#1 Lawyer Cosplayer Seeks to be #1 Justice Cosplayer

Dreadton

Dreadton

PC Load Letter
-
-
-
-
Pronouns
He/Him
TNP Nation
Dreadton
Discord
Dreadton
This will be a short thread, because many of you already are aware of my legal record and my knowledge of our legal process. I have been vocal on what I see as the State of the Court. What I bring to the table is knowledge, commitment, and a dedication to the region.

My legal work:

On the Form of the Oath of a Delegate,
On the Constitutionality of Vague Laws and Gross Misconduct ,
On the Power of the Speaker to Direct Deputy Speakers,
On the Regulation of the Regional Message Board,
On the Definition of a Candidate
TNP v Bobberino,
On the Sentencing of Whole India
TNP v Pigeonstant
On the Improper Acceptance of Evidence in Criminal Trials
The North Pacific v. St George
The North Pacific v. KEKISTON, GrandEngland
The North Pacific vs NorthArdenyan
 
TlomzKrano:
Can you commit to turning R4Rs around in a timely manner?
Click to expand...
I will endeavor to get R4Rs out in a timely manner, and if there is delays it will be because we are actively working on the request.
 
I have full faith in your ability to serve in this position. Your commitment to our legal processes in this region was never in doubt.
 
I have two questions:
What would you do in a situation where someone admits to lying to the court in order to gain an undue advantage?
What would you do in a situation where someone fabricates quotes or other evidence to attack your character?
 
Attempted Socialism:
I have two questions:
What would you do in a situation where someone admits to lying to the court in order to gain an undue advantage?
Click to expand...
If someone is committing perjury or fabricates evidence submitted to trail, then they should be referred for prosecution
Attempted Socialism:
What would you do in a situation where someone fabricates quotes or other evidence to attack your character?
Click to expand...
If its evidence in a trail then it needs to be handled in context of that trial, ether by dismissing the evidence from the record. If its someone doctoring or faking screenshots, then it might be an admin issue depending on the context.
 
Dreadton:
If someone is committing perjury or fabricates evidence submitted to trail, then they should be referred for prosecution
Click to expand...
I don't recall asking about perjury or fabricated evidence in a trial. I asked about someone admitting that they lied to the Court (in order to gain an undue advantage). Can I ask you to please answer the question, or, if you need further information, ask for elaboration rather than avoiding the question?
Dreadton:
If its evidence in a trail then it needs to be handled in context of that trial, ether by dismissing the evidence from the record. If its someone doctoring or faking screenshots, then it might be an admin issue depending on the context.
Click to expand...
Once again, I will ask you to answer the question.
 
Attempted Socialism:
I don't recall asking about perjury or fabricated evidence in a trial. I asked about someone admitting that they lied to the Court (in order to gain an undue advantage). Can I ask you to please answer the question, or, if you need further information, ask for elaboration rather than avoiding the question?

Once again, I will ask you to answer the question.
Click to expand...
If you want to re argue your screw up in procedure we can do that in the correct forum. If you are trying to do a gotcha and get me to say that the participants in a trial have a duty to tell the court to do its job, i wont. A Justice overseeing a trial should know the procedures involved and be held accountable and be willing to admit when they are incorrect. The last time I am aware that someone actively lied to the court would be 9003 and Whole India, and they were charged for it.
 
Dreadton:
If you want to re argue your screw up in procedure we can do that in the correct forum.
Click to expand...
I don't see the need. It's unrelated to my question, I never argued that it wasn't a screw up, and at this point it's quite disturbing that you think that's what I am trying to reargue.
Dreadton:
If you are trying to do a gotcha and get me to say that the participants in a trial have a duty to tell the court to do its job, i wont. A Justice overseeing a trial should know the procedures involved and be held accountable and be willing to admit when they are incorrect.
Click to expand...
I am not trying to get you to step on that particular landmine, no. I do wish to highlight to voters that not only did you lie to the Court (and admit it both privately to me and in the chat with the prosecutor and your co-coundel), you then later fabricated a quote to try and make it look like I had threatened a court case, in an effort to attack my character and prevent me from joining the Bar.
If the voters are comfortable with you joining the Court again I can't prevent it, but I do want the voters to be informed prior to casting their ballots.
 
I never lied to the court, nor have I fabricated anything, you are well into Fraud territory. I think its particularly telling that you waited till an election to say that.
 
Dreadton:
I never lied to the court
Click to expand...
You admitted as much to me in private and in the conversation with your co-counsel and the prosecutor, so that ship has definitely sailed. It's also something that I have shown before, so it's not like it's a secret.
Dreadton:
nor have I fabricated anything
Click to expand...
You most definitely did.
Dreadton:
you are well into Fraud territory
Click to expand...
This is the second time I see you make this hollow threat. If you really think so, make your accusation and file formal charges. It will not end well for you since I have quoted from our common correspondence without embellishments or fabrications.
Dreadton:
I think its particularly telling that you waited till an election to say that.
Click to expand...
I didn't wait. As I have shown in the two links above I responded at the time. If you mean that I bring it up now because you are running for a position that I believe you are unsuited for, then that is correct. I don't want to see you back on the Court.
 
Fabricated?
And once again, i never lied to the court.

image.png
 
Yes, exactly. You tried to fabricate some threat out of that last reply from me. That was the point I made after you tried to use your fabricated threat to hinder my application to the regional Bar.
The genius part here is that you're posting your admission that you knew you were backdooring me, that the reason you gave to me for why you wanted the restatement was false. I genuinely welcome your indictment of me for fraud now that I have a screenshot of your post.
It's also weird that you'd post a picture of me forthrightly acknowledging that it was a mistake, when you have persistently tried to make it look like I haven't taken responsibility for that mistake.
 
