TNP vs. Mesian - Revision trial

Mr.Gaunt

Mr.Gaunt

TNPer
Referring to the facts presented by Mesian as response to the Judicial Order, The Court of The North Pacific hereby issues the following ruling:
ENTERED THIS 30th DAY OF AUGUST, TWO THOUSAND SEVEN

Before the Court of the North Pacific, Associate Justice Leland Gaunt

Judicial Ruling in the case TNP vs. Mesian.

Based on state of file, The Court of The North Pacific - reconsidering the circumstances of the above mentioned trial and evaluating recently presented facts - declares that 

- Nation Mesian is not considered dead
- Player Mesian is not considered dead

Presented facts invalidate former stay of prosecution and withdrawal of charges against Mesian. The case is hereby reopened in form of a revision trial.

Signed,

Leland Gaunt
Associate Justice of the North Pacific
Click to expand...

*stamps "INVALID" on death certificate*
*stamps "INVALID" on the withdrawal document*

The Court asks the new AG to urgently respond (of course after officially taking the oath) in order to avoid further delays.

Until formal closure of this case, either by withdrawal of the charges or conviction, we are presented with the potential fact that a nation and player facing criminal charges is applying for the RA, already posting an oath that may be invalidated by the result of the trial.

Therefore I am afraid it is necessary to issue the following:
ENTERED THIS 30th DAY OF AUGUST, TWO THOUSAND SEVEN

Before the Court of the North Pacific, Associate Justice Leland Gaunt

JUDICIAL ORDER

The RA application of Mesian must not be processed until formal closure of the revision trial TNP vs. Mesian.

Signed,

Leland Gaunt
Associate Justice of the North Pacific
Click to expand...
 
Mr.Gaunt:
The Court asks the new AG to urgently respond (of course after officially taking the oath) in order to avoid further delays.
Click to expand...
Er. Quick point of order or whatnot.

Art. V Sect. 6:
Section 6. Continuity of Trials.

In the event an elected term of office for the Attorney General, the Prime Minister or the presiding judicial officer in a trial expires during trial proceedings, the outgoing incumbents of the designated offices shall complete the trial. In the event of a vacancy in the office during the trial proceedings, the acting or interim successor shall assume the responsibility for the trial without interruption or delay.
Click to expand...
(emphasis mine)

So, isn't it still Byard's case?
 
Before re-opening this trial, would it not be more appropriate for the court to officially enquire into the legitamacy of the said 'plea bargin', as now, its legitimacy will be a major component of the re-trial.
Also, I would like to bring to the attention of the court to Article 1, Section 6 of TNP constitution:
No Nation shall be held to answer for a crime in a manner not prescribed by this Constitution or the Legal Code. No Nation shall be subjected to being twice put in jeopardy for the same offense. No Nation shall ever be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against itself.
Click to expand...

@ Mr. Gaunt

Can I ask the legal reasoning for my Death Certificate being invalid, also, the legal basis for this move? For all intents and purposes, I died, my presence ceased to exist. I came back to existence through the region Lazarus, a region which many members, both from this, and other regions, have been born again from.
If you check, my nation was created again, meaning my previous death is still a death, as at that point, I ceased to exist.

Not to mention the fact that suspending him form the RA without a conviction is illegal too, even if you are just suspending membership application!
Click to expand...

I agree with this statement. I am innocent until proven guilty, which I am confident I will not be. This once again comes down to discrimination and some believing they are above the rule of law. I would go as far to suggest that I am in my rights to take action against TNP, or more specifically, the officials, who are engaged in the current procedural unfairness and discrimination against myself. It appears the courts officials are attempting to make their own laws up when it comes to this.

@ Gaspo

Mesian himself posted that his persona in TNP was deceased. The player decided he would not play in TNP as Mesian anymore. That player now wants us to ignore that statement, which he himself made of his own accord. Why are we not honoring his decision to kill the persona of Mesian? We all knew that the player himself was not gone, and his return has not changed the fact that he killed off that persona of his own accord. Why have you decided to invalidate his previous statement, seemingly based solely on the fact that the player still exists?
Click to expand...

Because this is not the first, nor will it be the last time, a nation, and a player, has left the game, only to return some time later. Nothing in NS is a definate, not even death, tho taxes maybe, and I think for those who knew the circumstances of the departure, the re-birth of mesian (a nation which now officially exists within NS, even though 3 weeks ago it did not) was very much a possibility. I to am unsure why my death at that time was invalidated, as I still ceased to exist, I have come into existence as mesian, now transfering my borth region from the east pacific to lazarus, so in actual fact, I am both the same, and completley different in the same.
I killed the persona off of my own accord, and have brought it back from the dead of my own accord, sorry if this displeases you, get over it.

