Re: commentary on criminal complaint against Flemingovia

I move this motion be dismissed.

The attorney generals office is far too overworked to be burdened with such a frivolous, self-serving case. Allowing this suit would diminish the universal awe and respect in which the attorney generals office is held.
 
The Attorney General's office may be overworked and clearly understaffed, however I have confidence that they will give this complaint the consideration it deserves.
 
Gracius Maximus:
The Court has opined that situations like this are best served via recall. But, since Flemingovia didn't win, it is likely just to be overlooked.
Click to expand...
Point of order: I have not lost yet.

Where there is life there is hope.
 
mcmasterdonia:
The Attorney General's office may be overworked and clearly understaffed, however I have confidence that they will give this complaint the consideration it deserves.
Click to expand...
Perhaps the attorney general could recruit some temporary staff to help cope with the unexpected demand?
 
There are many RA members who are not deputies of this office yet. So that is a possibility.

I am hoping for a speedy response to this.
 
Oh.......my........GOD! :headbang: :lol:

I assure you all, the AG's office is quite well staffed, and so are our kitchens where we are preparing a feast involving any number of Antipodean Marsupials including, but not limited to Kangaroo (a nice red Joey in particular which goes quite well with a nice NWW Shiraz).

Now, there seems to be a technical issue concerning the wording of the complaint, particularly in the phrase Murder Most Fowl. This is accented by the fact concerning the actual alleged accusations that Fleminginovia initially lodged, in which instance the phrase should read Murder Most Marsupial, which, in and of itself is silly and would make no sense at all and wouldn't even qualify as a really bad pun. Well, it could be Murder Most Marsoupial, which would be a pun that doesn't qualify as fowl.

I would tend to put this matter of culinary carnage on the back burner, but I suspect the midden would be a better location. If the AG wishes to investigate this complaint further, he can borrow my Wellies and tromp out and retrieve it, that is if the birds haven't gotten to it too badly by that time.

And besides, we don't want to give the greater Court a mental breakdown by subjecting them to this one...well, maybe.

Re-write the complaint with better supporting evidence, in detail, to give us something we can actually work with. You might consider adding a bit of onions and wine-sauce to spice it up a bit.
 
Romanoffia:
Oh.......my........GOD! :headbang: :lol: .
Click to expand...
There is no need to be so formal in this thread. You can call me "flemingovia", I do not mind.

Re-write the complaint with better supporting evidence, in detail, to give us something we can actually work with. You might consider adding a bit of onions and wine-sauce to spice it up a bit
Click to expand...

I am amazed that the vast staff of the attorney generals office still needs the public to do its job.

Please tell us, what do you and your staff actually DO all day?
 
As I said, I set this complaint out in a deliberately clear manner because I knew how busy this office is. I can't make it any easier for you, you may need to conduct your own additional investigation.

Perhaps we should cut government funding to the office.
 
flemingovia:
Romanoffia:
Oh.......my........GOD! :headbang: :lol: .
Click to expand...
There is no need to be so formal in this thread. You can call me "flemingovia", I do not mind.

Which begs the question, what does God say when he sneezes?


Oh, and is there any chance you could use your Godly Omnipotence to resurrect Skippy and his mum? We've run out of Roo tail and we can't get to the grocery until Friday.


Re-write the complaint with better supporting evidence, in detail, to give us something we can actually work with. You might consider adding a bit of onions and wine-sauce to spice it up a bit
Click to expand...

I am amazed that the vast staff of the attorney generals office still needs the public to do its job.

Please tell us, what do you and your staff actually DO all day?
Click to expand...


We do just a little bit more than the Court does on any given day. Other than that, we spend the rest of the time trying out new Recipes for Kangaroo and other Antipodean critters.

Next week we are planning a Judicial Branch outing to New Zealand (for official purposes, of course). And then, of course, we will be spending a day or two in Wellington as there is a wonderful little pub there that I hear serves a simply extraordinary Roasted Kiwi on a stick.

mcmasterdonia:
As I said, I set this complaint out in a deliberately clear manner because I knew how busy this office is. I can't make it any easier for you, you may need to conduct your own additional investigation.

Perhaps we should cut government funding to the office.
Click to expand...

And that is why we are being forced to eat marsupials as funding is down to the bone as it is. If funding is cut any further, we may be forced to eat the Court Justices and we all know that roasted Court Justices have a tendency to repeat regardless of the amount of antacids one takes.
 
Our attorney general has disappeared. Can you help us find him?

