this is still data being presented to them by only one party in the argument. But, as always, i must defer to your honour.
The North Pacific v. The Swedish Republic of New Kenya
- Thread starter Eluvatar
- Start date
- Pronouns
- he/him/his
- TNP Nation
- Zemnaya Svoboda
- Discord
- Eluvatar#8517
The parties are the prosecution and the defense, not the court and the defense.
those are the parties in the trial. the parties in the argument about whether the evidence submission period ought to be extended yet again to accommodate the prosecution are the presiding justice and the defence. It is YOUR decision i am querying, not the prosecution's.
I would like to respond to this, if I may, as flemingovia appears to be aiming to get a mistrial of some kind for his client.flemingovia:
As a member of the Security Council, he is correct that I have had access to the SC's discussions regarding New Kenya throughout, and I will readily agree that that is where my office drew most of the evidence and facts from our original indictment from.
When the defense originally made its request to the SC for release, I declined to comment on whether the release should occur, either for or against, because I am the AG and cannot be presumed to hold an unbiased opinion. I did, however, encourage the SC to consider the thread in the terms laid out in both the Adopted Court Rules and the Freedom of Information Act around the release of private information. More specifically, since the SC does, on rare occasion, discuss security-related matters, I stated that the Council should make note of anything in the original conversation which might have a bearing on regional security.
Once the Court issued an order regarding the thread's release, however, the question of whether to do so became irrelevant. And, in the interest of meeting the desired timetable, I decided in my role as a Councilor to make some suggestions about what should be considered information not safe to release. None of it, in my opinion, has any bearing on this case - everything I picked out for redaction was related to present or future security precautions, and not to the specific question of New Kenya's actions or crimes.
As with the question of release, I am comfortable in saying that my opinion on this cannot be taken for granted as unbiased - which is why I invited the rest of the Council to weigh in on the matters I raised, rather than simply taking action. And I am comfortable as well with the defense questioning whether the Council has held back any relevant information, and seeking to ensure that it has not. However, I do strongly protest the accusation that I am attempting to tamper with evidence, or seeking to violate the court's order. My suggestions to the SC were based on terms laid out in both the ACRs and the FOIA, and I believe the best course of action to resolve specific sentences that the SC believes pertain to regional security would be through a private court hearing, just as is called for when it comes to matters of executive release - that is how I interpreted the court's order, as I do not believe the court intended for regional security to be compromised.
If my presumption was incorrect, of course the Court can clarify.
- Pronouns
- he/him/his
- TNP Nation
- Zemnaya Svoboda
- Discord
- Eluvatar#8517
The appeal of my decision to extend evidence submission is granted.
Today is the last day of evidence submission.
Today is the last day of evidence submission.
Your honour, the defence submits as evidence the following Security council threads which pertain to my client, released under court order, and to which both the defence and prosecution have been granted access:
http://forum.thenorthpacific.org/topic/9012423/1/#new
http://forum.thenorthpacific.org/topic/7550985/1/#new
Since these threads are from a private area of the forum i will clear any quotes etc from them with yourself before using them in public argument, or take any other security precautions which your honour orders.
http://forum.thenorthpacific.org/topic/9012423/1/#new
http://forum.thenorthpacific.org/topic/7550985/1/#new
Since these threads are from a private area of the forum i will clear any quotes etc from them with yourself before using them in public argument, or take any other security precautions which your honour orders.
- Pronouns
- he/him/his
- TNP Nation
- Zemnaya Svoboda
- Discord
- Eluvatar#8517
That is not a valid evidence submission. Submitted evidence is posted in the trial topic.
You may PM me the evidence you would like to submit. Please include arguments for the inclusion of each post or sentence which either (A) one or more Security Council members would prefer redacted or (B) come from the separate Security Council topic regarding disclosure of the original topic which you would like included. Please also PM the Vice Delegate the same PM you send me, verbatim.
You may PM me the evidence you would like to submit. Please include arguments for the inclusion of each post or sentence which either (A) one or more Security Council members would prefer redacted or (B) come from the separate Security Council topic regarding disclosure of the original topic which you would like included. Please also PM the Vice Delegate the same PM you send me, verbatim.
