[CRIMINAL] Complaint by Cormac

Discussion in 'Office of Attorney General' started by Cormac, Oct 15, 2015.

  1. Cormac

    Cormac TNPer -

    Messages:
    1,107
    Name of Complainant: Cormac

    Name(s) of Accused: falapatorius; Gracius Maximus

    Date(s) of Alleged Offense(s): 10/14/2015

    Specific Offense(s): Espionage; Gross Misconduct

    Relevant Excerpts from Legal Code or other Laws:
    Summary of Events (What happened, in your own words): falapatorius, the incumbent Attorney General, apparently divulged information from the private subforum of the Cabinet to which he has access as Attorney General. This was shortly followed by Gracius Maximus divulging information from the same Cabinet subforum, to which he had access during his prior service as Minister of Defense under former Delegate Eluvatar. In so doing, both committed espionage, insofar as they have made private information available from an entity (the Cabinet) that has not legitimately sanctioned the sharing of said information, to others to whom the information would not be accessible except by cracking technical security measures.

    Each has also violated their oaths of citizenship and government office, namely the citizenship pledge of "responsible action" and the government office pledge to use the powers and rights of their offices in a responsible manner. Even if they did not willfully violate their oaths -- i.e., if they were not intentionally divulging private Cabinet information and only did so without thought -- they have nonetheless violated their oaths through negligence.

    Evidentiary Submissions (Evidentiary Submissions may be submitted to the Attorney General or Deputy Attorney General in charge of the Criminal Division via PM):

    http://forum.thenorthpacific.org/single/?p=8256849&t=7455133
    http://forum.thenorthpacific.org/single/?p=8256872&t=7455133

    Comments: Obviously, as the Attorney General is one of the accused, it would be improper for him to handle this complaint.
     
  2. Gracius Maximus

    Gracius Maximus Tyrant (Ret.)

    Messages:
    2,534
    Could the complainant specify if falapatorius's, and my own subsequent comment, were the first instances of discussion of what happened within the Cabinet Chambers?

    I am fairly certain that precedent exists that if the executive addresses a private discussion in public then subsequent discussion of that issue is not subject to criminal complaint as it has been priorly divulged.

    Eluvatar, Delegate at the time, and Myroria, current Vice Delegate, divulged information about the private cabinet discussion prior to either comment named within this complaint.
     
  3. Flemingovia

    Flemingovia TNPer - -

    Messages:
    10,579
    This is not - yet - a hearing, and this is not the place for premature discussion

    GM, you are not a justice. please stop acting as such.
     
  4. Gracius Maximus

    Gracius Maximus Tyrant (Ret.)

    Messages:
    2,534
    Actually, this is the Attorney General's Office and not the Courtroom. I am not acting as anything except an accused citizen. Perhaps you should stop acting as if you are part of the AG staff?
     
  5. falapatorius

    falapatorius TNPer -

    Messages:
    4,036
    Per:
    I won't be managing this complaint.
    Gentlemen, please. This a complaint thread.

    GM is an accused citizen entitled to defend himself, but the complaint is what it is. If it goes to trial, he can raise these issues there.

    Flemingovia, as a Justice who may/may not be presiding over this, should stay as far away from this thread as possible. Weighing in to badger the accused is inappropriate.

    Any future off-topic posts will be split out. Thank you.
     
  6. SillyString

    SillyString TNPer - - -

    Messages:
    4,221
    As, from what I can tell, there are no current deputy AGs, it appears that it falls on me to act as a deputy AG and take over managing the case - if such is warranted. So, going forward, here are the rules we'll be operating under:

     
  7. Cormac

    Cormac TNPer -

    Messages:
    1,107
    Madame Delegate, can you clarify whether this means you have rejected the case on behalf of the Attorney General's office and I now need to proceed with managing prosecution of the case? That's how it appears but I'm not certain.
     
  8. SillyString

    SillyString TNPer - - -

    Messages:
    4,221
    Sorry, no, I have not. I have not made a decision at this point about what to do. My intention was to point out to any interested parties what the procedure is at this time, and what the possible options are going forward.
     
  9. Cormac

    Cormac TNPer -

    Messages:
    1,107
    Oh okay, thank you!
     
  10. Flemingovia

    Flemingovia TNPer - -

    Messages:
    10,579
    As a justice, can i ask whether this complaint is being pursued either by the complainant or the AG's office?
     
  11. Gracius Maximus

    Gracius Maximus Tyrant (Ret.)

    Messages:
    2,534
    Well, as the potential defendent, who is also keeping an eye on the time lapse out of necessary concern, the acting AG has stated that she is considering it but does not have a mandated timetable for that. If she refuses to pursue the charge then the claimant has 30 days from that point to decide so we have a minimum of 30 days + the remaining determination time of the AG before a decision would be required to the Court.
     