WheresWallyAtWembley_6.jpg
 
An Attorney General that I used to know

TNP VOTERS: Now and then I think of when we worked together
Like when you were elected & you felt so happy you could die
Told ourselves that you were right for me
But felt so lonely in your company
But that was love and it's an ache I still remember

You can get addicted to a certain kind of sadness
No resignation till the end, always the end
So when we found that you would not make sense
Well you said that we would still defy the trends,
But I'll admit that I was sad that it was over.

But you didn't have to cut us off
Make out like this never happened and that we mean nothing
And I don't even need your office
But you treat me like a stranger and that feels so rough
No you didn't have to stoop so low
Have your Deputies collect your records and then ignore your office
I guess that I don't need that though
Now you're just an Attorney General that I used to know

Now you're just an Attorney General that I used to know
Now you're just an Attorney General that I used to know

[PaulWall:]
Now and then I think of all the times the voters screwed me over
But had me believing it was always something that I'd done
But I don't wanna work that way
Reading into every vote you gave
You said that you couldn't let me go
And I wouldn't fight for you so you became a voter that I used to know

[TNP VOTERS:]
But you didn't have to cut us off
Make out like these crimes never happened and that we were nothing
And I don't even need your office,
But you treat me like a stranger and that feels so rough
No you didn't have to stoop so low
Have your Deputies collect your records and then abuse your voter,
I guess that I don't need that though
Now you're just an Attorney General that I used to know

[x2]
Attorney General
(I used to know)
Attorney General
(Now you're just an Attorney General that I used to know)

(I used to know)
(That I used to know)
(I used to know)
An Attorney General...
 
I will look over this complaint and do an internal investigation within the AGs office, looking at any applicable law, intent, etc.
Click to expand...

I request that Romanoffia be recused or recuse himself from this investigation. His antipathy and bias towards me is well known, as he has shown himself to be a bit of a tit in the posts split from this thread. I do not believe anyone believes that he could be objective in this matter.
 
flemingovia:
I will look over this complaint and do an internal investigation within the AGs office, looking at any applicable law, intent, etc.
Click to expand...

I request that Romanoffia be recused or recuse himself from this investigation. His antipathy and bias towards me is well known, as he has shown himself to be a bit of a tit in the posts split from this thread. I do not believe anyone believes that he could be objective in this matter.
Click to expand...
You seem to completely misunderstand the very nature of the job of a prosecutor.

The very nature of a prosecutor is to nail the accused to a tree with the biggest spikes and hammer available. Antipathy, Bias are the very nature of any Prosecutor or Investigator for The Prosecution because the sole function of a Prosecutor or Investigator for the Prosecution is to be antipathetic and biased against the accused. Sympathetic prosecutors are ineffectual and shirkers. Prosecutors have one and only one function: to absolutely crucify the accused.

To try to force or otherwise coerce a Prosecutor in a trial on the part of a defendant is tantamount to the Defendant (or potential defendant, we know not which at this time) tampering with the Court itself in order to assure that a case is dismissed or found in favour of the Defendant.

That is to say, that were I or any Prosecutor to engage in prosecuting any case, such prosecution would be conducted with all due vigour and by all legal and constitutional means. It would be silly to have a prosecutor who wasn't absolutely convinced of a Defendant's guilt.

Also, you do not call an Officer of The Court a tit. Go and call a Court Justice you don't like a tit and see what happens there. Call a Prosecutor a tit in the context of the Courtroom and I am fairly sure it would garner some kind of Judicial discretionary action, under the current and revised Court Rules, that the tit caller would not be entirely please with.

As it stands now, I am about the most mild denizen of the AG's office and will investigate the matter as required. Impartiality is the purvey of the Court Justices. Going after accused individuals is not an impartial activity.

Hence, you would best be remiss in calling anyone a tit as it does not engender any desire other than to go after an accused individual with anything less than undue vigour. Impugning and nailing an accused individual to a tree before The Court are what Prosecutors do. Prosecutors are not required to be unbiased - they are required to absolutely believe the accused is guilty and then go after them by all legal and legitimate means and then nail them to a tree if possible. Anything less would be a dereliction of duty.

Objectivity. You use that term so loosely. The Objective of a prosecutor is to nail the accused to a tree. Objectively speaking, any accused person who has committed actions that upon discovery of the facts is worthy of being nailed to a tree, shall be subjected to the objective goal to that effect, if possible or probably.

Objectively speaking, my objective, should the evidence I will discover support further action, will be to nail you to a tree. Objectively speaking, my object being to assure a conviction, should the evidence support it, will be to objectively work towards a conviction. My job is to exactly to presume your guilt and try that assumption before The Court.

