Court Filings

Hileville

TNPer
This thread is for the filing of Charges by the Attorney General. After filings are received he Court will open a Trial thread and link it in this post.

What goes here?
  • Request for Indictment
  • Filing of Charges from the Attorney General's Office
  • Requests of Citizens to the Court with the exception of Judicial Reviews

All nations that wish to submit a Request for Judicial Review should continue to place this in a separate thread. This thread is meant to reduce clutter from multiple threads for trials.
 

punk d

TNPer
-
-

Indictment
In the name of the nations of The North Pacific, an indictment under The North Pacific Legal Code is filed against TNP Freedom Fighters (hereafter TNPFF) aka John Ashcroft Land aka Durkadurkiranistan aka King Durk the Awesome aka et. al. (hereafter JAL), alleging that sometime in July 2012, JAL sent the following telegram to a resident of The North Pacific:
The Republic of TNP Freedom Fighters

Greetings! Pleased to meet you. I'm writing you about your endorsement of our regional delegate, The Respublika of Zemnaya Svoboda. In particular, I ask you to remove your endorsement of him. Here's why:

1. He hasn't logged into his nation in days, and barely ever logged in even before that. He clearly doesn't care about the region when he is the most inactive delegate of any Pacific in Nationstates.

2. He hasn't been voting on World Assembly resolutions even when the region asks him to do so. Under his leadership, the North Pacific is totally unrepresented in the World Assembly.

3. He runs a Soviet-like regime and holds show trials against nations like John Ashcroft Land and Mallorea. He bans these nations from voting and participating without just cause. In the North Pacific we ought to protect the rights of the most vulnerable.
Therefore, for the above reasons, I request that you unendorse The Respublika of Zemnaya Svoboda.

Thanks!
In making these statements JAL is charged with committing the following act as defined by the Legal Code:
Section 1.3: Sedition
8. "Sedition" is defined as an intentional attempt to incite the Nations of The North Pacific to revolt in a manner not sanctioned by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
The Attorney General’s office would like to request the immediate suspension of JAL’s Regional Assembly voting rights given the egregious nature of the crime and the evidence linking TNPFF with JAL. JAL explained on IRC following the TNPFF incident that he was TNPFF:
[Jul 25 2012, 01:22 PM] <Durkadurkiranistan> Btw guys, I was Freedom Fighters
[Jul 25 2012, 01:23 PM] <Durkadurkiranistan> way to go thinking it was Anur :p
In sending telegrams to subvert the term of the legally elected delegate of The North Pacific, JAL engaged in acts of sedition hoping to bring about a delegate change that is not consistent with the process as outlined within the Constitution.

King Durk the Awesome (JAL) requested admittance to the Regional Assembly on November 16, 2012 and was admitted thereafter. The Attorney General’s office believes that regardless of JAL’s RA membership status at the time of the criminal acts, his current Regional Assembly membership should be suspended pending trial. He has shown a disregard for TNP laws and the court should not encourage future behavior of this kind by allowing JAL under the alias of King Durk the Awesome to continue to serve as a Regional Assembly member in good standing.

Pursuant to Chapter 3, Section 3.3, Clause 11, of the Legal Code, which states that "[a]ny Justice may approve or deny an indictment, and their decision will be final," this indictment is respectfully submitted for judicial approval.

Sincerely,

Punk Daddy
Attorney General of The North Pacific
 

Belschaft

TNPer
Whilst I recognize the charges and a trial thread will be created shortly, I cannot approve the requested indictment to expel JAL from the Regional Assembly. Section 3.3.10 of the Legal Code authorises such action only for reason of oath violation, and unless the Attorney General is capable to providing evidence that JAL did indeed violate an oath he had taken during the relevant period of time - not including previous oaths taken for positions or memberships since lapsed - then such action would be grossly illegal.
 

Eluvatar

TNPer
-
-
While the Law clearly states that any ruling by a Justice on a request to restrict a citizen pending trial is final and therefore I may not and will not, as no person should, appeal Belschaft's ruling, I believe the ruling was made using dangerously faulty reasoning.

If allowing one's nation to Cease to Exist, or withdrawing one's nation from The North Pacific, declining to enter this Forum for over 15 days, or even simple resignation from the Regional Assembly is enough to release one from one's word as below,
John Ashcroft Land said:
I, John Ashcroft Land, as the leader of The North Pacific nation of Drunk Montanans, pledge loyalty to the Constitution, Bill of Rights and Laws of The North Pacific Region, and to act as a responsible member of its society. I understand that if my Nation leaves The North Pacific region for reasons other than for official government business, that I may be stripped of my right to vote and required to reapply. I pledge to only register one Nation to vote in The North Pacific. I understand that my registration of, or attempt to register, multiple Nations to vote in The North Pacific shall warrant the summary withdrawal of my right to vote from all my Nations, past, present, and future, as well as possible expulsion from the Region. I further understand that if any nation under my control directly wages war against the North Pacific, or allies themselves with a region waging war, declared or not, against the North Pacific, this shall warrant the summary withdrawal of my right to vote from all my Nations, past, present, and future, as well as possible expulsion from the Region. In this manner, I petition the Speaker of The Regional Assembly of The North Pacific region for membership in the Regional Assembly.
then a path for a great number of abuses is opened.

Persons who acquired classified information while Regional Assembly members and distributed it after allowing for their removal from the Regional Assembly would not be violating their oath. A person who resigned from the Regional Assembly could seize the Delegacy and it wouldn't be a violation of their oath under this determination, and it would not block their rejoining the Regional Assembly until after a trial was completed. Indeed any sort of crime could be committed immediately after resigning, whereupon a person could reapply to join the Regional Assembly and the Speaker would be obliged to accept them until such time as the Court finds them guilty.

This doctrine is pernicious and ought not be used as precedent.
 

Belschaft

TNPer
It is my understanding that once membership of the Regional Assembly has lapsed a new application must be made for re-admittance, including once again taking the oath. JAL himself has taken the oath twice in the current application thread, first on August the 12th and then on November the 16th. This has led me to conclude that the oath cannot be considered to be in force whilst you are not a member of the Regional Assembly, just as my own previous oath as Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs is no longer in force now that I am a Court Justice; if it was in force you would not have to take it once more.

