2018