[Private] Indictment of 9003.

[Vivanco]

Indictment​

I bring forward the following charge(s) holding that all the below is true and honest to the best of my belief.

Name of Complainant: McMasterdonia

Name(s) of Accused: 9003

Date(s) of Alleged Crime(s): Sunday 13 December 2020

Crime: Perjury



Specifics of Crime(s):
The accused 9003 wilfully provided deceptive testimony during the trial of The North Pacific v St George. The accused provided evidence to the Court in the form of a complaint that included quotes by Madjack AKA St George made about Wonderess. When questions on this evidence, the accused claimed that they had not seen the quotes before until they were posted in the thread. This is clearly deceptive testimony provided by 9003 in order to deceive the Court.

Summary of Events: As above.

Evidence:

Deposition of 9003 - The North Pacific v St George

This thread shall be used for witness deposition of @9003 in the trial The North Pacific v St George. Per the Court Rules and Procedures: 1. The witness must make the following oath before questioning can begin: "I swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth." 2. Any...

forum.thenorthpacific.org

and https://forum.thenorthpacific.org/topic/6989211/post-10354701

Thoughts on the submitted indictment?
@saintpeter @Lord Lore

 

[saintpeter]

It's getting late so I'll keep it short.

I'm quite confused by 9003's behaviour. How could he not realise he has seen those post while having filed them as evidence? I am trying to think of a different interpretation, because this is just too silly, but cannot think of any reasonable one. Others?

The Legal Code section on perjury reads:

14. "Perjury" is defined as the willful provision of deceptive testimony provided under oath and the provision of altered evidence with the intent to deceive in a criminal trial being heard by the Court of The North Pacific.

Normally, in order to establish willfulnes in a crime, it needs to be "intentional, conscious, and intended to achieve a particular result" (LII Wex), although I'd also need to review case law to see how TNP has previously applied this standard. I'm still a bit stuck as to what the motive could be here too. I'll give it some more thought and look forward to your comments.[/I]

 

[Vivanco]

Here are my thoughts.

This is the very first case of perjury within the region's legal system, no prior judgement has been done.
Perjury in this case is composed by the deceptive testimony under oath during a trial, as we see in the Legal Code, and the willfulness is the fact discussed here in this case.
In my opinion, enough proof has been submitted in the indictment to show a part of the crime, the latter needed further discussion.

I would accept this indictment.

Do you agree? @saintpeter

 

[Just a Lore]

My one and only thought so far is, what is next? How deep with this inception get? Will the court finally beat the LR Record of 4 interlocking R4Rs with the region's first 5th order criminal case?