I, unlike The Court, am bound to treat you with the assumption that you are guilty as charged. That is my job and my job is to prove that if the evidence shows that such a charge is viable.

Oh, and don't call me a tit or anything else ever again when I am acting in the capacity of an Officer of The Court. It makes me angry and you wouldn't like me very much when I actually get angry. :fish:
 
The job of a prosecutor is to well prosecute.

Even though it is the job of a prosecutor to prosecute and to investigate complaints. Bias or no bias (which - I have full confidence in my deputies to divorce themselves of any personal feelings and investigate complaints on their merits) I am confident HuAt, Roman, and myself are fully capable of conducting an independent investigation and ultimately we will side on the side of truth. Let the chips fall where they may. If we feel there is evidence there to substantiate McMs complaint we will pursue it. If we find there is nothing substative then we wont. Simple. So if youre doing nothing wrong you have nothing to fear or to hide.
 
Romanoffia:
flemingovia:
I will look over this complaint and do an internal investigation within the AGs office, looking at any applicable law, intent, etc.
Click to expand...

I request that Romanoffia be recused or recuse himself from this investigation. His antipathy and bias towards me is well known, as he has shown himself to be a bit of a tit in the posts split from this thread. I do not believe anyone believes that he could be objective in this matter.
Click to expand...
You seem to completely misunderstand the very nature of the job of a prosecutor.

The very nature of a prosecutor is to nail the accused to a tree with the biggest spikes and hammer available. Antipathy, Bias are the very nature of any Prosecutor or Investigator for The Prosecution because the sole function of a Prosecutor or Investigator for the Prosecution is to be antipathetic and biased against the accused. Sympathetic prosecutors are ineffectual and shirkers. Prosecutors have one and only one function: to absolutely crucify the accused.

To try to force or otherwise coerce a Prosecutor in a trial on the part of a defendant is tantamount to the Defendant (or potential defendant, we know not which at this time) tampering with the Court itself in order to assure that a case is dismissed or found in favour of the Defendant.

That is to say, that were I or any Prosecutor to engage in prosecuting any case, such prosecution would be conducted with all due vigour and by all legal and constitutional means. It would be silly to have a prosecutor who wasn't absolutely convinced of a Defendant's guilt.

Also, you do not call an Officer of The Court a tit. Go and call a Court Justice you don't like a tit and see what happens there. Call a Prosecutor a tit in the context of the Courtroom and I am fairly sure it would garner some kind of Judicial discretionary action, under the current and revised Court Rules, that the tit caller would not be entirely please with.

As it stands now, I am about the most mild denizen of the AG's office and will investigate the matter as required. Impartiality is the purvey of the Court Justices. Going after accused individuals is not an impartial activity.

Hence, you would best be remiss in calling anyone a tit as it does not engender any desire other than to go after an accused individual with anything less than undue vigour. Impugning and nailing an accused individual to a tree before The Court are what Prosecutors do. Prosecutors are not required to be unbiased - they are required to absolutely believe the accused is guilty and then go after them by all legal and legitimate means and then nail them to a tree if possible. Anything less would be a dereliction of duty.

Objectivity. You use that term so loosely. The Objective of a prosecutor is to nail the accused to a tree. Objectively speaking, any accused person who has committed actions that upon discovery of the facts is worthy of being nailed to a tree, shall be subjected to the objective goal to that effect, if possible or probably.

Objectively speaking, my objective, should the evidence I will discover support further action, will be to nail you to a tree. Objectively speaking, my object being to assure a conviction, should the evidence support it, will be to objectively work towards a conviction. My job is to exactly to presume your guilt and try that assumption before The Court.

I, unlike The Court, am bound to treat you with the assumption that you are guilty as charged. That is my job and my job is to prove that if the evidence shows that such a charge is viable.

Oh, and don't call me a tit or anything else ever again when I am acting in the capacity of an Officer of The Court. It makes me angry and you wouldn't like me very much when I actually get angry. :fish:
Click to expand...
So that's a no on the recusal,then?
 
flemingovia:
Romanoffia:
flemingovia:
I will look over this complaint and do an internal investigation within the AGs office, looking at any applicable law, intent, etc.
Click to expand...

I request that Romanoffia be recused or recuse himself from this investigation. His antipathy and bias towards me is well known, as he has shown himself to be a bit of a tit in the posts split from this thread. I do not believe anyone believes that he could be objective in this matter.
Click to expand...
You seem to completely misunderstand the very nature of the job of a prosecutor.

