spilt off from Tyler v. Camwood thread

[Flemingovia]

My decisions are based on whether I believe a matter can be successfully prosecuted as a criminal case. If, for whatever reason, I do not believe that is possible, then I'm obligated as a prosecutor not to file the case.

And since no criminal case has ever been successfully prosecuted, therefore no case is ever filed.

A logic that Joseph heller would gave been proud of.

 

[Blue Wolf II]

My decisions are based on whether I believe a matter can be successfully prosecuted as a criminal case. If, for whatever reason, I do not believe that is possible, then I'm obligated as a prosecutor not to file the case.

You don't have the authority to pick and choose what cases you want to proceed with. Your job is to file and prosecute cases to the best of your ability and without regard to personal opinion to the case itself. My job, as a Justice, is to determine if the case is with or without Merit.

So, unless you want to take my job, do yours and proceed with this Criminal Case or resign and let someone else do it.

 

[Grosseschnauzer]

Blue Wolf I am doing my job.

You're the one who is interfering. You have been acting inappropriately as a justice almost from the day you stole the job when it was vacant.

And Flem, if someone wants to pursue their allegations as a civil case, there is nothing stopping them from filing one.

If people file weak claims that won't prove anything, I'll be irresponsible if I did file them. This office is not, repeat, is not a rubber stamp. Simply because someone thinks there a crime there somewhere, does not mean that there is one that can be proven.

And for the record, Blue Wolf, how many indictments did you actually bring during your term as Attorney General?

Answer: None. (I checked the Legal Office and Court archives.)

 

[Blue Wolf II]

And for the record, Blue Wolf, how many indictments did you actually bring during your term as Attorney General?

Answer: None. (I checked the Legal Office and Court archives.)

A few points on this:

1. That has literally nothing to do with anything.
2. Who cares?
3. No one ever filed for a case, therefore it would have been rather hard for me to make an indictment.
4. Should I have made up charges against random people? Would that have made me a "good" Attorney General?
5. No, seriously, who cares?

You're the one who is interfering. You have been acting inappropriately as a justice almost from the day you stole the job when it was vacant.

Apparently running unopposed is the same as "stealing" these days. So I guess, by that merit, you also stole the position of Attorney General when you ran unopposed. Yeah, that comment was a bit silly in retrospect, now wasn't it?



Grosseschnauzer, you have no Constitutional nor Legal right to deny these cases. Show me the law that gives you this power.

 

[Flemingovia]

If you are concerned with the lack of progress in the secular courts in this region, it is now possible to submit to the Fiqh, the religious court of Flemingovianism. All that is needed is for both parties to voluntarily pledge to be bound by the results of the court, and justice will be swift, honourable and sensible.

TO ENTER THE FIQH ALTERNATIVE JUDICIAL SYSTEM, CLICK HERE.

 

[Blue Wolf II]

Grosseschnauzer, you have no Constitutional nor Legal right to deny these cases. Show me the law that gives you this power.

The Attorney General's silence on this matter speaks volumes.

 

[Blue Wolf II]

I am glad to see the AG would rather split this topic off and label it as "spam" than address legitimate legal questions posed to him by a standing Justice.