|
|
|
The East Pacific brought to you by, | |||||||||||||
|
Social
Roleplay
|
|
| 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! |
| Notice of Ejection and Ban; The Empire of Mighty Riches | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: May 30 2007, 08:57:41 PM (1,033 Views) | |
| Gnidrah | May 30 2007, 08:57:41 PM Post #1 |
|
Former Delegate
|
At approximately 0155 UTC, Thursday, May 31, 2007, the nation Mighty Riches was ejected and banned from the region for endorsement-swapping and seeking to overthrow the lawful Delegate in first-person. The nation's ban will not be rescinded after 48 hours, as the Government intends to prosecute. The prosecution will specify charges within 24 hours as it reviews evidence and prepares for trial. |
![]() |
|
| Gnidrah | May 30 2007, 08:58:58 PM Post #2 |
|
Former Delegate
|
Revised Endorsement Restriction Act, 2007 4th Magisterial Assembly Chapter 3, Section 7, Subsection 2
Revised Endorsement Restriction Act, 2007 4th Magisterial Assembly Chapter 2, Section 3, Subsection 2
East Pacific Charter Chapter 1, Section 1, Subsection 8
East Pacific Charter Chapter 2, Section 2, Subsection 1
|
![]() |
|
| Free Pacific States | May 30 2007, 09:10:17 PM Post #3 |
|
Number One Drone
|
Again, Chief Barrister, I'll need you to find someone to contact and, if s/he wishes, defend Mighty Riches. |
| The Federated Alliance of Free Pacific States | Lyon Republic | Republic of Xiopothos | East Pacific Treaty Organization | |
![]() |
|
| Kangarawa | May 31 2007, 10:24:05 AM Post #4 |
|
Maker of Coffee
|
I will be happy to enquire, Your Honour, and will let you know as soon as someone is found. |
![]() ![]() If you get to thinkin' you're a person of some influence, try orderin' somebody else's dog around. | |
![]() |
|
| Kangarawa | Jun 1 2007, 06:29:13 AM Post #5 |
|
Maker of Coffee
|
Your Honour, Deitus has agreed to act as Counsel for the Defence. |
![]() ![]() If you get to thinkin' you're a person of some influence, try orderin' somebody else's dog around. | |
![]() |
|
| deitus | Jun 1 2007, 09:21:23 AM Post #6 |
|
Face Plant!
|
Your Honor, If it pleases the court, I am preparing to take this case. I have contacted the accused and will be confiring with him later today. As your Honor may know, this is the first case I have been requested to participate in. I am a member of the bar but unfamiliar with some of the procedures of this court. I beg the court's patience and request its guidance in those areas that I may be unfamiliar in. I trust that my inexperience as defense will not prevent MightyRiches from receiving a fair trial. |
![]() |
|
| Free Pacific States | Jun 1 2007, 10:01:23 AM Post #7 |
|
Number One Drone
|
As long as the defendant is aware of your inexperience and willing to proceed with you as his attorney nonetheless, this court has no trouble with your serving as his attorney, Deitus. You may direct any questions you have to me; I will endeavor to answer them as wholly as possible. |
| The Federated Alliance of Free Pacific States | Lyon Republic | Republic of Xiopothos | East Pacific Treaty Organization | |
![]() |
|
| deitus | Jun 1 2007, 10:29:35 AM Post #8 |
|
Face Plant!
|
Your Honor, The Defendent is aware that I will be representing him and has expressed his approval. I will require a short period, Your Honor, to confer with my client on the particulars of the case and to prepare for the case. Notwithstanding section 1, 1 of the East Pacific Charter, "The delegate shall have ultimate control over membership of the region, and shall have the power to remove from the region any nation seen to be in contravention of this charter or subsequent laws passed by the legislative branch," I petition the court to lift the ban and allow MightyRiches to return to the East Pacific, until such time as his guilt in this matter may be determined. |
![]() |
|
| Gnidrah | Jun 1 2007, 10:53:35 AM Post #9 |
|
Former Delegate
|
Your Honour, Given the nature of the alleged crimes, the severity of the charges levied against the defendant, and the defendant's behavior as a result of the actions taken and charges made against him, I most strongly object to the idea of allowing the defendant to return to the region. The Government recognizes the defendant as a potential threat to the security of the region, which is why the individual was ejected and banned from the region in the first place. Allowing him to return would negate the Government's action and potentially compromise regional security. As an enforcer of the laws of the East Pacific, I reserve the right to maintain the ban indefinitely, or until such time as the court might overrule my decision, pending the result of this trial. That is, after all, what these proceedings are for: to determine if the defendant did what he is being charged with, and to either uphold or overrule my actions as a result of the outcome of the trial. Gnidrah |
![]() |
|
| Reziel | Jun 1 2007, 10:56:07 AM Post #10 |
|
Eternal Delegate
|
Your Honour, I do not want to be unrespectfult towards either the Court or the Defence... but such a request should be a pre-trial one, and if I'm not wrong we aren't at that phase, yet. Consequently, this is not the time nor the place for it. EDITED because of same-time posting with the Delegate. Beg the Court's pardon. |
|
Armis Exposcere Pacem They demanded peace by force of arms ![]()
| |
![]() |
|
| deitus | Jun 1 2007, 11:49:09 AM Post #11 |
|
Face Plant!