The very nature of a prosecutor is to nail the accused to a tree with the biggest spikes and hammer available. Antipathy, Bias are the very nature of any Prosecutor or Investigator for The Prosecution because the sole function of a Prosecutor or Investigator for the Prosecution is to be antipathetic and biased against the accused. Sympathetic prosecutors are ineffectual and shirkers. Prosecutors have one and only one function: to absolutely crucify the accused.

To try to force or otherwise coerce a Prosecutor in a trial on the part of a defendant is tantamount to the Defendant (or potential defendant, we know not which at this time) tampering with the Court itself in order to assure that a case is dismissed or found in favour of the Defendant.

That is to say, that were I or any Prosecutor to engage in prosecuting any case, such prosecution would be conducted with all due vigour and by all legal and constitutional means. It would be silly to have a prosecutor who wasn't absolutely convinced of a Defendant's guilt.

Also, you do not call an Officer of The Court a tit. Go and call a Court Justice you don't like a tit and see what happens there. Call a Prosecutor a tit in the context of the Courtroom and I am fairly sure it would garner some kind of Judicial discretionary action, under the current and revised Court Rules, that the tit caller would not be entirely please with.

As it stands now, I am about the most mild denizen of the AG's office and will investigate the matter as required. Impartiality is the purvey of the Court Justices. Going after accused individuals is not an impartial activity.

Hence, you would best be remiss in calling anyone a tit as it does not engender any desire other than to go after an accused individual with anything less than undue vigour. Impugning and nailing an accused individual to a tree before The Court are what Prosecutors do. Prosecutors are not required to be unbiased - they are required to absolutely believe the accused is guilty and then go after them by all legal and legitimate means and then nail them to a tree if possible. Anything less would be a dereliction of duty.

Objectivity. You use that term so loosely. The Objective of a prosecutor is to nail the accused to a tree. Objectively speaking, any accused person who has committed actions that upon discovery of the facts is worthy of being nailed to a tree, shall be subjected to the objective goal to that effect, if possible or probably.

Objectively speaking, my objective, should the evidence I will discover support further action, will be to nail you to a tree. Objectively speaking, my object being to assure a conviction, should the evidence support it, will be to objectively work towards a conviction. My job is to exactly to presume your guilt and try that assumption before The Court.

I, unlike The Court, am bound to treat you with the assumption that you are guilty as charged. That is my job and my job is to prove that if the evidence shows that such a charge is viable.

Oh, and don't call me a tit or anything else ever again when I am acting in the capacity of an Officer of The Court. It makes me angry and you wouldn't like me very much when I actually get angry. :fish:
Click to expand...
So that's a no on the recusal,then?
Click to expand...


Precisely.



flemingovia:
PaulWallLibertarian42:
. So if youre doing nothing wrong you have nothing to fear or to hide.
Click to expand...
Time for a terry Pratchett quote:

SNUFF-6.jpg
Click to expand...

Almost crossing the line into Godwin's Law there.
 
Romanoffia:
flemingovia:
PaulWallLibertarian42:
. So if youre doing nothing wrong you have nothing to fear or to hide.
Click to expand...
Time for a terry Pratchett quote:

SNUFF-6.jpg
Click to expand...

Almost crossing the line into Godwin's Law there.
Click to expand...
Why? Do you think PaulWall is comparable to Hitler? I never mentioned Hitler because personally the analogy never crossed my mind. I was thinking of Terry Pratchett.
 
Hang on. More of the AAG's posts have had to be split from the official record into a peanut gallery thread? One might expect this from a member of the public, but not a public servant. Tsk Tsk tsk.
 
Flem:
More of the AAG's posts have had to be split from the official record into a peanut gallery thread? One might expect this from a member of the public, but not a public servant. Tsk Tsk tsk.
Click to expand...
.. or an admin for that matter.

Flem:
It is interesting that you have had to do two splits on this matter, both prompted by posts from one of your deputies.
Perhaps a bit better discipline from the AGs over his deputy is called for?
Click to expand...
I think it's high time the admin team reined in your behavior as well. You've called the AAG a tit, and insinuated members of the RA are stooges in another thread. Other people would've received an increase in warning level by now. There's that double standard again...
 
I just want the Complaint docket to be kept neat and clean. If there is to be public commentary and it isnt from the person filing the complaint then I ask that it be made in a seperate thread such as this. The complaint docket should be used for offical filing purposes.

If someone from the public feels need to make commentary about a complaint they can create a thread in the Attorney Generals main forum and title it "Commentary concerning 'complaint X' " or a similary named topic. - Id like to keep the complaint docket to just filing criminal complaints and not for "peanut gallery" commentary.
 
