TNP vs. Fulhead Discussion

Fergi the Great

Fergi the Great

TNPer
I think TNP SHOULD be held accountable for whatever judicial rights/responsibilities its constitution holds as binding. If they are NOT spelled out, for expedition's sake and in fairness to future proceedings, such should be addressed by the RA with all due diligence.

OOC:
In my own court experience, Poltsamaa's motion would have carried.
 
This would be your verbal and unofficial warning for an inappropriate post in a formal thread. Regardless of ones concerns regarding the Judicial system, the middle of a trial thread is not an appropriate place to voice that opinion without formal involvement in the trial.
 
(Not posted in trial topic out of respect for proceedings)

A reminder to the defense that selecting a jury can take time - unlike RL, The North Pacific Court cannot force people to respond to their jury summons - if there is no response, or the juror is unable to serve for some reason, they must proceed to the next candidate. Historically, it has taken a great deal of time for a complete jury to be set up. If you have actual proof that the Honorable Justice is not doing his best to do his job, kindly present said proof rather than make empty accusations.
 
Yet Court proceedings force the defense to respond in 5 days to the charges even before the prosecution evidence is made available to them?! Perhaps some sort of activity requirement for the RA is necessary to alleviate the inability of the Court to select a jury in good time..oh wait, thats already in the pipeline!!

My point is, there was no acknowledgement of the delay in jury selection!! The response to the Defense's response to the charges was one that portrayed our reply as out-of-order and it was never acknowledged by the Court itself!!

I have found our treatment to be contemptuous to say the least!! I hope the is not an omen for trial proceedings although I have a fair idea that it will!!
 
The defense is the one being charged, and thus is rather forced to respond in some way anyway or else they are almost guaranteed to be found guilty, due to the fact that they would not have defended themselves. That's usually the way any trial system works - if you would rather we do all trials in abstentia, I'm sure your client would be thrilled.

And I'm not quite sure what you've been reading, Polts, but this sure looks like a response to me...
DD:
My apologies. College started recently and has been taking a majority of my time. I have always let real life take precedence over an internet one. The Jury will be assembled today if all goes well.

I will be selecting the Jury randomly and there are no kangaroos here.
Click to expand...
Presumably the honorable justice is demonstrating proper responsibility and taking his RL concerns before NS, or else some unforeseen circumstances prevented his access.

Patience, grasshopper.
 
Hersfold:
The defense is the one being charged, and thus is rather forced to respond in some way anyway or else they are almost guaranteed to be found guilty, due to the fact that they would not have defended themselves. That's usually the way any trial system works - if you would rather we do all trials in abstentia, I'm sure your client would be thrilled.

And I'm not quite sure what you've been reading, Polts, but this sure looks like a response to me...
DD:
My apologies. College started recently and has been taking a majority of my time. I have always let real life take precedence over an internet one. The Jury will be assembled today if all goes well.

I will be selecting the Jury randomly and there are no kangaroos here.
Click to expand...
Presumably the honorable justice is demonstrating proper responsibility and taking his RL concerns before NS, or else some unforeseen circumstances prevented his access.

Patience, grasshopper.
Click to expand...
Wow, such a patronising tone Hersfold!! I expected no less!!

My queries were not based on our requirement to respond!! As is blatantly obvious, we responded well within the 5 days permitted!!

My concern is that the Court did not and has still not acknowledged the Defense's response!! The "response" you cite does not acknowledge the Defense's reply to the charges and was only posted 5 days after jury selection was to commence and only after I petitioned the Court for a response!! Had I not petitioned the Court most likely that response would never have occurred!! I understand RL comes before the game, but it takes no more than 1 minute to post a short post explaining the delay or to pass on such a message via a third party!! If the Defense is to be held to strict timetables then it is only fair that the prosecution is held to similar standards!! Rest assured if I am unable to respond in time I will relay a message informing the Court of this unless I'm hospitalised or the like!!