Whilst you are quite right in stating that this creates a number of serious loopholes that could potentially be exploited, it is nevertheless the law to my understanding. I invite you to submit this issue to judicial review where my fellow justices can make such a decision.
 

punk d

TNPer
-
-
Hileville said:
This indictment and pending trial is assigned to Belschaft as moderating Justice.
Hilevile – given some of the commentary with this filing. I’d like to recommend that we use the court room in the following way.

New threads for indictments. New threads for trials – pinned.

What do you think? I’m not trying to be nitpicky but this time next week I fully expect many open trials and I expect there will be many comments on most of the trials.
 

Hileville

TNPer
From this point forward all indictments should still be filed in this thread. After approval is received and a Justice is assigned the Court will create a Trial thread and a Discussion thread for that trial in which the public may comment in unless it gets out of hand. All discussion in this thread will be removed. Only the AG and Court Justices should be posting in this thread.
 

punk d

TNPer
-
-

Indictment

In the name of the nations of The North Pacific, an indictment under The North Pacific Legal Code is filed against Unibot, alleging the defendant fraudulently flew the coat of arms of The North Pacific in response to a ruling made by the court barring citizens from such activity.
Unibot’s charge
The defendant’s nation’s image was also included as evidence showing the Coat of Arms:
Unibot is hereby charged with committing the following acts as defined by the Legal Code:
Legal Code said:
First Count
10. “Fraud” is defined as an intentional deception, by falsehood or omission, made for some benefit or to damage another individual.
The Attorney General will argue that the defendant was not authorized to fly the Coat of Arms and that pursuant to a ruling by the Court only days earlier, intentionally flew the flag knowing that it would result in a charge of this nature. That the complainant and defendant are one in the same speaks to the defendant’s intent to commit the crime as the complainant filed so soon after the court’s ruling.

Second Count
The Attorney General’s office would also like to charge the defendant with a second count of fraud pending his plea to the first count of Fraud. The defendant brought forth the charge against himself. That alleges that the complainant felt that the defendant was guilty of flying the Coat of Arms illegally. Since both the defendant and the complainant are one in the same the only way this office believes that the defendant can not be guilty of a second count of fraud is by pleading guilty which would be consistent with the filed complaint.
If however, the defendant pleads not guilty, the defendant will then be saying either the complainant or the defendant fraudulently represented themselves when filing these charges and/or defending themselves against the same charges in order to damage or benefit the individual in question. The Attorney General’s office does not believe that the defendant can be innocent of these charges while the complainant also be innocent of intentionally deceiving the court into believing that the defendant committed the first count.
In other words, the defendant and complainant – both the same in this case – cannot have it both ways.

Third Count
The Attorney General’s office would also like to charge the defendant with conspiracy, regardless of his plea to the first count of fraud:
Legal Code said:
Section 1.8. Conspiracy
20. "Conspiracy" is defined as planning, attempting, or helping to commit any crime under this criminal code.
The Attorney General’s office believes that the complainant – Unibot – is guilty of conspiring with the defendant – Unibot – in committing the crime of fraud. This office cannot believe that the defendant committed this act without the aide and assistance of the complainant. This office shall argue that both the complainant and the defendant planned, attempted, and ultimately committed the fraudulent acts within this indictment together and should be punished accordingly.
The Attorney General’s office strongly urges this case go to trial in order to avoid similar actions in the future by complainants and defendants who wish to file charges against themselves and then plead not guilty to those charges.

Pursuant to Chapter 3, Section 3.3, Clause 11, of the Legal Code, which states that "[a]ny Justice may approve or deny an indictment, and their decision will be final," this indictment is respectfully submitted for judicial approval.
Sincerely,

Punk Daddy
Attorney General of The North Pacific[/quote]
 

Hileville

TNPer
punk d said:

Indictment

In the name of the nations of The North Pacific, an indictment under The North Pacific Legal Code is filed against Unibot, alleging the defendant fraudulently flew the coat of arms of The North Pacific in response to a ruling made by the court barring citizens from such activity.
Unibot’s charge
The defendant’s nation’s image was also included as evidence showing the Coat of Arms:
Unibot is hereby charged with committing the following acts as defined by the Legal Code:
Legal Code said:
First Count
10. “Fraud” is defined as an intentional deception, by falsehood or omission, made for some benefit or to damage another individual.
The Attorney General will argue that the defendant was not authorized to fly the Coat of Arms and that pursuant to a ruling by the Court only days earlier, intentionally flew the flag knowing that it would result in a charge of this nature. That the complainant and defendant are one in the same speaks to the defendant’s intent to commit the crime as the complainant filed so soon after the court’s ruling.

Second Count
The Attorney General’s office would also like to charge the defendant with a second count of fraud pending his plea to the first count of Fraud. The defendant brought forth the charge against himself. That alleges that the complainant felt that the defendant was guilty of flying the Coat of Arms illegally. Since both the defendant and the complainant are one in the same the only way this office believes that the defendant can not be guilty of a second count of fraud is by pleading guilty which would be consistent with the filed complaint.
If however, the defendant pleads not guilty, the defendant will then be saying either the complainant or the defendant fraudulently represented themselves when filing these charges and/or defending themselves against the same charges in order to damage or benefit the individual in question. The Attorney General’s office does not believe that the defendant can be innocent of these charges while the complainant also be innocent of intentionally deceiving the court into believing that the defendant committed the first count.
In other words, the defendant and complainant – both the same in this case – cannot have it both ways.

Third Count
The Attorney General’s office would also like to charge the defendant with conspiracy, regardless of his plea to the first count of fraud:
Legal Code said:
Section 1.8. Conspiracy
20. "Conspiracy" is defined as planning, attempting, or helping to commit any crime under this criminal code.
The Attorney General’s office believes that the complainant – Unibot – is guilty of conspiring with the defendant – Unibot – in committing the crime of fraud. This office cannot believe that the defendant committed this act without the aide and assistance of the complainant. This office shall argue that both the complainant and the defendant planned, attempted, and ultimately committed the fraudulent acts within this indictment together and should be punished accordingly.
The Attorney General’s office strongly urges this case go to trial in order to avoid similar actions in the future by complainants and defendants who wish to file charges against themselves and then plead not guilty to those charges.