|
Your Honor, With respect to the Court and to the Prosecution, as well as to the Honorable Delegate, I do not see that the defendent can be a threat to the region now that he has been singled out. If he has, in fact, committed the crime he is accused of, would he be so foolish as to commit the same crime again while on trial for the very offense? Surely, he would be under such scrutiny that any atttempt to gather endorsements would result in his immediate ban a second time. Notwithstanding the right of the Delegate to remove a nation from the region, it is the authority of this court to overrule the Delegate in such matters. If, after a lengthy trial, the defendent is found innocent of these charges, it will be a mute point as he will have already been banned from the region for some time. If the defendent is presumed innocent until proven guilty, then he should be allowed to remain in the region, under scrutiny, during the course of the proceedings. If this is a matter more fitting for the pre-trial phase, then I beg the court's pardon. I am ready to proceed when it suits the court. I trust that the pre-trial phase will include an evidentiary hearing that there may be a discovery of the evidence against my client. |
![]() |
|
| Gnidrah | Jun 1 2007, 06:07:57 PM Post #12 |
|
Former Delegate
|
Your Honour, While I continue to disagree with the defense, I am willing to compromise. I will remove the ban and allow the defendant to return to the region on the proviso that the defendant meet and keep the following terms:
Thank You, Gnidrah |
![]() |
|
| Free Pacific States | Jun 1 2007, 09:16:00 PM Post #13 |
|
Number One Drone
|
Is this acceptable to your client, Deitus? |
| The Federated Alliance of Free Pacific States | Lyon Republic | Republic of Xiopothos | East Pacific Treaty Organization | |
![]() |
|
| deitus | Jun 2 2007, 01:30:38 AM Post #14 |
|
Face Plant!
|
No, your honour. My client is not willing to give up his U.N. membership. He is also not a member of this message board. He will stop the campaign against the Delegate if the ban is lifted on his nation, the charges are dropped against him, and the endorsement cap is removed. Although he is unwilling to agree to any terms. |
![]() |
|
| deitus | Jun 2 2007, 01:32:30 AM Post #15 |
|
Face Plant!
|
My apologies to the court. My client will not agree to those terms. |
![]() |
|
| Free Pacific States | Jun 2 2007, 10:30:13 AM Post #16 |
|
Number One Drone
|
Alright. If the deal is off, then I'm afraid I have no choice but to rule on this matter. Which, of course, sets precedent (as no such ruling has been made previously). So, this is going to be a bit long. Sorry. To begin, bail will be defined in the East Pacific as the court's allowing a person to return to the region during the course of his/her trial with the trust that s/he will not commit a crime during his/her trial. In considering bail arguments, this court will consider two equally important factors: security risk and community participation. The first component, security risk, will be based around the threat of the defendant's attempting to overthrow the delegate during the course of the trial. Even if the defendant does not succeed, the cost (in influence) of banning him could put the region at risk. The second aspect, community participation, will relate to the defendant's activity on the regional forums. Any person active on the forums (in the past or present) will receive extra consideration due to the assumption that they do not wish to be ostracized as a criminal on the forums. These two elements, in any legal case, should be the primary determinants of bail. So, onto the specifics of this case. The defendant has refused to give up his UN Membership. Thus, should he be allowed to return, he could be a serious threat to the security of the region. Additionally, the defendant is not and never has been active on the forums of the East Pacific. As such, he has nothing to lose in making an attempt on the Delegacy. Taking these two factors into account, at this time, the court denies bail to the defendant. As a note, this does not bar future agreement between the prosecution and defense; however, the prosecution must agree to any bail terms from this point forward. |
| The Federated Alliance of Free Pacific States | Lyon Republic | Republic of Xiopothos | East Pacific Treaty Organization | |
![]() |
|
| Gnidrah | Jun 2 2007, 06:34:45 PM Post #17 |
|
Former Delegate
|
Understood, your honour. As a matter of standard, the prosecuting attorney will be the one handling any future bail terms. As Delegate, I do not want to make it a habit to put my hands in these matters, as I've done in these proceedings. Recognizing that the prosecuting attorney is the "middle-man" (if you will) between the judiciary and myself, I'll leave it to him to do the talking. My apologies to the Solicitor General and to you, your honour, if I've stepped on anyone's toes. |
![]() |
|
| Free Pacific States | Jun 2 2007, 11:56:16 PM Post #18 |
|
Number One Drone
|
*Shrug* If the Governor wants to try a case in a State Court, Gnid, its his right to do so. And there'd be little objection (just as you'll see no objection to me). Simply...a bit unusual, lol. |
| The Federated Alliance of Free Pacific States | Lyon Republic | Republic of Xiopothos | East Pacific Treaty Organization | |
![]() |
|
| Gnidrah | Jun 3 2007, 12:58:18 AM Post #19 |
|
Former Delegate
|
Well, I am a bit unorthodox at times, you know. Regardless, I'll do my best to rely on the Solicitor General, from now on. It is technically his job, after all. |
![]() |
|
| deitus | Jun 7 2007, 12:57:48 AM Post #20 |
|
Face Plant!
