The North Pacific v. Tim

punk d

punk d

TNPer
-
-
This Court is now in session and will hear the case of The North Pacific v. Tim, as filed by the Attorney General here.
Request for Indictment​

Accused: Tim
Complaining Party: Gaspo

The Office of the Attorney General humbly requests that the Court issue an indictment charging Tim with the crime(s) of: Treason x 1, Espionage x 2, Conspiracy x 2, and Fraud x 1.

Relevant Sections of Law
Section 1.1: Treason
2. "Treason" is defined as taking arms or providing material support to a group or region for the purpose of undermining or overthrowing the lawful government of The North Pacific or any of its treatied allies as governed by the Constitution.
3. Specifically, no player maintaining a nation in a region or organization at war with TNP may maintain a nation within TNP, or participate in the governance thereof, for the duration of hostilities.
4. At this time, there are no regions or organizations at war with TNP. At this time TNP is allied with Stargate, the South Pacific, Taijitu, International Democratic Union, Osiris and Equilism.
5. The Speaker will update the preceding clause as appropriate.

Section 1.2: Espionage
6. "Espionage" is defined as the use of a Nation or Persona within The North Pacific for the purpose of gathering information for a group or region not officially sanctioned by the lawful government of The North Pacific as governed by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
7. The information gathered must be of a nature that a person that has not registered on the official forums or attained public office would be unable to access it without cracking technical security measures.

Section 1.3: Fraud
8. "Election fraud" is defined as the willful deception of citizens with regards to the candidates running, the time and venue of the elections, or the requirements and methods by which one may be eligible to vote or run for office.
9. “Fraud” is defined as an intentional deception, by falsehood or omission, made for some benefit or to damage another individual.
Click to expand...

Section 1.7. Conspiracy
19. "Conspiracy" is defined as planning, attempting, or helping to commit any crime under this criminal code.
Click to expand...

Statement of Facts

The first set of charges (Treason/Espionage/Conspiracy/Fraud) arises out of Tim’s actions while Vice Delegate. When the NPA raided Warzone Africa in October 2012, Tim addressed Jamie regarding a leak of classified NPA information. An excerpt of that log is reproduced below. Tim served as a government official of The North Pacific at that time, yet received and refused to disclose information regarding a serious breach of TNP security, out of loyalty to the UDL. He also spoke to mcmasterdonia, again refusing to disclose the identity of the leak, while bragging about how he would become Delegate. The NPA and the UDL were at war in Warzone Africa at that time - this constitutes aiding the enemy in a time of conflict. Possession of classified documents, while refusing to disclose them, constitutes Espionage, and his work to cover up this incident, through his refusal to disclose the information constitutes Conspiracy with whoever the leak was. Lastly, Tim later claimed that the logs were anonymous, yet did not indicate so originally, instead refusing to declare their ownership. This lie satisfies the requirements for a Fraud charge.

The second set of Treason/Espionage/Fraud charges arises out of the Ravania affair, the details of which are well-known. Tim refused to participate in the investigation, despite his presence in the channel at the time of the leak and his oath to the Constitution as an RA member.

Evidence supporting these charges is included below.