Pursuant to Chapter 3, Section 3.3, Clause 11, of the Legal Code, which states that "[a]ny Justice may approve or deny an indictment, and their decision will be final," this indictment is respectfully submitted for judicial approval.
Sincerely,

Punk Daddy
Attorney General of The North Pacific
[/quote]The Justices will discuss this indictment.
 

punk d

TNPer
-
-

Indictment
In the name of the nations of The North Pacific, an indictment under The North Pacific Legal Code is filed against Grosseschnauzer, alleging the defendant did defraud one, Kingborough, on November 1, 2012 when he stated:
Grosseschnauzer said:
fraudulent comments
No, I simply followed the precedent of John Hancock when he signed the Declaration of Independence.

I blieve you are aiding a coup d'etat by your actions, and I will continue to seek to have respect given to speech or continue to challenge you illegitimate behavior untl you do.

I refuse to be bullied by your tactics Kingborough, I wonder what Tim has promised you to aid in his coup against the elected Delegate. (It's clear by who is voting and what way that this is a pre-planned manuever, and I will do everything I have to do to derail it.
The defendant claimed that Kingborough was aiding a coup d’etat of another Regional Assembly member Tim. The office contends that Tim was not, in fact, attempting a coup and that Grosseschnauzer defrauded the former Speaker in making claims which had no basis in fact.
The defendant continued further by opining that Tim offered Kingborough something in order to aide Tim in his quest to coup the region. by not allowing the defendant to vote in a manner that was inconsistent with the rules established by Kingborough.

Grosseschnauzer is hereby charged with committing the following act as defined by the Legal Code:
Section 1.4.10: Fraud
10. “Fraud” is defined as an intentional deception, by falsehood or omission, made for some benefit or to damage another individual.
Pursuant to Chapter 3, Section 3.3, Clause 11, of the Legal Code, which states that "[a]ny Justice may approve or deny an indictment, and their decision will be final," this indictment is respectfully submitted for judicial approval.

Sincerely,

Punk Daddy
Attorney General of The North Pacific[/quote]
 

punk d

TNPer
-
-

Indictment
In the name of the nations of The North Pacific, an indictment under The North Pacific Legal Code is filed against Eluvatar, alleging the following as outlined by Justice Blue Wolf on July 22, 2012:
A recent court ruling regarding a FOI request related to this supposedly official release of information ruled that the information was not, in fact, released by the government at all, but by an unnamed association of TNP members whom are outside the government entirely.

It is therefore obvious that Delegate Eluvatar was not acting in an official government capacity when that information was released, thus violating several laws:

TNP LAW 22 said:
Section 2: Espionage
A - "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.
B - The information gathered must be of a nature that a person that has not registered on the official forums or has not attained Regional Assembly status would be unable to access it without circumventing real-life legal means.

C - Exceptions may be given to members of the military and intelligence services of The North Pacific, with the consent of the Delegate and the appointee of the Delegate who commands the military or intelligence services of The North Pacific. This exception is only valid when on officially sanctioned missions for the purposes of perserving Regional security and the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
By the Court's most recent ruling, Eluvatar used his position of Security Council member and Delegate to obtain information that he otherwise would not have been able to obtain. He did so, according to the court, to fulfill the goals of a group outside the government entirely if this was not true, the FOI request would have been granted. In fact, by Eluvatar's own claim the information obtained was given to a group outside government control, as a matter of fact he used it as a justification for not fulfilling a FOI request and this claim was later verified by the Court itself.

It is quite clear that evidence exists to suggest that Delegate Eluvatar used his official position to obtain information that otherwise would not be accessible, as shown in a logged conversation between myself and Justice Hileville, whom allowed me to re-post this with permission.

<Hileville>: Elu got the log more or less because of being in TSP's cabinet and his position in TNP at the time.
<Blue_Wolf>: What was his position in the TNP at the time?
<Hileville>: SC.
The original posting may be found here.

The Court's most recent ruling suggest that this information was gathered on the behalf not of TNP government but for some as of yet unnamed group within TNP, acting outside government constraints and sanction. This leads to the next charge to be filed

Section 4: Election Fraud
A - "Election fraud" is defined as the willful deception of voters or residents of The North Pacific 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.
B - "Impersonation" is defined as behavior that fraudulently assumes or acts the character of an extant or former nation or otherwise fraudulently pretends to represent any part or whole of The North Pacific and its government.
If the any of the above is true, Eluvatar is also guilty of Impersonation, specifically when he pretended to represent TNP's government in order to obtain information for a non-official, non-governmental group existing within TNP.


Eluvatar is hereby charged with committing the following act as defined by the Legal Code:
Legal Code said:
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.
Legal Code said:
Section 1.4: Fraud
Section 1.4.10: Fraud
10. “Fraud” is defined as an intentional deception, by falsehood or omission, made for some benefit or to damage another individual.
Pursuant to Chapter 3, Section 3.3, Clause 11, of the Legal Code, which states that "[a]ny Justice may approve or deny an indictment, and their decision will be final," this indictment is respectfully submitted for judicial approval.
The Attorney General’s office would like to request the recusal of Justice Blue Wolf and Chief Justice Hileville. The court would also like to request that Chief Justice Belschaft state that he has no conflict of interest in this case or recuse himself accordingly.
The office would like to add that if Justice Belschaft has a conflict that the Justice appoint a hearing officer prior to recusing himself.
Sincerely,

Punk Daddy
Attorney General of The North Pacific
 

Hileville

TNPer
punk d said:

Indictment
In the name of the nations of The North Pacific, an indictment under The North Pacific Legal Code is filed against Grosseschnauzer, alleging the defendant did defraud one, Kingborough, on November 1, 2012 when he stated:
Grosseschnauzer said:
fraudulent comments
No, I simply followed the precedent of John Hancock when he signed the Declaration of Independence.