  12. SillyString

    SillyString TNPer - - -

    Messages:
    4,221
    I apologize for the delay. It is obvious that I don't have the time to deal with this complaint properly, and I think that's one of the flaws in our current system. Additionally, given the topic of the complaint and the chance that I would be called as a witness, I am not sure that I'm a viable party to deal with prosecuting the matter.

    So, I am officially declining to prosecute the complaint against Gracius Maximus. The complainant has 30 days to begin proceedings on their own.

    As for falapatorius, I'm asking anybody who would like to look at prosecuting the case to contact me within the next week. If I don't hear anything, I will send this one back to the complainant as well.
     
  13. Cormac

    Cormac TNPer -

    Messages:
    1,107
    To avoid keeping GM waiting any longer, I will not be prosecuting the complaint against him either as I trust the Delegate's judgment.

    Should the Delegate decline to prosecute falapatorius due only to lack of a prosecutor and not because she finds no merit in the case, however, I will be taking up that prosecution. I would prefer someone with more experience in prosecuting contact the Delegate though.
     
  14. Gracius Maximus

    Gracius Maximus Tyrant (Ret.)

    Messages:
    2,534
  15. SillyString

    SillyString TNPer - - -

    Messages:
    4,221
    Seeing as the Attorney General is no longer the potential defendant in a criminal trial, can I pass the buck on the rest of this back over? :P
     
  16. Vazos

    Vazos TNPer

    Messages:
    358
    Does the Delegate wish to pursue the charges against falapatorius?
     
  17. Gracius Maximus

    Gracius Maximus Tyrant (Ret.)

    Messages:
    2,534
    I will review the case.
     
  18. Gracius Maximus

    Gracius Maximus Tyrant (Ret.)

    Messages:
    2,534
    The Delegate was acting as interim AG since there was no other option. It isn't the place of the Justices to make such queries here, however.

    Thank you for your concern.
     
  19. Gracius Maximus

    Gracius Maximus Tyrant (Ret.)

    Messages:
    2,534
    The Office of the Attorney General will not be pursuing charges against Falapatorius. While I do believe that the commentary from the accused to have been out of order, I am not convinced, considering that it followed from the previous Delegate's disclosure of communications, that it broke the law or can be justified to have done so to the point of gaining a guilty verdict.

    The Complainant has 30 days from this point to decide if he wishes to pursue the case directly before the Court.
     
  20. Cormac

    Cormac TNPer -

    Messages:
    1,107
    I don't agree with this decision -- isn't it the Attorney General's job to find out whether the law was broken? -- but I'm not good at NationStates judicial affairs and I don't feel qualified to prosecute this complaint, so I will not be further pursuing it.
     
  21. Gracius Maximus

    Gracius Maximus Tyrant (Ret.)

    Messages:
    2,534
    It is the Attorney General's job to determine if sufficient evidence exists to reasonably expect a guilty verdict. I am not convinced.
     
  22. punk d

    punk d TNPer - -

    Messages:
    3,016
    Since the current AG is still named in the complaint, I feel there is prejudice in deciding even falap's fate and I would think the AG should recuse himself from said determination.

    Seeing that he has not and seeing that he has kicked this back to the complainant, Cormac....Cormac I am willing to pursue this further.

    Not at issue for me is the passionate pursuit of finding the two defendants guilty, I just do not like to see issues swept under the rug in potentially shady circumstances. I consider the current AG not pursuing this a little "shady", understanding he'll be offended, but I would say the same were anyone else the AG and also making this same decision.

    In that spirit if you'd like to confer on this, I'd be willing to assist.
     
  23. Gracius Maximus

    Gracius Maximus Tyrant (Ret.)

    Messages:
    2,534
    That is out of line.

    The previous interim AG determined that pursuit of the claim against me was not reasonable. The Complainant agreed. Your incorporation of my name into this issue is unwarranted and labelling my legally mandated right to refuse prosecution as 'shady' is slanderous. Those named in a complaint are not necessarily carried forward into an indictment so my name remaining on this has absolutely zero bearing on the pursuit of this case further. Any indictment presented to the Court would need to only list Falapatorius.

    The law does not give you standing to pursue this complaint at this point as the Complainant has stated that he does not wish to pursue it::

    I am the only person to have successfully argued trials in the long history of the Court here in TNP to multiple convictions and I have also defended the accused and received acquittals. I am uniquely qualified to determine whether or not a case is legitimately pursuable here in TNP. That is why I was elected to this position.

    If the complainant wishes to resubmit the complaint without my name on it, since certain parties are apparently ignorant of the process, and he states that he wishes to pursue prosecution himself, then he can name you as an attorney on his behalf. Until such time as that is the case, considering the complainant has decline to pursue this himself, this matter is closed.