Supporting Evidence
[18:48] * Tim heard about WZ Africa
[18:48] <+Jamie|Away> That was that True North's fault.
[18:49] <+Jamie|Away> The trigger was fine.
[18:49] <+Tim> Oh bullshit. You thought WZA updated 25 minutes before it really did
[18:49] <+Tim> And then NPA accused FT of being wrong
[18:49] <+Jamie|Away> Who told you this?
[18:50] <+Tim> I have logs.
[18:50] <+Tim> Also, we're coming for you.
[18:50] <+Jamie|Away> I'm not the lead.
[18:50] <+Tim> Doesn't stop us.
[18:50] <+Jamie|Away> Who gave you the logs Tim?
[18:52] <+Tim> That's classified
[18:52] <+Tim> Not my fault if NPA has worms
[18:53] <+Jamie|Away> You're running for delegate and accepting intelligence leaks?
[18:53] <+Jamie|Away> Also, whoever did give you it obviously only gave you one side of the story.
[18:53] <+Tim> I'm sorry, but when I get an email sent to me what do I do? Not read the logs?
[18:54] <+Tim> Oh no, I have a lot of NPA to blame
[18:54] <+Jamie|Away> What for? O.o
[18:55] <+Tim> It's incompetent
[18:55] <+Tim> Extremely incompetent
[18:56] <+Jamie|Away> Can I say my side of the story now?
[18:56] <+Jamie|Away> Or do you just ignore me?
[18:56] <+Tim> No, you can say it
[18:56] <+Jamie|Away> Firstly.
[18:56] <+Jamie|Away> I thought it was near the end of the update.
[18:57] <+Jamie|Away> But someone else tells me it was earlier.
[18:57] <+Tim> And you believe them?
[18:57] <+Tim> Just check the RSS
[18:57] <+Jamie|Away> No nations in WZ africa were answering issues.
[18:57] <+Jamie|Away> No way for me to check.
[18:57] <+Tim> ....you didn't put a trigger nation in to check beforehand? O.o
[18:57] <+Tim> ...what is this
[18:58] <+Tim> I don't even
[18:58] <+Jamie|Away> I was asked if I could trigger.
[18:58] <+Tim> By?
[18:58] <+Tim> Is NPA that incompetent that they find their triggermen the update of?
[18:58] <+Jamie|Away> Not important. If you don't tell me who gave you the logs, I don't have to tell you who asked.
[18:59] <+Jamie|Away> Also, my trigger was spot on, so before you talk shit, ask the person to be honest.
[18:59] <+Jamie|Away> Only because the trigger happened to be stuck behind an 1200 nation puppet dump, it wasn'tgoing to be 100% accurate.
[19:01] * Tim nods
[19:01] <+Tim> I doubt you didn't have a closer trigger
[19:02] <+Jamie|Away> I could have done something like a 2 second trigger yes.
[19:02] <+Jamie|Away> but would that have worked?
[19:02] <+Jamie|Away> really?
[19:03] <+Tim> One sec.
[19:03] <+Tim> Checking with FT for triggers
[19:06] <+Tim> damn...
[19:06] <+Tim> that sucks
[19:06] <+Tim> It really is the best you can get O.o
[19:06] <+Tim> Should have done GO command
[19:06] <+Tim> 2 seconds is enough then
[19:06] <+Tim> 50% chance that variance would help you
[19:07] <+Jamie|Away> In MSN Tim, that would work.
[19:07] <+Jamie|Away> IRC is a lot more difficult to work the GO command with.
[19:08] <+Tim> No..
[19:08] <+Tim> not really
[19:08] <+Tim> Everyone needs to just have both windows open
[19:08] <+Tim> Watch the IRC for a Go
[19:08] <+Tim> and mute the channel like 5 min before jump
[19:11] <+Tim> Sucks
[19:11] <+Tim> to
[19:11] <+Tim> Suck
[19:12] <+Jamie|Away> Also, you know what? For my 1st attempt at triggering for an operation, I didn't consider it a complete failure.
[19:14] <+Tim> My first triggering operation... I went 14/15
[19:14] <+Tim> Missed one because the person whos trigger I had to use didn't set it >.>
[19:14] <+Tim> So I had to blind jump it
[19:14] <+Tim> And we got UDLers
[19:15] <+Jamie|Away> Tim, it worries me what you'd actually do with the NPA if you were elected.
[19:18] <+Tim> It would stay BiGameplay
[19:33] <+Tim> Jamie
[19:33] <+Tim> http://forum.thenorthpacific.org/single/?p=8070790&t=6973096
[19:58] <+Jamie|Away> bleh.
[19:58] * Tim snickers
[19:58] <+Tim> Though it's not worth much for me.
[19:59] <+Tim> If Elu isn't back by Wednesday 10:41 AM EST
[20:00] <+Jamie|Away> Nothing changes.
[20:00] <+Tim> A lot changes.