I blieve you are aiding a coup d'etat by your actions, and I will continue to seek to have respect given to speech or continue to challenge you illegitimate behavior untl you do.

I refuse to be bullied by your tactics Kingborough, I wonder what Tim has promised you to aid in his coup against the elected Delegate. (It's clear by who is voting and what way that this is a pre-planned manuever, and I will do everything I have to do to derail it.
The defendant claimed that Kingborough was aiding a coup d’etat of another Regional Assembly member Tim. The office contends that Tim was not, in fact, attempting a coup and that Grosseschnauzer defrauded the former Speaker in making claims which had no basis in fact.
The defendant continued further by opining that Tim offered Kingborough something in order to aide Tim in his quest to coup the region. by not allowing the defendant to vote in a manner that was inconsistent with the rules established by Kingborough.

Grosseschnauzer is hereby charged with committing the following act as defined by the Legal Code:
Section 1.4.10: Fraud
10. “Fraud” is defined as an intentional deception, by falsehood or omission, made for some benefit or to damage another individual.
Pursuant to Chapter 3, Section 3.3, Clause 11, of the Legal Code, which states that "[a]ny Justice may approve or deny an indictment, and their decision will be final," this indictment is respectfully submitted for judicial approval.

Sincerely,

Punk Daddy
Attorney General of The North Pacific

The indictment is accepted and I will be moderating this Trial.
 

Eluvatar

TNPer
-
-
punk d said:
The Attorney General’s office would like to request the recusal of Justice Blue Wolf and Chief Justice Hileville. The court would also like to request that Chief Justice Belschaft state that he has no conflict of interest in this case or recuse himself accordingly.
The office would like to add that if Justice Belschaft has a conflict that the Justice appoint a hearing officer prior to recusing himself.
Sincerely,

Punk Daddy
Attorney General of The North Pacific
While I'd love it if my former(?) Defense Counsel were to appoint the tribunal trying me, I'm not sure that that'd be ethical.
 

Hileville

TNPer
punk d said:

Indictment

In the name of the nations of The North Pacific, an indictment under The North Pacific Legal Code is filed against Unibot, alleging the defendant fraudulently flew the coat of arms of The North Pacific in response to a ruling made by the court barring citizens from such activity.
Unibot’s charge
The defendant’s nation’s image was also included as evidence showing the Coat of Arms:
Unibot is hereby charged with committing the following acts as defined by the Legal Code:
Legal Code said:
First Count
10. “Fraud” is defined as an intentional deception, by falsehood or omission, made for some benefit or to damage another individual.
The Attorney General will argue that the defendant was not authorized to fly the Coat of Arms and that pursuant to a ruling by the Court only days earlier, intentionally flew the flag knowing that it would result in a charge of this nature. That the complainant and defendant are one in the same speaks to the defendant’s intent to commit the crime as the complainant filed so soon after the court’s ruling.

Second Count
The Attorney General’s office would also like to charge the defendant with a second count of fraud pending his plea to the first count of Fraud. The defendant brought forth the charge against himself. That alleges that the complainant felt that the defendant was guilty of flying the Coat of Arms illegally. Since both the defendant and the complainant are one in the same the only way this office believes that the defendant can not be guilty of a second count of fraud is by pleading guilty which would be consistent with the filed complaint.
If however, the defendant pleads not guilty, the defendant will then be saying either the complainant or the defendant fraudulently represented themselves when filing these charges and/or defending themselves against the same charges in order to damage or benefit the individual in question. The Attorney General’s office does not believe that the defendant can be innocent of these charges while the complainant also be innocent of intentionally deceiving the court into believing that the defendant committed the first count.
In other words, the defendant and complainant – both the same in this case – cannot have it both ways.

Third Count
The Attorney General’s office would also like to charge the defendant with conspiracy, regardless of his plea to the first count of fraud:
Legal Code said:
Section 1.8. Conspiracy
20. "Conspiracy" is defined as planning, attempting, or helping to commit any crime under this criminal code.
The Attorney General’s office believes that the complainant – Unibot – is guilty of conspiring with the defendant – Unibot – in committing the crime of fraud. This office cannot believe that the defendant committed this act without the aide and assistance of the complainant. This office shall argue that both the complainant and the defendant planned, attempted, and ultimately committed the fraudulent acts within this indictment together and should be punished accordingly.
The Attorney General’s office strongly urges this case go to trial in order to avoid similar actions in the future by complainants and defendants who wish to file charges against themselves and then plead not guilty to those charges.

Pursuant to Chapter 3, Section 3.3, Clause 11, of the Legal Code, which states that "[a]ny Justice may approve or deny an indictment, and their decision will be final," this indictment is respectfully submitted for judicial approval.
Sincerely,

Punk Daddy
Attorney General of The North Pacific
Indictment accepted. I will also be the Moderating Justice for this Trial.
 

punk d

TNPer
-
-
Chief Justice Hileville - I plan to add a fourth charge of sedition. I ask that you allow me 12 hours to file before sending the defendant his notice to enter a plea unless I am able to add this once the trial has been opened.
 

Hileville

TNPer
punk d said:
Chief Justice Hileville - I plan to add a fourth charge of sedition. I ask that you allow me 12 hours to file before sending the defendant his notice to enter a plea unless I am able to add this once the trial has been opened.
The Court will wait until the fourth charge is added before proceeding.
 

punk d

TNPer
-
-
Would the court please remove the filing against Eluvatar. I referenced the new Legal code and not the old one.
 

Eluvatar

TNPer
-
-
punk d said:

Indictment
In the name of the nations of The North Pacific, an indictment under The North Pacific Legal Code is filed against Eluvatar, alleging the following as outlined by Justice Blue Wolf on July 22, 2012:
A recent court ruling regarding a FOI request related to this supposedly official release of information ruled that the information was not, in fact, released by the government at all, but by an unnamed association of TNP members whom are outside the government entirely.

It is therefore obvious that Delegate Eluvatar was not acting in an official government capacity when that information was released, thus violating several laws:

TNP LAW 22 said:
Section 2: Espionage
A - "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.
B - The information gathered must be of a nature that a person that has not registered on the official forums or has not attained Regional Assembly status would be unable to access it without circumventing real-life legal means.