Ok Your honour. I will get straight to it after a hospital appointment.
But knowing the fact that this submission was on the cards, delayed by the need for a subpoena etc, it would have been courteous to have given the defence a heads-up that you would require so detailed a treatment of the evidence at this stage.
Defence is not looking for preference, just realistic courtesy and a reasonable degree of fairness from the presiding justice
But knowing the fact that this submission was on the cards, delayed by the need for a subpoena etc, it would have been courteous to have given the defence a heads-up that you would require so detailed a treatment of the evidence at this stage.
Defence is not looking for preference, just realistic courtesy and a reasonable degree of fairness from the presiding justice
Since the only SEcurity council member who has specifically outlined which posts ought to be edited before use by the defence, I assume you are instructing the defence that it can only use the evidence the Prosecuting counsel says we can use.
I just want to be absolutely clear and transparent about this.
I just want to be absolutely clear and transparent about this.
I skipped a phrase in the above post:
Since the only SEcurity council member who has specifically outlined which posts ought to be edited before use by the defence is Sillystring, I assume you are instructing the defence that it can only use the evidence the Prosecuting counsel says we can use?
I just want to be absolutely clear and transparent about this.
Since the only SEcurity council member who has specifically outlined which posts ought to be edited before use by the defence is Sillystring, I assume you are instructing the defence that it can only use the evidence the Prosecuting counsel says we can use?
I just want to be absolutely clear and transparent about this.
Your honour, on reflection I appeal your above ruling with regard to the evidence from the SEcurity Council, since the subpoena already issued mandated the release of any and all posts concerning my client.
I accept the need to submit argument drawn from the evidence in camera, I do not accept that the evidence per se is not admissible.
- Pronouns
- he/him/his
- TNP Nation
- Zemnaya Svoboda
- Discord
- Eluvatar#8517
You may post any material from the original topic for which there are no objections directly to this trial topic without recourse to private message.
It's only for those sentences for which objections exist, and those posts which are from the discussion of disclosure rather than the original discussion, for which the above directions apply.
The court expected the defense to be supplied with a public document, not direct access to private materials.
You remain at liberty to request an extension to evidence submission, presumably until sufficient time after the half term week you mentioned.
It's only for those sentences for which objections exist, and those posts which are from the discussion of disclosure rather than the original discussion, for which the above directions apply.
The court expected the defense to be supplied with a public document, not direct access to private materials.
You remain at liberty to request an extension to evidence submission, presumably until sufficient time after the half term week you mentioned.
- Pronouns
- he/him/his
- TNP Nation
- Zemnaya Svoboda
- Discord
- Eluvatar#8517
No legitimate trial in the history of The North Pacific has made judgement based on secret evidence. No rules for secret evidence exist. I don't intend to introduce such on my discretion.
Given my clarification of my instructions, would it be possible for clarity on just what is being appealed?
Given my clarification of my instructions, would it be possible for clarity on just what is being appealed?
Your honour, the subpoena request made by me asked for the release of any and all posts relating to my client made in the security council. This is what you granted, without qualification.
That is what I have been acting on.
I am appealing your honour suddenly seeking to limit the admission of evidence which has now been released in the closing hours of this trial phase.
I am also concerned that admission of this evidence is not effectively "talked out" by ever changing demands from the court until the deadline for evidence submission has passed. Given the hour I would seek assurance that this will not take place.
That is what I have been acting on.
I am appealing your honour suddenly seeking to limit the admission of evidence which has now been released in the closing hours of this trial phase.
I am also concerned that admission of this evidence is not effectively "talked out" by ever changing demands from the court until the deadline for evidence submission has passed. Given the hour I would seek assurance that this will not take place.
Your honour, the subpoena request made by me asked for the release of any and all posts relating to my client made in the security council. This is what you granted, without qualification.
That is what I have been acting on.
I am appealing your honour suddenly seeking to limit the admission of evidence which has now been released in the closing hours of this trial phase.
