Limerick1 For Justice

Limerick1

The Legal Eagle
Hello everyone, as many of you know my name is Limerick1. I am hoping for your support in the coming Court Justice election. Currently I am an associate justice on the court and was given this position by the RA recently to fill a vacancy. Unfortunately the term I was to serve ends very soon and I hope I am deemed capable to continue serving as one of your court justices. A sad truth is that in my time as a justice, one request for review was submitted but was almost instantaneously retracted with little action levied by the court. I feel I have not been able to flex my legal muscles and seek re-election. Obviously, the same issues that existed within my original campaign will exist in this one. I am a relatively new member to TNP considering the time many have put in. This however does not compromise my understanding of our legal documents as I read them in preparation for my special election campaign and Continue to re read them to this day. I have set a precedent for laying out my ideals early in my campaign and will not stray from that now. I recently authored an article about the job of a justice and the court as a whole. I am incredibly honored to even be considered for this position and would be more than happy to answer any questions you may have about me or my legal ideals, so ask away!
 

mcmasterdonia

TNPer
-
-
-
-
I'd like to see what you can do with a full term and hopefully get the chance to hear a case/review. So you can count on my vote.
 

Dinoium

Semi-retired legal nerd.
-
-
-
-
Do you think there was any mistakes that the Defense, Prosecution, or the Court made in "The North Pacific v Blue Wolf II"
 

Limerick1

The Legal Eagle
Dinoium said:
Do you think there was any mistakes that the Defense, Prosecution, or the Court made in "The North Pacific v Blue Wolf II"
Personally i believe theat "The North Pacific v Blue Wolf II" was a pretty well argued trial all together except for one huge mistake by the prosecution. The definition of treason at the time of treason could in no way be reinforced by any evidence the prosecution had. In this way it made the case as a whole look weak even if an argument could be made for sedition. Had i been a judge, the only thing i would have done different is that i would have accepted a pre trial motion should the defense had entered in a motion for acquittal (Only for the Treason charge). In reality i agree with the courts ruling and i do believe the prosecution had a case but the defense counsel was incredibly good and was able to defeat any claims made by the state.

I hope this answer is satisfactory, if not i would be more then happy to elaborate.

Thanks a ton for the question!
 

Dinoium

Semi-retired legal nerd.
-
-
-
-
Limerick1 said:
Dinoium said:
Do you think there was any mistakes that the Defense, Prosecution, or the Court made in "The North Pacific v Blue Wolf II"
Personally i believe theat "The North Pacific v Blue Wolf II" was a pretty well argued trial all together except for one huge mistake by the prosecution. The definition of treason at the time of treason could in no way be reinforced by any evidence the prosecution had. In this way it made the case as a whole look weak even if an argument could be made for sedition. Had i been a judge, the only thing i would have done different is that i would have accepted a pre trial motion should the defense had entered in a motion for acquittal (Only for the Treason charge). In reality i agree with the courts ruling and i do believe the prosecution had a case but the defense counsel was incredibly good and was able to defeat any claims made by the state.

I hope this answer is satisfactory, if not i would be more then happy to elaborate.

Thanks a ton for the question!
Interesting, you impress me, Limberick, for a new nation to the Forum and new Justice, I may vote for you but it's a good idea to ask more..

Now what about The North Pacific v. Mall, do you think there were any mistakes made in that case?
 

Limerick1

The Legal Eagle
Dinoium said:
Limerick1 said:
Dinoium said:
Do you think there was any mistakes that the Defense, Prosecution, or the Court made in "The North Pacific v Blue Wolf II"
Personally i believe theat "The North Pacific v Blue Wolf II" was a pretty well argued trial all together except for one huge mistake by the prosecution. The definition of treason at the time of treason could in no way be reinforced by any evidence the prosecution had. In this way it made the case as a whole look weak even if an argument could be made for sedition. Had i been a judge, the only thing i would have done different is that i would have accepted a pre trial motion should the defense had entered in a motion for acquittal (Only for the Treason charge). In reality i agree with the courts ruling and i do believe the prosecution had a case but the defense counsel was incredibly good and was able to defeat any claims made by the state.

I hope this answer is satisfactory, if not i would be more then happy to elaborate.