Signed

Mesian
 
I will try to keep it short and simple:

Mesian:
would it not be more appropriate for the court to officially enquire into the legitamacy of the said 'plea bargin', as now, its legitimacy will be a major component of the re-trial.
Click to expand...
This is what law geeks usually call "settlement". It is something like a compromise between both parties agree to. People like the AG or the Judge can then go back to work and the defendant can go back home and be happy.
Mesian:
Can I ask the legal reasoning for my Death Certificate being invalid?
Click to expand...
Because the nation is back and the player using the same forum account with the same old signature ("Colonel (Rtd.)" and so on, although now censored by yourself). This is sufficient basis for the TNP Court to declare the death certificate invalid in a formal ruling.
In your words: You are and were not dead, Sir, get over it.
Mesian quoting:
No Nation shall be subjected to being twice put in jeopardy for the same offense
Click to expand...
The TNP Court was presented with
- a wrong death certificate
- a settlement that the official defense counsels agreed to but was now referred to as "plea bargain" and invalid

This is sufficient ground for a revision trial because the settlement was either violated or the defense counsels were not entitled to agree to it. Like in RL: You cannot pay for a TV, take it home, and then claim your money back without giving back the TV.

This is a revision trial. Back to square one.

Mesian:
Random interjection:
Not to mention the fact that suspending him form the RA without a conviction is illegal too, even if you are just suspending membership application!
Click to expand...
I agree with this statement
Click to expand...
Mesian TNP oath:
I, Mesian, as the leader of the Mesian, pledge to obey the Constitution and Laws of The North Pacific Region, and to act as a responsible member of its society.
Click to expand...
Mesian is currently accused to have heavily violated the Constitution. He presented himself dead and is now back. There is strong doubt that the nation and player are really willing and able to obey the Constitution. One has to endure some appropriate restrictions in such cases in order to protect TNP from potential harm.

For all those whistleblowers out there:
The Court of The North Pacific only ruled that the former settlement between the AG and the defense counsel is invalid and as such the closure of the case. That's all.
If you do not agree with this, go buy yourself some common sense and/or go to work and get the TNP Constitution and Law changed to reflect such cases properly. I am here deciding on the Court's interpretation.

It is solely up to the new AG to how to proceed in this revision trial.
 
Playing Devil's Advocate here:

Because the nation is back and the player using the same forum account with the same old signature ("Colonel (Rtd.)" and so on, although now censored by yourself). This is sufficient basis for the TNP Court to declare the death certificate invalid in a formal ruling.
Click to expand...

By which prinicple of law would a death certificate be nullifed?

In a purely academic sense, this is totally bizarre. If the death certificate in question is null and void, the issue of double jeopardy may come into play. If the death certificate is considered invalid, the whole case for a revision trial may rest upon whether or not fraud on Mesian's part was involved in requesting the death certifical for that persona. Fraud would require intent and prior knowledge of the ultimate results of the action, and in this case, a deliberate intent with prior knowledge and forethought to defraud the legal system and/or due process.

Like I said, a bizarre set of circumstances. :o



R
 
The question of double jeopardy is an interesting one - Mesian never actually went to trial.

However, given that Mesian died, I would suggest that whomever is currently posting in that guise is an impostor. Of course, if Mesian did NOT die, I would suggest that his ASTOUNDINGLY coincidental timing to return should constitute prima facie evidence of an intent to defraud the Government, as well as a general flight from prosecution.

But just a suggestion.
 
Interesting analysis and most likely a correct one in legal terms regardless of prior intent.

Another way to produce 'fraud' would be is to look at it from this point: if the death certificate is valid, then the person acting as the 'decedent' would automatically be guilty of fraud for acting as that individual. Talk about a catch-22!

(OOC: this is an interesting issue that resides in both the OOC world and affects the NS RP world and doesn't seem to be covered in the Constitution which would make it 'extra vides' or. beyond the scope of the Constitution or Laws.

One solution would be to set a precedent by warding it over to some kind of 'mediation' or to declare 'Mesian' alive and to hold a new trial based upon the fact that the deceased is not deceased. Either way, in the event of a lack of an initial trial (or a trial that was ended by the 'death' of a defendent would probably not constitute double jeopardy. This is especially true if said trial was never completed prior to the issuance of a death certificate.

The prosecuting attornies could also appeal the results of a case they won in the event of new evidence and change the nature of the charges. Hence, charge for fraud instead of the original charges. Crazy, isn't it? :unsure:
 
OOOH! Silly me!


Declare a mis-trial on any number of bases.
 
Its all nice, warm and fuzzy to talk about the law, but because it appears the verdict of my trial has already been decided, along with any other actions of this region, lets kick this kangaroo court off!
Enter the charges AG and lets get this over and done with eh?

