[private] TNP v Bobberino

[Eluvatar]

Indictment

Trial

Moderating Justice: Eluvatar

Standby Hearing Officer: @bootsie

Recused: -

---

Didnt Start the FireYesterday at 1:52 PM
Fiji has filed a criminal complaint with the AG's office against Bob. I

EluvatarYesterday at 2:47 PM
If and when this turns into an indictment we will of course have to act on it
September 7, 2019

The Bestest of PersonsToday at 1:56 AM
It always gets interesting when i go to work. Guess its not going to be a peaceful term
https://forum.thenorthpacific.org/topic/6989211/page-6#post-10258986
The North Pacific
Court Filings
The request for indictment is accepted. I will be the moderating justice.

EluvatarToday at 9:21 AM
@Didnt Start the Fire do you have the available time to serve as moderating justice?

Didnt Start the FireToday at 9:56 AM
Yes, but i am running for speaker. If elected while the case is still active the hearing officer would have to take over.(edited)
@Eluvatar ^

EluvatarToday at 11:09 AM
Ah, yes
Thank you for reminding me
@Lore, Architect of Pandemonium unless you really want the case, I'll take it

Didnt Start the FireToday at 11:47 AM
For the record, @Lore, Architect of Pandemonium Eluvatar asked if we ojected to them remaining the cheif justice. I voted yes, you stated your indiffernce. that mets the election requirement for chief justice. imo

The Bestest of PersonsToday at 11:58 AM
Yeah but there was no conclusion to that @Didnt Start the Fire imo
@Eluvatar i could give it a shot if u need but with my schedule i could definately not meet deadlines and i am not confident of my knowledge of the criminal procedures

EluvatarToday at 12:02 PM
I'll do it
Now I need to find a standby hearing officer

Didnt Start the FireToday at 12:13 PM
Theres Dinoium if his position within the NPA isnt a conflic

EluvatarToday at 12:20 PM
It should not be

Didnt Start the FireToday at 12:23 PM
i havent asked him

EluvatarToday at 12:24 PM
I may ask him shortly

Didnt Start the FireToday at 12:27 PM
The only other two who would come to mind is Thomas Insanic and bootise

EluvatarToday at 4:27 PM
I've also thought of sillystring, crushing our enemies, and siwale

Didnt Start the FireToday at 4:30 PM
i would have no objections to any of them

EluvatarToday at 5:31 PM
Dino has joined bob's defense team

Didnt Start the FireToday at 6:10 PM
nvm i see the thread

EluvatarToday at 7:35 PM
bootsie agreed
https://forum.thenorthpacific.org/topic/9190915/
The North Pacific
The North Pacific v. Bobberino
The Court is now in session and will hear the case of The North Pacific v. Bobberino as filed by Darcania, Attorney General of The North Pacific....

Didnt Start the FireToday at 7:37 PM
Do we delib and discus here or on the forums?

EluvatarToday at 7:40 PM
Any discussion here should be copied to the forums

Didnt Start the FireToday at 7:54 PM
Going to open a thread, or would you like me to do it?

EluvatarToday at 10:14 PM
I can do that

 

[Dreadton]

I do not think QuiteDad has the standing to raise a conflict of interest claim. The defendant has not listed him as counsel, and he is not listed in the complaint. Also, I would agree with the AG statement. None of us are in the NPA, and the AG does not have a conflict clause.

 

[Eluvatar]

If I had to guess, the argument could be that as election commissioner I have some prior involvement in the matter. I think that's an insensible argument. If there were an action of the Election Commission at issue, sure, but there simply is not.

 

[Just a Lore]

Just a note for people of the future. In the above transcribed messages. "The Bestest of Persons" is myself. "Didn't start the fire" is dreadton. And obviously "Eluvatar" is Eluvatar.