Thanks a ton for the question!
Interesting, you impress me, Limberick, for a new nation to the Forum and new Justice, I may vote for you but it's a good idea to ask more..

Now what about The North Pacific v. Mall, do you think there were any mistakes made in that case?
Quite honestly when it comes to TNP v Mall, i believe the case was mismanaged by every party involved. The judge made an honest mistake when it came to typos as well as not making the argument of evidence clear thus having to offer a continuance to both parties. Second, the defense seemed to informally motion for continuance in a situation that made their case look incredibly unorganized when a lawyer lost contact with their client, then after making the motion, they retracted it, personally it would have made their case look much better had they just extended the motion even if it was to be denied. And finally the saddest part of this whole case is that the prosecution had a pretty good case. But by not motioning for continuance (which is what i hope happened) or by simply abandoning the case, the prosecution threw away pretty substantial and possibly damning evidence that in my opinion based off the law, most likely would have ended in the prosecutions favor.
 

Dinoium

Semi-retired legal nerd.
-
-
-
-
Limerick1 said:
Dinoium said:
Limerick1 said:
Dinoium said:
Do you think there was any mistakes that the Defense, Prosecution, or the Court made in "The North Pacific v Blue Wolf II"
Personally i believe theat "The North Pacific v Blue Wolf II" was a pretty well argued trial all together except for one huge mistake by the prosecution. The definition of treason at the time of treason could in no way be reinforced by any evidence the prosecution had. In this way it made the case as a whole look weak even if an argument could be made for sedition. Had i been a judge, the only thing i would have done different is that i would have accepted a pre trial motion should the defense had entered in a motion for acquittal (Only for the Treason charge). In reality i agree with the courts ruling and i do believe the prosecution had a case but the defense counsel was incredibly good and was able to defeat any claims made by the state.

I hope this answer is satisfactory, if not i would be more then happy to elaborate.

Thanks a ton for the question!
Interesting, you impress me, Limberick, for a new nation to the Forum and new Justice, I may vote for you but it's a good idea to ask more..

Now what about The North Pacific v. Mall, do you think there were any mistakes made in that case?
Quite honestly when it comes to TNP v Mall, i believe the case was mismanaged by every party involved. The judge made an honest mistake when it came to typos as well as not making the argument of evidence clear thus having to offer a continuance to both parties. Second, the defense seemed to informally motion for continuance in a situation that made their case look incredibly unorganized when a lawyer lost contact with their client, then after making the motion, they retracted it, personally it would have made their case look much better had they just extended the motion even if it was to be denied. And finally the saddest part of this whole case is that the prosecution had a pretty good case. But by not motioning for continuance (which is what i hope happened) or by simply abandoning the case, the prosecution threw away pretty substantial and possibly damning evidence that in my opinion based off the law, most likely would have ended in the prosecutions favor.
If you could, would you re-open the case?
 

Limerick1

The Legal Eagle
Dinoium said:
Limerick1 said:
Dinoium said:
Limerick1 said:
Dinoium said:
Do you think there was any mistakes that the Defense, Prosecution, or the Court made in "The North Pacific v Blue Wolf II"
Personally i believe theat "The North Pacific v Blue Wolf II" was a pretty well argued trial all together except for one huge mistake by the prosecution. The definition of treason at the time of treason could in no way be reinforced by any evidence the prosecution had. In this way it made the case as a whole look weak even if an argument could be made for sedition. Had i been a judge, the only thing i would have done different is that i would have accepted a pre trial motion should the defense had entered in a motion for acquittal (Only for the Treason charge). In reality i agree with the courts ruling and i do believe the prosecution had a case but the defense counsel was incredibly good and was able to defeat any claims made by the state.

I hope this answer is satisfactory, if not i would be more then happy to elaborate.

Thanks a ton for the question!
Interesting, you impress me, Limberick, for a new nation to the Forum and new Justice, I may vote for you but it's a good idea to ask more..