I am also concerned that admission of this evidence is not effectively "talked out" by ever changing demands from the court until the deadline for evidence submission has passed. Given the hour I would seek assurance that this will not take place.
That is what I have been acting on.
I am appealing your honour suddenly seeking to limit the admission of evidence which has now been released in the closing hours of this trial phase.
I am also concerned that admission of this evidence is not effectively "talked out" by ever changing demands from the court until the deadline for evidence submission has passed. Given the hour I would seek assurance that this will not take place.
Will this suffice?
our honour, the defence submits as evidence the following Security council threads which pertain to my client, released under court order, and to which both the defence and prosecution have been granted access:
http://forum.thenorthpacific.org/topic/9012423/1/#new
http://forum.thenorthpacific.org/topic/7550985/1/#new
excepting those posts or portions of posts which have been identified by the Attorney General or other Security Council members as unfit for release.
The Defence reserves the right to submit the queried posts into evidence at a future time, subject to the conditions laid down by the court.
our honour, the defence submits as evidence the following Security council threads which pertain to my client, released under court order, and to which both the defence and prosecution have been granted access:
http://forum.thenorthpacific.org/topic/9012423/1/#new
http://forum.thenorthpacific.org/topic/7550985/1/#new
excepting those posts or portions of posts which have been identified by the Attorney General or other Security Council members as unfit for release.
The Defence reserves the right to submit the queried posts into evidence at a future time, subject to the conditions laid down by the court.
Your honour, i hope in all this my complaint about the conduct of the Attorney General has not been quietly forgotten.
the AG should have recused herself in the SC, and certainly should not have sought to influence the redacting of evidence prior to its release to the defence. One might claim that Sillystring is a trusted member of our community, but once we set a precedent that someone can claim to be wearing "different hats" like this, other less scrupulous persons may well point to this and refuse to recuse themselves over conflict of interest.
the AG should have recused herself in the SC, and certainly should not have sought to influence the redacting of evidence prior to its release to the defence. One might claim that Sillystring is a trusted member of our community, but once we set a precedent that someone can claim to be wearing "different hats" like this, other less scrupulous persons may well point to this and refuse to recuse themselves over conflict of interest.
As required by the court, I have PM'd Eluvatar and Lord Ravenclaw with details of those posts listed by the Attorney General which i would like to be included in evidence for the defence.
I note that the remainder of the threads in question have been submitted as evidence above.
I note that the remainder of the threads in question have been submitted as evidence above.
Given that evidence submission was not extended, and given that none of the named witnesses have so much as taken their oath, I am concerned that this whole trial is in danger of going off the rails. Clearly, this is to the defense's advantage.
In hopes of avoiding a verdict of not guilty simply because none of the evidence was able to be authenticated in time, nor any other decision rendered, and in accordance with the prior order of the court that the SC release "its records regarding The Swedish Republic of New Kenya" I hereby submit the following evidence from the Security Council's private chambers. I have redacted some portions of them, because, in my opinion as a member of the SC, and in the concurring opinions of three other SC members, they relate solely to overall regional security and are not "regarding" tSRoNK.
In hopes of avoiding a verdict of not guilty simply because none of the evidence was able to be authenticated in time, nor any other decision rendered, and in accordance with the prior order of the court that the SC release "its records regarding The Swedish Republic of New Kenya" I hereby submit the following evidence from the Security Council's private chambers. I have redacted some portions of them, because, in my opinion as a member of the SC, and in the concurring opinions of three other SC members, they relate solely to overall regional security and are not "regarding" tSRoNK.