 

[Dreadton]

On 4 September 2019, Bobberino was a member of the NPA, the Minister of Defense, and a candidate for election to the delegacy. Bobberino, as Minister of Defense, has the authority to issue orders to members of the NPA in pursuit of regional military goals. As such, Bobberino has access to the NPA Discord, with permissions to post and ping on the #npa-announcement channel. This channel is to “announce orders” to the rank and file members. On the above date, Bobberino sent a ping to all NPA members in the NPA Discord who have the #npa-soldier role. He ordered all NPA Soldiers to vote for him, or he will ban them. Within a minute, several high ranking officers of the NPA criticized Bobberino’s use of the Announcement channel to promote his campaign and for threatening to ban soldiers who didn’t vote for him. Bobbernio’s response was not to remove his announcement, but to post that it was a “joke.” Ultimately, Darcania, in his capacity as a General in the NPA, deleted the message from the channel. In total, the message remained in the Announcement channel for 30 minutes. El Fiji Grande, the Delegate at the time, filed a criminal complaint with the AG’s Office.

Bobberino was charged with Gross Misconduct for violating his oath as Minister of Defense.

Bobberino has pleaded guilty to the above charge.



It is my opinion that Bobberino has no intention of removing the message. The message remained in the Announcement channel for 30 minutes and had to be removed by another General, even after Bobberino was told, several times by several different people, that the ping was not proper. Bobberino has offered no mea culpa for his actions.

Our region relies on multiple tools to ensure our democracy stays strong and to promote our foreign affairs. One of those tools is the North Pacific Army. From the Code of Governance for the NPA, “The Military exists to protect The North Pacific and It's citizens from Internal and external threats, to protect our allies and friends and to project TNP's Interests abroad, . . .” Bobberino swore to follow the Code of Governance when he joined the NPA. By his actions, Bobberino compromised the Regions ability to protect itself, jeopardized an election, and placed the NPA in a horrible position. His refusal to remove the ping, instead to fall back on the statement that it was a joke, shows a clear lack of awareness of the damage he could have caused. To date, Bobberino sole defense is that it was meant as a joke. Jokes that compromise our democracy are not funny and cannot be accepted as a mitigating circumstance.

I offer the following hypothetical to my colleagues. What if Bobberino did not face the push back he did when he posted the message, was elected to office, and then this screenshot was leaked. We would be faced with a crisis that could render the very foundation of our region apart.

For those reasons,

I recommend that Bobberino be sentenced to 5 Months of Voting Rights Suspension and that Bobberino be ineligible to run for office and hold government office for 12 months.

Dreadton,
Associated Justice

 

[Eluvatar]

Do you believe Bobberino's act was worse or more dangerous than Tomb's?

 

[Dreadton]

Tomb used his position to suppress the rights of a single nation.

Bobberino used his position to suppress the rights of the entire region.

 

[Dreadton]

In better terms, Bobberino attempted to use the military to install himself as head of state.

 

[Just a Lore]

I agree with Dreadton though I think the the Ineligibility should be for only 10 months. Using not the Tomb trial but the Madjack trial as the basis.

Madjack committed an act while in a state he could not fully control himself, for which he was deeply remorseful and made no attempt to hide his action or defend himself.

Bobberino meanwhile willfully and with no explanation other then "for the memes" and "for the joke" did nearly the same act but worse. Instead of trying to rope one person into a scheme drunken or not. Tried to threaten the entire TNP military to back his attempt to take the Delegacy on pain of removal. He wanted to fight the charges but his Defense team pulling out around him forced him to eventually do a 180 to try to get the leniency of pleading guilty when he realized he couldn't get other people to defend him.

I believe what Bobberino did was worse because he did it maliciously, he did it willfully, and he has shown little if any remorse for his action.

 

[Just a Lore]

For clarification. My recommendation is

Suspension of Voting Rights until February 15, 2020

Barring from Government Office until July 15, 2020

Which is a slight upgrade of MJ's sentence 2 more Months of voting rights, and barred from 5 elections vs 4 in the MJ case.

