[Private] Blue Wolf II's Request for Review

Kialga

Kialga

TNPer
TNP Nation
Kialga-Lourti
Discord
Elegante#5102
Request for Review filled here

Note: Until we decide, this is for discussion on whether or not this Request should be accepted or declined.

Blue Wolf has requested this review as they believe that Tomb has been denied rights by not having his Defense Counsel respond to any charges.


There are a couple of flaws with this Request. The first is what standing does Blue Wolf have to Request this review? The second is what government policy or law does this review cover?
 
Belshaft, a member of the defense team has endorsed the R4R. Whether he has standing or not, and whether that's a valid action is a question for the rest of the Court, since I have recused myself.
 
I rejected it, as I posted. Bel has both claimed to have been, and have not been part of the team. The R4R was not posted using the required template. Wolf has no standing.
 
I'm going to continue to use this thread for the new review filled by Wolf, which is simply the same request with the official template.

Once again, Wolf does not have the adequate standing standing to request the review. Wolf was neither part of the trial during depositions nor a member of Tomb's defense team. As it stands, the review is addressing Tomb's rights being violated, not Wolf's. Should Tomb feel his rights were violated enough, then we will address them should he file a Request. Otherwise, there is no one who has standing for this Request on the violation of Tomb's rights.

Should either of you disagree, please post as soon as possible. However, if you all agree with me, I will decline the request as soon as I return home from work this evening.
 
I was absent the past couple of days, apologies. I was waiting to hear from Sev once I returned, but I haven't yet. Thank you.
 
BW has filed for an appeal of my decision under Chapter 4 Section 2.1. (Although he erroneously cited Chapter 3, Section 2.1) Sev and you must now decide if the R4R will be rejected or accepted.
 
I also agree that Wolf's rights have not been violated directly, and as such, he is not an affected party. This case was a unique set of circumstances. If at such a time, and flemingovia forbid it should happen, he does become an affected party, the request would hold merit. We have to go by precedent and we have to go by our Adopted Court Rules. Neither of those give Wolf standing in this case.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top