|
If we may proceed your honour, ... I believe my client has the right to a speedy trial. Shall I enter a plea of guilty now or just wait for the court to rule on the matter? |
![]() |
|
| deitus | Jun 7 2007, 12:59:34 AM Post #21 |
|
Face Plant!
|
Seeing that my client has little chance of a fair trial in this court, I move for a change of venue. I move that he should be tried by the Court of the North Pacific. |
![]() |
|
| Free Pacific States | Jun 9 2007, 12:20:56 AM Post #22 |
|
Number One Drone
|
My apologies on the lack of response, Deitus, I had not seen the earlier post. Erm, the court does not rule on the matter of pleas. That is up to the defense entirely (whether to plead guilty or not guilty). If you'd like to declare it now, that's fine, though you'll have to re-declare at trial. If there is one...have you considered a plea bargain as opposed to simply pleading guilty and throwing yourself on the mercy of the court? As for the right to a fair trial...I personally agree, Deitus, though I'd remind you that at the moment there is no actual law requiring such. Nonetheless, I will try to keep this trial moving. In relation to your last comment, Deitus, do you have any evidence for this assertion that your client has no chance of a fair trial in this court? |
| The Federated Alliance of Free Pacific States | Lyon Republic | Republic of Xiopothos | East Pacific Treaty Organization | |
![]() |
|
| deitus | Jun 9 2007, 01:25:27 AM Post #23 |
|
Face Plant!
|
I beg the pardon of the court for my outburst. It is not my intent to grande-stand but rather to give my client a zelous defense. My client cannot have a fair trial "if the governor tries the case". Notwithstanding this, the defendent has expressed little interest in this case. His first telegram stated, "Sure why not, you can represent me." Then, to my suggestion of accepting bail he wrote: "If you think that there is any way at all you are going to get me to resign my UN membership you have your head in the clouds. Secondly he already kicked me out of the region to propose that I get out of the region is stupid. Thirdly I did nothing wrong and he kicked he out without trying to resolve any issues first as far as I am concerned the public has a right to know. Fourthly as far as your trail goes I can’t even find the trail through that link, and I am not a member on that forum so even if I could find it I couldn’t post there. "So hear are my terms, I will stop the campaign against him if he removes the ban on my nation, drops the charges against me and removes the 75 endorsement limit on the East pacific!" His last message states: What happened was I was trying to become more active in the UN by having more endorsements; I wasn’t trying to swap endorsements at all (I was simply saying that I was an upcoming member of the UN that believed in peace and would like their endorsement) and had absolutely no intention of destabilizing the government whatsoever. It is clear to me, your Honour, that my client is guilty as charged. By his own admission, he states that he was asking for endorsements. He has not responded to any of my recent messages and, judging from his recent activity in the Rejected Realms (he has gone from 15 to 50 endorsements overnight,) I would say he has moved on and has no intention of returning to the East Pacific. Despite my best intention of giving MightyRiches a fair defense and in fighting these charges, my client has revealed that he has no interest in these procedings and has no evidence to present in his defense. I, therefore, withdraw my application for a change of venue and ask that the court rule sumarily in this matter. |
![]() |
|
| Free Pacific States | Jun 9 2007, 10:48:26 AM Post #24 |
|
Number One Drone
|
Does the prosecution have any objection to an immediate court ruling in this case? |
| The Federated Alliance of Free Pacific States | Lyon Republic | Republic of Xiopothos | East Pacific Treaty Organization | |
![]() |
|
| Reziel | Jun 9 2007, 11:42:15 AM Post #25 |
|
Eternal Delegate
|
Considering the above statement, the prosecution has no objection at all, Your Honour. However, considering the persistent behaviour of the defendant, and namely THIS request:
we formally request the court to confirm the permanent banning against the nation of Mighty Riches. |
|
Armis Exposcere Pacem They demanded peace by force of arms ![]()
| |
![]() |
|
| deitus | Jun 9 2007, 04:36:55 PM Post #26 |
|
Face Plant!
|
The defense has no objection to this and will accept the ruling of the court in this matter. |
![]() |
|
| Free Pacific States | Jun 11 2007, 11:43:36 PM Post #27 |
|
Number One Drone
|
Actually, after examining the matter, I'm afraid I find that I cannot rule on this case, as the defendant is not present or being truly represented (without offense, Deitus, you've admitted that you no longer are in contact with the defendant). Taking that into account, I hereby do affirm the ban of the government until that time at which the defendant comes forward himself (here on the forums) or through an attorney to challenge the ban. This is, in short, a ruling of Guilty in Absentia. Case closed. |
| The Federated Alliance of Free Pacific States | Lyon Republic | Republic of Xiopothos | East Pacific Treaty Organization | |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Archive: Judiciary Exhibit · Next Topic » |






3:25 AM Jul 11