 

[Dreadton]

I would accept ten months. But I would request that we recommend to the delegate that Bobberino be demoted from General to a lower rank and for a period that the delegate determines. I do not think we have the authority to demote officers in the NPA, but I do think we can advise the Executive if we think a person is unfit for their rank due to the commission of a crime.

 

[Dreadton]

Looking at the Oaths, Bobberino is currently Deputy Minister of Communications and Home Affairs.

 

[Eluvatar]

We can't bar someone from government office for Gross Misconduct:

8. Gross Misconduct will be punished by removal from office and the suspension of voting rights for whatever finite duration the Court sees fit.

Madjack could get such a sentence because he was sentenced for conspiracy to commit Fraud, also.

We similarly can't bar someone from running for office merely for committing Gross Misconduct.

I'm a little surprised that we're going higher than the AG's recommendation as a lower limit. I would find it a bit odd if we imposed a higher sentence. Not out of bounds, but odd.

I would suggest removal from offices held and the suspension of voting privileges for four months.

 

[Dreadton]

I will write up why I think the sentence would be valid sometime tomorrow. @Eluvatar what would be your recommendation?

 

[Dreadton]

Never mind I misread your post

 

[Just a Lore]

I dont know what past Lore read get that as a possible option but i acknowledge my mistake.

I agree with the albet symbolic removal of office but i still believe 5 months of voting rights is acceptable entirely due to the fact of his lack of remorse. Any election tampering is serious, and if its being treated with mallace the response from the court should be punitive.

 

[Dreadton]

So what is to stop the delegate from immediately reappointing Bobberino to office once he is removed?

 

[Eluvatar]

Nothing. But Bobberino already resigned from the MoD office.

 

[Dreadton]

I have no choice but to conceed, even though I firmly believe that this sentance is no more than a slap on the wrist for a very seriouse criminal situation.

 

[Eluvatar]

If you two are firmly for 5 months, then I am outvoted and we will write up a sentence of five months.

 

[Eluvatar]

Draft

---

Sentencing Order of the Court of the North Pacific
In the case of The North Pacific v. Bobberino

Order drafted by Eluvatar on behalf of Dreadton and Lord Lore​

The Court took into consideration the relevant clause 23 of the North Pacific Criminal Code (Legal Code, Chapter 1):

Spoiler: Criminal Code

23. "Gross Misconduct" is defined as the violation of an individual's legally mandated sworn oath, either willfully or through negligence.

The Court took into consideration the relevant clause 23 of the North Pacific Penal Code (Legal Code, Chapter 2):

Spoiler: Penal Code

8. Gross Misconduct will be punished by removal from office and the suspension of voting rights for whatever finite duration the Court sees fit.

The Court took into consideration the sentencing recommendation by the defense:

Spoiler: Recommendation

Your Honors,


As the legal counsel for the defendant, Bobberino, I am submitting this sentencing recommendation on his behalf. The Court of the North Pacific will sentence Bobberino (henceforth referred to as Bob), in accordance with his guilty plea on one charge:

1. Gross Misconduct, in violation of TNP Legal Code Section 1.8 (23)

According to Section 2.1 of the TNP Legal Code,

1. Criminal acts may be punished by restrictions on basic rights, in a manner proportionate to the crime at the discretion of the Court unless specified in this chapter.

In accordance with the charges laid out in this case, Section 2.8 states that “Gross Misconduct will be punished by removal from office and the suspension of voting rights for whatever finite duration the Court sees fit.”


Circumstances


The details of the criminal act are discussed in the indictment by Attorney General Darcania, and are not rebuked by the defense.


Mitigating Factors

1. The defense has plead guilty on the charge, and is not contesting any of the evidence brought forward by the prosecution. By doing this, Bob has shown he is accepting responsibility for his actions, and is showing remorse by accepting the punishment of TNP’s legal authorities.
2. Bob is an upstanding member of the TNP community, that up to now, has no criminal record, and has promoted the military interests of The North Pacific by leading the NPA on numerous military expeditions. Under his watch, the Ministry of Defense worked closely with the delegacy and other appropriate bodies to ensure the security of the region, a net positive for TNP.
3. Bob is unlikely to offend again, as shown by his acceptance of responsibility, no prior record, and service to the Region. Bob is also not associated with any movements seeking to undermine the democracy of TNP.