Signed

Mesian
 
This matter appears to rest on the outcome of one question: Was the "plea bargain" negotiated between the Court, the former Attorney General, and the defense counsel legal?

Mesian has claimed that his counsel did not speak for him when they agreed to the plea and that, therefore, the agreement is binding to him. However, we have to remember that the only reason his counsel agreed without his explicit consent was that he had made clear that the persona of "Mesian" had died (Link to statement that "Mesian" had died, Link to Mesian's trial in the NPO). Now, Mesian has chosen to revoke his "death", seemingly hoping for no consequences.

However, we must remind him that justice will be carried out even if the accused chooses not to participate. Regardless of whether or not the real-life person behind "Mesian" chooses to participate, regardless of whether or not the persona of "Mesian" has died or not, justice will be had. TNP legal institutions allow for circumstances in which the accused does not participate. In this case, counsel is appointed to the accused and allowed to participate on his behalf. I refer to Interim Court Rule 509 (emphasis mine):

Rule 509:
Rule 509. Appointment of Defender.
A- A Nation may be represented by any counsel of the Nation's choosing. (Source: TNP Constitution, Article I, Clause 7.)
B - If the defendant refuses to participate or requests counsel, a public defender shall be provided. (Source: TNP Law 4.)
C - If a nation charged in a complaint fails to appear or is unable to obtain representation for the proceedings, a public defender may be appointed by the presiding judge to assist with the defense.
D - The request for appointment of counsel should be made as soon as is practicable, and whenever possible, prior to the entry of a plea to the complaint.
Click to expand...

Given that counsel is allowed to represent the accused and make decisions that the counsel perceives to be the best course of action for the accused, Mesian's only recourse would be to call for a mistrial on account of inadequate representation. However, this is outside the scope of the Office of the Attorney General.

If, then, the plea bargain is legal, Mesian may claim that he had already fulfilled all its terms. This would be untrue. The terms of the plea bargain are laid out as follows (Link to plea filing):

All charges filed against Mesian are automatically suspended on
JULY 28th TWO THOUSAND SEVEN
unless objection is filed by the Attorney General, the Defendant or his Counsel.

Following restrictions are mutally agreed between
the Attorney General and the Defendant and his Counsel:
- The former TNP nation of Mesian CTEs latest 15th July
- The TNP forum account "Mesian" may no longer be used for governmental activities
- Reference to former activities have to be erased from the forum account signature
- If the forum account shall be used for governmental activities, it may be renamed, not using any reference to Mesian (e.g. no "New Mesian", "Mesiana" or similar)

Restrictions are valid until JULY 28th TWO THOUSAND EIGHT.
Click to expand...

The first term can be arguably counted to have been fulfilled. The nation of Mesian did CTE, as verified by Byardkuria (Link to court filing).

However, the second, third, and fourth terms of the agreement possessed no time limit of enforcement that would supersede the expiration date of July 28, 2008. Mesian has, since his return to the forums, complied with the third term, but the others remain in non-compliance.

Given that the agreement above was expected to be a legally binding contract upon both parties, it shall continue to be enforced. Therefore, I execute the powers vested in the Office of the Attorney General and issue the following order:

Order #1:
ORDER #1: ENFORCEMENT OF AGREEMENT IN TNP VS. MESIAN

Barring a court injunction, the forum administrators of the forum of The North Pacific may use their powers to enforce terms 2-4 of the agreement between the Attorney General and defense counsel in TNP vs. Mesian, namely:
- The TNP forum account "Mesian" may no longer be used for governmental activities
- Reference to former activities have to be erased from the forum account signature
- If the forum account shall be used for governmental activities, it may be renamed, not using any reference to Mesian (e.g. no "New Mesian", "Mesiana" or similar)
Click to expand...

Preference shall be given to name changes over account banning. Mesian shall hold the right to change the forum account name from an administrator-issued one to one of his own choosing at any time, so long as his chosen name does not violate the above terms and so long as this privilege is not abused.

This order shall stand until the TWENTY-EIGHTH OF JULY, TWO THOUSAND EIGHT, or until such time as the referenced agreement expires or is nullified.

Signed,
Monte Ozarka
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
Click to expand...
 
*court officer drags FH out of the court room while FH continues coursing *
[size=-1]This is absolute crap. There wasnt even a legal basis for a plea bargin or death certificate anyway, let alone revoking it to retry someone[/size]
 
As a friend of the Court, may I suggest that careful review be made to see how counsel for Mesian came to act in that capacity? It seems to me both counsel volunteered and Mesian accepted, but in a form that wasn't full fledged representation, nor was the court appointment for a defendant without counsel.

That being said, I'm not at all certain Mesian consented to either counsel acting for him in a full representative capacity or to enter into a plea agreement.