C - Exceptions may be given to members of the military and intelligence services of The North Pacific, with the consent of the Delegate and the appointee of the Delegate who commands the military or intelligence services of The North Pacific. This exception is only valid when on officially sanctioned missions for the purposes of perserving Regional security and the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
By the Court's most recent ruling, Eluvatar used his position of Security Council member and Delegate to obtain information that he otherwise would not have been able to obtain. He did so, according to the court, to fulfill the goals of a group outside the government entirely if this was not true, the FOI request would have been granted. In fact, by Eluvatar's own claim the information obtained was given to a group outside government control, as a matter of fact he used it as a justification for not fulfilling a FOI request and this claim was later verified by the Court itself.

It is quite clear that evidence exists to suggest that Delegate Eluvatar used his official position to obtain information that otherwise would not be accessible, as shown in a logged conversation between myself and Justice Hileville, whom allowed me to re-post this with permission.

<Hileville>: Elu got the log more or less because of being in TSP's cabinet and his position in TNP at the time.
<Blue_Wolf>: What was his position in the TNP at the time?
<Hileville>: SC.
The original posting may be found here.

The Court's most recent ruling suggest that this information was gathered on the behalf not of TNP government but for some as of yet unnamed group within TNP, acting outside government constraints and sanction. This leads to the next charge to be filed

Section 4: Election Fraud
A - "Election fraud" is defined as the willful deception of voters or residents of The North Pacific 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.
B - "Impersonation" is defined as behavior that fraudulently assumes or acts the character of an extant or former nation or otherwise fraudulently pretends to represent any part or whole of The North Pacific and its government.
If the any of the above is true, Eluvatar is also guilty of Impersonation, specifically when he pretended to represent TNP's government in order to obtain information for a non-official, non-governmental group existing within TNP.


Eluvatar is hereby charged with committing the following act as defined by the Legal Code:
Legal Code said:
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.
Legal Code said:
Section 1.4: Fraud
Section 1.4.10: Fraud
10. “Fraud” is defined as an intentional deception, by falsehood or omission, made for some benefit or to damage another individual.
Pursuant to Chapter 3, Section 3.3, Clause 11, of the Legal Code, which states that "[a]ny Justice may approve or deny an indictment, and their decision will be final," this indictment is respectfully submitted for judicial approval.
The Attorney General’s office would like to request the recusal of Justice Blue Wolf and Chief Justice Hileville. The court would also like to request that Chief Justice Belschaft state that he has no conflict of interest in this case or recuse himself accordingly.
The office would like to add that if Justice Belschaft has a conflict that the Justice appoint a hearing officer prior to recusing himself.
Sincerely,

Punk Daddy
Attorney General of The North Pacific
I respectfully submit to the Court that this indictment is invalid as it charges me with acts that took place before the crimes as defined in the charges were adopted as law June 14, 2012. Our Bill of Rights protects against the ex post facto application of law:

Bill of Rights said:
9. Each Nation in The North Pacific is guaranteed the organization and operation of the governmental authorities of the region on fundamental principles of democracy, accountability, and transparency. No action by the governmental authorities of the region shall deny to any Nation of The North Pacific, due process of law, including prior notice and the opportunity to be heard, nor deny to any Nation of The North Pacific the equal and fair treatment and protection of the provisions of the Constitution. No governmental authority shall have power to adopt or impose an ex post facto law or a bill of attainder as to any act for purposes of criminal proceedings.
While I did not, of course, guilty of having mislead or spied on TNP, I have a right to not have to defend myself against ex post facto charges.

Thank you,
~Eluvatar
 

Belschaft

TNPer
I will be recusing myself from the case of TNP vs. Eluvatar, due to a conflict of interest - namely that I have previously been retained as and acted as defence counsel in this matter.

Which leaves us in the awkward situation of having no Justices available to appoint hearing officers, or to accept the indictment.
 

punk d

TNPer
-
-

Indictment
In the name of the nations of The North Pacific, an indictment under The North Pacific Legal Code is filed against Eluvatar, alleging the following as outlined by Justice Blue Wolf on July 22, 2012:
A recent court ruling regarding a FOI request related to this supposedly official release of information ruled that the information was not, in fact, released by the government at all, but by an unnamed association of TNP members whom are outside the government entirely.

It is therefore obvious that Delegate Eluvatar was not acting in an official government capacity when that information was released, thus violating several laws:

TNP LAW 22 said:
Section 2: Espionage
A - "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.
B - The information gathered must be of a nature that a person that has not registered on the official forums or has not attained Regional Assembly status would be unable to access it without circumventing real-life legal means.

C - Exceptions may be given to members of the military and intelligence services of The North Pacific, with the consent of the Delegate and the appointee of the Delegate who commands the military or intelligence services of The North Pacific. This exception is only valid when on officially sanctioned missions for the purposes of perserving Regional security and the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
By the Court's most recent ruling, Eluvatar used his position of Security Council member and Delegate to obtain information that he otherwise would not have been able to obtain. He did so, according to the court, to fulfill the goals of a group outside the government entirely if this was not true, the FOI request would have been granted. In fact, by Eluvatar's own claim the information obtained was given to a group outside government control, as a matter of fact he used it as a justification for not fulfilling a FOI request and this claim was later verified by the Court itself.

It is quite clear that evidence exists to suggest that Delegate Eluvatar used his official position to obtain information that otherwise would not be accessible, as shown in a logged conversation between myself and Justice Hileville, whom allowed me to re-post this with permission.

<Hileville>: Elu got the log more or less because of being in TSP's cabinet and his position in TNP at the time.
<Blue_Wolf>: What was his position in the TNP at the time?
<Hileville>: SC.
The original posting may be found here.