Comparison of Similar Cases

• In TNP vs. Madjack, the court sentenced Madjack to a suspension of voting rights for three months, and a ban on running or holding office until January 2020. Madjack arguably committed a more serious crime, as he was indicted on numerous charges (some of which were dropped following his plea deal), and compromised the foreign policy of TNP, as well as the electoral process.
• Link to TNP vs. Madjack: https://forum.thenorthpacific.org/topic/9190419/

• In TNP vs. Tomb, the court sentenced Tomb to a suspension of voting rights for three months. Tomb committed not just gross misconduct, but also violations of the TNP Bill of Rights, as he denied Flemingovia a spot on the NPA due to critical previous comments he had made of the organization.
• Link to TNP vs. Tomb: https://forum.thenorthpacific.org/topic/7393401/

General Comments


The defense understands that the sentencing must be proportional to the crime committed. We ask that the court not impose a sentence that impedes Bob’s ability to participate in the community in a constructive way once served. We also argue that relative to prior cases, Bob’s criminality is on a much lower scale, and ask that the sentence be reflective of that.


Final Recommendation


In all consideration of the TNP Legal and Penal codes, as well as prior judicial precedent and the related factors discussed here, the defense feels that Bobberino should be given a minimum possible sentence.


As such the defense recommends the following: A suspension of voting rights for a period of 2 months and 15 days effective from the final verdict date.

Thank you for your consideration of this recommendation,


D. Dinoium Esq.

The Court took into consideration the sentencing recommendation by the prosecution:

Spoiler: Recommendation

Your honor, the prosecution submits the following recommendation for the sentence of defendant Bobberino for one count of Gross Misconduct:

As per the Penal Code:

8. Gross Misconduct will be punished by removal from office and the suspension of voting rights for whatever finite duration the Court sees fit.

Thus, I submit the following factors and my own thoughts on what the sentence should be.

Aggravating Factors

1. Possibility of violating the rights of NPA soldiers: In his original message, the defendant threatened a ban for those soldiers who did not vote for him in the election. This would be a clear abuse of his authority as a government official, depriving an individual the right to fully participate as they choose in the governmental authority, i.e. the army. While the defendant clarified this was a joke three minutes later, even the threat of such abuse could curtail an individual's capability of expressing their speech.
   This factor is less severe than it may initially appear due to the defendant's common use of this "threat" as a joke, and his general reputation of joking as such, and of joking in general. However, it is still an aggravating factor that I believe the Court should consider when sentencing, especially as a joke should not excuse any crime, just as impairments have not excused any crime in the past.
2. Possibility of spoiling the election: For this, one has to consider if this incident was never brought before the Attorney General, and passed silently by. If the defendant had won the election, especially by some slim margin, would the results have been different had he not abused his position? How many votes were made under threat, even if that threat was a joke? What of those who were thus pushed only to his campaign, and not to any others? Even without this hypothetical, his abuse of his authority would have granted him an advantage in the election over his opponents, and if this act is not punished, could lead to others of few scruples seeking to abuse their own authority in turn.
3. Apparent lack of remorse: Despite several soldiers, including high-ranking officers, informing the defendant of the inappropriate nature of his message, the defendant never apologized for his message and in fact left it in place - it was only deleted by another general, rather than the defendant himself, half an hour later. As well, despite the defendant's guilty plea, one may sometimes see the defendant joking that he and others are no longer allowed to make jokes, pointing to this very court case, displaying a flagrant disregard for these proceedings and why they are happening.
   I cannot speak for how the defendant has acted in private, but in public areas, not only he has shown no remorse or acceptance, but he has also joked about these proceedings and the events that has led to them.
   Due to this factor, I can only conclude that the major factor behind the defendant's guilty plea was the preponderance of evidence, rather than a feeling of remorse. I do not doubt that there is some remorse involved, but I do not believe it to be major enough to be a mitigating factor, as the defense posits.