Bootsie:I'm dearly sorry for the delay in information, but I did want to have all my ducks in a row before posting this:
Ivan, under his identity as Pierconium, received this TG from a nation in The North Pacific, New Kenya, a Squire in the region with 513 endorsements:
Per their exchange, the nation did confirm their identity, which was revealed to be tsRoNK, a resident and member of the NPA group:
It does appear, since Ivan forwarded this information to me, that he is not going to hold up his end of the deal with the nation, and that the Council should focus on the user and nation of New Kenya.
plembobria:
Lord Ravenclaw:
Great Bights Mum:
SillyString:
Myroria:
Malvad:
mcmasterdonia:
Myroria:Absolutely. This New Kenya guy has been a real joker for the past few months - asking for endos on the RMB and the like. If anything I would be disappointed in Ivan for using such a terrible plant!mcmasterdonia:
Eluvatar:
Great Bights Mum:
Lord Ravenclaw:
Romanoffia:Find someone with a nation that has been around for a while and lure this New Kenya chap in. I suspect that this individual has been around before and is someone who returned to the game after being out for a while (otherwise they would have been smart enough to know all of Ivan's various personae and that things are different than they were several years ago. Just my instincts kicking in here.Great Bights Mum:
Being over-cautious and suspicious as my general nature, [redacted]. The trick is to find what group/region/etc., is actually behind this if this is not just a one hit wonder.
It would be a good exercise to stretch the wrinkles out of the NPIA brains.
But I agree that there is enough info here for the AG to act and that might be best to nip it in the bud here if we don't think more useful information might be obtained.
This reminds me of the good old days. Tresville would have a blast messing with this guy. Maybe I should give him a call.
SillyString:Yeah my primary concern is whether this person is working with anyone else - if so, it'd be nice to know who.
But... not terribly concerned, so... prosecute away?
Romanoffia:
Bootsie:
SillyString:
mcmasterdonia:
Bootsie:
SillyString:In case anyone hadn't noticed, charges have been filed and accepted.
PLease note that I have submitted two of the redacted sections for admission as evidence. As required by the presiding justice I have submitted it to Eluvatar and Lord Ravenclaw. Should the admission be accepted i am sure eluvatar will order them to be released to you as well.
- Pronouns
- he/him/his
- TNP Nation
- Zemnaya Svoboda
- Discord
- Eluvatar#8517
As a note, I have received the Defense's request to include 2 redacted portions of the above. I will rule on it after communicating with Lord Ravenclaw, or within 12 hours, whichever comes first.
I meant to say and cannot now edit in: The portions I included received no objections from any SC members as to their publication.
There are a couple redactions which one SC member believed were fine to be made public. I felt it was safer to redact them at this time given that several other SC members objected, and leave the matter to the court.
Additionally, given the crickets in all of the witness testimony threads and the imminent end of evidence submission, contrary to my request, I would like to formally submit the screenshots included in the request for indictment as evidence and request a waiver of the requirement for witness testimony regarding them. I am amenable to any corresponding documentary evidence that the defense desires to submit in the same way.
There are a couple redactions which one SC member believed were fine to be made public. I felt it was safer to redact them at this time given that several other SC members objected, and leave the matter to the court.
Additionally, given the crickets in all of the witness testimony threads and the imminent end of evidence submission, contrary to my request, I would like to formally submit the screenshots included in the request for indictment as evidence and request a waiver of the requirement for witness testimony regarding them. I am amenable to any corresponding documentary evidence that the defense desires to submit in the same way.
- Pronouns
- he/him/his
- TNP Nation
- Zemnaya Svoboda
- Discord
- Eluvatar#8517
I will hear any objections by the defense to the request for a waiver in the next 12 hours. through the rest of today.
I object to the admission of unverified screenshots. the prosecution has had more than enough time to verify, and the patience of the defence has worn out.
our laws state (bolding mine) Documentary evidence, which includes forum posts or threads, IRC logs, screenshots and other evidence of a similar nature, must be authenticated through witness testimony unless an exception is granted by the Moderating Justice.
the defence is of the opinion that a waiver should only be granted where it is impossible to authenticate documentary evidence. Ivan has stated several times his willingness to do so; it was purely the prosecution inactivity that failed to make this happen.
the court should not be here to accommodate prosecution inadequacies.
our laws state (bolding mine) Documentary evidence, which includes forum posts or threads, IRC logs, screenshots and other evidence of a similar nature, must be authenticated through witness testimony unless an exception is granted by the Moderating Justice.
the defence is of the opinion that a waiver should only be granted where it is impossible to authenticate documentary evidence. Ivan has stated several times his willingness to do so; it was purely the prosecution inactivity that failed to make this happen.
the court should not be here to accommodate prosecution inadequacies.