The Court's most recent ruling suggest that this information was gathered on the behalf not of TNP government but for some as of yet unnamed group within TNP, acting outside government constraints and sanction. This leads to the next charge to be filed

Section 4: Election Fraud
A - "Election fraud" is defined as the willful deception of voters or residents of The North Pacific 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.
B - "Impersonation" is defined as behavior that fraudulently assumes or acts the character of an extant or former nation or otherwise fraudulently pretends to represent any part or whole of The North Pacific and its government.
If the any of the above is true, Eluvatar is also guilty of Impersonation, specifically when he pretended to represent TNP's government in order to obtain information for a non-official, non-governmental group existing within TNP.


Eluvatar is hereby charged with committing the following act as defined by the Legal Code:
Legal Code said:

Section 2: Espionage

A - "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.
B - The information gathered must be of a nature that a person that has not registered on the official forums or has not attained Regional Assembly status would be unable to access it without circumventing real-life legal means.
Legal Code said:
Section 4: Election Fraud
A - "Election fraud" is defined as the willful deception of voters or residents of The North Pacific 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.
B - "Impersonation" is defined as behavior that fraudulently assumes or acts the character of an extant or former nation or otherwise fraudulently pretends to represent any part or whole of The North Pacific and its government.
Legal Code said:
Section 1: Treason
A - "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 allied groups and regions as governed by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
Legal Code said:
Section 3: Sedition
A - "Sedition" is defined as an intentional attempt on the official forums or within the NationStates region "The North Pacific" to incite the Nations of The North Pacific to revolt in a manner not sanctioned by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
The latter two charges of Treason and Sedition have been added because the Prosecution shall demonstrate that Eluvatar provided material support to a group for the expressed purpose of undermining the sitting delegate at the time which is tantamount to undermining the lawful government of The North Pacific. The defendant also took intentional steps on the official forums to incite the group of nations privy to his claims against Blue Wolf to prepare for a revolt that was not in a manner sanctioned by the Constitution and Bill of Rights. There are claims that this group was seeking to stop Blue Wolf from attempting a coup against the region while delegate, but Blue Wolf did not attempt a coup d’état nor was he ever convicted. It appears that Eluvatar’s actions were essentially a way for him and his group to implement regime change by circumventing the legal process at the time.

The Attorney General’s office would like to request the recusal of Justice Blue Wolf and Chief Justice Hileville. The court would also like to request that Chief Justice Belschaft state that he has no conflict of interest in this case or recuse himself accordingly.

The office would like to add that if Justice Belschaft has a conflict that the Justice appoint a hearing officer prior to recusing himself.

The office would also like to request clarification of the administration of this proceeding. Shall the current Adopted rules preside or previous Adopted rules under the prior Legal Code?

Pursuant to TNP Law 31, Section 2, Subsection 1, as Attorney General I hereby charge Eluvatar with the crimes listed above and bring this case before the court.

Sincerely,

Punk Daddy
Attorney General of The North Pacific
 

Hileville

TNPer
punk d said:

Indictment
In the name of the nations of The North Pacific, an indictment under The North Pacific Legal Code is filed against Eluvatar, alleging the following as outlined by Justice Blue Wolf on July 22, 2012:
A recent court ruling regarding a FOI request related to this supposedly official release of information ruled that the information was not, in fact, released by the government at all, but by an unnamed association of TNP members whom are outside the government entirely.

It is therefore obvious that Delegate Eluvatar was not acting in an official government capacity when that information was released, thus violating several laws:

TNP LAW 22 said:
Section 2: Espionage
A - "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.
B - The information gathered must be of a nature that a person that has not registered on the official forums or has not attained Regional Assembly status would be unable to access it without circumventing real-life legal means.

C - Exceptions may be given to members of the military and intelligence services of The North Pacific, with the consent of the Delegate and the appointee of the Delegate who commands the military or intelligence services of The North Pacific. This exception is only valid when on officially sanctioned missions for the purposes of perserving Regional security and the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
By the Court's most recent ruling, Eluvatar used his position of Security Council member and Delegate to obtain information that he otherwise would not have been able to obtain. He did so, according to the court, to fulfill the goals of a group outside the government entirely if this was not true, the FOI request would have been granted. In fact, by Eluvatar's own claim the information obtained was given to a group outside government control, as a matter of fact he used it as a justification for not fulfilling a FOI request and this claim was later verified by the Court itself.

It is quite clear that evidence exists to suggest that Delegate Eluvatar used his official position to obtain information that otherwise would not be accessible, as shown in a logged conversation between myself and Justice Hileville, whom allowed me to re-post this with permission.

<Hileville>: Elu got the log more or less because of being in TSP's cabinet and his position in TNP at the time.
<Blue_Wolf>: What was his position in the TNP at the time?
<Hileville>: SC.
The original posting may be found here.

The Court's most recent ruling suggest that this information was gathered on the behalf not of TNP government but for some as of yet unnamed group within TNP, acting outside government constraints and sanction. This leads to the next charge to be filed

Section 4: Election Fraud
A - "Election fraud" is defined as the willful deception of voters or residents of The North Pacific 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.
B - "Impersonation" is defined as behavior that fraudulently assumes or acts the character of an extant or former nation or otherwise fraudulently pretends to represent any part or whole of The North Pacific and its government.
If the any of the above is true, Eluvatar is also guilty of Impersonation, specifically when he pretended to represent TNP's government in order to obtain information for a non-official, non-governmental group existing within TNP.


Eluvatar is hereby charged with committing the following act as defined by the Legal Code:
Legal Code said:

Section 2: Espionage

A - "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.
B - The information gathered must be of a nature that a person that has not registered on the official forums or has not attained Regional Assembly status would be unable to access it without circumventing real-life legal means.
Legal Code said:
Section 4: Election Fraud
A - "Election fraud" is defined as the willful deception of voters or residents of The North Pacific 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.
B - "Impersonation" is defined as behavior that fraudulently assumes or acts the character of an extant or former nation or otherwise fraudulently pretends to represent any part or whole of The North Pacific and its government.
Legal Code said:
Section 1: Treason
A - "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 allied groups and regions as governed by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
Legal Code said:
Section 3: Sedition
A - "Sedition" is defined as an intentional attempt on the official forums or within the NationStates region "The North Pacific" to incite the Nations of The North Pacific to revolt in a manner not sanctioned by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
The latter two charges of Treason and Sedition have been added because the Prosecution shall demonstrate that Eluvatar provided material support to a group for the expressed purpose of undermining the sitting delegate at the time which is tantamount to undermining the lawful government of The North Pacific. The defendant also took intentional steps on the official forums to incite the group of nations privy to his claims against Blue Wolf to prepare for a revolt that was not in a manner sanctioned by the Constitution and Bill of Rights. There are claims that this group was seeking to stop Blue Wolf from attempting a coup against the region while delegate, but Blue Wolf did not attempt a coup d’état nor was he ever convicted. It appears that Eluvatar’s actions were essentially a way for him and his group to implement regime change by circumventing the legal process at the time.

