Search results

I shall be running for a second term as the Minister of Justice, but I will not be running again for the Security Council.

I'm awaiting a reply by FL, or some sign that he's talking with his counsel/indisposed at the moment.

I don't know.

I just posted in the OOC for once.

The evidence had long ago been presented. I just haven't used it till now.

Now, please explain. EDIT: Specifically, explain the bolded portion, where you act as if you aren't part of the region?

I thought it was pretty clear all along that we were trying FL for violation of article II of the Constitution. I must be missing something here.

Aye

Moving on. Fulhead Land, would you care to explain where you got your knowledge of the workings of the Lexicon as demonstrated in this thread? http://z13.invisionfree.com/TNP/index.php?...opic=2034&st=74

Abstain

Aye

My question is this: why would you be so eager to end the war if you had access to the same evidence presented by our region that showed that not only did The Lexicon first declare war, but that the spying attempt was at worst a joke gone wrong?

Did you know that The Lexicon first declared war?

Abstain.

So you were against the war?

What was your initial reaction to the war?

Fulhead Land: How aware were you of the events surrounding The Lexicon's war with The North Pacific?

*Cough* The prosecution is waiting for the Judge's ruling on this matter.

The prosecution's stance is that the oath is taken by the leader of the nation, acting on behalf of the nation, thus it is entirely IC. The prosecution's stance, therefore, is that the "UN nation" is associated as a puppet of the main nation whose leader has binded said nation to the oath. The...

The Prosecution has never stated that the oath was taken OOC. Rather, it seems more illogical to assume that the oath has to be part OOC and part IC. Thus it seems more likley that the best interpretation that the court should take is that ALL of the oath is IC, including the beginning.

Objection. Never has the Prosecution claimed that the entire oath is OOC in any of the proceedings. I also ask that the Defense's "logic" be ignored, as otherwise the actual TNP member nation itself is OOC, since it is declared before the oath.

I ask the Defense to point out the specific place where declaring a UN nation is said to be OOC in the RA pledge.

OOC: The UN Nation declaration is NOT OOC. Nowhere in the declaration does it say that it's OOC. Nowhere. IC: How then, can you have declared Lexiconhead to be your UN nation?

Says who? Even in the real world, people extend the jurisdiction of their courts arbitrarily. But even more to the point, we're not. We're using the rp court against the rp nation of FL in TNP, who has ties to other nations that you rp.

Surely you cannot think that roleplaying as a supposed repectful citizen of a nation and also as one that purposefully attacks it, both at the same time, would go unpunished by the established RP laws of the game. Our trial here is part of the roleplay.

OOC: You declared, in character, in your testimony that your UN nation was Lexiconhead. Nowhere in the Constitution does it make provisions for being out of character. Declaring UN nations is in character. IC: I'll ask again. I guess it can be established that you, the TNP member, had control...

The question wasn't whether you were Lexiconhead, but rather, that you being a member nation of TNP, how can you have declared that the nation which makes UN decisions for you to be Lexiconhead without knowing what the nation was. OOC: Need I remind you that up until I ask about you controlling...

Ok, so now you're saying that only the nation in and of itself and not the leaders/player of the nation can be held responsible for crimes against the region. But nations in and of themselves have no ability to act. How the hell can we hold them responsible? And what would the punishments be...

The question the Prosecution asked was: "As a member of The North Pacific Regional Assembly, did you declare a UN nation at the time of application?" The question was therefore declared to you as the nation of Fulhead Land in relation to your membership in the regional assembly. How, therefore...

Laws cannot be ex post facto.