There's also the question of the effect of reincarnation on our laws; I'm not sure that has ever been discussed this explicitly, even though nation revival is fairlt common, player revival is less so.
 
Grosseschnauzer:
As a friend of the Court, may I suggest that careful review be made to see how counsel for Mesian came to act in that capacity? It seems to me both counsel volunteered and Mesian accepted, but in a form that wasn't full fledged representation, nor was the court appointment for a defendant without counsel.

That being said, I'm not at all certain Mesian consented to either counsel acting for him in a full representative capacity or to enter into a plea agreement.

There's also the question of the effect of reincarnation on our laws; I'm not sure that has ever been discussed this explicitly, even though nation revival is fairlt common, player revival is less so.
Click to expand...
Just as a sidenote, these are certainly arguable points, and it is well within the accused's rights to ask the court to review the circumstances. However, any such appeal must come from the accused and be based on a firm foundation of judicial review. (i.e. It's in Mesian's court now.)
 
.........


.................



So, MO, what your saying is, the court can see or have proven to it by the third party that its legal standing is claptrap and not be able to drop its charges or change anything unless the accused makes the same points to the court again?
 
Fulhead Land:
.........


.................



So, MO, what your saying is, the court can see or have proven to it by the third party that its legal standing is claptrap and not be able to drop its charges or change anything unless the accused makes the same points to the court again?
Click to expand...
The Court has every power to nullify the plea bargain if it finds it unconstitutional/illegal. And certainly, such a judicial review can be filed by anyone and from within the case itself.

However, given the somewhat murky circumstances surrounding the legal processes employed, the Office of the Attorney General will simply enforce the latest decision from the Court (the plea bargain) until further judicial direction be given. In short, go file a judicial review, but the AG will not drop prior judgment to wait on you. I'm simply letting the Courts (and not the AG's Office) decide the legality of the plea bargain. If the Courts decide that this is all a bunch of bollocks, so be it, and the AG's Office will comply fully with its orders.
 
First of all, please keep c**p and b***o*ks out of my court room. Thanks. And btw: kangaroos are cute.

Secondly, I agree with MO that the plea bargain is valid unless the Defendant files a complaint before The Court. The Court accepted the volunteered counsel as the representative of the Defendant.
TNP Law 4 Section 2 does not require that the defendant agrees to the appointed counsel, btw.

The Court hereby asks the Defendant, if he wishes to represent himself or requests counsel in the revision?
Just in case counsel is requested or there is no answer: FH seems to have volunteered for the (potential) job somehow? This will enable him to further comment this trial without being subject to displeasing court proceedings. Other volunteers are asked to apply now, too.
 
Fulhead Land:
If he really wants me, but this trial is *beep* and I'd prove it!
Click to expand...
I take this a yes in any case, although I prefer a consent between defendant and counsel.

@ Mesian: Can we expect any reaction or will you just let us move on alone?
 
As a sidenote, I'd like to point out that, IMO, there are two ways of proceeding with this.

One is where the defendant first files a complaint, asking for a declaration of mistrial. The Court then examines the circumstances and makes a judgment.

Another is where someone files a request for judicial review regarding the legality of the plea bargain (or plea bargains in general). The thing about this is that anyone (not just the defendant) can file a request for judicial review. The Court would have to make a ruling on the issue and decide how relevant the ruling is to this case.
 
In my opinion,. a judicial review ought to be requested by the Attorney General, and, given the peculiar environment under which the ples agreement came about, it might be useful if the Court invited input from any party inclined to provide legal and factual observations on the matter.

I think there is a serious question whether the methods employed were consistent with the Declaration of Rights, and that alone would be substantial grounds for a judicial review.
 
Grosseschnauzer:
In my opinion,. a judicial review ought to be requested by the Attorney General, and, given the peculiar environment under which the ples agreement came about, it might be useful if the Court invited input from any party inclined to provide legal and factual observations on the matter.
Click to expand...
Given that I think that a case could be drawn up for either side of the argument, I do not particularly fall firmly on either side. And given that a request for a judicial review is filed on the basis that some action was potentially illegal/unconstitutional, I would make a terrible claimant. And whose action will be under review? The Court's? Defense counsel's? Byard's? The AG's Office? See, the last circumstance would be fun, as my Office would be filing a request for judicial review on itself.

In short, no, I'm not going to be the one to file this request.

But I do agree that the Court should open up the stand to anyone, or at least should accept amicus curiae briefs from all parties.
 
Sorry for a short delay, but RL set priorities.

I am not expecting any reply from the Defendant any more.
To further proceed, my first priority is to clarify the defense counsel issue.

FH: You are stilll not happy to defend without a clear yes from the defendant?
In parallel as a precaution, I have posted a "defense counsel wanted" in order to find someone happy to take part in this obviously strange trial.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top