- Pronouns
- he/him/his
- TNP Nation
- Zemnaya Svoboda
- Discord
- Eluvatar#8517
I hold with the defense on authentication of the evidence.
- Pronouns
- he/him/his
- TNP Nation
- Zemnaya Svoboda
- Discord
- Eluvatar#8517
I am asked by the defense what timezone I go by for these deadlines.
I intentionally avoided specifying, so as to be able to grant some reasonable leeway to either party to keep things moving smoothly. However, if I had to give an exact time that the 22nd ends, I would say it is when The North Pacific goes through the major update between the 22nd and the 23rd, around (time=1477197424) in the reader's forum time.
I intentionally avoided specifying, so as to be able to grant some reasonable leeway to either party to keep things moving smoothly. However, if I had to give an exact time that the 22nd ends, I would say it is when The North Pacific goes through the major update between the 22nd and the 23rd, around (time=1477197424) in the reader's forum time.
Objection, your honour. The vice delegate should not be abusing his powers to post in the trial thread. He has not at this time been called to give testimony (I gave up on calling him because of the tight deadline) and is chipping in rather than answering questions put to him by counsel.
This is a trial thread, not a deposition thread, and it is definitely not a free for all.
This is a trial thread, not a deposition thread, and it is definitely not a free for all.
- Pronouns
- he/him/his
- TNP Nation
- Zemnaya Svoboda
- Discord
- Eluvatar#8517
Pierconium:
- Pronouns
- he/him/his
- TNP Nation
- Zemnaya Svoboda
- Discord
- Eluvatar#8517
flemingovia:
Posts removed.
- Pronouns
- he/him/his
- TNP Nation
- Zemnaya Svoboda
- Discord
- Eluvatar#8517
I have received another Witness Statement:
I want to point out the Vice Delegate did not "abuse his powers". He posted at my request, after I received confirmation from the moderating justice that his post was an acceptable method of validating my quoted submission from the SC's private chambers.flemingovia:
Apparently there was some misunderstanding. I am not sure where, exactly. But the defense counsel is grasping at straws in trying to paint Raven as having done something wrong, especially since he was a part of the conversation where this permission was requested and granted.
Sorry. I did not see your request posted. Where is it?
The trial is carried out on forum thread.
There is no rule barring discussions in another location - and in fact, a few explicitly permitting it, such as in a deposition. So long as both sides have access to ensure that the justice is not engaging in inappropriate solo conversations with either side, propriety is preserved.
A tripartite conversation on Discord meets those requirements, and if you truly believe that it does not you had ample opportunity to say so when it was started. Or anytime thereafter.
I am not objecting to the moderating justice granting your objection; clearly my request was misunderstood and the affirmation of validity was incorrect. I am, however, objecting to your widening efforts to attack the character of everybody involved in the prosecution of this case - first myself, and now Raven - when you know full well (because you participated!) that the request was made and granted, and thus that Raven's post was made in good faith.
A tripartite conversation on Discord meets those requirements, and if you truly believe that it does not you had ample opportunity to say so when it was started. Or anytime thereafter.
I am not objecting to the moderating justice granting your objection; clearly my request was misunderstood and the affirmation of validity was incorrect. I am, however, objecting to your widening efforts to attack the character of everybody involved in the prosecution of this case - first myself, and now Raven - when you know full well (because you participated!) that the request was made and granted, and thus that Raven's post was made in good faith.
I would like to motion - again - to extend evidence submission through the 24th of October. I recognize that the moderating justice earlier stated that motions to extend would not be considered if presented on the 22nd, but I believe these are extenuating circumstances and I hope he will reconsider.