However, the prosecution agrees that the sentence carried out should not cause undue, long-term harm to the defendant's future career as a citizen of The North Pacific, especially as the defendant is a first-time offender.

As such:

Sentencing Recommendation for one count of Gross Misconduct

The first punishment listed in the Penal Code is removal from office. As the defendant has been sentenced for gross misconduct specifically for his use of his office for his own personal gain, the prosection recommends that the Court remove the defendant from any office they may hold at the time of sentencing, which may be none.

The second punishment listed is a suspension of voting rights for some finite duration. In this, the prosecution agrees that a suspension lesser than the three months given to Tomb in his trial is in order. However, due to the specific circumstances surrounding the defendant's use of his authority to push for his own purposes in the election, I would recommend an extended duration for election voting rights, that being at least until the end of the next General election. The prosecution thus recommends a suspension of all voting rights for two months, fifteen days, and a suspension of election voting rights for an additional two and a half months, to a total of five months.

Thank you, your honor.

The Court finds as follows:

Under The North Pacific Legal Code Chapter 1, Clause 23, The Court sees fit that Bobberino will be punished for Gross Misconduct removal from office and suspension of voting rights for a period of five months.

Bobberino has a history of good conduct in this region. However, the message in question was an abuse of power that could disrupt the Delegate election and call the result into question. Further, the defendant does not appear remorseful or to regret their actions. Not contesting the verdict is not of itself an acknowledgement of fault, regret, or remorse.


The Speaker of the RA and The North Pacific Election Commission will be informed of this verdict and instructed to make appropriate requests of forum administration.

This decision will stand unless overturned by an appeal. The Court hereby closes the case of The North Pacific v. Bobberino

 

[Just a Lore]

I approve of this

 

[Dreadton]

The AG broke his recommendation down into two parts, a suspension of all rights for 5 months, but after 2 1/2 his RA rights would be restored. Then full rights after the full 5. Should we specify that all voting rights are suspended for 5 months?

So should this part "suspension of voting rights for a period of five months." be rewritten to "suspension of all voting rights for a period of five months." Or am I reading to into it?

 

[Eluvatar]

As drafted, the sentence does not distinguish between election voting and RA voting. It's all voting and all subject to the same time period.

If you two want to do something else, I'll revise appropriately.

 

[Dreadton]

I'm fine with it as is

 

[Dreadton]

Absurd Results is Dreadton, no other name changes since first post.


9:21 PM] Eluvatar:
done
[9:23 PM] Absurd Results:
Awesome been reading through case law. I got some questions on procedure but I will wait till a plea is submitted.
[8:34 PM] Absurd Results:
@Eluvatar As a matter of procedures does all three judges weigh in on the case or is it the sole responsibility of the hearing office?
[8:34 PM] Absurd Results:
*officer
[9:11 PM] Eluvatar:
When it's time to make a verdict or sentence, that's all three
[10:05 PM] Absurd Results:
@Eluvatar I posted my thoughts for your review
[10:12 PM] Eluvatar:
Hm
[12:23 PM] The Bestest of Persons:
My thoughts are now officially known @Eluvatar
[6:23 PM] Eluvatar:
thanks
[12:13 PM] Absurd Results:
Responded, I may want to write a concuranced, depending on how the court words the final order
[3:24 PM] Eluvatar:
@Absurd Results @Lore, Architect of Pandemonium https://forum.thenorthpacific.org/topic/9190916/#post-10261369
[3:25 PM] Eluvatar:
Note that " Order drafted by Eluvatar on behalf of Dreadton and Lord Lore" is meant to show that I would prefer a different sentence, but was outvoted
[3:25 PM] Eluvatar:
"on behalf of" instead of "joined by"