[20:00] <+Tim> I become Delegate.
[20:01] <+Jamie|Away> On the forum, yes.
[20:01] <+Jamie|Away> You do not have the seat.
[20:01] <+Tim> Un-Endorse Campaign
[20:01] <+Tim> Would be sent within like... 48 hours
[20:01] <+Tim> And Elections would commence, which I'm probably going to win
[20:01] <+Jamie|Away> And the delegacy would go to Eras.
[20:01] <+Tim> I know
[20:02] * Tim starts his TartoGram
[20:02] <+Jamie|Away> Also, you couldn't do an unendo campaign against her. :p
[20:02] <+Jamie|Away> Since that would be treason.
[20:04] <+Tim> Nope
[20:04] <+Tim> But she'd set the WFE to endorsetim
[20:04] <+Tim> and then we send out anooother ENDOTIM TG
[12:36] <mcmasterdonia> Who shared logs with you abou the WZA mission?
[12:37] <Tim> That's classified
[12:37] <mcmasterdonia> If I have a privacy issue, I need to know about it.
[12:37] <mcmasterdonia> That's crap
[12:37] <Tim> You guys had UDLers in and out of that channel constantly
[12:37] <mcmasterdonia> A leak in the NPA is bad for our security
[12:37] <Tim> Nah, I got it UDLside
[12:37] <mcmasterdonia> Great, so we don't trust UDL anymore?
[12:37] <Tim> No you can
[12:37] <mcmasterdonia> Fine.
[12:37] <Tim> I was told because I was wondering what happened at Minor
[12:37] <Tim> because I saw that you tried
[12:38] <mcmasterdonia> Well its very disappointing
[12:38] <mcmasterdonia> Considering they want a treaty
[12:38] <mcmasterdonia> And expect trust
[12:38] <Tim> They?
[12:38] <mcmasterdonia> The UDL
[12:38] <Tim> 'you guys' would be a better term
[12:38] <mcmasterdonia> Well, I'm talking to you as a TNPer
[12:38] * Tim nods
[12:39] <Tim> It goes past a trust issue when your troops decide to start bashing our bot.
[12:39] <mcmasterdonia> If the UDL leaks conversations from our private channels, how can privacy be expected from us?
[12:39] <mcmasterdonia> bullshit
[12:39] <mcmasterdonia> One guy said the bot was wrong, I disagreed with him
[12:39] <mcmasterdonia> Complaining about a bot is not fair game to release logs
[12:39] <Tim> I didn't get the full logs, to be noted
[12:40] <Tim> So I assumed it was more like this one guy repeatedly yelling that FT was wrong
[12:40] <Tim> You can trust the UDL
[12:40] <mcmasterdonia> <+Tim> Not my fault if NPA has worms
[12:40] <mcmasterdonia> Really?
[12:40] <mcmasterdonia> You care about our security?
[12:40] <Tim> I do
[12:40] <Tim> I assumed it was NPA at the time
[12:40] <mcmasterdonia> I won't if they are going to be leaking conversations in our IRC.
[12:41] * Tim nods
[12:41] <mcmasterdonia> We have never leaked #udl conversations to anyone
[12:41] <Tim> Oh I bet I could find an instance
[12:41] <Tim> but point taken
[12:41] <mcmasterdonia> You wouldn't.
[12:41] <mcmasterdonia> I'm really disappointed.
[12:41] <Tim> With the conduct of UDLers after they see complete incompetency?
[12:42] <Tim> Yes. I'm calling the NPA incompetent
[12:42] <mcmasterdonia> The NPA is not incompetent
[12:42] <mcmasterdonia> That was one bad update for us.
[12:42] <mcmasterdonia> Just as this was one bad update for you
[12:42] <mcmasterdonia> Does this make you incompetent?
[12:42] <mcmasterdonia> no.
[12:42] <Tim> Yeah, it kind of does imo.
[12:42] <Tim> That I can't account for some fucking variance
[12:42] <mcmasterdonia> No, one mistake does not override all the good that someone has done
[12:43] <mcmasterdonia> You stuffing this up, does not mean you are incompetent or not good at your job
[12:43] * Tim shrugs
[12:43] <Tim> In my definition of incompetent, I judge the NPA is incompetent
[12:44] <mcmasterdonia> Based on what?
[12:44] <mcmasterdonia> The NPA has done a lot of successful missions. We can pull a decent amount of troops. Whenever things have gone wrong it has been due to triggering
[12:45] <Tim> Your troops doing things like insisting baselessly that our bot is wrong. the fact that you seem to have no capable triggermen of your own. and the fact that some of your troops insist that obvs region just hasn't update yet. Oh and your troops don't pay attention to their own chat channel (or I think you said that)