Specifically, we have the following issues unresolved as of now, with less than 3 hours remaining to resolve them, and RL bedtime having arrived for at least the defense counsel:
Specifically, we have the following issues unresolved as of now, with less than 3 hours remaining to resolve them, and RL bedtime having arrived for at least the defense counsel:
- The question of the redaction or declassification of certain sentences from the SC's deliberations regarding the defendant, requested by the defense;
- Validation of the remaining photographic evidence; I will note that I was only just informed today by a third party that Aleisyr, who is needed to authenticate it, is out of town this weekend and will not be available. My office has done its best to schedule a time for a deposition and has been unsuccessful, and I do not think justice is actually served by penalizing us for RL time constraints. It is no longer my intention to hold a full deposition, but rather, I would prefer simply to have the witness submit testimony as was done by Pierconium and Lord Ravenclaw earlier today. I remain hopeful that this can be achieved by the 24th where it could not be done by today.
- Any remaining testimony desired by the defense, which has thus far not used any of the witnesses it has named - witnesses which include the defendant themselves as well as Pierconium, Aleisyr, and Lord Ravenclaw. I am unsure if the defense continues to wish to proceed with that testimony, but I assume flem had some reason for calling his client as a witness. An inability to follow through with that may prevent the court from a full and fair hearing of the defendant's side of this case.
- Pronouns
- he/him/his
- TNP Nation
- Zemnaya Svoboda
- Discord
- Eluvatar#8517
The two sentences requested by the defense are being restored.
Ah crap, hit submit too soon. I was going to say:
Additionally, I submit that it is problematic that the prosecution has repeatedly been denied a chance to respond to the defense's objections to any given motion or request before a decision has been made. Most recently, a full four minutes (!) elapsed between the two, and before that - looking at the original request I made to extend evidence submission - there were just 21 minutes between when the defense appealed the extension to the full court and when the court went into deliberation on the matter. Considering that the exchange of posts on this took place very late at night (22:32 for the original objection; 23:37 for the original decision, 00:24 for the appeal, and 00:45 for the closure of discussion on it), the prosecution was not simply hard-pressed to reply in time but was, in fact, outright deprived of any chance at all to respond to the defense's objections and present its own side to the court.
As such, I petition the moderating justice, and the full court if necessary, to reconsider an extension of evidence submission in the best interests of all parties - in order to ensure that the defendant's right to a fair trial is adequately met.
Additionally, I submit that it is problematic that the prosecution has repeatedly been denied a chance to respond to the defense's objections to any given motion or request before a decision has been made. Most recently, a full four minutes (!) elapsed between the two, and before that - looking at the original request I made to extend evidence submission - there were just 21 minutes between when the defense appealed the extension to the full court and when the court went into deliberation on the matter. Considering that the exchange of posts on this took place very late at night (22:32 for the original objection; 23:37 for the original decision, 00:24 for the appeal, and 00:45 for the closure of discussion on it), the prosecution was not simply hard-pressed to reply in time but was, in fact, outright deprived of any chance at all to respond to the defense's objections and present its own side to the court.
As such, I petition the moderating justice, and the full court if necessary, to reconsider an extension of evidence submission in the best interests of all parties - in order to ensure that the defendant's right to a fair trial is adequately met.
- Pronouns
- he/him/his
- TNP Nation
- Zemnaya Svoboda
- Discord
- Eluvatar#8517
SillyString:Given that evidence submission was not extended, and given that none of the named witnesses have so much as taken their oath, I am concerned that this whole trial is in danger of going off the rails. Clearly, this is to the defense's advantage.
In hopes of avoiding a verdict of not guilty simply because none of the evidence was able to be authenticated in time, nor any other decision rendered, and in accordance with the prior order of the court that the SC release "its records regarding The Swedish Republic of New Kenya" I hereby submit the following evidence from the Security Council's private chambers. I have redacted some portions of them, because, in my opinion as a member of the SC, and in the concurring opinions of three other SC members, they relate solely to overall regional security and are not "regarding" tSRoNK.