The Attorney General’s office would like to request the recusal of Justice Blue Wolf and Chief Justice Hileville. The court would also like to request that Chief Justice Belschaft state that he has no conflict of interest in this case or recuse himself accordingly.

The office would like to add that if Justice Belschaft has a conflict that the Justice appoint a hearing officer prior to recusing himself.

The office would also like to request clarification of the administration of this proceeding. Shall the current Adopted rules preside or previous Adopted rules under the prior Legal Code?

Pursuant to TNP Law 31, Section 2, Subsection 1, as Attorney General I hereby charge Eluvatar with the crimes listed above and bring this case before the court.

Sincerely,

Punk Daddy
Attorney General of The North Pacific
As there is no Justice who has not recused himself from this trial this indictment cannot be accepted or denied at this time.
 

punk d

TNPer
-
-
This office would like to add a fourth charge in the case against Unibot, that of sedition. Sedition is defined as:
Legal Code said:
8. "Sedition" is defined as an intentional attempt to incite the Nations of The North Pacific to revolt in a manner not sanctioned by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
Unibot is charged with committing the act of sedition because subsequent to ruling that non-governmental nations could not fly the coat of arms, the defendant did indeed fly the coat of arms with the express knowledge that such an act was not sanctioned by the Constitution as the Courts had ruled earlier. In his action, the defendant was attempting to incite the nations of the North Pacific to revolt against the same Constitution because the defendant has a different interpretation of the Constitution and Bill of Rights than do the Court Justices on this matter. However, when it comes to interpreting the laws the only opinions that carry the weight of law, are the Court Justices, and the defendant clearly ignored their ruling and this office believes that the defendant encouraged other nations to also ignored the justices ruling by his actions.
 

Indictment
In the name of the nations of The North Pacific, an indictment under The North Pacific Legal Code is filed against Former English Colony, alleging the defendant did commit sedition by colluding "with Game Mods to delete the legitimate, legal delegate McMasterdonia, at which point she was able to seize control of the region. FEC also ran unendorsement campains against Tim under the alias 'Oh My Goodness Gracious'. Upon seizing the delegacy the only thing stopping FEC from dismantling the government was the mods' speedy restoration of McM's legal delegacy."

Former English Colony is hereby charged with committing the following act as defined by the Legal Code:
Section 1.3.8: Sedition
8. "Sedition" is defined as an intentional attempt to incite the Nations of The North Pacific to revolt in a manner not sanctioned by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
Pursuant to Chapter 3, Section 3.3, Clause 11, of the Legal Code, which states that "[a]ny Justice may approve or deny an indictment, and their decision will be final," this indictment is respectfully submitted for judicial approval.

Sincerely,

Sovreignry
Deputy Attorney General of The North Pacific
 

punk d

TNPer
-
-
Your honors, regarding the case against Former English Colony. This office has queried the complainant regarding supporting evidence of the charges and the complainant has not supplied this office with additional supporting evidence. This office shall try the defendant with the utmost vigor if called upon, but my office felt compelled to note that the evidence supplied in the indictment and complaint is the only evidence as my disposal.
 

Hileville

TNPer
punk d said:
Your honors, regarding the case against Former English Colony. This office has queried the complainant regarding supporting evidence of the charges and the complainant has not supplied this office with additional supporting evidence. This office shall try the defendant with the utmost vigor if called upon, but my office felt compelled to note that the evidence supplied in the indictment and complaint is the only evidence as my disposal.
I cannot accept this indictment with no supporting evidence.
 

Hileville

TNPer

Indictment

In the name of the nations of The North Pacific, an indictment under The North Pacific Legal Code is filed against Unibot, alleging the defendant fraudulently flew the coat of arms of The North Pacific in response to a ruling made by the court barring citizens from such activity.
Unibot’s charge
The defendant’s nation’s image was also included as evidence showing the Coat of Arms:
Unibot is hereby charged with committing the following acts as defined by the Legal Code:
Legal Code said:
First Count
10. “Fraud” is defined as an intentional deception, by falsehood or omission, made for some benefit or to damage another individual.
The Attorney General will argue that the defendant was not authorized to fly the Coat of Arms and that pursuant to a ruling by the Court only days earlier, intentionally flew the flag knowing that it would result in a charge of this nature. That the complainant and defendant are one in the same speaks to the defendant’s intent to commit the crime as the complainant filed so soon after the court’s ruling.

Second Count
The Attorney General’s office would also like to charge the defendant with a second count of fraud pending his plea to the first count of Fraud. The defendant brought forth the charge against himself. That alleges that the complainant felt that the defendant was guilty of flying the Coat of Arms illegally. Since both the defendant and the complainant are one in the same the only way this office believes that the defendant can not be guilty of a second count of fraud is by pleading guilty which would be consistent with the filed complaint.
If however, the defendant pleads not guilty, the defendant will then be saying either the complainant or the defendant fraudulently represented themselves when filing these charges and/or defending themselves against the same charges in order to damage or benefit the individual in question. The Attorney General’s office does not believe that the defendant can be innocent of these charges while the complainant also be innocent of intentionally deceiving the court into believing that the defendant committed the first count.
In other words, the defendant and complainant – both the same in this case – cannot have it both ways.