[12:45] <Tim> An army is only as good as its triggerman, as well
[12:46] <mcmasterdonia> It's because most of them are new tim. It takes them time to learn.
[12:46] <mcmasterdonia> FT has been wrong before
[12:46] <Tim> Not by 25 minutes
[12:46] <mcmasterdonia> The issue was that he overestimated HOW wrong he was
[12:46] <mcmasterdonia> Yes
[12:46] <Tim> No.
[12:46] <mcmasterdonia> But I disagreed with him
[12:46] <Tim> Not on a normal update
[12:46] <mcmasterdonia> And Jamie chose to listen
[12:46] <Tim> Jamie is incompetent
[12:46] <mcmasterdonia> Not the issue
[12:46] * Tim nods
[12:46] <Tim> Also, define: new?
[12:47] <Tim> I've seen troops go into an update with no idea what they're doing, and come out as a not-half-bad- raider/defender
[12:47] <Tim> It doesn't take that long to train your troops
[12:47] <mcmasterdonia> I'm saying it was one update Tim
[12:47] <mcmasterdonia> Most of the time they do well
[Mar 18 2013, 05:51 PM] <Ravania> btw McM is questioning BW in NPA thread
[Mar 18 2013, 05:51 PM] * Tim-Opolis nods
[Mar 18 2013, 05:52 PM] <Solm> Btw: BW is smart. And his ultimate goal is to turn NPA raider.
[Mar 18 2013, 05:52 PM] <Tim-Opolis> Indeed.
[Mar 18 2013, 05:54 PM] <Ravania> BW: I've already looked into it, and there is no violation of the NPA doctrine. Also, NPA is a neutral military, we support our friends and allies if they ask for assistance regardless of gameplay alignment.
[Mar 18 2013, 05:54 PM] <Solm> And would not of made this move just for lulz, so don't think that we have some upper ground.
[Mar 18 2013, 05:54 PM] <Solm> lol should we ask him to help against TBH?
[Mar 18 2013, 05:54 PM] <Tim-Opolis> Heh
[Mar 18 2013, 05:54 PM] <Tim-Opolis> Yus
[Mar 18 2013, 05:54 PM] <Ravania> MCM: Lastly, what made TBH come to us out of all their resources in the raiding world? We are hardly a mercenaries first choice. Or did you offer our services to them? My main concern is that this will set the precedent that we are simply a piling army, that moves whenever we are asked to, particularly, when said mission, has little relevance or benefit to The North Pacific.
[Mar 18 2013, 05:55 PM] <Mahaj> yo Rav
[Mar 18 2013, 05:55 PM] <Ravania> MCM: When the region is still split on military grounds, my concern is that a raiding mission such as this which holds little relevance or benefit for The North Pacific could cast the Army in a bad light. I'm supportive of raiding and defending for fun, or when it benefits our interests. I'm not sure support missions of such kind, would either be fun, or beneficial.
[Mar 18 2013, 05:55 PM] <Tim-Opolis> That's fantastic
[Mar 18 2013, 05:55 PM] <Mahaj> could we get screenshots?
[Mar 18 2013, 05:56 PM] <Mahaj> if you have chrome, there's an extension that screenshots the whole page, even stuff below the fold
[Mar 18 2013, 05:57 PM] <Solm> wut
[Mar 18 2013, 05:57 PM] <Solm> Gimme this extension
[Mar 18 2013, 05:57 PM] <Mahaj> at least i've heard there is
[Mar 18 2013, 05:58 PM] <Mahaj> hm i think its called screensh00ter
[Mar 18 2013, 05:59 PM] <Ravania> just making a pdf works too
[Mar 18 2013, 06:01 PM] <Mahaj> okay yeah its not below the fold
[Mar 18 2013, 06:01 PM] <Mahaj> dissapointing
[Mar 18 2013, 06:01 PM] <Mahaj> i'll talk to my friend see what he was talking about
[Mar 18 2013, 06:03 PM] <Ravania> https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B4g2ZqnCsXKsMXpjMEdZaXd2YjQ/edit?usp=sharing <-- here you go
[Mar 18 2013, 06:04 PM] --> Earth joined the channel
[Mar 18 2013, 06:04 PM] --- ChanServ changed mode: +o Earth
[Mar 18 2013, 06:04 PM] <FriarTuck> *glomph*
[Mar 18 2013, 06:11 PM] <Ravania> Hm, I never knew pdf, kept the links provided...
[Mar 18 2013, 06:12 PM] <Tim-Opolis> It does
[Mar 18 2013, 06:12 PM] <Ravania> i can even reply from the pdf...
[Mar 18 2013, 06:14 PM] <Tim-Opolis> Yuup.