Bootsie:I'm dearly sorry for the delay in information, but I did want to have all my ducks in a row before posting this:
Ivan, under his identity as Pierconium, received this TG from a nation in The North Pacific, New Kenya, a Squire in the region with 513 endorsements:
Per their exchange, the nation did confirm their identity, which was revealed to be tsRoNK, a resident and member of the NPA group:
It does appear, since Ivan forwarded this information to me, that he is not going to hold up his end of the deal with the nation, and that the Council should focus on the user and nation of New Kenya.
plembobria:
Lord Ravenclaw:
Great Bights Mum:
SillyString:
Myroria:
Malvad:
mcmasterdonia:
Myroria:Absolutely. This New Kenya guy has been a real joker for the past few months - asking for endos on the RMB and the like. If anything I would be disappointed in Ivan for using such a terrible plant!mcmasterdonia:
Eluvatar:
Great Bights Mum:
Lord Ravenclaw:
Romanoffia:Find someone with a nation that has been around for a while and lure this New Kenya chap in. I suspect that this individual has been around before and is someone who returned to the game after being out for a while (otherwise they would have been smart enough to know all of Ivan's various personae and that things are different than they were several years ago. Just my instincts kicking in here.Great Bights Mum:
Being over-cautious and suspicious as my general nature, [redacted]. The trick is to find what group/region/etc., is actually behind this if this is not just a one hit wonder.
It would be a good exercise to stretch the wrinkles out of the NPIA brains.
But I agree that there is enough info here for the AG to act and that might be best to nip it in the bud here if we don't think more useful information might be obtained.
This reminds me of the good old days. Tresville would have a blast messing with this guy. Maybe I should give him a call.
SillyString:Yeah my primary concern is whether this person is working with anyone else - if so, it'd be nice to know who.
But... not terribly concerned, so... prosecute away?
Romanoffia:
Bootsie:
SillyString:
mcmasterdonia:
Bootsie:
SillyString:In case anyone hadn't noticed, charges have been filed and accepted.
Having examined the arguments of the defense and the Vice Delegate, I rule in favor of including the two additional sentences the defense requested.
Bootsie:I'm dearly sorry for the delay in information, but I did want to have all my ducks in a row before posting this:
Ivan, under his identity as Pierconium, received this TG from a nation in The North Pacific, New Kenya, a Squire in the region with 513 endorsements:
Per their exchange, the nation did confirm their identity, which was revealed to be tsRoNK, a resident and member of the NPA group:
It does appear, since Ivan forwarded this information to me, that he is not going to hold up his end of the deal with the nation, and that the Council should focus on the user and nation of New Kenya.
plembobria:
Lord Ravenclaw:
Great Bights Mum:
SillyString:
Myroria:
Malvad:
mcmasterdonia:
Myroria:Absolutely. This New Kenya guy has been a real joker for the past few months - asking for endos on the RMB and the like. If anything I would be disappointed in Ivan for using such a terrible plant!mcmasterdonia:
Eluvatar:
Great Bights Mum:
Lord Ravenclaw:
Romanoffia:Find someone with a nation that has been around for a while and lure this New Kenya chap in. I suspect that this individual has been around before and is someone who returned to the game after being out for a while (otherwise they would have been smart enough to know all of Ivan's various personae and that things are different than they were several years ago. Just my instincts kicking in here.Great Bights Mum:
Being over-cautious and suspicious as my general nature, I would suspect that "New Kenya" knows the ropes so any puppet nation that was used would have more credibility if it has been around for a while with a sizeable population. The trick is to find what group/region/etc., is actually behind this if this is not just a one hit wonder.
It would be a good exercise to stretch the wrinkles out of the NPIA brains.
But I agree that there is enough info here for the AG to act and that might be best to nip it in the bud here if we don't think more useful information might be obtained.
This reminds me of the good old days. Tresville would have a blast messing with this guy. Maybe I should give him a call.
SillyString:Yeah my primary concern is whether this person is working with anyone else - if so, it'd be nice to know who.
But... not terribly concerned, so... prosecute away?
Romanoffia:
Bootsie:
SillyString:
mcmasterdonia:
Bootsie:
SillyString:In case anyone hadn't noticed, charges have been filed and accepted.
My objection to extension stands. the Prosecution has had quite long enough.
And this has been upheld before by appeal to all the justices.
And this has been upheld before by appeal to all the justices.