Third Count
The Attorney General’s office would also like to charge the defendant with conspiracy, regardless of his plea to the first count of fraud:
Legal Code said:
Section 1.8. Conspiracy
20. "Conspiracy" is defined as planning, attempting, or helping to commit any crime under this criminal code.
The Attorney General’s office believes that the complainant – Unibot – is guilty of conspiring with the defendant – Unibot – in committing the crime of fraud. This office cannot believe that the defendant committed this act without the aide and assistance of the complainant. This office shall argue that both the complainant and the defendant planned, attempted, and ultimately committed the fraudulent acts within this indictment together and should be punished accordingly.
The Attorney General’s office strongly urges this case go to trial in order to avoid similar actions in the future by complainants and defendants who wish to file charges against themselves and then plead not guilty to those charges.

Pursuant to Chapter 3, Section 3.3, Clause 11, of the Legal Code, which states that "[a]ny Justice may approve or deny an indictment, and their decision will be final," this indictment is respectfully submitted for judicial approval.

Sincerely,

Punk Daddy
Attorney General of The North Pacific
Additional 4th Charge against the Defendant said:
This office would like to add a fourth charge in the case against Unibot, that of sedition. Sedition is defined as:
Legal Code said:
8. "Sedition" is defined as an intentional attempt to incite the Nations of The North Pacific to revolt in a manner not sanctioned by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
Unibot is charged with committing the act of sedition because subsequent to ruling that non-governmental nations could not fly the coat of arms, the defendant did indeed fly the coat of arms with the express knowledge that such an act was not sanctioned by the Constitution as the Courts had ruled earlier. In his action, the defendant was attempting to incite the nations of the North Pacific to revolt against the same Constitution because the defendant has a different interpretation of the Constitution and Bill of Rights than do the Court Justices on this matter. However, when it comes to interpreting the laws the only opinions that carry the weight of law, are the Court Justices, and the defendant clearly ignored their ruling and this office believes that the defendant encouraged other nations to also ignored the justices ruling by his actions.

The Indictment as filed including the 4th Charge against Unibot have been accepted. The Court will notify the Defendant shortly and open Trial proceedings.
 

Belschaft

TNPer
Hileville said:
punk d said:
Your honors, regarding the case against Former English Colony. This office has queried the complainant regarding supporting evidence of the charges and the complainant has not supplied this office with additional supporting evidence. This office shall try the defendant with the utmost vigor if called upon, but my office felt compelled to note that the evidence supplied in the indictment and complaint is the only evidence as my disposal.
I cannot accept this indictment with no supporting evidence.
Nor can I. Further, I would like to note that were contempt of court a crime I would be seeking charges against the plaintiff.
 

punk d

TNPer
-
-
Dear Justices,

I am asking for the immediate recess of all pending cases. Some critical questions have been raised as a result of the case against JAL, that my office needs clear, concise, and consistent direction on.

I believe that it is in the interests of justice that without the court advising on these procedural matters, this office may be impaired to prosecute. I shall be filing several 'requests for ruling' as one omnibus request, requesting the recusal of Justice Belschaft as he has ruled on several items that I will be presenting to the larger court.

I think that, and I should have been prepared for, this conversation was bound to happen given that very little cases have gone through these courts. Still, i think in order to conduct a fair trial - defense and prosecutions must have clear, concise, and consistent rules to follow.
 

Indictment
In the name of the nations of The North Pacific, an indictment under The North Pacific Legal Code is filed against Empire of Narnia, alleging the defendant did defraud one, Gaspo, on December 12, 2012 when he stated:
Empire of Narnia said:
fraudulent comment
If you want the practical reason it's so people know not to send my (sic) Private Messages

Motherfucker

Empire of Narnia is hereby charged with committing the following act as defined by the Legal Code:

Section 1.4.10: Fraud

10. "Fraud" is defined as an intentional deception, by falsehood or omission, made for some benefit or to damage another individual.
Pursuant to Chapter 3, Section 3.3, Clause 11, of the Legal Code, which states that "[a]ny Justice may approve or deny an indictment, and their decision will be final," this indictment is respectfully submitted for judicial approval.

Additionally, the Attorney General's office would ask that Associate Justice Gaspo recuse himself from this case due to his proximity to the case and conflict of interest.

Sincerely,

Sovreignry

Deputy Attorney General of The North Pacific
 

Belschaft

TNPer
I will not be approving this indictment. Calling someone a 'Motherfucker' is not a matter for the courts, but for forum moderation.
 

Gaspo

TNPer
I do not agree with Belschaft's legal decision on this matter, but I cannot accept the indictment either as it is a conflict of interest.
 

Indictment
In the name of the nations of The North Pacific, an indictment under The North Pacific Legal Code is filed against Empire of Narnia, alleging the defendant did commit Forum Crashing by reporting the regional forums of Zoo to Invisionfree causing the forums to be deleted.

Empire of Narnia is hereby charged with committing the following act as defined by the Legal Code:

Section 1.5.11: Crashing

11. "Crashing" is defined as any unauthorized action which could cause a forum to go out of service or lose information, including the deletion of posts, the deletion of a forum, spamming, or any other act of such kind.
Pursuant to Chapter 3, Section 3.3, Clause 11, of the Legal Code, which states that "[a]ny Justice may approve or deny an indictment, and their decision will be final," this indictment is respectfully submitted for judicial approval.

Sincerely,

Sovreignry
Deputy Attorney General of The North Pacific
 

Hileville

TNPer
Reginald Carmichael said:

Indictment
In the name of the nations of The North Pacific, an indictment under The North Pacific Legal Code is filed against Empire of Narnia, alleging the defendant did commit Forum Crashing by reporting the regional forums of Zoo to Invisionfree causing the forums to be deleted.

Empire of Narnia is hereby charged with committing the following act as defined by the Legal Code:

Section 1.5.11: Crashing

11. "Crashing" is defined as any unauthorized action which could cause a forum to go out of service or lose information, including the deletion of posts, the deletion of a forum, spamming, or any other act of such kind.
Pursuant to Chapter 3, Section 3.3, Clause 11, of the Legal Code, which states that "[a]ny Justice may approve or deny an indictment, and their decision will be final," this indictment is respectfully submitted for judicial approval.

Sincerely,

Sovreignry
Deputy Attorney General of The North Pacific
Indictment is approved and assigned to Gaspo to moderate.
 
Top