Conclusion and Recommendation
It is the opinion of the AG’s Office that these very serious charges be accepted immediately and proceed to trial as soon as possible. The charges arising from the earlier incident date to October, and must be addressed. The information pertaining to these was provided by members of the government to this office, and Tim’s behavior indicates a clear pattern of protecting UDL resources to the detriment of TNP and in violation of her laws. These charges must be answered.

The Attorney General's Office wishes to thank Jamie and Mcmasterdonia in particular for bringing evidence of these serious crimes to the attention of this Office, and for expressing a willingness to testify in support of these logs.

The AG’s Office asks that PunkD recuse himself, due to his public statements regarding his opinion of the Ravania affair, and that Hileville recuse himself due to his longstanding and deep involvement with the UDL, particularly around the time pertaining to the first set of events leading to these charges. Additional evidence supporting these charges surely exists, and will hopefully be uncovered through depositions.

Signed,
Gaspo
Attorney General of The North Pacific
Click to expand...
Representing The North Pacific will be Gaspo, Attorney General.
Representing the Defendant will be Treize Dreizehn, Attorney for the Defendant.

Presiding over this case will be Punk D, Chief Justice and Trial Moderator, Hileville, Justice, and Blue Wolf II, Justice.

The Defendant is charged with:
  • one count of Treason,
  • two counts of Espionage (E.01 and E.02),
  • two counts of Conspiracy (C.01 and C.02), and
  • one count of Fraud.
The court requests parties in this case to refer to the espionage and conspiracy counts as noted above. *.01 counts shall refer to the charges related to the "Warzone Africa" incident and *.02 counts shall refer to the "Ravania" incident as noted within the indictment.

The Defendant has 48 hours to enter a plea, at that time if no pleas is entered a default plea of "Not Guilty" will be entered for the Defendant. After this period has elapsed we will move into pretrial motions and the evidence discovery phase.
The court rules used in this case are located here.

Tim, how do you plead?