First off, I did not call Roman a tit. I said he was acting like a tit. Important distinction. There is some fine role play in this region, and folks act in all sorts of ways that is not their true character (including myself).

However, flap has a point and I will from now on act with greater decorum.
 
Flem:
First off, I did not call Roman a tit. I said he was acting like a tit. Important distinction.
Click to expand...
A minor distinction I'd say, but I'll cede your point.

Flem:
I will from now on act with greater decorum
Click to expand...
Not as difficult as one might think. I've been managing thus far. :P
 
flemingovia:
First off, I did not call Roman a tit. I said he was acting like a tit. Important distinction. There is some fine role play in this region, and folks act in all sorts of ways that is not their true character (including myself).

However, flap has a point and I will from now on act with greater decorum.
Click to expand...
Semantics. Damned semantics.

Be that as it may, your implication was that I was indeed a tit.

Carry on.
 
Romanoffia:
Semantics. Damned semantics.

Be that as it may, your implication was that I was indeed a tit.
Click to expand...
semantics
noun
1. The branch of linguistics and logic concerned with meaning.
2. The meaning of a word, phrase, sentence, or text.

Yes, as it turns out, a difference in phrasing leads to a difference in meaning; this is the foundation of the study of semantics. There's nothing terribly informative about the apparent accusation that meaning attaches to expression.

Anyways, what's wrong with tits? I think they're pretty great.

tits.jpg


The other kind too!
 
SillyString:
Romanoffia:
Semantics. Damned semantics.

Be that as it may, your implication was that I was indeed a tit.
Click to expand...
semantics
noun
1. The branch of linguistics and logic concerned with meaning.
2. The meaning of a word, phrase, sentence, or text.

Yes, as it turns out, a difference in phrasing leads to a difference in meaning; this is the foundation of the study of semantics. There's nothing terribly informative about the apparent accusation that meaning attaches to expression.

Anyways, what's wrong with tits? I think they're pretty great.

tits.jpg


The other kind too!
Click to expand...
Oh, it depends upon whether or not the tit in question is in reference to birds or mammary glands. Generally, I have nothing against mammary glands or any other organ of the body.

In fact, I am quite fond of mammary glands. When I think about all the girls I dated in College, it is a virtual trip down Mammary Lane. :P

It is possible that Flemingovia used the term tit in an archaic sense of the word, in which case a tit could possibly be construed as a small or poor horse; nag. If this is indeed the case, I know a few beggars that can be put on horseback and thence ride to Hell. :lol:


But, by all means, please do keep me abreast of any new or interesting interpretations of the term tit. /bad pun :cheese:
 
flemingovia:
First off, I did not call Roman a tit. I said he was acting like a tit. Important distinction. There is some fine role play in this region, and folks act in all sorts of ways that is not their true character (including myself).

However, flap has a point and I will from now on act with greater decorum.
Click to expand...
I seem to recall someone crying all over the NS world because he was stated to have been 'acting like a terrorist' within the context of the game.
 
Gracius Maximus:
flemingovia:
First off, I did not call Roman a tit. I said he was acting like a tit. Important distinction. There is some fine role play in this region, and folks act in all sorts of ways that is not their true character (including myself).

However, flap has a point and I will from now on act with greater decorum.
Click to expand...
I seem to recall someone crying all over the NS world because he was stated to have been 'acting like a terrorist' within the context of the game.
Click to expand...
An interesting thought just crossed my mind - in the context of the game, this would be like putting "God" on trial. I love it.
 
flemingovia:
So you accept that I am God now? Well done. You took your time but got there in the end.
Click to expand...
Now you're just being silly. :P

If you were really God, you'd be Deus Ex Machina and none of this would be happening now. If you were really omnipotent, you could prove it by turning the seas into rum...wait, on second thought, bad idea. Mall likes to play with matches. :lol:
 
Deus ex machina is a theatrical rather than theological term. Let me give you three sound theological reasons why I do not stop this

First, this trial may be part of my ineffable divine plan, which you (as a mortal) cannot perceive. So although I could stop it, I choose not to. In the christian, rather than flemingovian, tradition the trial and execution of Jesus is seen in this way.

The second possibility lies in the concept of kenosis. Perhaps, as a means of interacting with humanity, I have emptied myself of divine transcendence and become fully human as well as fully divine.

Finally, perhaps I wish you to become a flemingovian without showy miracles like turning the seas to rum. For then it would truly be a matter of faith and trust.

But it is good that you are spiritually enquiring, even if you have not got there yet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top