Search results

Welcome

1

Bootsie: The Speaker would likely be charged with Gross Misconduct because of the situation that happened. It would be up to the Court to implement the Penal Code. The punishment is laid out for Gross Misconduct in the Penal Code.

The last case was some time back. I can't remember the defendants names but it was in a Roman themed Region with an off site forum. I think it was The Republic of Rome (?) but I'm not sure. There is an element of confidentiality to any Defense Counsel/ Client relationship as well.

No I haven't Defended 3 RL cases. Not Real Life, but Gameplay yes. So I think that significantly changes most of your query. I have already stated in a prior post what I would proactively do as Attorney General.

I will go into more detail tonight but I think Gross Misconduct is the problem. Thank you

Yes I would stand for reelection.

My first priorities would be to catch up on any reading of past Court Rulings and get the Deputies together. Yes, my law firm experience prepares me very well for this role. I'm the only candidate who has actual courtroom experience. I'm not unfamiliar with facing an opposing counsel. I have...

1. I would suggest reviewing all relevant Court Rulings on Speakers actions. How have they specifically violated their Standing Procedures? 2.You need to pass along all required checks to become a citizen. Why did they refuse it specifically? 3.Did your bill have any major errors in it? Did you...

I will in the interim read more thoroughly past Court rulings and keep up to date on the law. I honestly think I'm very ready. As far as I know I'm the only candidate with actual courtroom experience. I'm not unfamiliar with it. At least three Deputies. Probably Goyanes, Kasch and a third. I...

1. Well the factors would be based on clear and convincing evidence that some government action violated or affected a party negatively. The law would have to have been clearly breached in such a way as to make any non-reply by me look like nonfeasance- of course not that I would be nonfeasant...

Thank you for your questions. 1.When talking about using a government action that could be cause for review its difficult to pin down going into specifics and hypotheticals. I think we should keep somewhat strictly to people who were directly affected under the government action etc. Of course...

A summary of my experience can be found under "Attorney Urquhart" in this dispatch: https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=869448

I have past Criminal Defense experience and general NS legal experience. I accept my nomination.

I nominate Great Bights Mum

Mountain

817

272

10

Which one is more important?

1

Honey

4736 cans of spam on the wall, 4736 cans of spam! Take one down, pass it around, 4735 cans of spam on the wall!

Mist

O

Tent

Lion

813

72

268