Attempted Socialism:
Yes, exactly. You tried to fabricate some threat out of that last reply from me. That was the point I made after you tried to use your fabricated threat to hinder my application to the regional Bar.
The genius part here is that you're posting your admission that you knew you were backdooring me, that the reason you gave to me for why you wanted the restatement was false. I genuinely welcome your indictment of me for fraud now that I have a screenshot of your post.
It's also weird that you'd post a picture of me forthrightly acknowledging that it was a mistake, when you have persistently tried to make it look like I haven't taken responsibility for that mistake.
Click to expand...
Backdooring does not mean lying. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/backdoor Ive never denied that it was a Devious move. I will repeat my previous statments on the matter. "It is not the job of the defense council to do the courts job for it. " You opened the door and i did what was best for the defendants. At no point did i lied to the court, nor did i fabricate anything. You made a mistake and I capitalized on it, like any good defense council would. and you literately said "if you hadnt used the situation to try for a mistiral" so again nothing was fabricated. the threat is clearly implied there.

Its clear we will never agree on this. If you want to continue, please do so, but im not going to keep going in the same circles as youl.
 
Dreadton:
Backdooring does not mean lying. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/backdoor Ive never denied that it was a Devious move. I will repeat my previous statments on the matter. "It is not the job of the defense council to do the courts job for it. " You opened the door and i did what was best for the defendants. At no point did i lied to the court
Click to expand...
This is the crux of your lie. Tlomz made a motion, in response to my error, for a mistrial. I have never (Nor will I ever) fault Tlomz for that. Why? Because Tlomz didn't lie to me and say that he feared a later court case. Tlomz didn't say this:
i would ask for a restatment that we are in the argument phase
i dont want someone to come back later and say hehe you screwed up here see you in court
Click to expand...
Rather than letting me step on the rake on my own, you made sure to maneuver me into the correct position. Your error was that you were so determined to make sure I would step on it that you overplayed your hand.
Dreadton:
you literately said "if you hadnt used the situation to try for a mistiral" so again nothing was fabricated. the threat is clearly implied there.
Click to expand...
Okay, a few things. No, I did not literately say that (Unless you're arguing that everything I say is literate). You can't argue that I literally said it either, since the spelling error and grammar mistake both are introduced by you. What I literally wrote was:
I don't see any grounds for you to be charged with gross misconduct, if you hadn't used the situation to try for a mistrial. Not even minor misconduct.
Click to expand...
Now, you'll have to help me because I can't see the threat. In the scenario where you hadn't used the situation for a mistrial, I don't see any grounds for you to be charged with gross misconduct. Not even minor misconduct. So the forthright conclusion that you can't be charged... is somehow an implied threat?

To any voter following along. Do you want a Justice whose judgement is so bad that he's either lying about something this obvious, or imagining things so far from reality, that the conclusion that no charge is possible can become a threat? Who would manufacture a threat out of my reassurance that no charges are even possible?
 
Anyway, back to the matter at hand.

What I would like to see from the next term as justice and what I would be working to accomplish is bringing the housekeeping task up to date and to formalize the requirements for a plea in the court rule that covers the requirements that have been outlined in past court cases. I will also be working with the other justices to ensure that R4Rs are actively worked on and not lingering.
 
Attempted Socialism:
To any voter following along. Do you want a Justice whose judgement is so bad that he's either lying about something this obvious, or imagining things so far from reality, that the conclusion that no charge is possible can become a threat? Who would manufacture a threat out of my reassurance that no charges are even possible?
Click to expand...
Frankly, given how you mishandled my trial so completely and utterly both the prosecution and defence on multiple occassions said to each other "I don't know what the fuck he is doing", I'm not sure it's Dreadton's judgement that's in question here, especially as you repeatedly showed yourself to be both incompetent and corrupt.

I wasn't planning on voting anything but abstain in the election, but given this unwarranted and unjustified attack, I will happily cast a sole vote for Dreadton to go on the bench, just because if he does I'm sure it'll annoy you seeing someone more qualified and more able than you to do the job you so thoroughly botched on the court.
 
Last edited:
St George:
Frankly, given how you mishandled my trial so completely and utterly both the prosecution and defence on multiple occassions said to each other "I don't know what the fuck he is doing", I'm not sure it's Dreadton's judgement that's in question here, especially as you repeatedly showed yourself to be both incompetent and corrupt.
Click to expand...
Just to check, this was where you first said I wouldn't be asked to recuse myself, then you changed your mind and asked me to recuse myself, at which point I recused myself without any argument? Because if recusing myself by the request of the defense is incompetence and corruption... I guess that's a novel way of putting it.
 
Halsoni:
This conversation only makes me want to vote for someone else.
Click to expand...
Im not sure if you are speaking to me or MJ, but if you are speaking to me, this is one of the better parts of our elections. A voter who has an issue can directly ask and get a response from a candidate. The voters then can see it and make their own decision from the information they receive, no three second sound bite on the news or scripted political rallies. Direct questions and answers.
 
Sanjurika:
what is your favorite TNP court case?
Click to expand...
forum.thenorthpacific.org

Court Rulings Index

Ruling of the Court of the North Pacific On Promptness and the Time at which RA Membership Begins and Ends Opinion drafted by Chief Justice SillyString, joined by Justices Kiwi and Blue Wolf II The Court took into consideration the inquiry filed here by Mall. The Court took into consideration...
forum.thenorthpacific.org forum.thenorthpacific.org

The one on the delegates oath. It was both ridiculous and an great example of legal philosophy
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top