Simply posting a short message stating that the jury selection will be delayed would have been courteous to the Defense and the Prosecution alike!! Although I'm sure the Court and the prosecution are working closely together on this case anyway so perhaps it was only the Defense left out of the loop!!

Your patronising responses are completely devoid of fact as per usual Hersfold!! The irony of you asking me to be patient when you badgered me incessantly not so long ago about MoIIA duties is not lost on me!! I haven't PMd DD at all, I petitioned the Court rather than harrass the player!!
 
Sorry to post here

FL thats only in the US you have that right in TNP it can take as long as they want...basically until you give up and plead guilty :P
 
I was sure taht right was in the TNP constitution too...if not it was suggested and then denied!

Seriously Hers you didnt have to be patronising!

And again I agree with the honourable Consul !!

Its not only courtious but shows the court is paying attention unlike in many historical cases. To mention a few, both myself and Shoeless Joe are waiting for evidence in SC/NPIA investigations from way back when!!!!
 
I was wondering if the defense attorney would care to explain this comment:

Poltsamaa:
The judge in this case is tied to the government and therefore the prosecution!! The randomness of jury selection is, therefore, questionable!!
Click to expand...

It is my understanding that any judge, in order to have the authority to preside over cases, needs to be recognized by the government. This statement questions the impartiality of any judicial system by treating a government as a monolithic entity as opposed to a collection of separate people, each carrying out separate tasks.
 
I think you'll find in most places, the defense has the right to challenge a number of jurors selected!! In TNP, the government appointed judge handpicks the jury for the case!! Yes, I see this as a flaw and a conflict of interest!! Especially in a case such as this!!
 
Speaking of flawed, I am immediately drawn to the above statement.

You may wish to refer to the Interim Court Rules, which specifically explain the random procedure by which the jury list is generated. The jurors are selected, straight down that list, with exceptions as given (obvious bias, Justice, etc.) The jurors selected do not have to participate, but in that case we go to the next person on the list. This list is public knowledge, being posted in the Court forum, and so any chicanery should be immediately apparent.

And where the heck did you come up with the idea that you couldn't object to the jurors selected? The ICR specifically reference eexclusion of a biased juror - if you have good-faith reason to believe that a juror is not impartial, you have an absolute duty to object, and the Justice had better have a pretty good reason for overruling. If they don't, we have a dandy, if as-yet-unused appeal procedure, and I can assure you that at least one of the Justices has no problems handing out a mistrial for a jury irregularity.

In conclusion, do not immediately assume that the Justice system is a rubber-stamp that says "Guilty". We moved out of that chapter of TNP legal history a little over a year back, and have no intention of returning, at least most certainly not whilst I am driving the bus.

EDIT - I also want to remind everyone about the gag rule regarding discussion of a criminal case - so far, nothing I have seen in here would be an issue (in my opinion), but if discussion starts to drift to questions of fact, or questions of interpretation of the laws applicable (or their applicability), that would be the time for jurors and involved parties to recuse themselves. Simple trial procedure questions, IMO, are still hunky dory.
 
The jury has already been publicised without my chance to object to any of them!! Seeing as I was not made aware of the jurors until they were officially named it makes it difficult to object to any of them!!

Anyway, in the interests of the "gag order" I'll say no more on this matter as I already have the prosecution blowing smoke up my arse over comments of mine in this thread!!
 
Interesting process, this one.

As a relative newbie, I would love to see how this plays out.

:bat:

Ik
 
KBP, moved your post here as we really don't need discussion stuff in the main trial thread.

Edit: Misspoke (typed?)
 
D-fence.jpg
 
Not at all. just stating what I thought was an obvious truism:

The Bible Deuteronomy 1:14:
Do not show partiality in judging; hear both small and great alike. Do not be afraid of any man, for judgment belongs to God.
Click to expand...

Personally, I regard the Jury as intelligent human beings who are fully capable of deciding for themsleves what is relevant comment and what is not, and of discounting comment outside the courthouse and lines of enquiry within it that are irrelevant. I do not agree with Poltsamaa that the jury need to be shielded from intelligent discussion outside the courthouse.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top