Now what about The North Pacific v. Mall, do you think there were any mistakes made in that case?
Quite honestly when it comes to TNP v Mall, i believe the case was mismanaged by every party involved. The judge made an honest mistake when it came to typos as well as not making the argument of evidence clear thus having to offer a continuance to both parties. Second, the defense seemed to informally motion for continuance in a situation that made their case look incredibly unorganized when a lawyer lost contact with their client, then after making the motion, they retracted it, personally it would have made their case look much better had they just extended the motion even if it was to be denied. And finally the saddest part of this whole case is that the prosecution had a pretty good case. But by not motioning for continuance (which is what i hope happened) or by simply abandoning the case, the prosecution threw away pretty substantial and possibly damning evidence that in my opinion based off the law, most likely would have ended in the prosecutions favor.
If you could, would you re-open the case?
While i do believe the case would have set a good precedent, as a court justice this just simply wouldn't be within my jurisdiction to do. The court responds to cases rather than creates them. And not only this, the prosecution had its chance and due to the double jeopardy clause in our bill of rights, it would be no ones place to re open this case as it has been deliberated and decided.
 

Mall

TNPer
Some would say that you've had your chance at Justice and you should move over and let others have a turn. How would you respond?
 

Limerick1

The Legal Eagle
Mall said:
Some would say that you've had your chance at Justice and you should move over and let others have a turn. How would you respond?
That is a great question, it is true that i have had my "turn" for justice. But, respectfully, we don't vote for people so they can have a turn at a position. No one elected siwale because they felt it was his turn, they elected him because they thought siwale would make a good delegate. I have said in my last campaign as well as an article that i wrote for the MoComm that people should put a lot of thought into their pick for court justice. I have also said that if you don't think that i am the best pick, i don't want your vote. I post my Page to ask questions early because beside my 1/2 term as justice, i don't have any other credentials. But what i do have is a great understanding of our laws, and i use this page to attempt to prove that to people. In short some may say ive had my turn, but running our positions off of whos turn it is rather than merit is a dangerous prospect.

Thanks a ton for the question Mall! If you have any more please don't hesitate to ask.
 

Highton

Not a Malorian vassal
-
You were not given a fair opportunity to show what can do and because of this, you can count on my support.
 

bootsie

Global Moderator
-
-
-
I’ll be honest, you have some fierce competition out there. You’re new to TNP, but the Court especially. What differentiates you from your competitors?

What would your dream bench look like?
 

Limerick1

The Legal Eagle
Bootsie said:
I’ll be honest, you have some fierce competition out there. You’re new to TNP, but the Court especially. What differentiates you from your competitors?

What would your dream bench look like?
Fierce competition is never a bad thing, especially not in the court. Competition breeds success in the way that the strongest people and ideas will come out on top. One thing i bring differently than my competition is that i let my ideas speak for themselves. During my campaign, i have always opened a question thread and encouraged people to challenge me with tough questions, I don't hide. And while I am a fun person, when it comes to campaigning, i take my job here in TNP seriously. I do not paint my competition in a negative light, instead i answer questions that perhaps others are not willing to. While i am new, i am also eager to prove myself and carve out my niche in TNP, my niche in real life being law, it seems natural to start my career off with law in TNP. I feel that winning the special election a couple months ago was my first step in showing what i can do. The obvious problem being that the court was pretty quiet during the rest of my term.

My dream bench (and i will not name any names) would consist of people who have a passion for law and are willing to put in the work to read and understand our laws. Along with this, they need to take the position seriously as well as have a sense of humor. The court has immense power but nobody wants to deal with a judge who seems like he doesn't want to have fun.

Thank you so much for the question Bootsie! If you have anymore questions please don't hesitate to ask.
 

Syrixia

The one, the true, the great.
-
-
-
A woman stepped up to speak. "Hej. I'm from the Confederation Public Broadcasting Corporation's CPBC news team. I'd like to know, what is your stance on the recent failure of the motion to reject Merilia's application to the Pan-Gotic Union?"
 

Limerick1

The Legal Eagle
Hello, being used as a question in which to determine my judicial Philosophy, it must be said that the court does not operate in means of opinion but in a Matter of fact. Furthermore I am but an outside observer of the Pan gothic union, they have their own constitution and elected officials, of which I hold no jurisdiction over, so they may do what they wish. I am a member of the court of The North Pacific, not the Pan Gothic Union, respectively.
 

Syrixia

The one, the true, the great.
-
-
-
"Thank you for your timely answer, sir." the correspondent replied, sitting down.
 
Top