Estimated Timetable (Subject to Change)

June 16th: Plea [Defendant Entered plea of Not Guilty]
June 16th – June 24th: Pre-Trial
June 24th – June 29th: Discovery
June 29th – Ju1y 1st: Arguments
June 1st – July 5th: Recess for Judgement

EDIT: Timetable adjusted
 
The court recognizes the plea of Not Guilty entered by the defendant and this trial shall now move to the pre-trial phase.

The pre-trial phase shall last from the time of this post + 72 hours which is approximately 10:18PM June 19th US EST.
 
To simplify the reading, I'd like to separate the motions based on the charges. We have what is essentially two cases here.

With regards to the Raviana charges:

The court has already ruled that Raviana's actions did not meet the criteria for Treason. It seems laughable to me that the court would entertain charges of Treason related to the investigation, when the defendant in this situation had no legal obligation to disclose information to TNP and that TNP already possessed within hours of the initial leak.

Furthermore, the prosecution has done nothing to allege actual misconduct on the defendant's part in the Raviana affair. He has simply said "Tim was there, and he didn't help us more". This does not meet the criteria for the charge of espionage, and certainly doesn't meet the criteria for treason.

I therefore ask that the charges relating to the Ravania affair be summarily dismissed.

On the topic of the Warzone Africa charges:

In neither log does Tim say that he has information on the source of the logs he received. It is unreasonable to expect him to disclose a name he doesn't possess, and there is nothing in the evidence submitted to indicate that he possessed the name or source of the logs he spoke of.

These charges are predicated on the notion that Tim possessed a name and refused to disclose it. That fact is not in evidence. These charges are baseless.

I therefore ask that the charges relating to Warzone Africa be summarily dismissed.
 
I would advise Defense Counsel to actually read my indictment, which related the Treason charge to the October incident, rather than the Ravania incident. If there's a typo that makes that unclear, my apologies - I noted only one treason charge in the header, and discussed it pertaining to the October incident. Regarding the Rav incident, the Prosecution is of the opinion that conscious, willful failure to disclose an egregious violation of TNP security constitutes espionage, particularly when that information is indicated through other evidence to be submitted as having been considered for use by Tim to advance outside interests. Given its complete lack of mention, I presume the Defense does not contest the Conspiracy charge arising out of the Rav incident.

Regarding the October incident...
[18:50] <+Jamie|Away> Who gave you the logs Tim?
[18:52] <+Tim> That's classified
[18:52] <+Tim> Not my fault if NPA has worms
Click to expand...
[12:36] <mcmasterdonia> Who shared logs with you abou the WZA mission?
[12:37] <Tim> That's classified
Click to expand...
I would note for the Court that, when given a clear opportunity to say "I don't know," the Defendant instead chose, on two separate occasions, to refuse to disclose whatever information he possessed regarding a leak. He did not deny knowledge - not until later, changing his story (thus the Fraud charge). Even if he did not know, he knew there was a leak and made zero effort to report it or assist the government of The North Pacific in maintaining regional security, despite his obligation to do so as Vice Delegate. Given that he later said he received the information "UDLside," and still refused to disclose it, despite his legal obligations to TNP, in favor of his loyalty to the UDL. Thus that pesky Conspiracy charge, and the other charges associated with Tim's proactive effort to conceal the identity of a leak within the NPA, while serving as our elected Vice-Delegate.
 
Regarding the motion to dismiss the "Ravania" charges, defense has stated:
The court has already ruled that [sic]Raviana's actions did not meet the criteria for Treason.
Click to expand...

This is correct, however, this court is not trying Ravania. The court is trying Tim and his actions during this incident. The AG believes that Tim's activities during this time period constitute treason. Within the indictment itself, there is sufficient evidence to allow the AG to present a case to this court. Since no additional evidence or witness testimony can be taken during this phase of the trial, I'm inclined to allow the AG to present all evidence at his disposal to the court.

Since the defense doesn't mention the other charges specifically, the Court has difficulty parsing the rest of the defense's argument favoring dismissal. In light of this and given that the court does believe there to be sufficient evidence in the indictment to proceed, the motion to dismiss the "Ravania" charges is DENIED.

Regarding the motion to dismiss the charges related to the "Warzone Africa" incident, the Court acknowledges that the prosecution has the burden of proof to successfully argue that Tim a) knew where the leak came from, b) purposefully withheld said information, and c ) prove Tim is guilty of the charges claimed by the Attorney General. However, the Court is persuaded that (and since the exhibits within the indictment are not yet accepted as 'evidence') the logs contained within the indictment do not clearly indicate Tim did not know the name of the 'leaker'. The logs alleged Tim's statement being that the name of the 'leaker' was "classified". That implies knowledge and refusal to publicly acknowledge the name. The Court is therefore persuaded to allow the AG to present his case and supply any and all evidence that supports his assertion.

Thus, with respect to the motion to dismiss the charges related to the Warzone Africa incident, the motion is DENIED.
 
Gaspo:
Given its complete lack of mention, I presume the Defense does not contest the Conspiracy charge arising out of the Rav incident.
Click to expand...

As the AG well knows, the defense enjoys the right to file pre-trial motions in addition to those already filed until the end of the pre-trial motion phase.
Click to expand...
 
Treize - you will come to see that the inability to edit posts, in a word, sucks. But, you will get used to it.

Be that as it may, the Court interpreted your 2 motions as seeking to dismiss all counts within this case. The ruling denied, based upon the arguments presented, dismissing any of the charges against your client including the conspiracy counts. Unless there is a different argument to dismiss the charges, you do not need to present an additional motion for the conspiracy counts.

Notwithstanding, if there is new factual information for which you would like to base a dismissal motion for any charge, you are free to do so during the remaining pre-trial period.
 
punk d:
Treize - you will come to see that the inability to edit posts, in a word, sucks. But, you will get used to it.

Be that as it may, the Court interpreted your 2 motions as seeking to dismiss all counts within this case. The ruling denied, based upon the arguments presented, dismissing any of the charges against your client including the conspiracy counts. Unless there is a different argument to dismiss the charges, you do not need to present an additional motion for the conspiracy counts.

Notwithstanding, if there is new factual information for which you would like to base a dismissal motion for any charge, you are free to do so during the remaining pre-trial period.
Click to expand...
Yes, that was my understanding. I was pointing out that there are more dismissal motions coming. The ones we've already seen were denied, that doesn't have to be the only ones made. I belive the charges are baseless, and there are MANY reasons to dismiss them. If the courts disagree with all of them I'd be surprised. I appreciate the comments nonetheless.

Also yes, I'm used to editing my posts after reading/rereading them. So that's a thing to get used to.
 
I would like to ask the court for an extension on the time allowed for the Pre-Trial motions phase. For a number of reasons(specifically an issue in Osiris), I will not have the time for at least the next few days to commit to this case. Tim deserves better from his counsel, but as Pharaoh of Osiris there are simply things I must deal with there.

If we could extend the time for at least another week(or until I find someone else to take over this defense), I would be appreciative.
 
Treize - is this a sudden issue or an issue that has been ongoing for a while?

Also - are you sure you will be able to adequately devote the time to defend your client after this situation is resolved?

An extension for a week is a bit much. I'd be comfortable adding an additional 3 days given we were able to enter into pre-trial two days earlier than expected, but a week seems like a lot.
 
The situation is sudden yes, and three days would be plenty. I am almost certain I'll have the time available after that... barring something else unforseen happening. I don't want to waste the court's time each time I have a crisis to deal with though.
 
Fine, I will extend pre-trial until June 22nd 5:37PM US EST.

I would advise the defendant and his counsel to make sure there is time to mount a sufficient defense in these matters.
 
For the rest of the trial, I shall be replacing Treize Dreizehn as the defense counsel for Tim.
 
May I request that the pre-trial date be extended for a while longer so that I may compile a sufficient defense for my client? I only recently (as of yesterday) spoke with Tim about the case and would prefer more time to decompose the prosecutions argument and the charges brought forth.
 
I will extend you 48 hours to bring yourself up to speed.

This means pre-trial shall end at approximately 8pm 6/24 US EST.
 
The pre-trial period has ended.

We now enter into the Discovery Period. Discovery shall end on June 29th at 8PM US EST.
 
I'd like to remind both defense and the Attorney General of this provision of the Adopted Court Rules:

Prior to, or within the first 24 hours of, the commencement of Discovery, all Parties will submit a list of witnesses they intend to call, as well as the scope and subject of each Witness’ intended testimony, to allow for adequate preparation.
Click to expand...

It's been almost 24 hours since the commencement of Discovery and there have been no submissions from either party. I will extend this provision of the Court Rules another 24 hours.
 
I would like to request 24 hour extension to the discovery period and another 24 hour extension to the witness submission period. It is very hard to get in contact with witnesses in the short time span given.
 
I will grant defense's request for an extension. I shall give you an additional 24 hours to submit your witness list and I shall grant 24 hours additional in discovery time.

I'd like the record to reflect that the court is concerned with the absence of the Attorney General in recent days in these proceedings given there were only 20 minutes remaining to submit witnesses and the AG has not made a request to extend the time frame.

If the AG does not submit a witness list then I shall assume no prosecution witnesses shall be called. If the AG does not submit evidence within the discovery period, this case shall be dismissed as there will be no submitted or accepted evidence for which the court to judge the innocence or guilt of the defendant. Prior to taking such action, I shall confer with my fellow justices but, as I said, the recent absence of the AG is concerning.
 
The defense would like to call the following witnesses:
Tim - The defendant of this case. Tim's testimony shall be sought regarding the charges brought against him.
Solm - Acting Chief Lieutenant of the UDL at the time. Solm will testify about Tim's actions at the time of the Ravania affair.
Mahaj - Acting Lieutenant of the UDL at the time. Mahaj will testify about Tim's actions at the time of the Ravania affair.
 
Thank you counselor, what substantive difference is the testimony of Solm from that of Mahaj since they are both testifying about the same incident?

in other words, are both witnesses testifying about the same thing, and if so do you need two witnesses to repeat the same thing?
 
The Attorney General has failed to submit a witness list.

I'm placing this trial in recess until I can confer with my fellow justices to decide what to do.

In the meantime, I hope the AG presents himself.
 
Trial proceedings are commenced anew.

I am extending discovery another 24 hours until July 30th 8:40 PM US EST.

I'd like to ask the defense if he has been able to contact the AG to schedule time to question his witnesses.

If the prosecution presents no evidence (at this point he can't present witnesses), then this trial shall be dismissed. I am deciding if it should be with or without prejudice. Just to be clear, if the trial is dismissed with prejudice charges cannot be refiled due to dereliction of the office of Attorney General. If without prejudice charges can be refiled.

NOTEOnly parties relevant to this case may post here. Please use the public gallery to post comments on this case.
 
The defense council has not been able to make contact with the AG. The last time the AG was seen was on the 23rd of June and he did not respond to the query I had sent him. The AG has not been around since then and has not attempted to contact me either during the time that has elapsed.

Regarding the courts question about the two witnesses submitted, I would like to note that Solm and Mahaj would serve to reinforce each others testimony. If that is not necessary to include two witnesses for the same event, then the defense wishes to withdraw Mahaj from the witness list.

(I've also noticed that the extension is 24 hours yet it mentions July 30th. I'm assuming that should be June 30th.)
 
Discovery has ended.

The AG has not contacted the defense.

The AG has not submitted a witness list.

The AG has not submitted evidence.

I am dismissing this case with prejudice meaning the charges against Tim cannot be refiled. The AG has not fulfilled his duties in this case and I have no other alternative than to make this decision.

Case Closed
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top